This card is a good example of an inappropriate imbalance in the game design. The common argument for allowing this sort of thing is that anyone can prepare for it by including removal spells. What I don't like about these sorts of extreme cards, is that they demand too much attention in a well-calculated deck design. It is possible to prepare for an over-powered creature such as this? Of course, but it forces many players into relying heavily on control. The opposite of a deck that uses Terror of the Peaks might be a deck including all or mostly non-creature spells. Players use such designs to leave no chance that powerful creatures or setups can dominate them in play. So, extreme creatures dictate extreme contradictions, ruining the basic gameplay dynamic that we find in the current game. Bad, boring strategies can easily ruin a more legitimate player's day by incessantly barring his path to success. Really, it isn't fun for anyone, when an extreme control player must sit there, countering or killing everything you do, and eventually pull the win on a technicality, or some other rigged outcome. Think, how many hours they must spend, wasting their time with petty tricks, and learning nothing of real strategy. In any case, their insane devotion to the prize money warrants a certain sort of admiration - It takes a real "iron man" to always ignore the mind's constant pleas for freedom from a tedious task. All that said, Terror of the Peaks could work with a rule - One per deck. The imbalance would be corrected by chance, if a rule were implemented to only allow one mythic rare of the same name per deck. Do I hear them weeping? I'm just looking for ways to make the game more interesting, because I won't stay interested for very long in something that fundamentally ignores the integrity of its own premise - This is supposed to be a strategy game, and you shouldn't be able to win by paying them for rigged deck. |
