Does anyone else remember the uproar when this card was first spoiled? Everyone wanted neutral card draw, but it seemed the general consensus was that this card was overpriced and too conditional.

So for those that have used it, have you changed your mind or do you still feel the same? Obviously, at Black Friday Dan used it to great effect. And I must admit, I recently put it in a deck, and found it so effective I was reducing some of my other card draw in the deck.

I can´t remember which side i originally supported. ;-) King´s landing could be a great card draw engine, but it´s more situational like e.g. the old Promo King´s landing. I mean you have to build for it, including shadow cards is one thing but finding the room for enough kings´landing location could be tough for some decks.

So i think afteral it´s okay.

I absolutley changed my mind after BF. i'm trying to incoporate it in all my decks - I went and picked up my third Secrets adn Spies friday just so i could get my third KL.

That being said - i'd still like more neutral draw in the environment. As KL becomes more popular - it will become less reliable by its very nature.

I'm sorry; the old promo King's Landing was situational ? Really? Back in the day, it was typical to play at least 1 (usually more) locations per round because there were few location resets and plot gold pretty well maxed out at 4. And there was location search at plot form. Promo King's Landing tended to be basic, not situational, for a couple of years.

Anyway, the new King's Landing is really good - although more situational than the old promo KL. The only thing that really makes it situational is the "more KL location" limitation. You have to make sure you have more. But in a Shadows deck, that's easy because of Twilight Market. In a Shadows deck, it's ridiculous. In a non-Shadows deck, using only, oh, Syrio and Silent Sister's, you still get pretty decent use out of it. And even better, if your opponent is using Shadows cards, they essentially bring things out of Shadows at the cost of giving you a card. I've had opponents postpone bringing cards out of Shadows because of that.

I'd be nervous with it as the only draw in my deck, but I depending on my gold curve, I put it in a lot of decks, Shadows or not.

Stag Lord said:

Stag Lord said:

Stag Lord, your thoughts, I believe, are an interesting and immediate adjustment to the metagame that many people (including myself) are making. I built my first post-Gencon deck two weeks ago and did not include Kings Landing. I had many shadows cards, so I decided to throw in KL and a few extra Kings Landing locations. It increased the draw magnificently. But like all metagame decisions, there are reaction consequences. And obviously as more people play decks with a ton of King's Landing locations, then King's Landing itself loses it's effectiveness since only one player will be able to use theirs at a time. It reminds me of Story event vs Story event decks from 3 years ago, but with a much more deck-building-friendly mechanic.

Old Ben said:

Probably my biggest beef with it is how some Houses namely Bara and Lanni have a near automatic leg up on using it since they have locations that are staples of most any deck built for them that have the King's Landing trait. It's easier for them to "build for it". With Bay of Ice, all Houses starts off on level ground (I guess you could say that certain Houses tend to run higher initiative plots, but that advantage is much more attenuated) and it's not the potential beast that King's Landing is.

In case anyone is interested, the previous discussion on King's Landing can be found here . Ironically, I contributed a pretty scathing review of King's Landing that seems pretty idiotic in hindsight. I also had some other bad calls, though to be fair, I expected quite a few more cards like Tunnels and Dragonpit to be released. Had there been more mechanics that keyed off cards in shadows, or at least one location for each house that provided a big incentive to keep cards in shadows, we would probably see more decks with 15+ shadows cards.

My (and others') reviews definitely underline how initial reactions can be way off. This said, King's Landing is expensive and more of a long-term investment, so it will likely be most effective in control builds with low gold curves. At least, that was my experience. (My v.1 Targ burn played it, but it was just too expensive to bring out, and I typically preferred a Goldcloaks.) And also, depending on the metagame, my own success could have turned out quite differently. (Though, again, there's really no reason to run a lot of King's Landing-traited locations unless you're running a shadows deck, so I felt fairly confident that the draw engine would work most games.)

I definitely agree with Stag though: We need more neutral or in-house draw options.

ktom said:

=

Old Ben said:

?!

Maybe i´m overreading a word here, but i think we are on the same bandwagon. ;-)

LetsGoRed said:

Yeah, I actually kind of agree. I wouldn't say it cost me the finals game at Black Friday necessarily, but there were two rounds that I couldn't draw off King's Landing b/c that was the only King's Landing-traited card I had out, while Paul had a Cersei's chambers on the table. (I eventually drew Dragonpit, which in this case served the dual purpose of giving me draw and burn.) Had Cersei's chambers not had the King's Landing trait, I probably would have drawn 4-5 more cards very early in the game, and that likely would have put me out ahead of Paul much earlier. In the end, Bara and Lanni just have an advantage...at least Lanni's other draw is more overall more efficient/faster, so chances are most Lanni decks won't play King's Landing. In any case, it's probably a good idea to run at least a minimal amount of location discard if you're running King's Landing. (I cut mine last minute and it worked out OK, but given the post-Black Friday reassessment of King's Landing, I'd definitely add it back in.)

Old Ben said:

Sorry, I read "it's more situational like e.g. the old Promo King's Landing" to mean that both versions are situational - "like" being a word that indicates similarity. My contention is that the new one is "more situational than e.g. the old Promo King's Landing" - "than" being a word that indicates a difference of degree.

I do not consider the old promo version to be situational. If your post was saying that is was, like the new version, we are in disagreement. We're certainly on the same page as far as the new one is concerned, though.

I also see the old King´s landing as a non situational card, that has been a standard card addition for ever deck.

Twn2dn said:

More evidence of Lannister's supremacy; they turn off draw that another House might use without hardly even trying.

It's good to be the king...

I have to admit, I was hoping it would stay a secret. I didn't think much of the card to begin with - 4 is a pretty hefty cost, and there is now decent location control out there.

However, I tried it out, and it has been really good.

I only use it in a Shadows deck, since I think building high initative decks and playing them well with the 0-gold location is actually more consistant for Stark, Bara, and especially GJ (in Targ I actually think that the recursion to hand/play stuff they have is enough unless you are going full shadows).

Recently, I actually took out GTM's for 3X KL's...crazy I know. Not sure if that is worth it yet, but 2+ draws on the first turn it is out is hot.