On Giant's Blood 4. "problematic card"

henrik wrote:

KevinM wrote:

henrik wrote:

For very different reasons than why lots of people are including Giant's Blood now.

Quite correct. Which is why Giant's Blood isn't the problem.

Which is why that comparison you keep making is irrelevant. So either you're going to stop making it or you're being a jerk. If the latter, please stop.

To restate it for you:

Izaak wrote:

I think the fact that literally EVERY deck plays one nowadays is a sign of a card that has no place in the game as it currently is.

Literally EVERY deck for 15 years played Blood Doll. That wasn't a sign that Blood Doll was a card that had no place in the game.

Amenophobis wrote:

{{Giant's Blood}} is so "stupidly" good, that if you don't include it, you are shooting yourself in the foot, whether you need it or not. Which defines for me a card that has a power level that is over the top.

Blood Doll was so stupidly good for 15 years that if you didn't include it, you were shooting yourself in the foot, whether you needed it or not, but that didn't define Blood Doll as a card that had a power level that was over the top.

So, the comparisons that I'm making, given the incorrect statements that keep getting said, are *exactly* relevant and are *direct* comparisons.

Statements which prove why Giant's Blood isn't the problem.

Notice that this is the EXACT same discussion that came about regarding Freak Drive, after Una was printed. FD was never a problem card, just highly-powered, and a vampire that should have never been printed took Freak Drive over the top and made it broken. In the same way, Giant's Blood was never a problem card, just highly-powered, and a library card that should have never been printed took GB over the top and made it broken.

KevinM wrote:

Blood Doll was so stupidly good for 15 years that if you didn't include it, you were shooting yourself in the foot, whether you needed it or not, but that didn't define Blood Doll as a card that had a power level that was over the top..

This is where the comparison fails. How did you shoot yourself in the foot by not including Blood Doll in decks where it wasn't needed?
In the Giant's Blood case that's clear, since playing Giant's Blood on any vampire removes the possible blood gain for the other players, Blood Doll has no similar effect.

henrik wrote:

KevinM wrote:

Blood Doll was so stupidly good for 15 years that if you didn't include it, you were shooting yourself in the foot, whether you needed it or not, but that didn't define Blood Doll as a card that had a power level that was over the top..

This is where the comparison fails. How did you shoot yourself in the foot by not including Blood Doll in decks where it wasn't needed? In the Giant's Blood case that's clear, since playing Giant's Blood on any vampire removes the possible blood gain for the other players, Blood Doll has no similar effect.

Blood Doll doesn't have the exact same effect as Giant's Blood, no, but that isn't needed for a direct comparison.

Before Vessel and Villein were printed, Blood Doll's "transfer blood into pool" effect was on a similar -- if not greater -- power level than Giant's Blood's effect. So, for 15 years, if you didn't play BD in almost every deck then you were hindering your own progress.

Because of this fact, I am able to make the direct and relevant comparisons that I do, given the statements that are being presented.

KevinM wrote:

Notice that this is the EXACT same discussion that came about regarding Freak Drive, after Una was printed. FD was never a problem card, just highly-powered, and a vampire that should have never been printed took Freak Drive over the top and made it broken. In the same way, Giant's Blood was never a problem card, just highly-powered, and a library card that should have never been printed took GB over the top and made it broken.

No, Freak Drive was always broken card as it can be used till you have blood on a vampire. Una just have in-build blood management for freak drive. Una is fine, it's freak drive which is badly designed.

The same with giant's blood. It was always broken card, villein just reduced opportunity cost for it to be played for maximal profit.

KevinM wrote:

Before Vessel and Villein were printed, Blood Doll's "transfer blood into pool" effect was on a similar -- if not greater -- power level than Giant's Blood's effect. So, for 15 years, if you didn't play BD in almost every deck then you were hindering your own progress.

The comparison is flawed because Blood doll require 6-10 turn to take advantage of a giant blood. And thoses 6-10 turns must be before you play giant blood.

The biggest difference is, of course, that if I play a Blood Doll, everyone else still can do the same and reap the same benefits.

The comparison is totally wrong. It would make sense if Giant's Blood was once per Meth per game, but it's not.

It's a stupid lottery and has always been. It's only because you're not forced to stack your MPAs with Minion Taps any longer that the card actually sees a LOT more play, just revealing what a stupid effect it really is.