I unthinkingly threw together a deck (Bridget, Sheitane, Kenny, Mojo, Gina Glitt, Samantha, Zatman and another Upper I do not rememer... which does not make a difference anyway). Results? I was beaten 1 round out of 5, one of 2 in which I did not get Bridget. (All in Danger Zone.) The other rounds? I lazily threw things in. In one round the opponent could have won if he had risked everything on one move. The other ones... were objectively doomed after the very first round.
I guess this is a clear case of players decisions not always being good for a game.
Bridget is, even with 50% chance of appearance in a deck, clearly broken. I did not even think too much about the above deck, just threw in Poison, Life and Attack-reduction with one added damage reduction.
P.S.: This applies primarily to ELO. I have not tested it against a 8x5 star deck with or without doubles. But since I could do the same then... (or think of Bridget, 3x Kenny, 3x Mojo, 1x Sheitane? and that is still "relatively beatable", I think)
I just don't get it.
Please answer this question: why adding the option +2life/turn to the poll ?
The second I saw it I opened a topic like WTF OVERPOWERED.
I lost an ELO match where my opponent had Bridget and he played just 1 PILL !!! WTF 1 PILL FOR AN ELO MATCH.
This is plain humiliation - overpowered to the maxx
So next time, please start a topic "we feel Erika is underpowered; give her a stop opp bonus"
I'd rather see you just say you realize the poll option that won was a mistake and should have been caught and removed from the poll due to it's clearly unbalancing and overpowered traits. Then revert her to the 2nd place poll option.
Putting a cap on the life, unless it's a universal cap that effects any abilities that can grant life is bandaiding the problem at best.