Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Seas or 2-reducers?

- - - - - strategy deckbuilding resources

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1
AndrewHows

AndrewHows

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 96 posts
So looking at competitive decks, I see most seem to prefer Seas over 2-reducers (Godswood, Great Hall, etc). Why is this? Is it just for the setup bonus? Or the influence on the seas?

During marshalling, as long as you're playing at least one 2+ character, it seems the 2-reducers would be more effective.

#2
cockbongo

cockbongo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 896 posts
Usually because the reducers are Limited.

#3
JCWamma

JCWamma

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 2033 posts
Setups are the main reason. A 0-cost one-shot non-limited card is preferable to a repeatable 2-cost limited one in most places, particularly since a lot of decks that consistently want to churn out expensive characters are of the "aggro" persuasion and need to start brightly.
  • Sligui likes this

#4
Ire

Ire

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 519 posts
Seas are more versatile than the reducers.
Setup is part of the thing as well as influence for some decks. Limited also is part of it since you don't want too many limited cards in your deck.
Where the seas shine over the reducers are that they give immediate resource advantage the moment you play them. You pay 0 and you basicly get 2 gold from them (some decks even get 1 use of influence before discarding the sea). While the reducer limited locations it takes 1 turn to pay back the investment that you placed on it and the next turn it starts to develop resource advantage, for some decks that is too slow for a limited card with cost 2.

#5
mnBroncos

mnBroncos

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 3801 posts
The main thing is how quick most games. With limited and two gold costs it takes you longer to get a good use out of them while the seas are instant profit.

#6
AndrewHows

AndrewHows

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 96 posts
Thanks for that. I think I'm constantly undervaluing speed in my decks.

#7
Skelton

Skelton

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2091 posts
I tend to use both. I wouldn't be without Godswood's in my Stark deck.

#8
Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1052 posts
I've never used 2-reducers, but I wouldn't be caught dead without seas.

#9
NuFenix

NuFenix

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1261 posts

I tend to use both. I wouldn't be without Godswood's in my Stark deck.


Does that deck use Maege Mormont by any chance Skelton??

#10
Skelton

Skelton

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2091 posts

Does that deck use Maege Mormont by any chance Skelton??


It might do. ;)

I also use them in my Greyjoy deck as well. I find that they can help so much in affording the more expensive people. Some decks I wouldn't dream of using them but any deck with a higher proportion of 3 cost (or above) than normal can reap the rewards. At least for how I play.

#11
NorthMaester

NorthMaester

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
I like them a lot more in KotHH decks. Then setup doesn't matter, and they pay for themselves the first round (like the fiefdoms) and after then provides a big economy boost. Also KotHH decks tend to be a little slower than other decks.

#12
14Shirt

14Shirt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 970 posts
This is a great question because it's one of the main examples of how deck building really changes as you move further away from the core set and further away from casual play. Like you or the vast majority of players I'm sure, when I only had the core set and house expansions, cards like Godswood seemed like the ultimate reducers. But you quickly realize they get used very sparingly in the broader card pool or competitive play.

I have a love-hate relationship with this personal evolution since it can be fun and rewarding but also very challenging and time-consuming.

Moving out from a couple hundred cards to nearly a couple thousand is like taking the training wheels off your bike at the top of a steep hill in heavy traffic. :P

#13
JCWamma

JCWamma

    Advanced Member

  • Small Council
  • 2033 posts

I like them a lot more in KotHH decks. Then setup doesn't matter, and they pay for themselves the first round (like the fiefdoms) and after then provides a big economy boost. Also KotHH decks tend to be a little slower than other decks.


On the other hand, KotHH decks generally run influence (hence using the agenda at all), so a 0-cost influence card is more valuable than a 2-cost resource cards with no influence. Especially given that, again thanks to the agenda, KotHH decks typically need less resources than a standard deck anyway.

