1 hour ago, Ser Nakata said:

Well, they could release Deluxe boxes not around one Faction, but around a big event in the timeline.

They could-- and it would probably be better if they did-- but I am afraid I have seen indication that they have already stated that such boxes will be faction-oriented.

4 hours ago, Ser Nakata said:

Well, they could release Deluxe boxes not around one Faction, but around a big event in the timeline.

They could, but precedent suggests faction-based boxes.

I think the issue really is mostly only a problem for the very first deluxe box...when the card pool is very small, nearly doubling the cards for one faction gives them a huge advantage over all the others. Once the card set has a few expansions and is more robust, bumping a single factions card pool by 20% or less isn't nearly as big a deal.

This is why I hope the rumor that the first deluxe expansion will feature a new faction is true. That seems like a good way to handle this issue; make the first deluxe box feature Shadowlands/Spider or Mantis, and by the time the second deluxe box comes along there should be enough cards that there is less of an impact.

Well, the content of the first Deluxe Box will surely be faction-centered. But will it be a new Faction or an existing one, it will depend on t he point of story at which the game begins :

a) if it's a reboot, the first Deluxe could be the Scorpion Clan coup, and focussing on the Scorpion, but if the first Cycle is the Coup, it'd be early to release Spider/Shadowlands or Mantis if FFG follows the AEG story.

b) if it's not a reboot : it could be about bringing the Mantis back, or the Naga, or the Spider (but the big evil being a playable faction doesn't seem right).

1 hour ago, Ser Nakata said:

...the big evil being a playable faction doesn't seem right.

There's lots of people who enjoy playing the evil faction. How does it not seem right? Or is this just another bias post?

I would be very surprised if the evil faction was completely left out. Since day 1 of L5R a crucial deck decision is whether or not to play with "tainted" cards.

This is how I would set it up:

Core Set: original 7 great clans

Deluxe 1: Shadowlands/Spider (depending on timeline)

Deluxe 2: Yoritomo's Alliance/Mantis (depending on timeline)

Then go into a faction based rotation.

Back to deluxe expansions as timeliness events.

I like the idea a lot but I don't think it will happen because: ideally the story will be ongoing (as in non-static) and deluxe expansions are typically evergreen legal.

6 hours ago, Ryric said:

I think the issue really is mostly only a problem for the very first deluxe box...when the card pool is very small, nearly doubling the cards for one faction gives them a huge advantage over all the others. Once the card set has a few expansions and is more robust, bumping a single factions card pool by 20% or less isn't nearly as big a deal.

This is why I hope the rumor that the first deluxe expansion will feature a new faction is true. That seems like a good way to handle this issue; make the first deluxe box feature Shadowlands/Spider or Mantis, and by the time the second deluxe box comes along there should be enough cards that there is less of an impact.

That was probably the case with AGOT since it was at the beginning of second edition when the Lannister cards were released. You basically had the base set and then a massive Lannister set. Suzumi brought up a good point that imbalance will exist no matter what, but I do hope they spread the cards out more evenly. Has anyone from FF ever addressed their release and their thoughts about factions having larger card pools? If their stance is anywhere on the web, I'd love to read it.

6 minutes ago, Muktidata said:

That was probably the case with AGOT since it was at the beginning of second edition when the Lannister cards were released. You basically had the base set and then a massive Lannister set.

Wolves of the North, the Stark-themed boxed expansion, was released about six months before the Lannister expansion.

3 minutes ago, Kakita Shiro said:

Wolves of the North, the Stark-themed boxed expansion, was released about six months before the Lannister expansion.

Didn't the stark box drastically increase stark placings in tournaments too?

51 minutes ago, BayushiCroy said:

Didn't the stark box drastically increase stark placings in tournaments too?

Indeed. Stark went from unplayable to become a meta-defining deck.

18 minutes ago, Kakita Shiro said:

Indeed. Stark went from unplayable to become a meta-defining deck.

God I hope our meta isn't dictated by deluxe expansion release cycle, but that seems to be a given.

21 minutes ago, BayushiCroy said:

God I hope our meta isn't dictated by deluxe expansion release cycle, but that seems to be a given.

My hope is that new cards/sets (deluxe or other) continually shake up the environment and stimulate creativity. I don't care whether your clan or mine ends up on top.

32 minutes ago, BayushiCroy said:

God I hope our meta isn't dictated by deluxe expansion release cycle, but that seems to be a given.

Indeed. In my experience every expansion usually alters the meta. It is a bit annoying, but I will admit it keeps the game a bit fresh. More importantly for FFG, if the meta requires cards from the new expansion then they make money. That is just the way these games work, though.

1 hour ago, Muktidata said:

Suzumi

Sparrow clan gets no respect. ?

9 minutes ago, FunTimeTeddy said:

My hope is that new cards/sets (deluxe or other) continually shake up the environment and stimulate creativity. I don't care whether your clan or mine ends up on top.

