Hey guys so I will just start us off. I dont get how lizbeth is on top of the charts??? I mean for 1 less damage, you get lulabee, which is FAR more stable than lizbeth. I know, different clans, but Ulu is not that bad by themselves. + there are many replacements, and lizbeth is what, like 60k? this is ridiculous.
I think Dorian is quite borderline as well, uppers can still do pretty well without him. Herman, hefty, even lady are all replacements for dorian, i mean i know he is strong against SoA, but thats it!. Herman is actually more threatening than dorian in many matchups minus gheist/roots.
Yes it is really very very rare because I have never managed or never tried to block a 2-power card with bristone.
But, it does not matter. let's assume your bristone could block pilled Dorian, lady, don, fuzz, etc, in the same fight, your pilled Rolph defeats a 0-pilled-card like wendel. When both of you have less than 5 pills, Gheist has no upper hands. Attack-manipulators can do a good job to prevent your fury and wait for proper round to attack with fury(or with heavy hitters). All in all, this is because you can not guarantee an absolute damage advantage with Rolph.
You keep suggesting strange, unlikely scenarios which I think do a very poor job of demonstrating the effect of a card on the meta. If something has a less than 1/10 chance of happening, don't try to use it as example.
WHY would my pilled Rolph defeat a 0-pilled Wendel is as good a question as WHY my Bristone would block Wendel.
Lady, Don, and Fuzz all have 6 power -- Rolph makes mince meat out of them!
WHY am I attacking an opponent with my Rolph in this scenario? I know that Rolph will definitely not be met by those 5* cards -- it makes more sense for my opponent to fight him with something he does not gain a 3 power advantage against, or to let him through. I also know that Rolph is more effective late in the game, where he can be a huge threat if furied.
So, if I am attacking, I will hold on to Rolph and Bristone during early rounds, and if I am defending, I will only use them against cards that seem appropriate -- definitely not against Wendel! There are very few scenarios where these cards would ever meet, assuming you are talking about a match between two experienced ELO players.
I'm also confused about the meaning of this: "When both of you have less than 5 pills, GHEIST has no upper hands."
How often will both sides have the same # of pills in endgame? A 4 pills, many GHEIST beat every 2-pilled Upper.
Why your pilled Rolph can defeat a 0-pilled Wendel is the same reason why your 0-pilled Bristone can block 3 damages off a pilled hitter. It was exactly your suggesting of bristone that make me feel strange and reply to you in the same style, and this would remind you that the game is not simple as you suggest.
If you are attacking , you hold on to Rolph, and Bristone during early rounds. OK, let's admit you have lower chance to win the first two rounds against attack manipulators(Why? normally Gheist has to pay 2 more pills to win a round especially in low pills). Then you have left bristone and Rolph in hands and have to win both rounds. In this case finally you could let Bristone block 3 damages, but you lost fight. Ok, even when you manage to win last two rounds, 4+6 damage can not guarantee a victory in many of the cases.
If you are defending, no opponent will put out a heavy hitter in front of your bristone unless he has more than two of them. Want a small pills win against attack manipulators? Come and try your luck, wasting 2 more pills is the best situation for you, sometimes 3-4.
On that stand, It is not often that both sides have the same number of pills, but it is quite often that you as a Gheist have less than 5 pills in endgame while your opponent has more than 6. You must be kidding, within 5 pills, even Rubie can beat most of the Gheist cards(7 powered) pill for pill.
Yuri, the Bristone/Wendel comparison is not accurate. Rolph is the strongest round winner GHEIST has available; an intelligent player will use him defensively if at all possible. This is precisely because an intelligent player understands the scenario you suggest. To put it simply, throwing Rolph out there where he does not create a damage advantage if the opponent lets him through causes his ability to be wasted. It is a bad move... And therefore a bad example to demonstrate that Rolph is not OP. Of course any card is not OP if you use it badly.
Ideally, the only times Rolph should be used offensively is when him hitting will secure the match, such as in an r3/r4 pill split.
Lol wow someone beat me to it. I love this rise of Sakhrom popularity cause of Uranus lol .
Sad to see Ongh gone....Jungo deck just doesn't cut it anymore. Nahema's underrated but will probably become more prevalent now. I actually run Adler over Nahema though because I'm starting to see more SoA.
Stompah is so op but man....I feel so bad for Frozn if they ban Stompah because Stompah and Tiwi were probably the only reason why I saw Frozn in elo :/
Ulrich was banned at a time before there were so many 8 powers around, before CoB, etc etc. Piranas felt a little bit stronger back then. It was possible to win (especially against +damage clans) by hitting with two weak cards, one in fury, and riding out Ulrich's DR.
Ulrich would have probably been fine to unban at one point, but now Piranas have more heavy hitters (The Lizbeths.) Do you really wanna fight a hand with Lizbeth and Ulrich in it?