Jump to content

LordofBrewtown

Members
  • Content Count

    238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LordofBrewtown

  1. Kennon said: madkasel said: ~ Just wondering, Chris... is Targaryan Kool Aid red or more of an orangish color? BWAHAHAHAHA! Quote of the week. Hah, just reading trhough the thread now & was about to post; but waited to read the rest of the thread - Drew's response was better than what I was going to post
  2. Stag Lord said: LT: So well said. i too ahve been a big Daenerys fan since Book 1 - and have always found her the msot engagaing and fascinating character in the novels. Teh Meereenese Knot not only led to poor and plodding plotting - it led to some bad writing; in terms of charcter development and what had been established. Many of dany's actions were clearly foolish and her refusal to heed the advcie of people she knew she could trsut liek slemy and the bloodriders was hard to beleive. You can see Martin's struggles with the plot very clearly and very painfully in the Meereen sections - and this sentiment seems to eb unviersal. Can maybe agree on character development. Disagree on the points in bold. Dany acted pretty much as I've always read/interpreted her character. Granted, she's never been a favorite of mine/I've always found her chapters hard to read (at least post-Drogo's death); but, all of her actions were pretty much exactly what I expected of her. Stag Lord said: Lone wanderer; fully agree on Darth Stannis. There is very little i am sure about after closing teh Dance, but one thing is that Bolton's letter is mostly lies adn Satnnis does not die off screen in the dark and snow. Martin ahs invested way too much in the character for him to go out like that. I too would be extremely disappointed if Stannis is dead. I actually like his character quite a lot. Please, GRRM, just have Dany fall off Drogon or die, and end it with Stannis on the Iron Throne.
  3. WolfgangSenff said: michaelius said: WolfgangSenff said: Ktom: I think the point is that people don't feel melee should be included in the overall standings because of the possibility of collusion, which makes it possible that two substandard decks get to the final table and one or the other takes it all. We both know (everyone here does) that Erick and Corey had awesome decks, but at the same time, *should* world championships (rightly named or not) be decidable by a format that in most other games would amount to cheating? If substandard deck get's to final table wouldn't it mean it wasn't so substandard? Or that they player had either ultra luck or outskilled his opponents? It's a hypothetical situation - what if that person meets a metamate in every single table up to the final table, and they all collude to make his substandard deck win each table? How realistic is that though? With over 70 competitors from how many different metas, you have to have a deck that's good enough/be skilled enough to get through at least 1, more likely two rounds on your own without 'help'. In a smaller tournament, yes, maybe that's possible. I think that volume of players here made it extremely likely that four of the best decks made it to the final table. There may have been a better deck that didn't make it, but there's even some luck in jourst (setup/draw/matchups). As to melee not being considered for the overall chamption - I totally disagree. The best player/overall champion should have a broad skillset/be able to adapt to a variety of deckbuilding situations/scenarios. The best way of proving that is by playing a variety of formats. Limiting the champion to joust only makes him less diverse/more specialized (is the best kicker in football the best player in the league? or the best left handed relief pitcher or pinch runner the best player - no, it's generally the player who is considered to have the most well-rounded skill set)
  4. Rubinon said: On the other hand I would really like to see some of the supporters of the Targaryens in Westeros: Why not make a house Darry subtheme (with Willem Darry as a great card that saves nobles, or something like that) I've long been on board with that. In my fantasy land where there the 9 Great Houses each have a faction in the game - I would have made a few 'House Darry' characters that were dual house Tully-Targ (and likely either Celtigar or Velyarion - one of the Narrow Sea houses- would have been Bara-Targ). Just a few dual-house cards like this would have made the 9 factions doable without too much dilution/ample # of new cards for each House each set.
  5. FFG has screwed up Targ a lot from a 'nedly' standpoint almost right from the beginning. I totally agree that a large number of Targ characters in the game are really enemies. The "Quartheen' characters, Pyat Pree, and there should really be as many or more nuetral dothraki characters as Targ dothraki. Even before Dance, there were enough unique characters to give to Targ. Her handmaidens and Qaro have never had cards, and Illyrio really should have been Targ. I'm also on board with a Targ version of Varys, though nuetral is fine too for spoiler purposes.
