I agree.  If you can compare Keyforge to Magic, then every game with cards in it is "like magic".  It's a silly notion especially with Keyforge that is barely a competitive game, it is effectively two people playing solo games next to each other in what is essentially a race.  Destiny had more in common with magic then Keyforge does, at least Destiny was a dueling game.
I think this is a pretty common assumption, but it's really not the case.  The CCG (Random Collectable) business model has been historically a catastrophic failure with a few exceptions to that rule.  The overwhelming vast majority of random collectable games fail miserably.  While in the same token, I would be hard pressed to name a "failed" LCG to date.  Even games like Star Wars LCG which were actually super **** games outlasted your typical CCG, I mean **** it had a 7 year run, I can count on one hand all CCG ever released that made it past the 7 year mark.
I don't disagree with you that FFG has trouble balancing their games, its always been an issue even with their successful ones, but I think that is the point.  All of their LCG's have been successful, but each time they have entered a new market its been a miserable failure. When they got into the miniatures (non-prepainted) miniatures with Runewars it was nothing short of a disaster and their first CCG was dead on arrival.
They should stick to making what they know how to make well, board games and LCG's.

Probably not, but it's important to note that regardless of whether you are a CCG or LCG, you still need to be a good game regardless of anything else in order to be successful.  
So the LCG and CCG are an apples to oranges discussion.  The Star Wars LCG was released to lackluster reviews, got a poor reception from the card playing market and has always been considered a mediocre card game on its best day.  FFG was never going to be able to save the game, the fact that it lasted as long as it did was entirely the result of it being an LCG.  Had Star Wars LCG been a CCG it would have been canceled outright after the release of the core set.
Destiny on the other hand was well received, well reviewed and is still considered one of the better card games on the market today.  It remained in the top 10 of ICV2 for its entire run.  For it to "fail" is not the result of its quality or reception, its pure mismanagement by the publisher.

Probably not, but it's important to note that regardless of whether you are a CCG or LCG, you still need to be a good game regardless of anything else in order to be successful.  
So the LCG and CCG are an apples to oranges discussion.  The Star Wars LCG was released to lackluster reviews, got a poor reception from the card playing market and has always been considered a mediocre card game on its best day.  FFG was never going to be able to save the game, the fact that it lasted as long as it did was entirely the result of it being an LCG.  Had Star Wars LCG been a CCG it would have been canceled outright after the release of the core set.
Destiny on the other hand was well received, well reviewed and is still considered one of the better card games on the market today.  It remained in the top 10 of ICV2 for its entire run.  For it to "fail" is not the result of its quality or reception, its pure mismanagement by the publisher.

That is a very surface observation.  Keyforge hasn't proven anything yet, if it is not canceled in the next 5 years, then we can have a conversation about how it might have said something about the business.  For now it's the latest fad and the most likely thing to happen is the same thing that happens to most fads in the last couple of decades, it bursts on the scene as the greatest thing since slice bread and like Destiny, a couple of years later we are talking about how shocked everyone is that it was canceled.
Personally I'm surprised that Keyforge is even thing, I tried it, I think its one of the most underwhelming designs of Garfield's entire career.  The entire draw to the game is "unique decks", but it's effectively two people playing a solo game.  I think the only thing keyforge will prove is what we already know about Garfields games, he made one game decades ago and he has been riding that success ever since.
As for Destiny as an LCG, I don't think the community or purchase base would be necessarily smaller.  The only real difference between an LCG and CCG is that there is no need for a 3rd party market for an LCG and frankly I consider that a positive.  I don't want to buy things from a 3rd party market, so if the primary market for a game is too expensive I buy less or not at all.  I would have thought publishers would have learned this lesson about their consumer base by now as I'm quite certain I represent the overwhelming majority of how gamers operate.  I have no issue shelling out some money for cards to play a game I like, but you need to make it hassle free for me and the price vs. benefit needs to be reasonable.  With Destiny, it wasn't, so I, like many, I stopped buying and here we are.
For these CCG's to be successful they need to be successful outside of the competitive scene, it needs to be a fun game casual gamers like to play, hence it needs to be reasonably priced and modeled.  Your average competitive players is doing everything in his power not to spend money on the game and still create competitive decks.  They don't buy stuff for it, they acquire only what they need so most of the competitive players are working it out in the 3rd party market. 
Destiny failed because it failed to be a game casual gamers picked up.
 
