jcikal said: I personally wouldn't mind if a "big" expansion of at least 60 new cards or so would be released every quarter instead of the monthly pack for that particular month. So instead of the extra 10 cards per month (totaling 30 per quarter) that you originally wanted you now want 40 cards over the same period? In a year we'd have 480 unique cards from battlepacks plus any big box expansions that FFG plan to release? I take it you'd like the game to go the route of MTG where they have to constantly dredge up old ideas, re-skin them and increase the power level thereby obsoleting the cards you own at the moment?

Wytefang said: My lack of concern for price increases is related to the fact that I understand that simple axiom, that everything has a Cost of Entry - if you are unwilling to pay those costs, it's probably best to just find a different hobby, all things considered. I'm unconcerned with price increases, since I am gainfully employed and am willing to pay the cost of entry to the hobby. I was however trying to provide a balanced argument to the OP as to why we should be happy with what we are receiving from FFG for W:I at this point in time, however you seem to have missed the point as usual.

With the shift to the collation format starting with the enemy cycle, FFG is providing fantastic value for money at a relatively low cost. The whole point of the monthly releases was the low price point, which will be increasing marginally for additional copies of cards, increasingly the number of cards released each month will not only result in a much larger increase in cost, but possibly reducing card quality due to reduced development time. I'd much rather FFG continue to release the small number of cards each month to ensure longevity of the game rather than cashing in on the franchise for quick profit. If FFG wish to go down this road, why not changed to much larger expansions 3 or 4 times a year and change to a collectible format where they can recycle concepts endlessly? Small numbers of card month ensures adequate development time with an acceptable price point for those in a budget.

Darkdeal, this deck is certainly one of, if not THE deck to beat. I'm thinking that Huntsmen is probably better than Errant Wolf at this stage since you can play it turn one with one of your 2 cost support cards or alternatively to start up the Infiltrate! asap.

Wytefang, if you post your deck perhaps we can make some suggestions for you?

Draft the remaining neutral cards. Determine who goes first randomly, then first person takes one card, then other person takes card, repeat until done. That way each of you can determine what cards are a priority for them. I'd wager that the warpstone excavation and contested villages would go first, although it really depends on what decks you think you'll build as either order or destruction.