  6. JerusalemJones said: Though mayhaps this was a blessing. Had he lived, he would have grown up to be a Frey." Laughed out loud at Wyman Manderly with this line. Yeah - that he actually said it suprised me - was awesome though. That, and "The North Remembers" were great. I know there's one I loved that I've apparently forgotten already - maybe 2nd red through will help
  7. madkasel said: Rubinon said: "Hizdahr, Humzum, Hagnag, what does it matter? I call them all Harzoo." My sentiment exactly That would be great flavor text for an event card like this... Moribund in Meereen No action may take place this round. I'm on board. Man, the Dany chapters are still very hard for me to read.
  8. Stag Lord said: Very nice - text blanking is always helpful. Agreed - always helpful & useful, but not overly powerful/broken. I feel like this is a prime example of where FFG has gone astray. More cards like this one are needed - as opposed to card that discard/kill when coming into play for relatively cheap costs. Too many no brainers out there that are easy Jaime plays. Cards like Meera can save your bacon, or have to be thought out in combo with another card to get at something. More strategic in my mind & better for the game.
  9. Dobbler said: Kennon said: I should be there. As long as this doesn't detract from us getting our eats on at Alcatraz. Alcatraz will have to be Thursday or Friday night. This will start shortly after the Joust Championships (which likely won't end much earlier than 8 PM) Hmm. Part of me says that a drunk draft should never start before at least bar time (& some guy dressed as Zelda let's your horde back into the hotel through a locked door after having his name chanted) . The other part of me admires not wasting any time getting the debacle started. Boy, I wish this wasn't in Mid-August every year. Need to find a different job before I join you gentlemen again. Hope everyone enjoys - & preemptive props to Greg for organizing the tradition.
  10. rings said: It wouldn't be a drunk draft without me...drafting...drunk...heck the first year we mostly used my 'winnings' from 'Worlds'...and Prof AJ's huge supply of beer if I remember right. Ah, nothing like paying influence with drinks... One of the funniest things I've seen is AJ in his roorm earlier that night, trying to place a drink on top of the rounded TV, watching it start to slide, catching it, repeaing 3 times, then thinking he finally had it balanced, turning around and watching the drink then slide down & crash to the floor (well, right behind the $200 dollar tip he gave to the waitress at BW3 & watching him get his face buried in her bosom as a thank you & his face turning beet red). rings said: My favorite story is Brooks (TheKingg) hailing down a 'cab' he was so goners and trying to get to the airport for a VERY early flight. Turned out the cab was a cop. You know nothing, Brooks. That was the same night I forgot the name of my hotel, so just walked around aimlessly until I remembered it was close to the capitol building. I have some product too, if needed - just tell me ahead of time. Even some Czech House of Talons and French Thorns. When/how did you get the Czech & French cards - & better question, does your wife know?
  11. Just to specify/elaborate further: The game was originally a "CCG" - that means the cards came in packs like baseball cards, some cards were rare, others common, and you had to "collect" the set. The cards work perfectly fine from a gameplay standpoint if you just want to have fun/play with friends. A couple of years ago, the game changed/they came up with the "LCG" format - this means that all cards are fixed - if you purchase a pack/box of cards, you know what will be in them/the same exact cards will be in each box. If you ever decide to play in an "official" tournament, sponsored by FFG - only the LCG cards are generally legal (though there may be different formats). If you do decide you just want to play for fun & purchase some of the CCG packs from internate sites, I would suggest the Five Kings, Iron Throne Edition, House of Thorns, and House of Talons sets/packs - as they most closely resemble the mechanics/game feel of the LCG cards, and are easily playable with any LCG cards you already have.
  12. For those two houses, I would suggest: Targ boxed set (Queen of Dragons) for Targ, and the King's Landing chapter packs for Lannister (the shadows mechanic and plots are a popular deck build for Lannister, and there's another version of Tyrion in this cycle). Depending how much you can afford, then I'd go with the Brotherhood without Banners chapter pack cycle. These packs give Targ players the option of building a Dothraki themed deck, and Lannister players Clansmen decks.
