Shades of Rarity?

View: New views
8 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

Shades of Rarity?

by Worlder :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

http://www.pojo.biz/board/showthread.php?t=491860

Now what do we fans do now?
I am an Enlightened Despot, not a tyrant.
But a dictator no doubt.

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by ChaoticJune27 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Let me check this.....
Hmmm.... I barely notice any difference. I'll take a look at them later.
But this can cause cheating. Especially If a rare card Is face down, and then they could find a card that can somehow back-fire.
http://www.nabble.com/file/p13570175/stelgar.jpg (This Signature Is thanks to pocketkoi)
_____________________________________________________
http://www.savetheporygon.proboards83.com/
________________________________________

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by Pocketkoi :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

They could always just issue backs to them, or proxies for any holo cards...
Strategy is buying a bottle of fine wine when you take a lady out for dinner. Tactics is getting her to drink it.
Chaotic Insider: Tune in every week for the newest strategies and tactics for the Chaotic TCG

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by ChaoticGamePlus :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Interesting, but . . .

Unless all of the different rarities are a different color or if there is only one rare mugic or one rare attack, etc. card, I do not see that there is a problem.  Anyone who either purchases a starter deck or booster is going to have a rare card.  So you know that your opponent will probably be using at least one rare card in their deck. So yes, you might know that the rare card may be a mugic card, but unless you know which mugic "spell" is on the card, it should not make much of a difference.

If your opponent has a whole deck of "shaded" cards, and you have a regular starter set, it does not matter you are probably going to lose anyway.

LED

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by Palin :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

I saw this a while ago, and was going to tack it onto the next blog post I write. There is something of a noticeable difference between the backs of foil and non-foil cards, to the point that I can separate my foils from my non-foils using only the backs. I'm not 100 percent accurate, but I can spot the difference most of the time. The foils have a richer black color, whereas the non-foils are a smoky gray. If you hold one of each next to each other, you can tell the difference rather easily.
In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by Irvine :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Well, no, it's not the cards that matter! It's the player! LOL :p

Anyway, I checked too, and didn't noticed any difference between rare and non-rare cards... If you can, well, good for you, but I can't! :p So I can't cheat! lol

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by Kerberos999 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

i don't think you're oppenent would be to worried about it because you may not know their rares. I think the concern is in the attack decks because is let's say a telekinetic bolt was on top of your deck you may know it to be so because it's the only super rare in the attack deck so instead of playin and wasting a squeeze play you may instead play a flash kick. then the next strike you'll pick up your telekinetic bolt and probably use it.
"H'earring! H'EARRING!"
                            -Tom
"Quiet! My name's H'earring not Hard of H'earring"
                                                -H'earring

Re: Shades of Rarity?

by Worlder :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Well this might pose difficulties for draft tournaments.

One scope out a rare if held in the right angle of light exposure.
I am an Enlightened Despot, not a tyrant.
But a dictator no doubt.