 

Probably not, but it's important to note that regardless of whether you are a CCG or LCG, you still need to be a good game regardless of anything else in order to be successful.  
So the LCG and CCG are an apples to oranges discussion.  The Star Wars LCG was released to lackluster reviews, got a poor reception from the card playing market and has always been considered a mediocre card game on its best day.  FFG was never going to be able to save the game, the fact that it lasted as long as it did was entirely the result of it being an LCG.  Had Star Wars LCG been a CCG it would have been canceled outright after the release of the core set.
Destiny on the other hand was well received, well reviewed and is still considered one of the better card games on the market today.  It remained in the top 10 of ICV2 for its entire run.  For it to "fail" is not the result of its quality or reception, its pure mismanagement by the publisher.

That is a very surface observation.  Keyforge hasn't proven anything yet, if it is not canceled in the next 5 years, then we can have a conversation about how it might have said something about the business.  For now it's the latest fad and the most likely thing to happen is the same thing that happens to most fads in the last couple of decades, it bursts on the scene as the greatest thing since slice bread and like Destiny, a couple of years later we are talking about how shocked everyone is that it was canceled.
Personally I'm surprised that Keyforge is even thing, I tried it, I think its one of the most underwhelming designs of Garfield's entire career.  The entire draw to the game is "unique decks", but it's effectively two people playing a solo game.  I think the only thing keyforge will prove is what we already know about Garfields games, he made one game decades ago and he has been riding that success ever since.
As for Destiny as an LCG, I don't think the community or purchase base would be necessarily smaller.  The only real difference between an LCG and CCG is that there is no need for a 3rd party market for an LCG and frankly I consider that a positive.  I don't want to buy things from a 3rd party market, so if the primary market for a game is too expensive I buy less or not at all.  I would have thought publishers would have learned this lesson about their consumer base by now as I'm quite certain I represent the overwhelming majority of how gamers operate.  I have no issue shelling out some money for cards to play a game I like, but you need to make it hassle free for me and the price vs. benefit needs to be reasonable.  With Destiny, it wasn't, so I, like many, I stopped buying and here we are.
For these CCG's to be successful they need to be successful outside of the competitive scene, it needs to be a fun game casual gamers like to play, hence it needs to be reasonably priced and modeled.  Your average competitive players is doing everything in his power not to spend money on the game and still create competitive decks.  They don't buy stuff for it, they acquire only what they need so most of the competitive players are working it out in the 3rd party market. 
Destiny failed because it failed to be a game casual gamers picked up.
 
 

I tend to agree.  Destiny getting the axe was always inevitable, the CCG business model was just all wrong for this game with how collecting dice and cards was necessary.
I think FFG needs to realize that the overwhelming majority of gamers do not like dealing with 3rd party markets and the entire concept of buying a game and not knowing what is in it until you open up the surprise package is a selling point for an extremely niche audience the vast majority of which will not represent your primary customers with a game like Destiny (people who love Star Wars and want to play a Star Wars game).
Had they made this a Living Card game, there is no doubt in my mind that Star Wars Destiny would be alive and well today.
Live and learn I guess.
 

I tend to agree.  Destiny getting the axe was always inevitable, the CCG business model was just all wrong for this game with how collecting dice and cards was necessary.
I think FFG needs to realize that the overwhelming majority of gamers do not like dealing with 3rd party markets and the entire concept of buying a game and not knowing what is in it until you open up the surprise package is a selling point for an extremely niche audience the vast majority of which will not represent your primary customers with a game like Destiny (people who love Star Wars and want to play a Star Wars game).
Had they made this a Living Card game, there is no doubt in my mind that Star Wars Destiny would be alive and well today.
Live and learn I guess.
 

