Posted by: thederangedbear | October 15, 2008

Check it Out-

Before I get this started I highly urge those of you out there to watch Gundam 00! I know a lot of you might be aversive to anime simply because of stereotypes, but if you enjoy politics, big robots beating the snot out of each other, and superheroes you’re going to love it.



Tony wrote this awesome article today about the fight between curve and control, and the move toward less and less interactive play. It’s a really good article, it has length so you feel like you actually read something, but each paragraph is really easy to digest.

After his article, I started wondering what are the traditional was curve beat control. Traditionally, curve decks have beaten control with a small element of disruption – Dr. Doom – Diabolic Genius or Bad Press – in tandem with a flurry of pumps.

Anyways, I started doing a bit more thinking and I had a thought:

This guy is really good, and turns the game into “Can i draw enough pumps” instead of a strategic game. It is quite tough, almost impossible, for control decks to beat Wolverine with a beeper.

On the flip side we have this guy, who is also really good too.

As many of you know from the recent Clone Saga, it is quite possible and in fact dangerously realistic to completely deny your opponent of an attack for the entire game with this guy.

So we have two big gaps. Rush and control.

In the middle?

This guy is good… really?

If you stack these three cards next to each other, clearly Ahmed Samsarra is the one that falls a little short.

Whereas the other guys can completely morph the course of the game, Ahmed Samsarra really does nothing. I mean, this guy turns sideways to find a location which can maybe fix your curve, which is stark contrast to the other guys who turn sidesways to, you know… win the game.

Then there’s that whole king kill clause thing.

Right now I am trying to remember why exactly people are saying Ahmed was bad. The reason I came to was that people hate repetitive game states, but I mean doesn’t every deck have a certain set of drops that they want to hit more? Is strategy really bad?

The question them becomes… is it really that bad for curve decks to be able to hit their drops easily? Shouldn’t they be rewarded for playing fair? I mean against WolverineSmash and Spidey Clones it’s completely possible for you to hit all your drops and still never be in the game.

Why is Ahmed bad? Why do you hate Ahmed? Were you one of those who clamored for the banning of Ahmed?

Like… I’ve been doing some thinking about the Golden Age of constructed lately which is somewhere after the release of MAV. We had awesome OP, good attendance, and the environment was great.

Anyways, if you look at the popular curve decks at the time Common Enemy, Reservists or Glock, all these decks have comparably easier time hitting their drops then other decks, and I think that is a crucial identity: Curve decks hitting their curve should be a foregone conclusion. Other decks with gimmicks should have to worry about missing drops and whatever, but for the fair curve decks this should be a foregone conclusion.

In the face of guys who completely keep another out of the game, is a three drop whose sole job is to keep you in the game that bad?

If anything… curve really needs another Ahmed Samsarra.





  1. Bear I had no idea you were a GM head like me. So loving the new season and while it does parallel Zeta in a number of ways it is better in the ways it doesnt.

  2. Ahmed turned sideways means you have an answer for X. X Being anything your opponent plays. Stop trying to sandbag me with Ahmed paul.

  3. @ Joe: I grew up watching Gundam and playing Super Robot Wars so I love all the Gundam – except maybe Turn A. Seeing 00 in action was pretty bad ass!

    @ Ludin: I thought sandbag means holding things in till the last minute then pwnage!

  4. I think Ahmed is tame compared to some of the newer cards.
    Is it crazy good yes, is it broken no

  5. I agree that Ahmed is way more tame compared to Wolverine.

    I think the biggest problem people had with Ahmed is that he was in every. single. deck. Everybody had a different take on Checkmate/X, but it boiled down to the same thing. Row full of locations, smash face.

  6. The difference between Ahmed and some of the newer uber 3 drops is that Ahmed is not an X-Factor – he’s the precise opposite. When luck reduces as a factor, playskill and deckbuilding increase as factors. Which is good. The problem with Ahmed was that he was far and away better than any other option for reducing luck, leading to stale, repetitive games. But at least those stale repetitive games were decided by skill, not who drew their fistful of pumps for Wolverine first.

  7. Oh now be fair turn A took a lot of imagination to set gundam in a psuedo 1920-30’s time zone. It was G-gundam that sucked, because lets face it….shining finger. That phrase/attack alone screams for help. But yes I’m thoroughly enjoy 00 especially because i’m sitting there trying who mirrors who from Zeta and 00

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: