Well, the leader is designed to dumb down the game, exploit leader synergies, which (by design of homecoming) are supposed to be safe and thus killing several cards, which live of leader synergy.
It is not even necessarily the balancing aspect, it is just not fun to play a needlessly dumbed down game for no reason.
As for me I would say "GG" should actually mean "Good Game", if my opponent does not even take the time to adapt to different leaders and their playstyles and thus not playing the game they do not deserve a GG.
Well, playing Usurper is not as easy as you think. And if the opponent has a well balanced deck they can often win. Synergies, sure, but alot of decks can deal with that in various ways. A synergy strategy is somewhat risky in the first place.
My point is, it does take a good game to win with Usurper as well, as much as any leader. Different decks are strong and weak against different factions/decks etc, that's the nature of the game. Usurper is just one of the many in such a mix.
I'm not a super fan of Usurper or anything, I'm just trying him and finding it fun to be so "sadistic" to my opponents. Usurper makes it about the cards, not the leader, and as such, he is at a disadvantage with 160 provisions.
My point is, it does take a good game to win with Usurper as well, as much as any leader. Different decks are strong and weak against different factions/decks etc, that's the nature of the game. Usurper is just one of the many in such a mix.
I'm not a super fan of Usurper or anything, I'm just trying him and finding it fun to be so "sadistic" to my opponents. Usurper makes it about the cards, not the leader, and as such, he is at a disadvantage with 160 provisions.
So the same goes for all "Usurper is bad/op/broken/whatever" whiners. If you dont adapt your deck in anticipation playing against Usurper you dont deserve a gg as well.
That assumes I am losing against it more often than not, I specifically stated I despise the design behind it, not its powerlevel.