Pentex Subversion (tm) vs Direct Intervention (& DI2)

Lönkka wrote:

Meh.
I've dabbled with a couple NSFTM decks and you constantly live in fear of the unblockable actions.

That is you constantly have to worry if the acting minion have Fortitude, superior Obfuscate, superior Necromancy etc etc

But not every deck can pack unblockable action to make the NSFM drop off.

In the same way, Eze the Demon prince deck may cause no trouble on persistent enough rush deck or wall deck, but can be extremely overwhelming if you do something else.

That's why there is a potent but costly solution to thoses problems. Problem being that it can get here for a very long time and / or be recursed.

Silver bullets are a poor way to address problems with game design. At best it delays a problem. Perhaps the correct answer is both of these cards are bad -- AND there's more cards out there whose design needs to be hit with the NERF bat.

Surreal wrote:

That gave an idea to make a deck which gets one fast VP and then times out the table with useless DI deal talking.

Great. I'd play that with Rewind Time also, even more haggling .

pentex and di are both staples in tournaments, and its because both are incredibly multi-faceted and fit in a ton of archetypes. i don't think either are a serious problem (i've been DI'd and pentexed a ton, and i've pentexed and di'd people a ton as well) its rare that i've actually hated the existance of either card. DI2 is what i prefer to di, but everyone argues it not being as good. 2 pool is alot to stop one card, but it shuts down una/turbo decks if played timely and cancels a di (or mundane, i suppose...)

both cards are somewhat high cost, but attainable as far as actually owning them, and i don't really see a big problem with either. yes, they can be game deciding, and maybe they COULD be once per game per methuselah, but they have pool costs, and in decks that don't recycle them indefinitely, you normally draw another of what was di'd or burn the pentex and move on. as far as haggling, "what will you do for me if i don't (dt, eagles sight, foul blood{ } , whatever) this action?" is always going to have similar haggling sessions to potential di getting played. haggling happens, being prudent about it is the fix in games.

i see power level being high, but i just don't see these cards being like PTO good, or edge explosion good where they would make me irate.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

I've lost more tournament rounds to a DI/DI2 than a Pentex. It's 'mega block' for those who can't by other means.

Prey is taking a bloat action and you are FoS?? Just DI/DI2 it!
Prey is about to oust?? Just DI/DI2 the bleed card!

Yeah, except that is more accurately described as;

'Any player is playing a minion card you dont like? Just DI it!'

Thats supremely lazy and poor design.

Pentex Subversion costs 2 pool and is burnable. With proper timing it can ruin someone's game and/or win the game for you. But that is true of many cards, with the difference being that Pentex Subversion is more easily applicable. It's an easy power card you should consider for many decks, but it is properly balanced.

Direct Intervention is an ok card. Alright, I hate it. But the main problem I have is with timing. During a finals, you don't have to give everyone the opportunity to DI a card as long as you play your cards in a timely fashion. That is, don't rush a sequence of cards. If you have a DI in your hand: pay attention to the game, if you have to think about it, ask the players to pause for a second.

With Direct Intervention it is necessary to correct the game state all too often. A player plays a succession of cards, and another player jumps in with a DI. It's often difficult to tell who's in the right. Sometimes a player isn't fast enough announcing the DI, other times a player is playing his cards too fast.

The problem with Direct Intervention is not the power level of the card, but in how it is played.