Syobon wrote:
Quote:
As a subnote, I don't think "Pay to win" is really a valid criticism you can leverage against a collectible card game in general: that's the nature of any card game, and trying to do it differently doesn't really work. Scrolls tried to have a no-transaction card model and it failed horribly because you ended up in a reverse situation where people who played the game occasionally and had disposable income just couldn't compete with the people who spent 10 hours a day grinding cards.
That's the problem with games that try to focus on competitive gaming but still want to have progression in the game itself, it just doesn't work. In a competitive game an older account with more playtime or cheddar invested should have no inherit advantage over a new account, else the game is going to feel unfair.
I don't think that's universally seen as a problem, else Pokemon wouldn't have such a popular competitive scene. It is a little unfair from time to time, but that isn't a huge problem unless it gets really bad.
That said, legendary cards are a bit imbalanced. I think they should be limited to one legendary per decl rather than the current one of *each kind* of legendary per deck.