346 replies to this topic

[widowmaker93]

Venomous Blade is a poison as well.

Would you rather deal with the Blade or with all of this Bloodthirst sh*t in it's current form? Yeah...I thought so.

[mnBroncos]

as much as i'd love blade to come off it won't and shouldn't, it'd be run in every single martell deck. It is the reason castelen never comes off even with the oh its an ally and limited response talk its still a card that would be in every single lanni deck if did come off.

[widowmaker93]

as much as i'd love blade to come off it won't and shouldn't, it'd be run in every single martell deck. It is the reason castelen never comes off even with the oh its an ally and limited response talk its still a card that would be in every single lanni deck if did come off.

It's in 95% of Lanni decks now... I don't see the big deal if it were to come off. Why try and curb the power level of every good build when you could just empower them instead? Remove Castellan, Venomous Blade, Meera, Long Lances, Asha, and leave Bara alone... We get access to being able to play more cards and top archetypes in each house get stronger across the board.

[Bomb]

In all honesty, I'm surprised VB isn't the restricted card of choice more. Its absolutely horrible to be against.

[ocedy]

Hmm, the problem with empowering all kind of decks instead of weakening the outliers a bit is that games will become more swingy and reliant on splashy and powerful effects. This could lead to players feeling that they are less able to determine the outcome of the games by their decisions rather than just putting the most powerful card on the table.

[mnBroncos]

the main reason is to many decks looking the same. that is the real reason. in my opinion.

[widowmaker93]

the main reason is to many decks looking the same. that is the real reason. in my opinion.

Kinda like how every Targ KotHH, Targ Dragonpit, GJ Maiden's Bane, Martell Bloodthirst, Bara KotHH, Lanni PBTT, Lanni N/A, and Stark Seige deck looks the same now? I don't see how it makes any difference other than me getting to play with the cards that I paid good $ for.

[mnBroncos]

i do see the argument, but i'd still disagree (:

[widowmaker93]

i do see the argument, but i'd still disagree (:

~That's certainly your right to do so, no matter how wrong it is.

[widowmaker93]

Hmm, the problem with empowering all kind of decks instead of weakening the outliers a bit is that games will become more swingy and reliant on splashy and powerful effects. This could lead to players feeling that they are less able to determine the outcome of the games by their decisions rather than just putting the most powerful card on the table.

I disagree. There is always going to be an outlier or at least a "perceived" best deck(or two decks) so if we continually curb the power level of every good deck the restricted list is going to be as long as Santa's Naughty/Nice list... Nobody but the jolly fat man will even have time to sift through it. If a deck is just a major NPE(like Bloodthirst) or is unbeatable(like Martell Summer was in 2011) then yeah, restrict something to bring it in line with the other houses. Don't curb stomp every good deck just because it happens to be solid and you're too lazy to look at the card pool to come up with any solutions on your own.

[Arzoo]

In all honesty, I'm not too concerned with the restricted list this time around. I have my wish-list, for sure, but I'm thinking it's not this but the next one that will matter. I believe that they're going to push the prized thing hard. They want there to be so many good cards with prized that seeing them is simply inevitable; rush players will splash targeted kill for the delicious combo of power + board advantage, and control/aggro get faster games in general.

Look at the new Viserys: I already saw complaints that he's an auto-include, if only as a one-off because why not have a 1g king that also fries attachments when needed. But think about it... that means they got what they want: people look at it and say, "oh, it's only prized 1, I'll just throw it in." I suspect they want there to be a LOT of cards like that in this cycle. Until people look at their decks and realize that they're losing because aggressive decks hit 15 power much quicker now that they have all those sweet prized cards to murder/pillage, and start cutting prized cards until they have just the few they really think are worth it in this particular deck. So every house gets tons of "power" cards to play with, the kind that you get giddy to see in your hand... but these cards all have a built-in limiting factor (beyond the cumbersome restriction-list) that punishes cramming too many "auto-includes" in.

