No one is agrueing against the fact that Chairman is really hard, he's rated a 4 in the rulebook for a reason. The only thing being stated is The Chairman has his weaknesses that can be exploited to give an easy victory. I've seen it happen many times. The example that Humble-Knight mentioned, we managed to incap Operative before Chairman even flipped, then I few rounds after that the Chairman was incapped as well. And if I remember correctly, most heroes were missing only a quarter to half their health. You want to know how we got this team? It was random, so there was no planning ahead of time to decide who we would use. We got a team and went with it. Sadly I can't recall the team exactly, but I know Tempest, Parse, and Unity were involved. That may have been the game with Greatest Legacy as well, not sure.
The thing that confusing me the most, is you even said Iron Legacy can be "solved" if you bring this, this, and that. So against Iron legacy it's perfectly fine to bring the optimal heroes and hope for a good draw? It's the exact same thing.
Oh no, I'm not confused at all. I was simply making a joke relating to a previous ridiculous "discussion" on the subject (which did indeed involve the pre-ban Envisioner) and the general misunderstanding of the general public about statistics, about which I've made many jokes to other people elsewhere.
It's one of my comedy routines (not dissimilar to the one about how every single hero needs many more search cards, or how much I really hate British people, or how SotM is the worst game I've ever played because there aren't even any dice) in which I gently mock those with whom I disagree by taking their arguments to extremes and exaggerating them. I thought I might remind people of my rants in the hope of amusing them.
I am confused as to why you'd think that was aimed at you though.
Whoa, hold on there. Are you saying that all those times we have discussed the importance of every hero needing a search card for every card in the deck, you were merely joking? Dang, I really thought we were having some heart felt moments. You will see, you all will see! Search cards are the wave of the future! Soon there will be a hero where every card in their deck is a search card.
Ronway, that was the game with greatest legacy; I was playing him. I think we had one more but I can’t remember who. Until you reminded me I thought I was AA. Maybe Naturalist was the 5th?
Was it a five hero game? It's hard to remember, because we play so dang much! Just like I can't remember which heroes were in that Voss game where Naturalist was in human form the entire game. Hmm… I can't even remember who I was playing… Oh yes! Fanatic, first turn End of Days! Boom goes the minions and Forced Deployment!
We totally could have a search-based hero. Let's call him Searchy. His base power would be Search: Search your deck, hand, or trash for any one card, and put it into play or into your hand. You may use this power again now.
Prison Break can be mostly neutralised by Hairtrigger Reflexes, Grease Gun, Bee Bot, Ground Pound, Buffer Overflow, Caliginous Form, Synaptic Interruption and Amulet of the Elder Gods, because actually the really dangerous part of Prison Break is the Hired Gun and you only have to stop the Hired Gun.
Come to think of it, I left out Wrecking Uppercut, Fumbling Fool, and Parse's and Naturalist's cards that let them look at the top of a deck and discard a card.
I'm still unclear on what exactly you would characterize that "weakness" as. "Lack of access to damage types other than Melee and Projectile" is about the best I can come up with, and there are a lot of villains in that boat, and not many heroes (pretty much just Legacy and maybe O-X) who can make that a significant problem.
The thing that confusing me the most, is you even said Iron Legacy can be "solved" if you bring this, this, and that. So against Iron legacy it's perfectly fine to bring the optimal heroes and hope for a good draw? It's the exact same thing.
Almost all heroes have the tools to stop IL, though. The only heroes who I know are deeply disadvantaged against him are Unity and maybe the Sentinels, because of sensitivity to mass damage. Heroes without Ongoing destruction will struggle, and heroes with no damage mitigation are unlikely to survive to the end of the game; a lot of heroes face an uphill battle, but few are completely helpless, with luck determining a lot of whether you have a chance, but not needing an incredible LOT of luck to succeed. Overall, IL has a much bigger weak point than Chairman; heck, immunity to just melee (or to damage in general) removes about 90% of the threat he poses, but even without that, there are a lot of different ways to stop him, from stripping all his ongoings and repeatedly Throat Jabbing him while you setup, to redirecting his worst attacks at critical moments and getting him just low enough that the Environment will attack him, to having him luckily not have Superhuman Redirection and just one-shotting him to death before he flips. He's still definitely tough, just because of how hard and how fast he hits, but if you can survive that initial onslaught he's not too bad - certainly more solvable than the Chairman, I think.
Uh…The Broker? The Deputy? Heck, even The Fence? All of the thugs except maybe Enforcers and Thieves are absolutely backbreaking must-kill-instantly targets, which are produced by other backbreaking must-kill targets (not so much the Fence, he's more of a nuisance), and every time you kill either of these, the Operative stabs you, and then on her turn she searches up another must-kill target who brings back another must-kill target.
Come to think of it, I left out Wrecking Uppercut, Fumbling Fool, and Parse's and Naturalist's cards that let them look at the top of a deck and discard a card.
Wrecking Uppercut and Fumbling Fool are no more likely to remove a Prison Break than they are to make it happen sooner.
Depends on the situation. I've been in games where I was using Infrared Eyepiece to control the Prison Breaks, but The Chairman's deck was getting depleted and basically the only cards left were Prison Breaks. Fumbling Fool would have been perfect then.
I don’t know why but I think Kismet is my least favorite villain. I think its because the first time I fought her I got beat down by jinxes with a team without good ongoing destruction and there were too many effects to track to want to keep playing. I wad solo so all the effects were giving me a headache. I also never know if it’s appropriate to flip her
If you are short on Ongoing destruction, you will need to keep her on her flip side as you start playing ping pong with the charm, she just gets too many damage buffs and its not worth it. When her front side gets out of control damage wise, you should flip her.
No they aren't. Their Thugs need to be trimmed down most of the time, but you won't lose a game just because an Underboss other than The Contract hangs around for a turn longer than you want them to. The Operative's retaliatory strike can in most Environments be dealt with through damage reduction. A couple of guys with 1DR, or one guy with 2DR, make her a lot less scary.