I think the term "dedicated fan base" is a bit shaky.  I mean what is that really?  Does a couple of hundred players around the world count as a dedicated fan base? a couple of thousand?  
Games are successful when they sell, but they are not necessarily failures if they don't.  Runewars did not sell, so it was canceled, but I would argue it was a successful game that just had a very short run.  Having a "dedicated fan base" is not easy to achieve and even if that fan base is small, its not to be disregarded.  I mean consider Twilight Imperium.  Its on its 4th edition and by all accounts they never even printed enough copies of the game in its entire lifetime to qualify it as a economic success.  They were making nickles and dimes on their best day on that game, but they made it because although small, the fan base that followed the franchise loved it.  
I know some people liked it, whenever any game is canceled there is always a "some people liked it" commentary but Runewars never really had any hope of being an economic success.  You had a skeleton people, a people people, elf people and demon people.  The only way they could have made it a more generic fantasy game is if they removed all art and wrote "fantasy game" on the cover.  The game just didn't have anything special about it, there was no spark.  It was rather plain and boring.
Under the covers I agree there was a great mechanic, and I think this is what really helped to build an audience for it but you can't sell a miniature game on the basis of a mechanic. 
If Gamesworkshop has showed us anything its that mechanics don't matter at all to the miniature gaming community.  Its all about the visual and hobby component of miniature games.  I mean Warhammer 40k has always been and always will be complete trash as a game mechanic.  I mean, it literally has no redeeming qualities as a strategy game of any kind and anyone who knows anything about gaming and plays 40k knows that.  Its just garbage.  But the miniatures are amazing, the best in the business by a margin so wide that nothing else is even in the same space time continuum.   Simply put, the only reason to play 40k is to paint the miniatures and that is enough to make it one of the longest running and successful miniature games in the history of the genre despite it being a complete failure in every other regard.
The real success stories are games like Warmachine and Horde.  They pulled together great mechanics, amazing miniatures, great setting.  Its a game that has held up with minimal changes to the mechanic since release and miniatures from 10 years ago are still better than anything modern efforts have managed like those from FFG.  Privateer Press may have some questionable business ethics, but they know how to make a game successful.  If FFG should model themselves, it should be after what P3 is doing.
 

QFT This!
Not to suggest that I don't love the game, I do, but it's only because I play very off and on and always with the same opponent (a buddy of mine) and we very intentionally create unoptimized (theme decks).
For a brief period we didn't do that (my friend made a droid deck just to see how it would play) after which we stopped playing for several months.  Competitive level decks instantly sucked all the fun out of the game.
If you intentionally avoid these sort of decks, find an opponent that the goal is casual fun decks and you stick to that format (self balancing and banning), the game is great, but as it is in terms of a competitive game it's just outright broken and not fun at all to play.
I agree that the main problem with the game from the very beginning is its business model.  Collectable Card Games just don't last.  There are a few that have broken that mold like Magic The Gathering, but for the overwhelming vast majority of CCG's they are dead on arrival.  LCG's and contained card games may not be as popular and economically successful in the short term, but they last.

QFT This!
Not to suggest that I don't love the game, I do, but it's only because I play very off and on and always with the same opponent (a buddy of mine) and we very intentionally create unoptimized (theme decks).
For a brief period we didn't do that (my friend made a droid deck just to see how it would play) after which we stopped playing for several months.  Competitive level decks instantly sucked all the fun out of the game.
If you intentionally avoid these sort of decks, find an opponent that the goal is casual fun decks and you stick to that format (self balancing and banning), the game is great, but as it is in terms of a competitive game it's just outright broken and not fun at all to play.
I agree that the main problem with the game from the very beginning is its business model.  Collectable Card Games just don't last.  There are a few that have broken that mold like Magic The Gathering, but for the overwhelming vast majority of CCG's they are dead on arrival.  LCG's and contained card games may not be as popular and economically successful in the short term, but they last.

