124 replies to this topic

[hagarrr]

The wraiths doesnt even do anything in that scenario.  On the first snow turn peopel are probably going to be discarding.  If you made them discard 2 cards earlier with Wraiths, thats just 2 less cards they are discarding on the snow turn.

 

Okay so I'll spell out the thinking.

 

Turn 1 you usually have 9/10 cards in hand before marshalling (depending on whether you Summoned etc), and Wraiths will drop your reserve to 4/5 meaning that you'll probably need to play out 5 cards to meet reserve.

 

If my opponent takes the bait and plays out plenty of chuds, then I'd be of a mind to play out a big character (econ permitting) and hit them with First Snow next round.

 

If they don't take the bait and instead play out a bigger character and pitch cards to reserve, then Marched becomes a good consideration.

 

So I would argue that Wraiths probably does do something in this scenario?

[sparrowhawk]

Okay so I'll spell out the thinking.

 

Turn 1 you usually have 9/10 cards in hand before marshalling (depending on whether you Summoned etc), and Wraiths will drop your reserve to 4/5 meaning that you'll probably need to play out 5 cards to meet reserve.

 

If my opponent takes the bait and plays out plenty of chuds, then I'd be of a mind to play out a big character (econ permitting) and hit them with First Snow next round.

 

If they don't take the bait and instead play out a bigger character and pitch cards to reserve, then Marched becomes a good consideration.

 

So I would argue that Wraiths probably does do something in this scenario?

 

Well explained, Richard (this hasn't been poor Alex's best thread - the dangers of contributing by posting).

 

However, my reason for rejection was winning initiative and going second with Wraith's 1 initiative. Standard openings are 0 (Noble, Summons), 2 (Game, Trading), 3 (Calm), 4 (Filthy), 6 (Calling) or 11 (Sneak). Even with possible Navigator set up (Kingsroads are a wash), I couldn't see a player consistently going first in that first turn so I would have to commit to an initial marshall first before him.

 

That (and lack of plot space) was the rationale but it was definitely considered (as mentioned in the OP).

[hagarrr]

I agree initiative is a problem, than can be unreliably mitigated to a degree with that Kingsroad and/or Salty Navigator. However I often find that not many players actually want to let me go first as Greyjoy anymore, especially if I have that Longship on the board.

 

As for plots, it's an easy decision for me, as I don't run Calm in GJ. But I can certainly understand your desire to protect a sub-optimal setup.

[sparrowhawk]

I agree initiative is a problem, than can be unreliably mitigated to a degree with that Kingsroad and/or Salty Navigator. However I often find that not many players actually want to let me go first as Greyjoy anymore, especially if I have that Longship on the board.

 

As for plots, it's an easy decision for me, as I don't run Calm in GJ. But I can certainly understand your desire to protect a sub-optimal setup.

 

That's really good insight I hadn't thought of - the psychology of setting up a Longship or knowing it was coming! It's a no good decision dilemma. Yep, I really think you're onto something here, the go broad or go deep choice.

 

Now to get back onto topic, do people think they have the control options yet to embrace First Snow as a good plot for the meta?

 

It was interesting reading contrary opinion, backed up by Craven and Wamma's like, so would be great to hear contrary opinion.

 

I did say that Tyrell is propelled to tier 1 with this plot because it plays the closest to Hollow Hill with an Arbor set-up and its other locations.

 

But the pressure to conform to 2 parameters in set-up without a reset is surely a bad thinng?

[jaycr0]

I've been messing around with First Snow and while I understand that it does change the definition of a good setup, doesn't Calm basically counter it hard? If you're worried you can't survive a First Snow opener just play Calm. Now you've got enough money to dump a big guy out and they can't kill your stuff (ignoring PttS and targeted kill but that doesn't have a lot to do with First Snow except maybe that it makes getting it off a little easier for Greyjoy). Not only that but now if you have a military presence at all, you're in the driver's seat of his plot since now he has to be worried about claim instead.

