Search Cards

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!
Notice!
We have scheduled maintenance windows for the following times:
Monday (5/20/2013) from 2200 EST to Tuesday (5/21/2013) at 0200 EST.
Tuesday (5/21/2013) from 2200 EST to Wednesday (5/22/2013) at 0200 EST.
Estimated Downtime 1-2 Hours total.
Follow cardgamedb on Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ to recieve updates when we are down.

Blogs@ CardGameDB

  • May 18, 2013: Netrunner in Austin, Texas
    By Keggy
    Back to Austin for Netrunner regional #2. After squeaking into the top 8 last time, I was hoping to either get top 2 or blow out and have fun. The TO took up the score sheets I...
  • Centerville Tourney Report May 19, 2013
    By erocklawell
    Hey Everyone!! This is my first tournament break down, but second tournament, and I felt the need to record the games I've played. I may do a report on my first tour...
  • May 11, 2013: A Game of Thrones Regional in Austin, Texas
    By Keggy
    Round three of regionals in Austin. I'm gonna apologize in advance for many, many memory gaps. Pre-Tournament Report This was gonna be my first Thrones tourney, and I was...
  • Ottawa Regional
    By darknoj
    So my second regional of the session was a bit smaller then the first. I think the lower turn out was due to the extremely high cost to attend (35 to get into the con, 10 for th...
  • Stark City of Shadows (Winter Burn)
    By agktmte
    So I'd like to start off by posting a deck list I made for a "creative deck night" we had a few weeks back at the Team Covenant store in Tulsa, OK. I had previously...
  • Laval Regional
    By darknoj
    So I went to my first regional of the year last weekend. Thirteen players showed up at BD Cosmos in Laval Quebec to play AGoT. I had prepared three different decks for the event...
  • Game of Thrones Regionals 2013
    By 14Shirt
    Well I took the plunge and entered my first-ever regionals for GoT (first-ever card tournament of any kind, actually). I took a Stark Siege army deck I was having some fun with...
  • April 20, 2013: Netrunner Regional in Austin, Texas
    By Keggy
    Another week, another regional. I enjoyed my Star Wars tournament at Mothership Games in Austin the week before, and looked forward to going back. Pre-Tournament Report I was...
  • April 13, 2013: Star Wars Regional in Austin, Texas
    By Keggy
    Maybe I shouldn't wait two weeks to write up tourney reports. Oh, well. Pre-Tournament Report So, this was my first official tournament for any LCG. We had hosted a few...
  • Tourney Report: UK Huddersfield Regional 2013
    By JCWamma
    With regional season back upon us I can resume my favourite part of this game - talking for too long about my competitive experiences and expecting people to pay attention!...

‹ ›


Search Articles

- - - - -

San Francisco Regional - The Lion Returns?

May 11 2012 05:06 PM | Devastacia in Game of Thrones
Game of Thrones Regional 2012 Stark Siege Devastacia

Last weekend saw the first of two Regional Championship tournaments in the San Francisco Bay Area this Regionals Season. Much like the Moonboy Classic, this tournament served as a precursor to the larger tournament to come on Memorial Day weekend, held at KublaCon in Burlingame. There were sixteen people in attendance, representing three metas: San Francisco, Sacramento, and the East Bay Area. In the end, Lucas Sydlaske took home his first regional championship and the trophy with a Stark Siege deck, defeating yours truly in the finals playing Targaryen Maester Burn. Unfortunately I will be unable to post deck lists as we were not prepared to actually run the tournament at the store, but I was asked to at the last moment by the store’s employee.



Perhaps the most interesting data from the tournament is the house breakdown, which is as follows:


Lannister – 5
Targaryen – 3
Greyjoy – 3
Stark – 3
Baratheon – 1
Martell – 1


Wow, five Lannister players! That’s more Lannisters than there were in the Moonboy Classic, New York City Regionals, and San Diego Regionals…combined. Well, looks can be deceiving. Of those five players, three of them were players who have played for less than one year, and one of the other two happens to be another writer for this website who is a bit of a known Lannister fanboy (see: Rave, Crimson and Gold Column). Overall, the Lannister players performed to a record of 7 wins, 13 losses, a staggeringly low win percentage of 35%. The two more experienced players combined for a finish of 3-5.


This begs the question, what the hell has happened to the Lannisters? A year ago at KublaCon, one of the larger regionals, Lannister was second in the field to only Martell for total number of decks, and performed fairly well. To be fair, one of the decks that made the cut at both San Diego and San Francisco regionals was a Greyjoy/Lannister Alliance (the same player for both). But is the fact that it was allied with Greyjoy a symptom of the problems the house has right now? In the span of only two chapter pack cycles, the Lannisters have fallen from being one of the most consistently competitive houses to being almost entirely out of favor.


Personally, I think this is a result of a few things. First of all, there are simply too many answers for the Lannister style of play right now. Kneel doesn’t stand up well to Stark Rush/Murder decks that keep the board cleared, flood the board themselves, and limit the number of cards you can play with Fear of Winter while you are trying to get built up. When this is a glaring weakness of your deck, and one of the most prominent decks in the metagame exploits it, it’s going to make the deck less successful. Martell decks with vengeful characters such as Ellaria Sand (PotS), and control like Ghaston Grey (FtC) and A Game of Cyvasse (ACoS) also handle most kneel decks with ease. Recurring attachment control from Targaryen and Maester decks also cause problems for Lannister decks that often rely on attachments such as Flogged and Chained (TftRK), Pyromancer's Cache (TWot5K), and Widow's Wail (LotR).


Secondly, The Lions of the Rock expansion simply wasn’t that good. There. I said it. I heard a lot of raving about that box when it came out, but I simply do not think it stands up to the other house boxes. Stark, Baratheon, and Targaryen all gained much more from their boxes than Lannister did. The last couple cycles of Chapter Packs haven’t done much to assist, either. The Power Behind the Throne (LotR) agenda can be explosively powerful in the right situation, but if your opponent gets the chance to exploit it, it can be a game changer. I claimed no less than four power in one of my matches by winning intrigue challenges and opting for the power over the card draw.


Also, one of the things that has set the Lannisters apart from the other houses for a long time, their ability to produce gold and reduce cost more effectively than other houses, has essentially been nullified by many recent releases. Locations such as Street of Silk (LotR), Flea Bottom (TGM), River Row (QoD) and Ocean Road (WLL) have created a glut of neutral locations. Because of this, the Lannisters simply aren’t the only house that can rely on playing several high cost cards without difficulty anymore.


Put simply, don’t expect to see a lot of Lannister success in the remaining regional chamionships this season. They simply do not have the strength to compete with the top tier decks in the metagame right now. Well, enough about the problems with Lannister, there is other data to breakdown! Next we have the agenda breakdown:


The Maester's Path (GotC) – 4
None – 4
The Siege of Winterfell (LoW) – 2
Knights of the Hollow Hill (MotM) – 2
The Power Behind the Throne (LotR) – 1
Alliance (PotS) – 1
Treaty with the South (CoS) – 1
City of Shadows (CoS) – 1


The Maester's Path (GotC), Knights of the Hollow Hill (MotM) and The Siege of Winterfell (LoW) remain three of the most popular agendas in the game, which was fairly similar to San Diego and New York City, and no big surprise. The only real surprise was the lack of any Greyjoy choke decks, and not a single Kings of Winter agenda. One of the reasons I personally played Targaryen Maester Burn was for the potential to shut down Greyjoy’s choke tactics through ambush abilities and changing the season to Summer, but there was not a single choke deck to be found.

Finally, we have the restricted cards, which were as follows:


Fear of Winter (BtW) – 3
Pyromancer's Cache (TWot5K) – 3
Val (RotO) – 2
Fury of the Dragon (AE) – 2
Fury of the Lion (AE) – 1
Castellan of the Rock (BoRF) – 1
Fury of the Kraken (AE) – 1
The Viper's Bannermen (PotS) – 1
Venomous Blade (TBoBB) – 1
None – 1


Again, there were few surprises here. Fear of Winter continues rising as a top pick in Stark decks. Pyromancer's Cache (TWot5K) and Val (RotO) remain the best options for card draw in some decks. The only surprising selections on this list are Fury of the Lion (AE) and the lack of a restricted card altogether, but both of those selections were from the aforementioned players who had been in the game for less than a year.


