Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LordofBrewtown

  1. Penfold said: Maester_LUke said: ShivesMcShivers said: I wouldn't call the GJ wildling deck control at all. What would you call it then? I didn't get to see it played, and was making shoddy assumptions. Could you describe it for us, until the decklist appears? I know some people would call it Tempo control, but I'd call it disruption. It isn't really about controlling a bunch of things seeking to lock your opponent down so much as disrupt everything they try to do, try to plan for. Breaking things up. Had a lot of stealth in that deck, & claw Isle seemed awfully important. Certainly not classic rush, but I felt I was set up pretty good on the board when Shives got to 15 against me. I'd side more towards rush than control - but our game may not have been typical.
  2. Stag Lord said: THIS IS TREASON! King Aerys would have boiled you alive, ser! Will you change your board name from Stag Lord to Dragon Worshipper already!
  3. ASoIaFfan said: Fotonurth said: Things I learned: Know who your friends are at a melee table and examine every possible card combo on the table. If you're at a table with Dobbler, pissing him off is fun, but usually doesn't end well. Event control is important. Paper shield should be in EVERY deck. (personal opinion) I don't know if Paper Shield *should* be in every deck, but I predicted that it would become ubiquitous once re-released to the environment, which is why I was not happy to see it return. Some of my local meta-mates doubted me when I said how prevalent it would become, but sure enough, it's everywhere now, for better or worse. Auto-includes annoy me, because I see it as limiting options and variety in deck-building. I do agree that everyone should strongly consider how they are going to deal with Paper Shield whenever they put events in their decks (without gold or influence cost) that they are counting on getting to play. One will have to hedge their bets and run event protection from now on. Or just avoid events altogether and laugh that your opponent wasted three deck slots on a card he or she will never get to use during a game with you. I preferred Hand's Judgment for event cancel. It had a cost so not everyone ran it, yet it was available to anyone who really wanted event cancel in their decks. Agreed. I was very disappointed to see Paper Shield reprinted (though not surprised, gameplay feel has been drifting away from what I like for some time now). In particular, this really mitigates events that have a cost requiring kneeling a crest character - that's probably my largest complaint.
  4. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! FFG's attempt at this in the CCG/Winter block was an epic failure IMO. Your opponent(s) is playing a completely different game than you. Maybe I just have a bad taste in my mouth from the doomed mechanic (I think it's fairly safe to call this easily their worst introduction ever), and it is possible - but I don't see it.
  5. Kennon said: Ok, how about we put it this way? Other major characters in the series reference it constantly. They might be wrong. It could be a misconception and most of the realm only thinks that Renly and Loras are homosexual. We aren't specifically shown them together in a sex scene, though we are frequently shown that the rest of the realm thinks that they are. HBO chose to take the other characters' assumptions as concrete fact. In this case, I have no problem with that. Of course, I could still argue that we still didn't really see them, I suppose. ~Just shirtless Loras shaving shirtless Renly. Right. Loras, being a good squire, was simply following up the chest shaving with a pedicure, or maybe lacing up his lords boots.
  6. RE: Loras/Renly - I didn't think GRRM was subtle at all about their sexual preferences (well, it's possible Renly goes both ways). I had no problem with the scene at all - helps set up future events well/understand where Renly sits in the line of succession. If I was upset about anything - it was portraying Renly as kind of wimpy/not a fighting type. I think he was more of a 'manly man' who liked 'manly men'.
