I'm not sure if it is because this game is co-operative but it seems to me like there is a lack of discussion on Tiers for deck lists, at least in comparison to other LCG games. It could also be because each quest is going to change how you approach list building. Are there any Tier 1 decks for LotR?
Tier 1 Decks
We did have a discussion a couple months ago: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/181540-dominating-archetypes/
Not sure much has changed since then.
It can be argued that things are about to change.
It can be argued that things are about to change.
Yeah, I have no doubt that Erestor will become a top tier archetype. I am very excited to see what people come up with.
We did have a discussion a couple months ago: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/181540-dominating-archetypes/
Not sure much has changed since then.
Thanks for the link. It was a good discussion but I felt like that thread was really only scratching the surface on Tiers. Trying to identify a tier 1 deck list is probably really difficult because of the nature of LotR and the quest design but I feel like it is still a worthy excercise. For example, one of the identified Tier 1 decks from that thread was "Dwarves" with no other explanation as to hero choices, ally choices etc. This would lead people to assume that any deck with a bunch of dwarves is going to be Tier 1 but that simply is not the case. In fact, if you or someone at the table is not running Dain, I would say that Dwarves are not a Tier 1 archetype. What does a Tier 1 dwarf deck include. Which spheres of influence and then, which heroes from those spheres are going to work well together. What allies are we including, what events etc. This is what I am hoping to see from a discussion on Tiered Decklists but maybe it just isn't possible or worthwhile since this game is not competitive.
How do we decide on what tier a particular deck should be? Unlike in competitive LCGs or CCGs, the decks are that winning tournaments are clearly separated and identified from the rest. But in a cooperative game, like LOTR, players don't go through a similar testing gauntlet. Do we base the tiering on the number of players who says "yeah, these are tier 1", by popularity, by inclusion of powerful cards, by what?
A further complication is that there aren't really clear "success criteria" as to what counts as strong performance in terms of results. Is it important for a deck to be capable of beating most/all quests, or is it more important to win consistently?
For instance, which is stronger, hypothetically: a deck that beats 50% of quests 100% of the time, or a deck that beats 100% of quests 50% of the time?
There is also the further complication of scoring - is the ability of a deck to achieve low scores (i.e., essentially, to win quickly) relevant in assessing its strength?
There will be a variety of different views on these questions, I think, and therefore without consensus and agreement it is hard to speak of "tiers" in general.
This, of course, is arguably a strength of the game's solo/co-op nature: that players can set their own "success criteria" and play towards them.
What is/defines a "tier 1" deck? I think, I never heard of that term. What does that number count?
When reading the above answers it sounds like "good vs. not that good decks", which is complicated in LotR LCG. Just because many quests needs (or at least are easier with) specialized decks. While the first designed quests are more like general quests the later quests need more and more specialized deck builds to play along. Just my two cents.