Good morning fellow Archons!

I just published my second article on The Crucible Combine this morning containing a very meaty topic.

Please take a look and see how you can use Quadrant Theory to help you evaluate cards in Keyforge.

I don’t think this is likely to become an integral part of the way I assess my cards; I think my brain leans towards a less analytical and more emotional or intuitive approach. But it’s very interesting and a handy tool to have up your sleeve if you do find yourself wanting to break down a card more comprehensively.

I also love that you had the audacity to criticise the golden child, Bait and Switch!

28 minutes ago, timhodge said:

I also love that you had the audacity to criticise the golden child, Bait and Swith!

?

I think it's an interesting approach to evaluating the overall strength of the card, but, I wouldn't use it on it's own.

Single card evaluation is still important, but, evaluating the overall deck and how well the collection of cards synergizes with one another is equally if not more important. Knowledger of what houses, or even cards, are in your opponent's deck will be of high importance as well as that will influence the value you place on your own cards differently depending on what you are playing against.

Take the example provided of Bait and Switch compared to Virtuous Works.

In a vacuum, VW is the better card, however you have to look had what else is in the decks along with these cards and then evaluate what your opponent is or could be playing. I'll say my opponent has VW and I have B&S. B&S is not a good early card as I need my opponent to gain AEmber before I can use it. But because I am playing B&S, the value of my opponent's VW immediately goes down and the value of B&S goes up. In a race to forge keys situation, B&S has a clear edge unless the player with VW has a way to forge a key before their forge step occurs. VW would have to be held back to be used as a way to recoup stolen AEmber after getting hit by B&S, because playing AW first gets it's effectiveness nullified if B&S is played afterwards.

I would still give VW a slight edge over B&S because VW is a threat whereas B&S is more of an answer. If I see my opponent playing Shadow, I can try to play around B&S. I can't really play around VW unless I have a way to steal or capture AEmber. I prefer cards that force my opponent to have the answer instead of trying to have the right answer for their threats.