(Metagame Archives) Marvel Knights Preview: Doop, Ultimate Weapon

Mike Flores

A powerful offensive card that can fluster your opponent and end the game, this version of Doop might really be the Ultimate Weapon. Much like the comic book that spawned him, Doop breaks all the rules.

First of all, Doop, Ultimate Weapon is absolutely enormous for his threshold cost. An admittedly expensive 8-drop, Doop is as big in front as a 10-drop Dark Phoenix! If Doop comes down on turn 8, he should be able to take out almost any character the opponent recruits, and still be able to do a little breakthrough, even while facing the opponent’s biggest giant. This use for the X-Statix mascot can yield a great tempo swing, but let’s be honest . . . often, assuming you have the initiative, you’ll want to use Doop to hit the smallest character on the opposing squad. You know . . . the Destiny or Bolivar Trask cowering in the back row.

Moreover, Doop’s being a concealed character offers a measure of insurance on that last turn of the game. Often, you’ll drag the game to turn 8, play out your huge guy, and lose anyway. The opponent has the initiative and sets you up for a series of stuns that leaves you without potential attackers, taking away your options and undoing your hard work. But not with Doop. Concealed ensures that Doop will stick around for your combat, even if you don’t have the initiative. So, even in games where the opponent knocks you below 0 endurance, the Ultimate Weapon gives you a potential ray of hope. Look to use Doop’s formidable 25 ATK for the best possible breakthrough with which to end the game, like the Red scourge of communism at the end of the eighth turn . . . I mean eighties.

Flying is also a great feature for the weapon to end all weapons. I mean, sure, of course he flies—he doesn’t have any legs. As the Ultimate Weapon, flying allows Doop to pick the right on-board character to strike. He can break up formations on the initiative and play bully while the opponent is stuck playing fair.

The odd part about this Ultimate Weapon is his miniscule DEF. Of course, you’re probably saying to yourself, “Didn’t Doop get his brain sawed out by some terrorist Russians?” Or perhaps you’re saying, “Didn’t Thor put the whammy on the little with Mjolnir straight to the gray (green) matter?” Well, while the answer is yes to both (maybe indicating his low DEF), Doop walked (floated) away from those trials to take pictures another day (for one last issue, anyway), didn’t he? In game terms, this means that while Doop might get stunned by any defender bigger than the venerable May Parker, his invulnerability won’t leave you on the wrong end of his 8 threshold come endurance loss time . . . I mean, that could be pretty embarrassing.

What it comes down to is that Doop is a very well composed and dangerous threat.

How else could he have ended the Cold War?

 

That’s right. Lovable Doop, X-Statix’s very visible cameraman and one of the most dangerous entities on the planet, was built for a specific purpose! Though his old buddy Wolverine probably knows what’s what, Doop’s own teammates are clueless until another super soldier fills them in.

Thematically, the concealed Doop “hides in plain sight.” Even though he is, perhaps, the most visible member of the world’s most famous and wildly popular superhero team, people aren’t coming after him for the right reasons. While Captain America may be worried that Doop might be the target of a terrorist attack or fall into the wrong hands, the Brotherhood ends their own series in a failed attempt on his life. As a political statement, that’s kind of like assassinating one of the former members of 98 Degrees to spell out their disapproval of boy bands or reality television.

A gelatinous blob of nothing? Hood Brother, you’d better head back to the Savage Land, or maybe study in Genosha so you can get a clue!

Doop is there for every X-Statix battle, just as you’ll want him on the table when you play with Marvel Knights. The thing is, the opponents are too busy shooting at Mr. Sensitive and the Anarchist to notice that the huggable floating booger with the camera might just be stronger than the Scion of Asgard himself.

(Metagame Archive) Marvel Knights Preview: Witching Hour

By Danny Mandel

And no, that isn’t the Scarlet Witch—it’s Witch Woman!*

Witching Hour is one of my favorite types of card designs—unapparent in power and modular in deck design.

For argument’s sake, let’s say there are two axes on which to describe a card. Axis one is the card’s power level. I actually don’t find this axis quite so interesting, because often, one card’s strength is only relative to other cards’, and it’s pretty easy for a developer to amp up a card’s overt power (hey, just add +1 ATK/+1 DEF to it!).

What I do find interesting is when a card’s power level is less obvious, even if it’s just at first glance. You see this all the time during previews. Some cards are looked down on as complete junk, but later become solid components of high-end decks. (A Death in the Family is a good example of this. The card was much maligned as a bad Finishing Move when it first debuted, but is now commonly used in aggressive strategies that don’t have time to exhaust a character.) On the other hand, some cards look like they’re phenomenally broken, but later end up being simply decent, or—gasp—stinky. (I blame Humphreys for these.)

So, is Witching Hour hot or not? I’d tell you what I think, but that would ruin all the fun.

A second axis on which to describe a card is how linear or modular it is when it comes to deck design. One way to look at it is that the more linear a card is, the more obvious its role is in a deck. For example, Mystical Paralysis is a very linear card. Not only is its function extremely narrow (exhaust a character), but it’s only playable in decks that include Dr. Doom himself (or possibly a Decoy Program). While Mystical Paralysis is a staple in both Pure Doom and Common Enemy archetypes, you don’t build those decks because of Mystical—rather, you include it in those decks because it’s a good card.

While still somewhat linear, Alicia Masters is a more open ended card around which you might build a deck. While she serves one very specific function (to cheapen the recruit cost of some of your character cards), one could argue that she lends herself towards a Turbo Thing deck, a Turbo Torch deck, and a Turbo Thing and Torch deck. Even though she serves a similar role in all three decks, each of those archetypes owes its existence to her. (She is the “turbo” part, after all.) Further, you might just splash her in a more standard FF build, assuming that in some matchups you’ll have the opportunity to “go off.”

An example of a modular card is Tech Upgrade. Sure, it only works with one class of card—equipment—but it works with any equipment. You can run the Upgrade in an equipment-centric Barbara Gordon deck, in a deck that wants to load up on Fantasticars, or in a deck that wants to guarantee it gets Decoy Program by turn 3.

Which brings us back to Witching Hour. While the card has some pretty specific requirements—it has a threshold cost of 7 and only works on small Underworld characters—there are lots of different ways to build a Witching Hour deck. Let’s talk about some of them now.

Underworld Swarm

 

As you might have guessed after seeing some of the other Underworld previews, a team full of demons and the undead is heavily invested in KO pile interactions. You’ll find cards that efficiently allow you to fill your KO pile and cards that “tax” you by removing cards from your KO pile. You’ll also find cards that reward you for having lots of “dead” characters. And what better reward than to bring them all back to the land of the living?

Traditionally, swarm decks run out of gas in the late game. A swarm player ends up quickly emptying his or her hand to put as many small threats into play as possible. Often, this puts an opponent on the defensive, forcing that player to stabilize the board until he or she can play larger characters that can hold back the swarm. Once the opponent has stabilized, the game’s all but over for the swarm deck, which now lacks a way to “punch through.”

With Witching Hour, the swarm player has a new late game weapon. Just as you’re about to run out of steam, the clock strikes midnight and it’s time for all your dead little buddies to wake up and smell the blood. In this build, Witching Hour acts as a kind of “Plan B.” You’d much rather tear your opponent’s throat out before the late game, but at least now you have a safety net.

’Phisto Food

 

We spoiled the Father of Lies a few days ago, and as one would expect from a demon, he offers you a tricky deal. The upside is that you can’t lose the game. The downside is that you can (and will) lose three characters every turn, which might end up costing you Mephisto himself. But what if there were some way to guarantee that you could feed Mephisto for as many turns as necessary? You guessed it! Witching Hour provides the perfect snack pack. Play it on turn 7 to fill up your board (just make sure you leave three critters in your KO’d pile to satisfy Mephisto’s recruit requirement), and then play the big guy on turn 8 to create the soft lock. Since you can’t lose the game, the fact that you just spent a ton of endurance to recruit your army for “free” doesn’t matter so much.

There are a couple of other things to remember about Mephisto. His start-of-attack-step power won’t trigger if he’s stunned. This means you could conceivably find a way to stun him (perhaps teaming up and using Blackgate Prison?), then recover him later to benefit from his can’t-lose-the-game ability. Speaking of recovery effects, keep in mind that the incredibly efficient but painful Rise from the Grave is a perfect match with Mephisto, since endurance loss doesn’t matter if you can’t lose the game. Just make sure you have 5 endurance to pay its play cost.

A Beastly Combo of Doom

 

Man, that threshold cost of 7 is daunting. But with cards such as Beast and Latveria, maybe we can get the party started a little sooner. This archetype is all about the big payoff. Spend the first few turns of the game filling your KO pile with tons of 1- and 2-cost characters. (Remember that you still have to recruit them, so to make sure uniqueness isn’t a problem. Either use lots of army guys or characters with different names). Then, on turn 5 or 6, bring ’em all back. Mix in some Hired Goons for added spice.

Okay, that’s all I got.

Tune in next week for the who, what, when, where, and how of concealed and the hidden area (bonus “why” section also included).

Send questions or comments to dmandel@metagame.com.

*No jokes. She works for Mephisto. Also, she used to own a restaurant.

(Metagame Archive) Marvel Knights Preview: Jigsaw

By Brian-David Marshall

Apparently, word of Daywalker’s existence leaked from the underworld, so I found myself suddenly faced with a change of plans. Instead of the original column I was going to write—Walking on Sunshine: Blade, The Daywalker—I found myself under the gun to pull a different preview together. Seriously under the gun . . . get a look at this little number.