Is there something I'm missing? This punishes you if you like to go straight into a Summons or Noble but now you just need to adapt when you see an aggro opponent set up a First Snow friendly setup.

This is mostly a setup/turn one concern but if your opponent can First Snow and wipe you out and you decide to Summons anyway, that's a misplay.

I didn't play 1E so maybe I'm misunderstanding something but I don't see the First Snow opener being so unstoppable, I guess.

[sparrowhawk]

I've been messing around with First Snow and while I understand that it does change the definition of a good setup, doesn't Calm basically counter it hard? If you're worried you can't survive a First Snow opener just play Calm. Now you've got enough money to dump a big guy out and they can't kill your stuff (ignoring PttS and targeted kill but that doesn't have a lot to do with First Snow except maybe that it makes getting it off a little easier for Greyjoy). Not only that but now if you have a military presence at all, you're in the driver's seat of his plot since now he has to be worried about claim instead.

Is there something I'm missing? This punishes you if you like to go straight into a Summons or Noble but now you just need to adapt when you see an aggro opponent set up a First Snow friendly setup.

This is mostly a setup/turn one concern but if your opponent can First Snow and wipe you out and you decide to Summons anyway, that's a misplay.

I didn't play 1E so maybe I'm misunderstanding something but I don't see the First Snow opener being so unstoppable, I guess.

 

Yep, hence why I have both Calm and Filthy in the plot deck.

 

However, the issue here is...

 

1. More unforgiving set-ups with need for mitigation plots in your plot deck, eating into your most valued resource that dictates your strategy

 

2. Limitations on what is an acceptable curve, devaluing smaller characters in a meta that is already high end impact focused because of Wildfire reset (but impact characters are cost 5+ hence easy to be stuffed by unlucky opening draw/mulligan) so more bias to build tall rather than broad

 

3. The double punishing nature of First Snow and reserve. So you play Calm to leave 1 impact character on the table to be Marched or Accused next turn, but what about your good set up characters cost 3 or less? You are given 7 cards plus non-characters to start turn 2.

 

I'm not saying you are wrong, sir - but is it good to have Calm in every deck?

 

 

A deck like Lanni Rose Renown that runs 15 cards of cost 5+ with Renown is already a "throw as much renown in, plus economy plots, plus lucky kingsroads plus dupes and bodyguards for stickability" can be very strong - but can also fizzle by trying to over-reach. High end builds are an acceptance of greater variance in decks. But that's what First Snow promotes in deckbuilding.

 

 

Doesn't the existence of First Snow cry out for the Valar reset? With an evergreen deluxe box so soon out just before Regionals season, in the popular faction that is all about aggro so needs a counterpoint, are we not in a strange limbo where we have the poison but not the antidote?

 

I will of course rejoice if Valar is released in the Stark box - as suddenly everything will make sense in what has been a very cleverly orchestrated staggered release of cards.

[JCWamma]

It was interesting reading contrary opinion, backed up by Craven and Wamma's like, so would be great to hear contrary opinion.

 

I think that the aspect of First Snow that are problematic are aspects of the game that were already problematic - the swinginess of first turns, particularly with regards to the reliance on big characters. So maybe I'm somewhat numbed to the downsides? Like, Greyjoy can make First Snow work amazingly if you get out Asha and Theon, Lanni can put it to great use with Jaime and can utilise Tywin to push big characters out, etc., but those things were true anyway, so to me it feels just like one more tool in that regard. That's the bad side in the current meta, and it's not making the game worse in that regard for me than it already was.

 

Meanwhile, it opens up a lot of new ground. Once you get past the first round or two, it changes from a swingy hand-attrition plot to, despite what it looks like, an anti-big character plot. Sure, if you only run characters of cost 3 or lower, you'll be in serious...proverbial, but that sort of deck should in theory be very strong otherwise, so it's only right that it has a check on it. Meanwhile, those larger characters have their claimsoak removed and you can really get at their 'soft-underbelly', as it were.

