2 hours ago, Kubernes said:

Why don't we go with a more detailed example. This is 1x core set and after mulligans.

Player A (first player)

Stronghold - Isawa Mori Seido (phoenix) Splash - Crane Role - Seeker of Void

Province Flip - Naïve Student, Seppun Guardsman, Wandering Ronin, Isawa Masahiro

Hand - For Shame!, Grasp of Earth, Banzai!, Stewart of Law

Player B (second player)

Stronghold - Yojin no Shiro Splash -??? Role - Keeper of Earth

Province Flip - Akodo Gunso, Keeper Initiate, Favorable Ground, Lion's Clan Brawler

Hand - ???

Not know Player B's hand or splash, what would you do?

Buy Masahiro with a fate, buy Naive Student, bid 3, and, assuming most of your opponents guys don't have any fate on them, attack Water Military with Masahiro.

3 hours ago, shineyorkboy said:

Buy Masahiro with a fate, buy Naive Student, bid 3, and, assuming most of your opponents guys don't have any fate on them, attack Water Military with Masahiro.

Definitely agree with this. In my experience from the L(ondon)5R Honoured event, unless people are lucky enough to be able to play their Clan Champion on turn one then the first turn generally involves something of a stalemate - with minimal ring-triggering or province-breaking because people would rather cancel each other out than let their opponent go into round two with an advantage. So on first turn it's often a case of 'what ring ability do I want to deny my opponent?' than 'which ring do I want to trigger for myself?'. So in that respect if you have initiative on turn one then i think it makes sense to make a chump attack that denies your opponent the chance to trigger the Water ring.

I say this having learnt the hard way from playing the same deck configuration that Kubernes described (Phoenix splashed with Crane, Seeker of Void). I was too obsessed with claiming and triggering the Void ring, which in retrospect was a bad idea given that each of my games went to time and were decided on points....

I realise of course that the 3-core environment will be a very different prospect!

Played a game of Dragon vs Crane last night where going first won me the game. Turn one was more or less a wash (I lost a province, Crane didn't, I had a Niten Master with some equipment, she got a honoured Hotaru for her trouble). Turn 2 I took two provinces to her one. As I went first turn 3, I could break the third province first and so threaten (and take) her stronghold before she could push for mine. Anecdotal, probably, maybe just an edge case, but in 3-turn games, going first may make you the victor.

6 hours ago, shosuko said:

The Ring of Water would straighten the character player 2 used to defend against your first attack - so they would have a ready character after their first conflict, and you would not.

Nothing ensures either of them will win either conflict. All things being equal if they all only tie, this still gives player 2 the advantage on the Ring of Water taking it to a 3rd conflict. Basically player 1 needs some trick to get ahead. Nothing means player 1 wins their conflict any more than player 2 winning theirs, but just the mechanics of Ring of Water are built to suit player 2, combined with the bonus 1-2 fate they have a stronger presence turn 1.

I don't think Player 2 passing early gives Player 1 any advantage. They only have the characters they flipped to buy, and they only have 7 fate total compared to their opponent's 9...

shosuko do you play on OCTGN? I want to play with you On one hand I am not sure about this whole argument so maybe seeing it in practice will make it understand ur position and change my mind. On the other hand I want to practice my Scorpion matchup to whom I almost always lose horribly.

I can see how Scorpion going second can generate huge advantage - because of very big fate disadvantage for the opponent created by seeker of air and the way to use it for board presence - Adept of Shadows(Master of disguise lol). But I don't think it is as prevalent in other clans.

Normally having fate advantage during conflict phase with less characters is not so strong as opposed to bigger board - because of conflict characters being overcosted(so if you looking for stats its better to spend your fate in dynasty phase). Adept + seeker of air however breaks that rule.

On 9/5/2017 at 7:30 AM, Ignithas said:

The more I play and read about L5R, the more I think that they missed the mark with the finetuning. Which is strange considering how many people playtested the game.

It's FFG.