Although San Francisco’s regional was less than half of the expected size of the regional championship coming up at KublaCon, it creates many questions leading up to it. Are the Lannisters truly dead in the water in the current metagame, or is there a rogue deck out there that could shine at one of the upcoming regionals? Is the lack of Greyjoy Choke a sign that deck is falling out of favor as well? Just how did Old Man Smithers create the ghastly apparition that scared away all the amusement park customers? I would love to hear your thoughts on this in the comments below.


43 Comments


Rave
May 11 2012 06:47 PM
Good breakdown, Joey. Thanks for the write-up. It's nice to see Sac back in the game :)

Though, as you may have expected I don't agree on your assessment of the current state of Lannister.

The sample from this tournament really doesn't do much for the argument, since no Lannister was playing a top-tier build.

As you said, 3 players were new, including the Power Behind the Throne player. (I matched up against 2, both of which werent running Valar) I ended up going 2-2 with my sad little maester deck, but neither of my losses were blowouts.

And just in general, if you accept that Stark Siege is a top tier build, you cannot discount Lannister, because Power Behind the Throne is such a hard counter to it. If PBTT was more of a gimmick, this claim would be irrelevant, but it's a solid decktype.

The lack of Lannister on the east coast is just the nature of the competitive beast, it's why the leaderboard of SFIV was full of Sagats, and why the SFIVAE leaderboard is full of Yuns. They were new, easy options with few discovered drawbacks at the time. It's why people freak out about the scarcity of Summer/Winter, and think they need it to compete when they really don't.

I agree that the Lannister box was hyped, but the cards are still quite good. I don't need to argue why.
I agree 100% however, that little love is being shown to Lannister in the chapter packs, especially this new one, and if it continues long, I could see the Lions falling out of favor.

I don't see Flogged and Chained and Widow's Wail as cornerstones of competitive decks. Hyper Kneel, for example, will probably be more based in shadows effects for Alchemist's Guildhall, make use of YKTWD, and use Castellan+Enemy Informer.

Widow's Wail has it's uses, but Golden Tooth Mines, Tommen, and Cache are going to be your draw staples. In decks that don't use Cache, you have to get more creative, but elsewise this should be all the draw you need.

Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out.

Cache is weak to Targ and Maesters. Lannister has very solid tools against Maesters (Bastard, A House Divided) that are common and versatile enough to not be considered silver bullets. Current Targ, I have no easy answer for. This has been the hardest matchup for me since Martell in the CCG when they had The Broken Arm. The match-up is winnable, but man is it an uphill battle.

Of course, words are wind. But I'll be bringing PBTT in some form to Kubla. So we'll see for ourselves.

sparty
May 11 2012 06:54 PM
I wonder how much the success may have been dependent upon the player's depth of card pools and their relative skill levels having limited play experience and potentially very little competitive play experience. Would that have affected their standing and wins when equally matched decks met and experience prevailed?

MikeS
May 11 2012 06:59 PM
Where was this advertised? I would have probably showed up if I had known it was happening.

Khaleesi
May 11 2012 07:43 PM
All regionals are listed on the FFG site and facebook is a good place to see groups and stores in the AGOT community. There's a regional in Fresno tomorrow.

Devastacia
May 11 2012 08:10 PM
@Rave, I really have to disagree that PBTT is a counter to Stark Siege. Stark Siege is built for high flops and strong military power with high claim and selective killing. If they are constantly keeping your board low on characters or devoid of them entirely, it's going to be hard to even get off two intrigue challenges, let alone win two of them. First turn Fear of Winter, which nearly every Stark Siege deck is running, is very difficult for a PBTT deck to overcome. I think Stark has the clear edge in that matchup.

@Sparty, I think that may have influenced the success a little bit, but I think the relative weakness of the house at present is why most of the better players simply are choosing to play other houses. Better players are going to get more wins with weaker decks than lesser players will, that's simply a given, but better players are also going to trend towards where they think the strongest builds are. That trend is clearly away from Lannister right now.

@MikeS, The tournament was listed on FFG's list of regional championships that was posted on their websites. There was also a post made in FFG's forums for the game.

KhalBrogo
May 11 2012 09:15 PM
@Rave:
"The sample from this tournament really doesn't do much for the argument, since no Lannister was playing a top-tier build."
-This is because there is no top-tier build for Lannister currently.

"And just in general, if you accept that Stark Siege is a top tier build, you cannot discount Lannister, because Power Behind the Throne is such a hard counter to it. If PBTT was more of a gimmick, this claim would be irrelevant, but it's a solid decktype."
-PBtT is bad. It is far from a hard counter to stark-siege (see Devastacia

's post above). PBtT doesn't have to be more of a gimmick (it's gimmick enough imo). Also there's no evidence whatsoever that it's a solid decktype aside from your claim.


"The lack of Lannister on the east coast is just the nature of the competitive beast, it's why the leaderboard of SFIV was full of Sagats, and why the SFIVAE leaderboard is full of Yuns. They were new, easy options with few discovered drawbacks at the time. It's why people freak out about the scarcity of Summer/Winter, and think they need it to compete when they really don't."
-The first part is just empty words without reasoning. The second part is merely your explaining a phenomenon as applied to street fighter, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you really saying that the non-lannister decks are NEW and EASY options?

"I agree that the Lannister box was hyped, but the cards are still quite good. I don't need to argue why.
I agree 100% however, that little love is being shown to Lannister in the chapter packs, especially this new one, and if it continues long, I could see the Lions falling out of favor."
-Why don't you need to argue that the Lannister box was any good? That's kind of the crux of the matter currently. The point is that the other boxes did much more for their houses than the Lannister box did for Lannister. Are you arguing that is not the case? If you're not your words are meaningless here as well.

"Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out."
-I would gladly argue that other houses have much better and more efficient weenies than Lannister does. See Distinguished Bboatswain, Lost Spearman, Flea Bottom Scavenger, House Messenger, etc.

What you forget is that more than any other house, Lannister is plagued with bad traits like allies and mercenaries. Not to mention all the other weaknesses of the house and homogenization of the house's strengths as stated by the OP. Lannister's strengths used to be great card draw, and lots of gold. Those strengths have been spread out to the other houses and made irrelevant. Lannister is not known for recursion/burn (Targ), save/choke (GJ), kill/search (Stark), bounce/icon manipulation (Martell), rush (baratheon). What the hell does Lannister have left over the other houses you say? Infamy? (made irrelevant by ghaston grey).

BTW one could say that PBtT is not only a gimmick but also extremely hard countered by The Laughing Storm which any and all competitive Baratheon decks will be running.

Lannister was the House I played when I first got into the game around the King's Landing Cycle. In the last few months I've been trying out multiple builds of Lannister to no success. With their strengths so homogenized to the other houses and their weaknesses so emphasized by the current meta I don't see them being top tier again for a very long time.

BTW OP great article. Is that you Joey Kreins? If it is, this is Christian Na. :P

Rave
May 11 2012 09:20 PM
@ Devastacia,
First turn Fear of Winter is bait for first turn Shadows and Spiders, even more so if you have Misinformation in your hand. It's also extremely telegraphed when they pre-plot the epic phase event. My PBTT also runs 9 1 cost characters, so it's not difficult to outplay the Stark player's kill with characters if necessary. Stark Siege on the other hand, has pretty low intrigue presence and what they do have dies to deadly.

Crevic
May 11 2012 09:42 PM
PBTT decks can flop well too, and if you expect FoW on the first turn, Frey Hospitality can be very devastating as well. I also don't play PBTT without 3x Misinformation.

