Sezhed said:

Thanks. Now I understand what you were saying earlier.

Sezhed said:

It's not like everyone else was using the card under the errata while Greg wasn't. Everyone had access to the same card at that time, and could have used it. I see nothing strange or unfair in that.

So what happens if Lords of Winter is released before regional season is over and some one wins a regional using Seige of Winterfell? I'm certainly not going to get upset because other regionals have access to it when I don't. As long as everyone at the same regional has access to the same cards, I don't see any problems.

Sezhed said:

I kind of said this before, but I'll repeat it again. Silver bullets can be added, but it's extremely impracticable in an LCG model. If the designers decided a few days ago that something has to be done about AGH it would probably take at least nine months for bullet to be added. Cards are produced way ahead of their actual release. Brotherhood without Banners has already been printed in it's entirety. It's cheaper/easier to design/produce all the CP's at once than to do it once a month. The two remaining CP's of DoN, the six CP's of BwB, and Lords of Winter won't have silver bullets for AGH if the AGH issue was realized a few a days ago. Putting aside that the game designers should never release a too powerful/unbalanced card (I think everyone agrees with this, but remember humans aren't perfect), either FFG waits at least nine months, letting all the remaining Regionals (only ONE has been played; so this happened at the beginning of Regional season, not the middle. I don't think that Regional was very large either; about six to eight people attended. It's unfortunate that this happened after Regionals began, but I don't think it's tragic) and major AGOT tournaments have the current card be legal or they errata it. Given that it takes almost a year to address the issue in a non-errata matter it would be poor game design to NOT errata the card. Even if silver bullets could be produced in a timely manner, I personally feel that errata is often the better course of action. Sometimes the best way to address a problem is not to come up with solutions but to get rid of the problem itself (it wasn't banned, but you get what I'm saying).

CP's have to be out for at least a week to be considered legal in a FFG sanctioned tournament. The same goes for the FAQ if I'm not mistaken. I think one week is a reasonable amount of time to modify a deck due to game changes.

While you may find AGH useless now (obliteration = ban, in my eyes) I'm pretty sure that most hyper-kneel Lanni decks that had it before will continue using it. This errata definitely hurts Lanni, but I, along with others, am still skeptical if this will be enough to stop Lanni from sweeping the Regionals.

Kennon said:

Because playing AGH means playing shadows cards, an expensive mechanic that take many slots in a deck. Is it worth the price for a single kneeling effect, interferring with another great kneeling card ? I'm not sure of that. I'll try it to see exactly what is possible but I think for the moment that a pure kneeling deck is now better than a kneeling/shadows deck.

AGH is still playable, but mostly in pure shadows decks, IMO...

Arthur Lannister said:

I agree in theory, but just to be sure, it's probably better to recap which shadows cards Lanni players are likely to play in a normal Lanni deck...

Tyrion (often 2x or 3x)

Qyburn (possibly 2x)

Varys

Syrio

AGH?...since it still has fewer restrictions AND vulnerabilities (being a location) than Castellan

King's Landing? (Hadn't seen this in many Lanni decks before, but I expect to see it more after Zsa's successes.)

Depending on the number of duplicates a Lanni deck plays of each card, even non-shadows decks will likely play at least 5 shadows cards, with plenty of "regular" Lanni decks playing closer to 8-10 shadows cards without breaking a sweat. Considering Syrio fuels AGH, and Lanni draw tends to be pretty strong, playing with only 10 shadows cards is still likely enough to fuel AGH fairly reliably. And if not, Castellan is sitting on the table to help.

So while I agree that AGH requires a large investment in shadows to make it viable (at least 8 or so cards if one of them in Syrio), this investment is pretty easy in Lanni, since Lanni's shadows cards tend to be stronger than what most other houses have in-house access to. And if you happen to draw into that second AGH, you can just leave it in shadows to fuel Tunnels (if playing it) or bring it out of shadows so that you guarantee you have more King's Landing-traited cards to fuel your King's Landing draw.

