#485624
Omnipotent Armament
Previously, a player could usually guarantee winning combat. Now, with Defend It and Hope, there's the real possibility that one could lose combat, so you have to ask: is the gamble (of three dilemmas) worth losing the game for?
Of course, interrupts can be filtered/removed/countered, but this requires more resources. Add to that the required sacrificial >=3 cost Q event, and it's just making the deck look a little more costly and a little more bulky.
Overall, not one of my faves, but eager to hear if it's one of yours. I think it's a 4/10.
(3) •Omnipotent Armament
Hand Weapon.
Order - Destroy your Q event that costs 3 or more and remove this equipment from the game to begin combat involving your personnel. If you win, choose a non-headquarters mission you command. The opponent on your left places the top three dilemmas of their dilemma pile beneath that mission. Otherwise, you lose the game.
49 V 9
- Winning combat will bag you three dilemmas beneath a mission of your choice.
- An equipment rather than an event, so harder for your opponent to destroy.
- Losing combat will lose you the game.
- Counter cost to set this up is pricey.
- For some reason, doesn't have the Q. keyword.
Previously, a player could usually guarantee winning combat. Now, with Defend It and Hope, there's the real possibility that one could lose combat, so you have to ask: is the gamble (of three dilemmas) worth losing the game for?
Of course, interrupts can be filtered/removed/countered, but this requires more resources. Add to that the required sacrificial >=3 cost Q event, and it's just making the deck look a little more costly and a little more bulky.
Overall, not one of my faves, but eager to hear if it's one of yours. I think it's a 4/10.
A lot of good arguments are spoiled by some fool who knows what he is talking about. ~ MIGUEL DE UNAMUNO (1864-1936)
It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation. ~ HERMAN MELVILLE (1819-1891)
It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation. ~ HERMAN MELVILLE (1819-1891)