Jump to content

Nitro Pirate

Members
  • Content Count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Nitro Pirate

  1. Staton said: Well since they're clearly too drunk to post, I will make a topic. I thought it was pretty good, but I think that the Martell House Card is the top card of 2011. Every major shift in the meta came through Martell first or was the best out of Martell. It started with the Brotherhood, then went through to Maesters, and then to the Summer Masterlite Rush decks. They all are best out of Martell. Martell had the most restricted cards BY FAR than any other house and is STILL the best house for these decks. Also I listen to the end of each episode! Whoohoo... I applaude you, someone who knows the score :-)
  2. Started out wanting to play Greyjoy because I stumbled upon a tournament report from the Gencon 2009/2010 (I don't recall now) melee winner, and he bigged up Greyjoy something chronic and they sounded fun to play. Unfortunately, I couldn't get the cards so I started out playing Baratheon and loved them. When I later loaned a new player my deck to learn with (Bara are one of the easier houses to grasp the basics of) I moved onto playing Targaryen for a while. I could never make these guys regular winners, but I did enjoy the recursion theme. Following this I played Martell just to try out a deck concept, and played them for a few months... and now I finally have my Greyjoy cards, so I've been trying Greyjoy decks out :-) I have no plans to play Stark or Lannister, as most of the cards I own have been farmed out to friends who like those houses. Having played so many of the houses, it's really hard to choose a favourite. I can say that I dislike Martell a fair bit, as I've found some of their cards to be obnoxiously powerful... not down to anything with the background of House Martell in the books.
  3. Pretty much, yes. Imagine if you will that the world you're creating with the cards is persistent, and the characters don't leave play unless the rules say otherwise.
  4. Hi all, Becoming increasingly frustrated at FFGs failure to make an announcement on a reprint for the Clash of Arms cycle. In short, I do not have these cards. Other people in my meta do have these cards. I wouldn't say this ruins the game for me, but it does afford some people an edge that I don't have access to. I wouldn't mind if FFG had announced that they were going to be reprinted, as it's a matter of waiting but knowing I'll eventually get my hands on them, but thus far nothing has materialised. If there's no announcement on this cycle by March, I'll be pushing our local TO to ban the Clash of Arms cycle from our organised play. I know this won't be a popular decision with some people, but they've had two/three years to play with those cards and they will still have them for casual play. Wonder if anyone will be adopting a similar stance with their local meta?
  5. Sadly I think all this discussion on Jaqen is moot, as I don't believe that FFG have any plans to reprint the Clash of Arms cycle. They announced three cycle reprints within one week... that was months ago... nothing at all has been mentioned of a clash of arms reprint, and I suspect that they will be 'quietly cycling it out'. If no announcement is made by the end of March I'll be pushing our local TO to ban that cycle from our tournaments, as it's unfair to the players who can't obtain those cards. The whole point of an LCG is that everyone has access to all the cards they want by purchasing the appropriate chapter packs. No so, when they're sold out and not being reprinted.
