greentime wrote:
Dennis, we get it. You don't like the meta. You don't like heavy activation control and Arica/lancer. You have expressed this opinion hundreds of times.
Thanks for your input. I am glad someone is keeping count of how many times I post an opinion. I don't think I have a total of 100 posts, let alone "hundreds" on a very limited subject.
Quote:
Please stop acting as though having a meta you do not care for is a game-threatening problem that must be addressed with massive errata/rules changes/shaming players into not using good squads.
I care about fairness and balance of game play in the spirit which it was intended. It has nothing to do with what I personally care for, and anyone who knows me on these boards can attest to that.
Quote:
And this isn't even any kind of solution. What, if he leaves your seer alone for TWENTY TURNS so you can get 100 points of gambit? Does that sound feasible to you? Does that even vaguely make sense? (Hint: He can strafe it 5 times without even losing a lancer)
Hence invalidating your theory that I am only "upset" about the Lancer.
Quote:
In my humble opinion, you ought to play the some game more before you try to rebuild it. Movement breakers are the core of the game. Creating opportunities to attack your opponent at low or no risk to yourself is the core of the game. It is my opponent's task to attack my pieces. Making it possible or easy is not my job.
Again - and this is not a personal attack on anyone - there is a somewhat dominant school of thought that is in conflict with this opinion. I happen to agree with you but I am not a judge at the major events.
Quote:
There are strategies in most every game that a fraction of the player base finds unappealing or even frustrating or infuriating. The more complex the rules, the worse it gets. By the Coruscant expansion, SWCCG had gotten so complex and sprawled so widely that they added shields to try to rein in the less pleasant or "Star Wars-y" tactics. Even today some people build "shield-buster" decks to try and get around that and play abusive cards anyway. Maybe SWM needs more pieces that protect against lancer ganking. But having Han shoot you from across the table while you can't do anything is pretty bad too. Or trying to hustle your melee pieces through a corridor jammed with 10 mouse droids. Or having the Yammosk steal your CE. Or any number of other things. Right now all of those things are part of the game. Over time we as a group have to decide what to keep, what to nerf, and what new things to add. By nature, that will be a gradual process.
Unilateral, sweeping changes to the rules and the game's core activities are not the way to effect such changes.
Completely agree with you. But I also believe that the proposal starts with the largest extreme and then we scale back to the middle ground. This ensures all the bases are covered.