With 7 clans, and Hatamoto titles up for grabs.....7 different decks isn't a lot for initial release? I'm sure as time goes on each clan will have two viable builds.

The way they solved deck homogeny within a particular faction in Conquest was that each Warlord emphasized a very particular way to play, which pivoted the values of each faction's respective card pool. By games end I did feel like there was a couple viable ways to play each faction in a tournament.

I'm hoping we see more strongholds in this game early. That will definitely contribute to the same effect since they are all significant effects that persistent across the match. I think the role cards will help break up homogeny from season to season. The regular cycle of cards also do that naturally, but I do feel like LCGs can use the extra push to get people out of their comfort zone. The role cards don't do anything to promote multiple ways to build a clan's deck within a season however.

38 minutes ago, Shu2jack said:

With 7 clans, and Hatamoto titles up for grabs.....7 different decks isn't a lot for initial release? I'm sure as time goes on each clan will have two viable builds.

I'd go as far as saying that there are different deck types for each of the clans revealed so far. Even more of people consider the different splashes as different decks or builds.

Well, with Conquest, while there were plenty of warlords and factions, a few remained dominant through the games lifespan:

Kith was good from the game's release to it's final major tournament. Eldorath got good a couple of expansions in and stayed good thereafter. Worr joined the club for a while, and Kugath entered as a serious contender right near game end. There were always some Space Marines about too, but at any given point in the meta, there were 2-3 meta dominant decks, and its hard to argue that there was ever more than one meta-dominant warlord with a very specific deck shape: that is, Kith with at least 30 of the 50 cards absolute auto-includes.

Say we'd had a meta-decision thing on top of that distorting things further, how would that have looked. Say the top Dark Eldar player had a choice of a persistent effect that would boost a particular build. Would he look to open up a different build from his dominant one? Probably not - he'd instead be looking to make his faction's Tier 1 build even stronger, to gain an edge over other factions Tier 1 builds.

Thus, in pure theory at least, I'd expect that an optimisation tool (that supports a particular build and which is applied without individual option to all decks of a faction) is going to lead to a narrowing of the range of decks seen.

If I understand the keeper and seeker....its either going to change one province or allow a clan to splash more - allowing more variety.

Yeah, there is some ring stuff for defending, but opponents can work around it.

I don't see this limiting options.

3 minutes ago, Shu2jack said:

If I understand the keeper and seeker....its either going to change one province or allow a clan to splash more - allowing more variety.

Yeah, there is some ring stuff for defending, but opponents can work around it.

I don't see this limiting options.

It all sort of depends on how the value of the cards associated with the Roles pans out.

For example, Seeker of Earth will have the option to run Ancestral Lands AND Entrenched Position. If Phoenix get Seeker of Void, they can run Kuroi Mori and Shameful Display or Pilgrimage.

Additionally, Seeker Roles will have access to the Seeker Initiate which probably reads: When you claim your Role [Element], search the top 5 cards of your deck and add one to your hand. Shuffle.

Keeper Roles will have access to the Keeper Initiate, though we don't know what the text on that card is yet.

Finally, Seeker also allows you to gain 1 Fate whenever you flip over the Province of the Element type so inherent potential for an extra 2 Fate per game compared to Keeper which only gains Fate when claiming the Ring on defense.

Post Worlds, some clans will have 3 extra influence to play with while others will still be restricted to whatever their Stronghold says.

Now, these are all relatively minor differences, but minor differences can be what swings games sometimes. Additionally, the lack of flexibility in choosing a Role you want for the deck you want is a deck building restraint, even if it is a minor one.

1 hour ago, Prepare for War said:

Well, with Conquest, while there were plenty of warlords and factions, a few remained dominant through the games lifespan:

Kith was good from the game's release to it's final major tournament. Eldorath got good a couple of expansions in and stayed good thereafter. Worr joined the club for a while, and Kugath entered as a serious contender right near game end. There were always some Space Marines about too, but at any given point in the meta, there were 2-3 meta dominant decks, and its hard to argue that there was ever more than one meta-dominant warlord with a very specific deck shape: that is, Kith with at least 30 of the 50 cards absolute auto-includes.

Say we'd had a meta-decision thing on top of that distorting things further, how would that have looked. Say the top Dark Eldar player had a choice of a persistent effect that would boost a particular build. Would he look to open up a different build from his dominant one? Probably not - he'd instead be looking to make his faction's Tier 1 build even stronger, to gain an edge over other factions Tier 1 builds.

Thus, in pure theory at least, I'd expect that an optimisation tool (that supports a particular build and which is applied without individual option to all decks of a faction) is going to lead to a narrowing of the range of decks seen.