I honestly think this is going to have a relatively minor (albeit noticeable) impact on the environment.

Like Dan said, Lanni already has some pretty cool shadow options already that are worth including in a deck even if you're not running a shadow theme.

And the cool part right now is that you have a choice (as far as I can see):

a) go with more shadows and include 1-2 copies of AGH

or

b) stick to the bare minimum for shadows and go in another direction

I still think Lanni is competitive (to echo most other people ), they still have gold and draw and other kneel effects - just not as much as before

Twn2dn said:

or

leave 3 AGH's in there, let the two sit in shadows till you need them and make cersie stronger by always having a card that you want to leave in shadows.

As stag said this means lannister players get to explore their options a bit more (~see isn't that a nice way of saying think )

Or... you could replace the third and possibly second guildhall by shadow cards that actually do something besides sit in shadows

With 3 Castellans and 3 AGH, you're going to have a lot of redundancy in your deck for a limited response that you're going to be able to trigger only once per round. To me that seems like a waste

Zsa said:

they do plenty of stuff, make it harder for dragonpit to be effective provide untouchable 'backup' plans, fuel cersie, fuel tunnels of the red keep, scare your opponent (whats he got in shadows....), fodder for by the light of the sun, turns off knight of flowers, and turns off King Bobby.

I didn't say the AGH don't sit in shadows looking pretty and help some other cards (Tunnels, Littlefinger, Cersei), but I'd rather have cards in shadows that I can actually use. I think we can both agree that a card in shadows that can be used is better than a card that just "scares" your opponent but is pretty useless otherwise

Kennon said:

Remember, Castellan is an ally as well, and there is a bit more ally hate than in the past (Varys, Oakheart obviously). I don't mind cost 1 allies, and I will put cost 2 in if they are really strong/efficient, but for the most part I won't put in cost 3-5 ones. That is a big swing.

I think the errata rewards more varied, consistant decks - which is what I love to see. I agree it should have been unique from the start (BTW, it even has a helpful trait!)...but then again everyone knows my favoritism for uniques (guess who will be playing Halfhand in every deck...?). Remember, I play Lanni as well, and like Kennon I don't mind the 'neutering' that has been going on for most of the erratas...that is the price to pay for being the best house

Hmm... at printed cost 5 I would certainly question an Ally (unless it's Littlefinger, who consistently costs approximately 2). But 3 three point mark is the sweet spot for me, and it's difficult to find a more efficient character than the Castellan, Ally or not. Of course, his efficiency was just bumped down in any deck that is also planning on using Guild Hall, but at the moment, I still think it's worth it.

~Of course, I don't have a past World Championship to back up my opinion.

gerg was using the agend and had Arya Stark in there that he kill and just put back in shadow and get thehall off very turn or so there are nice cards that can make shadow powerful and what not

King Blith said:

Arya, Syrio, Kingswood Trail, etc. all have nice synergy with AGH. You do need to run the Shadows Agenda for some of the cards, but that isn't too hard to do in Lannister.

~Even if people don't run AGH 3x anymore what other similarly costed cards can they replace the other one to two cards with? Enemy Informers? Flogged and Chained? The Lion's Will? Hornvale? Shae? The way overly costed event, Misinformation? Poor Lannisters.

I think FFG should interact more with the players' community.

Why is not Nate French posting here? Nate, where are you?

The designer of a game has to be the freakest player here. In other games it is and it works great. Check the Dungeoneer forums. The maker of the game is the player who post the most. He shares his ideas with the community and he is grateful of receiving opinions about them.

More interaction is good for the players and it's good for the company. All the business attend to the needs of the client.