For a substitute preview card, it doesn’t get much better than this. Hot art by one of my all-time favorite comic artists, a villain with a slightly unlikely story (how is this guy the only villain that the Punisher hasn’t just simply popped?), and a kick-butt ability that—depending on the other cards available to Crime Lords players—should have an impact on both Sealed Pack and Constructed.

Curve Sentinels may currently be the most consistent deck in Constructed Vs. System. The deck’s success is fueled by the power of the 6-drop Bastion. I think many people will fall into the trap of misevaluating Jigsaw because they’ll try to hold it up to Bastion for comparison. Bastion has a similar ability, though his effect lasts until the end of the turn instead of for just one attack, and he is also backed up by the card advantage–crazy Reconstruction Program.

Despite not having these advantages, and its below drop–optimum stats, Jigsaw, Billy Russo is very powerful. He has the ability to boost any of your characters on offense or defense. So what if it’s only for the duration of the attack? Basically, he allows you to power up anyone on your side of the table, regardless of their affiliation, with any Crime Lords character card in your hand.

When Jigsaw comes down on turn 5, he should give your opponent fits, regardless of which initiative you have. If your opponent wants to attack your characters, then he or she will have to play a guessing game about how many Crime Lords you have in hand, and then attempt to administer tricks appropriately. On your attack, assuming you have cards in hand, your opponent will be staring down the barrel of a handful of power-ups that will allow your characters to jump up and down the curve.

I see Jigsaw being a pretty high pick in Marvel Knights Sealed Pack, especially if you’re able to draft a near-dedicated Crime Lords deck. On turn 5, you should be able to do a number on your opponent’s side of the table. In Marvel Origins Booster Draft, Bastion was the only card that could send me straight into Sentinels, and Jigsaw may well be a similar signpost for the Crime Lords affiliation.

Since Jigsaw is an uncommon (whereas Bastion is rare), you’ll see him more often in Sealed Pack. Consequently, you can actually get some experience with the archetype and work on perfecting the strategies needed to draft it effectively. Players don’t usually get enough experience playing with rare cards in drafts because . . . well . . . they’re rare. I have seen more than one Bastion-based draft go awry because the drafter lacked the experience to know when to snag army Sentinels or Reconstruction Programs. Every army Sentinel card you select in a Bastion deck could be treated like a super power-up. When you piece together the Jigsaw deck, even the lowliest of Crime Lords characters can be treated the same way.

For Constructed, Jigsaw’s fate will rely on the power of the rest of the affiliation’s cards. Certainly, if there are any cards that return Crime Lords characters from your KO pile to your hand, things will be looking up for Billy Russo. Even without such a card, there’s still a good chance that Jigsaw will find some use in Constructed. You could build a Curve Sentinels deck with him and Bastion, provided that you have a team-up for Sentinels and Crime Lords. I’m sure an aspiring crime lord like Billy would love to look down on Earth from the Avalon Space Station. I’m sure that something could be done, but it’s too soon to tell for sure.

One thing I can tell you about this card is that Chris Bachalo has turned in one of the best pieces of art I’ve yet seen in Marvel Knights. Card illustrations seem to get better and better with each new set, and if Jigsaw is any indication, that will hold true for Marvel Knights. Until this card came across my desktop, Andrew Robinson was my favorite gunsmith for Vs. System, with kick-butt illustrations for Solo and Arsenal Roy Harper. Move over Mr. Robinson, because Mr. Bachalo has stuck a gun in everyone’s face and announced his presence on the Vs. art scene.

The art on this card really captures the in-your-face, wet-your-pants terror that any Crime Lord worth his salt hopes to inspire. This is no “namby pamby, falling down and firing away against a typographical background” art. This is no “running away and firing willy nilly in your wake” art. I am reasonably certain that Jigsaw has never done anything in his life that rhymes girlishly. Despite the presence of a bullet-pocked wall and a hideously disfigured madman, the image that dominates the scene is the looming menace of that obviously oft-used gun.

Historically, I don’t fully understand the relationship between Billy Russo and Frank Castle. After killing a room full of thugs, The Punisher chose not to kill the handsome, rising superstar of thugdom. Instead, he threw him face-first through a plate glass window. Reconstructive surgery has come a long way since his fateful defenestration, but poor Billy developed horrible scars that led him to become the Punisher-obsessed madman known as Jigsaw.

That’s all well and good, but what I can’t understand is why the Punisher keeps letting him live. It’s not like the Batman/Joker dynamic—Batman simply doesn’t kill anyone. Frank Castle has always been a proponent of letting god sort ’em out. I guess he needed some other recurring villain besides the Kingpin (the original Kingpin, not the “Karen Page’s death has pushed me over the brink of sanity so why don’t you all join me, Matt Murdock” Kingpin), or maybe he couldn’t stand to look at Billy Russo’s face long enough to get off a clean shot.

If you want to get your clean shot at the Punisher, Jigsaw, Blade, The Daywalker, and all the other exciting characters available in Marvel Knights, you can go to a Marvel Knights Sneak Peek tournament on February 5th or 6th. I will be running a Sneak Peek on both days at Neutral Ground in New York City, and I hope to see you there. If NYC is too long a haul for you, you can find the complete list of locations by clicking here.

(Metagame Archive) Marvel Knights Preview: Weapon of Choice

By Matt Hyra

You asked for it, and soon you’ll have it. Marvel Knights is bringing us a character search card that anyone can use.

Now, any team can pretend that they’re the Fantastic Four . . . sort of. Weapon of Choice offers every team a bit of the curve smoothing that, until now, only a select few have enjoyed.

There are several things you should be aware of, however, before tossing Weapon into your next deck.

1. Don’t expect to go find a power-up during an attack.

It’s just a bit too obvious when one of the characters you choose is the same as your current attacker. If you think you’re going to need a power-up, grab a copy during the build phase. If you get the card, you’ll be power-up ready. If not, choose some less risky attacks.

2. Don’t expect to get the best character for the turn.

Your opponent knows what hoses him or her, so you’re going to end up with the card against which your opponent has the best chance. Dragon Man and Gog will never see your hand via Weapon when you’re facing a deck they do well against.

3. Don’t expect to use it four times during the game without suffering.

Discarding two cards to gain one is not something you can afford to do and still keep lots of tricks up your sleeve for later turns.

4. Don’t expect to resolve this plot twist too many times against the Gotham Knights.

One big drawback is that the discard is part of the cost. If your opponent hits it with a Fizzle, you’ll be crying, as those cards and the Weapon will be lost.

5. Don’t plan to use it very effectively in Army decks.

Army decks tend to use six or seven copies of a single character at each drop, so they can’t make much use of this card. Are you really going to play this card just to let your opponent hand you Master Mold while you shuffle up Bastion?

What does all this really mean? It means you could search your way out of a bad draw, smooth out your curve, run out of cards in your hand, and still possibly not get anything (or anything usable) to show for it. If you haven’t been scared off yet, there are some great benefits available to the wise Weapon player.

Go ahead and use six different 4-drops in your deck. If half of them are offensively minded and the other half have great activated powers, you’ll be all set to search out two characters who don’t offer your opponent any slack. Make your opponent choose between a rock and a hard place. Many decks use just two different characters at most drops—one offensive and one defensive. If you Weapon those two into your hand, be prepared for your opponent to laugh when you give him or her the option of Robot Seeker or Volcana. I mean, c’mon! One is only good while attacking, and the other is basically only useful while defending. Hmm, okay . . . I guess your opponent is really laughing for a different reason.

Another great benefit is that you can cut down on the number of characters at certain drops where you’d prefer not to overstock. If you want a decent chance of drawing a 2-drop by turn 2, you naturally need to put six or more of them into your deck and accept the possibility of a mulligan. Weapon of Choice gives you more chances to make each drop. So, if you don’t want to overstock on 2-drops, you could play with two 2-drops and four copies of Weapon. You’d then have six chances to “draw” a 2-drop by turn 2.

Questions or comments may be sent to mhyra@metagame.com.

(Metagame Archive) Cerebro #1

By Paul Ross

Welcome to the first edition of CEREBRO (which may or may not stand for Column Explaining Rules Enquiries by Readers of Metagame.com)!

I’m Paul Ross, a Level 2 judge from Sydney, Australia, and I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m the kind of guy who enjoys wading through the Comprehensive Rules document. (“Who wouldn’t?” as Peter Parker asks in the first movie.) I’m reliably informed, however, that this might not be everybody’s idea of zany fun.

At the same time, I’m guessing that many of you would like to improve your Vs. skills, and enhancing your rules knowledge is a great way to do just that. So, the idea of this column is to assist those of you who are perhaps not as dangerously rules-obsessed as myself, but still want to become more competitive (or even professional) at this fine game.

Please send your questions on any aspects of the Vs. System rules to vsrules@gmail.com. My only “rule” is that you let me know which part of the world you’re writing from. Simple, hey?

Since my mailbag’s a little on the light side at the moment (this being the first edition and all), the plan for the initial week is to explore a handful of areas that seem to cause the most confusion in tournaments and rules forums. So, without further ado . . .

1. Priority and the Chain

What’s priority? Who’s the primary player?