 

To give an anecdotal example, I was playing against Bek yesterday who had her Bara Fealty with Bob out that was untouchable for me because of all the claimsoak. Going first on First Snow with 4 gold, I was able to bounce her chuds, military with Jaime, then ambush in Olenna's Informant for a second military challenge and swing it. And now she's gone up from 2x Davos to 3x Davos, because of how important he is to have out when that happens.

 

If you want to build/play around it though, that doesn't necessarily mean upping your curve from including loads of 3s to including loads of 4s. It can mean putting more of your effects outside of the characters (Martell, for instance, can run the icon-strippers; Tyrell can utilise Highgarden highly effectively; Baratheon's In The Name of Your King! is perfect for that round, etc.); it can mean something as simple as opening with a high-reserve plot - despite its weakness to Naval Superiority I've found Building Orders a perfect opener right now, with a strong reserve and the ability to fetch a Kingsroad or negative attachment if the opponent opens with First Snow; it can mean carefully playing characters so you never have more than you need, to minimise the impact of the plot - make your opponent always want to really turn the screws with First Snow "next turn", never "this turn", until they've run out of time to truly make it impactful.

 

Of course, sometimes you can plan all you like, but your deck gives you a 4-card setup of weenies without economy and you're screwed. That sucks if it happens, but as Istaril says on Beyond the Wall, I don't think it's any worse than the situation with Marched. If anything I find Marched worse, with its higher stats, far more impactful effect when it hits, and ability to be run 2x. It's just one more thing to consider, and sometimes get hurt by.

 

I suppose ultimately the game is always, by its nature, going to go through changes and upheaval, some more serious than others. I found it very dangerous in first edition to become too attached to any one meta, because all it takes is one new card, or group of cards, or (for first edition) restricted list change to mess it all up. Much better to be receptive to the changes, excited by the new possibilities that the cards can offer, even if those possibilities are counters for you to run when others try to focus on it!

 

So overall I don't find the card damaging enough to worry about, and certainly not excessively more damaging than one would expect from a new chapter pack, especially this early into the game where each chapter pack still makes up a non-trivial portion of the overall cardpool. Although I will admit to finding it intensely fun to use myself, so I'm probably biased here .

[jaycr0]

Yep, hence why I have both Calm and Filthy in the plot deck.

However, the issue here is...

1. More unforgiving set-ups with need for mitigation plots in your plot deck, eating into your most valued resource that dictates your strategy

2. Limitations on what is an acceptable curve, devaluing smaller characters in a meta that is already high end impact focused because of Wildfire reset (but impact characters are cost 5+ hence easy to be stuffed by unlucky opening draw/mulligan) so more bias to build tall rather than broad

3. The double punishing nature of First Snow and reserve. So you play Calm to leave 1 impact character on the table to be Marched or Accused next turn, but what about your good set up characters cost 3 or less? You are given 7 cards plus non-characters to start turn 2.

I'm not saying you are wrong, sir - but is it good to have Calm in every deck?


A deck like Lanni Rose Renown that runs 15 cards of cost 5+ with Renown is already a "throw as much renown in, plus economy plots, plus lucky kingsroads plus dupes and bodyguards for stickability" can be very strong - but can also fizzle by trying to over-reach. High end builds are an acceptance of greater variance in decks. But that's what First Snow promotes in deckbuilding.


Doesn't the existence of First Snow cry out for the Valar reset? With an evergreen deluxe box so soon out just before Regionals season, in the popular faction that is all about aggro so needs a counterpoint, are we not in a strange limbo where we have the poison but not the antidote?

I will of course rejoice if Valar is released in the Stark box - as suddenly everything will make sense in what has been a very cleverly orchestrated staggered release of cards.