KhalBrogo
May 11 2012 09:52 PM
Watch out flopping all those low cost characters it'll wreck you against first snow into rbd.

Rave
May 11 2012 10:00 PM
-This is because there is no top-tier build for Lannister currently.
Ok. Thanks.

-PBtT is bad. It is far from a hard counter to stark-siege (see Devastacia
's post above). PBtT doesn't have to be more of a gimmick (it's gimmick enough imo). Also there's no evidence whatsoever that it's a solid decktype aside from your claim.
Already explained.

-The first part is just empty words without reasoning. The second part is merely your explaining a phenomenon as applied to street fighter, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you really saying that the non-lannister decks are NEW and EASY options?
No, it isn't. It is a competitive phenomenon, Street Fighter is also a competitive game, how is that irrelevant? There are plenty of similarities between the two. Jaime players flock to characters like Yun and Sagat because they are high tier and popular, and all the new player Jaime's follow suit. Doesn't mean Akuma isn't top tier.

-Why don't you need to argue that the Lannister box was any good? That's kind of the crux of the matter currently. The point is that the other boxes did much more for their houses than the Lannister box did for Lannister. Are you arguing that is not the case? If you're not your words are meaningless here as well.
Pretty much half of the PBTT deck comes from this box. As does Myrcella, Bastard, Terminal Schemes, Frey Hospitality, Iron Throne, and Brothel guard. Nearly every Lannister deck I've seen runs some at least a few of these.

"Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out."
-I would gladly argue that other houses have much better and more efficient weenies than Lannister does. See Distinguished Bboatswain, Lost Spearman, Flea Bottom Scavenger, House Messenger, etc.
We are talking about why Lannister income is still a strength. Lannister income is still a strength because their income is efficient. I'm glad there are other efficient weenies, but I think you missed the point of what I'd said.

What you forget is that more than any other house, Lannister is plagued with bad traits like allies and mercenaries. Not to mention all the other weaknesses of the house and homogenization of the house's strengths as stated by the OP. Lannister's strengths used to be great card draw, and lots of gold. Those strengths have been spread out to the other houses and made irrelevant. Lannister is not known for recursion/burn (Targ), save/choke (GJ), kill/search (Stark), bounce/icon manipulation (Martell), rush (baratheon). What the hell does Lannister have left over the other houses you say? Infamy? (made irrelevant by ghaston grey).
I was wondering when the allies talk would come up. All houses get Varys, 2 get Arys Oakheart, and 1 gets Jorah Mormont. Do you plan on seeing much dissention?
It is there, it is a weakness, but it is not as much of a factor as people make it out to be.
Lannister still has kneel and tons of it, which is the easiest way to disrupt an opponents character for a turn. Lannister can empty your hand on the first turn with PBTT and Valar you next turn. Lannister Iron Throne is pretty neat too. These are strengths. Also, I don't understand how infamy in itself was ever a strength, please explain this.

BTW one could say that PBtT is not only a gimmick but also extremely hard countered by The Laughing Storm which any and all competitive Baratheon decks will be running.
-No. The Laughing Storm can be neutralized with kneel, and enough Lannister runs kneel for this claim to not be a silver bullet. Stark has no easy answer to Shadows and Spiders or deadly intrigue.

Lannister was the House I played when I first got into the game around the King's Landing Cycle. In the last few months I've been trying out multiple builds of Lannister to no success. With their strengths so homogenized to the other houses and their weaknesses so emphasized by the current meta I don't see them being top tier again for a very long time.
-Sorry to hear it. Maybe we can get some Lanni matches in at Kubla.

Crevic
May 11 2012 10:07 PM

KhalBrogo, on 11 May 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Watch out flopping all those low cost characters it'll wreck you against first snow into rbd.

A Stark Siege deck generally isn't going to be running that first turn, which is what I was responding to

KhalBrogo
May 11 2012 10:34 PM
-This is because there is no top-tier build for Lannister currently.
Ok. Thanks.
~if this is a sarcastic rebuttal point me to one please.

-PBtT is bad. It is far from a hard counter to stark-siege (seeDevastacia
's post above). PBtT doesn't have to be more of a gimmick (it's gimmick enough imo). Also there's no evidence whatsoever that it's a solid decktype aside from your claim.
Already explained.
~Nope.

-The first part is just empty words without reasoning. The second part is merely your explaining a phenomenon as applied to street fighter, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you really saying that the non-lannister decks are NEW and EASY options?
No, it isn't. It is a competitive phenomenon, Street Fighter is also a competitive game, how is that irrelevant? There are plenty of similarities between the two. Jaime players flock to characters like Yun and Sagat because they are high tier and popular, and all the new player Jaime's follow suit. Doesn't mean Akuma isn't top tier.
~I don't think you understand how an analogy works. You say these SF players are flocking to certain characters because they are NEW and EASY. My rebuttal was that your analogy is irrelevant in more ways than one but namely that you seem to be implying that the non-Lannister decks are NEW and EASY. Yet you don't explain or deny this. You now bring up a second analogy which is also irrelevant. Neither the OP or I are saying that the lack of Lannister at tourneys is the only reason they are not top-tier. We gave several other reasons and even if we didn't your analogy wouldn't work because at this tournament Lannister was the most represented house.

-Why don't you need to argue that the Lannister box was any good? That's kind of the crux of the matter currently. The point is that the other boxes did much more for their houses than the Lannister box did for Lannister. Are you arguing that is not the case? If you're not your words are meaningless here as well.
Pretty much half of the PBTT deck comes from this box. As does Myrcella, Bastard, Terminal Schemes, Frey Hospitality, Iron Throne, and Brothel guard. Nearly every Lannister deck I've seen runs some at least a few of these.
~Does not affect my argument nor the OP's argument that the other house boxes did more for their houses than this box did for Lannister. I didn't say there weren't any good cards in the box. Again your words here are meaningless if you're not refuting that point, which you don't seem to be.

"Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out."
-I would gladly argue that other houses have much better and more efficient weenies than Lannister does. See Distinguished Bboatswain, Lost Spearman, Flea Bottom Scavenger, House Messenger, etc.
We are talking about why Lannister income is still a strength. Lannister income is still a strength because their income is efficient. I'm glad there are other efficient weenies, but I think you missed the point of what I'd said.
~Actually you were first talking about income and then started talking about efficiency. You still have no counterargument for the OP and I in saying that Lannister income regardless of how efficient it is is no longer a strength because of the homogenization of various neutral reducers which is effective income.

What you forget is that more than any other house, Lannister is plagued with bad traits like allies and mercenaries. Not to mention all the other weaknesses of the house and homogenization of the house's strengths as stated by the OP. Lannister's strengths used to be great card draw, and lots of gold. Those strengths have been spread out to the other houses and made irrelevant. Lannister is not known for recursion/burn (Targ), save/choke (GJ), kill/search (Stark), bounce/icon manipulation (Martell), rush (baratheon). What the hell does Lannister have left over the other houses you say? Infamy? (made irrelevant by ghaston grey).
I was wondering when the allies talk would come up. All houses get Varys, 2 get Arys Oakheart, and 1 gets Jorah Mormont. Do you plan on seeing much dissention?
It is there, it is a weakness, but it is not as much of a factor as people make it out to be.
Lannister still has kneel and tons of it, which is the easiest way to disrupt an opponents character for a turn. Lannister can empty your hand on the first turn with PBTT and Valar you next turn. Lannister Iron Throne is pretty neat too. These are strengths. Also, I don't understand how infamy in itself was ever a strength, please explain this.
~First of all enabling Varys and Jorah is kind of a big deal when you compare it to not doing so. Dissension may not be a 3x in every deck but it is still somewhat present. If you're saying that having allies is not a weakness I don't know what to tell you. Other houses have more permanent solutions than kneel. Kneeling may have once been the easiest but now Stark can almost as easily kill your characters. I didn't say infamy was a necessarily a strength, infamy is a mechanic made exclusive for Lannister more or less (thus something Lannister has over the other houses) and if you try to utilize it is neutered by Ghaston Grey.

