Jump to content

xbeaker

Members
  • Content Count

    462
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About xbeaker

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , 0, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I made up a spreadsheet for this.
  2. Well, that much at least has been decided already. Only sanctioned store events will count. Were a deck effected by casual results it would be far too easy to modify a decks rating.
  3. I am a big fan of Dis/Shadow combos. I have a few of them, and what I believe to be my 3 strongest decks are all that combo. 2 are Dis Shadow Brobnar, 1 is Dis Shadow Logos. Martín the Allegedly Shadowy https://www.keyforgegame.com/deck-details/7fac3cba-5a19-468e-b94a-0deceed141d5 Christiansen the Thirsty https://www.keyforgegame.com/deck-details/33dcda60-04ea-4ba8-b1f0-49a5c02b56f7 Empress "Gray" Valiance https://www.keyforgegame.com/deck-details/8cf110b8-475e-4a51-9ca7-d76b3badac42 I don't have much play time with Empress "Gray" Valiance. I got her in a sealed deck tourney. I won 3 - 0 3 rounds of swiss. (small tourney obviously) the last player of the night was the only one who managed to forge even a single key against me. He was also the only person where I didn't have a strong Dis game. I can't say for sure if @Amanal and @Krashwire are correct about that being one of the best house combos because with so little time with the deck I can't be certain. Dis is the clear strength of that deck too, not Logos. But I will say that from what I have played, it may take the top spot in my deck list for sure!
  4. xbeaker

    Trading Decks?

    FFG is fine with trading decks based on everything I have seen. They even mention that chains stay with a traded or sold deck. So yeah, you can use a deck, then sell/trade it no problem. Though be sure the person who is receiving the deck knows if the Aember Shard has been claimed.
  5. If you want to play on www.TheCrucible.online you'll need to register your decks. It is a good way to get some practice, and if you are just itching for a game real quick.
  6. Ah, but you see there is also the counter argument. It prevents "an amount of damage", where the Shadow self absorbs all damage. It could go either way. As I said, I previously played it the way you describe, but in thinking about it, I changed my own mind haha.
  7. I said I agree with how you interpreted it. And that is how I have played it in the past. But the more I think about it, I think it was played correctly. It absorbs all damage, not overflow damage not prevented by the armor.
  8. I can't point you to the specific video, but I remember seeing something where they discussed chains and how if you sold or traded the deck, the chains would stick with it, potentially reducing its value. The also have mentioned the ebay listings and how outrageous they are. As they hold the copyright, I think they could get the Keyforge decks pulled from eBay if they had a problem with it. I could be wrong though. I'm not saying FFG has it in their business plan to feed a secondary market. But they seem pretty OK with it as a fact of life in this market. But opened decks at tourney do have one problem. When passing decks around it is very easy to lose cards. I was in a draft tourney at PAX (A lot of fun btw! ) and one of the players insisted we open the decks, not just read the backs. The Judge was not happy, and sure enough we nearly lost a few cards as people were quickly trying to read deck lists and pass decks around. I agree they should do what they can to limit fraud, but there are other options that are easier. I think yo misunderstood me here. I don;t think they need a second wrapper. Just put a black box on the plastic that already covers the deck inside the box. No change in manufacturing required. Just a change in the plastic. I'm a programmer in the printing industry. It's actually a pretty easy process. Yeah, no question here. Covering the QR code would have protected @Greenknight08 from losing Aember, but not from a deck that was opened, reviewed and replaced (I know this isn't assured what happened, but we are talking theoretical.) But a modification to the die which cuts the boxes would. Were the bottoms perfed in such a way that opening them would require damage to the perf, it would be impossible to reseal the deck in a convincing way. gluing flaps together is easy. gluing a perf back.. god luck! haha And again, this a very minor change to the production process. Dies are easily swapped out. They would just need to do some testing to make sure the perfs don't damage the integrity of the box under normal circumstances. I think flipping the archon should be a last ditch option. I really liked the draft tourney, and like the security that a plastic wrapped deck is complete.
  9. I agree this is an incorrect play of the applied damage. You should have soaked the damage leaving both the knight and shadow alive. That being said, there is a clear interpretation the other was as well that is plausible... As the armor is absorbing the damage, it is not adding damage to the armored creature. But the damage is still being applied in some form. The Shadow self it kind of an all encompassing ability. It doesn't specify damage tokens, just damage in general. It attracts ALL the bullets, not just the ones that would have pierced your armor. It wants to leave your armor undamaged too! I won't be surprised it FFG rules that the way the crucible is interpreting it is correct.
  10. This is also (allegedly) an intentional thing by FFG. The claim is that they left it open so you could track a friend's deck and such
  11. The problem with flipping the archon card made the deck list visible or purpose. They want the list to be available for draft tournaments. At release they also encouraged trading decks. I got one of my favorite decks through a sealed treade. Sure the other guy cold have opened it and shown me the list just as easily, but him deciding he didn't want to play it, it was easier for him to keep it in the plastic. They also have seem no problem with the secondary market. If they wanted to conceal it, it wouldn't even need to be flipped, just make it the top card in the deck instead of the bottom. I think they should perf the bottom to make it difficult to open it without an obvious tear, and have a black box on the plastic to prevent scanning of sealed decks
  12. Yeah man, no question there. I spent many years in the trenches of retail. Working at Software Etc. (before it became GameStop.. I am old haha) The manager of 1 store I worked was blatantly ripping the place off. We got demos of a lot of software, in many cases we got full releases of stuff, games and productivity software that were intended as promos for the staff. He would claim the more valuable stuff, then 'return' it to the store. As the manager he could override the need for a receipt. When called on it, he claimed there was nothing wrong with it, or he was doing it to add another copy to the store stock. He was the worst example, but the staff definitely stole more for any store I worked at than the customers.
  13. Yeah, I am. It is a perfectly reasonable scenario. I don't think anyone said it was 100% that it was opened and returned. It could have been a bug as well. But way to blame the victim. And yeah, me sitting on an account for 4 years and then using it concoct a story to prove that something that is obviously possible, is possible is pretty absurd. Sorry, but your opinion of whether it could happen isn't that important to me. The decks don't have to be really bad. They could just be something that aren't obvious sellers on the secondary market.
  14. What is certain is that he got decks that provided no Aember shard. I am a programmer, so I know weird things can happen. It is possible that for whatever reason these 2 decks had a bug that just made them not register as first time scans. But it is more likely they were returned. B&N has a pretty generous return policy. And the teller isn't going to inspect what appears to be a sealed deck for signs of possible tampering. And that he said they appeared to be below average decks also lend to the theory they were opened before. But yes, based on the information, it is impossible to know either way. I would suggest if anyone else runs into a deck which provided no Aember straight out of the deck, before you scan any others go to the app and search for the names of decks. That is a sure way to see if they were registered or not. It may not help you either way. But it would prove it was scanned, not just a bug.
×
×
  • Create New...