They're also professionals, arhar, who have plenty of lead time to ferret out broken cards prior to releasing them. I too, think R&D should do a better job of filtering out broken cards.
I am against banning on principle, mostly because, to me, it's stupid to sell people cards, then tell them they can't play with them (in tourneys, anyway). To me, it's almost worse than opening a booster pack and having the rare be a Lace, or a Pale Moon, because at least then you know the card is worthless right away, instead of getting all excited about it and going out and buying/trading for the other 3 you'll need to make a deck, only to find out later the cards are no good any more.
I realize, of course, that even with the best playtesters in the world they'll miss a card every now and then. I think in that case they should try restricting a card first, long before they consider banning. Yes, Restriction increases the luck factor, but let's face it - if you're only allowed 1 copy of a card in your deck it's highly unlikely you'll be building a deck around it.
This way, a card wouldn't necessarily turn into just so much wasted money. I don't know about you guys, but I don't have nearly enough money to be able to waste it like that. I work hard for what I earn, and I expect value back when I spend it. Telling me, essentially, I was a fool to spend it on your product is not a good way to build customer satisfaction.
Of course, that's just my opinion...
TomB
CPA Member