BTW one could say that PBtT is not only a gimmick but also extremely hard countered by The Laughing Storm which any and all competitive Baratheon decks will be running.
-No. The Laughing Storm can be neutralized with kneel, and enough Lannister runs kneel for this claim to not be a silver bullet. Stark has no easy answer to Shadows and Spiders or deadly intrigue.
~As to no easy answer for Shadows and Spiders: Forgotten Plans would like a word with you. As to kneeling: TLS, Marya Seaworth, King Robert's Hammer, Massey's Hook, Distinct Mastery, etc etc would like a word with you. Kneeling TLS is great and all but you will then be facing the House with arguably the most standing mechanics in the game so this is more or less moot.

Lannister was the House I played when I first got into the game around the King's Landing Cycle. In the last few months I've been trying out multiple builds of Lannister to no success. With their strengths so homogenized to the other houses and their weaknesses so emphasized by the current meta I don't see them being top tier again for a very long time.
-Sorry to hear it. Maybe we can get some Lanni matches in at Kubla.
~Sorry bro but I won't be at Kubla. Again I consider Lannister to be my favorite house but more than perhaps anyone else, I am saddened to see them at this state.

KhalBrogo
May 11 2012 10:35 PM

Crevic, on 11 May 2012 - 10:07 PM, said:

A Stark Siege deck generally isn't going to be running that first turn, which is what I was responding to

Sorry John I was referring to Rave's post above yours. Good point though.

Devastacia
May 11 2012 11:05 PM
@KhalBrogo Yeah Christian, this is Joey Kreins :P

@Rave The Epic battle event definitely isn't always indicative of a first turn Fear of Winter. In fact, many times it's indicative of a first turn Rule by Decree.

FranciscoG
May 11 2012 11:23 PM
My only point will be that there is at least 1 top tier build out of lannister. In spain there's this guy ¿aioria? that wins week after week with a pbtt control build against all those archetypes that rule in the competitive meta. And you can't say spain is not competitive cause you would be wrong since they owned stahleck last year.

thats my two cents

KhalBrogo
May 11 2012 11:35 PM

FranciscoG, on 11 May 2012 - 11:23 PM, said:

My only point will be that there is at least 1 top tier build out of lannister. In spain there's this guy ¿aioria? that wins week after week with a pbtt control build against all those archetypes that rule in the competitive meta. And you can't say spain is not competitive cause you would be wrong since they owned stahleck last year.

thats my two cents

A proper rebuttal. Glad to hear there's someone having success with Lannister. This post gives me hope. :)

Btw if you're the Francisco that updates the octgn thread thank you so much an keep up the good work bro!

Nomos
May 11 2012 11:51 PM
Then post up the proverbial top tier deck

Crevic
May 11 2012 11:52 PM
~It's Clansmen, clearly

Devastacia
May 11 2012 11:57 PM
What Nomos said. If there's a deck that's doing it, i'd like to see it.

FranciscoG
May 12 2012 12:41 AM
i'm not that francisco...sorry.

I can't post it cause its not mine. i only have seen the report in another site. I'm guessing is a pbtt with kneel. I know he uses bastard.

Rave
May 12 2012 02:36 AM
-This is because there is no top-tier build for Lannister currently.
Ok. Thanks.
~if this is a sarcastic rebuttal point me to one please.
No. It was simply a throwaway statement for a throwaway statement.

-PBtT is bad. It is far from a hard counter to stark-siege (seeDevastacia
's post above). PBtT doesn't have to be more of a gimmick (it's gimmick enough imo). Also there's no evidence whatsoever that it's a solid decktype aside from your claim.
Already explained.
~Nope.
Did you actually read my reply? Are you going to touch on it at all?
edit: found it

-The first part is just empty words without reasoning. The second part is merely your explaining a phenomenon as applied to street fighter, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you really saying that the non-lannister decks are NEW and EASY options?
No, it isn't. It is a competitive phenomenon, Street Fighter is also a competitive game, how is that irrelevant? There are plenty of similarities between the two. Jaime players flock to characters like Yun and Sagat because they are high tier and popular, and all the new player Jaime's follow suit. Doesn't mean Akuma isn't top tier.
~I don't think you understand how an analogy works. You say these SF players are flocking to certain characters because they are NEW and EASY. My rebuttal was that your analogy is irrelevant in more ways than one but namely that you seem to be implying that the non-Lannister decks are NEW and EASY. Yet you don't explain or deny this. You now bring up a second analogy which is also irrelevant. Neither the OP or I are saying that the lack of Lannister at tourneys is the only reason they are not top-tier. We gave several other reasons and even if we didn't your analogy wouldn't work because at this tournament Lannister was the most represented houses.
PBTT has a very heavy and apparent drawback that none of the other agendas do. Many players aren't willing to have this double-edge sword hanging over their head. This is why it isn't an easy deck to play. Using Street Fighter was kind of random and may not have been a good idea, and I apologize for that.


-Why don't you need to argue that the Lannister box was any good? That's kind of the crux of the matter currently. The point is that the other boxes did much more for their houses than the Lannister box did for Lannister. Are you arguing that is not the case? If you're not your words are meaningless here as well.
Pretty much half of the PBTT deck comes from this box. As does Myrcella, Bastard, Terminal Schemes, Frey Hospitality, Iron Throne, and Brothel guard. Nearly every Lannister deck I've seen runs some at least a few of these.
~Does not affect my argument nor the OP's argument that the other house boxes did more for their houses than this box did for Lannister. I didn't say there weren't any good cards in the box. Again your words here are meaningless if you're not refuting that point, which you don't seem to be.
You've got to be joking. What part of "The Lanni box just isn't that good" did you miss?
Would you like to compare each box's offerings and give a numerical value to each? The Lannister box has pretty much given them their most tourney worthy decktype.

"Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out."
-I would gladly argue that other houses have much better and more efficient weenies than Lannister does. See Distinguished Bboatswain, Lost Spearman, Flea Bottom Scavenger, House Messenger, etc.
We are talking about why Lannister income is still a strength. Lannister income is still a strength because their income is efficient. I'm glad there are other efficient weenies, but I think you missed the point of what I'd said.
~Actually you were first talking about income and then started talking about efficiency. You still have no counterargument for the OP and I in saying that Lannister income regardless of how efficient it is is no longer a strength because of the homogenization of various neutral reducers which is effective income.
I'm going to copy/paste my original post and clarify what I said.
Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out.
Income weenies give you board presence and gold at the same time, this is where the efficiency lies. I can use them to challenge, and use their initial boost to play control locations that in any other house I would have to hold back characters to do. This is still a strength, no other house has the ability to do this.

What you forget is that more than any other house, Lannister is plagued with bad traits like allies and mercenaries. Not to mention all the other weaknesses of the house and homogenization of the house's strengths as stated by the OP. Lannister's strengths used to be great card draw, and lots of gold. Those strengths have been spread out to the other houses and made irrelevant. Lannister is not known for recursion/burn (Targ), save/choke (GJ), kill/search (Stark), bounce/icon manipulation (Martell), rush (baratheon). What the hell does Lannister have left over the other houses you say? Infamy? (made irrelevant by ghaston grey).
I was wondering when the allies talk would come up. All houses get Varys, 2 get Arys Oakheart, and 1 gets Jorah Mormont. Do you plan on seeing much dissention?
It is there, it is a weakness, but it is not as much of a factor as people make it out to be.
Lannister still has kneel and tons of it, which is the easiest way to disrupt an opponents character for a turn. Lannister can empty your hand on the first turn with PBTT and Valar you next turn. Lannister Iron Throne is pretty neat too. These are strengths. Also, I don't understand how infamy in itself was ever a strength, please explain this.
~First of all enabling Varys and Jorah is kind of a big deal when you compare it to not doing so. Dissension may not be a 3x in every deck but it is still somewhat present. If you're saying that having allies is not a weakness I don't know what to tell you. Other houses have more permanent solutions than kneel. Kneeling may have once been the easiest but now Stark can almost as easily kill your characters. I didn't say infamy was a necessarily a strength, infamy is a mechanic made exclusive for Lannister more or less (thus something Lannister has over the other houses) and if you try to utilize it is neutered by Ghaston Grey.
I didn't say it wasn't a weakness, I said it wasn't a significant weakness. The more permanent solutions you refer to require certain conditions to go off, and these conditions have potential to fail. For kneel, you generally just have to draw the card, which in many cases is enough. In this deck, it is the reset that is the permanent solution.

