Toronto Meetup #3 - TOURNAMENT AND Rule Reform info!

[Onslaught]

This also became an issue when trying to teach people to play. After two rounds of play most new players would give up because of all the things they are supposed to know that AREN'T on the cards.

This is kinda weird. I mean, these new rules don't magically add ink to the cards, so they are still referencing an outside document or having to initially read a set of rules to learn how to play.

Yes and no.

I'm not seeing a "no" part here.

Any Errata we kept were primarily for consistency. Mutant Gestalt and Rhino Charge being examples.

Mutant Gestalt is a power level errata. It's not clarifying a rule or anything, it's just decreasing the power of a card that is too good. Now the droves of new players you are trying to teach the game will have to refer to a sheet that says "this card does something different than what the printed text says." No big deal, right? So why would it be so hard to do this for a few more cards such as Leech, Fortress, etc.

What's more important: a new player having to memorize "btw Leech targets a character," or a new player playing it as written but then quitting the game because Leech is ridiculously overpowered without the errata?

You love your hyperbole, don't you?

Defensive Vertigo from a site in this format is so beyond broken, I'm sorry your extensive testing didn't try  it  out or you would have noticed this.

Again with the hyperbole. Newsflash - The game didn't need my help to get to that point.

If I don't have a negate in my hand or placed, I can still stay and fight the Starjammers. If I don't have a negate vs. any heroes, I'm not going to risk getting Leeched and losing not only the current venture, but also a bunch of placed cards so that I am at even more of a disadvantage the following turn.

Bear in mind with the Citadel, that you can build an identical team several ways without the homebase! So you can still get your crazy trick, you just won't see people using the base.

No you can't. Under your rules, I don't get Merciless Conqueror, Obfuscate, Apocalyptic Minion, etc. as pseudo-aspect cards by building an identical team without the homebase.

A tweak may come up here or there, but they are far easier to play, and options open up

In your thorough playtesting, what options were opened up by these rules that weren't viable before? Personally, I see tons of options shut down. The few current decks that are viable without a negate just become completely unplayable under your rules.

I just don't get where all of this hostility and negativity comes from, you have both been posting here for a long time with no issues and recently you have taken a very "holier then thou" attitude in your interactions with everyone.

Message boards are for discussion. This is a thread about his rules, and a discussion about them is taking place. Sorry if this is a problem for you?

Anyway, regarding "I had no intention of buffs/nerfs" - I can see how Vertigo might be inadvertently boosted in your process of clarifying rules - but you cant claim you didnt intentionally nerf or boost stuff when you remove a negative inherent from Citadel and add a detrimental inherent to FF4. Still seems extremely arbitrary. Why does Citadel lose its negative inherent, but some of the way worse battlesites don't? Wundagore Mountain, Avalon, Big Apple, etc all have detrimental inherents and their lineups are far worse than Citadel, especially when you take into account the whole "absent characters specials" rule. Which brings up another thing. When you say you tested these extensively...are you sure? Aside from the aforementioned "some cards get screwed unfairly like New Lease on Life" (which may have been easy enough to overlook during testing), what about testing the stuff that got buffed?

X-Man, Dark Beast, Holocaust, Post - Onslaught's Citadel Homebase, The Vault Battlesite

It meets the "negates are mandatory in this format" barrier by having 7. It has Merciless Conqueror (absurd as a pseudo-aspect) and Master Mold. It has defensive Vertigo from the site. This deck would shred most of the current top tier decks, and makes nearly all of the tier 1.5 decks completely unplayable because of how bad their matchup against this would be.

I haven't given any thought to this, so if I were to refine things it might have Sentinel in reserve instead of Post to allow access to Obfuscate for one of the mini-aspects. This is just taking two things that you specifically buffed, and showing in a few seconds that it is a pretty grossly overpowered deck. Since there are so few things that are specifically improved in your rules, you would think that they would be the first things you tested. If this deck is that good off the bat, it just implies that there is lots of other stuff you might have missed as well. That's another huge advantage of using the existing rules (besides cohesiveness amongst the playerbase instead of fracturing it) - they have passed the test of time.

[BigBadHarve]

This is kinda weird. I mean, these new rules don't magically add ink to the cards, so they are still referencing an outside document or having to initially read a set of rules to learn how to play.

It's one thing to have a core set of rules from a rulebook, and it's quiet a different thing to have to refer to another document entirely (aka the Meta Rules) to discover that your cards don't play as they are written. That was my entire beef with the metas, and many of the errata they made.

I'm not seeing a "no" part here.