They have to push stuff out the door. I don't mean that in a specifically disparaging way, it's just the reality of producing a lot of stuff. Once the ball is rolling it needs to keep rolling or the whole thing falls apart (the company I mean). They can't afford to let things sit forever and make it 'perfect'. Which is also not a realistic goal for a business.

I'm sure they will tune it up over time. No amount of playtesting is equal to having the thing out in the wild.

9 hours ago, shineyorkboy said:

Buy Masahiro with a fate, buy Naive Student, bid 3, and, assuming most of your opponents guys don't have any fate on them, attack Water Military with Masahiro.

What if Lion buys Akodo with 1 fate, Brawler with 2 fate?

In 1 core, I'd recommend buying Masahiro with 2 fate so that your opponent can't come back with Ring of Void to clear your board.

I know you have Steward and For Shame, but your opponent could easily have assassination (every 1 core deck does) to stop that combo and could potentially win the Void ring right there, take the fate off your Masahiro and bow your student in the process with Lion's Pride Brawler, leaving you with no board state going into turn 2.

14 hours ago, Kubernes said:

Why don't we go with a more detailed example. This is 1x core set and after mulligans.

Player A (first player)

Stronghold - Isawa Mori Seido (phoenix) Splash - Crane Role - Seeker of Void

Province Flip - Naïve Student, Seppun Guardsman, Wandering Ronin, Isawa Masahiro

Hand - For Shame!, Grasp of Earth, Banzai!, Stewart of Law

Player B (second player)

Stronghold - Yojin no Shiro Splash -??? Role - Keeper of Earth

Province Flip - Akodo Gunso, Keeper Initiate, Favorable Ground, Lion's Clan Brawler

Hand - ???

Not know Player B's hand or splash, what would you do?

Your buying Naïve Student, Seppun Guardsman, and Isawa Masahiro with one fate.

You then bid four to try to draw one more combat trick I'm assuming the lion bid 2-3. If its political you swing the student but really you want to swing the Seppun Guardsman, either way you swing for fire, assuming that you are going with the Seppun.

This makes the opponent have to defend, because if they don't you dishonor the Brawler which neuters most of her use going forward.
Defending with the Gunso is a risk, as he is only costs 2 and dies to Masahiro, plus avoids auto rout without the opponent spending cards. This forces Player B to either defend with Lion's Clan Brawler or let the guardsman through.

If Brawler is defending you Banzai twice to force B's combat tricks and keep them from using Favorable Ground to back out, as they then lose the province. This forces cards out of their hand and then you either win the conflict and dishonor the Gunso or graciously lose, bowing both the Brawler and denying the opponent the chance to swing fire. If the attack is let through with no defense then you, depending on your draw, you simply Banzai and dishonor the Brawler. However the opponent will probably let you through, so we assume the Brawler is dishonored.

Player B then has a tough challenge. First thing you do in-between conflicts is use the stronghold on the brawler, making her a 0/0. They now need to swing with both to profit both from stronghold and to try to ensure the Gunso becomes honored. They will swing Void, in an attempt to deny you Masahiro next turn, or earth for the Keeper. Depending on your hand, the province flipped, and what not you either defend the province with Masahiro or let them through, lose the void on Masahiro or the card, but now have a clear shot to snag either void or earth politically with both Masahiro and the Student. Earth widens the card advantage gap, void strips fate off of the Gunso.

Either way, this ends with you drawing off the Student and hopefully drawing more cards out of their hands then yours. Also snagging that Imperial favor.

Then you just hope for a similar advantageous flip next turn of a bad flip from the opponent.

Granted, this can all be nonsense depending on draws from the conflict decks or province flips so who really knows? But that would be my logic approaching this board.

7 hours ago, BordOne said:

shosuko do you play on OCTGN? I want to play with you On one hand I am not sure about this whole argument so maybe seeing it in practice will make it understand ur position and change my mind. On the other hand I want to practice my Scorpion matchup to whom I almost always lose horribly.

I can see how Scorpion going second can generate huge advantage - because of very big fate disadvantage for the opponent created by seeker of air and the way to use it for board presence - Adept of Shadows(Master of disguise lol). But I don't think it is as prevalent in other clans.

