I think the problem is that with such low production speed and such low hero count per pack/box, they just physically unable to cover all bases

... if new quests are designed around the assumption that low-starting threat, cheap readying/action advantage, and powerful location control are all available, then I am basically handicapping myself not to at least consider these cards for the harder quests.

I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, though. I'll admit to still working my way through early Ringmaker, so maybe the new cycle is so awful you can't use anything but the best... but while the assumption/knowledge of these cards is definitely active, I think we see it more in encounter effects than overall difficulty. There are any number of examples of effects that limit staging progress, or punish you for it. IMHO the reactions take the form of "Asfaloth is very good, so limit his ability to function" rather than "Asfaloth is very good, so we're going to design every scenario so you fail without it".

**** dude, do you always come out attacking? So what if I net deck to play the game? I don't have time to build my own decks so I look online. I understand there are limitations to that aspect of play, and I take that into account (i.e. ignoring spirit glorfy). I do what I can with my limited time, and for me, that time is better spent actually playing the game. And I'm not the only one here who is claiming the card is overpowered, overused, a crutch, etc. I feel like I'm being attacked for stating an opinion. Seriously, wtf?

I never said anything against you for netdecking. Netdecking is fine. But "I hate this card and people need to stop using it in the decks I copy" is a pretty ****** attitude. The nice thing about a co-op game is that you don't have to deal with what anyone else chooses to play. You not wanting to make your own decks doesn't change that.

So again: Netdecking, fine. Crying at people for building their decks with a card you don't want, not so fine.

Dude, stop putting words into my ****ing mouth. I think he should be nerfed, and yes, even banned, but that doesn't mean I think ill of anyone who uses him or has a different opinion on the card. Not once did I say people who build decks with him should stop using him. I choose not to use him. Simple as that. Are you telling me I can't play the way I want because I'm not using one card? Get off it!

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Your original post was a little bit harsh as I have posted decks in the deckbuilding strategy forum with Spirit Glorfindel as part of the strategy for people to use and to think that they were annoying to you is upsetting. There was a popular saying during the Heirs of Numenor cycle that friends don't let friends play Outlands. I say why not, you bought the cards play with whatever you want. About his current power level, at one point he was probably the best hero in the game but recently has been eclipsed, Galadriel, Erestor and Gandalf are all superior to Spirit Glorfindel IMO so I do not welcome any sort of ban or Errata. Lastly, this game is all about the thematic experience of questing through middle earth, there are no boring heroes only boring quests.

Sorry you took offense to that. My initial post wasn't to insult those who build decks with him. Players who use him is fine. I don't care if the guy across the table from me uses him. Their game, their preference, their fun. To me, he is OP and not fun to use so I don't use him. The guy is here to stay, I get that but it doesn't mean I have to use him.

I think he should be nerfed, and yes, even banned.... Not once did I say people who build decks with him should stop using him.

These two statements are at odds. Suggesting a card should be banned is pretty directly saying people shouldn't be able to use it. I'm really not trying to put words in your mouth here, because your own are making the point for me just fine.

My initial post wasn't to insult those who build decks with him.

And yet several people did take it as explicitly insulting, so at some point the problem is with the author rather than the listeners.

For what it’s worth, I think Glorfindel is very powerful. He’s not the strongest hero in the game by any means but he’s at least near that power level and unlike many of those other very powerful heroes he requires very little deck-space (6 cards—3x Asfaloth and 3x Light of Valinor) and setup to begin seeing that power shape the board. But it’s not really his relative power or ease of setup that makes him so popular—it’s the fact that his 7 card set can be slipped into almost ANY deck including some spirit and lore (or a Song of Wisdom) and almost universally make that deck better without drawing any significant attention away from whatever else that deck is trying to do.

He’s just so easy. And because of that, he’s everywhere. And I really do get why that annoys people. His ubiquity makes him a nightmare second only to Gandalf when trying to coordinate a game with multiple players constructing decks; a problem that only gets worse when trying to get a pickup game going where players may not have had a chance to coordinate deck construction.

And worse, his very common inclusion DOES shape the meta. And no, that doesn’t matter in the same way it would in a traditional competitive game. But his prevalence does affect the way the game devs design the quests. If 6/10 players are playing Spirit Glorfindel they have to make scenarios challenging for those players…even if that makes the brutal for other less powerful archetypes. People can always custom-build decks for the scenarios of course to get around this problem but many people (myself included here) hate that philosophy in deck-construction. Easy Mode is of course always an option but, as I said in my previous post, it’s hardly an appealing one.

But, for all that, I still think Glorfindel and the other “easy” combos and traits (and I would include Outlands here too) are necessary for this game. As a coop game, we cannot expect every player in a given game to be the same skill level and these easy to use, relatively powerful cards and sets of cards form a very necessary equalizer to allow less skilled players to play along with more skilled players without stripping down the quests the way Easy Mode does or dragging the other players down.

