Dave ruined it. Im out again. )

While your return shone briefly, it shone brightly. I'll look back on it one day and say "good times".

Perhaps, a better response would have been:

Make a fun deck that is utterly broken to play against other totally open decks. Some of them are just ludicrous, then follow some of Dave's links to make some tourney legal decks. The idea is that tourney legal has no hope against open (broken) decks. I think you had a crazy story event deck that would destroy some of the current field. Welcome back.

I believe Miguel is tucker.

I don't check this enough. Anyway, down for the 28th. Thanks for the compliments on the decks, but the attachment one was my buddy, and the dominance one I can't take full credit for (half the same buddy). As for tourney-legal decks, my Martell deck is pretty darn close! Just need some supplementary events. Got a little bit of cash now that wedding season is over, so I'll probably start trying to legalize my decks a little more (particularly find those new versions of Sword and Torch). As for the tourney stuff, we can always just... run tourneys while we play, and not have prize support. That's if Wizard's doesn't work out. Also, we may wanna see what Warp 2's policy on tourneys is, because if it's like it was back in the day then the two stores practically function as different entities.

So, I forgot that my inlaws and immediate family were all going to be visiting on the same weekend. It kind of ruined my plans to play GOT today. I hope that nobody got left in the lurch on that note. Can we plan to play on the monday of the long weekend? I will try and hard confirm asap.

I too was absent on Sunday as anyone who ended up going will know. Not sure if Holiday Monday will work for me, but I won't be free for the next two weekends. After that though I can resume the biweekly games.

I am going to send out some texts to see if there is any interest for this monday. At this point there hasn't been any confirmation so I will probably be out as well. Next week is very poor for me so maybe we should start confirming for the 17-18th weekend.

Sorry for being away from the thread for so long. I'd be willing to play tomorrow, but I'd rather leave it until next weekend. I'm getting back into my classes, and the crippling left me away from school for 9 months, so it's a hard habbit to get back into. But is everyone game for next week? With enough notice, I should be able to get a couple in my playgroup for once, as well.

I'll try and be there this Sunday although if I make it, I probably won't be staying too long. It's been a busy last month on weekends and it's not over yet. Also I'm rocking the Robert Maester deck so make sure you either run it too, or tech against it. I hate the way it plays because it reminds me of Magic, one of the worst ccgs I've played, but it's good. Thematically it's also lame but so are many of the builds.

It's my Aunt and Uncles 50th wedding anniversary and there is a party I need to attend on Sunday, so I won't be able to make it out this weekend. (big surprise, I know.)

@Davy Black Fight: I know, eh? Magic, pfft. Playing resources and using said resources to play other cards. Ugh, Magic is the worst.

Fat Bob said:

Not for that reason, but more because of the whole race to get your win combo out before the opponent. Magic's resource mechanic is a pretty common one found in many ccgs to control the tempo of the game by gradually escalating the power level and number of cards playable the longer the game. Not to say that every MtG deck is based on completing some kind of ultra combo, but rather that at any given time in type 2 there are definitely a very small amount of top tier decks running clearly superior cards which are as a result, the most expensive and rare, so to encourage Thrones in a similar style of play, I think, is bad news for diversity which according to tourney reports over the last couple of years, has already been bad enough. But that's just my opinion.

To be fair, I did find a certain simple satisfaction in Magic when I did play, but that was with the caveat that I wasn't playing against anyone who was killing me with tourney competitive decks.

In regards to playing today: I won't be able to this weekend. This has been one of those weeks where nothing goes right, and as a result I've got some important errands to run today. I'll text some people when I'm done, if it's before 3, to see if anyone is still at Warp, but don't hold any breath on me showing. Though who knows, maybe I'm overestimating the amount of time my chores will take this morning! I will be available again next week finally, I'm fairly sure. Maybe I'll even have some new cards by next week, too.

As for Magic gotta agree. The uber-powerful cards can be one hit kills if you happen to get the right rare (my buddy runs a blue deck that has a card that changes all basic mana of one type to another type, for example; so if you run a 1-colour deck, you're ******).

Also, been cleaning my house this week. I found CCGs from a looooong way back that I forgot even existed (the non-FFG Warhammer 40k one and SimCity are two of my more unique finds). Dunno what that has to do with anything, but as fellow CCG fans I thought some people might get a kick out of it.

chaos28 said:

Crazy stuff, SimCity I've never heard of although I wouldn't think it'd be easy to make a competitive game from it. I remember the Warhammer one from way back though I never played it. I've played some over two dozens CCGs or collectible miniature games from when I was in junior high, so I know the thrill of uncovering some box of nearly forgotten cards.