[Skelton]

Castellan has no place on the list anymore. I'm not denying he's good but his effect can easily be replicated these days.

[JCWamma]

Cards like Castellan will have no place on the list for me right about the time they aren't far and away the most common restricted card of choice for their house. Castellan was the restricted in the deck that won Worlds, is that not perhaps a sign that it's still worthy of its place?

Unrestrict Castellan and every Lanni deck suddenly has access to Cache. Then people start saying "well Cache is in every deck anyway, why not unrestrict that?". It builds. Castellan is on the list for a reason. It's the kind of attitude that got Pentoshi unrestricted!

[lucarov]

I think that when you see an agenda you know how to play to win (or to try to win).
There is nothing unexpected, no surprise, you know surely how the deck works.
If I see "noble cause" I know, for example, that I have to start with Men of Pride; if I see BT I know that I have to play max 3 characters (so I can make all 3 chalenges) and not overextend ...

I do not understand why people constantly complain if a deck becomes stronger.
T1 decks exist in all card games and it's true they are strong ... but they are not unbeatable.
if you get to the 3 round against "noble cause" in 90% of cases you can win: against Noble Cause in the past day I lose on 1st plot (2 times), 2 plot (3 times), and win on 7th, 5th, 9th, 9th plot...
if you do not overextend against BT and try to do 3 challenges in turn you can win (my friends beat me in this way against my Martell BT Mill)

In the end I think that is fantastic to try to find a way to beat these types of decks (they are not unbeatable) ... and the way exists and, at least in these cases, is not called "Ban" or "restrict".
sorry for bad english (i'm italian)

[widowmaker93]

Cards like Castellan will have no place on the list for me right about the time they aren't far and away the most common restricted card of choice for their house. Castellan was the restricted in the deck that won Worlds, is that not perhaps a sign that it's still worthy of its place?

Unrestrict Castellan and every Lanni deck suddenly has access to Cache. Then people start saying "well Cache is in every deck anyway, why not unrestrict that?". It builds. Castellan is on the list for a reason. It's the kind of attitude that got Pentoshi unrestricted!

Who cares if they get access to Cache? They already have more card draw than any other house in the game. If you aren't draw capping early with Lanni then you are doing something wrong. Letting them run Cache just makes people have to think about including attachment or location hate in their decks if they want to deal with it. Cache goes on a location which right now there is a LOT of hate for those going around with CbtC, City Besieged, Rally Cry, and FG in most T1 decks so it's fragility is very high ATM. I don't think it would be that big of a deal.

[PulseGlazer]

Burning on the Sand? Meet Deathbound. Problem? No problem.

[dcdennis]

I used to subscribe to Boy's Life magazine. It taught me how to make a bird feeder out of a pine cone and peanut butter.

[widowmaker93]

I used to subscribe to Boy's Life magazine. It taught me how to make a bird feeder out of a pine cone and peanut butter.

OHHHH I had that issue! Good stuff right there.

[widowmaker93]

Burning on the Sand? Meet Deathbound. Problem? No problem.

Burning isn't the problem. Prince's Plans is the problem with Martell these days. I'm OK with Burning. I'm ok with it being in the discard pile and them being able to recur it. But not when they can get 3 other cards back as well. If they are running Open Market and have to discard 2 cards to get it back, so be it. If they have to waste a plot spot for Regroup to get it back... fine.

[PulseGlazer]

Burning isn't the problem. Prince's Plans is the problem with Martell these days. I'm OK with Burning. I'm ok with it being in the discard pile and them being able to recur it. But not when they can get 3 other cards back as well. If they are running Open Market and have to discard 2 cards to get it back, so be it. If they have to waste a plot spot for Regroup to get it back... fine.

Eh, it's what stops challenges. If you can get challenges through each turn, you have a shot no matter how many resets they use. Burning, even 1, when the draw works is nearly auto win (besides GJ and no draw stannis).