Champ VS Chump Round 1!!!!- 2 Champs&AChumpEP11

[Dobbler 3]

 Latest 2 Champs and a Chump  episode is up.  Go check it out here!

 

We bring you our first broadcasted game!  Kennon and his much talked about Army deck  versus Dobbler and his Stark nastiness!  Zeiler, Darryl and Jon provide our play-by-play commentary.

 

Come listen and enjoy!  Feel free to critique Kennon's mistakes and applaud Dobbler's brilliance!  Or something like that!

[Twn2dn 1]

Nice job, guys. I liked the intro (laughed a few times), and the post-game discussion was very good.

Honestly, the game itself was interesting but not so interesting that I would want to listen to future 20+ minute play-by-plays. I'm not sure if there's a way to do it, but perhaps you could just record interesting rounds and/or play choices that are no longer than ~5 minutes? The Valar round was interesting, and as Greg points out, useful as a learning lesson for new players. But 7 rounds of playing cards lost my interest.

Otherwise I liked the episode...good editing and content, and great thoughts about the game, decks, etc.

Lastly, I'm not a big fan of Fear of Winter (as a card, it's obviously a powerful effect). Even when it backfires, as it seemed to the first time Greg played it, the effect essentially just promotes stasis more than anything. Had Greg played FoW round 1 or 2, I think it would have been a much faster game (given Will's lack of setup). I really hope FFG doesn't print more cards like this (and Burning, TLS, etc.) that effectively slow the game; it's especially bad when it's neutral.

[Saturnine 47]

 I actually enjoyed the whole episode, although obviously the match didn't exactly brim with excitement. The in-game commentary was excellent, reminding the listener of the cards on board and their potential effects, making the game easy to follow.  I wouldn't mind another episode like that at some point in the future.

Minor caveat, I didn't enjoy the music bumper playing between each round. A boxing bell would have been less disruptive, albeit less Nedly.

[Saturnine 47]

 I also think the alliterative "Bastards & *******" would be a catchier name for Greg's deck.

[King Blith 0]

I just would like to know why you killed Robert Baratheon. When you could have low the sth of the army and won the chal. In which you could use Dubious Loyalties to take controll of hima dn gain 3 or 4 power.

[kpmccoy22 0]

Yeah, part of the problem of listening to the game without any visual is that you miss things. There were a couple time when it seemed like there were obvious plays by Greg that he didn't make. I'm assuming I missed some of the cards marshalled or something. Otherwise I enjoyed the episode. Maybe a scenario tutorial rather than a round by round play by play in the future until you start a video podcast would be better. Excellent idea, just difficult to execute in an audio medium. And I also think that next time you should use decks that match up well with each other.

But overall I enjoyed the episode. Looking forward to the next one.

[Rydo72 0]

 What a nice way to spend my afternoon! Loved this podcast, and as a relative noob, I learnt a lot from it. Will spent the first few turns not initiating a challenge because he didn't see it's worth. If I were playing, I would probably still attack to try and kneel out a character, but that's an unwise decision - I just hate not attacking! 

Not that I play Bolton, but Fortified Position as a plot is something that screams "play me" if I did. It's usually just a plot I ignore as it just doesn't work in any decks I play.

 

Btw guys, also loving the new series of Archer - although so far I don't think this season has been as strong as the first. Nothing tops that zeppelin episode:

"What is it about the ship being filled with non-explosive helium that you don't understand Archer?"

"Well, obviously the core concept Lana!"

[Kennon 20]

 Thanks for the kind words! It's good to know that this particular episode is going over much better than I actually expected.

 

Also, Rydo, that might be my favorite Archer quote ever. Followed closely by:

"Can you put it in him?"

"......... it'll suffocate?"

[The Nick-ler 0]

Kennon said:

"Can you put it in him?"

"......... it'll suffocate?"

my fave...

"was that before or after you were caught fondling a teenager?"

"before, obviously! after was all gendarmes and ****-stitches"

[Zordren 42]

I'm with Rydo72 on the play-by-play commentary and brief discussions that came up regarding tactics/strategy being very helpful for "noobs" (like myself).  Thanks again for the great show!

[JerusalemJones 1]

I still don't understand why you guys don't like Flea Bottom (were you being sarcastic). I've used that card very effectively, especially in relation with the WED Red Viper. And in today's environment, Greyjoy could get alot of use out of this card with To be  Dragon and Support of Harlaw for standing, as could Baratheon and Martell with Vigilant and Vengeful.

[Dobbler 3]

JerusalemJones said:

I still don't understand why you guys don't like Flea Bottom (were you being sarcastic). I've used that card very effectively, especially in relation with the WED Red Viper. And in today's environment, Greyjoy could get alot of use out of this card with To be  Dragon and Support of Harlaw for standing, as could Baratheon and Martell with Vigilant and Vengeful.