Yes, as in 'yes, it's like a homemade on the level that you print up the new inherent and affix it to your character'

No, as in 'no, its a house rule because it's an adjustment to how an existing card is played'

Ergo - Yes AND No.

Mutant Gestalt is a power level errata. It's not clarifying a rule or anything, it's just decreasing the power of a card that is too good. Now the droves of new players you are trying to teach the game will have to refer to a sheet that says "this card does something different than what the printed text says." No big deal, right? So why would it be so hard to do this for a few more cards such as Leech, Fortress, etc.

What's more important: a new player having to memorize "btw Leech targets a character," or a new player playing it as written but then quitting the game because Leech is ridiculously overpowered without the errata?

The errata on Mutant Gestalt was an official errata, to correct a misprint. The errata simply makes it like every other GD coded special. As with Rhino Charge.

As you know, the Leech was an errata made because the makers realized they made a powerful card and wanted to depower it.

But the Leech is no more powerful than many cards available to characters that can be put into a battle site (which also cannot be avoided).

Anyway, regarding "I had no intention of buffs/nerfs" - I can see how Vertigo might be inadvertently boosted in your process of clarifying rules - but you cant claim you didnt intentionally nerf or boost stuff when you remove a negative inherent from Citadel and add a detrimental inherent to FF4. Still seems extremely arbitrary. Why does Citadel lose its negative inherent, but some of the way worse battlesites don't? Wundagore Mountain, Avalon, Big Apple, etc all have detrimental inherents and their lineups are far worse than Citadel, especially when you take into account the whole "absent characters specials" rule. Which brings up another thing.

As I said - there was no overall intention of buffing or nerfing any specific characters. FF plaza we did want to address further. As for the other sites with a penalty for an inherent - The Citadel was the only one with a truly debilitating effect. Other the others can be worked around as it doesn't diminish the strength of your draws, but drawing one card less is a HUGE disadvantage in this game.

X-Man, Dark Beast, Holocaust, Post - Onslaught's Citadel Homebase, The Vault Battlesite

It meets the "negates are mandatory in this format" barrier by having 7. It has Merciless Conqueror (absurd as a pseudo-aspect) and Master Mold. It has defensive Vertigo from the site. This deck would shred most of the current top tier decks, and makes nearly all of the tier 1.5 decks completely unplayable because of how bad their matchup against this would be.

I haven't given any thought to this, so if I were to refine things it might have Sentinel in reserve instead of Post to allow access to Obfuscate for one of the mini-aspects. This is just taking two things that you specifically buffed, and showing in a few seconds that it is a pretty grossly overpowered deck. Since there are so few things that are specifically improved in your rules, you would think that they would be the first things you tested. If this deck is that good off the bat, it just implies that there is lots of other stuff you might have missed as well. That's another huge advantage of using the existing rules (besides cohesiveness amongst the playerbase instead of fracturing it) - they have passed the test of time.

Okay then, give it some thought for me, please. And I don't mean that in any sarcastic or snarky way. If you are seeing things that are potentially broken then help me address the issues to fix them.

Build me a team (or teams) that are absolutely broken under these rules. Give me the exact specifications as you would build it, so I can construct it and take a look.

We have tested these rules and have yet to create a broken team that we haven't fixed, but I'll be the first to admit that with so many options there will always be something lurking in the cards that we've missed.

You're clearly passionate about this, so I do want your point of view.

-BBH

[Onslaught]

We played a first to three series earlier using these rules, and the Citadel deck is stupidly good. Spawn/Witch/Jammers/Spider-Woman with Infinity Gauntlet and Onslaught's Citadel got completely reamed by the Onslaught's Citadel homebase deck (which was a suboptimal build that was put together in ten minutes). Merciless Conqueror as an aspect is dumb. Defensive Vertigo from a site is also really dumb.

The first obvious suggestion would be to change the inherent of Citadel back to being draw 7. The mini-aspects from absent characters makes Citadel way too powerful.

Vertigo also should go back to offensive only.

The absent character stuff is really cute and I wish homebases would have been created with those rules in mind in the first place, but it doesn't make any of the bad homebases worthwhile and it gives unnecessary buffs to the good homebases. If I was making Overpower from the ground up with rebalanced stats/characters, I'd definitely design the homebases taking the absent character rule into account. Applying it retroactively to the current cardpool doesn't work out so well.

By my suggested changes: Vertigo is offensive, Citadel is back to original text, and mini-aspects are left alone (though I'd still suggest dropping this mechanic too), then all decks would look pretty much identical to what they look like now other than the fact that negates are even more important (and they are already way too important). If you play with the official errata on Leech (which is as vital as making Vertigo offensive only IMO), then you just have a 10 page document about shuffling basic universe cards into the powerpack.

