Jump to content

Wrecking Ball

Members
  • Content Count

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wrecking Ball

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Paxton, Illinois, United States
  1. ktom said: Equal access can only be considered at a particular point in time. Is it unfair that Ford doesn't sell the Model-T anymore, even though there are some people that would like to buy one? The only problem I see here is that FFg is running events where the prize support involves something many would like to have an equal chance of winning. If some people do not have an equal access to the cards they need to win these games then how is that fair?
  2. This seems like a huge spoiler alert.... I know some people play this game without yet knowing the story.
  3. I find it interesting the article doesn't mention using the most powerful attachment removal in the game to get rid of it, the Tin Link. Which makes me wonder if the link will be restricted or banned in the near future.
  4. rings said: Just one HIGHLY playable card like Put to the Torch (win military = kill two locations) or Fire from the Skies (win military AND intrigue = kill a character and location, both < or = 3 cost) would be nice for houses like Lanni or Martell. Or even better, 2-3 location control plots to get location control option to 25% of the character control options. I think Fire From the Skies is a great idea, but it should discard character and locations at 2 cost or lower. 3 cost is too high in my opinion. Though the event would be easily canceled so maybe not.
  5. Rave said: -Game goes from 50 to 60 card minimum. (IIRC due to Stark Murder's dominance at the time) -Game gets the 3 card draw cap. (Response to the Promo King's Landing card, which would let you kneel any location to draw a card) I believe the game started with a 40 card minimum instead of 50. The king's landing promo card allowed you to draw a card when a location was played, not knelt.
  6. I guess. I wonder if any card will make it off the restricted list.
  7. Can somebody tell me why TVB was restricted in the first place? It's a 7 cost army! Is there something i'm missing?
  8. I don't agree with you either Shives, but if anybody could prove me wrong it would be you. It will always be you.....
  9. I would like to see Bounty of the Realm or some form of it reprinted. To balance it just make it a City plot with the same restriction as at the Gates. Baratheon and Stark would love this card.
  10. I do not know if you are being serious or if you are trying to troll the boards. This could go either way.
  11. Ok, so if the combo is a problem, is the problem Satin or Robert?
  12. oshi said: Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless) now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check) I'm actually excited to see the satin combo get pulled off, it doesn't scare me that much either. Robert's self standing ability will be an issue in the future as it has in the past and is now. Maybe a no attachments errata is the way to go.
  13. oshi said: Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless) now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check) I'm actually excited to see the satin combo get pulled off, it doesn't scare me that much either. Robert's self standing ability will be an issue in the future as it has in the past and is now. Maybe a no attachments errata is the way to go.
  14. ktom said: (Let the flaming with all the reasons why you "can't" kill him start....) ~Your so stupid! My opponent is obviously running double The Power of Bloods!
  15. Staton said: I don't see how people can say "Oh just put answers in your deck for GG! There are a million answers out there!" But those same people say that Robert is broken. Just another example of the community thinking uber control is fine, while being scared to death of anything that isn't control possibly gaining ground. The reason why no shadows Robert might need to be fixed is because of his uber control aspect. I don't see anybody complaining about his insane rush or powergrab.
×
×
  • Create New...