When you have priority, it’s “your turn” to do something if you choose to, such as play an effect, flip a location, or propose an attack. If you choose to do something, you retain priority to do something else. If you choose to do something else, you retain priority to do something else again. If you choose to do something else again . . . you get the idea.

Choosing to do nothing is called “passing” priority. After all players pass in succession (which takes way too long to type, so from now on I’ll just say “successive passes”) on an empty chain, the game progresses to the next phase/step/substep.

Inside one of the game’s four steps (resource, recruit, formation, and attack), the primary player is whoever owns the step. Outside these steps, the primary player is whoever has the initiative. At the beginning of each phase/step/substep, the primary player is the first to get priority.

When do effects resolve? Can I do something “in response?”

When you play an effect (including the recruit effect of a character or equipment), the effect is added to the chain. Only after successive passes does the most recently added effect resolve. Then the primary player gets priority.

If a player says he or she is doing something “in response,” that player is doing something before the most recent effect resolves. Remember that you retain priority whenever you do something, so your opponent won’t receive priority to do something “in response” until you pass. Generally, you can’t stop a player with priority from paying the cost of an effect (like exhausting a character to use an activated power), and once an effect is on the chain, doing anything to the source of that effect won’t disrupt the effect in any way.

Playing an effect is like shooting a basketball. Once it’s in the air, fouling the shooter won’t change the trajectory, and it certainly won’t have stopped the shot from being taken in the first place.

Example: Hugh Jackman is playing Anna Paquin in a Teen Titans mirror match and has priority in his attack step. Hugh opts to activate Terra targeting Anna’s Roy Harper ◊ Arsenal. Hugh retains priority, and then passes. In response, Anna exhausts Hawk to play Roy’s pump effect (retaining priority), then exhausts Dove to play Roy’s pump effect a second time, then passes. Hugh also passes, so the most recent pump effect resolves. Roy becomes 6 ATK/3 DEF, and priority shifts to the primary player (Hugh). After successive passes, the second pump effect resolves, making Roy 8 ATK/3 DEF. After Hugh passes, Anna activates Roy (KO’ing a resource) targeting Terra, and then passes. Hugh also passes, so Roy’s effect resolves and stuns Terra. After successive passes, Terra’s effect resolves (even though she has been stunned), replacing one of Hugh’s locations and stunning Roy.

Does flipping a location use the chain?

No. Flipping a location is an action that doesn’t use the chain, but rather “interrupts” successive passes.

 

Example: Patrick Stewart is attacking Ian McKellen’s Dr. Doom, Diabolic Genius with Poison Ivy and has priority on an empty chain. After Patrick passes, Ian flips Doomstadt and passes. The attack doesn’t conclude at this point, because flipping the location interrupted successive passes. Instead, Patrick gets priority. If he passes without taking any action, then the attack will conclude, because there were successive passes on an empty chain.

 

Some locations have a power that triggers when they’re flipped. Even though flipping a location doesn’t use the chain, any triggered effect from such a power is put on the chain.

 

Later in the same match, Ian no longer controls Dr. Doom. Patrick has a Fear and Confusion face-up in his resource row when Ian flips Latverian Embassy. The Embassy’s triggered effect is put on the chain, but its continuous power starts generating a modifier immediately. Therefore, if Ian were to pass priority, Patrick wouldn’t be able to play Fear and Confusion in response to the triggered effect. After successive passes, the triggered effect would resolve and Ian would discard a card.

 

Metropolis adds an interesting twist to this last example. Like Latverian Embassy, its triggered effect is put on the chain, but its continuous power starts generating a modifier immediately. However, because the triggered effect is the choosing of affiliations required to “fuel” the modifier, the modifier won’t actually do anything useful until the triggered effect resolves.

 

2. The Attack Step (and Attack Substep)

Will exhausting an attacker make an attack illegal? How will a team attack conclude if one of the attackers is stunned?

The key factor in these (and nearly all attack-related) questions is usually whether or not the attacker has exhausted.

An attack substep begins after successive passes on an empty chain following an attack proposal. An attack substep starts by rechecking the legality of the proposed attack (let’s call this the legality check). If it’s still legal, then proposed attackers exhaust and become attackers, proposed defenders become defenders, and the attacking player gets priority.

Before the legality check, there are no attackers or defenders—only proposed attackers and proposed defenders. If a proposed attacker becomes exhausted or stunned by the time of the legality check, then the proposed attack is illegal, even if there are other proposed team attackers who are still legal.

After the legality check, a legal attack will always remain legal until it concludes. Exhausting an attacker will not affect attack legality in any way. Stunning any number of team attackers (or the defender) will not make an attack illegal, but it may influence the conclusion of the attack.

An attack only concludes after successive passes on an empty chain. If there are no attackers remaining, then do nothing. If there is no defender remaining, then ready attackers. If at least one attacker and one defender remain, then compare ATK & DEF.

Example: Famke Janssen (Brotherhood) is playing Halle Berry (Doom) and has priority in her attack step. Famke proposes to team-attack Halle’s newly recruited Dr. Doom, Victor Von Doom with Sabretooth, Feral Rage and Rogue, Anna Raven. Famke retains priority, and then passes. Halle exhausts Dr. Doom to target Sabretooth with Mystical Paralysis. After successive passes, Mystical Paralysis resolves and exhausts Sabretooth. After successive passes on the now-empty chain, the attack substep begins, but the proposed attack fails the legality check because Sabretooth is no longer a legal proposed attacker. After successive passes, the attack concludes, but nothing happens because there are no attackers. Note that even though the proposed attack failed the legality check, an attack substep began and concluded. This may or may not have some relevance to a new mechanic in Marvel Knights (he says mysteriously . . . )

 

Never one to give up, Famke next proposes to team-attack Dr. Doom with Rogue and Quicksilver, Speed Demon, and then passes. Halle says “Legal,” indicating that she also passes, so the proposed attack will consequently pass the legality check. The two attackers exhaust, Rogue’s triggered power puts an effect on the chain, and the primary player (Famke) gets priority and passes. Halle knows that exhausting Rogue now will not impact the attack in any way, so she plays Reign of Terror from her hand to bounce her, instead. After successive passes, Rogue returns to Famke’s hand. Then, after successive passes, Rogue’s triggered effect resolves, trying to exhaust the already-exhausted Dr. Doom. Finally, after successive passes on the now-empty chain, the attack concludes with Dr. Doom stunning Quicksilver.

3. The Recovery Phase

The recovery phase can cause at least as much confusion as the combat phase, but fortunately, it has far fewer moving parts. So, understanding the phase is simply a matter of learning the order in which things happen. A typical question might be:

I have Gone But Not Forgotten face-up in my resource row. At the end of the combat phase, I’m at -1 endurance and my opponent is at 0 endurance, but I have a stunned character in play. Can I choose not to recover the stunned character, gain 2 endurance, and win the game?

 

You can choose not to recover a character, but you will lose the game before you get to make that choice. Here’s how it works:

 

As the recovery phase starts, effects that trigger at the start of the recovery phase are added to the chain, and then the primary player gets priority. After successive passes on an empty chain, the recovery phase “wrap-up” begins, and no players get priority until the next turn.

The first part of the wrap-up is a comparison of endurance totals. In the scenario above, this is when you would lose the game. So that we can continue, let’s pretend that both endurance totals are still in positive territory. Next, each player has the option of choosing a stunned character to recover. The primary player chooses first, and chosen characters recover simultaneously. Then, all stunned characters are KO’d. This is when Gone But Not Forgotten would trigger, but the triggered effect isn’t added to the chain until a player is about to receive priority. Finally, all objects ready, modifiers with the duration “this turn” finish, and initiative passes clockwise.

As the draw phase of the next turn starts, the game-based effect instructing each player to draw 2 cards is added to the chain first. Then the triggered effect from Gone But Not Forgotten is added (along with any other effects that have triggered since the start of last turn’s wrap-up). Then the primary player gets priority.

I control a Silver Banshee with a cosmic counter, and my opponent has two stunned characters. Can I wait until my opponent chooses which character to recover, then activate Silver Banshee to KO the chosen character?

Hopefully, you can figure out the answer to this question from the sequence described above. The answer is no, because you don’t have priority to play Silver Banshee’s activated power during the wrap-up (when your opponent chooses which character to recover). You can, of course, play it before the wrap-up.

4. The Uniqueness Rule

Is it possible to control more than one character of the same name?

Absolutely. The uniqueness rule applies only to recruiting a non-army character (or unique equipment) or flipping a unique location. If you do, then any objects of the same name you control are put into the KO’d pile as part of resolving the recruit effect or flipping the location.

As an aside, putting an object into the KO’d pile this way is not the same as KO’ing that object. One reason for this distinction is so that modifiers instructing that objects cannot be KO’d (such as Lazarus Pit’s) do not disrupt the uniqueness rule.

If duplicate unique characters/equipment/locations come under your control by any other means, then the uniqueness rule has no impact.

 

For example: A boosted Dr. Light, Arthur Light will return any number of Dr. Light character cards from your KO’d pile to your front row. In addition, any other Dr. Lights you control when the boosted Dr. Light resolves will also end up in your front row. This is because they are put into the KO’d pile (by the uniqueness rule) as part of resolving the boosted Dr. Light, and then returned to play when his triggered effect resolves.