[BigBadHarve]

We played a first to three series earlier using these rules, and the Citadel deck is stupidly good. Spawn/Witch/Jammers/Spider-Woman with Infinity Gauntlet and Onslaught's Citadel got completely reamed by the Onslaught's Citadel homebase deck (which was a suboptimal build that was put together in ten minutes). Merciless Conqueror as an aspect is dumb. Defensive Vertigo from a site is also really dumb.

The first obvious suggestion would be to change the inherent of Citadel back to being draw 7. The mini-aspects from absent characters makes Citadel way too powerful.

Vertigo also should go back to offensive only.

The absent character stuff is really cute and I wish homebases would have been created with those rules in mind in the first place, but it doesn't make any of the bad homebases worthwhile and it gives unnecessary buffs to the good homebases. If I was making Overpower from the ground up with rebalanced stats/characters, I'd definitely design the homebases taking the absent character rule into account. Applying it retroactively to the current cardpool doesn't work out so well.

By my suggested changes: Vertigo is offensive, Citadel is back to original text, and mini-aspects are left alone (though I'd still suggest dropping this mechanic too), then all decks would look pretty much identical to what they look like now other than the fact that negates are even more important (and they are already way too important). If you play with the official errata on Leech (which is as vital as making Vertigo offensive only IMO), then you just have a 10 page document about shuffling basic universe cards into the powerpack.

Can you supply me with your build? Or what you think would be the most broken way to build it. I know how I would build (and have built) this team to maximize it, but I want a completely different perspective on it.

On the pseudo-aspect front (I think I shall rename the rule to that) I disagree. It makes you look at the homebases from a whole new light, and gives a reasonable answer to "Why would I bother to play one of the homebases?"  Yes, wholeheartedly agree that it would have been really nice if they'd thought of it from the beginning and built around it, but even as is, it still creates new options for the Homebases. That extra bit of defense, or trick can go a long way, even on the lesser sites.

Leech as target, Vertigo as offensive (but still OPD!) I'm certainly flexible on. In our games, we've found the Leech as written to be extremely enjoyable (you'd be amazed at how many rounds we played where we both had the leech! Or, perhaps you wouldn't, you've probably been there many times too. But it was interesting because had we been playing the target rule there were many times when one of us could have avoided it) but I can also understand the frustration too.

Under our system, you may have noticed that many more cards are usable defensively, and are slightly more potent. I think you'll find this changes things somewhat. This is what I meant by increased options. Likewise with the duration rule - which, granted was official, but didn't serve as a blanket rule.

So, even taking into account your suggestions, it's not just about recycling basic universe cards and such. I want to open versatility of cards. So many cards got nerfed, and I'm not talking about the big ones like leech. Little things like Brood spawn. Many players won't use it, even if it is game lasting, but why would you make it so unappealing that even those who would consider using it just walk away?

Thanks for your thoughts, I'm sorry for any snark. I don't want to leave any bad blood on these boards. I would appreciate you devising any broken team you can think of. And by all means, if you have ideas for a more organic way of playing the cards (that doesn't involve referencing meta rules) let me know.

-BBH

[Palatinus]

To preface, I haven't played enough Overpower under any rules to begin to be able to take advantage of any rule-set in a way that would let me make a broken deck.  I don't think I will be making the tournament in April, but not because of the rules, simply because I don't have a way to work out the time right now.  If I were going to attend, I would have to learn these reform rules just as much as I would have to learn the errata and other additional rules for a tournament run by the official rules.  For me, then, having as few changes to the cards and written rules as possible would be ideal.  I'm not too sure about all of BBH's changes, but I like the idea of the ones that add more into the game.  One thought I did have was if there is a real concern for the pseudo-aspect rule, why not make the specials playable as defensive only.  That would make sense in a certain way if you think of the absent characters as the ones who are back at the base defending it.

Some of the other stuff that has been said, for instance that Vertigo or Power Leech will change everything about the way people play.  I don't know what the real impact in Overpower would be with these cards at their maximum power.  What I do know is that in my experience playing Magic one overpowered card does not break an entire game or tournament.  First of all, not everyone will play those cards.  Even if they are actually unbeatable and the most powerful cards in the game, that doesn't mean everyone will want to limit themselves to a few very specific decks.  More than that, even in a tournament with prizes, winning isn't everything.  In fact, if there are 20 people and 3 people get prizes, then winning is exactly 15% of what it was all about.  When I play games even competitively, I really just want to have a good time and see other people's ideas and just share in a unique experience with a group of people with similar interests.