Coucou FFG! We are the client! Do you want us to play Magic instead of A game of Thrones LCG????

matamagos said:

Well, maybe he is just working on the game? Maybe Game of Thrones is not the only Game he is working on? Maybe you should indeed play Magic?

matamagos said:

He may be very busy. But if he or some other official guy could answer some tough questions, it would be nice.

matamagos said:

I concur.

eh, FFG is very accesible when they need to be. And Nate did speak, he just spoke through the FAQ and doesn't feel the need to currently say anything else on the subject quite yet.

If you really want to pick his brain come to GenCon

Kennon said:

Depends on the deck I guess. I love cost efficient cards and very balanced decks that don't rely on any one theme, but many usually (why I am so excited about all the good NW, Wildling, Clansman, Brotherhood sub-themes that seem to be starting). I also usually don't play a ton of gold and/or locations in that I have seen too many games where someone draws 3 straight locations at a crucial time and loses.

I agree that Castellan is very efficient, but in choosing between the two, I probably would use the location. Tempo is a big deal in aGoT (a little less important w/ Valar legal again), and having a 1/2 turn Castellan discarded can really change things.

mischraum.de said:

Damm mishraum. Have I offended you in some way? There is no need to be rude with another user.

Of course I have nothing personal against Nate. I just wondered if it will be a good idea that some designer spend some of his time listening to the community in this forums. It is not very costly for the company and probably they will take benefit from it.

The GenCon sounds great, but unfortunately I live not in USA.

Lately, we currently have more Designer Journals/Card of the Week Articles than we have ever had.

Lately, we have received timely updates to the FAQ in response to problematic cards and situations

We have seen swift changes to the nature of the LCG product in how it is packaged. Princes of the Sun and the new chapter pack types soon to be issued (3x of each card) are great examples of this.

I understand the desire to see Nate post on here, but that has NEVER been a luxury afforded to Nate since he has worked at FFG. He is involved in the design of multiple games (not just GoT) and in my few conversations with him, surfing and responding to the message boards is simply not feasible. Personally, I am very pleased with the formal interraction we currently receive from FFG, and other than the lack of a true OP program, I've been quite pleased with the progress we have seen over the past year.

Dobbler said:

This is very true. Although I am a newbie (only played LCG), the game is improving every month.

C

matamagos said:

"Listening to the community in this forums" is not necessarily the same thing as " posting to the forums," which was the originally stated desire.

They obviously read them, and they obviously listen to the community. They use articles, news and so forth to share their views. What does FFG gain from having Nate post to the boards, other than encouraging the community to question, criticize and critique every design decision - which we do a good job of doing anyway.

By not posting frequently or even really joining the discussion, FFG actually allows the community to be its own, in my opinion. Nate weighing in on every discussion on the boards would actually stifle things in my opinion. I think many people would tend to either not express what their opinion or engage in healthy debate because they'd just wait for his authority in a "Nate will be along to give the official word pretty soon" mentality. Either that, or, since they couldn't challenge his authority, they'd challenge him personally if they didn't agree (consider where the "what bad timing" observations could have gone if Nate had come on to tell everyone why it wasn't bad timing).

I think it actually keeps the community more involved and more active when FFG doesn't post on every little thought or question.

matamagos said:

Personally, I didn't find mischraum's post any more rude to you than yours was to FFG.

As I have said, in other games the experience has proven very positive. Check also the Warmachine Forums, from Privateer Press, which is not a small company!

I'm sure that Nate doesn't work alone. He has to have a team and do the playtestings with a lot of gamers. Maybe them can form a bridge between us and the designers. As an european player, I personally don't feel very confortable with the actual situation. We have strong communities here and strong forums, and I don't know if they have been taken into account. The two last FAQ's have reduced the power of the Lannister house and it's understandable that some lion players don't agree with the measures. Maybe they will feel better if someone explains them the details of the decision, which alternatives have been considered and why they were rejected. Answering to a couple of questions will not harm anybody.

Personally, I didn't find mischraum's post any more rude to you than yours was to FFG.

I apologize if I made cry FFG...