  13. House Tyrell House Card House Arryn House Card Hourse Tully House Card
  14. baragwin said: Wrecking Ball: I agree with you that chapter pack space is precious, but for me, that's an argument in favor of printing more agendas. A non-agenda card has a limited ability to affect the competitive environment, but a new agenda can make a bunch of old cards more playable. So from a perspective of wanting to increase the number of competitive decks, I think agendas are the way to go. There is a likely a saturation point at which we could have too many agendas and not enough cards to play with them, but we are nowhere near that point. On the contrary, we have hundreds of unplayable cards (including entire block-long themes that aren't remotely competitive). LordofBrewtown: You say that agenda card effects can be just as easily implemented using unique characters and locations. Can you elaborate on this? It seems pretty clear that the guaranteed nature of agendas allows for game effects that would otherwise be impossible (maester's path and city of shadows, for instance). And even those agendas that could be implemented using non-agenda cards would be much less likely to see play (for instance, how much less playable would summer be if the agenda text were implemented on a location?). So the result of implementing that game text using non-agendas would be to reduce the incentive to play the cards that work with them. And that would result in less deck diversity. Do you disagree with this? On your comments about trying to balance agendas: I talked about this issue in a couple of my previous posts, but I think the most important point is: over the past two years, as we've seen more agendas introduced into the game, the balance of the game (the number of different competitive decks) has risen. Even when the completely overpowered wildling agenda was legal, there was still more diversity than there had been previously. I attribute much of this rise in diversity to the increasing number of agendas. Look at the current competitive environment: summer, maesters, city of lies, winter, wildlings, brotherhood. Do you think we would have this much diversity without those agendas? I contend that, without the agendas, we'd all still be playing lannister. The problem with Lost Spearman isn't the card itself. There will always be cards that are the best (or better than most other cards)... that's just the nature of any game. But agendas can change that rule. An agenda can guarantee a changed game state such that a card that is normally great becomes mediocre (my example above about all refuges being +2 cost). An agenda can force a deck builder to evaluate a card in a completely different context. The result is more options about what cards to play with. baragwin said: LordofBrewtown: You say that agenda card effects can be just as easily implemented using unique characters and locations. Can you elaborate on this? It seems pretty clear that the guaranteed nature of agendas allows for game effects that would otherwise be impossible (maester's path and city of shadows, for instance). And even those agendas that could be implemented using non-agenda cards would be much less likely to see play (for instance, how much less playable would summer be if the agenda text were implemented on a location?). So the result of implementing that game text using non-agendas would be to reduce the incentive to play the cards that work with them. And that would result in less deck diversity. Do you disagree with this? Part of the problem I have with agendas is the 'guaranteed' nature of them. I don't understand why they/certain effects should not be targetable or guaranteed (maybe this is another topic, but by their very nature, Agendas seem to me to be a 100% Jaime type player card - at least as they've been designed). I just get the feel that some players are looking for/want that automatic lock/guarantee (I want to be able to draw 5 cards per round and have certain effects guaranteed). To me, what makes/made this game great/fun is that nothing is guaranteed (in that respect - house balance aside - I honestly preferred much of the game feel during the beginning/Westeros block). Furthermore, my personal opinion is that things like Agendas and Shadows put a lot more emphasis on the deck building than the actual playing of the deck (I'd much prefer the other way around). baragwin said: On your comments about trying to balance agendas: I talked about this issue in a couple of my previous posts, but I think the most important point is: over the past two years, as we've seen more agendas introduced into the game, the balance of the game (the number of different competitive decks) has risen. Even when the completely overpowered wildling agenda was legal, there was still more diversity than there had been previously. I attribute much of this rise in diversity to the increasing number of agendas. Look at the current competitive environment: summer, maesters, city of lies, winter, wildlings, brotherhood. Do you think we would have this much diversity without those agendas? I contend that, without the agendas, we'd all still be playing lannister. I don't agree that the release of the agendas is what has led to/the 'cause' of more deck diversification. The card pool itself has grown considerably in this time period - it's a tremendous leap (IMO) to pick out those agendas as the reason for more diversification. I'm not ruling them out as a factor; but, I'd need a lot more convincing that they are the main cause.
