Well, with Conquest, while there were plenty of warlords and factions, a few remained dominant through the games lifespan:
Kith was good from the game's release to it's final major tournament. Eldorath got good a couple of expansions in and stayed good thereafter. Worr joined the club for a while, and Kugath entered as a serious contender right near game end. There were always some Space Marines about too, but at any given point in the meta, there were 2-3 meta dominant decks, and its hard to argue that there was ever more than one meta-dominant warlord with a very specific deck shape: that is, Kith with at least 30 of the 50 cards absolute auto-includes.
Say we'd had a meta-decision thing on top of that distorting things further, how would that have looked. Say the top Dark Eldar player had a choice of a persistent effect that would boost a particular build. Would he look to open up a different build from his dominant one? Probably not - he'd instead be looking to make his faction's Tier 1 build even stronger, to gain an edge over other factions Tier 1 builds.
Thus, in pure theory at least, I'd expect that an optimisation tool (that supports a particular build and which is applied without individual option to all decks of a faction) is going to lead to a narrowing of the range of decks seen.

To me, Conquest IS dead, but you can have a lot of fun playing with a well built corpse.
Uh... that may have come out wrong.

Well, with Conquest, while there were plenty of warlords and factions, a few remained dominant through the games lifespan:
Kith was good from the game's release to it's final major tournament. Eldorath got good a couple of expansions in and stayed good thereafter. Worr joined the club for a while, and Kugath entered as a serious contender right near game end. There were always some Space Marines about too, but at any given point in the meta, there were 2-3 meta dominant decks, and its hard to argue that there was ever more than one meta-dominant warlord with a very specific deck shape: that is, Kith with at least 30 of the 50 cards absolute auto-includes.
Say we'd had a meta-decision thing on top of that distorting things further, how would that have looked. Say the top Dark Eldar player had a choice of a persistent effect that would boost a particular build. Would he look to open up a different build from his dominant one? Probably not - he'd instead be looking to make his faction's Tier 1 build even stronger, to gain an edge over other factions Tier 1 builds.
Thus, in pure theory at least, I'd expect that an optimisation tool (that supports a particular build and which is applied without individual option to all decks of a faction) is going to lead to a narrowing of the range of decks seen.

To me, Conquest IS dead, but you can have a lot of fun playing with a well built corpse.
Uh... that may have come out wrong.

Not keen that so much about the global tourney metagame is going to be decided in what is essentially an American tournament. I suppose that most of the best players in the world will fly over regardless (I recall in Conquest, the British worlds winners were dedicated globetrotters), but it still feels odd that such a major decision will be basically gated by geography and money.
More broadly though, I don't like the way that the cards will encourage certain deckshapes, as I expect this will narrow the variety of decks seen in tourneys.
Historically, all FFG LCGs have suffered from a slight problem of deck homogeneity, in that everyone has access to a full card pool, and the internet distributes new ideas rapidly. Not saying that everyone plays the same deck, but rather that there's a lot smaller spread of deck builds than you'd see in most CCGs. That everyone can build a top deck without going mad on spending money on single cards is also a really great thing, of course, and why I like LCGs in the first place.
However, any additional mechanic that further encourages a strategy along a give path is - in my opinion - going to make the spread of decks more homogenous at the competitive level. As has been observed, Seeker of Earth could show one direction that will encourage everyone with that option to build the same, for example.

Not keen that so much about the global tourney metagame is going to be decided in what is essentially an American tournament. I suppose that most of the best players in the world will fly over regardless (I recall in Conquest, the British worlds winners were dedicated globetrotters), but it still feels odd that such a major decision will be basically gated by geography and money.
More broadly though, I don't like the way that the cards will encourage certain deckshapes, as I expect this will narrow the variety of decks seen in tourneys.
Historically, all FFG LCGs have suffered from a slight problem of deck homogeneity, in that everyone has access to a full card pool, and the internet distributes new ideas rapidly. Not saying that everyone plays the same deck, but rather that there's a lot smaller spread of deck builds than you'd see in most CCGs. That everyone can build a top deck without going mad on spending money on single cards is also a really great thing, of course, and why I like LCGs in the first place.
However, any additional mechanic that further encourages a strategy along a give path is - in my opinion - going to make the spread of decks more homogenous at the competitive level. As has been observed, Seeker of Earth could show one direction that will encourage everyone with that option to build the same, for example.

