I guess Stahleck will be the last big tournament using cards from ITE. But what about the tournaments 2010? Will your metas play a "Standard" format using cards from 5KE and LCG or will all of you completely switch to LCG? If you keep 5KE cards in your meta how long do you want them to stay? Until summer 2010 what would be like normal rotation or will you keep them longer cause they interact rather good with the first two CP cycles? I must confess I am a bit biased on this topic since I invested in 5KE cards over the past year and just waited for ITE to rotate out so I would have a very competitive card pool after this point of time.

I really hope that works out for you and your meta. I haven't heard much about the continuation of Standard once the Martell expansion hits, It seems most of the Standard holdouts are coming around to LCG. Our meta prettty much splits with the new guys playing LCG and the old time players playing mostly Legacy or straight Classic. If you guys do go with Standard, I would be interested in seeing what the play environment was like(Strong houses, strategies, etc.) Also, would you guys keep the erratas and bans from LCG? We are thinking about playing LCG without the bans experimentally.

I'd like to write my little opinion, here.

With all due respect to EACH PLAYER in the world, I think playing standard is a non-sense. I KNOW that everyone's free to play whatever he wants, but we're talkin' about a DIFFERENT game and even if some months ago someone negated this issue, now it's a FACT.

The game has changed a lot. Worlds are held in LCG format, new players come for the LCG format (before the LCG era we had problems in recruiting players...Now I recruited 5 players in a week and more are to come all over the world, especially now, with a movie that's coming, a videogame in production and so on).

The LCG environment, now, is ready to offer a great and serious play experience, with lots of possibilities, more balancing is coming and new cards each month.

I UNDERSTAND each of the points made to me about this and I understand who owns lots of old cards and doesn't want just to see them wasted (I own old cards to, but I'll play them just in the classic Highlander or for occasional thematic tournaments)...But that's what happened and EVEN if everyone's free, as I've already said, who plays standard is playing a dead game, that's simply gone and changed.

In Italy we have many players who quit the game for the format change...I understand the point...But now the game is reborned, with a lot of depth.

I love THE game and I like to follow its course. Now, I could change my mind in the future, but now I'm pretty sure about the choice I made and I reccomend it to everyone.

IMHO.

Hi there, in behalf of Czech meta I have to say that we still play Standart (ITE+) and only because if we have had switched to LCG we would have lose half of our meta, that is currently struggling with numbers anyway. On the last big tournament was only 10 players from the whole country and I was the only representative of the second biggest city in CZ. We lost some players due to the switch to LCG and gain few new, that bought some 5KE cards or we lended them some so they can play with us. But there are some new players that would like to start the game but everything is a little more expansive here due to the high shipping costs. Each CP costs us at least 13$ and we have discount as league players. So it is hard for them to even start playing LCG so we are thinking to switch to LCG.

So the NW plan is keep the Standart alive for few more month and when there is a solid LCG card base we will switch completely from CCG to LCG, rotating out ITE and 5KE at the same time. This will help to the new players so they can be more competitive. But so far 90% of our meta is CCG oriented. We will have to see what the new Martell expansion brings and which way is going the new set of CP go, but still there are few thing missing in LCG. 1. Attachment control for all houses, 2. basic resources (some +2 gold locations), 3. some more plots (traited or not). If the Martell expansion will fix all of these I think it will be time ot become LCG only comunity.

But we most certainly look forward to play Standart in Stahleck, if the time and money let us

You see some "bugs" in the LCG because you try to apply your CCG experience on the LCG environment and it's an error IMHO.

In a LCG ONLY vision of the game (as it is), nothing is missing. You'll find something missing just comparing with the past, but remember, that the past is not considered part of game design anymore.

I'M NOT ARGUING the fact that you play Standard. You can do whatever you want.

But I don't like the fact that "old players" go on saying that LCG is lacking on something while it's a lie, if you consider LCG as it is, and that's you should do.

When a format changes, the whole game changes with it.

DB_Cooper said:

Well, its not a lie. Most of the time when people who played the CCG are saying that the LCG is lacking or missing something they don't really mean its missing a 5 Kings Ser Davos Seaworth. they mean its missing something as in the game mechinics are lacking or just not fully realized. Yes it is a 'new' game, but it was 'canabilized' from old parts. As such things were costed, triggered, or impacted on the game based on the old game.

Look at plot, king/queen/kingdom traits as an example. there were a lot of things that keyyed off of those and they were lacking. It wasn't that the LCG needed to have those effects its that those effects were not even half realized and are now closer to being fully realized.

another example is event cancel. While seeing Paper shield come back would have been nice for CCG players, the event cancel that we got is new/unique to LCG and fine because it fills the game mechanic that was lacking. Events were dominate in LCG before Hand's judgment. A seductive promise wrecked someone and since you knew it couldn't be canceled you had no problem over committing to the win by 4. Now that it can be canceled you less likely to overcomit to the win by 4 if there is a gold lying around and the win by 4 is now a real cost as opposed to a token cost.

