Also, thank you everyone for your input on this thread. I think Lannister currently has access to the easiest/strongest draw. Even in CCG they had very good draw. While I understand and have no problem with Lannister having access to gold, I never understood why they should have access to easier/better draw than other Houses. In my opinion, good draw should not be kept to a couple of Houses. I think every House should have relatively easy access to it. I don't want universal draw cards (i.e. Watching the Heavens), but cards that relate to a House theme/style (i.e Maegi's Crone). I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes out in the next CP expansion.

FATMOUSE said:

this is where I get a little baffled. Look at maegie's crone vs GTM.....

look at king renly vs. king tommen......

notice a trend? its not that other houses don't get some draw effects, its that they have to jump through hoops to draw (even LIV, which just fits the theme a lot better then Crone or Renly, but still compare to devious intentions) while lanni just plops down draw.

I agree, Lars. I think Lanni does have too easy access to draw, which is why I said every House should have "relatively" easy access to it AND it should fit a theme/style. GTM is just straight guaranteed up draw, which is just silly IMO. LIV you have to win a challenge to draw a card, Maegi Crone requires burn, Renly requires winning power challenges. These cards provide relatively easy access to draw (Renly is a lot tougher because of the Power Struggle requirement. It would be better if he was like the Blackfish but with power challenges) in that they are achievable, but not stupid easy where it's virtually guaranteed. They also fit a theme for each House. LIV +2 STR fuels Intimidate, Crone fits burn, and Renly fits Bara winning power challenges. I don't see what theme GTM fits. Everyone reveals plot cards. Not just Lanni. The fact that it's non-unique makes it that much better. Insidious Ways is LIV in Event form with better draw. Tommen kind of fits Lanni's kneeling theme? Parting Blow actually works with Lanni's theme, but it's a universal event.

I don't mind Houses having extra draw, except that I think every House should have it, you should have to work towards it a bit, and there should be some rhyme and reason behind it. Right now, the draw is unbalanced, is easy to achieve in some Houses and too hard in others, and is often non-thematic. I think if these issues are addressed and fixed, we will see a much more rock, paper, scissors kind of game. Which is what I think a card game like this should be.

I don't really have a problem with one house having easier access to draw than the others as long as the game balances out that advantage. I find it thematic. I definitely want to see draw increased in the other houses, but to a varying degree, and certainly not up to the level of Lanni. I think things are going that way.

The problem I see is that the game does NOT balance Lanni's easy draw advantage out. Instead, it makes it worse. Lanni has access to more gold to play those cards, a well balanced character selection, and some of the best character control in the game. That lack of balance between the houses is the root of the problem IMHO.

I agree with the folks who would like to see "thematic" draw for all houses. I also don't get why Lannister has easy draw. I see gold as their house specialty, not draw. I think draw should not be a specialty of any house, but there should be ways for all houses to increase draw through thematic mechanisms as others have related. I don't want it to be too easy (for any house) though, or we just end up with an arms race where everyone is drawing max cards every round. I like the effects where one has to win a challenge to draw for the houses that currently have that.

Good discussion.

Yeah, I side with Deathjester. I'm not opposed to any house having easy access to draw or any other mechanic. Targ has easy access to recursion, which can effectively allow you to draw more than five cards a round. (I don't think Lanni or Martell should have as easy access to recursion, though thematically it makes sense that Bara might...and possibly even GJ.) The difference, of course, is that recursion tends to be naturally balanced...since you can't pull cards from your dead/discard pile if there aren't any in there. On top of that, Targ's recursive cards restrict exactly when and what type of cards you can pull. For example, waif says "only if two are there" AND let's the opponent select, while Dany's chambers allows you to target attachments only AND only after you play a Targ character with the same cost or higher.

GTM doesn't seem to have a downside, or even much risk at all. I think this is largely because of the power level of LCG cards (fewer draw options make those currently available that much better) and the lack of effective ways to deal with locations. Hopefully Stark box will help with the latter point.

Twn2dn said:

How? by what was spoiled there are only two location hate cards coming and they put House Stark only on one and the other I'd rather use on characters.