[BigBadHarve]

On the Errata:
I love the fix for Hulk's BC special. My question is if Hulk and Venom and Rhino are on the same team could I make the reserve miss 3 battles *insert evil maniacal laugh!*  

I strongly disagree with the fourfreedoms change.   I think ALL 6-character locations used as homebases should be allowed to shift attacks if those attacks are defended with a power card based defense.  That blanket rule would make many more playable.  This is ultimately the point I thought.    Also online I saw some homemade-homebases   that said," team's power grid is an eight e/f/s/I (whatever was appropriate) for defense" as another way of making them more playable.  

Everything else looks good to me.

As you can see I'm more interested in depowering an unlimited shift rather than expanding it. But it's an interesting idea. I recall you posting it elsewhere...

Your question about the double shift - It comes in handy for situations where an EB special is in play. Say Taskmaster's Trained lackeys. Under normal rules, you can't shift it to him then re-shift it to that card. It's a small adjustment, and the main point of adjusting the shift rule was to change it so that you couldn't shift to characters who couldn't be targeted by the opponent in the first place. We added the 'double shift' proviso as well while we were at it.

I admit, it doesn't largely get used, but it was worth mentioning in case the reference was needed.

As for the Reserve Inherent, that was another issue of blanket rules. Years ago, when learning the game, I asked if inherent abilities still applied from reserve. I was told yes. Then when using Longshot in reserve for a team, I was told no. It didn't apply to him, or Invisible Woman or Blue Beetle, or Comm. Gordon. Because they added to venture. I asked where that was written and I got an 'I don't know, that's just the way it is.'

So, either they do, or they don't. And I'm not sure cancelling ALL inherents from reserve unless they say playable from reserve wouldn't go over well, so we decided they do. Blanket rule.

Inifinite loop: It isn't a huge problem in Overpower, and really would only come up at a tournament situation where games are timed, but most card games have such a rule, so we decided to have one just in case. Say you're using Marauders and Taskmaster. They both have Identical BQ specials. You could theoretically create an unlimited stall tactic by playing Malice to get Photographic reflexes, to call Malice back, to play it for Reflexes again, and so on.

Like I said, not a likely situation, but might as well address it.

Cheers!

-BBH

[gameplan.exe]

Inifinite loop: It isn't a huge problem in Overpower, and really would only come up at a tournament situation where games are timed, but most card games have such a rule, so we decided to have one just in case. Say you're using Marauders and Taskmaster. They both have Identical BQ specials. You could theoretically create an unlimited stall tactic by playing Malice to get Photographic reflexes, to call Malice back, to play it for Reflexes again, and so on.

I thought you were just being funny  

Without OP being timed, there really wouldn't be an issue. Since i've only ever seen OP timed, by my wife telling me I have to be home by X:XX, I couldn't see how it could be an issue, but there you go!

[Nostalgic]

@ BBH

Thanks for addressing my post.  I was starting to feel like the invisble man...

I had a genuine question about forcing the opponent's reserve to miss 3 battles with Hulk, Venom, and Rhino.  I just wanted to be sure that was your intent or at least whether you're fine with the possibility or not. 


What do you think about making the "psuedo-aspects" function like activators with the specials under the homebase?  Since you couldn't place the specials to the homebase you have less control over your window to use them.  Perhaps that dials back the power enough for Onslaught's tastes. I only mention that In the intererst of tweaking things for broader consensus.

Related to that I appreciate any feedback you may give on some of the house rules I post.  I realize there are many things I may not think about (since I don't play as often) regarding what effect a rule my have on the game balance. Specifically how  a rule may completely break things do to specials, teams, or combos I may not have thought of. 

[BigBadHarve]

I had a genuine question about forcing the opponent's reserve to miss 3 battles with Hulk, Venom, and Rhino.  I just wanted to be sure that was your intent or at least whether you're fine with the possibility or not. 

Sorry about that, I saw the question and for some reason didn't process it. 

Yes, you could theoretically do that. There's an any-hero version of that card too, if you're interested...

What do you think about making the "psuedo-aspects" function like activators with the specials under the homebase?  Since you couldn't place the specials to the homebase you have less control over your window to use them.  Perhaps that dials back the power enough for Onslaught's tastes. I only mention that In the intererst of tweaking things for broader consensus.