 

Other examples abound: A Mad Hatter may “steal” an opponent’s Mad Hatter. A boosted Vic Stone ◊ Cyborg may  retrieve a Time Platform, even if a character you control is already equipped with one. Alternately, you could play Misappropriation to “steal” an opponent’s Time Platform. You could also play Relocation to “steal” a Doomstadt from your opponent, yet still keep the one you already have face up in your resource row.

5. Self-Reference

If the text of a card refers to its own name, is it also referring to any other cards of the same name?

Although fifth on my list, I’ve seen this question cause as much confusion as any of the others. The short answer is “no, with one exception,” and the long answer is best illustrated by two characters from two opposing affiliations.

Superman, Red’s cosmic power reads, “While Superman is attacking from the front row, he gets +4 ATK.” This literally means, “While this piece of cardboard is attacking from the front row, this piece of cardboard gets +4 ATK.” No other characters named Superman are affected.

 

Example: You control three characters named Superman, Red (all are face up in the front row and all have a cosmic counter). If they team-attack a defender, each one only gets +4 ATK, because each one is only affected by its own power.

 

Intergang’s power reads, “Exhaust a location you control >>> Characters named Intergang get +1 ATK and +1 DEF this attack.” The key word is “named.” This is the exception I mentioned above. If a card’s text refers to characters “named” CardName, then it refers to all characters named CardName.

Example: You control three characters named Intergang (all are face up). If you exhaust a location to use one of their payment powers, all three get +1 ATK and +1 DEF this attack.

I hope that you’ve learned at least one or two new things here today. If not, I’ll just have to try harder next time! Who knows, maybe I’ll even have a chance to delve into my mailbag. That address one more time: vsrules@gmail.com.

(Metagame Archives) The Best of Times/Worst of Times: Following Up the NJ $10K

By Brian-David Marshall

Okay . . . I think I have fully recovered.

The New Jersey $10K tournament was a great event with a huge turnout. The Top 8 featured a good mix of the game’s best players, fresh new faces, and seven distinctly different decks. Two different $10K winners squared off in the semifinals, and the ultimate match was between a $10K winner seeking his unprecedented second trophy and a Yu-Gi-Oh! World Championships Top 8 competitor seeking double-threat status.

So, from what did I need to recover?

Well, about a week before the event, the tournament venue changed ownership and the new management had not quite . . . figured things out yet. This had little to zero impact on the competitors, who had an amazing time by all accounts, but it was actually the worst for this live coverage reporter.

When I arrived at the hotel a few minutes before 11 p.m. on Friday night, the staff was getting ready to change shifts. The guy who was coming on for the overnight shift made a point of finishing his drink before he got to work. By “finish his drink,” I mean down all 40 ounces of his carbonated beverage.

Later, when I came back down to get a remote control for my television set, I found him holding up the bar across from the lobby while the front desk phones rang and rang and rang. When he came over to help me, he also had to answer the phones. The calls were all for wake-up calls, and it was interesting to meet someone with such a terrific memory, because all he needed to do for each wake-up call was repeat it to the caller and not write it down anywhere—truly amazing.

When I got back to my room, I set the alarm clock and my cell phone to get me up in time for the live coverage. While I did wake up in time to do the live coverage, actual live coverage would have involved carrier pigeons. There was no wireless Internet in the hotel, no high-speed access, and no dial-up phone lines in the tournament area. There was dial-up in the business center, but the new management did not know the password to use the computer.

Because it takes so long to send photos via dial-up, going back to my room and dialing up did not seem like a good option with half-hour rounds. Instead, we decided to send someone out periodically to use a local Internet café recommended by the front desk. “Local Internet café,” however, apparently meant “coffee shop in Pennsylvania with dial-up where nobody speaks English.” The first two rounds of coverage and the blurb that went up in the middle of the day on Saturday were the result of the one and only trip to Pennsylvania.

I decided to wait until the end of the day to upload all the information, and simply focused on covering the event. At the end of the day, I went back to my room and called down for some room service so I could get to work. That wasn’t happening, as the hotel did not offer that amenity. So, I dashed across the highway to grab a healthy meal at Perkins. When I came back to my room, finally able to polish the coverage before sending it in to be uploaded, I stepped ankle-deep into water. The bathroom in the room above me was sending a steady stream of water into my room.

I stared at the ceiling for about fifteen minutes, waiting for the water to turn pink. At that point, I really wanted someone to be dead. Finally, convinced I was not going to see a satisfying change of water hue, I called the front desk and had them switch me to another room. Finally, I was able to sit down, finish the Day 1 coverage, and send it in, leaving me just a couple of hours to get some sleep.

Day 2 saw some fantastic matches between some great players. Robert Leander became the first player ever to win two $10K trophies. He piloted his Teen Titans deck past the top-ranked player in the game and another $10K winner before facing off with Roy St. Clair in the finals. Roy was playing Cosmic Cops—one of the worst possible matchups for Titans—and Leander won after playing a three-hour match. Over the course of those three hours, my USB memory stick was stolen, along with the Top 8 profiles and photos, and the computer that Josh Wiitanen used to cover an additional quarterfinal and semifinal match crashed and ate all of his hard work.

To make matters worse, my ride home decided to take a wrong turn, so we took a scenic trip through Newark and Jersey City before finding our way back to anything I recognized. To make a long story slightly less long . . . There were plenty of things that should have been included in the coverage, but because of time, dumb luck, and my growing annoyance, they did not happen. 

One of the things that did not get done on Saturday night was a metagame breakdown of all the deck types in the tournament. You can find that below, along with a breakdown of decks for everyone who finished in the money. I also provided deck lists for every deck in the Top 20 that did not have an archetype represented in the Top 8.

The most popular decks by far were Curve Sentinels and Teen Titans. The key difference is how the archetypes fared. While the tournament was won by Titans in the hands of Robert Leander, there was only one other Titans player in the money. Curve Sentinels, on the other hand, saw seven of its thirty-five programmers make money. Twenty percent of the players with purple robots made money, while only five percent of the same number of Titans players won money.

Before you go back to the fact that Leander won with the deck, let me make one thing perfectly clear—Robert Leander is better than you or I. Most other players would have lost in the final round of the Swiss and in the Finals match, both against Cosmic Cops.

Common Enemy had a very disappointing weekend, with only one player finishing in the cash (and even that was outside of the Top 8). TNB posted similar numbers. One of the decks that generated quite a bit of buzz during the tournament was Edison Soto’s Knights/New Gods deck that finished in the money and came within one win of the Top 8.

Soto’s deck list is among the six presented below. I have also included one duplicate archetype. Osyp Lebeodwicz’s 9th place Cosmic Cops deck list was built with some direct input from Ben Seck. The list is different from the 2nd place version in that it is more dedicated to the combo, with nary an 8-drop in sight. Osyp’s list also contained a very different plot twist base, including multiple Crowd Controls (contrary to early Day 1 reports, Roy St. Clair had only one Crowd Control, not three).

Anyway, dig in and enjoy. I believe that all of the deck lists from this event will be available sometime next week, so keep your eyes peeled. I will be organizing a Marvel Knights Sneak Peek the first weekend of February, and then on Sunday, February 3rd I will be organizing a PCQ. Both events will be at Neutral Ground in New York City. I hope to see you there. If not, I can always be reached at brian dot davidmarshall at gmail dot com.

Deck Number Played Top 8 Top 20
       
Curve Sentinels   35 2 7
Teen Titans   35 1 2
Common Enemy 24 0 1
TNB 15 1 1
X-Stall 12 1 1
Gotham Knights 10 0 0
Brave and the Bold 10 1 1
Spider-Friends 9 0 0
Cosmic Cops 7 1 2
X-Men 7 0 0
FF Cars 5 0 1
Superman 4 0 1
Big Brotherhood 4 0 0
Wild Vomit 4 0 0
Doom 3 0 1
Heroes United 3 0 0
My Beloved 3 0 0
Advanced Hardware 3 0 0
Rigged Elections 2 0 0
Revenge Squad 2 0 0
League of Assassins 2 1 1
Doom/Inmates   1 0 0
Spidey/Supes 1 0 0
Brotherhood/LOA 1 0 0
Doom/LOA 1 0 0
Cosmic New Gods 1 0 0
Doom/Gotham 1 0 0
Superman/LOA 1 0 0
Doom/Apokilips 1 0 0
Spidey/LOA 1 0 0
Darkseid’s Elite 1 0 0
Inmates 1 0 0
Gotham/New Gods 1 0 1
New Gods 1 0 0
LOA/Syndicate 1 0 0
Unlikely Allies 1 0 0

    
Rank          Player                              Decktype
    
9                Lebedowicz, Osyp             Cosmic Cops, deck list below
10              Crespo, Freddie                 Curve Sentinels
11              Sundholm, Peter                 Curve Sentinels
12              Renie, Paul                         FF Cars, deck list below
13              Meyer, Matthew                 Superman, deck list below
14              Zemel, David                      Teen Titans
15              Paasch, Robert                   Curve Sentinels
16              Desai, Justin                       Common Enemy, deck list below
17              Soto, Edison                       Knights/New Gods, deck list below
18              Raiff, Brian                         Curve Sentinels
19              Anderson, Jerry                  Doom, deck list below
20              Wu, Albert                         Curve Sentinels
        

Osyp Lebedowicz
9th Place, New Jersey $10K
Cosmic Cops

13 GCPD Officer
4 Alfred Pennyworth
4 Invisible Woman, The Invisible Girl
4 Mr. Fantastic, Reed Richards
1 Wyatt Wingfoot
1 Ant Man
1 Barbara Gordon Oracle
2 Batman, The Dark Knight
1 Spoiler
1 Harvey Bullock