Side note, Its kind of interesting that the stark box took a little wind out of the sails of the AGH errata, introduced a lot more ways of limiting the castellan/AGH combo for a turn or more allowing the lanni player to make an easier choice, oh you turned this one off, ok i'll use the other. not saying the errata wasn't needed, just an observation that I (and possible only I) found interesting.

Fleeing to the Wall, Condemned by the Council, Price of War, Support of the Kingdom, Pyromancer's Apprentice, Frozen Solid, Chella, the Bandits, that new Wildling card I can't remember the name of, and probably a couple other cards I'm forgetting, and we don't have adequate levels of location control? *raises eyebrow* I'd say that it's much more accesible than it's been since the days of Bandit Lord.

Kennon said:

There are massive amounts of location control, and REALLY good location control at that, but it still doesn't hide the fact that some houses don't run it and lannister walks all over them because of card advantage.

Don't run it, not can't. There's location control available for every challenge type, some from shadows, some from hand, and a plot. It's not that people can't run it. For whatever reason people for the most part don't seem to be running it. I'm not sure what that reason might be. I think most people would find their decks improved to run a little, but whether it's thematic reasons or just wanting those slots for something else, I don't see it happen very often.

Kennon said:

I'd like to exercise my right to disagree here . Even if you list quite a few cards, location control is quite weak compared to say character control.

Fleeing to the wall is first of all a really "loose form of control" you only get punished if you over extend your locations too much, you don't get to choose anything, 1 claim only, 3 gold 3 initiative, not very impressive unless you're playing vs a guy that is running 20+ locations- and unless you hit that sweet spot, there are probably better things to do with your plots like Dan mentioned.

Chella sucks as a location control character, the bandits are VERY conditional (season specific, 2 houses only) - I don't see how those be considered to be solid loc control.

Price of war is good if you're running war characters, and you win a military challange on the attack and if your opponent is actually running some non-resource locations worth discarding. Support the kingdom only really works in resource denial decks, otherwise it's not worth the slot in your deck

So from all that list I think the only solid location control is condemned by the council (and you cannot touch shadow cards) and pyro prentice which is a 1 str int, 3 gold character that MAY allow you to discard one location (if your opponent is out of gold). Frozen solid is not out yet but that will be another good location control card I think (if you're not playing vs targ ).

So all in all, I think you don't see that much location control out there because the options are not that good. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing (I mean who said locations HAVE to be easy to get rid of). It's just part of the game.

Yeah, Zsa hits on all the main points, I think. Frozen Solid will be excellent (for Stark) when it's out. Support of the Kingdom is pretty crappy, really (in my opinion anyway). Traitors don't really count (they aren't reliable and are terrible in most match ups). The current neutral stuff is OK...passable as location control in certain deck types (for example, apprentice in a Lanni shadows deck), but it's situational and generally pretty inefficient, even in decks devoted to those mechanics. The one thing apprentice, in particular, has going for it is that at least you get a character for 3 gold...too bad it takes up that shadow slot so you can't play your Qyburn, Syrio, Tyrion, AGH, etc. for that phase/round though.

I actually like PoW a lot...it doesn't hit most resource locations, but those don't tend to be the "problem" locations anyway (AGH, Black Cells, King's Landing, LIV, GTM, Dany's Chambers, Lost Oasis, etc.). The only problem I have with PoW is that it's really hard to play it outside of Stark or Greyjoy. Since GJ also has Wintertime Marauders, which often doubles as location removal, GJ doesn't seem to have a big problem with locations anyway.

Condemned is pretty good, but it's not nearly as good as PoW: You're trading 1 card for 1 card, and you still have to win the challenge to pull it off. Also, Condemned doesn't hit some of the worst locations to play against...namely AGH and King's Landing. (I think those are the worst, but I'm probably very biased on this assessment based on the decks I like to play. In some ways, AGH's errata makes Condemned better, I guess, since it likely discards a higher % of a Lanni opponent's deck, assuming that Lanni player plays fewer AGH post errata.) GTM and LIV are good targets for Condemned, and those locations are the biggest factor in my decision to play it. But at its best, Condemned really isn't that exciting or even efficient, and sometime's it's actually pretty crappy too.