 

JJ, keep in mind I created that card.  And we like to give each other crap every chance we get on the show.  Thus, it is just another opportunity to try and and mock me.  And yes, there are many people who liked the card.  However, in terms of defining the card environment at that time during the CCG days, Bandit Lord (before it) and First Snow of Winter (After it) were much more powerful.  And Fleabottom often gets looked at in reference to the power level of those other two cards.

[JerusalemJones 1]

Well, sure, First Snow redefined the meta game. And I had you sign my copy of Flea Bottom, so I knew it was yours (and naturally the ribbing you take).

[Dobbler 3]

JerusalemJones said:

Well, sure, First Snow redefined the meta game. And I had you sign my copy of Flea Bottom, so I knew it was yours (and naturally the ribbing you take).

 

I would just say to not expect the other members of the podcast to ever stop claiming Fleabottom sucks, regardless of the super-deep seeded feelings they truly have towards my beautiful masterpiece

[Twn2dn 1]

I agree with JJ...Flea Bottom is a great card. Erick's Blackfish (or "cat fish" in France ) didn't redefine the metagame, and most people agree it was a pretty awesome addition to Stark.

 

In fact, one of the downsides of attempting a "metagame-defining" card is that as the metagame changes, the card may become less useful over time. Cards like KotHH become much less useful if *everyone* packs Fear of Winter and Blockade in their plot deck (luckily that hasn't happened), or as more gold/influence is available to each house. (Just think, how many Lanni decks do you see running KotHH?) First Snow would similarly be less useful in an environment where everyone minimizes the number of weenies they play. (I'm not saying either card becomes useless, but that they'd be much less likely to see continued play at the tier-1 level.) I know this didn't happen for Bandit Lord, but that card was meta-defining more because the environment was missing location control, rather than because it was particularly innovative (no offense to Casey).

In contrast, Flea Bottom was pretty useful all the way up until it rotated, and the Blackfish is played in (almost?) every Stark deck I've seen since it came out. If there's a direct relationship between "player legacy" and number of people who see/use your card, I'd say cards like Flea Bottom and Black Fish easily take the cake.

[Zordren 42]

(and for the record, I thought the music in between rounds was cool - much better than a lame bell or something like that...)

[lars16 2]

Twn2dn said:

Cards like KotHH become much less useful if *everyone* packs Fear of Winter and Blockade in their plot deck (luckily that hasn't happened), or as more gold/influence is available to each house. (Just think, how many Lanni decks do you see running KotHH?) First Snow would similarly be less useful in an environment where everyone minimizes the number of weenies they play. (I'm not saying either card becomes useless, but that they'd be much less likely to see continued play at the tier-1 level.)

i've actually been toying with a control deck that runs KOTHH and 1st turn blockade and 2nd turn fear of winter.....

 

and sorry but that comment about first snow of winter is horsecrap...first snow of winter was effective BECAUSE it made everyone minimize the number of weenies they played....with first snow of winter a weenie had to blow me away to make a deck (see veteran looter, and even then i hesitated putting 3 x in the deck).

[FATMOUSE 0]

Lars said:

 

and sorry but that comment about first snow of winter is horsecrap...first snow of winter was effective BECAUSE it made everyone minimize the number of weenies they played....with first snow of winter a weenie had to blow me away to make a deck (see veteran looter, and even then i hesitated putting 3 x in the deck).

 

 

As Twn2dn said, First Snow wouldn't become useless.  It's just not as effective in an environment with lots of weenies vs. an environment with not so many weenies.  It's influence would still permeate throughout the metagame and deck building, but it's effectiveness on actual game play would be diminished.

So if 50% (just making up figures here) of characters played are weenies when First Snow comes out and then that figure goes down to 30%, First Snow will be less effective in game play because there will be less characters affected by it.  The diminished potency of the card may in turn lead it to see less play.  Removing four of an opponents characters is great, but removing two or one - maybe not so much.  However, a decrease in the number of players running First Snow could lead to an increase in the number of weenies played (let's say it goes up to 40%).  This in turn will cause more players to run First Snow...so on and so forth.  Eventually an equilibrium would be reached and the percentage of character weenies ran would always hover close to it (suppose 35%), assuming everything else about weenies and non-weenies stays relatively constant.

I don't think First Snow would ever completely leave competitive play, but it's play frequency would probably decrease over time to some stable non-zero value, which is more or less what Twn2dn was saying.

 

[Twn2dn 1]

Yeah, just to add to what Fatmouse said and separate out the threads a bit...