BTW one could say that PBtT is not only a gimmick but also extremely hard countered by The Laughing Storm which any and all competitive Baratheon decks will be running.
-No. The Laughing Storm can be neutralized with kneel, and enough Lannister runs kneel for this claim to not be a silver bullet. Stark has no easy answer to Shadows and Spiders or deadly intrigue.
~As to no easy answer for Shadows and Spiders: Forgotten Plans would like a word with you. As to kneeling: TLS, Marya Seaworth, King Robert's Hammer, Massey's Hook, Distinct Mastery, etc etc would like a word with you. Kneeling TLS is great and all but you will then be facing the House with arguably the most standing mechanics in the game so this is more or less moot.
First turn forgotten plans takes the bite away from the deck, since the early potential for control is in question. You have to assume you draw into your kill or or control effects, and then hope I have no way to win your military challenge, or kneel your WAR or unique characters. This also conflicts with Joey's reasoning of why Stark Siege does well against the deck (first turn Fear of Winter)

Also, a bara deck that uses it's kneel effects defensively is playing the wrong game. I no longer have to worry about power grab and just focus on emptying their hand for the reset.

Lannister was the House I played when I first got into the game around the King's Landing Cycle. In the last few months I've been trying out multiple builds of Lannister to no success. With their strengths so homogenized to the other houses and their weaknesses so emphasized by the current meta I don't see them being top tier again for a very long time.
-Sorry to hear it. Maybe we can get some Lanni matches in at Kubla.
~Sorry bro but I won't be at Kubla. Again I consider Lannister to be my favorite house but more than perhaps anyone else, I am saddened to see them at this state.
-You could always just play them anyway. Nobody would've guessed Robert Maester would've been the next uber decktype right?

Rave
May 12 2012 02:43 AM
@Rave The Epic battle event definitely isn't always indicative of a first turn Fear of Winter. In fact, many times it's indicative of a first turn Rule by Decree.
This is an excellent point, and something I did not think about. I'll have to keep this in mind when I head to the next regional.

KhalBrogo
May 13 2012 07:52 PM
-This is because there is no top-tier build for Lannister currently.
Ok. Thanks.
~if this is a sarcastic rebuttal point me to one please.
No. It was simply a throwaway statement for a throwaway statement.
~My statement wasn't throwaway. I don't see how it can be. Could you explain? My point is that your statement complaining of people at the event not running top tier Lannister builds, is functionally meaningless. This is because at the time there were no top-tier Lannister builds. If you're saying otherwise point me to one. Unless you consider yourself to be the almighty judge of top-tier deck builds just by looking at decklists. If that's the case then good for you.

-The first part is just empty words without reasoning. The second part is merely your explaining a phenomenon as applied to street fighter, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you really saying that the non-lannister decks are NEW and EASY options?
No, it isn't. It is a competitive phenomenon, Street Fighter is also a competitive game, how is that irrelevant? There are plenty of similarities between the two. Jaime players flock to characters like Yun and Sagat because they are high tier and popular, and all the new player Jaime's follow suit. Doesn't mean Akuma isn't top tier.
~I don't think you understand how an analogy works. You say these SF players are flocking to certain characters because they are NEW and EASY. My rebuttal was that your analogy is irrelevant in more ways than one but namely that you seem to be implying that the non-Lannister decks are NEW and EASY. Yet you don't explain or deny this. You now bring up a second analogy which is also irrelevant. Neither the OP or I are saying that the lack of Lannister at tourneys is the only reason they are not top-tier. We gave several other reasons and even if we didn't your analogy wouldn't work because at this tournament Lannister was the most represented houses.
PBTT has a very heavy and apparent drawback that none of the other agendas do. Many players aren't willing to have this double-edge sword hanging over their head. This is why it isn't an easy deck to play.Using Street Fighter was kind of random and may not have been a good idea, and I apologize for that.
~Let me show you how your argument does not follow logically. Let's say your proposition above is true that: "PBTT has a very heavy and apparent drawback that none of the other agendas do. Many players aren't willing to have this double-edge sword hanging over their head. This is why it isn't an easy deck to play." It does not necessarily mean that the non-Lannister decks are both new and easy. This is why your analogy is irrelevant. Not merely because it is a SF analogy, but because the inference from the one does not translate to the other. In one you are saying certain characters are new and easy in the other you are saying one decktype is not new and easy. It would make at least make some sense if you were saying rather that other decktypes were new and easy in your analogy, but you're not.

-Why don't you need to argue that the Lannister box was any good? That's kind of the crux of the matter currently. The point is that the other boxes did much more for their houses than the Lannister box did for Lannister. Are you arguing that is not the case? If you're not your words are meaningless here as well.
Pretty much half of the PBTT deck comes from this box. As does Myrcella, Bastard, Terminal Schemes, Frey Hospitality, Iron Throne, and Brothel guard. Nearly every Lannister deck I've seen runs some at least a few of these.
~Does not affect my argument nor the OP's argument that the other house boxes did more for their houses than this box did for Lannister. I didn't say there weren't any good cards in the box. Again your words here are meaningless if you're not refuting that point, which you don't seem to be.
You've got to be joking. What part of "The Lanni box just isn't that good" did you miss?
Would you like to compare each box's offerings and give a numerical value to each? The Lannister box has pretty much given them their most tourney worthy decktype.
~Again you're missing the point. I will concede that the Lannister box did some good. The argument is that the Lannister box did less for Lannister than the other boxes did for their houses. Are you saying this isn't the case? First of all I think this claim is ridiculous: "The Lannister box has pretty much given them their most tourney worthy decktype." Lannister has had way much more worthy decktypes in the past in its own metas than it does currently. I didn't say you have to assign numerical values but again you ignore the basis of the argument. Are you saying that Lions of the Rock did more for Lannister than other house boxes did for their houses? Because I disagree.

"Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out."
-I would gladly argue that other houses have much better and more efficient weenies than Lannister does. See Distinguished Bboatswain, Lost Spearman, Flea Bottom Scavenger, House Messenger, etc.
We are talking about why Lannister income is still a strength. Lannister income is still a strength because their income is efficient. I'm glad there are other efficient weenies, but I think you missed the point of what I'd said.
~Actually you were first talking about income and then started talking about efficiency. You still have no counterargument for the OP and I in saying that Lannister income regardless of how efficient it is is no longer a strength because of the homogenization of various neutral reducers which is effective income.
I'm going to copy/paste my original post and clarify what I said.
Other houses can match Lannister for income, this is true. But they cannot match Lannister for efficiency. Income weenies give a good first turn boost at the very least, which can be nice if you have a an Iron Throne/Tourney Grounds/Brothel you need to get out.
Income weenies give you board presence and gold at the same time, this is where the efficiency lies. I can use them to challenge, and use their initial boost to play control locations that in any other house I would have to hold back characters to do. This is still a strength, no other house has the ability to do this.
~I will concede that you may still consider this a "strength." However, this is a strength that is becoming less and less relevant. Again you still aren't arguing against this. Do you think that gold weenies are as good or better in the meta now than before all the neutral reducers came out?