I agree on the whole. But my worry stems from how story is done then the deluxe cycles will break it. If story is based on tournament results, then the deluxe expansions will mess it up.

Ultimately I believe a healthy meta that is frequently shaken, even if that means one clan is one top for a while. But what I don't want is the meta to be tied to other thing s like the story.

Given the vagueness off the Gama talks though, I don't think they are going to do story similarly.

18 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:

There's lots of people who enjoy playing the evil faction. How does it not seem right? Or is this just another bias post?

I completely understand some players like to play the bad guys.

But in my opinion, it is not necessary to have them in the game as a playable faction. I know the Spider players are numerous, but I've always felt the Shadowlands horde/Shadow/Spider should be the evil you fight against, and not playable factions, as in my view, this game should be about samourai (in the broader sense, that is Bushi, Shugenja and Courtier, etc.) fighting for their Empire and their Clan.

I also completely get you and a lot of other people disagree with me, and I'm fine with that.

49 minutes ago, Ser Nakata said:

...as in my view, this game should be about samourai (in the broader sense, that is Bushi, Shugenja and Courtier, etc.) fighting for their Empire and their Clan.

So you don't even realize this includes the spider, not excludes them, right? I mean, Spider had ALL three of those keywords from the very beginning! And they were ALWAYS fighting for their empire AND their clan.

But their Empire and their clan is not the same as all the other samourai

I liked the City of the Lost as a mimicry of the Empire, but I disliked Iweko bringing the Spider into the Empire. I thought they were better as villains than as people trying to fit in.

14 hours ago, BayushiCroy said:

God I hope our meta isn't dictated by deluxe expansion release cycle, but that seems to be a given.

When the deluxe for a faction comes out, it causes many players to try stuff with that faction. It doesn't suddenly make that faction dominate tournaments (Lannister was already in a good place before LoCR came out).

13 hours ago, BayushiCroy said:

Ultimately I believe a healthy meta that is frequently shaken, even if that means one clan is one top for a while. But what I don't want is the meta to be tied to other thing s like the story.

This has always been an issue with L5R. Players getting to influence the storyline is good and all, but because certain clans are going to be more viable than others at different times, game balance issues also have an effect on the story to some extent. I seem to recall that most tournament seasons were not dominated by a single clan, but generally there were a few favorites. It also meant that when the championship season at the end of each arc rolled around you would have some clans that were basically not in contention, and thus had less ability to affect the story. While that is unfortunate, I don't know if it's realistic to expect 9+ factions in any game to be so well balanced that they all have an equal chance of winning.

8 minutes ago, Suzume Tomonori said:

I don't know if it's realistic to expect 9+ factions in any game to be so well balanced that they all have an equal chance of winning.

It's not.

But L5R CCG history knows many high-level (Worlds, Euros, NA Champs) tournament surprises, when underdogs took 1st places (Ornatov's TFT, faceless Imperial honor, Madness variations and many more).

1 hour ago, Suzume Tomonori said:

This has always been an issue with L5R. Players getting to influence the storyline is good and all, but because certain clans are going to be more viable than others at different times, game balance issues also have an effect on the story to some extent. I seem to recall that most tournament seasons were not dominated by a single clan, but generally there were a few favorites. It also meant that when the championship season at the end of each arc rolled around you would have some clans that were basically not in contention, and thus had less ability to affect the story. While that is unfortunate, I don't know if it's realistic to expect 9+ factions in any game to be so well balanced that they all have an equal chance of winning.

Actually, there were a lot of times when the CCG tournament seasons were completely dominated by one or two clans. There were always a couple factions that were basically so busted that they didn't have a very fair shot of winning.

But L5R isn't like Magic where you can get off infinite combos or do infinite damage or gain infinite life or draw and play nearly your entire deck from a single two-card combo. And there have always been some pretty good counter cards for whatever your opponent is doing. So L5R was only able to become so particularly imbalanced at any given time. You might have certain factions with decks that generally win 3/4ths of the time while other factions seemed to only be able to win 1/4th of the time, but that is about as extreme as it gets.

It certainly was never quite to the level where all top 4 of all tournaments were the same faction in any given season.

3 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:

So you don't even realize this includes the spider, not excludes them, right? I mean, Spider had ALL three of those keywords from the very beginning! And they were ALWAYS fighting for their empire AND their clan.

To be fair, their "Fighting for their empire" was dedicated to subverting the accepted norm for their own set of beliefs. They were subjected to being philosophically persecuted, but their philosophy also said being a bully was not only okay, but the right thing to do, and scorns a millennia of tradition.

2 hours ago, Mirith said:

To be fair, their "Fighting for their empire" was dedicated to subverting the accepted norm for their own set of beliefs. They were subjected to being philosophically persecuted, but their philosophy also said being a bully was not only okay, but the right thing to do, and scorns a millennia of tradition.

I never said otherwise.

29 minutes ago, Sparks Duh said:

I never said otherwise.

Something something, you can't have it both ways.