2 World’s Finest
2 Press the Attack
4 Bat-Signal
1 Team Tactics
1 Blind Sided
4 Fizzle
2 Crowd Control
4 Cosmic Radiation
4 A Child Named Valeria
2 Marvel Team-Up

2 Utility Belt

Paul Renie
12th Place, New Jersey $10K
FF Cars

4 She-Thing
2 Human Torch, Johnny Storm
4 Thing, Ben Grimm
2 She-Hulk, Jennifer Walters
4 Invisible Woman, Sue Storm
2 Wolverine, New Fantastic Four
4 Mr. Fantastic, Stretch
1 Ghost Rider
3 Hulk, New Fantastic Four
3 Thing, The Ever-Lovin’ Blue-Eyed Thing
2 Silver Surfer

4 It’s Clobberin’ Time
4 Savage Beatdown
4 Signal Flare
3 Tech Upgrade
3 Overload
3 Acrobatic Dodge
3 Total Anarchy

4 Fantasticar
1 Personal Force Field

Matthew Meyers
13th Place, New Jersey $10K
Phantom Phone Booth

4 Gangbuster
4 Superman, Red
2 Linda Danvers ◊ Supergirl
4 Superman, Clark Kent
2 Alpha Centurion
3 Cir-El Supergirl
2 Superman, Blue
3 Kara Zor-El Supergirl
1 Superman, Kal-El
2 Eradicator, Soul of Krypton
1 Superman, False Son
2 Superman, Man of Steel

4 Acrobatic Dodge
4 Cover Fire
4 Man of Tomorrow
3 Overload
4 Savage Beatdown
4 Super Speed

4 Cadmus Labs
4 Phantom Zone

Justin Desai
16th Place, New Jersey $10K
Common Enemy

4 Boris
4 She-Thing
4 She-Hulk, Jennifer Walters
2 Purple Man
4 Dr. Doom, Diabolic Genius
1 Wolverine, New Fantastic Four
1 Thing, Heavy Hitter
1 Robot Destroyer
1 Ghost Rider
2 Hulk, New Fantastic Four
1 Dr. Doom, Victor Von Doom
1 Thing, The Ever-Lovin’ Blue-Eyed Thing
1 Submariner
1 Silver Surfer
1 Dr. Doom, Lord of Latveria

3 Savage Beatdown
4 It’s Clobberin’ Time
2 Flying Kick
1 Flame Trap
1 Faces of Doom
4 Signal Flare
4 Common Enemy
3 Mystical Paralysis
3 Reign of Terror
1 Ka-Boom!
2 Overload
1 Betrayal

3 Doomstadt

Edison Soto
17th Place, New Jersey $10K
Knights/ New Gods

4 Alfred Pennyworth
3 Barbara Gordon, Oracle
2 Tim Drake The Boy Wonder
1 Huntress
1 Jason Todd
1 Bat Girl, Martial Artist
1 Nightwing, High Flying Acrobat
2 Batman, Caped Crusader
1 Lady Shiva
2 Nightwing, Defender of Bludhaven
2 Superman, False Son
4 Big Bear
4 Highfather
1 Metron
2 Big Barda
1 Orion, Dog of War

4 Royal Decree
4 Savage Beatdown
4 Fizzle
2 Acrobatic Dodge
2 The Exchange
2 Bat-Signal
2 Overload
2 Detective Work
1 Have a Blast!
1 Unmasked
1 Flame Trap

3 The Source

1 Utility Belt

Jerry Anderson
19th Place, New Jersey $10K
Doom

4 Puppet Master
2 Robot Sentry
4 Purple Man
4 Dr. Doom, Diabolic Genius

4 Robot Destroyer
1 Dr. Doom, Victor Von Doom
4 Boris
3 Submariner
3 Apocalypse
1 Dr. Doom, Lord of Latveria

4 Reign of Terror
4 Mystical Paralysis
3 Faces of Doom
3 Gamma Bomb
4 Swift Escape
1 Reconstruction Program
3 Overload
1 Flame Trap

4 Doomstadt
4 Latveria

(Metagame Archive) Voices From The Field: Judgment Calls

By Ben Kalman

“Since this is a game, people take their responsibilities less seriously than they should.”

– Tay Howland, UDE Net Rep

A situation arose a few weeks ago that questioned a spectator’s responsibilities within the game and whether or not one’s loyalty to a friend meant that one should not call attention to that person’s playing errors.

The situation in question:

Someone was watching a game featuring a player he considered a friend. The player recruited Boris before laying down a resource. He then searched for a Common Enemy and placed it in his resource row. He played Signal Flare and began to search. At that moment, the spectator went to find a judge. By the time the judge had reached the table, the player had already searched for Dr. Doom, Lord of Latveria. The judge’s decision was to rewind the game state back to where the player played Common Enemy. Hence, the player would only have 7 resource points instead of 8 after playing Boris. Common Enemy would be played from his hand, and the Signal Flare could be used to find a different card.

The spectator, when posting this conundrum, was worried that he had done the wrong thing by bringing a judge over to correct his friend’s mistake, as it essentially cost that player the game. I was terribly disheartened by some of the responses he received, with people referring to him as a snitch and putting him down for being disloyal and ratting out a friend. One person went so far as to say that he should have waited for someone else to find a judge, as his responsibility was to his friendship and not to call his friend’s mistakes.

These people are 100 percent wrong. It is never snitching to get a judge to fix a game. If that player had won the game with a broken game state, he would have won falsely. If someone had discovered the mistake later on, that player could have been disqualified for cheating. In this case, the friend did the correct thing by getting a judge to fix the game (not interfering with the game itself), and also potentially saved the player from a very embarrassing situation.

When I asked Erick Reyes, owner of Edgeworld and someone well versed in tournament responsibilities and play, about this situation, he said, “There [are] two ways to look at it. One, you don’t say anything because you want your friend to win. Two, you do your duty as an observer as outlined by the tournament policy and report the error to a judge. The problem is that if you don’t report it, the game could progress to a point where your friend would be given a penalty game loss even if he is winning. As a judge and storeowner, [I recommend that] you report all errors. As a friend . . . it’s sticky, and I can see the other side, especially at a high level event where a lot is on the line. But, that being said, I would side on always reporting game errors.”

The problem is that many players don’t realize—or care—that when they sign their UDE cards the very first time they enter an UDE-sanctioned tournament, they are agreeing to the Upper Deck code of conduct. Their responsibility as players in a UDE tournament is to follow that code to the letter. Is it cheating as a spectator to not report an obvious play error? As UDE Premier Events Specialist Alex Charsky points out, “This is more of a question of ethics and personal integrity [than rules violations]. Technically, it is [the] responsibility of a spectator to report any errors they see to a judge. Can we expect it from 100 percent of all tournament participants? I hope so, but then again, I am an optimist!” Charsky does state, rather emphatically, that it is indeed the player’s responsibility to know and follow the UDE code of conduct. “Yes it is. They do sign the UDE card that says they agree to abide by UDE tournament rules.”

Rob Leander, a longstanding Yu-Gi-Oh! judge and one of the highest ranked Vs. System players in the world, lays the responsibility on the spectator, as well. “One could say that a spectator’s responsibility would be nothing at all; all they do is [watch], as the [word] “spectator” [suggests]. However, others say that a spectator has a responsibility where if he or she sees a wrongdoing, they should address a judge and see about getting [it] corrected. Well, I believe it was the right call to inform the judge. Whether it was an honest mistake or a blatant act of cheating, it was still something that needed to be corrected so that the game state was not affected. If it were me personally, I would have informed a judge, as well. Some people say that personal loyalty is stronger then the rules. If it were Dave [Spears] or Rian [Fike], I would wish I [had] not witnessed it, but if I did, I would [do the same as] I would for anyone and inform a judge.”

As Alex Charsky points out, it is indeed a question of ethics and integrity. That means doing what is right as laid out in the tournament guidelines and code of conduct provided by Upper Deck. As a player, if you have issues with the possibility of a friend “betraying” your play errors, you should remember two things:

1) Tournaments are played in public. There is no privacy in a tournament, nor should there be. Snitching and ratting out are derogatory words designed to implicate someone who has betrayed something secret or private to people who have no business knowing it. In this scenario, the judge needs to know what has happened in order to repair the game. No one who would wish for a friend to remain silent is someone I would want as a friend, because to keep one’s mistakes under the table and hope nobody notices them is cheating.

2) What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Think about what you would do if you lost a game where an opponent made a crucial error that cost you the win, and you found out that a friend of his or hers saw the mistake but didn’t say anything because that person didn’t want to betray a friend. If you say that you would applaud the decision and go merrily on your way, you’re most likely a blatant liar. I would be willing to bet that you’d be very angry and would do everything you could to rectify the situation.

It has been said that people are now uncomfortable allowing this spectator to watch their games. I would hesitate to trust anyone who is uncomfortable being watched by a spectator whose priority is to protect the integrity of the game and who has a history of doing the right thing. This judge was lenient compared to what some judges would have done in his place, so having bystanders who ensue that the game is finished fairly and properly is actually quite comforting. If not for this spectator, the player might have had a much more serious problem. Alex Charsky said, “I think there are grounds for investigation of cheating there. I think that a friend bringing up the error is what actually saves this player from getting DQ’d for blatant cheating. It’s obvious that the player is not accidentally searching for Common Enemy, since he needs it in play to search and recruit Dr. Doom.” Charsky went on to say that if he didn’t disqualify the player, he would have pretty much followed the same path the judge did, although, “once again, all of this assumes that I believe that the player accidentally made this error, which as presented above seems very doubtful to me.”

