QUOTE (volleyballgy @ November 12, 2007 02:12 am)
QUOTE (Hags888 @ November 11, 2007 11:46 am)
I think the crux of the Vader issue is that most of us would prefer to see a Darth Vader deck that is formidable.

Well, that's certainly not Hasbro's version of Vader; you'll find no argument from me about that. Considering I don't see the armored Darth Vader do anything "formidable," it doesn't bother me that he is in a lower tier. Personally, I think it's presumptive of you guys to call it a design "flaw" just because he isn't at the power you want him to be. It's also worth pointing out that Vader is a top-tier 2v2 deck...


I don't think anybody is arguing that his win/loss record, by itself, is the reason his deck is flawed....his win/loss record is just indicative of the deck's performance, given the design flaws that several of us have pointed out. So, none of us are pointing to the win/loss record and saying, "the deck is weak, we want it stronger and THAT is why we think it sucks". The deck is weak, but it is weak *because* of a design flaw. You could fix the design flaw and still keep it weak as far as I'm concerned. Would I like to see the deck perform better and be a bit stronger? Yes. But, the relative power level of the deck isn't the reason I think the deck design is flawed. I pointed that out several posts ago...there are several aspects to a deck's design to consider how effective it is. The whole point of the argument is dissecting the Path to Victory and analyzing it. And that to me, is where the deck design is flawed. The flaw then contributes to it's shoddy win/loss record. If the win/loss record is one that is acceptable, so be it, but the deck design is still flawed.

Roman hit it right on the head, 8 of the 12 talent cards don't work together and don't support the PtV (whether it's attrition, or a two-pronged DD + attacking approach is beside the point). Choke + Wrath + Dark Side Drain is a poor combination of cards and they not only work against each other, they don't support any kind of PtV. Granted, in 2 vs 2 the problem is not as pronounced as then you have many more minors on the board for which these cards can work against. But, in 1 vs 1, the deck is totally flawed in design. If you fixed the flaw by making the cards *not* work against themselves and added some cards that support the deck's PtV (again whether that path is attrition or something else is beside the point), then you will probably end up with a stronger deck...in which case, you can forever tweak the DD amounts to get a deck that is of the "right" power level (whatever that is). But, the point I am trying to make here is that a win/loss record alone does not determine how effective a deck's design is. It can help you gauge how effective it is, but it can't be the sole determining factor. Other factors like analyzing the deck's PtV, noting playability trends, etc are just as important (I've said that before not only in this thread but in others as well).

To respond to the claim that Vader is a top tier deck in 2 vs 2...I disagree. He's definitely much more formidable, but in practice Vader's deck usually only performs at a Tier II level (at least in my limited team game experiences). I don't think that Vader goes from Tier III in 1 vs 1 to a sudden Tier I in 2 vs 2. I agree he gets stronger, but even in 2 vs 2, he's not as strong as Maul, Obi or Emp. He can probably hang with the likes of Anakin, Dooku and Mace in team games, depending on his partner, but his red deck leaves him even more vulnerable, especially when he can get double teamed (which isn't possible in 1 vs 1).


Darth Trumpetus...trumpeter of fury.