u/Business_Machine_935

I see people on here talking about how Time Eater was not that bad and having only one oppressive gimmick makes him easier than Doormaker. But Doormaker has many things to him that make him much easier than Time Eater. 

1. Time Eater’s attack pattern is random: with Doormaker, you know exactly what he’s going to do and which phase you are going to try and do things in. With Time Eater? Who even knows. Will he do literally no damage, or hit you for 32? There is no way to plan around his attack pattern since you can’t predict what he will do
2. Time Eater cleanses debuffs too: I’ve seen people say it’s stupid that you can’t apply debuffs to Doormaker on turn one. Imagine if halfway through the fight, Doormaker instead healed back to 50% hp and removed all debuffs. Sure would be a shame if a certain snail did that.
3. Time Eater has a turn where he gives Vuln and Frail: You think Doormaker hits hard? On turn 2, he’s hitting you for 35. On turn 2, Time Eater could be hitting you for 48. And you are frail. 
4. Time Eater gives draw reduction for some reason: Wanna complain about lack of choice? Imagine only drawing 4 cards on your turn and one of them is a slimed. Why does the boss who already restricts card playing need this too?

And the funny thing about people complaining about all of this? People are always comparing Time Eater and Doormaker in the way that they counter specific archetypes, but the thing I always hear is “Time Eater counters shiv decks.” But this literally only happens if your shiv deck was bad. I’ve beaten A20 silent (hopefully A20H someday) and I’ve beaten Time Eater with plenty of shiv decks. You can just play 12 cards each turn and not have to worry about your turn being stopped short. 

In conclusion, does Time Eater suck because of his incredibly oppressive main mechanic? No, I actually find it kind of fun. Does he suck because of literally everything else in his fight? Yes.