It is a fine line to walk between cheating and protecting a friend. As a spectator, you are equally responsible for ensuring that the game is played correctly, although only a judge should interfere with a match to try to repair it.

Here are some simple guidelines on how to react when you, as a spectator, player, or judge, witness an error in play.

1) As a spectator, do not attempt to stop the match or fix it yourself. Longtime Vs. System judge and rules adjunct Chad Daniel says, “A player should not stop a game in progress. Just get a judge over as fast as reasonably possible. While this may result in a very few situations where, by the time judge gets there, it is too late to fix it, it is overwhelmed by the number of times a spectator is wrong about the misplay he thought he witnessed. What I mean is, if players were told to stop matches where they witnessed a misplay, [often] no misplay actually occurred, and we would have held up the tournament for no reason and interfered with the match, possibly even breaking someone’s concentration.”

2) Spectators should immediately get the judge and carefully explain the error to him or her. Only the judge should stop or repair a match. The longer you wait, the more danger there is of a game loss, or worse, as the game state falls into disrepair.

3) If you’re a player, you should always carefully watch what your opponent does. You should always respect an opponent’s decision to call a judge, and always respect the judge’s decision. As Rob Leander says, “The player has the responsibility to be respectful to their opponent, as they are expecting them to be respectful in turn.” This goes for judges, too. Players and judges should be respectful to each other, as they would expect the same in return.

4) As a player, never try to fix the problem yourself. Always call a judge and let him or her fix it. Charsky is adamant that “one of the worst things that players can do is try to fix procedural errors themselves. I can’t stress this enough. If you messed up, let the judge fix it. Don’t try to fix it yourself. I can’t count the number of times that I had to game loss a player for a severe procedural error that resulted from a player trying to incorrectly fix a minor procedural error. The best example of this is a player accidentally seeing the top card of his deck and [shuffling the deck] to fix the problem.”

5) As a judge, stop the game first and ask questions later. Charsky advises that “the judge should make a decision on stopping the match immediately or getting the full story out of the spectator to ensure that what he observed was indeed an error, and then attempt to fix the error. Immediately stopping the match is slightly better, since you have a better chance of repairing the game state, although you do occasionally stop a match in progress when there was no error committed.”

6) No matter what happens, the judge should always repair the problem to the best of his or her ability. Charsky says, “The absolute worst thing a judge can do is not follow up on the problem and let the players sort or play it out. Judges should practice active judging. This means that it’s okay, for example, for a judge to step in and ask a player what they discarded for a Signal Flare if it’s not obvious from looking into the KO pile.”

6) As a player, spectator, or judge, learn what the cards do. Read the comprehensive rules and make sure that you know and understand both the code of conduct and what’s expected of you as a UDE member. I can’t begin to tell you how important it is that you do this, as nearly every mistake I encounter—especially those that become unrepairable—is the result of ignorance in one form or another.

In the end, everyone who is involved in a tournament—the players, judges, and spectators—share the responsibility of protecting the game’s integrity at all times and of keeping the tournament fair and civil. If you don’t step up and make sure that an error is corrected or that a cheater is caught, then you are an accessory to the problem. Take care to make sure that you are aware of and follow your responsibilities, and the game and community will be better for it.

Also known by his screen name, Kergillian, Ben Kalman has been involved in the Vs. community since Day One. He started the first major player in the online community, the Vs. Listserv, through Yahoo! Groups, which now boasts well over 1200 members! For more on the Yahoo! group, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Marvel_DC_TCG

(Metagame Archive) Totally Freakin’ Broken: Finite Endurance

By Jason Grabher-Meyer

I bet that when you saw the title of this week’s column, you figured I’d be talking about card groups that somehow interact with endurance. “Finite Endurance?” Time for a six-parter covering every card that causes endurance loss when played, via both cost and effect!

Strap in for the next month and a half as I look at over a hundred cards in blazingly minute detail! It’ll be a proverbial log flume of rippingly monotonous mathematics and nitpicking! Get ready for the pointless tech article to end all pointless tech articles!

Okay, so . . . not really. In fact, this week I’m going to abuse the knowledge that the site needs somebody to fill my posting slot by completely ignoring the fact that I’m supposed to write a fairly rigid technical column. Instead, I’m going to talk about a very simple fact—Luke Bartter conceded after game 1 of the finals in the recent Melbourne $10K, handing Ben Seck and his “Make Batman Really Big and Hit You With Him Repeatedly” deck a prestigious win and, in effect, a bag full of money.

Now, don’t get me wrong . . . I know Bartter came off of a PCQ earlier in the weekend, and for all I know, he and Seck had a prize split. I also think Seck deserved the win that he got, as his deck looked really, really cool and, well . . . Batman rules. Bartter’s concession because of exhaustion, however, is the tip of a very large and unfortunate iceberg that has been with the Vs. System since its inception—a lot of people don’t have the endurance to compete as well as they’d like to.

There are a lot of reasons why Vs. has gained a reputation for being incredibly fatiguing at the money level. The game system is inherently challenging—its complexities, and the escalation of difficulty as turns progress, make for a pretty sizable cranial strain. Your brain is at its most vulnerable when it’s changing gears, hopping from mindset to mindset. No matter who you are, that’s tiring. It’s been said that a game of Vs. is more like a sequence of mini games, and that’s definitely a statement that I agree with. A good game plays almost like a comic arc—it starts off slowly and then rises until it reaches the grand finale. There are some ups and downs, but generally, each decision gets increasingly more difficult as the stakes get higher. This happens not because a decisions made on turn 6 is inherently more important than a decision made on turn 2, but rather because the decision on turn 6 is riddled with more caveats and considerations than a similar decision in the early game.

As a result, a good player is constantly moving from one mode of thought to another. Thus, he or she will get fatigued.

In addition, a great deal of the playing population is relatively new to TCGs. Several industry veterans were predicting that very few dedicated Vs. players would make it to the Top 8 back at Gen Con Indy, strictly because veterans of other TCGs would have more drafting experience. Though the prediction proved to be mostly true, fatigue was arguably the average PC competitor’s greatest downfall, not a lack of drafting experience.

What else is to blame? The proliferation of online play. Online play (be it through specialized programs or simple chats) is an exceptional tool for deck testing, no doubt about it. For many players, it is the primary source of competition¾they forego local level tournaments and leagues for the convenience of sitting at home. I’m a cheerful recluse myself, and am currently relishing the fact that I’m writing this article without the “business formality” of pants. But I’ve talked to a lot of players who have turned primarily to web options for their Vs. goodness, and they always seem so shocked when they go to premier level events and make absolutely boneheaded decisions in the last third of the day.

Here’s a little equation to keep up my tech-specific rep: great player + no endurance = blazing failure at premier level events.

Playing in a competitive in-store environment does wonders for your endurance, whereas online play does virtually nothing. If you’re one of the gifted few who don’t suffer mental fatigue, then hey, go for it. Stick with playing online and emerge from your mountain cave only to compete in PCs and $10Ks. But for the average players who knows their stuff, and yet still can’t believe some of the mistakes they make when the pressure is on, local-level play is probably what they’re lacking. Even if your local league is extremely easygoing, play hard and play a lot. You don’t need to run a tier-one deck. You don’t even need to win reliably. The point is to train your mind to switch gears quickly without slowing down.

If you really want to jumpstart your mentally ability, there are some exercises you can do. Most of them are as simple as changing your routines. Take a different route to work. If you’re right handed, start doing things with your left hand. Memorize numerical sequences left to right and then memorize them from right to left. Sounds crazy, but it works. The game-specific application of these exercises is to vary your play experience. Trade decks with opponents and vary your formats. Don’t compromise the quality of play, but don’t limit yourself to the same deck and format day in and day out.

Training your mind is only half of surviving a PC or $10K, of course. Remember that your body is subject to the same rules and laws of reality as everyone else’s. If you bussed in the night before the event and partied instead of sleeping, expect to see the vomit on your shoes repeatedly as you hang your head in shame with each loss. Partying is good. Not sleeping is not good. For PCs in particular, try to fly. If you’re in North America and book your flight far enough in advance, it’s hard to imagine being forced to pay more than $150-$200 bucks, regardless of where you’re flying to. Shop around to find the best fares—it only takes a few minutes, and if you’re going to be travelling with a team, you can always job someone as the “flight guy” and make him or her do the work. Road trips can be a blast and can promote team bonding, but understand that you’ll be competing against both people who flew (and are thus quite fresh) and locals (who barely needed to travel at all).

In addition, be sure to eat. No one can do a fourteen-hour day without eating, and if you can, you’d still probably do a lot better if you kept your blood sugar up.

Simple knowledge of the game isn’t enough to put you in the money at a major event. If you can’t back up your raw skill with endurance, you won’t get very far. Balancing aggressive online playtesting with local play and mental exercise, as well as actually getting some sleep, isn’t always easy. If, however, you can find a combination that works for you, you might do exceedingly well. The thing that sets pro level players apart from really good non-pro players is an understanding of the game outside of the game. While Vs. itself is your main focus, you also need to pay attention to judge interactions, the metagame, how best to attack the mental strength of opponents, and your own mental strength. The latter is the most important of the four elements. If you can keep your mind strong, the rest will fall in line.

