[UEP, Accepted] Misdirection for everyone

Wacho · Post by **Wacho** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:44 pm

Name: Misdirection for Everyone!

Status: Accepted
Proposal maintainer: Wacho

Categories: Balance

Errata: Chance of Being Lost and Winds of Wrath: You may play these cards against any opponent who is using the same type of location deck (hero sites or minion sites) as yourself.

Remove this entry from CRF and replace with -- Chance of Being Lost and Winds of Wrath: You must supply the site for your opponent.  If opponent is using a different type of location deck you may use a site of the appropriate type from outside your location deck.  If you do not have access to the appropriate type of site cards you may not play this card.  Note: you may not use a site that you have in play or in your discard pile.  

Problem:  As it stands now when playing hero vs. minion these two hazards are banned from play without much reason for it.  Fallen-Wizards have slight advantage because they have access to both types of sites.

Solution:  Allow players to use opposite type sites for these hazard cards

Pros:  Removes unnecessary restriction which will give more options for hazard portion of deck.  More fun sending your opponent all over Middle Earth.  Balance.

Cons: None that I can see.

Rationale: There is no real thematic reason why you can get lost if your opponent is the same alignment but not if he is a different alignment. Also many people already play this way.

Discussion:

Voting started at: 6 MAR 2008

Voting ends at: 27 MAR 2008

Khamul the Easterling · Post by **Khamul the Easterling** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:09 pm

I agree

Bandobras Took · Post by **Bandobras Took** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:49 am

Also gives some more options for CvCC defense; I like it.

Thorsten the Traveller · Post by **Thorsten the Traveller** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:54 pm

So obvious I completely forgot about this rule, we always play it like this anyway.

Sly Southerner · Post by **Sly Southerner** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:05 pm

Yes for me too. Wow 12-0 this must be some kind of UEP record!

Wacho · Post by **Wacho** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:32 pm

Adrian, you jinxed it.  

 Someone voted no.

Seriously now, to whoever voted no, if you see a problem with this UEP please share it.

Jambo · Post by **Jambo** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:36 pm

my money's on Sauron.

Wacho · Post by **Wacho** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:59 pm

Ok, voting is over and at 15-1 it looks like this passes.

Thorsten the Traveller · Post by **Thorsten the Traveller** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:17 pm

I thought voting period was 1 month always? Some people might still vote against  

 (people bought by Sauron then)

Wacho · Post by **Wacho** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:56 pm

The introductory thread doesn't say anything about a standard voting period.  All I could find was a statement about 2 weeks for voting.  If that has changed to a standard one month somewhere let me know.  I don't have a problem keeping this open another week.  Initially I set a 3 week time period because I thought that would be sufficient.

Thorsten the Traveller · Post by **Thorsten the Traveller** » Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:23 pm

Tried to look it up because I distinctly remember discussing it somewhere, but couldn't find it, so maybe something for Jamie to slip in the creating UEP guidelines? up till now it has been kind of common practise to use a 1 month voting period, after initially we used 2 weeks I think. Anyway, I was just joking, the support for the proposal is quite overwhelming so no need to drag it out longer I suppose  

MeCCG.net

[UEP, Accepted] Misdirection for everyone

Do you agree with this UEP?

[UEP, Accepted] Misdirection for everyone