  7. Well, I'm sure you guys are having fun. Keep us updated on what's going on!
  8. Greg - thanks for the breakdown on decks - always interesting. Sorry I couldn't make this one.
  9. Oh Yeah, definitely remember the wildling promo deck (still have it!). I would say - yes, they are worth buying/work fine with the LCG cards. Escpecially the last couple of sets (The Iron Throne block was a favorite of mine), ITE and Five Kings sets wouldn't alter the play feel a lot from what you have now in my opinion. Other blocks would have a different feel, and definitely some cards where the power alignment would feel out of place. For instance, I would suggest avoiding the Winter Edition blocks (they have a lot of wildling and Night's watch characters if you like those, but introduced the doomed mechanic - which only lasted that set, and was probably the biggest failure/mistake FFG came up with). As stated, the initial block Westeros, also has a different feel (negative was a lot more marshalling effects - but aside from those, I thought the feel of the game was actually better - a lot more events focused on bad things happening if you lost a challenge). I would suggest starting with the ITE block: Irone Throne Edition, House of Thorns (House Tyrell & House Bolton characters), and House of Talons (Arryn characters) Then if you like it, maybe go back to the Westeros block (Westeros (only Stark, lannister and Baratheon were houses), Sea of Storms (introduced greyjoy) and Flight of Dragons (introduced Targaryen). This block will give you a completely different feel. Depending on what you like better, then go with Five Kings (if you like ITE/LCG feel/similar more similar cards) or if you liked westeros go with Valryian block, then Ice & Fire, and Winter Edition last. Some people might suggest Valyrian before Westeros - but if you want something different I'd try Westeros (definitely a different feel to game with Put to the Sword/Torch, Tears of Lys, and Contested Claim). Note that Westeros won't have separate Martell cards - they were not introduced until the Ice & Fire block
  10. Never really had a Manderly unique, even back during Westeros and SOS ( and there weren't even House X traits then) Just curious what others would like to see out of the minor houses. I *think* everyone likes uniques - but: 1) How would people prefer to see the lesser houses incorporated - especially those of the Riverlands, Reach, and Vale, since they don't have separate houses in the game? 2) Would people prefer to see Houses 'fleshed out'/completed before starting others, or is it OK to introduce single characters from minor houses - even if there's no synergy (with the thought that there could be later)? What's the best order/priority for introducing unique characters in general? 3) Does the ability/cost/strength of the character at all affect how/when you think a unique should be introduced (would you only prefer to see certain characters with a higher strength/etc. - or do you just want a copy of Ser X, no matter what the ability)? 4) Minor houses - how many unique characters, locations, etc. and/or non-unique cards are needed to make a minor house playable (not necessarily competetive tourny decks, but at least fun to play/a deck that has a chance)?
  11. So, just picked up the first chapter pack from the maester cycle & had a couple of observations on the House themes (which I'm partial to). The first thing I noticed is Lucas Blackwood, with the House Tully trait. Interesting choice for a card, I thought. More uniques are always better - but I found the House Tully trait interesting. I could understand it in that not every minor house can be viable, so a House Blackwood trait probably isn't viable. But then, wouldn't one of the Tully's bannermen, like Jason Mallister or Tytos Blackwood been a better choice (maybe not for a one strength character) - or they could've filled out the Tully's with either Utherdays Wayn (Sterward), Ser Desmend Grell (Maester-at-arms) or Ser Robin Ryger (captain of the guards) - any of whom would've been fine in the 1 cost/strength slot (and this would have been my preference). Lucas Blackwood just seemed like an odd choice for a character (at least at this point) So, not my choice; but, more uniques with minor House traits are still always appreciated (and this still makes some sense). And it is a bit harder to come up with 'nedly' 1 strength unique characters. However, then I see Leyton Hightower, and with the 'House Hightower' trait, as opposed to the "House Tyrell" trait. So, what prompts the decision to go with one minor house (to another house not represented as their own faction in the game) but not another? Or did they just throw the House trait on Hightower because they didn't have another to give him (would making him a Lord have unbalanced him somehow)? Anyone else notice or have any thoughts on this, or how you'd like to see FFG handle this in the future (with Mallisters, Freys, Tarlys, Rowans, Royces, Baelish's)? I would've liked to have seen Lucas get 2 traits, 'House Tully' and 'House Blackwood' - just for nedly purposes.
  12. shadow stag said: rings said: I certainly remember Euron Sample...hard to forget that board name Welcome back! True story. Glad to see old names popping up again... thanks HBO! yep, welcome back! Now, where's my favorite former british player, Ser Poopalot?
  13. ASoIaFfan said: LaughingTree said: I think its time for FFG to re-visit the topic of producing simple sleeves with the logo of each great House on them. I would buy deck sleeves for all 6 playable Houses in the game plus Arryn, Tully, Tyrell and a reverse black on red for Targaryen Blackfyres. I think printing deck sleeves with House logos is a better choice than the Jaime and Cersei image ones (since I would buy far more product of House Logo sleeves than with images of just one character). House Logo sleeves would have a much wider appeal than just a single character and would likely sell extremely well. My old personal favorites though were Max Protection Tournament Sleeves that come in a box of 100 but apparently were discontinued. I like the house sleeves idea. It's been talked about before on these boards and I know I'd buy a set for each house if they ever do release them. Would be perfect! Yep- topic keeps coming up because it's a good one. I too would buy each of those houses, as well as Bolton & Dayne sleeves, and even some with Stannis' sigil, Dondarrion (for the Brotherhood)& some Night's Watch ones, maybe even Clegane or Umber. Think Tully sleeves striped blue & mud red with the trout would be especially cool (have always liked Dayne's also). You'd think we'd almost have enough firm commits for them to do some kind of small test run on the main houses (can always reprint if popular enough)
  14. Interesting review from some guy who has never read the books (link below) - cracked me up. His review does reveal that HBO is not doing a great job with names of the characters - could have improved that just by characters referring to each other by name more. http://www.youtube.com/user/OtakuASSEMBLE#p/a/u/1/TFGlVBvmC4o
  15. FATMOUSE said: think a change in the structure of Melee tournaments could go a long way in achieving that. For example, only rewarding points to the player that won the game (you win or you die), would create a much more "final table" atmosphere in the preliminary rounds. The first four players in the tournament to get X wins, makes the final table. You'd have to work out a few kinks in terms of how to pair players after the first round (winners with winners? losers with losers?) and probably make some use of strength of schedule if more than four people reach X wins in the same number of rounds, but I believe it can be done. Agree 100% - I believe that when they decided to score 2nd, etc based on power, they made a HUGE mistake. You win, or you die. Strength of schedule should suffice for advancing, else random pair up/pair down. I might put a point system in for each player you defeat (so if you win a 4 player melee, you get 3 points, vs 2 for a 3 player melee) - that'll mix up the SOS a bit too for odd player tournies.
