I think what he is saying is that the implications HoBS and ToL impose on the growth of new players is hindering to the point of frustration and a sense of defeat. This can be debilitating to a game, especially one so new in it's development. What is interesting is what new players will do with these losses to a so called "oppressive" card. It seems that players that do not have a set strategy that they have read about or tried often find new ways to tackle a problem. This leads to branching strategies, and ultimately a much deeper meta game.
That being said, the hurdle ToL imposes on new players is great, but reachable. I don't think a nerfing is in order at all, as that will hurt the game much more than it would help it.
I don't appreciate the implication of lack of understanding because I have a lack of sympathy for the hurdle this card creates. I think the real problem lies in the lack of strategies given help new players understand the game, rather then throwing them in the fire. Because it is this fire that let's players believe that cards are oppressive and need to be nerfed. In a game such as this where player and playtester feedback is so important, I think giving players the push they need through new strategic content will open more doors in the long run than reconstruction of cards themselves.
And as far as discussing this sort of thing in "open" forums, I think everyone's say is rather important on the matter. Democratic feedback is the only way designers will know what to do without shutting players out. We've seen many bannings/errata of cards in other games history, but why? In recent years, it has been because of this "unfun" factor the card imposes on new players. Mage Wars by mechanics alone implies seeking more than one strategy is available to handle a problem.
As this is a game of very little luck, and very high strategy, there is already a high threshold that players have to reach to become "good" at the game. ToL and Hand raises that threshold, and it scares people away from the game, without deeper thought into why they lost and how they can beat that loss. Take Chess, for example. If Chess was introduced into todays society instead of 400 years ago, there would be many new players who would shout the oppressiveness of the Rook, or the Bishop, or even the Pawn. Why? Because people want to grok the game as soon as they learn it, and Mage Wars does not offer that. It is complex game designed to challenge the mind, not to just reward it. It is what brings so many people into the game. The deep, tactical gameplay. The double thinking as to what opponents are going to plan next. It is what makes ToL just another strategy, and not THE strategy. Simply because it is difficult to beat does not make it oppressive. And because it is a large hinderance to new players does not make it oppressive either, it simply means that we, as a community have to give new players a fighting chance by adding strategy articles, new content, videos of gameplay. It is in this that gives players the step ladder to the hurdle that is ToL/HoBS, not mechanics and rules changes. Let me give you an example. Magic the gathering is a rather popular game. It is also a very difficult game. It used to be that whenever a card would start to see a significant advantage in the meta game, said card would be banned/errata'd. Now, with the advent of the internet, and the popularity of strategy sites like Channelfireball, new players feel empowered instead of overwhelmed. Difficult strategies to beat become a lot easier once you understand how they work, and it is this grokking that new players need, not changes to the game itself, but the way they think about the game.