What you forget is that more than any other house, Lannister is plagued with bad traits like allies and mercenaries. Not to mention all the other weaknesses of the house and homogenization of the house's strengths as stated by the OP. Lannister's strengths used to be great card draw, and lots of gold. Those strengths have been spread out to the other houses and made irrelevant. Lannister is not known for recursion/burn (Targ), save/choke (GJ), kill/search (Stark), bounce/icon manipulation (Martell), rush (baratheon). What the hell does Lannister have left over the other houses you say? Infamy? (made irrelevant by ghaston grey).
I was wondering when the allies talk would come up. All houses get Varys, 2 get Arys Oakheart, and 1 gets Jorah Mormont. Do you plan on seeing much dissention?
It is there, it is a weakness, but it is not as much of a factor as people make it out to be.
Lannister still has kneel and tons of it, which is the easiest way to disrupt an opponents character for a turn. Lannister can empty your hand on the first turn with PBTT and Valar you next turn. Lannister Iron Throne is pretty neat too. These are strengths. Also, I don't understand how infamy in itself was ever a strength, please explain this.
~First of all enabling Varys and Jorah is kind of a big deal when you compare it to not doing so. Dissension may not be a 3x in every deck but it is still somewhat present. If you're saying that having allies is not a weakness I don't know what to tell you. Other houses have more permanent solutions than kneel. Kneeling may have once been the easiest but now Stark can almost as easily kill your characters. I didn't say infamy was a necessarily a strength, infamy is a mechanic made exclusive for Lannister more or less (thus something Lannister has over the other houses) and if you try to utilize it is neutered by Ghaston Grey.
I didn't say it wasn't a weakness, I said it wasn't a significant weakness. The more permanent solutions you refer to require certain conditions to go off, and these conditions have potential to fail. For kneel, you generally just have to draw the card, which in many cases is enough. In this deck, it is the reset that is the permanent solution.
~Are you really suggesting that cards like No Quarter and Ghaston Grey are so much more difficult to satisfy conditionally than kneel effects that it makes up for kneeling being a temporary control effect? Kneeling is arguably the weakest control effect. Other houses have received much easier ways to permanently remove or return to hand etc characters so ease of use is less and less relevant. Reset is not exclusive to Lannister thus the reset being equal Lannister lags behind in permanent solutions whereas other houses have the reset + other permanent removal options.

BTW one could say that PBtT is not only a gimmick but also extremely hard countered by The Laughing Storm which any and all competitive Baratheon decks will be running.
-No. The Laughing Storm can be neutralized with kneel, and enough Lannister runs kneel for this claim to not be a silver bullet. Stark has no easy answer to Shadows and Spiders or deadly intrigue.
~As to no easy answer for Shadows and Spiders: Forgotten Plans would like a word with you. As to kneeling: TLS, Marya Seaworth, King Robert's Hammer, Massey's Hook, Distinct Mastery, etc etc would like a word with you. Kneeling TLS is great and all but you will then be facing the House with arguably the most standing mechanics in the game so this is more or less moot.
First turn forgotten plans takes the bite away from the deck, since the early potential for control is in question. You have to assume you draw into your kill or or control effects, and then hope I have no way to win your military challenge, or kneel your WAR or unique characters. This also conflicts with Joey's reasoning of why Stark Siege does well against the deck (first turn Fear of Winter)
~Newsflash, there are many more viable stark builds than simply Stark Siege. First turn forgotten plans works well for many decks especially currently where many decks will play first turn fear of winter. Also:You have to assume you draw into your kneel or control effects, and then hope I have no way to win your intrigue challenge, or kill your characters. See what I did there?

Also, a bara deck that uses it's kneel effects defensively is playing the wrong game. I no longer have to worry about power grab and just focus on emptying their hand for the reset.
~I never said Bara used kneel effects. The cards I mentioned actually stand characters and standing characters would not be using the effect defensively it would actively counter kneeling control effects and you would still definitely have to worry about power grab.

Lannister was the House I played when I first got into the game around the King's Landing Cycle. In the last few months I've been trying out multiple builds of Lannister to no success. With their strengths so homogenized to the other houses and their weaknesses so emphasized by the current meta I don't see them being top tier again for a very long time.
-Sorry to hear it. Maybe we can get some Lanni matches in at Kubla.
~Sorry bro but I won't be at Kubla. Again I consider Lannister to be my favorite house but more than perhaps anyone else, I am saddened to see them at this state.
-You could always just play them anyway. Nobody would've guessed Robert Maester would've been the next uber decktype right?
~I could, but I have another favorite decktype right now that I built myself. I am also concocting various Lannister builds all the time but have not ended up liking any of them yet. I don't like netdecking. The point of all this is that we all know that there could be a Lannister decktype out there that is really competitive. What you are arguing is that there is a "top-tier" build for it already. For something to be "top-tier" it needs to be put on the radar somehow to have proven itself. This hasn't happened. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.

Rave
May 14 2012 12:45 AM
~My statement wasn't throwaway. I don't see how it can be. Could you explain? My point is that your statement complaining of people at the event not running top tier Lannister builds, is functionally meaningless. This is because at the time there were no top-tier Lannister builds. If you're saying otherwise point me to one. Unless you consider yourself to be the almighty judge of top-tier deck builds just by looking at decklists. If that's the case then good for you.
-----------
I think the issue here might be that we view the concept of "top tier" decks in different ways. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your definition of a top tier deck is a deck that has a record of consistently performing well in tournaments. My definition of a top tier deck is a deck that theoretically has many strengths and few weaknesses considering the card pool, regardless of tournament performance.
By my definition, your statement is throwaway because you had given me no evidence to support why, but by your definition it is sound, because you are right, the tourney results aren't there.

Anyway, if that is what you believe, I would ask you: By your definition, what tournament evidence is there that you could show me that PBTT is a low-tier or even mid-tier build? In a consistent trend?

~Let me show you how your argument does not follow logically. Let's say your proposition above is true that: "PBTT has a very heavy and apparent drawback that none of the other agendas do. Many players aren't willing to have this double-edge sword hanging over their head. This is why it isn't an easy deck to play." It does not necessarily mean that the non-Lannister decks are both new and easy. This is why your analogy is irrelevant. Not merely because it is a SF analogy, but because the inference from the one does not translate to the other. In one you are saying certain characters are new and easy in the other you are saying one decktype is not new and easy. It would make at least make some sense if you were saying rather that other decktypes were new and easy in your analogy, but you're not.
-----------
Ok, I think I understand. Will this work to clarify?
New = Recent tournament winning deck with a posted decklist.
Easy = No fundamental drawback.
If I am the typical Jaime type player just getting into the game, I will look up a list of recent tournament winning decks and play them, gravitating to the ones that have as few obvious drawbacks as possible, or that generate the most buzz, and that cycle will repeat.

I feel that this is why PBTT does not get played often. The buzz isn't there.

~Again you're missing the point. I will concede that the Lannister box did some good. The argument is that the Lannister box did less for Lannister than the other boxes did for their houses. Are you saying this isn't the case? First of all I think this claim is ridiculous: "The Lannister box has pretty much given them their most tourney worthy decktype." Lannister has had way much more worthy decktypes in the past in its own metas than it does currently. I didn't say you have to assign numerical values but again you ignore the basis of the argument. Are you saying that Lions of the Rock did more for Lannister than other house boxes did for their houses? Because I disagree.
-------
I don't think bringing the past of the game into this discussion is a good idea. If it wasn't clear I was talking about the current state of the game from the start.
I believe PBTT is the best decktype for Lannister at the moment, so yes, I do believe LOTR added a lot to the house. Logically I never had to prove that they got more than the others, just that they got "nearly as much". I think half of the deck should qualify as "nearly as much"

~I will concede that you may still consider this a "strength." However, this is a strength that is becoming less and less relevant. Again you still aren't arguing against this. Do you think that gold weenies are as good or better in the meta now than before all the neutral reducers came out?
---------------------
Definitely not as good, this is true. But who cares? I don't think was ever a critical strength of the house, at least not to the level that kneel or the intrigue challenge are.

