For the weaker elements, what do you think would greatly improve them the most? How would you address the problem that they face in events like War?
The weaker elements in EtG are usually weaker in that they do not have an answer to their weakness. Thus the result of clashing with their weakness is predicable enough for their opponent to exploit. (Hence my push for what I call completeness)
I have not played War. The following is from my observations as a spectator and my experiences at similarly higher tier metagames.
(regular MtG multiplayer playgroup with evolving decks to utilize mental interaction like politics and manipulating threat levels.)
War is not an EtG match. War is not a tournament of EtG matches. War is a vault strategy game using a tournament of EtG matches as the field. A team who is more predictable can be taken advantage of.
What do you believe creates a lot of disinterest/backlash in the idea of PseudoElement cards?
4 reasons
1) No obvious in game precedent. (
and Pendulums excluded as being coincident)
2) Generally poor quality as a result of rushing and not deriving the correct usages of the suggestion.
3) Lack of well communicated persuasive reasons for how EtG would benefit.
4) Generally poor themes or misunderstanding of the correct classification.
If you meant the PseudoElement classification rather than the PseudoElement Crucible, please correct me.