Sometimes I wonder if we'd have a similar reaction to Marched if it weren't in the core, angry that we can't set up one character plus locations and attachments anymore. It's just adaptation. Yes, you do need a mitigation plot I guess, but there's more than one choice (Calm and Filthy both work well and any high initiative plot turns the tables on First Snow turn one).

As far as making you waste a resource on it, if your opponent doesn't kill something meaningful off their First Snow opener, they've wasted more than you. Not only are you up on board position most likely, you now know that they can't play First Snow and can freely play as broad as you want.

It shakes up the meta but I don't think it makes the cardinal sin of introducing a dominant, stale strategy, so I'm okay.

[Alexfrog]

Well explained, Richard (this hasn't been poor Alex's best thread - the dangers of contributing by posting).

I disagree.  I still think the Wraiths doesnt really do anything.

 

 

By that I mean that while yes, it has an effect on the game in some way, it doesnt do enough in this scenario to justify playing it over one of many other plot options, and therefore it is bad when accounting for the opportunity cost.

[Alexfrog]

Well explained, Richard (this hasn't been poor Alex's best thread - the dangers of contributing by posting).

I disagree.  I still think the Wraiths doesnt really do anything.

 

 

By that I mean that while yes, it has an effect on the game in some way, it doesnt do enough in this scenario to justify playing it over one of many other plot options, and therefore it is bad when accounting for the opportunity cost.

 

 

Also, good players will probably learn to respond to your plan by just doing what they were planning to do, discard 2 cards, and then have less hand size issues when a first snow comes.

[Ryaxs]

I might have missed some details in the thread, but what kind of setup do you need to have to benefit from opening with First Snow -> Marched as the 'aggressor'? Of course anything with Ambush is helpful, but it's still hard to have a chud for Marched to the Wall on second turn AND be menacing enough on turn 1 to counter a Calm over Westeros. I know this means that Calm is now really important (was running it before anyway) and that as an opponent you also need to watch your setup, but I have a hard time wrapping my head around a setup that benefits from this.

 

If the stars align (ok maybe not THAT rare), I admit it can be nasty. I'm just not convinced yet that this kind of opening fits a lot of decks and that it can be consistent enough to win game on turn 1. 

 

Like I said, I might be missing something too Being new to the game does that

[PatrickHaynes]

I think wraiths will be a lot more impactful once Kings of Winter comes out. Lowering your opponents reserve by three and potentially lowering their gold by one as well is incredibly juicy. 

[sparrowhawk]

 

I might have missed some details in the thread, but what kind of setup do you need to have to benefit from opening with First Snow -> Marched as the 'aggressor'? Of course anything with Ambush is helpful, but it's still hard to have a chud for Marched to the Wall on second turn AND be menacing enough on turn 1 to counter a Calm over Westeros. I know this means that Calm is now really important (was running it before anyway) and that as an opponent you also need to watch your setup, but I have a hard time wrapping my head around a setup that benefits from this.

 

If the stars align (ok maybe not THAT rare), I admit it can be nasty. I'm just not convinced yet that this kind of opening fits a lot of decks and that it can be consistent enough to win game on turn 1. 

 

Like I said, I might be missing something too Being new to the game does that

 

 

Yes, a Calm opening stymies a First Snow opening. Which is why I opened Calm myself on a couple of occasions. But in conjunction with stealth + Longship + Sword, dupes + Risen for the swing back, a deck finely tuned to exploit the current high variance of set ups (too broad and I First Snow, too tall and I Marched) can have explosive openings.

 

Maybe the "stars aligned". Maybe the meta was not used to it. But the intense pressure that First Snow applies on the opponent when you are playing Greyjoy unopposed rush, Support into the Chair to target their best character whilst you keep the board small, there are just too many synergies between Greyjoy and First Snow.