~Are you really suggesting that cards like No Quarter and Ghaston Grey are so much more difficult to satisfy conditionally than kneel effects that it makes up for kneeling being a temporary control effect? Kneeling is arguably the weakest control effect. Other houses have received much easier ways to permanently remove or return to hand etc characters so ease of use is less and less relevant. Reset is not exclusive to Lannister thus the reset being equal Lannister lags behind in permanent solutions whereas other houses have the reset + other permanent removal options.
------
For the purpose of PBTT, where it's only necessary to control board position until the opponent's hand advantage is gone, yes. For the purpose of swallowing the early threat of rush decks yes.
If I'm drawing off the deck, and I draw a kneel card, it is immediately useful, if I can pay for it, I get use out of it. Also, Castellan is my Restricted choice for PBTT and that is re-usable. (Though an ally, which is annoying, but not critically so, because he works off himself.)

~Newsflash, there are many more viable stark builds than simply Stark Siege. First turn forgotten plans works well for many decks especially currently where many decks will play first turn fear of winter. Also:You have to assume you draw into your kneel or control effects, and then hope I have no way to win your intrigue challenge, or kill your characters. See what I did there?
-------
Are we talking about different viable builds now as well? Will I see these viable builds often when I go to tournaments? Any specific reason PBTT be afraid of these builds also? Why? I thought Stark Siege was the best to mention, because it is the most popular, and I feel it is the best Stark has to offer.

Let's examine this:
"You have to assume you draw into your kneel or control effects"
---I have a better chance of doing this, as GTM and Tommen give me marshalling phase draw. (I went with Castellan over the Cache) You get Bay of Ice possibly, Sansa if you have the attachments to back her up, Val if you chose to include her as your restricted, the Dreadfort if you have a bolton subtheme, or whatever you drew up after your setup. Each of my choices are as efficient as it gets.
"and then hope I have no way to win your intrigue challenge"
---There are 7 intrigue characters in the deck I'm running with deadly. If you beat me, there's a chance you'll have to kill a character, and a chance the cost ratio will be in my favor (ie. House payne enforcer, Bronn's Hireling) This is Lannister's advantage. If I win your military challenge and your guy happens to be deadly, chances are I'll be killing a chud, or come into play character (ie. House Clegane Enforcer, Enemy Informer), I don't need to have much military presence to with this build. Also keep in mind, I get 2 intrigue challenges a turn to your one.
Not to mention, that I have 3 cards in my deck that will auto-win intrigue for me if I need it.
"kill your characters."
--- Getting your kill effects off requires winning initiative and going first. If you go first, my kneel will always have the potential to kneel your key characters. If you go second, I will get my intrigue challenges off, and you may lose your kill effect.

With kneel, all I have to do is draw the card, and it goes into effect in marshalling, this is one of the strengths of kneel.

Another thing, is that if none of these things factor in for either player, I am winning. Just like you will consistently win military, i will consistently win intrigue, emptying your hand, and getting you ready for Valar. You are killing my weenie characters.

If you are opening with forgotten plans every time, chances are unless I flop poorly, that I have enough characters out to get my 2 intrigue challenges off even after I take claim, maybe even after your kill effects go off.

This is why I feel Lannister has the advantage in this match-up.

~I never said Bara used kneel effects. The cards I mentioned actually stand characters and standing characters would not be using the effect defensively it would actively counter kneeling control effects and you would still definitely have to worry about power grab.
------
LOL. I meant *standing effects, of course (sorry about that). And yes, using standing effects to restand The Laughing Storm will significantly lessen the the bite that a power rush deck brings to the table. You're basically countering your own threats by yourself by not re-using your renown characters.


~I could, but I have another favorite decktype right now that I built myself. I am also concocting various Lannister builds all the time but have not ended up liking any of them yet. I don't like netdecking. The point of all this is that we all know that there could be a Lannister decktype out there that is really competitive. What you are arguing is that there is a "top-tier" build for it already. For something to be "top-tier" it needs to be put on the radar somehow to have proven itself. This hasn't happened. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.
-----
Hey, good for you. I hate net-decking also. Knowing what is out there is good, but I think working it out yourself makes you a much better player.

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is much evidence to the contrary, that is: a large enough sample size of experienced competitive players playing a tournament tweaked PBTT deck only to end up at the mid to lower end of the rankings of the tournament.
Players simply not playing a deck, or your ability to take advantage of it's drawback against a new player should not be provided as evidence on why it is bad.

Hey, I could be wrong. Show me some evidence.

It does need to be said, that based on this discussion, I don't really think PBTT is a "hard counter" anymore, because forgotten plans does make a difference, as well as the first turn RBD. But I still believe that the matchup is in the Lannister players favor.

And I certainly don't believe they are a "bad" house, that is madness.

KhalBrogo
May 14 2012 07:16 AM
~My statement wasn't throwaway. I don't see how it can be. Could you explain? My point is that your statement complaining of people at the event not running top tier Lannister builds, is functionally meaningless. This is because at the time there were no top-tier Lannister builds. If you're saying otherwise point me to one. Unless you consider yourself to be the almighty judge of top-tier deck builds just by looking at decklists. If that's the case then good for you.
-----------
I think the issue here might be that we view the concept of "top tier" decks in different ways. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your definition of a top tier deck is a deck that has a record of consistently performing well in tournaments. My definition of a top tier deck is a deck that theoretically has many strengths and few weaknesses considering the card pool, regardless of tournament performance.
By my definition, your statement is throwaway because you had given me no evidence to support why, but by your definition it is sound, because you are right, the tourney results aren't there.

Anyway, if that is what you believe, I would ask you: By your definition, what tournament evidence is there that you could show me that PBTT is a low-tier or even mid-tier build? In a consistent trend?
~So am I to understand that your definition of a top-tier deck is completely subjective? The one I am using is not.
~Why would I need to do that when the point you're trying to make is that there is a top-tier build? In order for me to refute such a claim all I need to show is that it is not. In order for me to show you that not all sheep are white I need to only show you one that is not (a black one for example). I don't need to then also show you a brown one and a grey one.

~Let me show you how your argument does not follow logically. Let's say your proposition above is true that: "PBTT has a very heavy and apparent drawback that none of the other agendas do. Many players aren't willing to have this double-edge sword hanging over their head.This is why it isn't an easy deck to play." It does not necessarily mean that the non-Lannister decks are both newand easy. This is why your analogy is irrelevant. Not merely because it is a SF analogy, but because the inference from the one does not translate to the other. In one you are saying certain characters are new and easy in the other you are saying one decktype is not new and easy. It would make at least make some sense if you were saying rather that other decktypes were new and easy in your analogy, but you're not.
-----------
Ok, I think I understand. Will this work to clarify?
New = Recent tournament winning deck with a posted decklist.
Easy = No fundamental drawback.
If I am the typical Jaime type player just getting into the game, I will look up a list of recent tournament winning decks and play them, gravitating to the ones that have as few obvious drawbacks as possible, or that generate the most buzz, and that cycle will repeat.
~I see you've more or less abandoned your analogy. I believe I understand the point you are trying to make. However, if you're going to classify every deck outside of PBtT as easy I think now you're reaching. Further, if you're saying that decks like GG Martell control is a new deck I think you need to choose your words more wisely. In fact neither new nor easy should be used if you're using those definitions.
~I agree with your assessment otherwise about why PBtT isn't being played among other reasons.

~Again you're missing the point. I will concede that the Lannister box did some good. The argument is that the Lannister box did less for Lannister than the other boxes did for their houses. Are you saying this isn't the case? First of all I think this claim is ridiculous: "The Lannister box has pretty much given them their most tourney worthy decktype." Lannister has had way much more worthy decktypes in the past in its own metas than it does currently. I didn't say you have to assign numerical values but again you ignore the basis of the argument. Are you saying that Lions of the Rock did more for Lannister than other house boxes did for their houses? Because I disagree.
-------
I don't think bringing the past of the game into this discussion is a good idea. If it wasn't clear I was talking about the current state of the game from the start.
I believe PBTT is the best decktype for Lannister at the moment, so yes, I do believe LOTR added a lot to the house. Logically I never had to prove that they got more than the others, just that they got "nearly as much". I think half of the deck should qualify as "nearly as much"
~So basically you are saying Lions of the Rock is good because a lot of the cards in your deck is from it. Equivocating top-tier Lannister deck with best option currently is like comparing the best 12 year old QB in your peewee football team with the best QB from the NFL. Anyway, I Will simply state then that I believe Lions of the Rock should and could have been much better for Lannister.