I think the term "dedicated fan base" is a bit shaky.  I mean what is that really?  Does a couple of hundred players around the world count as a dedicated fan base? a couple of thousand?  
Games are successful when they sell, but they are not necessarily failures if they don't.  Runewars did not sell, so it was canceled, but I would argue it was a successful game that just had a very short run.  Having a "dedicated fan base" is not easy to achieve and even if that fan base is small, its not to be disregarded.  I mean consider Twilight Imperium.  Its on its 4th edition and by all accounts they never even printed enough copies of the game in its entire lifetime to qualify it as a economic success.  They were making nickles and dimes on their best day on that game, but they made it because although small, the fan base that followed the franchise loved it.  
I know some people liked it, whenever any game is canceled there is always a "some people liked it" commentary but Runewars never really had any hope of being an economic success.  You had a skeleton people, a people people, elf people and demon people.  The only way they could have made it a more generic fantasy game is if they removed all art and wrote "fantasy game" on the cover.  The game just didn't have anything special about it, there was no spark.  It was rather plain and boring.
Under the covers I agree there was a great mechanic, and I think this is what really helped to build an audience for it but you can't sell a miniature game on the basis of a mechanic. 
If Gamesworkshop has showed us anything its that mechanics don't matter at all to the miniature gaming community.  Its all about the visual and hobby component of miniature games.  I mean Warhammer 40k has always been and always will be complete trash as a game mechanic.  I mean, it literally has no redeeming qualities as a strategy game of any kind and anyone who knows anything about gaming and plays 40k knows that.  Its just garbage.  But the miniatures are amazing, the best in the business by a margin so wide that nothing else is even in the same space time continuum.   Simply put, the only reason to play 40k is to paint the miniatures and that is enough to make it one of the longest running and successful miniature games in the history of the genre despite it being a complete failure in every other regard.
The real success stories are games like Warmachine and Horde.  They pulled together great mechanics, amazing miniatures, great setting.  Its a game that has held up with minimal changes to the mechanic since release and miniatures from 10 years ago are still better than anything modern efforts have managed like those from FFG.  Privateer Press may have some questionable business ethics, but they know how to make a game successful.  If FFG should model themselves, it should be after what P3 is doing.
 

Well I do have to admit the first few times I tried Lord of the Rings, I didn't think much of it.  I mean I recall a friend bought it first, we played it at his house, he was very excited about it but I just thought it was kind of basic and uninspired.  Fast forward a few years later I have the whole collection on my shelf soooo.. there is that.

I have played about 5 games at this point.
Rhino was fairly easy to beat, I tried him three times, all three times I pretty much crushed him.
Klaw I haven't managed to beat yet, though I haven't tried with anything but the tutorial spidey deck.
Generally my experience has been good, it's a straight to the point card game without a lot of bells and whistles, the rules are smooth and easy to remember.  After my 3rd game I found I only referenced the manual once or twice per game as I ran across unusual circumstances and events.
I think if I was going to say anything negative about it, it is that its more or less Lord of the Rings with a Marvel super hero skin.  I mean even the various cards are effectively alternate versions of Lord of the Rings cards (like Nick Fury = Gandalf).  
The flow of the game is a bit different in how things are timed (two phases, rather then a bunch of unique phases) which makes the game a lot simpler to learn and play, but in terms of style of play and general game elements, it was too reminiscent of a game I have already played for years, mind you I love my Lord of the Rings, but I guess I was just hoping that Marvel would be something unique and different like Arkham Horror was.  
I feel like with a Super Hero game it would have made more sense to have Locations with unique effects (where are we fighting?), I think it would have also been cool to see more of a feeling of mobility.  I don't know quite how to word it, but like I feel like their should be different locations where different battles are taking place, rather then the engagement system.  Like there is the city center, that's where the villain is, but some minions are robbing a bank downtown and maybe there is a jet in the air in trouble.  Where it would make a difference if your hero can fly, or if he can sneak and stuff like that.  It doesn't really feel like the super powers and the fight come through.. I agree with whoever said that it feels like its just a game of resource management and the Marvel Theme could just as well have been pretty much anything else and it would not have made much of a difference.
I agree with with the posters sentiment, I thought the game was kind of Meh... I'm not sure I'm going to collect.  I may give the goblin one a go just to see what they can do with the design space, but right now I don't think I'm sold on it.