 

The solution, as has been explained, is that we all play Calm over Westeros. And that ubiquity is healthy for the game? With Power challenge of little consequence at the start and Intrigue often a random card loss rather than a discard for Reserve, why don't we just skip challenges in turn 1 if both players open Calm?

 

I took that deck to the SC purely to try to make a point (no incentive to win) and sadly failed. But playing it showed me how nakedly high variance the current "acceptable set up" parameters are.

 

 

First Snow worked well in 1E - but there are key differences:

(1) we have a gold choke now (1E was mainly a draw choke)

(2) we have reserve

(3) we don't have Valar as a safety net

 

These key differences make First Snow into a far more powerful plot in current 2E that it was in 1E.

 

Of course the meta will adapt. But to resignedly accept that First Snow just makes games even more "swingy" feels so defeatist. To be "numbed" by the latest increase in variance is surely a sad indictment of where the game is heading?

 

I guess there is this argument: a game with only a few critical dice rolls has very high variance whilst the game with dice rolls for every result of equal importance has far less variance - "because the luck evens itself out". So maybe the best thing is to just inject more and more luck into the game?

 

 

Of course if Valar comes out in the Stark box, then this all makes sense. But First Snow now is surely only going to exacerbate the Snowball Effect that the game suffers from?

[Ryaxs]

Fair points. Can't argue that it can be really swingy.

 

I mainly focused on the combo of First snow into Marched and couldn't wrap my head around the kind of setup required for it to work. 

 

Having both are indeed good and cover both end of the setup spectrum but you also have to plan your own setup in consequence.

 

It's definitely some food for thought. We'll see how everything turns out soon enough!

[sparrowhawk]

I mainly focused on the combo of First snow into Marched and couldn't wrap my head around the kind of setup required for it to work. 

 

Sorry, I missed that point with my impassioned response.

 

I did manage a First Snow into Marched. I had a duped unique and a Drowned, went first to claim 1, accepted a swing back on the dupe then, because I evaluated his deck archetype wouldn't play Marched, I Marched my Drowned and his sole premium character.

 

More often you First Snow into Filthy as its safer than double Marched. You are not Stark aggro that wants a boardwipe (but keeping the board small is a priority), you crave power and tempo is sufficient (because you run out of steam in a long game).

 

In one game, I faced Calm vs my First Snow so my Asha attacked in Power, used my IF Scout to Support into the Chair to then kill the sole military icon that I stealthed. This was in the last round of Swiss against my only opponent who was not a SC winner and I felt so bad that I had denied him his first cut right at the end in the final SC of the season that I gave him all my swag.

 

When you add Longships, Sword and Risen to your duped 18 characters of 4+, you inevitably get overlap to be tempted with a First Snow into Marched.

 

If I was playing a one-trick pony First Snow deck, I would have gone with my Greyjoy Lion for the ambush. But there was one game when I never played First Snow and beat him with 2 Priests, 2 Drowned, 2 Longships and 2 IF Scouts (he was Targ too). I preferred a deck which is more than a one-trick pony with internal synergies hence the switch to Fealty.

 

Anyway, enough about the "example deck" (hey, I put my money where my big mouth is and play my convictions untested), this is a thread about the seismic meta shift that is this pack.

 

 

If Valar were to come out in the Stark box (it makes sense as a counterpoint to Stark aggro, like Rule by Decree in a Baratheon box would make sense), would this solve this whole issue? I think it would. We would then have plays like First Snow into Valar that lower curve decks can exploit.

 

But in the meantime, the game seems "a bit wonky" now and even though I like playing Lanni most (with higher variance set-ups; as AlexFrog notes, Tywin + Reducer + Limited is just awesome), I'm hoping the antidote is released before Regionals season starts.

[CptPugwash]

Out of core Tywin, Reducer and Limited was indeed awesome. However as a almost exclusively a Lannister Player, I know it became considerably less awesome versus a Nymeria set-up or even less so versus Arianne into Nymeria. First Snow does presumably swing it back somewhat into Tywin's favour.   