Ultimately I think it is more complicated than just: “if you don’t like him, don’t play him.” Glorfindel, and cards like him, do effect the game. I get the hate. But without those types of cards a lot of scenarios would simply be unbeatable when playing with less skilled players. Maybe that’s a deeper design issue with the game that needs to be addressed. Maybe the game always should have come out of the box with each quest having multiple difficulties and a better way of scaling those. Or maybe we as players need to self-police ourselves and just say “it’s okay to not use all the best cards and combos in every deck” so that the devs can design quests at a somewhat gentler difficulty that we can all enjoy and still be challenged by.

I don’t know the right answer but I think it’s a tough design issue that’s deeper than just Glorfindel (or Steward of Gondor, or Dain, or UC, or Elrond, or old Ziggy, etc, etc, etc).

I agree with JonofPDX, in that Asfaloth, combined with Sp Glorfindel fundamentally altered the way the designers make the quests. It is impossible to dispute that locations have drastically changed in the number of quest points on them pre-Asfaloth and post-Asfaloth. Each quest the designers make they have to account for if Asfaloth is in play, this means that if the players don't use Asfaloth, they are at a slight disadvantage. Others are right when they say that Sp Glorfindel is probably the best spirit hero, and until Galadriel was almost irreplaceable, for solo players splashing spirit. About a year ago I stopped using Glorfy just because I used him in basically every quest. Playing all the NM quests without him can sometimes be difficult and I have been tempted a few times, but I have resisted and managed with careful deck construction. I have no gripe with people that do use him, but I believe he fundamentally altered the game for the worse since his appearance, and only with the introduction of Cirdan, Arwen, and Galadriel, will he finally diminish in value.

I think he should be nerfed, and yes, even banned.... Not once did I say people who build decks with him should stop using him.

These two statements are at odds. Suggesting a card should be banned is pretty directly saying people shouldn't be able to use it. I'm really not trying to put words in your mouth here, because your own are making the point for me just fine.

My initial post wasn't to insult those who build decks with him.

And yet several people did take it as explicitly insulting, so at some point the problem is with the author rather than the listeners.

I took issue with you claiming this "I hate this card and people need to stop using it in the decks I copy". Just because I dislike the card, doesn't mean everyone needs to stop using the card for my sake so I can have a bevy of decks to choose from. That's a pretty ****ed up leap of logic and spin tactic there all based on my opinion for a ban.

Yes, my evil plan is to get the card banned so everyone is forced to build decks without him just for me. I'm the player people should cater to, you know?

And yes, I can see how some people might take offense to my initial post. I could have worded it better. For that I apologize.

I agree with JonofPDX, in that Asfaloth, combined with Sp Glorfindel fundamentally altered the way the designers make the quests. It is impossible to dispute that locations have drastically changed in the number of quest points on them pre-Asfaloth and post-Asfaloth. Each quest the designers make they have to account for if Asfaloth is in play, this means that if the players don't use Asfaloth, they are at a slight disadvantage. Others are right when they say that Sp Glorfindel is probably the best spirit hero, and until Galadriel was almost irreplaceable, for solo players splashing spirit. About a year ago I stopped using Glorfy just because I used him in basically every quest. Playing all the NM quests without him can sometimes be difficult and I have been tempted a few times, but I have resisted and managed with careful deck construction. I have no gripe with people that do use him, but I believe he fundamentally altered the game for the worse since his appearance, and only with the introduction of Cirdan, Arwen, and Galadriel, will he finally diminish in value.

Agree 100% that Glorfindel will reduce in value to better players once those other cards begin to disperse in the cardpool. They all require a little more skill than Glorfindel, but potentially offer some very interesting rewards as well (not least of which will be the ability to play the Glorfindel Ally when he arrives). And that will leave Glorfindel hopefully open to players that need a little bit of an easier play-experience.

We will still see him used a lot, though, until we see some more decent location control to at least somewhat replace Asfaloth. And some more low threat heroes with decent stats that don't require a very specific deck build (I'm looking at you, Mirlonde).

You know--all of this reminds me of when Ziggy first released(around the same time as Glorfindel). I remember one of the articles from the devs around that time straight up explained how to break the game with Ziggy and the devs were all like: "okay, have fun!"

I really do think that at that time they just thought that if a card or combo was so good that it was making the game easy, people just wouldn't use it if they didn't want to--that players would self-regulate their own difficulty in their player decks. Then there was this huge backlash from the community and I think it scared them a bit. That's when the quests took a sharp up-turn in difficulty to balance out some of the very powerful cards we got in the Dwarrodelf cycle and I think the player cards have backed off a bit in power overall (with some obvious exceptions). But even the most powerful combos now seem to require a bit more setup than the powerful combos back then.