(1) First Snow was always a great card...nobody disputes that. But it wasn't always *as* good as it was when first printed. When ITE came out (or whatever the block after winter was), weenie decks became a lot less prevalent than the WED days. So I'm not saying First Snow was bad, but if you go back to my main point, it became less metagame-defining as the metagame evolved.

(2) We're getting too hung up on examples. The point is that the metagame is constantly evolving, so designing a card with the intent to influence the metagame is often going to mean printing a card that will become less relevant as things change. Also, chances of failure are higher, since it's attempting to hit a moving target. Now I'm not saying this is a bad thing, or even that World Champions have this intent in mine, but if one is shooting for a card that always sees play and everyone uses, then a metadefining card may not be the best choice.

(3) With regard to Flea Bottom (again, going back to the point of my initial post), it is a powerful effect less based on the metagame or a particular build. Similarly, Blackfish is a powerful card that fits into a lot of decks. I don't know about everyone else, but Flea Bottom was in *ALL* of my decks when it was legal, whereas First Snow made maybe 1/3 of my decks. I know this has to do with deckbuilding preferences, but that's the point: cards like Flea Bottom, the Blackfish, etc. are probably on average going to see more play. If a World Champ wants to print a card that everyone will use, it seems to me a card like Flea Bottom is a great choice and will better stand the test of time.

People may disagree with this, but I suppose it ultimately comes down to personal preference...do you design a card that makes a *big* splash initially but potentially has less lasting effect, or do you design a card that has less of a dramatic effect on the environment but remains relevant for years? I know what I would prefer, which is why I think that Flea Bottom is a great card (props to Greg).

[kpmccoy22 0]

Maybe it's a matter of perspective, but if my card completely changes how everyone builds their deck, my card has more influence than if my card is an autoinclude in 1 house or many houses.

[Dobbler 3]

 Not to rain on the Fleabottom love, but a couple of quick notes on it:

 

1) It was never an autoinclude in every deck.  I think I played it in less than half of my decks.

2) It absolutely did nothing to change the metagame (as mentioned by several people already)

3) The card creation process was nothing like it is now.  This is meant as no insult to the FFG employee who I worked with to create Fleabottom, but the process of creating Knights of the Hollow Hill was immensely more enjoyable and involved wrestling with a lot of intellectual and philosophical game design issues.  When I created Fleabottom, all of the "interesting" ideas I had were shot down or ignored.  I do not exaggerate when I say that Fleabottom's design was probably the 15th different card idea I came up with for the process.

4) Fleabottom seems more suited to the LCG era than it does the CCG era, mainly because it is one of the most balanced Champion cards.  I hope Knights of the Hollow Hill accomplished the same thing, game balance.

[9thimmortal 1]

Dobbler said:

 

1) It was never an autoinclude in every deck.  I think I played it in less than half of my decks.

It was for me.  At that time there was also a decent amount of 'non-unique' location hate (even a guy who stole for GJ I think), plus location search, plus a bunch more personalities with great 'coming into play effects' or 'stand' effects so you didn't care if they came in knelt.  So I could get away with 3X King's Hall and 1X Flea Bottom in 99% of my decks.  I absolutely loved it with self-standing Jaime, who was for some reason one of my all-time favorite characters. 

~But then again, you said Ghost of HH only made 50% of your decks, so poo-on-you. 

We are always self-critical (especially on try #15 I am sure).  I loved Flea Bottom.  ~And I am not just saying that to get you to play it more so I can win more

[JerusalemJones 1]

I think some of us define meta-defining differently. First Snow of Winter was meta-defining because it made weenie decks harder to play, and people built less weenies into their decks. It didn't need to be an auto-include; just the existance of this card in the meta-game changed how decks were built. That is meta-defining.

Flea Bottom didn't change the meta-game, players didn't have to take into account this card could disrupt their deck. But it was a strong, useful card. Look at the 2/2/2 locations from 5KE. These cards would have been great without the additional "put into play" text. They didn't disrupt the meta-game except to make the gold curve faster. Flea Bottom did the same thing, to a degree.

First Snow could have a serious impact on the current meta-game. Look at how many weenie characters are in the game. It wouldn't stop anyone from running Flea Bottom Scavenger or Dornish paramour, they are played for their one-off effects mostly. Greyjoy has lots of low STR characters. Night's Watch would be even worse than they already are. Targ's draw crone is hit, as are Lanni's gold characters. But I bet many of these would still see play. That's the effect of First Snow.

Flea Bottom in the current meta-game would make certain decks faster. It wouldn't dramatically change how people go about building their decks. But it would still have a large impact on the game. Even if it was Dobbler's 15th choice.

Which begs the question: what was you first choice, Dobbler?