Normally having fate advantage during conflict phase with less characters is not so strong as opposed to bigger board - because of conflict characters being overcosted(so if you looking for stats its better to spend your fate in dynasty phase). Adept + seeker of air however breaks that rule.

I do play octgn, the problem is time. I seem like I'm on the forums all day, but that's because my line of work allows me to be a chatterbox on the forums. I am at -6GMT, and free after 10:30PM for a game, and off Monday and Tuesday. If you want a game, let me know. If anyone wants a game, hmu

I play Scorpion, and also have a Phoenix, Crane, and Dragon deck to play. I tried Lion... I suck at Lion lol.

If the speculation that the Goblin Sneak steals fate from your opponent is true, this could be another time when you would want to be first, so you steal fate while your opponent still has some.

One of the biggest reasons that, at least for now, going second is generally advantageous, is the best thing the first player can hope for is being fate neutral by the time they reach the conflict phase, in exchange for getting to pick the first ring to contest. The worst case scenario is that the first player ends up being -2 fate by the time they reach the conflict phase and with no fate on any of the rings, they have no chance to regain fate on that first turn.

When the first player token switches, there will be fate now on the rings so this fate gap could grow to a -4 deficit for the player that plays first on the first turn. Is this a fair trade for starting first? It really doesn't seem that way, and I was one of the bigger and more vocal supporter of the advantages of going first........however that was before it was revealed that the player going second gets an extra fate.

Personally I think they should add a special first turn rule to have the second player place one fate on a ring at the end of the first dynasty phase. This now gives the choice to the first player to take a ring for a slight fate advantage, or to go after the ring that impacts the board the most.

Forgive me, I am new to this game and trying to figure it all out. So, let me see if I understand this right.

Player 2 gets +1 fate. Player one goes first. All things being equal, player one should finish first and gain a +1 fate balancing out. The end result is both players have the same strength value of cards in play with equal fate.

However, player 2 can opt to finish early and snag the +1 fate, for a total of +2 fate.

In this event, player 2 has fewer characters in play than player one, but +2 fate.

Now, the idea is that after player one attacks, and player two defends, player two can then try to claim the water ring in his first attack and unbow one character he used to defend, making up for his shortage of characters in play. In this scenario, the assumption is that both players effectively have equal resources in play, but player two has an advantage with +2 fate.

Because of this, player one feels pressure as the best he can do is tie up with player two, and a mistake will result in player one being behind.

This is the argument, as best as I can follow it.

I still tend to think that going first typically has the advantage for a few reasons. First of all, both players are trying to guess how much each person will put into play. If player two passes early for the +1 fate, it gives player one a lot of room to consider what characters he wants to put into play, as he knows that player two can no longer move his characters out of his provinces. To flip it around, I would feel really nervous about passing first as 2nd player, knowing that I am giving my opponent the ability to strategize quite a bit about what I have on the board and not being able to respond to him. Since I already have the +1 for being the second player, I have to weigh the cost/benefit of no longer being able to respond to my opponent during the dynasty phase vs getting +2 fate.

Sure, as the second player, I can try to make a bid for the water ring in my attack phase, but a lot can go wrong with this. For example, maybe player one simply passes on his first attack action. Now the table is turned. As player two, I have fewer characters in play and having to attack first means I can't grab the water ring. So, I attack, player one defends, then player one announces his counter attack for water ring to unbow a defender, making my second attack very unlikely to succeed.

Otherwise, player one is starting off the conflict phase with better-developed characters. Player two has +2 fate with an underdeveloped set of characters and a gamble to try and win a conflict to get the water ring, to unbow a single character, in the hopes of being able to attack a second time. And I think the key word here is "gamble." If player two pulls it off, then great! Excellent play! But it seems more likely that player one will have more options in terms of how to develop his characters in play, choosing which ring(s) he wants to fight for, and possibly even having an advantaging of only needing to bid low for conflict cards and saving honor (whereas presumably player two will bid high to get extra cards to spend those extra two fate tokens on to try to offset his underdeveloped set of characters). As player one, I might happily forfeit two fate if it means an easy smash of a province against the other player's underdeveloped deck with only minimal counter attack. Sure, player two might pull off some trick and come out ahead, but more often than not I don't think it will happen.