They desperately need to make some cards that can replace Asfaloth in decks. If they did I would INSTANTLY stop using Glorfindel. If they don't I'm stuck with him forever. Not losing every however many games to location lock, no thank you.

I'm not talking stuff like Expert Trackers or Distant Stars, proper repeatable location control on an ally or attachment that isn't just far inferior to Asfaloth.

For example, a Leadership Gondor hero with a 7 or 8 threat cost and 2 willpower would be amazing. It would allow for much more interesting Gondor builds. As it is, I either include Balin as one of my heroes or have a mediocre but thematic deck with a starting threat in the 34 or 36 range. Same thing for Spirit Rohan where I can go with Dunhere as my third hero - who might fit thematically but makes no sense strategically - or I splash Galadriel/Glorfindel/Eleanor etc. so that my starting threat is not insane and the deck can actually function.

I want to give you a big bear hug.

They desperately need to make some cards that can replace Asfaloth in decks. If they did I would INSTANTLY stop using Glorfindel. If they don't I'm stuck with him forever. Not losing every however many games to location lock, no thank you.

Arod works, but obviously is only 1 progress instead of 2. I don't think we'll ever see a location control card with the same level of power as Asafaloth -- regular action with no conditions, just slap it on and off you go. But I do think we'll see a host of other cards more like Arod, conditional and less progress per use.

Actually Steed of Imladris is a really great location control card, almost as good as Asfaloth but since it can only work on the active location it is just not as flexible.

yeah its really nowhere near as good man. You have to discard a card EACH time and it only targets the active location.
good card for sure but it is not almost as good as Asfaloth. Asfaloth is on a whole level of its own compared to anything else that targets locations.

edit: Steed can also only be activated upon committing to the quest whereas Asfaloth is an action you can use at ANY time, after questing, during combat, during the planning phase whatever. This can be amazing to get rid of a detrimental location at a time you would not normally be able to. Also steed has restricted, Asfaloth does not.

They desperately need to make some cards that can replace Asfaloth in decks. If they did I would INSTANTLY stop using Glorfindel. If they don't I'm stuck with him forever. Not losing every however many games to location lock, no thank you.

Arod works, but obviously is only 1 progress instead of 2. I don't think we'll ever see a location control card with the same level of power as Asafaloth -- regular action with no conditions, just slap it on and off you go. But I do think we'll see a host of other cards more like Arod, conditional and less progress per use.

Yeah I agree that we will probably only see similar cards to Arod or the Steed which are definitely steps in the right direction but we need a couple of these cards all at once not stretched out across another 2 or 3 cycles and perhaps a little better and less situational than these two but not quite as good as Asfaloth.

I just really want to not be so reliant on Asfaloth to be honest and I know plenty of people don't use him and get by just fine without but I personally just cannot deal with location lock and I already encounter it from time to time even with Asfaloth so to have it happen even more often I simply cannot allow. The worst is when you have awesome cards, have played well and just lose because almost only locations appear and you simply cannot get through them quickly enough and just get stuck and lose. Easily the least fun way to lose..

I'm afraid if they release something similar to Asfaloth, it would have to be extremely restricted to prevent players from abusing both it and Asfaloth together.

I'm afraid if they release something similar to Asfaloth, it would have to be extremely restricted to prevent players from abusing both it and Asfaloth together.

True.

Maybe another version of Asfaloth? In the Spirit sphere, so it is easier to use with Glorfindel without lore, but a more restricted card.

Also, I like to use Asfaloth on other heroes; not just Glorfindel. That way it's a still a good card, but not as extreme as it is on Glorfindel.

I'm afraid if they release something similar to Asfaloth, it would have to be extremely restricted to prevent players from abusing both it and Asfaloth together.

Very True....

How about a new version of Asfaloth himself to prevent using both?

Asfaloth

Leadership

Cost 3

Attach to a Noldor or Silvan hero.

Asfaloth costs 1 less if being attached to Glorfindel.

Action: Exhaust Asfaloth to place 2 progress tokens on any location.

Obviously just being silly

*Asfaloth (Lore)

Cost: 2

Mount.

Attach to a Noldor or Silvan hero. Restricted.

Limit 1 Mount per character.

Reduce the cost to play Asfaloth on Glorfindel by 1.

Response: After attached hero commits to a quest, exhaust Asfaloth to place 2 progress on any location.

My "perfect" version of Asfaloth. Still very strong and potent (not as strong as original, though). Is equally good on any hero, regardless of his name, but still cheaper for Glorfindel. And most important: provides plenty of room for the future potential progress placer cards.