~I will concede that you may still consider this a "strength." However, this is a strength that is becoming less and less relevant. Again you still aren't arguing against this. Do you think that gold weenies are as good or better in the meta now than before all the neutral reducers came out?
---------------------
Definitely not as good, this is true. But who cares? I don't think was ever a critical strength of the house, at least not to the level that kneel or the intrigue challenge are.
~Who cares? Seriously? Weren't you making a big deal of this from the start? Isn't that what I've been trying to say?

~Newsflash, there are many more viable stark builds than simply Stark Siege. First turn forgotten plans works well for many decks especially currently where many decks will play first turn fear of winter. Also:You have to assume you draw into your kneel or control effects, and then hope I have no way to win your intrigue challenge, or killyour characters. See what I did there?
-------
Are we talking about different viable builds now as well? Will I see these viable builds often when I go to tournaments? Any specific reason PBTT be afraid of these builds also? Why? I thought Stark Siege was the best to mention, because it is the most popular, and I feel it is the best Stark has to offer.
~While Stark Siege is a good build. I don't believe it's the best nor only build. I guess you haven't played much against Stark murder variants. I also disagree with both you and Joey that Stark decks need to run Fear of Winter first turn everygame. In a lot of cases I think that is the wrong call. For one thing, if you're facing any non-stark-siege deck you will get wrecked by First Snow into Rule by Decree. This will happen pretty much every time in mymeta if you play your deck the way you do. You say that you have tons of weenie intrigue characters that you flop and you pretty much always first turn Shadows and Spiders thus you are not going to forgotten plans first turn thus leading into an almost inevitable huge RBD.

Let's examine this:
"You have to assume you draw into your kneel or control effects"
---I have a better chance of doing this, as GTM and Tommen give me marshalling phase draw. (I went with Castellan over the Cache) You get Bay of Ice possibly, Sansa if you have the attachments to back her up, Val if you chose to include her as your restricted, the Dreadfort if you have a bolton subtheme, or whatever you drew up after your setup. Each of my choices are as efficient as it gets.
~Yep that's all that Stark has in terms of draw...
~Also if you're using Shadows and Spiders first turn, any non-0 initiative plot your opponent is running will get him initiative. If you have all these monocon intrigue chars and the Stark player goes first and wins a military challenge (enabled by forgotten plans) you'll have to give up 1 character for claim and possibly more from Die by the Sword, No Quarter, etc. If they first turn first snow you then honestly it won't matter because you basically lose when he RBD's you next turn.

"and then hope I have no way to win your intriguechallenge"
---There are 7 intrigue characters in the deck I'm running with deadly. If you beat me, there's a chance you'll have to kill a character, and a chance the cost ratio will be in my favor (ie. House payne enforcer, Bronn's Hireling) This is Lannister's advantage.
~The deadly will then be more or less nullified by triggering your agenda as that card will replace itself in their hand.

If I win your military challenge and your guy happens to be deadly, chances are I'll be killing a chud, or come into play character (ie. House Clegane Enforcer, Enemy Informer), I don't need to have much military presence to with this build. Also keep in mind, I get 2 intrigue challenges a turn to your one.
Not to mention, that I have 3 cards in my deck that will auto-win intrigue for me if I need it.
~Yep I know how PBtT works. If you're winning military challenges with your PBtT against Stark Siege decks I think maybe you are just playing against bad decks.

"kill your characters."
--- Getting your kill effects off requires winning initiative and going first. If you go first, my kneel will always have the potential to kneel your key characters. If you go second, I will get my intrigue challenges off, and you may lose your kill effect.
See above about forgotten plans vs Shadows and Spiders. Sure kneel their key characters while they kill your key characters.

With kneel, all I have to do is draw the card, and it goes into effect in marshalling, this is one of the strengths of kneel.
Actually you still have to pay for them. Like Enemy Informer, which can give you terrible flops. If most of your kneel is during marshalling how will you kneel a character like Syrio Forel or Arya Stark (KL)? Another thing to note is that kneeling (especially marshalling kneeling) is terribly weak against Targaryen ambush decks as well.

Another thing, is that if none of these things factor in for either player, I am winning. Just like you will consistently win military, i will consistently win intrigue, emptying your hand, and getting you ready for Valar. You are killing my weenie characters.
~If this is your strategy against every deck I'd like to introduce you to a popular tourney deck - GJ choke. Try Valaring that deck.

If you are opening with forgotten plans every time, chances are unless I flop poorly, that I have enough characters out to get my 2 intrigue challenges off even after I take claim, maybe even after your kill effects go off.
If you have that many characters out on the flop prepare to eat a First Snow into RBD instead as said above.

This is why I feel Lannister has the advantage in this match-up.
~So I guess it's an advantage now instead of a hard-counter. Ok I'll accept that. I don't care for arguing who has the advantage so long as you are no longer arguing that the match is a hard-counter.

~I never said Bara used kneel effects. The cards I mentioned actually stand characters and standing characters would not be using the effect defensively it would actively counter kneeling control effects and you would still definitely have to worry about power grab.
------
LOL. I meant *standing effects, of course (sorry about that). And yes, using standing effects to restand The Laughing Storm will significantly lessen the the bite that a power rush deck brings to the table. You're basically countering your own threats by yourself by not re-using your renown characters.
~A standing Laughing Storm means they don't have to rush against you. Go ahead and win your intrigue challenges. Why would they care? Your intrigue claim has effectively been nullified and your strategy of emptying their hand no longer applies. If your strategy against Bara is kneeling the laughing storm and emptying their hand wouldn't them playing distinct mastery and nullifying your intrigue claim for 1-2 turns really "take the bite out of your deck?" How about while it's standing they also make you eat a Threat from the North?

~I could, but I have another favorite decktype right now that I built myself. I am also concocting various Lannister builds all the time but have not ended up liking any of them yet. I don't like netdecking. The point of all this is that we all know that there could be a Lannister decktype out there that is really competitive. What you are arguing is that there is a "top-tier" build for it already. For something to be "top-tier" it needs to be put on the radar somehow to have proven itself. This hasn't happened. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.
-----
Hey, good for you. I hate net-decking also. Knowing what is out there is good, but I think working it out yourself makes you a much better player.
Thanks bro, I agree.

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is much evidence to the contrary, that is: a large enough sample size of experienced competitive players playing a tournament tweaked PBTT deck only to end up at the mid to lower end of the rankings of the tournament.
Players simply not playing a deck, or your ability to take advantage of it's drawback against a new player should not be provided as evidence on why it is bad.
I didn't say it was bad. I said it was wrong for you to call it Top-Tier. In fact I think it has a lot of potential. Two of my friends actually have PBtT builds that I think are pretty strong. I'm not using the lack of representation to show that it's a bad deck. What it is evidence of though is that until it's been somehow proven succesful it cannot be said to be objectively Top-Tier.

It does need to be said, that based on this discussion, I don't really think PBTT is a "hard counter" anymore, because forgotten plans does make a difference, as well as the first turn RBD. But I still believe that the matchup is in the Lannister players favor.
~That's fine. I don't personally agree but whatever. That is pretty subjective thing to argue anyway.

And I certainly don't believe they are a "bad" house, that is madness.
~House Frey is the bad house.
  1. Card Game DB
  2. → Pages
  3. → Articles
  4. → Game of Thrones
  5. → Article: San Francisco Regional - The Lion Returns?