It is also worth considering that you are likely to burn your +2 fate on conflict cards just to make up for your underdeveloped hand. This may or may not work out so great. But even if it does, there is the problem that player one has developed more characters than you, which will to some extent, carry over into the next round. In the next round, player one can afford to end development early to gain +1 fate, bringing the two players closer into balance, and player two will be trying to play catch up. Sure, player two might have an extra couple of fate on round two, but again, those fate came at the cost of playing a weak first turn. Alternatively, player one can just spend round two developing as much as possible and maintaining his lead over player two in terms of development. And, in round two, player two attacks first and gives player one the option to use the water ring unless player two passes on their first attack.

If I am player two, the safer bet is probably to just develop my hand in response to what player one is playing during the first dynasty phase, and let him end up matching me in fate points. Then, we enter the conflict phase on a mostly equal footing. To end development early is to elect to be behind in strength of characters in exchange for +2 fate. But that fate, which will either be spent on conflict cards or in the second round, and bids for the water ring, are all actions aimed at trying to catch up, rather than pulling ahead, in terms of what is actually in play.

But, like I said, I am new at this game so maybe I am missing something.

Short version of my long -winded post above: passing early to gain +2 fate at the cost of underdeveloping your characters in play, and hoping you can catch up with use of your bonus fate in conflict cards, development in round two, and trying to snag the water ring, sounds like a very risky gamble with not that much of a pay-off. But I am new at this game so I might be missing something.

22 hours ago, Moes1980 said:

Short version of my long -winded post above: passing early to gain +2 fate at the cost of underdeveloping your characters in play, and hoping you can catch up with use of your bonus fate in conflict cards, development in round two, and trying to snag the water ring, sounds like a very risky gamble with not that much of a pay-off. But I am new at this game so I might be missing something.

Its not just Ring of Water to ready a character to get a 2nd attack. You could just play conservatively your first turn as player 2, bank up more fate, and overwhelm your opponent turn 2 when you can also pass first, and also claim fate from a ring going into a much stronger board position than player 1 can with going first when there is no fate on any rings. Sure player 1 could buy a 3rd character, but with just 7 fate this means there won't be much fate ON any character leading to much weaker turn 2.

I had a player buy just 1 character against me and pass. It was their champion and it had 3 fate on it because they had 8 fate during the dynasty phase to dump on it... That was really rough. You can't overlook the advantage of player 2. Sure, if player 1 passes they both had 8 fate - but only 1 of them was able to put it on characters that turn. Even if I don't pass first, as player 2 I can build a noticeably stronger presence with that extra fate.

2 hours ago, shosuko said:

Its not just Ring of Water to ready a character to get a 2nd attack. You could just play conservatively your first turn as player 2, bank up more fate, and overwhelm your opponent turn 2 when you can also pass first, and also claim fate from a ring going into a much stronger board position than player 1 can with going first when there is no fate on any rings. Sure player 1 could buy a 3rd character, but with just 7 fate this means there won't be much fate ON any character leading to much weaker turn 2.

I had a player buy just 1 character against me and pass. It was their champion and it had 3 fate on it because they had 8 fate during the dynasty phase to dump on it... That was really rough. You can't overlook the advantage of player 2. Sure, if player 1 passes they both had 8 fate - but only 1 of them was able to put it on characters that turn. Even if I don't pass first, as player 2 I can build a noticeably stronger presence with that extra fate.