The "Resticted"-Keyword and the limitation "Limit 1 Mount per character" should apply to all Mounts currently in the game and for the future.

Or.. do you remember Eomer above Firefoot and a Rohan Warhorse?

It even makes more thematic sense for Asfa to be just as good at progress for non-Glorfindel characters, because even when attached to Frodo it bore him away at a speed even the black steeds of the Enemy could not rival.

The "Resticted"-Keyword and the limitation "Limit 1 Mount per character" should apply to all Mounts currently in the game and for the future.

Or.. do you remember Eomer above Firefoot and a Rohan Warhorse?

As I recently mentioned in a different thread, it is theoretically possible to have a hero with 10 mounts. Several of them would be completely redundant, but you could do it if you chose.

Let me preface this by saying that I think the reason so many people rely on Glorfindel is because of Asfaloth. I also still think he would get a lot of use if Asfaloth did not exist simply due to his low threat and access to LoV, however people would not rely on him.

I think making cards that are similar to Asfaloth is not exactly the right way to go. They need to make something different than Asfaloth, but fulfills the same role of helping you clear locations more quickly. For example, you could make an ally or an attachment that exhausts and allows you to travel to a second location [i understand that there would need to be some rules considerations in this respect - especially in scenarios that have "x" based effects where x is the value of something on the active location. I also think this should only be allowed to trigger once per round, no matter how many of such a card was in play]. This would assist with location lock which makes people rely on Asfaloth (and, as a result, Glorfindel).

Now, two things about the theoretical attachment/ally that would allow travel to two locations...These two questions need to be considered when attempting to make cards that would alleviate the need for Asfaloth...

1. Does it make the players less reliant on Glorfindel/Asfaloth?

Personally, I think that the clear answer here is yes. Now, instead of relying on Asfaloth to assist with clearing locations, you can simply travel to two locations and clear them with high willpower. The reason people feel like they "have" to use Glorfindel/Asfaloth is because people like making all-purpose decks and all-purpose decks have to have a way of reliably dealing with locations otherwise certain scenarios will punish you since simply outquesting them is not enough because of certain forced effects.

2. Would it be too powerful in conjunction with Asfaloth?

I am not sure it would be too powerful, but I honestly think this would make people use Glorfindel less. In the event that they wanted it to combo less effectively with Asfaloth, it could also have the text along the lines of "While this card is in play, progress from player card effects cannot be placed on locations in the staging area". Granted, this text may need to be reworded to do precisely what is intended, but I think you get the gist of what I'm trying to say.

Right now, the two most effective methods for clearing locations are Asfaloth and Northern Tracker (especially the latter in 3+ player games). Legolas is also nice in this respect.

In my opinion, if you take away the reliance on Glorfindel/Asfaloth, you will see him less even though he will still remain a top-tier hero.

Edit: I also think my theoretical card may not be the perfect solution as it may be too strong, in general, but I definitely think the route that needs to be taken is to give the players other ways of dealing with location lock that may not require placement of progress.

They desperately need to make some cards that can replace Asfaloth in decks. If they did I would INSTANTLY stop using Glorfindel. If they don't I'm stuck with him forever. Not losing every however many games to location lock, no thank you.

Arod works, but obviously is only 1 progress instead of 2. I don't think we'll ever see a location control card with the same level of power as Asafaloth -- regular action with no conditions, just slap it on and off you go. But I do think we'll see a host of other cards more like Arod, conditional and less progress per use.

This. ^

FFG has realized that player (understandably) want to use the best available cards and have become way more cautious about making cards at Asfaloths power-level without a lot more setup and/or drawback.

That said, I wish Arod was just a little better so that it could stand toe-to-toe w/ Asfaloth. Maybe something like: "After attached character destroys an enemy, exhaust Arod to place one progress on a location OR ready attached character." Or add a progress to the quest. Or something--just an option so there is a reason to play it instead of Asfaloth, even though it is more restrictive.

Actually Steed of Imladris is a really great location control card, almost as good as Asfaloth but since it can only work on the active location it is just not as flexible.

Yes. The problem is that the designers are adding terrible travel costs to so many locations in the recent quests. Even with 3 West Road Travellers in my Spirit decks it is a real issue in 4 player games. Thror's Map is going to go back into these decks, but even with the the Map and the Steed you can still easily fill the staging area with locations when you are revealing ~6 cards per quest phase. There is also the issue of locations with negative effects while they are active - the map does not solve this, and since many of these locations have 5-6 quest points, the Steed alone won't solve them either. Targeted location control is so powerful because you never have to travel or deal with active location effects, and you can trigger it after staging. I agree with others that we will never again see a location control card approaching the power of Asfaloth on Glorfindel.

I'd like to see attachments similar to the ranger traps. Only that they work with locations.