OMG Ban it.....

Seriously, there isn't a single piece worthy of a ban at this time.

Look at what causes bans in any game, including what cause GOWK. The same is not true of the current meta, or of any piece in the game - in fact, it's really not even close.

The "problem" minis will always be a problem, that's what happens when you make a game like this. Something is always better than something else. The question is when is too much too much. The V-sets will deal with a lot of the problems, and the new ones that arise as a result of those changes.

That's pretty much what a meta is. Removing any of the minis on the list, will not make anything more wide open, will not make anything more playable, and will not help in the least.

Case in point - removing Mas (I can't believe this is even a topic at this point), does nothing but make the Republic an non-competitive faction. Their commanders need the range 6 to be competitive... The same is true of Imperials.

Neither of those factions are dominating the meta. You can win with both, but if you take away mas, I hope you like playing Rebels and NR then, because that's all you would see other than the occasional Sep squad.

First of all, let me point out that this thread was purely speculative and as it appears to me, designed as a a venue through which people could state their opinions in a lighthearted, fun way, or if nothing else to harmlessly vent a little. It was never meant to be taken seriously, and I resent you coming in to derail the thread and your sarcastic and condescending comments. They're not needed.

Second, you stated alot of your personal opinions as fact. There are alot of players, who love the game, but despise the meta due to the figs you call "problem" figs. These same people would disagree with you. That is what makes your opinion merely that. An opinion.

Furthermore the thread title is "If you could ban 5 minis, which would you ban?" Not- "Should we ban minis?"

You are not responding to the thread, but drudging up arguments from the past on which everyone has a different and valid view. If you want to contribute to the discussion, by actually responding to the thread title, great. If not, I would appreciate it if you left the sarcastic condescending tone out of the thread so I can enjoy reading other people's responses and having a positive experience here on bloomilk.

Why? He only has 30 HP, Bombad Gungan is a save of 11, and if there happens to be no one within 6, it doesn't work.

I'm with pitcherstar for the record. Negativity and changing the topic are not needed in forums. Bill proves a good point about not banning, but I didn't like the way it was presented. Pitcherstar's comment was in no way negative, it was just stating facts in a straight, non-aggressive way. Thank you. That is all. Except for this:

Interesting interpretation of Pitcher's post as stating "facts". Well, it should be known that my post was intended as a fun comment in the vein of the thread. If everyone else is expected to interpret the entire thread in a "fun" way as Pitcher said we all had to do, then I expect that he has to do the same with my post.

So none of what he posted was "fact". It was a personal attack on me, and he wasn't even right about how he interpreted my post. I wasn't trying to prove a point, of give you a bunch of facts.

I posted a fun, sarcastic, comment that should be read the way you would talk to your buddies at the FLGS, nothing more, nothing less. If the post hadn't read "billiv15" we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Ok, that should be the end of it, so here is my top 5 (remember, this part is sarcasm for those inclined to read my posts however they want, rather than as intended).

1. Bail Organa - by far the most damaging mini to any competitive meta!
2. Jabba RS - You might not see him a lot, but his reserves 30 is way too much
3. Darth Vader, Dark Jedi - imagine him in a thrawn swap!
4. Gran Raider - I mean seriously, a 4pt stealth mini with mobile attack? What were they thinking!
5. Greedo - We all know Han shot first, so no way he should have "cunning" attack.

You have obviously never lost a game solely because Jar Jar made all his rolls. For a couple weeks I was experimenting with Jar Jar in various squads and after one game (where Jar Jar drew fire and bombad'ed on like 5 of Han in STA's shots in the final round and redirected them all to Rieeken and Dodonna, killing them both), my opponent snapped and started yelling at a bystander not to laugh. This from a guy who is the calmest and most mild-mannered out of everyone in our play group.

Losing the game because Jar Jar made 90% of his Bombad rolls is probably the most depressing way to lose a game there is.

Thanks Echo. That was what I was trying to get at in my response, but you managed to do so more tactfully than me.

Shatter, I think your thread title was great and stimulated a fun and interesting discussion.

Bill, perhaps I mistook your intended over the top response as a serious response, but to be fair, we are on the internet, and the arguments you used and tone of them were very reminiscent of many of the serious posts I have read of yours in the past.

And Bill, I would respond that way regardless of who posted, as it took away from the discussion of the thread and IMHO was turning what had previously been a fun discussion into a pointless debate where none was needed. However, usually the kind of response I made gets done by another poster in order to get the thread back on topic or a forum moderator hops in to edit the previous person's post. It just so happens that I was online and happened to read it before anyone else responded or your post got edited. Perhaps everyone else on the boards just knows your kind of sarcastic humor better than I do and knew to take it as such?

I'm tired of the negativity that seemed to plague the WOTC boards and don't particularly want to have to deal with it again, so maybe in that vein I am a little sensitive to what is and is not a negative post. Bill I have no beef with you and it was not intended to be a personal attack. To my knowledge I did not insult you. So let's not turn this into an "elitist" vs "nonelitist" thing. Let me just say that I do apologize for misinterpretting your post and its intentions so that the thread can get back to what it was intended for.

Sorry guys for further derailing the thread.

Well said on both points.

Lol that's awesome

Perhaps a more appropriate way to put it is "what five pieces would you most like to see downgraded in effectiveness by upcoming v-sets."

Because that's a totally different question, really. You could easily downgrade the effectiveness of the lancer by making a 6 point piece with self-destruct 20. You could downgrade Yobuck by giving Mon Mothma's CE to Imperials and Rebels... or by giving Sith and Yuuzhan Vong enough good pieces for them to be commonly played in competitive tournaments. You could downgrade quad shooters by making evade available to factions other than NR and Rebels. And so on.

My objection to Dodonna is that I don't see any obvious solution. I don't think every faction getting activation control is a good idea, and a piece that basically says "cancel Dodonna" is inelegant and useless in many games. I honestly think the best solution for him is to errata his card to either forced on activation per turn, or LOS to an enemy to choose.