  6. Tone him down by removing Infamy, then make him Baratheon only :-)
  7. michaelius said: Kennon said: Honestly, there is a pretty large supply of neutral renown at the moment.... It probably would be better with those new Knights/Dothraki event giving renown... Would it also give them a power icon? Cos half the Dothraki are short on that too ;-)
  8. Staton said: michaelius said: Staton said: I disagree that the Heir to the Iron Throne is significantly worse than Power Behind the Throne. The Lannister agenda is a bit better, but not by much. I think the problem is that Targ is ill suited to take advantage of the extra Power challenge, wheras Lannister is obviously VERY well suited to take advantage of the extra intrigue challenge. Heir to the Iron Throne makes little sense as a Targ card. That doesn't make the actual Agenda bad, just not easy to make work. If Power Behind the Throne was House Greyjoy Only, it wouldn't be any worse, just less playable. Cost benefit is not worth it with heir. You sacrifice one two very important control challenges since either you give your opponent 100% safe hand or surrender board control with military challenges. With Lannisters you sacrafice nothing it only get's a bit riskier to play INT challenges but if you manage to get 2 INT wins against enemy he can say good bye to his cards. That's why the Lannister agenda is better. However, I still don't think giving up the intrigue challenge or the military challenge is that bad. I've had plenty of Bara rush decks that don't do intrigue challenges. Did it hurt me? Not really, because for the most part I could care less what cards they have in their hand. I mean a rush deck just tries to get as much power as possible as quickly as possible. Being able to do another power challenge is more important than doing an intrigue challenge for a rush deck. Bara can give up on intrigue challenges a lot easier than Targ can, Knights of the Realm can mitigate any damage from cards lost from the hand, as well as the fact Bara can also drop everything from the hand in pusuit of the rush. Furthermore, Bara don't have to even give up the challenges, as lots of decks will play Melisandre, Marya Seaworth or a number of other cards. Therefore your opponent can't completely go all out with his intrigue offensive without risk.. unlike playing against Heir to the Iron Throne where there is NO risk of retaliation. You're also tying up 'rush' quite closely with additional power challenges. There's a problem with that, in that you can have the additional power challenge but if you're rushing and putting pressure on your opponent, there's a good chance that they won't even have power on their house which means they additional power challenge is a stack less effective than an intrigue challenge where your claim would count for something. Of course, having played a lot of Bara decks yourself, you'll know that Bara are also capable of additional power challenges even without an agenda, but this is not at the expense of any other challenge type.. ie; 4 challenges a turn! and that has a lot more in common with the Lannister Agenda, because when Power Behind the Throne is release they too will be able to initiate up-to 4 challenges per turn, every turn. I also don't see the logic in saying that Heir isn't a bad card, it's just with the wrong house. That's like saying Jojen Reed is a great card, he just needs to be Greyjoy instead of Stark :S Well, maybe it could be better one day if they introduce the right right cards to Targaryen, but you can say that about any other card. Most people agree that Heir to the Iron Throne can have it's moments, but that all in all, it's not nearly as good as the Agendas out there.
  9. Mathias Fricot said: But ya, I agree, its beauty. Haha, beauty, I love it perpetual noob said: In my (somewhat limited) experience, Heir to the Iron Throne isn't that great out of Targ, since the one thing you need to really make it shine is a bunch of renown. An extra power challenge isn't going to really do that much if you're just getting one extra power for claim, and maybe an extra for unopposed. Getting copper link in play will give you almost the same effect, without having to give up intrigue challenges. If you can give Danerys the Dragon trait she will claim an extra power as a dragon (assuming she goes off with Rhaegal), will claim an extra power with renown, and if you can get her to also win an intrigue challenge she'll claim another power for renown. Renown works just as well when you win two power challenges as it does when you win one intrigue and one power. In fact, if you're going for that type of renown rush then two power challenges would be better as you still have another chance at repeating your claim effect, rather than making them discard a card. Not that I'm sticking up for Heir to the Iron Throne. It's a bit rubbish, really. Nothing like as powerful as the up and coming Lannister agenda... not even a smidgeon. I do hope Targ receive a better Agenda at some point. Coming up with an idea for one is a bit of a challenge, though.
  10. Ikaros said: Hi. There is the plot Desolate Passage in play: javascript:void(0);/*1324226742529*/ Player A has 2 characters with an intrigue icon, let's say Jaime and Tyrion. Player B declares an intrigue challenge against Player A and triggers Decadent Brothel on Jaime: javascript:void(0);/*1324226758558*/ Can player A declare first Tyrion as defender and thus Jaime is no more an eligible defender and makes the Brothel fizzle because of Desolate Passage? Or must player A declare Jaim as defender first? Jamie must defend
  11. If you're new to the game then you're probably playing the wrong house. Targ are the most difficult house to win with 'out of the box', and to be fair they aren't really the easiest house to win with at the best of time. If you want to beat your friend, play Baratheon ;-)
  12. Hi all, This may sound a little odd at first, but I have a question I was hoping to have answered... Widow's Watch is worded - Response: After you play a unique card from your hand, kneel Widow's Watch or kneel a learned character to search your deck for a copy of that card, reveal it, and add it back to your hand. Then, shuffle your deck. If it was worded as - Marshalling: After you play a unique card from your hand, kneel Widow's Watch or kneel a learned character to search your deck for a copy of that card, reveal it, and add it back to your hand. Then, shuffle your deck. ... would it still work? And If not, why not? Just pure theory on some of the game mechanics and how they work, just need to get my head around something... help appreciated :-)
  13. TheLarz said: clu said: It was ruled at the MN regionals that the 7th city plot does "see" the previous 6 plots long enough to trigger the responses. And yes, it makes city plots that much more powerful. I had been playing it incorrectly for years (well, however long city plots have been out!) as well! Was not aware of that and have heard exactly the opposite ruling from one of the LCG designers at FFG. Will have to ask again next time we have game night. It was explained to me that as soon as you reveal your last plot (before any effects go off), that your other six go back to your unused plot deck and so the last City plot has no triggers. If that somehow isn't the case, that adds a decent amount of power to them. Given that (as quoted above) the rulebook states in clear, unambiguous wording 'after your revealed plot has taken effect', I'd say that the person who told you otherwise was having a bad day.