Yeah the SimCity one is weird. You can play solo even. You build the city in the play area based on how many adjacent squares have connecting roadways, railways, and how much population they add. The thing is, cards can't overlap so if you run out of room to expand your city, the only choice is to build up (some cards are like, Farm 1, Farm 2, Farm 3 etc, like how the game builds up locations). Other cards like politicians and disasters can be used to attack opponents. I kind of wish I could find more cards for this game actually.

Not totally sure about this yet, but i know the 16th is terrible for thrones. How about the following week? If there is interest I will investigate being free. Also, I have been playing magic and yugioh again mostly because the kids play it at work. I am intrigued with how much magic now resembles GOT. Yugioh is still a terrible game.

I am worried about the next set of GOT being so focused on melee. The issues with the maester attachment I think get ballanced by errata and the fact that each expansion has introduced a super powerful archetype, but non of the archetypes are rotated out. Wildling/nightswatch is still powerful from last year. Maester is just powerful right now.

Four things:

1. The weekend of the 23rd works for me.

2. I'm a little apprehensive about the melee focus as well, but the non-melee oriented cards previewed have been good, so I'll just be throwing ninety percent of each chapter pack or more in a box never to be used, much as I do now.

3. I also have to say that you're on crack, because unless MtG completely changed over the last year or so, it still resembles Yugioh more than Thrones. I've played both of them at one point albeit never collecting Yugioh, and found them mechanically to be very similar. Just look at the objectives as well as the turn structure. The only thing they don't have in common is the resource mechanic where MtG is better by pacing the game.

4. I have hated that some cycles have introduced powerful archetypes that dominate the field instead of requiring them to be built up in subsequent cycles. Maesters and NW Wildling are the worst offenders, but the seasons cycle and Brotherhood to a lesser extent are guilty. I think for that reason, this next cycle will be better barring some kind of agenda that is designed for melee and will be an auto-include because it will be so much more useful in multi than running another agenda. Not that I should care since I don't really like melee.

In response to being on crack, I was talking about how elements like vigilant and ambush have made their way into magic. Almost word for word. Now i am not sure how these ideas were started, but it has added a Got flavour to the game. You are correct about the turn structure being similar to yugioh. Initially, my thought was how powerful GOT was in terms of influencing other games. I hope that was the way it went and not the other way around. My dislike for both magic and yugioh is based on the annoying simplicity of both games. Who ever brings the correct weapon to the battle and has the best draw wins quite immediately. GOT has much more of a sophisticated card base for resource management and card types. Also the variability of play is greater in GOT. In yugioh there is only ever two top tier deck types for year, the dominant one and the dominant trump. In Magic, it seems that you play a pretty basic strategy of combo build until you think you can pull it off and win the game. Most games only take about five or six turns that move quite fast. I am not a competitive player but i imagine that top tier decks should be able to win on turn three or four. That has always been possible in GOT but never easy or common in the long term competitive field. Also, turn three or four is a completely different experience in GOT.

Good point about the the next set, so that makes it one point for you and two for me. I win again, Tucker!

Hoser said:

Okay, fair enough, you're not on crack. This time.

But yeah I agree on the keyword thing, which is something MtG adds and removes all the time. How many different keywords have existed as new mechanics in that game? But yeah that was my issue with the game as well, the simplicity. There really is a focus more on packing the right cards and drawing them than making tactical decisions since the right combo wins the game more than whatever choices to attack and when.

I think MtG still has the market cornered when it comes to lending out concepts in card game design, since you can find many common elements in most ccgs, and are probably responsible for the foundation in almost all ccgs to some extent, but certain companies like FFG or AEG took them and blended them with board game elements to create better systems.

Again though, if you just want something to pick up and play quickly while watching something in the background it's great, but if I am in the mood for gaming, I need something more substantial. MtG is like the Twitter of card games.

In other news I hope the new CP hits soon because I've been jonesin' for more thrones cards but Maesters bored me to no end thematically. As a result I bought like two of them and hated that I did just to get the combined three cards that fit my decks.

You guys have fun trolling each other.

Thanks Captain Obvious.

