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.
Eibeza to rubie is an unfair comparison, eibeza is made to be STRONG against SoA, otherwise hes just a solid card, nothing special.
rubie is not a top tier fighter out there, ill admit. but look, what makes her special is her versatility and 6 damage. SoA is one of the best abilities out there, and 6 damage makes her one of the best bluffs (especially with her sick bonus).
i really doubt you have actually played uppers before, because 6 damage is A LOT better than 5, you should know if you played the clan.... hence, 6-5 is actually not that much better than 5-6, and 6-5 makes her op. (otakool, elvira (BANNED), ludwig, vito). she is easily one of the best SoAs.
lizbeth not terrible, sorry got a bit too excited. but definitely overrated. selma, dalhia cr, even the less popular bloodh area ll better candidates.
mokra is like saki, yah pretty powerful.
Thank you for finally agreeing with me on one thing. Although Elvira is banned, Elvira shouldn't be banned.
I don't play much uppers, but I played them in a half deck for elo with Jungo. (and I used Rubie, Oxen, Kazayan, Maurice, Ongh, Jean, Pegh, Mindy) (A bit top heavy I know) I also play them in Survivor and once, we were matched up. Next time, I might not ruin your streak Don't deny it!
Bloodh a better candidate than Lizbeth? I don't think so. Bloodh can be easily countered. 7 power isn't much. He can't wall, he's a "glass cannon." (Quoted from the message board)
Lizbeth has less trouble winning. She fits perfectly into the piranas strategy of winning two rounds. Although I would choose Dalhia and Selma over lizbeth as that goes into the pilz manip + atk manip theme.
Mokra is not that much better than Romana but is definitely OP. One more damage, 1 more power and dmg manip, but 2 higher minimum for both. If the damage manip had a minimum of 1, then, it would be almost as Op as Graks.
Puttin otakool in that list doesn't make sense. Why would I use otakool over Tremorh or Romana? And I still have Qubik/eebiza and Flanagan/Veenyle to complete my half deck if I was playing 2 3*s.
Skeelz is pretty underpowered if you ask me. The only way I might play them is to play a 5-3. The 3 I would choose from skeelz is Greem/Jay, Redra, Chiara Cr.
Running 3 2 stars from the same clan is super unbalanced. kazayan and maurice are not their top end characters, at least not together. i like wendel, he doesnt look great on paper. but trust me, going first with him makes your opponent scratch their head. they never know how many pillz to put.
umm PIRANAS WINNING TWO ROUNDS? seriously man???!?! are you serious? pillz manipulation heavy = trying to win 3 rounds.... im not even gna explain the rest. especially with no DR.
if bloodh is a glass cannon, lizbeth is a paper cannon. 6/4 against SoA.
elvira is borderline i dont know about this one. i mean rescue has one of the most powerful clan bonuses, so they had to give them a nerf. just a bit too, lets just hope they get a replacement SoA (while cliff is very powerful, i dont like conditional SoA). id say 5/3 SoA 2*? 5/7 SoA 4*?
i am just comparing rubie to other attack manip SoAs. otakool comes third honestly. i was trying to explain why rubie is so great.
umm no honestly only use skeelz in mono, or splash chiara cr in some funny decks. their topend characters (sandro, sasha, dr falkenstein) are all support based.
Lizbeth Vs Selma
Selma beats lizbeth pill for pill up until 7 pills (due to Selma 's ability + 2 pills) except the last round. Against SOA Selma is 7/7 while Lizbeth is 6/4. They both fair the same against a DR. So Selma is better.
Lizbeth Vs Bloodh
If your opponent does not have an SOA Lizbeth is better she is a 9/7 which helps you win more rounds. Bloodh is a 7/9 which deals more damage but makes it harder to win rounds. Against SOA Bloodh is 7/6, Lizbeth is only 6/4. Against DRs Bloodh is better because of his ability. E.g against Spiaghi bloodh is a 7/6 Lizbeth is a 9/4. Thus Bloodh is arguably more stable, since Elo is riddled with DRs and SOAs, Bloodh is a safer choice.
Lizbeth Vs Michael
Courage michael = 10/7 otherwise he's a 7/7. Lizbeth is 9/7. Under SOA Michael is not hindered one bit at best he's a 10/7 at worst a 7/7 Lizbeth is only 6/4. There is no way Lizbeth and Michael belong to the same tier.
Sorry didnt even read mokra's stats correctly, thought it was only - power, now i saw its -damage as well.....
talk about versatility and brute force all in one card, this card is so op, what is there to counter this?? compare minerva to this, minerva is supposed to be powerful by herself already (due to bonus), but mokra is so good that she is straight up a better card. the only not so good thing about her would be that 5 damage, but cant really brag that much she is only 4*s.
permaban this card please UR, i dont even know why this was released.... 10/10