In the most recent cries for things missing you have general/nuetral attachment control. this is because of lot of attachments are costed wit5h their vunerablility in mind. 1 gold to turn off a text box is not a big commitment for such a strong effect. 2 Gold to constiently kneel a character is not as well. 1 gold for 1-3 of the following; 2 STR, Stealth, and/or Renown is nothing. This is because attachments have always been doubly discardable, through character control and attachment control. Instead of a host of errats it would be easier to reintroduce attachment control into LCG. Now the power level does not have to be on par with 5 Kings and can be more of what it was in westeros or an earlier incarnation of the game, but it is still needed.

DB_Cooper said:

In my opinion, there is both truth and misconception in this.

On the one hand, DB is entirely correct. If you draw the line between the 5KE set and the Clash of Arms CP cycle, the LCG card pool offers quite a bit to play with, and a very complete and enjoyable play experience at that. The trick, as he points out, is to draw that line in your head as well as in the card pool. If you think only about the LCG cards and how that has revamped the Houses and their strategies, you can have a lot of fun, competitive or otherwise, with AGoT. The things that made it fun when it was a CCG are still there in the LCG.

But I disagree that when the format changes, the whole game changes with it. In fact, one of the issues is that FFG has largely been telling the old CCG community that other than the distribution strategy, the game has not changed significantly - and from the time you sit down at the table across from an opponent, that's largely true. The game rules are almost exactly the same (the only exception being the gold pool concept, which could have happened for a new CCG block, anyway).

So it is not a lie from the "old" CCG players that the LCG is lacking. True, they have not drawn the line in their minds permanently separating the CCG from the LCG as a completely different game - and this would help their transition. But they haven't really been encouraged to, conceptually, by FFG. The LCG is largely touted as an evolution of the CCG, not a replacement of it. So, since there are many strategies, mechanics and styles of play that are not well supported in the LCG (whether because of a change in development philosophy or a "smaller" card pool), it feels like there is something lacking for those who lived in the CCG.

Here's my analogy. Say that I had been driving a Ferrari for the last 6 years. Great car. I love it. Then, someone takes away my Ferrari and gives me some sort of a Mini with a Ferrari logo on it, telling me that this, too, is a Ferrari. The Mini might also be a great car. It may have all the same general features, get me where I want to go and be a lot of fun to drive. But the experience of driving it, regardless of how good that experience may be intrinsically, will not be the same as my old Ferrari. Someone who never drove my Ferrari will probably not understand why I can't just let it go and enjoy the Mini, but to tell me to forget the old experience and stop making the comparison, especially while the Ferrari logo is right there on the car, doesn't help, either.

Of course, I would not be helping matters, either, if I told everyone within earshot - repeatedly, loudly and with much malice - that no matter how much they like that Mini, they aren't really driving a Ferrari.

Points are valid on both sides. The experience of LCG is different from the experience of CCG. Stop expecting them to be the same. But by the same token, recognize that the game is still treated the same.

Now, all that said, I think the play format of AGoT (LCG, "informal Standard" or Legacy) is a wholly uninteresting one. Without an organized play program to drive a consistent format between play groups, it is a completely moot topic to my ears.

I agree with Lars when he says that when the old players say the they are missing something i means that some game mechanic is strong and you cant do pretty much enything about it.

Now it is mostly the attachment control. As Lars said some examples i will add one more. Imagine that your opponent has a Core Renly with Lightbringer on him. He is almost unkillable and there isnt a lot you can do about it. Unless you would discard the attachment, which you cant unless you are Targ right now.

Also an other example is Valar, tell me what can you do about it as Lannister for exapmle? Very little, so you put your big chars out and they are killed just like that with one plot. Outfox would help you balance this.

I always try to change my mind if I see the "shadow" of a mistake or just to re-think about my opinions and that's what I did, right now.

I made a couple of errors in my analysis, but in the end, I guess we're agree in some points.

Thanks to KTOM that helped me to explain a "complicated" concept that was "in shadows" (to use game terms) behind my im-perfect english.

And I take this chance to say "Excuse me if my previous posts seemed to be offensive. They didn't. I just have some problems to explain my opinions and sometimes I have to use simple sentences...And the "simplify" process becomes a nightmare, especially in a forum, where you cannot see my face ;-)

I used the word LIE just to be effective, not offensive.

That said...

I love LCG cause it's a great and ever growing format. I like the whole environment, even if I made some "design-flaws-spot" in a recent thread about LCG-Houses and basic mechanics.

I DO notice the fact that there's something missing, if we see it as Lars, Ktom and the others do (The Ferrari example is perfect, IMHO)...But I was just trying to say to old players to move one with the game, IF THEY WANT.

They can tell me: "Hey noob, shut da f...k up!", but I can say "Try this mini. It has confortable leather seats ").

Peace

DB