1. When I talk to people about game of thrones, the one thing that gets stuck in their craw is the fact that all players get all cards. This seems to bother them mostly because of the economic business model nature of the game. They feel that the game can't survive because people aren't forced to by massive amounts of cards they will never use. Here is my most common reply:

Game of thrones is not intended for children. It is intended for a mature audience that has grown tired of searching/resourcing expensive and hard to find cards. The gaming experience ends up being exactly the same for high level players, but casual players don't have to feel like 'he with the biggest wallet wins'. Also, there is really only room in the market for one or two of these kinds of ultra secret invisible rare kinds of games. Game of thrones lives in a moderate in between place between table top and ccg.

2. How do decks become varied if everybody has the same cards. Here is my most common reply:

Most high level players show up at Magic and Yugioh tournaments with virtually the same deck. If you look at tourney reports from other games, I am a super nerd, you find that there is really only one or two dominant archetypes that make the top eight. There were three or four in the GOT world championship joust in 2010. Message boards and decklist posting does more to homogenize decks that game format ever will. Top level players think and act a certain way. A small group of people will always have a similar thought process that turns them into tourney winning deck builders.

3. FatBoob: I'm not sure what trolling is but it sounds like somebody that doesn't play a game that shows up on boards occasionally to sarcastically comment to little or no effect. I take back the last points allottment and rescore it this way. 1 point for me, 1 point for yourmom, and zero points for tucker.

4. What about the strange lannister card in the last maester pack that gets 10 strength once per game. i have to use this card somehow!

You're right. I was wrong to swagger in here and comment on your MtG hate on. I apologize.

It's okay Swags, it's okay.

I have no problem with the random business model. It's akin to gambling and so provides me with a minor thrill, a part of the experience which a lot of people share. There was actually a feature interview with someone from AEG about why the "rolling thunder" distribution model failed and it related to consumer voting dollars shooting down the idea of non-rarity schemes in semi-fixed packs while supporting rarity schemes in a more standard ccg model.

This said, I think my hate on as it were, for MtG, really is that unless you are super lucky, the cost of optimizing a competitive deck is more than any other ccg. Case in point, I played blue and black when I played. Right now, if I were trying to get the new Liliana from the most recent expansion, I could a) chance a $120+ box and maybe get one, plus the non-mythic basic cards I need, or b) go straight to ebay and cough up $35-50 for up to four copies. That seems wrong to me, but I suppose if I win with the deck at a large enough event, I can earn money and more free product so in a way the argument can be made that it's an investment. Not to say that this card would be essential to a winning deck... but mythic rares that tend to pop up in decklists are that much.

Has the economy and this day and age changed how people might respond to rolling thunder? Maybe, but I doubt it since the success of MtG and Yugioh is blatant. Thrones simply attracts a different crowd, especially since, as reading new player threads on the general discussion can atest, many new players are Ice and Fire fanboys who play because they liked the books, not because they are into card games.

For some positive opinion though, I admire Wizards's for what they've done with Magic. They made a solid product, marketed it properly, and are doing well. It's just the obvious disparity with what makes a good rare and a bad rare which sets the value from $35+ to $2 for a playset respectively since demand is high, and secondary market sellers have to earn back the cost of a box plus profit. Would I be willing to pay $200 or more for a competitive deck? Yes but I'd have to either feel the game is substantial enough to satisfy my gaming time since it is my recreation money, or feel confident enough that I could win that money back. In the end I didn't feel either for the game, but that's not to say that I can't understand why it's appealing. Quite the opposite, I can very easily see why it's so popular.

In response to Fatbob, I don't think that we are hating Mtg as much as we are discussing the nature of gaming. On my way to work today I was trying to put my finger on the resource base/pacing of GOT. I am not sure of this one, but I think that the plot card cycle limits claim clearly to 1 or 2 in most cases. This means that i can usually anticipate how much power I will lose on any given turn. Alternately, I can't lose power if I don't have it. This controls the speed of the game to a certain extent and allows for a more reasonable play pace. Rather than hate on another game, this is why the GOT is a good game.

The claim on plots contributes, but things like renown and the cost for rush deck characters contradict limitations that would be set. I think the base is the five gold flop. It plus the gold on plots sets the resource tempo for the game; where non-turn based resource mechanics differ is that the player is free to spend their build in many different ways instead of being restricted to only being able to afford weaker cards early in the game, with the potential to play stronger individual cards the longer a game progresses.

I definitely think that turn limitations on resourcing reduces variety since it's easier to optimize what one would ideally need to see and play every turn since the available resources are more or less projected barring horrible resource screw.

But blah blah blah, we'll talk more on ccgs this weekend maybe. Games Sunday?