  14. playgroundpsychotic said: Kennon said: playgroundpsychotic said: The other creature deck got a nice leg up with Maester of the Last Hearth. Why not a maester that aids dragons? SPOILERS!!! Well, it's hinted at rather strongly in the novels that Maesters actually played a prominent role in killing off the dragons, so I'm not sure if it's Nedly to print one that helps them. Yet not all Maesters are of all the same mind and one in particular has a rather un-Nedly version of himself. Which one?
  15. Twn2dn said: Nitro Pirate said: rings said: I just wish there was something comparable for locations. It gets a little annoying that you can run 3-5 plots that control characters, and 1.5 for locations (Flee and maybe Assault). I don't see this at all... Fleeing and Assault are obviously in there, but so is Dry Season, so is Burning Bridges, and so is First Rains of Autumn... I tend to agree with Rings on the need for more location hate, but I am finding Dry Season specifically a pretty decent card. We need more, but there are a few more options now than there used to be. The problem with location hate, as opposed to character hate, is that strictly speaking you do not need locations to win. However, you always need characters to win. If there was a valar for locations, this would be horrendously unbalancing for the health of the game. It would allow people to create locationless decks which is thematically poor and generally, a bit dull ! There are some exceptionally powerful locations, but there are also plenty of ways to control them. If you're looking at someone playing a small number of powerful locations then you should be able to handle this via the usual methods. If you're looking at a deck that's incredibly location heavy, then how is fleeing to the wall not an acceptable way of bringing them down to size? My local meta has seen some heavy location based decks recently, so the last melee tournament I played in saw me slide two favourable grounds into my deck alongside the condemned by the councils. One of the guys was playing a Shadows agenda and used a massive number of locations to lock people down. Favourable Ground absolutely wiped him out. Fleeing to the wall would have had a severe impact too, although I didn't need to take this plot as the cards to deal with locations already exist. We don't need to see more plots to deal with locations. We just need some of the locations to be toned down a little (or maybe just the one location )
  16. I can't see a 44 on the feed on that link or iTunes :S
  17. Staton said: Something like the Rainbowguard but with Dragons instead of lords. I immediately thought yes I like this idea, then immediately afterward I thought NO, cos that's just replacing the words Sand Snake with Dragon...
  18. Whilst I disagree that aggro / rush decks are difficult to win with, even against control, I agree it's currently impossible to build a consistent, quality Dragon deck that will win more than half of it's matchups against top tier decks. The Dragons are just too few, and too susceptible to too many effects (targetted kill, blanking, icon removal, kneel, bounce). Unfortunately, Targ are a victim of the canon when it comes to Dragons. They probably need to re-release Balerion as a playable card and also the 2 other great, historical Dragons before we can hope for competetive Dragon decks.
  19. michaelius said: Am I the only one who is unhappy ? Not only are low cost chars usually low STR being easy victims to Venomous Blade now they will also receive another huge enemy in First Snow+Rule by Decree combo. At first I winced a little because some of my decks are very weenie heavy... but then when I thought about it, so is everyone else's deck!! At the minute people seem obsessed with getting great setups and decks are full of refugees and 1 and 2 cost characters, with maybe a couple of expensive finishers. This plot just adds another dimension to the game, and I'm delighted that this is almost a direct buff for Targaryen who can surely make the most of the situation. If one house needed some help it would be Targ. Annoyingly, I think it helps Martell almost as much, but that's no surprise :S
  20. rings said: I just wish there was something comparable for locations. It gets a little annoying that you can run 3-5 plots that control characters, and 1.5 for locations (Flee and maybe Assault). I don't see this at all... Fleeing and Assault are obviously in there, but so is Dry Season, so is Burning Bridges, and so is First Rains of Autumn...