Well I do have to admit the first few times I tried Lord of the Rings, I didn't think much of it.  I mean I recall a friend bought it first, we played it at his house, he was very excited about it but I just thought it was kind of basic and uninspired.  Fast forward a few years later I have the whole collection on my shelf soooo.. there is that.

I personally skipped the nightmare packs, I always felt the game was tough enough.  I might start collecting them in the future, but I did manage to finish the Saga Expansions recently and I'm just a couple of decks short of a complete Saga set myself.
I don't know how satisfying it is, sometimes I look at my collection just imagine a pile of money on fire.  Suffice to say I love the game and I expect I will continue to get enjoyment out of it as I have for years, but man... did I blow some cash on this little hobby of mine!

I can assure you when it comes to the miniature gaming hobby, Games Workshop always wins in the end.  This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, even though I can't fathom how anyone, no matter how pretty the mini's are, can go from playing a game like Runewars with a deep, rich, modern and streamlined mechanic, to playing Yahtzee with miniatures in a game like Kill team or 40k?
There are so many miniatures games out there and mechanically speaking I can't think of a single one that I wouldn't recommend over 40k, Kill Team or Age of Sigmar.  I mean quite literately you can buy any random published miniature game and it IS better designed then anything Games Workshop has made in 30 plus years of the genre.

I think the term "dedicated fan base" is a bit shaky.  I mean what is that really?  Does a couple of hundred players around the world count as a dedicated fan base? a couple of thousand?  
Games are successful when they sell, but they are not necessarily failures if they don't.  Runewars did not sell, so it was canceled, but I would argue it was a successful game that just had a very short run.  Having a "dedicated fan base" is not easy to achieve and even if that fan base is small, its not to be disregarded.  I mean consider Twilight Imperium.  Its on its 4th edition and by all accounts they never even printed enough copies of the game in its entire lifetime to qualify it as a economic success.  They were making nickles and dimes on their best day on that game, but they made it because although small, the fan base that followed the franchise loved it.  
I know some people liked it, whenever any game is canceled there is always a "some people liked it" commentary but Runewars never really had any hope of being an economic success.  You had a skeleton people, a people people, elf people and demon people.  The only way they could have made it a more generic fantasy game is if they removed all art and wrote "fantasy game" on the cover.  The game just didn't have anything special about it, there was no spark.  It was rather plain and boring.
Under the covers I agree there was a great mechanic, and I think this is what really helped to build an audience for it but you can't sell a miniature game on the basis of a mechanic. 
If Gamesworkshop has showed us anything its that mechanics don't matter at all to the miniature gaming community.  Its all about the visual and hobby component of miniature games.  I mean Warhammer 40k has always been and always will be complete trash as a game mechanic.  I mean, it literally has no redeeming qualities as a strategy game of any kind and anyone who knows anything about gaming and plays 40k knows that.  Its just garbage.  But the miniatures are amazing, the best in the business by a margin so wide that nothing else is even in the same space time continuum.   Simply put, the only reason to play 40k is to paint the miniatures and that is enough to make it one of the longest running and successful miniature games in the history of the genre despite it being a complete failure in every other regard.
The real success stories are games like Warmachine and Horde.  They pulled together great mechanics, amazing miniatures, great setting.  Its a game that has held up with minimal changes to the mechanic since release and miniatures from 10 years ago are still better than anything modern efforts have managed like those from FFG.  Privateer Press may have some questionable business ethics, but they know how to make a game successful.  If FFG should model themselves, it should be after what P3 is doing.
 