 

Again out of core Lannister had to have higher variance decks than most, but that simply isn't true anymore. If Lannister players still have "higher variance" decks that is because they choose to do so, there are more than enough lower value options to include. Most players however pack events and/or higher value characters.    

[sparrowhawk]

I think the best possible opening in the game right now is possibly...

 

Set-Up:

Arbor

Highgarden

Caretaker

 

Open First Snow (go first):

Play Olenna (fealty 6), dupe with Lady-in-W, 1 gold left for Highgarden

Intrigue in Paxter via Olenna

Play Tears (via Paxter) on target

Lose dupe to Military if Highgarden does not protect

Lose Paxter to Marched if opponent plays it

 

That is the "Magical Christmas Land" opening reminiscent of the broken openings that Hollow Hill + Redwyne Straits could generate.

 

I do agree with Wamma and others that First Snow has opened up some interesting possibilities. The above is in essence the strong "long game control" Tyrell Fealty deck that I believe is propelled to tier 1 that I referred to earlier. Cunning x3 or Building Orders finds Arbor x3 by turn 1, eroded slowly by 3x Barges' burst draw. Very heavy on locations with Support into Mander synergy as well and all these Reach locations pump your 4 cost Army for First Snow.

 

But I still believe for the majority of occasions, First Snow creates some very unsatisfactory NPE games. So ultimately more damaging than it is positive (without Valar).

[Toggle]

I think the best possible opening in the game right now is...

 

Set-Up:

Arbor

Highgarden

Caretaker

 

You forgot the dupe on Highgarden.  #growingstrong

[sparrowhawk]

Growing Strong indeed. Each pack has seen them gain great goodies until they are a force to reckon with now. Hats off to Mr French for resonating the House words and their emergence in the storyline with their strengthening card pool. Very clever.

 

It still doesn't make me any more enamoured with this grubby upstart family (as expressed earlier...).

 

Willas? Probably. Truth be told, I must have skipped bits of the Tyrell introduction (so long ago, it feels like a lifetime). Such an awful nouveau riche family of power hungry sycophants trying to curry favour from the rightful Lions. Only the amazing Diana Rigg saves them for HBO. They should remember what happened to House Reyne and know their place. Growing Strong? More like Wither On The Vine...



I reckon I will have to reread to understand who all these Slobbers and Horrors and other obscure references that FFG have elevated to centre stage are again.

Still, Tyrell is my fave house in Game of Thrones the Boardgame (where Loras and Olenna smash face).

Yeah, Willas is probably the heir. But he never slept with a King or won a Tourney. So who really cares?

 

Anyone who has seen the BBC 60s black-and-white series The Avengers with a young Diana Rigg in skintight leathers will know that when Olenna details how she snared her husband to Margaery, she really was perfect for the role. After all, she was James Bond's only wife.

 

The Tyrell's opulent decadence is actually quite a delicious aspect of the books/series.

 

 

Back to the thread topic - what other big changes has this pack brought in? Or not? So did Blood of the Dragon end up dropped outside of Fealty?

[Alexfrog]

I think the best possible opening in the game right now is possibly...

 

Set-Up:

Arbor

Highgarden

Caretaker

 

Open First Snow (go first):

Play Olenna (fealty 6), dupe with Lady-in-W, 1 gold left for Highgarden

Intrigue in Paxter via Olenna

Play Tears (via Paxter) on target

Lose dupe to Military if Highgarden does not protect

Lose Paxter to Marched if opponent plays it

 

That is the "Magical Christmas Land" opening reminiscent of the broken openings that Hollow Hill + Redwyne Straits could generate.

Yeah this is discouraging.

 

A game which is based around having an X% chance to generate magical broken setups which auto-win is not a good strategy card game. 

 

The game needs to start out about even, and then have players generate advantages through skill, not start out heavily lopsided and already a probably-foregone conclusion.