Not keen that so much about the global tourney metagame is going to be decided in what is essentially an American tournament. I suppose that most of the best players in the world will fly over regardless (I recall in Conquest, the British worlds winners were dedicated globetrotters), but it still feels odd that such a major decision will be basically gated by geography and money.
More broadly though, I don't like the way that the cards will encourage certain deckshapes, as I expect this will narrow the variety of decks seen in tourneys.
Historically, all FFG LCGs have suffered from a slight problem of deck homogeneity, in that everyone has access to a full card pool, and the internet distributes new ideas rapidly. Not saying that everyone plays the same deck, but rather that there's a lot smaller spread of deck builds than you'd see in most CCGs. That everyone can build a top deck without going mad on spending money on single cards is also a really great thing, of course, and why I like LCGs in the first place.
However, any additional mechanic that further encourages a strategy along a give path is - in my opinion - going to make the spread of decks more homogenous at the competitive level. As has been observed, Seeker of Earth could show one direction that will encourage everyone with that option to build the same, for example.

To me, Conquest IS dead, but you can have a lot of fun playing with a well built corpse.
Uh... that may have come out wrong.

To me, Conquest IS dead, but you can have a lot of fun playing with a well built corpse.
Uh... that may have come out wrong.

To me, Conquest IS dead, but you can have a lot of fun playing with a well built corpse.
Uh... that may have come out wrong.

Not keen that so much about the global tourney metagame is going to be decided in what is essentially an American tournament. I suppose that most of the best players in the world will fly over regardless (I recall in Conquest, the British worlds winners were dedicated globetrotters), but it still feels odd that such a major decision will be basically gated by geography and money.
More broadly though, I don't like the way that the cards will encourage certain deckshapes, as I expect this will narrow the variety of decks seen in tourneys.
Historically, all FFG LCGs have suffered from a slight problem of deck homogeneity, in that everyone has access to a full card pool, and the internet distributes new ideas rapidly. Not saying that everyone plays the same deck, but rather that there's a lot smaller spread of deck builds than you'd see in most CCGs. That everyone can build a top deck without going mad on spending money on single cards is also a really great thing, of course, and why I like LCGs in the first place.
However, any additional mechanic that further encourages a strategy along a give path is - in my opinion - going to make the spread of decks more homogenous at the competitive level. As has been observed, Seeker of Earth could show one direction that will encourage everyone with that option to build the same, for example.

There you go promoting that gamer myth.  Just because a game is no longer produced doesn't mean that it's "dead" and can't be played, or picked up somewhere else, or even play it over an electronic system, like OCTGN.

Oh, you mean like our game last week?
I admit, when you've got a couple of Exarchs at the win planet, and you're up against a deck that doesn't rout or do spike damage, it's pretty much game over...
I'm glad that locally we're seeing so much interest in Lo5R. I'm optimistic that it's going to have a bigger scene than Conquest did.

What I'm liking here is that this game looks to have a high density of meaningful decision points with non-obvious answers.
That's a great thing for making a game experience that is based around skill, and it looks to be a complex enough model with enough "emergence" to make that skill as much about intuition and practice as it is about knowing the odds or having exhaustive card knowledge (though I'm sure those things will help too).
All in all, this looks to be shaping up to be a really, really great game.

I'm a bit underwhelmed by the crab.  They kept focusing on the fact the crab defend, but I see no way to win by defending, and while I guess there isn't an honor clock in this game your opponent has to attack you at some point, it just seems underwhelming.  Maybe I was was just hoping to see the Wall as the stronghold that either gave you honor or caused your opponent an honor loss whenever you successfully defended all your conflicts that turn.