I can assure you when it comes to the miniature gaming hobby, Games Workshop always wins in the end.  This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, even though I can't fathom how anyone, no matter how pretty the mini's are, can go from playing a game like Runewars with a deep, rich, modern and streamlined mechanic, to playing Yahtzee with miniatures in a game like Kill team or 40k?
There are so many miniatures games out there and mechanically speaking I can't think of a single one that I wouldn't recommend over 40k, Kill Team or Age of Sigmar.  I mean quite literately you can buy any random published miniature game and it IS better designed then anything Games Workshop has made in 30 plus years of the genre.

I can assure you when it comes to the miniature gaming hobby, Games Workshop always wins in the end.  This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, even though I can't fathom how anyone, no matter how pretty the mini's are, can go from playing a game like Runewars with a deep, rich, modern and streamlined mechanic, to playing Yahtzee with miniatures in a game like Kill team or 40k?
There are so many miniatures games out there and mechanically speaking I can't think of a single one that I wouldn't recommend over 40k, Kill Team or Age of Sigmar.  I mean quite literately you can buy any random published miniature game and it IS better designed then anything Games Workshop has made in 30 plus years of the genre.

Lotr card game is tough for even experienced players with full collections and its particularly so if your playing straight up solo.  Easy mode is kind of poorly named, I would say it's more like "solo mode" as a huge chunk of the scenarios in the game (I would say in the 80 percentile) are virtually impossible without some seriously specialized decks.  I can imagine it's even tougher without a full card pool.
The general advice is
1. Play easy mode if your playing solo
2. Avoid online decks and seek out advice articles instead (most online decks require a very specific way to play them so it can do more damage then good without clear instructions and experience).
3.  Realize when playing solo mode you will fail more often then win.
More specific advice for solo players
1. Build specific decks for specific scenarios.  Aka, once you have lost a few times with a deck, adjust the deck to beat that specific scenario rather then building "I'm ready for anything decks".
2. Build 2 sphere decks.  One sphere is usually to narrow, three spheres is to wide.  Two sphere decks tend to do best in solo mode. 
3. Control the top deck.  Solo decks do 100% better if you can control the top deck as most scenarios have show stopper cards that can derail your progress in one swift motion.  There are lots of great cards and heroes that can be used for this purpose, but suffice to say having encounter deck control in your deck is a must in my opinion.
4.  Realize that some scenarios are virtually unbeatable solo as they were simply not tested or designed to be beat with 1 player.  This is a sad reality of Lord of the Rings and certainly some people will claim to beat all scenarios "EASY!", but don't buy into that comotion.  Anyone who claims such things is full of ****.  All scenarios are beatable, but few of them can be quantified as easy.  Most range from really hard, to just shy of impossible.

Lotr card game is tough for even experienced players with full collections and its particularly so if your playing straight up solo.  Easy mode is kind of poorly named, I would say it's more like "solo mode" as a huge chunk of the scenarios in the game (I would say in the 80 percentile) are virtually impossible without some seriously specialized decks.  I can imagine it's even tougher without a full card pool.
The general advice is
1. Play easy mode if your playing solo
2. Avoid online decks and seek out advice articles instead (most online decks require a very specific way to play them so it can do more damage then good without clear instructions and experience).
3.  Realize when playing solo mode you will fail more often then win.
More specific advice for solo players
1. Build specific decks for specific scenarios.  Aka, once you have lost a few times with a deck, adjust the deck to beat that specific scenario rather then building "I'm ready for anything decks".
2. Build 2 sphere decks.  One sphere is usually to narrow, three spheres is to wide.  Two sphere decks tend to do best in solo mode. 
3. Control the top deck.  Solo decks do 100% better if you can control the top deck as most scenarios have show stopper cards that can derail your progress in one swift motion.  There are lots of great cards and heroes that can be used for this purpose, but suffice to say having encounter deck control in your deck is a must in my opinion.
4.  Realize that some scenarios are virtually unbeatable solo as they were simply not tested or designed to be beat with 1 player.  This is a sad reality of Lord of the Rings and certainly some people will claim to beat all scenarios "EASY!", but don't buy into that comotion.  Anyone who claims such things is full of ****.  All scenarios are beatable, but few of them can be quantified as easy.  Most range from really hard, to just shy of impossible.