  21. msommi said: I'm facing a Martell Maesters deck, I've already lost all my attachments, the field is full of huge maesters played at cost 0. They setup with 52 cards, don't kneel to attack and sometimes also to defend, they cancel valar, draw at least 5 cards every turn... But I keep going...I have to get to that bloody Ghaston Grey that keeps hitting me !! They already bounced me back so many times: I lost icon's, bounced back to hand, got str reduced to 0.But this time I'm gonna get it !! 2 marauders... 3 marauders..... First one get bounced (eh...the last shot for that bloody GG), second one goes too (well cyvasse is cyvasse,the only pity is that costed him just a weenie maester thanks to STR reduction,) but now i'm finally there facing just few gigantic 3 icon maesters: but now I can beat them and finally destroy it...destroy Ghaston Grey!!!. but hold on.... what was I thinking ? That I could really touch a Martell ? LOL... This one time, I nearly busted a Martell Maester's Ghaston Grey too. He played retaliation, I was first player... the time was ripe, condemned by the council was sat in my hand waiting to leap out... But I reckoned without Edric Dayne, Game of Cyvasse and Parting Blow. Turns out I got two four cost characters back into my hand, lost one of them (and the condemned) to an intrigue challenge, and had my remaining characters slain by a Lost Spearman. Time to Wildfire Assault, but OHH NOEEES, I'VE BEEN OUTWITTED ONCE AGAAAAINNN!!! So close though. I'm gonna tell my grandkids that one.
  22. playgroundpsychotic said: Staton said: If you have two players of the same skill, TMP deck will always win. If that was the case then why isn't TMP dominating still? Seems to me its day in the sun was GenCon and those builds don't quite work anymore due to some errata. Same goes for Martell. Even when you see TMP decks they are often "TMP Lite" employing only a very limited number of chains on agenda. Slapping a single chain on TMP really doesn't make it strong. It means you get 1 gold and 1 card during the challenge phase. Clearly monstrous. I was at a joust tournament in Sheffield last weekend (only 14 players) which was won by a Martell deck playing TMP (only 6 chains). Does that means it's a lite version of the deck? Does that really matter?! It's still a TMP deck. I came second with a BWB Martell deck, only using 5 brotherhood characters. Does that make it a BWB lite deck? Anyhow, of the top 5 finishes four of them were Martell (all completely different builds) and one Targ TMP deck. Alright, not a particularly large field but a completely unsurprising composition for the final tables, with the overall winner playing both Martell and TMP...
  23. [EU] - Corsair 2000 at Gmail (dot obvious ) Reckon I can muster a couple of other EU entrants at least.
  24. imrahil327 said: Not that surprising, it was a pretty fantastic cycle, and for me by far the most impossible thing to acquire when getting into the game recently. Of all the cycles available, this was the one I didn't really miss. I'd much prefer to see the Clash of Arms cycle reprinted than this, and also Defenders of the North (which I know is next). Each to their own :-)
  25. Penfold said: I wonder about GG though, it's prevelance was du, I believe, mostly to the Maester and the voltron builds it encouraged. When your opponent has multiple targets, with useful attachments paired up with cheap characters, and powerful characters with no attachments choosing targets is a little more difficult, and while you are bouncing back the biggest threat (as you see it) you are putting yourself 3 (soon to be 2) gold behind at a minimum of advancing your own board position. See, this misconception with GG keeps cropping up. If putting yourself 2-3 gold behind as a cost of advancing your board position is the only disadvantage you can think of, then it's no disadvantage at all! Please explain how returning Robert Baratheon (KotS) to your opponents hand by bouncing Edric Dayne puts you 3 gold behind? I'm sorry if that sounds intentionally rude, it's not meant to be, I'm just trying to hammer home a point that keeps recurring when people talk about Ghaston Grey like it has a significant drawback to consider.
×
×
  • Create New...