So it seems its been awhile since there has been a Judgement deck posted here, if at all, and I wanted to see what could be done with the new cards. I threw together a list here;

Units: 24
3 Reiksguard Swordsmen
3 Reiksguard Knights
3 The Greatswords
3 Pistoliers
3 *Johannes Broheim
3 Bright Wizard Apprentice
3 Talabheim Detachment
3 Errant Wolf -or- Huntsmen

Support: 11
3 Church of Sigmar
3 Shrine to Taal
3 Contested Fortress
2 Gate of Sigmar

Tactics: 12
3 Will of the Electors
3 Twin-Tailed Comet
3 Forced March
3 Judgement of Verena

Quests: 3
3 *Infiltrate!

The idea is pretty basic. Lots of counterstrike for defense. Things to move the opponents stuff for an effective Judgement. Infiltrate! to combo with Forced March moving the opponents units into his/her quest zone. Extra copies of Johannes, Infiltrate!, and Errant Wolf are good to put down as developments. Huntsmen may be better than Errant Wolf just so you can get a turn 1 Infiltrate! going.

Anything that should change here?

Very nice i would add 2 démolition to help play a later judgement of Verena or to destroy a key support.

Very good, looks a lot like mine with out the new cards!

Judgement deck was already good.

I would usally tell a deck liek this they do not have enough units, but thats ok for a tuned judgement deck. I do not think the little temples are nessary, I would them for demolition. Also fit in some of the warrior priests, the ones that make units return to hand if they leave play.

church of sigmar, thats it. usefull, but not enough.

Dywnarc said:

The warriors priests ability scares me a bit, If I am going for the win by decking the opponent, I don't want them killing the priest forcing me to bounce one of their quest zone units.

I will probably do the demolition change though. I am still having a hard time evaluating cards that are out of faction at their expensive cost.

You need more cards to really maximize the strength of any Empire deck - it's just not worth crippling its inherent strengths to limit the deck size so much. But you already knew my stance on that from our chats on BGG.

Wytefang said:

You are wrong. Nobody needs to add cards just to add cards. They need to serve a purpose in the deck. If I need to add cards, suggest cards to add and give reasons other than "your deck is only 50 cards and you will get decked out". A note though, I have never had it happen to me, or had it happen to an opponent as our decks are tuned to a point where we rarely see past turn 6.

edit: maybe we are getting our lines crossed somehow. I will state, in case this is a cause for our disagreements, that I am not a casual player. I will play everything as competitive as possible. Thats the reason I typically like minimum deck size.

darkdeal said:

I'm wrong....in your opinion, of course. And of course, I would agree - you don't just add cards to "add cards." That's not what I was implying. And I don't recommend having more cards to avoid Decking out, I agree with you - it happens too rarely to worry about it. I'd add more cards to be more versatile and because this game doesn't necessarily require you to have the least-possible cards in your deck to still win consistently. I win very frequently against these kind of over-the-top "minimalistic deck-size" decks.

I'm as competitive as the next person though as I've aged I've started to worry less about winning tournaments and having some killer Win-to-Loss ratio. But I don't build decks simply to lose, either, by any means. So that's not why our wires are crossed, no worries.

darkdeal said:

Darkdeal, this deck is certainly one of, if not THE deck to beat.

I'm thinking that Huntsmen is probably better than Errant Wolf at this stage since you can play it turn one with one of your 2 cost support cards or alternatively to start up the Infiltrate! asap.

I understand why you wouldn't want to add cards like City Gates, Contested Stronghold, Abandoned Mine, Reap What's Sown...but why not Innovation? It's pretty much free resources... Also - Sigmar's Intervention; especially with Ulric's Fury coming next week would be rad with this deck

I'm having a hard time chosing Huntsmen over Errant Wolves as i like the art of the latter more and just think it's cooler lol

thanks for posting

darkdeal said:

No offense here, but if your games don't last more than six rounds that don't mean in itself that they are that finely tuned. It just mean you can't stall the game if not everything goes planned... seems like a big problem if you play control deck.

I think your deck is well built in many regards, but have 2 problems :

- Vulnerable to early disruption, since you won't take to the field more than 1 power in turn 1 and 2 power in turn 2 in most cases. Even small disruption could make a loss, because our opponent could play developments in every turn.

- You have no hitting power to follow up a Verena if decking is not possible (for example your enemy have a bigger deck). I cannot imagine how could you deck somebody by turn 6 as you mention...

Some toughts, but maybe I'm wrong :

- I would use Innovation (you will ply developments, and it gives you speed... especially if your opponent tries to disrupt your kingdom)

- consider Iron Discipline to protect your units. A good rush deck could win in 3-4 turns if they can get to your capital... and they will use removal/corruption on your units. (they will attack your quest or kingdom first (to also disrupt your economy), and battlefield second (so you must spend resources there)

- Dwarwes could be a real problem for you (they could play even more developments then you, and they also have hitting power and Demolition) but not many things to do with that

- I don't see the point in Bright Wizard Aprentice. They won't help really help you in the early rounds, and even later their ability seems limited.

- About Huntsman vs. Errant Wolf... stay with Hunsman. They could be played in turn one with a 2 cost Empire card (even Church of Sigmar) going to Kingdom.

For what its worth, I said that our games "rarely" go past turn 6, not that they never do.

You also don't need to be able to burn a zone the turn after you Judgement. If you do it when it hurts the opponent the most, you can be assured a win just because you are several turns ahead of them on kingdom and battlefield and they wont be able to recover.

Also, this thread is a little old. The deck has changed.

Units:
3 Pistoliers
3 Talabheim Detachment
3 Reiksguard Knights
3 The Greatswords
3 Reiksguard Swordsmen
3 Free Company
2 Johannes Broheim

3 Runesmith

Support:
3 Shrine to Taal
3 Gate of Sigmar

3 Keystone Forge

Tactics:
3 Judgement of Verena
3 Forced March
3 Twin-Tailed Comet
3 Will of the Electors

3 Demolition!

Quest:
3 Infiltrate!

I am considering droping the Shrine to Taal for some Contested Villages.

I am not a big fan of

3 gate of sigmar
3 keystone forge

The effect of healing or negating is for me to small.

I would add instead:

3 Contested village
3 Huntsmen (or Contested forteress)

The deck would be cheaper and you will gain a little early boost.

Hi,

I feel that overall your deck just become even slower, thanks to the low number of cheap supports/units. It become impossible to reach more than +3 power (KZ+QZ) until the end of your 2nd turn, and even that is not always managable. A chaos-sniper deck could reach +5 power in the same number of rounds, even if he don't draw any Warpstone Excavations, and an orc player could easily burn your first zone in the same time with even a mediocre hand.

Your additions are great in theory, but there is no resource engine to support them with tempo.

Removing Shrine to Taal is a bad idea... that's the card which gives a meaning for Jumping packs. Without it Pistoliers are no more a threat.

The Inflitrate! quest don't add much to your deck in my opinion, as you could already win longer matches thanks to your control effects, and it won't help you against early problems.

What is the plan with Runesmith in this deck ? I would them and the quests for Huntsman AND Contested Villages to gain a more "pure" Judgement deck.