A lot of it depends on your behavior as well, and as long as you aren't making personal attacks (including decks, as many people get personal about their decks), you should be fine.  That being said, don't act up to your clan's negative stereotypes.  Don't cheat as a Scorpion, don't be a haughty jerk as a Crane, bathe and wear pants as a Crab, don't sacrifice people to your dark god as a Phoenix.  Mostly it is just common courtesy.  

Another clan to look over!
Kitsuki Investigator: Expensive effect but I do like any ability to force a discard. A real balancing act between deciding on how many fate to put on the investigator and using the effect.
Ascetic Visionary: I like the action but it feels like the Kitsuki Investigator's ability and the balancing act between placing fate and having fate about readying personalities. He is a monk and we do get a rather awesome monk event.
Enlightened Warrior: I haven't seen much about this guy yet but I rather like him. There's a good chance after turn 1 that he'll be able to stay around quite awhile even without other Dragon cards putting fate on rings.
Mirumoto Raitsugu: Our first fate/character removal duel and he has a great cost attached to him and he isn't even restricted to which type of conflict he can duel at. I expect to see him in most Dragon decks.
Manta of Fire: Wow. It is a restricted card that requires a fire conflict from your opponent but I'd still use it if I'm playing enough monks. This might be a worthwhile Phoenix card if they get a decent number of monks. However, it might end up being cut because of the core set's focus on attachments and non-monk stuff.
Kitsuki's Method: It's ok as an ancestral attachment but it is very boring. It might find some usage just because of that keyword alone.
Niten Master: Useful untap effect but it's somewhat limited by the weapon requirement. Still, he's big and gets around some removal if you have the cards. Most likely to be picked as a potential Voltron personality.
Togashi Kazue: She's a conflict personality, which is nice. The effect is potentially great but it requires several turns and opponents with fate counters. She's also expensive as an attachment and even her personality form is underwhelming. At the end of the day, I could see running at least 2 of her in a Dragon deck simply for that fate "tax" ability or just as a conflict personality.
Secluded Temple: I rather like this effect since it mitigates the problem that dragon will have focusing on fewer characters than other clans. It should prove annoying if you happen to get two into play but opponents might simply switch to swarming you or tying you in personalities instead.
Tattooed Wanderer: Far more interesting than Kauze, both as a conflict personality and as an attachment. Covert should be quite powerful and I expect this guy to pop up all over the place during the core set. I think he has Scorpion written all over him too.
Let Go: Meh, but people seem to really love Cloud the Mind so it might see play?
Mountain's Anvil Castle: Typically boring like the last two strongholds and really reinforces the attachment. I do like that Dragon get 11 honor which means the spread between the highest and lowest clan might only be 1 to 3 (most likely 2).
Restoration of Balance: very very meh. I think the effect is way too weak. Yes, you could make someone discard a bunch of cards or nothing happens. I'd rather the ability forces a player to either draw to four cards or discard down to four cards rather than an opponent discarding to four. I'd definitely pass on including this card.
Togashi Yokuni: Hmmm, a shugenja seems like a nice little addition. He definitely takes some set up to really get mileage out of him but he can really wreak house depending on what he copies. Getting an extra play out of covert seems very useful from the Tattooed Wanderer or even the Enlightened Warrior.
Way of the Dragon: It's ok but really requires triggered abilities to flourish. Triggered abilities like covert from the wanderer or enlightened warrior. So expect those two to be staples of Dragon decks.
Overall, I'm not fully on board with the attachment game. There are some great cards that will be cursed by opponents and they have a good mix of military and political too.
I'm still really waiting on the Monk stronghold and more Kihos (look at your Phoenix). Most likely we'll see one more Kiho Mantra of either Air or Water then further ones in expansion sets with Earth probably going to Dragon and Air/Water going to Phoenix. Manta of Void will probably be neutral.
 