  15. baragwin said: Rings: I think Erick addressed your question in his post about the "blank agenda". The problem is cards that hurt agendas only help one decktype (the "blank agenda") but hurt many other decktypes (all agenda decks). The result is less diversity in the decks (and therefore in the cards) being played. For instance, how many martell decks have you seen that don't play Lost Spearman? Zero, because there's really no incentive not to play it. Which is boring because auto-includes don't make for interesting deck design. But if you printed an agenda that made attachments cost -2 and refuges cost +2 (a simple example), there is now some incentive to play a martell deck without Lost Spearman and with cards you otherwise wouldn't have played. And isn't it more fun to have more choices about which cards you play? - Corey So, isn't the problem really Lost Spearman (and auto-include cards like it)? Just seems to me like flooding the environment with agendas in order to fix this problem is a huge risk. If the problem is auto-includes, which are cards that probably weren't optimally designed/balanced - what confidence do we really have that trying to create agendas - which are probably the hardest card to balance - are going to fix this? Just seems to me like a scenario would be set up similar to introducing a new predator species into the environment to fix one problem/species, where it kills everything off and destroys the ecosystem. IF the purpose is really greater diversity - I think agendas are just going to create other problems, and maybe to change which cards are auto-includes, but I don't think they are the best way to address the problem.
  16. rings said: I guess considering the original material of this post, I haven't really heard a good argument on why there couldn't be cards that negatively affected agendas more? Why is it so important to have a starting card that can't be targeted? Seriously, I am just wondering. I think having a 4/3 unique that blanks all agendas would be super cool. Or a nuetral 2/2 guy with one icon that gains an icon and then doesn't kneel to attack/defend? It would actually open up game play and the feeling of 'meta' (~that Dobbler loves to try guessing), which is a good thing...no? Again, if there are cards that punish you for using a certain house card (a starting card that doesn't really give you anything, other than access to certain cards) - i.e. the traitors - why can't there be something similar for having an agenda (a starting card that DOES give you something, albiet sometimes with a possible downside)? Maybe this is mutually exclusive to Erick's point on agendas (I swear I read it, just mis-understood I guess!), but I think you can have both - a more robust agenda system (with careful playtesting) and cards that make them a little more risky. *shrug* Agreed. And those are the kinds of cards/characters/abilities I'd also like to see targeting excess draw, or out of house characters ( you draw a card, but I kneel a character or location to claim a power; or stand a characters, etc)
  17. finitesquarewell said: i know that some in the old guard have predispositions that would lead them to rue an environment in which agendas are ubiquitous, but i think these attitudes are founded in great part on the specific uses of the agenda card type we have seen in this game, many of which i would classify as poorly designed cards. i'd encourage those players to rethink whether they simply want a bunch of cards to be printed to discourage players from playing agendas -- or whether we should beg the designers to make cards that discourage players from making use of the bland set agendas we have today, and direct our collective whining toward making a bunch of agendas each of which is fun to play with. if agendas were made more along the lines of what i've described above -- agendas that give us a reason to play house dayne, clansmen, dothraki; and do so in ways that make it actually feel like we're playing something different than the usual sauce in martell, lanni, or targ, or combine those themes with the houses' most efficient cards in ways that give rise to decks that don't feel like the other efficient in-house builds -- i contend that there would be few players who would not enjoy the environment immensely more. i agree that more agendas along the lines of the maester's path or knights of the realm aren't the way to go, but at the same time i think we should be begging more creative thematic diversity of our designers rather than marginalizing the agenda cardtype altogether. I can understand where you're coming from here, & may even agree with the sentiment about not creating cards that target agendas/anti-agenda cards (I think a few are fine, but they shouldn't be commonplace). You may very well be right that the problem with agendas has been their design; however, your thesis seems to assume that it's possible to design all of these agendas well. I'm not so sure that it's just not possible to - that agendas, by their nature, are more difficult to balance/design well (which is actually what I believe). I'm just skeptical of the ability of designers to pull this off/balance everything if agendas actually were ubiquitous.