There are three key issues with Legend of the Five Rings.
First is the simple fact that the theme of the game is very niche.  Most people I have introduced "meh" the game before I tell them a single thing about it, just the simple fact that is based on a Fantasy Samurai setting is a big turn off.  That's not something that can be fixed, it simply is what is it is and some people like that theme, most people simply do not.  At least that is my experience.
The second thing is that we live in an era of simplicity when it comes to board and card games.  Complex games, weather they are complex because of the rules or simply have complex strategies witters the game down to a niche product.  Again there is not much to do about, the fan base of this game enjoys a complex strategic experience and so the game should and does cater to that, but it does put it on the outs with your average gamer.
Finally its a competitive Dueling card game.  This in its own right complicates its space and this I can attest to.  There are 8 people in my gaming group, when we get together for a game night its always at least 3-5 of us.  There just is very little room for a 2 player dueling game.  More than that, for all of us to collect and build our own decks is a huge expense for everyone, meanwhile there are tons of great card games made for 3-5 players that require no collecting of any kind.  Hence it makes it hard to justify.
Legend of the Rings is a unique and interesting game.  Personally I bought two core sets, built a couple of decks and me an a buddy of mine get together a few times a year when a rare opportunity comes up where there is just two of us and we play it.  We both enjoy it but I just don't see myself diving into collecting the game, we just don't get enough play out of.  I think since launch I have played the game maybe 5 times so even just justifying the two core sets is iffy.   It spends most of its time on the shelf collecting dust.
A couple of things I can see helping to get me more involved might be.
1.  Sell the sets in a single box.  I would be far more willing to spend 50 bucks on a 2 player set with all the cards, then I am trying to track down 6 unique expansion packs x 2.
2.  Sell pre-made clan decks.  Im far more likely to buy a pre-made deck then I am random cards.  This really helped get Game of Thrones to the table.
3. Make a good online version of the game.  Being able to play a game online can help a game a lot.
4. It would have helped a lot if buying a core set gave you everything you need for a 2 player game.  The fact that I had to buy 2 core sets to make a full deck was a big turn off.
As a whole I have far more interest in games like Marvel Champions where its a core set made for 4 players with all the cards you need to play a full game right out of the gate.  Games like Lord  of the Rings LCG I own almost everything because you can play it solo.  Destiny we like as well because the randomness of the CCG means we have no expectation to collect everything.  Both me and my friend made a couple of decks and pick up occasional cards and its simple and fast enough to work as a filler so we can play on game nights when we wait for people to arrive.  Even Game of Thrones is a more attractive game because its designed and tested for multiplayer and it actually plays better with 3-4, comes with pre-constructed faction decks.  
I guess what I'm saying is that Legend of the Rings doesn't really fill any common niche and the competition in the 2 player dueling collectible card games genre is pretty stiff too.  I can understand why the population of the game is relatively small.