Uh huh...no wonder you're Crane, Height of Fashion indeed!  

My understanding is that in the past FFG don't actively encourage octgn but haven't moved against it either.
Past precedent on other games has been not to have cards added to octgn before they're out and released in the real world, and I think that's a good rule to follow, especially as you're brazenly promoting your add-on on the FFG website.
 
Personally I think octgn is great for the community, and that it increases sales of physical product by keeping people engaged and interested in a game, as well as raising the standard and quality of the tourney environment by creating a community of "expert players". It's rare to see FFG LCG champions who aren't octgn regulars. These top players then cause a trickle down of enthusiasm to new players, and create more customers for a game.
I therefore hope that FFG continues its "turn a blind eye" approach to octgn, on the understanding that it is good business sense for them to do so.
However, best way to maximise the chances of them doing so is to maintain an approach that is respectful of their IP. A large part of that, I think, is not releasing octgn updates or feeds until they are live in the real world.
 
That said, looking forward to seeing you on octgn once the game comes out!

Nothing yet.
My original driver for the timing of this topic was to try prevent myself or someone else from developing one in parallel and having someone's work get discarded. For the reasons you've pointed out, I was hesitant to post it here but know of no where else that would reach the same community. At the same time, I'm not trying to keep it hidden or secret and would respect any of their requests.
I too think it's an overall benefit for the community but am aware that it's not my decision. I hope to be playing for a long time and to take part in both a strong local and global community. Following the formal release is perfectly reasonable and roughly what I'd expected, for lack of specific terms.
I'll probably post a couple more updates before ending the thread but if folks think that's unwise, feel free to PM me.
Cheers,

If FFG/Asmodee doesn't want something to be seen on the internet in the year 2017, don't bring it to a public event. In reading the French thread, it appears the guy running the demo had no problem with people taking pictures of things. If they didn't want people to take pictures, don't demo the game.

My understanding is that in the past FFG don't actively encourage octgn but haven't moved against it either.
Past precedent on other games has been not to have cards added to octgn before they're out and released in the real world, and I think that's a good rule to follow, especially as you're brazenly promoting your add-on on the FFG website.
 
Personally I think octgn is great for the community, and that it increases sales of physical product by keeping people engaged and interested in a game, as well as raising the standard and quality of the tourney environment by creating a community of "expert players". It's rare to see FFG LCG champions who aren't octgn regulars. These top players then cause a trickle down of enthusiasm to new players, and create more customers for a game.
I therefore hope that FFG continues its "turn a blind eye" approach to octgn, on the understanding that it is good business sense for them to do so.
However, best way to maximise the chances of them doing so is to maintain an approach that is respectful of their IP. A large part of that, I think, is not releasing octgn updates or feeds until they are live in the real world.
 
That said, looking forward to seeing you on octgn once the game comes out!

My understanding is that in the past FFG don't actively encourage octgn but haven't moved against it either.
Past precedent on other games has been not to have cards added to octgn before they're out and released in the real world, and I think that's a good rule to follow, especially as you're brazenly promoting your add-on on the FFG website.
 
Personally I think octgn is great for the community, and that it increases sales of physical product by keeping people engaged and interested in a game, as well as raising the standard and quality of the tourney environment by creating a community of "expert players". It's rare to see FFG LCG champions who aren't octgn regulars. These top players then cause a trickle down of enthusiasm to new players, and create more customers for a game.
I therefore hope that FFG continues its "turn a blind eye" approach to octgn, on the understanding that it is good business sense for them to do so.
However, best way to maximise the chances of them doing so is to maintain an approach that is respectful of their IP. A large part of that, I think, is not releasing octgn updates or feeds until they are live in the real world.
 
That said, looking forward to seeing you on octgn once the game comes out!

Hmm, my main takeaway from that is that I must get a table mat like that.

Hmm, my main takeaway from that is that I must get a table mat like that.