Kith was always good and some factions were more wealthy with winning deck builds but if you looked at the reports from store champs from the games last two season both the representation and the winning warlords were very diverse. I would never consider only the representation at the highest level of competitive play. It is a very minor sampling of your overall experience with the game. Most of us will only ever play competitively at the store level or in the swiss rounds of major tournaments. If this game has a similar climate at the same competitive level I think that will speak very well for the games overall health.

If in addition to that we had this shifting layer on top that effected your deck building decision and the way you played I think that would have been great. It would have just further forced people to explore different ways to approach a particular faction. I just don't see how that could lead to more homogeny considering the role selection is completely out of the deck builder's hands. It's gonna force deck strategies to shake up each season.

ADD: even if the DE player picked what he thought was the strongest option at the time for their clan it's a fleeting choice since he'll have to pick a different one next time around. Also we don't know the selection process. It sounds like a draft, but then do the top finishing clans pick first? I'd almost appreciate it more if the low finishers picked first since that would help give them a leg up next year.

I think the way they are going to do the Shogun, Hatamoto, and the Seeker / Keeper cards is genius!!! It gives players a direct relation to the story mechanically in every game they play. It also gives players the spotlight as icons of each clan, and definitely supports clan loyalty going forward. I'm super excited for this! I wish I could have gone to gencon this year lol

16 hours ago, phillos said:

Kith was always good and some factions were more wealthy with winning deck builds but if you looked at the reports from store champs from the games last two season both the representation and the winning warlords were very diverse.

What?

You call this DIVERSE? Are you joking? It's 2016 season table. Even at Store level 51% of wins come from literally 4 Warlords (out of 27).

I miss conquest, it was a fun game. Hopefully l5r will fill that hole.

1 hour ago, Matrim said:

I miss conquest, it was a fun game.

It is.

Honestly, one of the biggest dissapointment for me is a fact they made this all-lcgs-hybrid game instead just retouch and reskin Conquest mechanic.

Fantastic. What an abrasive way to make your point kempy. The numbers in that spreadsheet seems pretty good to me. No I wasn't joking. Some deck styles will always rise to the top, but we saw a lot of representation for the different warlords both at the store tournaments and winning the tournaments. Yeah Worr and Kith were monsters, but in Worr's case it did get harder as the season went on to win with him. I know since I played him through the entire season and in the beginning of the season I snagged a couple store champ wins. By regional times I really had to work to get the middle of the pack because people were so practiced at defeating the known Worr decks. You can see that reflected by him leveling out with Kith and Eldorath statistically by regional times. Then if you look at what made the top cut at nationals that's a great spread for a card game. Yeah Kith and Worr are gonna show higher numbers, but I mean they were the established winning deck types.

New player here, reading through the organized play mechanics of the seekers and keepers makes it seem like it would possibly make it frustrating for players playing competitively. While I understand this does promote some sort of clan loyalty(disputable), the bonuses might cause the outcome of competitive games to become overly influenced by the seeker and keeper titles. Nothing is more grating to a competitive player than perhaps an opponent having one extra fate that allows him to keep a unit for an additional turn, which could have swung it to his victory.

12 hours ago, tanhy said:

New player here, reading through the organized play mechanics of the seekers and keepers makes it seem like it would possibly make it frustrating for players playing competitively. While I understand this does promote some sort of clan loyalty(disputable), the bonuses might cause the outcome of competitive games to become overly influenced by the seeker and keeper titles. Nothing is more grating to a competitive player than perhaps an opponent having one extra fate that allows him to keep a unit for an additional turn, which could have swung it to his victory.

Its good to be concerned about these, but every clan will have them - so every player will have them. This means both players can play around this mechanic equally. Any ring can be chosen, so if you're concerned about your opponent having the extra fate right now you may choose a different ring, but that is a layer to the tactics.

If you are a truly competitive player first and care little for clan loyalty you'll just pick the clan you though got the best situation after the Role selection. It's pretty much just another version of what competitive players already do as the card pool evolves each time a pack is released each month.

This system is really about promoting both clan loyalty and community leaders for people who care about those things. It give those type of players something tangible in the game to fight for when they go to tournaments besides alt art cards and pins. How well it will work is of course yet to be seen. I'm optimistic. This is certainly the most elaborate OP system FFG has ever devised so we can't accuse them of not getting behind there game here

Tournament results that have an immediate impact on the metagame besides providing more netdecks are a fascinating idea. I'm excited to see how it pans out, especially because the same role cannot be selected by the same Clan twice in succession. Maybe Scorpion with Keeper of Fire is the best deck out there but in a few months it will literally be unplayable without bans or errata. Then the deck evolves or gets put on the shelf until the role is available again. Sounds like a good shake-up!