  16. Woohoo! I knew using painting that maple tree in the front yard up like a weirwood would help spur on George's writing!
  17. Saturnine said: By the way, I hope you keep posting, jgt, it's really interesting to read the impressions of someone unfamiliar with the books. Agree. Please keep posting JGT, it's very interesting to hear the thoughts of someone who hasn't read the books or played the game. I especially like reading your theories/guesses as to what's to come (& I'll be sure not to comment on the accuracy of any of your theories).
  18. Rogue30 said: Syd said: There was some criticism from another poster about the slow speed of Dany entering the tub. Yes, because that scene was totally unnecessary. What's the point to show the ass for syuch a long time? (I like asses for the record) I prefer if they not shortened the other more important scene instead. Yeah, that was me (& I too liked it for the record), but it did strike me as gratuitous the first time I watched (but, then honestly the haircut scene with Robb,Jon & Theon was clearly thrown in for the ladies & not necessary at all either - couldn't help but think they patterned it after the locker room scene in Top Gun with Ice & Maverick).
  19. Rickon was also in the 'lineup' when Robert arrives (to the right of Catelyn for the viewer, or Catelyn's left - all the other kids were on the other side of Ned & Cat)
  20. The books. Game is fun, but if the characters/feel ever strays too much from the books, I'll stop buying new chapter packs.
  21. A lot of people (not just here) seem to be commenting on how dull/slow the first episode was, and how it was a bit confusing. Is that really so different than the first episode of the Sopranos, Deadwood or the Wire? Really, not a hell of lot happened in those shows either. I think sometimes people get impatient, forget that at this point, there is really a lot of stuff the view is NOT supposed to know yet ( & as readers of the books, we can do too much helping/interpreting for new viewers). Regarding the nudity, after watching several times, some of it was a bit much (not that I'm complaining, but the opening scene with Danaerys, before she gets in the tub, she takes a step, long pause, another step, long pause - really no reason for it).
  22. I enjoyed it - but I am extremely concerned about how much this cost, and how popular it will have to be to keep around for multiple seasons. It looked great, but if it would've made it cheaper, I could do without the metalwork to put wolves on shields or creating a Dothraki language.
  23. First, great to have you back John! As you've noticed, a lot of new players/posters on this board. For those of you who don't know, Mathlete is truly one of the nicest guys there is to play against (no offense to Dobbler, Rings, Nate or other past champs) It's a great community in general - but Mathlete always travelled across the country to regional events & was a true ambassador of the game. I think you know that I've always been more a proponent of casual games (with my Ned "house" theme decks). It'll be great to have you playing in any capacity. Totally agree on Val (though I've always been an anti-draw guy) & Laughing Storm, as well as the Stark Uniques. Regarding Melee - like Stag, I've always said that it's really just a different skill set (just as draft was) - and he is correct that I think it is hard for some of the high level joust players to alter their mindset to melee as they have less control (and yeah Rings, Stag's comment can come off as a bit superior; but, really so do the comments of the anti-melee proponents). That said, I'm almost ready to throw in the towell & agree that melee just doesn't work that well. I think that in theory it should be a better measure of a player's ability in that he/she is more often forced to react to unforeseen circumstances (it's much harder to lockdown/control an opponent). However, that doesn't necessarily seem to play out because: it is too easy in tournaments for local meta's to gang up, and in games I've played, it far too often has come down the the action (or inaction) of one player who cannot win deciding if player B or player C will win - not to mention that game length is just too long in general. 5-6 players is too many for a game (with all of the ability text on cards right now - too hard to track all cards/see what's going on) & I really don't think the titles work in the 3 player format.
  24. I agree that it would be better if it just reduced the claim to zero so the opponent still received unopposed power & renown,if you had to kneel a character to trigger (like Lanni pays Debts). I just don't think it's as bad as a lot of people make it out to be - lots of other cards I find to be more 'talentless' than Burning. You still have to plan on when to use best,are generally only going to negate 3 challenges a game at best.
  25. Stag Lord said: Nah - but for some reason my posts have a lot of typos in them...clearly because of these werid forums. Wow, were you ever set up. Still laughed though
  • Create New...