So, to recap, a player can do the following to build and maintain endurance:

  • Play in “real life” competitive environments as often as possible.
  • Perform mental exercises, game-oriented or otherwise.
  • Get rest.
  • Eat well.
  • Know when an opponent is consciously attempting to wear you down—often, the ability to recognize mentally offensive tactics is enough to stymie them.

 

Should disaster strike and you find yourself mentally fatigued, the following tips can help you out:

  • Breath deeply. Increased oxygen flow to the brain calms the mind.
  • Take a break if you have the time. Removing your mind from whatever is wearing on it is a good thing.
  • Eat something sugary. Alternatively, if the venue is ridiculously hot and you’ve been sweating, make sure to replace the salts you’ve lost by eating something salty.
  • If your exhaustion manifests as headaches, have some sort of solution on hand. Ibuprofen is pretty hard to come by in a tournament hall, so bringing your own is recommended. Caffeine gets medication into your bloodstream faster than it would on its own, so take stuff with cola or coffee instead of water.

 

If you’re an expert-level player who has been looking to take your game up a notch, these pointers could really help you. Stressing over them would, of course, be counterproductive, but if you can work even a few endurance-enhancing habits into your life, you will see tangible rewards in your results.

Tune in next week as I analyse and compare every card that has an ATK between 3 and 8!

. . . Just kidding.

-Jason Grabher-Meyer

Feedback? Comments? Hate mail? Marriage proposals? Email me at Jason@metagame.com.

(Metagame Archive) Design Vs. Absence

By Danny Mandel

Well, it’s sure been a long time since we’ve spoken, and I don’t know about you, but I’ve got a lot to talk about. About a million years ago, I wrote an article detailing some stuff I was hoping to see at Pro Circuit 2. Today, I’d like to go over how it all went down, but first, I want to fill you guys in on what’s been happening deep in the bowels of R&D. I guess that might sound pretty gross . . .

Marvel Knights is as done as done can be. This set marked the first Vs. System design effort for Brian Hacker and Dave Smith (a pair previously known only for creating the Shaman King TCG, sleeping, and playing with balloon people), and let me tell you, these guys went to town. I don’t want to ruin any of the surprises, but if there’s one thing I can say, it’s that black is definitely the new red and I’m pretty ecstatic about how it all turned out. Expect to start seeing previews on this very website in a couple weeks.

One of the main reasons I haven’t had enough time to write articles this past month is that I’ve been plugging away to finish up the Green Lantern expansion. You see, I’ve been given the much-lauded position of “Lead Designer” of the set. Unfortunately, “Lead Designer” is really just a euphemism for “Guy Who Has to Do All of the Legwork and Doesn’t Get to Playtest.” The bad news is that the weight of responsibility falls squarely on my shoulders, so if anything goes wrong, I’m the guy who gets sent to the Principal’s office. The good news is that when the set ends up a massive success, I’ll probably still be passed out from exhaustion.

So yeah, Green Lantern is all but finished. At this point, we’re finalizing development and flavor, and our editing team is . . . well . . . I’m not exactly sure what they do*. We got the art images this week—mostly a bunch of weird aliens wearing green pajamas and jewelry—which means we got to see what the final cards would look like. Or, in some cases, we got to see what the final card would look like if it had Colossus’s flavor text**.

Mike Hummel is well into leading Avengers design. (Oh, yeah, in case you hadn’t heard, the set after Green Lantern features everyone’s favorite Avengers. Take that, Emma Peel!) I haven’t actually gotten a look at the first draft of the card pool that Mike compiled from everyone’s submissions, but I have seen Humpherys (the lead developer of Avengers and pretty much every other Vs. set since the beginning of time) shaking his head in a kind of “Yep, Mike’s gone mad with power again” sort of way.

The artist formerly known as Matt Hyra has already got his nose to the grindstone, cranking out Justice League cards. (Oh, yeah, in case you hadn’t heard, the set after Avengers features Strawberry Shortcake and the many wonderful characters of Strawberry Land. Just kidding***, it’s all Justice League all the time!) Unfortunately, $ (Matt’s new name) guards his computer monitor like a bear guards a jar of honey that has a bunch of cool Justice League cards written on it, so I don’t really have anything to report, yet.

One last bit of info . . . we’ve got two new faces on the team. Justin Gary is cutting his teeth by heading up a special Vs. project I’m not yet allowed to talk about, and Andrew Yip, a former member of Team Realmworx, was grown in a lab.

 

Looking Back at the PC

There were three things I was hoping to see at Pro Circuit 2.

First, I wanted to see a robust metagame at the PC, and I was especially hoping to see some new archetypes. Well, I got my wish. Curve Sentinels and Spider-Friends showed up, but curve Gotham Knights and the X-Men stall deck helped put one and three players respectively into the Top 8. The rest of the tournament was a good mix of the standard favorites, with Teen Titans rising to take the crown.

My second wish was for a team from the freshly released Superman, Man of Steel expansion to claim the DC half of the double $10K tournament. All right, I knew I was kinda reaching on that one. Probably because of the newness of the Superman set, and the more obvious power of the DC Origins teams, Man of Steel teams made up only a small percentage of the tournament (with New Gods team-up decks leading the charge). A couple of bright spots were the Arkham Inmates deck that cracked the Top 8, and a brave little Darkseid’s Elite deck that placed 12th (see below).

The deck was piloted by Ben Seck (also known as The Ben Seck.)

Characters

3 Bernadeth, Leader of Female Furies

2 Desaad, Royal Torturer

1 Devilance, The Pursuer

4 Gole, Deep Six

4 Granny Goodness, Everyone’s Favorite Granny

4 Jaffar, Deep Six

4 Kurin, Deep Six

4 Shaligo, Deep Six

4 Slig, Deep Six

3 Steppenwolf, Darkseid’s General

4 Trok, Deep Six

Plot Twists

3 Airborne Assault

4 Blood Feud

4 Hordes of Apokolips

4 Mega-Blast

2 The Exchange

Locations

3 Apokolips

3 Armagetto

The third thing I hoped to see was the first ever Unused Robot Exchange Program™. The idea here was that for every fourteen of the oft-maligned Robot Enforcers and/or Sentinel MK I’s a player signed and gave me, I’d trade him or her a pack of Vs. cards. The bad news is that, since my article ended up going up a week later than I’d planned, I guess most people left for the PC without packing their robots (at least, that’s what I tell myself.) The good news is that a whole bunch of people e-mailed me about mailing in their robots. Well, it took a lot of convincing, but Mike has agreed to let me continue the UREP using the wonder that is the US Postal Service. So yeah, here’s the deal. You send me your robots, and I’ll send you some packs. Drop me an e-mail at the address below for details.

Okay, that’s all I got. Tune in next week for some Superman design stories.

Send questions or comments to dmandel@metagame.com.

*Maybe it’s not the smartest thing in the world to tease the editors, given that they’ll receive this before it goes online. Ah well, I’m pretty sure they don’t read my articles anyway, especially after I started wearing a dress and heels around the office. Did I mention that Rachel’s the best?

**No, sadly, I’m not kidding. Apparently, the Colossus flavor text was used as the default template when pre-press (the people who get the cards images ready to go to press) built the cards. Once I asked them why that was, and they said, “What is the point of possessing power if it’s not used, and of being human if it’s not used for good?”

***But Humpherys can dream, can’t he? Someday . . .

(Metagame Archive) Voices From the Field: To Write, or Not To Write?

By Ben Kalman

“Poetry is the mother tongue of mankind.” – Johann Georg Hamann

 

I’ve recently gotten a lot of emails from people who were wondering if I could get them a writing gig or give them advice on how to be a better writer. While I can’t offer jobs or turn anybody into Hemingway, I thought I’d write an article on how to write an article. What follows are some tips for writing about Vs. System, writing in general, and what to write about.

The First Rule of Writing

 

“Poetry is poetry, and one’s objective as a poet is to achieve poetry precisely as one’s objective in music is to achieve music.” – Wallace Stevens

As a writer of both journalistic and creative works, as a publisher of poetry and prose fiction, and as a student and teacher of English literature, I can draw on my experiences to tell you one thing above all—nobody can “teach” you how to write well. Anyone can give you tips, point out your mistakes, and even tell you what to write about . . . but in the end, only you can improve your writing.

As well, writing and editing are entirely subjective. You can take the greatest writers in human history and still find critics who’ll tell you those writers are garbage. Two editors side by side may have entirely opposing opinions of your work. One may tell you not to quit your day job, while the other might hire you on the spot. Writing is a crapshoot in many ways, and even after you’re established as a writer, it won’t free you from being mercilessly edited, criticized, and even rejected. I know award-winning authors who submit their work regularly to journals and magazines and only get thirty to fifty percent of their submissions accepted. Don’t even ask how much of my work gets accepted! (For the wise guys, yes, the number is higher than zero.)