#14
Karma

Karma

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1890 posts

On the other hand, KotHH decks generally run influence (hence using the agenda at all), so a 0-cost influence card is more valuable than a 2-cost resource cards with no influence. Especially given that, again thanks to the agenda, KotHH decks typically need less resources than a standard deck anyway.

While generally thats true, you also have to consider the fact that 2 for 2 limited reducers out of KotHH tend to also allow the KotHH player to play a few less reducers because of how effective the 2 for 2 limited reducers are. I've played Lannit KotHH with limited 2 for 2 reducers before and it did allow me to cut down to about 10 reducers in the deck.

#15
CobraBubbles

CobraBubbles

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 366 posts
Since it's been raised, I'm curious - what do people make of Great Pyramid of Meereen (AHM)? Does the added value from the influence make it better than the other 2-cost reducers or is its unique-ness too much of a downside?

Personally I think it's great in Dragon decks which have expensive characters and want influence for ambush, but I'd rarely use it elsewhere.

#16
NorthMaester

NorthMaester

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts

On the other hand, KotHH decks generally run influence (hence using the agenda at all), so a 0-cost influence card is more valuable than a 2-cost resource cards with no influence. Especially given that, again thanks to the agenda, KotHH decks typically need less resources than a standard deck anyway.

True. I'd say it depends on how many/what effects you have for the influence.

#17
Vaapad

Vaapad

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 560 posts

Since it's been raised, I'm curious - what do people make of Great Pyramid of Meereen (AHM)? Does the added value from the influence make it better than the other 2-cost reducers or is its unique-ness too much of a downside?

Personally I think it's great in Dragon decks which have expensive characters and want influence for ambush, but I'd rarely use it elsewhere.


1x in almost every Targ deck I've ever built. And the ones that don't have it are usually quirky or somehow unusually built.

#18
NegativeX

NegativeX

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 194 posts
Usually I play KotHH martell and I hardly ever use seas. If I had the option I would use a two cost reducer though. In KotHH, as a general rule, you never want more than ten resource cards in your deck, so any more long term efficient reducer is welcome.

Since it's been raised, I'm curious - what do people make of Great Pyramid of Meereen (AHM)? Does the added value from the influence make it better than the other 2-cost reducers or is its unique-ness too much of a downside?

Personally I think it's great in Dragon decks which have expensive characters and want influence for ambush, but I'd rarely use it elsewhere.

Burn and dragon decks both use it. Its uniqueness usually just means it's a one of.

#19
Karma

Karma

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1890 posts

Usually I play KotHH martell and I hardly ever use seas. If I had the option I would use a two cost reducer though. In KotHH, as a general rule, you never want more than ten resource cards in your deck, so any more long term efficient reducer is welcome.

I wouldn't say thats always the case. To be honest Martell KotHH is probably the exception to that rule. Martell KotHH is kinda popular with paying 7 for Viper's Bannerman, so it does actually break that rule pretty often. 11 to 12 seems to be the sweet spot if your playing Viper's Bannerman in that deck. If you aren't then i generally stick with 10 to 11. I'm playing around with a Shadow sub-theme of Martell KotHH that uses Jaime and shadows cards that jump in and out of shadows as a draw engine of sorts.

#20
NegativeX

NegativeX

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 194 posts

I wouldn't say thats always the case. To be honest Martell KotHH is probably the exception to that rule. Martell KotHH is kinda popular with paying 7 for Viper's Bannerman, so it does actually break that rule pretty often. 11 to 12 seems to be the sweet spot if your playing Viper's Bannerman in that deck. If you aren't then i generally stick with 10 to 11. I'm playing around with a Shadow sub-theme of Martell KotHH that uses Jaime and shadows cards that jump in and out of shadows as a draw engine of sorts.

Martell KotHH are one of the most expensive KotHH decks even without the bannerman (due to the use of gaston grey most of the time). The typical advantages of resources cards aren't as great with KotHH because of no setup and that being a big enough downside that you have to make the most of the advantages.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: strategy, deckbuilding, resources