That was actually something we discussed off the top, but opted against it. It does have merit, though, and would be yet another use for DoW (because, you know, it's just not useful enough), which would now affect the activators for the pseudo-aspects.

Palatinus' suggestion of making them defensive only was interesting, but I'll have to sit and review the locations to see how that would affect things. Though, despite the controversy with the Citadel, I'm still very pleased with how the pseudo-aspect rule works.

-BBH

[Nostalgic]

What do you think about making the "psuedo-aspects" function like activators with the specials under the homebase?  Since you couldn't place the specials to the homebase you have less control over your window to use them.  Perhaps that dials back the power enough for Onslaught's tastes. I only mention that In the intererst of tweaking things for broader consensus.

That was actually something we discussed off the top, but opted against it. It does have merit, though, and would be yet another use for DoW (because, you know, it's just not useful enough), which would now affect the activators for the pseudo-aspects.

Palatinus' suggestion of making them defensive only was interesting, but I'll have to sit and review the locations to see how that would affect things. Though, despite the controversy with the Citadel, I'm still very pleased with how the pseudo-aspect rule works.

-BBH

Defensive only or just treat them like additional non-placeable any-heroe cards.

[breadmaster]

no proxies ...no 5 multi or DoW for the breadman then

also, do you anticipate so many disputes you can't play?  wouldn't it be boring hanging around for hours on end?

[BigBadHarve]

no proxies ...no 5 multi or DoW for the breadman then

also, do you anticipate so many disputes you can't play?  wouldn't it be boring hanging around for hours on end?

Yeah, no proxies, sorry. Mike wanted to print up and offer proxies of things like Beyonder and DoW, so that everyone would at least be on an even keel for the match. But I've found people divided on that issue - some players would prefer to play straight up, if you don't have the card then you don't get to use it. Others don't mind the proxy and will say just do it. For tournaments I'm more inclined for the former, myself. Marvels being the obvious exception - but even the Marvels can be divisive, because they were never officially created, even though they are recognized as the cards that would have been. I like them, and think they make for a fun dynamic.

If the last gathering was any indication, there will be a lot of people asking questions. I couldn't go ten minutes without someone asking me how rules were played when we met in February. And those were people playing official rules! So I think it best that I sit out and be on hand to act as the judge. Also, since I'm organizing things, and providing the prize support, not to mention utilizing my own rule set - it's best that I sit out lest things come across as somewhat sketchy. I'll have my teams and be there for casual matches though.

-BBH

[Nostalgic]

BBH have you thought about simply changing vertigo from 'may' to 'must'?   Would that fix it?

[Hot Rod]

BBH have you thought about simply changing vertigo from 'may' to 'must'?   Would that fix it?

That's an interesting idea.  I'm not if it would stop vertigo from being used to load up specific characters (X babies) but, I think it would be a fairly good nerf as it would only let you have shift to 2 characters and not 3 (assuming all attacks go to the same character).

On another note I've been doing some testing of this format which (borrowing from Onslaught) I would like to call the "Negates or Fantastic" format.

I played about 15 games with a Stark Enterprise; Scarlet Witch, Iron Man, Captain America and Hawkeye/Spider Woman reserve deck.  Using the Outback and Infinity Gauntlet.  I literally could not manage a better than 1 out of every 4 against a Mr. Fantastic, Spawn, Starjammers, Silver Sable deck using any heroes and shattered image.

With Devourer already not being negatable, the addition of Leech only being negatable combined with the Gen 13 vs the Regulators and to a lesser extent Entropy Field, creates absolutely unwinnable hands far too frequently.  This isn't even taking into account Web Head, 2 draw 3's, Python Hold, Raza, and Finite Power.

I can see this becoming a format that requires both decks to have hand winning cards that can only be negated (HQ, JA, BQ, BY, OC).  If you're running activators, I wouldn't even bother using a site other than Onslaught Citadel or Outback, unless you have a KL character on your team (most likely X babies in a beyonder deck).

Anways, I'll keep testing, but I suspect Onslaught could correct about this being 10 pages on how basic universe are now recyclable (sorry BBH!)

[Nostalgic]

BBH have you thought about simply changing vertigo from 'may' to 'must'?   Would that fix it?

That's an interesting idea.  I'm not if it would stop vertigo from being used to load up specific characters (X babies) but, I think it would be a fairly good nerf as it would only let you have shift to 2 characters and not 3 (assuming all attacks go to the same character).

How could they load up the x-babies?  For any attack that the Marauders would chose to shift the new target hero 'must' defend it. It's basically to take away letting someone just spread hits around in the most convenient way and require defensive action to also be played.