There are three key issues with Legend of the Five Rings.
First is the simple fact that the theme of the game is very niche.  Most people I have introduced "meh" the game before I tell them a single thing about it, just the simple fact that is based on a Fantasy Samurai setting is a big turn off.  That's not something that can be fixed, it simply is what is it is and some people like that theme, most people simply do not.  At least that is my experience.
The second thing is that we live in an era of simplicity when it comes to board and card games.  Complex games, weather they are complex because of the rules or simply have complex strategies witters the game down to a niche product.  Again there is not much to do about, the fan base of this game enjoys a complex strategic experience and so the game should and does cater to that, but it does put it on the outs with your average gamer.
Finally its a competitive Dueling card game.  This in its own right complicates its space and this I can attest to.  There are 8 people in my gaming group, when we get together for a game night its always at least 3-5 of us.  There just is very little room for a 2 player dueling game.  More than that, for all of us to collect and build our own decks is a huge expense for everyone, meanwhile there are tons of great card games made for 3-5 players that require no collecting of any kind.  Hence it makes it hard to justify.
Legend of the Rings is a unique and interesting game.  Personally I bought two core sets, built a couple of decks and me an a buddy of mine get together a few times a year when a rare opportunity comes up where there is just two of us and we play it.  We both enjoy it but I just don't see myself diving into collecting the game, we just don't get enough play out of.  I think since launch I have played the game maybe 5 times so even just justifying the two core sets is iffy.   It spends most of its time on the shelf collecting dust.
A couple of things I can see helping to get me more involved might be.
1.  Sell the sets in a single box.  I would be far more willing to spend 50 bucks on a 2 player set with all the cards, then I am trying to track down 6 unique expansion packs x 2.
2.  Sell pre-made clan decks.  Im far more likely to buy a pre-made deck then I am random cards.  This really helped get Game of Thrones to the table.
3. Make a good online version of the game.  Being able to play a game online can help a game a lot.
4. It would have helped a lot if buying a core set gave you everything you need for a 2 player game.  The fact that I had to buy 2 core sets to make a full deck was a big turn off.
As a whole I have far more interest in games like Marvel Champions where its a core set made for 4 players with all the cards you need to play a full game right out of the gate.  Games like Lord  of the Rings LCG I own almost everything because you can play it solo.  Destiny we like as well because the randomness of the CCG means we have no expectation to collect everything.  Both me and my friend made a couple of decks and pick up occasional cards and its simple and fast enough to work as a filler so we can play on game nights when we wait for people to arrive.  Even Game of Thrones is a more attractive game because its designed and tested for multiplayer and it actually plays better with 3-4, comes with pre-constructed faction decks.  
I guess what I'm saying is that Legend of the Rings doesn't really fill any common niche and the competition in the 2 player dueling collectible card games genre is pretty stiff too.  I can understand why the population of the game is relatively small.

One of the best things about Guardian is that when someone rolls a 1 damage for example, you can take that, instead of giving him an opportunity to re-roll or alter that to a higher damage result.  So in addition to protecting your main character, you can deny the opponent opportunities to re-roll and fix weaker results.
It is also goods in decks you want to stall.  Some decks are intentionally slow, designed around the "you finish your stuff and then I will own you after you have claimed".  Guardian sucks up an action so its really great in these sort of delay decks.
Its also great when dealing with blue boosters.  Aka someone rolls damage and + damage (blue result) and you remove the damage rendering the blue result useless.  This can really mess up a guys big move.
Finally they are great in dice removal decks.  Again similar to the above, you use your dice removal mechanics to get rid of dice that can affect you but these mechanics are usually very specific in how they are used.  For example the card will say "remove an ability die" or "remove a character die".  As such sometimes you can't use it because the hit the play needs was rolled on a type of die you don't have removal for in your hand, but with guardian you can still remove it and deny your opponent the blue combo's, later removing those with other removal die mechanics.
Its a very subtle ability, but many advanced strategies and deck building concepts, but its really great for breaking up combos and denying your opponent the opportunity to re-roll and adjust his dice.
Guardian decks work really well in combination with shield mechanics as well.  The common play is that you hit characters without shields, but with guardian you can have some control over where the damage goes (on your shielded guardian character).
Suffice to say, there is more to it than just what is on the surface, its actually one of the more diverse mechanics with a wide range of impact.