  18. Admittedly, I've never been a fan of agendas. As Rings always points out - they are extremely hard to balance, and I really don't like how they generally cannot be targeted/don't interact with other cards the same way. And while I like the idea of enabling House X or trait theme decks more - that can just as easily be done with unique loacations & other cards if designed properly - the agenda really shouldn't be necessary. I honestly fail to see how agendas make the game better or more enjoyable overall - they feel more to me like FFG adding a new card type/mechanic just for the sake of change itself (although really, influence pay gold effects are kind of like that to - did these really improve the game beyond kneeling a character? - I would argue no). However, if we're going to have them, I definitely agree with the statement below: finitesquarewell said: the maester's path could have required that you place chains on maester characters only, not allowing for the apprentice collar to allow you to use the agenda with any old character. at the gates could have required you to pull an in-house maester only, and instead of a bunch of neutral maester characters (and other non-maester junky characters the houses didn't really need) the oldtown cycle could have given each house a few unique maesters and a non-unique maester or two. in this way, each house would have had a maester theme that had a distinct flavor, rather than the same small bunch of specific maester-themed cards being played out of each house with fewer variations. and to make each in-house implementation of the maester theme feel "maester-y," each could have done something that simulated the maesters supporting the house's main lords of ladies, or sending messages via ravens, or studying and teaching, or any of the other things maesters do. (we get a little bit of that in the set, as those of you who have seen the spoilers on the uncut sheets or on agotcards know, but it's a minority of cards in oldtown, and many of them are inefficient or just sort of useless.) I was utterly shocked to see At the Gates - basically a reprint of Here to Serve - which created a lot of discussion on the very point of in house vs out of house years ago. But this seems to be one of FFG's sacred cows (along with Draw - anti draw or effects targeting out of house characters are always costed far higher than draw cards or cards allowing you to play cards from out of house).
  19. The think I'm most surprised is to see Knight of Flowers listed by so many, but not one appearance for Tower of the Hand Robert Baratheon - effectively the same card, and plots like Stoic Resolve and Valar Dohaeris give an edge to Robert.
  20. I think the conversation has to start with the Laughing Storm. Deadly is very handy & there are no worries on losing intrigue with him around (another example of Tears of Lys, Put to the Sword are missed from the old Westeros block). Though I agree that Massey's Hook is excellent, as is Smuggler's Cove ( two great tastes that taste even better together?)
  21. Stag Lord said: I really wish they'd give the agendas a rest at this point. Amen!
  22. Stag Lord said: bloodycelt said: My friend's jaw was hanging wide open. She hadn't read the books. Yep. i got two incredulous phone calls shortly after ten last night. that's the scene that will hook them. Great episode - the Twins looked freaking AWESOME! Stag Lord said: bloodycelt said: My friend's jaw was hanging wide open. She hadn't read the books. Yep. i got two incredulous phone calls shortly after ten last night. that's the scene that will hook them. Great episode - the Twins looked freaking AWESOME! Agreed on the Twins - very impressive. Rings - thanks for that link - wasn't aware of that site - lots of good stuff there. Zsa: I agree regarding the Whispering Wood. I didn't expect to see it; but, I felt like they really didn't build up enough drama for it within this episode. Why were Cat & Rodrick just waiting there? They could have been a bit more obvious about the armies splitting. Ideally, this could have made for a great cliffhanger (end the show showing Robb, a column of Lannister riders led by Jaime, and hearing the Umber's war horn sounding, followed by others, start the next episode with Cat). It's not that I need to see big battles/thousands of soldiers, - but they could have had Cat hearing the sounds of battle, and seen a little obscured battle through the trees
  23. Twn2dn said: Maester_LUke said: Does anyone find it odd that NYC & DC had two of the lowest turnouts? A lot of the East Coast players boycotted both of those regionals, including the Long Island players, so I don't find it very odd. What is the boycott for?
  24. Very interesting to see all the different house represented. Also, somewhat surprised that in all the matches after the cut the seedings held (higher seed from Swiss won) - not a single upset if I read correctly. How did you go about the pairings for the 1/8 finals? I would have expected 1vs 16 and 8 vs 9, but it doesn't look like that's what occurred? Fantastic turnout, and great to see almost everyone stay for a full 7 rounds of Swiss. An impressive event.
  25. I'd vote for venemous blade. He Calls it Thinking is great; but, it's the repeatable part of venemous blade that gives it the edge (as both are effectively free).
×
×
  • Create New...