1

With reference to your first part, I don't think banking a bunch of fate is a good idea. If player one spends more fate than player two on turn one, then player one can accomplish more during turn one (i.e., breaking provinces). When turn two comes yes, player two will have a bunch of fate in the bank, possibly around twice as much, but it's not the same as saying player two has twice the resources of player one in the context of the entire game. They both have close to the same amount of resources (about 14-16 fate to use(d) or bank(ed) by the end of the second dynasty phase), it is just that player one put those resources to good use by spending them while the second player didn't spend their resources during turn one. During turn two, that fate bonus also becomes diminished in terms of a percentage bonus of total earned fate. Furthermore, it will be tough for player two to catch up on the second turn because you only have 4 dynasty cards to put into play, so it is not like you can just flood the play area with cards in a single turn with lots of banked fate. Even with the banked fate, player one is likely to have more characters in play for the first two turns because he put characters into play over two turns whereas player two held back to a significant degree during turn one. Player two might be able to make up for it by spending the leftover fate on conflict cards or to keep characters in play longe (in fact, he better if he doesn't want to lose the game). But again, this is taking what I see to be a high-risk gamble that could be very costly and with little payoff, as you hope that you can balance out your early underdevelopment into a later overdevelopment.

The second part of your post is what I would say is the opposite mistake of banking most of your fate, which is playing all your fate on turn one, and is especially a bad move to play it all on one character, even if its a cost 5 character. It seems like saving one fate per turn slowly builds up a reserve of fate so that on the third turn, you suddenly have a nice bank of 2-3 fate after playing that turn's 7 fate to put new cards into play (hopefully your playing conflict cards will be offset by winning rings with extra fate on them, and other abilities). Playing all on one character is even worse, though, especially on the first turn. If player one has two or three decent characters out, say two 3 cost characters or a 3 and a 2 and 1 (or a 3,3 and a 1), player two is going to be in trouble as he can only either attack once or block once, and has to choose which. Player one, however, can assign attackers/defenders two or three times. Player one should not have trouble breaking a province, possibly two provinces, and there is little risk of losing a province in the first turn. Granted, in the next couple of turns that extra fate placed on the cost five character starts to pay off, essentially giving you a cost five for another turn but for a cost of one. But again, with being behind in the number of provinces you broke, you are playing a catch-up game. Given that just about anything can happen in this game with conflict cards, character abilities, and province abilities etc., I would not typically feel comfortable with playing this kind of catch-up game. Ideally, I want to be ahead or, at worse, tied with my opponent in terms of development and provinces broken.

Of course, you could certainly have a situation where playing the cost 5 with two fate on turn one is an extremely good idea. For example, if on turn one, player one drew two strongholds and two very weak characters with only one strength. Then, by all means, play the cost five and have fun wrecking the poor player one who drew such crappy cards even after taking a mulligan, and enjoy getting your one copy of the cost five card in your deck on turn one. But this shouldn't be a typical example.

Also, it doesn't have to be so much of an "all or nothing" in my examples. Player two could pass early to get a two fate lead, and time it right so that he only puts out one less character than player one. I would only do this if I have a nice conflict card that I know I can use (for example, assassinate or route), to compensate for my underdevelopment. In this case, the risk is not so large and that extra fate could come in handy at the right moment later on. Nonetheless, the cost-benefit trade-off is still there, as having even one less character can be enough to make the difference in breaking or not breaking a province.

What has seemed to work really well for me so far is playing all my fate -1 each dynasty phase, with putting one fate on each character I put into play, so that on turn two, when I get 7 or 8 more fate, I can roughly double the number of characters I have for that turn. This way, I am pretty consistent with having 4-5 characters in play after turn one, and a slowly growing reserve of fate to enhance my ability to play conflict cards or play that cost five characters when he shows up. Player two either keeps up with me and its a tight game or player two falls behind and is eventually unable to catch up. I would actually hate it if my cost five showed up on turn one or two. This is because I would have to choose to spend my fate in an inefficient way or risk my opponent breaking that province and sending the 5 cost to the discard pile. That card needs to show up not too soon and not too late.

Again, not impossible to pass early/put all fate on one character/bank lots of fate, and turn around an early underdevelopment into something big down the road. But it seems risky, difficult, and ultimately not a best-practice to adopt.