So, the first thing to do is prepare for rejection. Whether you’re submitting an article to a website or a magazine, looking to win a contest, or trying to get a monthly column, quit before you start if you can’t take rejection . A few writers get their first novel published on their first attempt. The millions of other writers can wallpaper their bedrooms with rejection letters before garnering even one success. Also, please remember that not everyone is born to be a writer, and most writers will never become “known.” If you’re looking for fame as a writer, you have a long road to haul. As a fun little game to put this to the test, list every writer who has ever written an article for Metagame.com. Now, go through the Archives and Events sections, and look at all of those writers you’d forgotten about. The second test is to take the latest issue of Scrye or Inquest and flip through it, looking at the authors of every article. How many have you heard of before? How many do you know anything about? To write often is to wallow in obscurity.

Oh No! It’s Research!

 

“Who wants to understand the poem

Must go to the land of poetry;

Who wishes to understand the poet

Must go to the poet’s land.”

 – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Now that we’ve established that writing is generally an innate talent that needs to be honed, let’s look at the process of writing itself. If you want to write about Vs. System, whether for Metagame.com, trade magazines, or fan sites, then you should know the product from end to end. This means knowing the game and the system, knowing games in general and how they work, and knowing comics and comic book history. To find success as a writer in this field without any prior knowledge of one or more of those is possible—heck, high school dropouts have written bestsellers—but it will make the road extremely difficult.

Let’s start with Vs System knowledge. Knowing Vs. is not necessarily the same as being a highly successful Vs. player. You don’t need a $10K Top 8 finish, nor do you need to have placed in the money at a PC. In fact, most of the writers I know don’t play competitively anymore, assuming they ever did. You do, however, need an intimate knowledge of the game. You should have the comprehensive rules and spoilers of every set at your fingertips for reference, and you should read each of those documents several times. It is extremely important to be aware of the cards—what they do and how they interact—and how the rules of the game work. The best way to get rejected as a writer is to make fundamental errors in an article. Any proof you provide that shows you’re not technically adept will push your potential editor/employer away from you and towards the next person whose article is mistake-free.

Also, if you don’t understand every aspect of the game, how can you expect to write about it coherently? Believe me, it’s not easy to come up with new ideas week after week without fail, but knowing the game from end to end does help inspire you. You’ll need plenty of those ideas on the back burner for when you’re at a loss for new content.

The second category of knowledge, games and gaming history, is also very important. If Vs. is your first TCG or your first game, you should get out and try new things. Try some other TCGs, classic and current, and some other types of games. You don’t even have to invest any money. Just demo them a little to get a feel for other games and gaming systems. While it is always possible to write about and play a single game, isolating yourself in a microcosm within a large universe will not help you to understand the game any better. Nor will it help you to express an understanding of how that game (or other games) works. You should be well versed in the world of TCGs and hero games, and a background in role-playing games, board games, video games, and so forth never hurts. I’ve been gaming for over twenty years, and I often draw on my knowledge of other games, especially hero games, while writing about Vs. System. Many, if not most, of the primary Vs. writers (not to mention game designers and play testers) have extensive experience in the gaming industry as players and fans. Many of the Metagame.com writers have gamed for years, and play at least a dozen different games.

This is especially pertinent if you ever wish to write about the pros and cons of Vs. System, what it needs in order to improve, how it compares to other games, and what makes it a positive force in the TCG world. It is useful to have played some superhero TCGs or RPGs so that you can see both where Vs. ranks in terms of superhero games, and how it functions as a system when compared to previous attempts.

Which brings me to the third point. You should familiarize yourself with the comic universes and their characters. I’m a little over the top in this regard, being an obsessed and somewhat fanatical comic collector with a collection of nearly 5,000 . . . and that’s nothing compared to some fervent collectors I know. You don’t need to rush out and bankrupt yourself to build a vast collection, but most writers should have a fair knowledge of at least one of the two universes, if not both. In order to understand the fundamentals of the characters’ powers, how they interact, why they’re as weak/powerful as they are, and whether or not the character cards are well designed incarnations of the comic versions, you should know about comic and character history. After all, a character card may be good, bad, weak, or strong, but there are often reasons for that beyond game play or system necessity. Understanding the comics gives you added insight into the game.

Once you have done the necessary reading, research, and field-testing, you’re ready to put your ideas to paper.

Writing and Editing

 

 “Touched by poetry, language is more fully language and at the same time is no longer language: it is a poem.” – Octavio Paz

The first and most important key to writing, be it creative or journalistic, is learning how to write. No, I’m not kidding. That may sound condescending, but the vast majority of aspiring writers have no clue how to write. As a publisher and editor, I come across dozens of manuscripts that show a ton of raw potential but are horribly written. As a teacher at the university level, I have encountered term papers with great ideas that are written at a grade school or high school level. If you want to write professionally, you must be able to write coherently, with proper transitions and good grammar, and you must be able to present your ideas in a thoughtful and intelligent manner. Sure, you can have minor mistakes that your editor(s) will fix—after all, nobody’s infallible, and everyone makes typographical errors—but messy articles with dozens of mistakes, or those that are poorly written or presented, will guarantee your rejection.

The first step to good writing is to show and not tell. That’s the first thing you learn in creative writing class, and you should apply it to every form of writing. Don’t tell me that “the one-game match system sucks!” That doesn’t mean anything. Present an argument, and then back it up with evidence. Explain to me what the problem is and why it’s a problem. If you’re putting together a deck, for example, it’s not enough to simply write up the deck list and say what drops to play and how to use the plot twists. You have to show how the deck functions, what’s special about it, the interaction between key cards, and the reason you built it. You have to make your article interesting enough that people want to read it. Simply presenting basic facts without explanation or flavor won’t get you very far.

Flavor is definitely a key aspect of any article. Flavor, for those who are unaware, is that extra “oomph” that makes writing interesting. It’s the way you write—the anecdotes, the adjectives, and the asides. Flavor can consist of colorful language, humor and wit, interesting facts . . . It’s simply the extra touches one adds into his or her writing to make it unique, like Danny Mandel’s bad jokes, Gary Wise’s wisecracking, or Jason Grabher-Meyer’s infectious excitement. While the flavor in an article is hard to insert manually, it will come automatically over time as you write more often. One way to improve the flavor and style of your arguments and ideas is to expand your vocabulary. If you use the same adjectives in every paragraph, you become an editor’s nightmare—he or she will have to spend time rewriting half of your article to make it less repetitive. As well, it never hurts to look over someone else’s article or story and think about how you could make it more interesting or exciting.

“A poet can survive anything but a misprint” – Oscar Wilde

 

Which brings me to editing. First of all, always edit your writing manually. This goes beyond a simple spell check. Spell check is the lazy writer’s editing tool that, while useful for catching obvious errors, often misses the important ones. You should read over your writing at least twice—once immediately after you’ve finished it, and once a day or so afterwards. It is especially important to edit and revise your work at least once after you’ve stepped away from it for a little while, as you will often catch mistakes that you would otherwise have missed, or notice bits that could really use some gloss.

You also have to realize that your writing isn’t perfect. If you think that every word is vital, every phrase immaculate, every line-break untouchable, then think again. Yeats kept editing his work until he died, never satisfied that his poems were finished. And I’m sorry to say it, but you ain’t Yeats. Writing is give and take. You have to be able to give in and accept change, and you have to take advice on how to implement change. A good rule of thumb when you’re just starting out is to show a piece of your writing to a dozen or so people, and let them workshop it. Let them mark possible changes, remove words, and mark down their opinions. If the majority of those readers don’t like something, then it doesn’t fit. Period. Even once you’ve started writing regularly, it never hurts to get a reality check now and then by soliciting peoples’ opinions on your work. Fan sites and message boards are great for this, as open forums often garner strong, constructive criticism. Listen to criticism, both positive and negative, and try to glean something useful from it. Change is often good.

Granted, there are always exceptions. There will be times you’ll absolutely, without compromise or question, want to leave something in your work. So be it. First, however, take a step backwards and try to think objectively about the piece. Remember that this is your baby—of course you’ll be defensive, and you won’t want anyone to malign your work. At first, every suggestion is like an insult. In time, though, you’ll get over that. My advice is to leave a piece aside for a few days (or weeks, if it’s creative writing) after reading/hearing suggestions, and then go back and re-read the advice. I think that, more often and not, you’ll begin to realize that the piece could use some change.

Finally, don’t forget about deadlines. Punctuality is a good thing, and if you respect deadlines, you are more likely to endear yourself to your publishers and editors. This means that you can’t leave everything until the last minute. You have to leave enough time to make sure your work is edited and polished before it’s submitted. Once you’re established, you may have a little more leniency (although, even then . . . ), but until that moment, missing a deadline can be the kiss of death.

Enjoy What You Do

 

“I love the language, that soft bastard Latin,

Which melts like kisses from a female mouth.” – Lord Byron

“Ink runs from the corner of my mouth.

There is no happiness like mine,

I have been eating poetry.”

                                                – Mark Strand

The most important part of writing is to remember that, even though it’s work (and hard work, at that), it’s also fun. You should always try to have fun while writing. Remember that the end goal of your writing is to please yourself, and although you are writing for a public audience and trying to impress your publishers, you have to be satisfied with your writing before anyone else can be.

So sit back, absorb, and maybe even re-read what I’ve said. Then get writing! Don’t get disheartened, and don’t be afraid to revise or take advice. Most importantly, don’t give up!

Also known by his screen name Kergillian, Ben Kalman has been involved in the Vs. community since day one. He started the first major player in the online community, the Vs. Listserv, through Yahoo! Groups, and it now boasts well over 1200 members! For more on the Yahoo! group, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Marvel_DC_TCG