Twn2dn said:

I have been sold on support of the kingdom for quite awhile now, I will never run a deck without 3 of them.

Wrecking Ball said:

thats good I'll run 3x streets, 3x 2 for 2 reducers, 1x chambers (attached to my house card) and a bunch of strong none income locations. now you have three dead cards in your deck. I could even add in the seas and use them on turn they are played. In lanni, martell, bara, targ, and stark i can add in or substitute gold providing characters, The 0 limited reducer, or the 1 gold character reducers.

Kennon: I was asking how the stark box will make location control better. The best card is stark only and twn2nd alluded to it in his post above.

Lars said:

You could run that income set, but 80% of decks run either the Feifdoms, Limited +1 gold locations, or the shadow +1 gold location, so normally it won't be a dead card. And in an environment where Greyjoy Winter is a strong archetype, it could really be crucial. How many times have you had games where +1 gold would have completely changed your marshalling and ultimately the way the game played out?

Kennon said:

I've found that 80% of the time you end up against a deck that doesn't have anything worthwhile to blow up. But then you come across a 20% deck that makes you wish you had catastrophe.

Granted location control is excellent against Targ, Greyjoy, and Martell.

kpmccoy21 said:

well I prefer reducers over +1 gold generally anyway (dunno way just seemed more efficient to me I guess). And the +1 gold thing has only happened to me since Martell came out once and that was because I drew a combo after taking the draw title (1st and 3rd card were the combo).

Hmmmmmm....

Kennon's main point is worng IMO. There isn't nealry enough decent location control right now, and we were much better off as recently as Five Kings when high Tide was around as well as a couple of decent events and location hate characters.

The Bandits are unplayable, the Plot doesn't hit enough quickly enough (though it is good in a control deck), the new wlldling events are inefficient, and Frozne isn't here yet (but will help tons)

Chella is good - too expensive OOH. Pyros are good - too expensive in a non shadows build.

I disagree with anyone questioning Support> It is one of the best control cards ever printed, even in LCG it shines. Kpmccoy si 100% correct - EVERYONE runs fiefdons and +1 gold - i have yet to see a pure streets/2 for 2 income based deck. Support is money - literally - and I ahve won or lost more games becuase of this one card than almost any other in LCG.

Price fo War is awesome as is Condemned by the Council. I'm very happy where we are with event based lcoation control, would just liek to see a few more characters that hit locations. And admittedly, i need to loo closer at Pyros - i've gotten away from Shadows cards and these might be worth including.

To sum up: we ahve soem excellent events for lcoation control, but how many slots are you willing ot allocate in your deck for them? Unless there is more character absed lcoation hate, this si still an area of control that needs to be developed.

Yeah, I agree that Support of the Kingdom can be really good at times...especially against a GJ winter deck that then inadvertently puts the choke on itself. Still, the main point of this thread was "what if every house had a lot/no draw," and I said that I hoped Stark box would help even things out. My thinking is that Frozen Solid and PoW, which should be more ubiquitous with Stark reemerging as a competitive house, will keep location-heavy decks more in check, so that certain deckbuilds take more risks by playing a low number of characters and relying too much on their control-oriented locations (including GTM, King's Landing, etc.).

Does Support of the Kingdom in any way restrict Lanni's ability to draw? No...unless you count the fact that Lanni may not have enough gold to marshall Tommen, GTM, or King's Landing...but that's rarely the case. So whether or not it's a playable card for its own sake, Support really isn't playable as a way to restrict draw.

Back to the tangent

In most games I've played, Support hasn't mattered nearly as much as another surprise event (or Condemned) would have mattered. I don't mean that it hasn't done a thing, only that it normally didn't affect the game nearly as much as a cheap character, event, or gold-providing location would have. (It looks like some, including Rings and Stag Lord, have had different experiences though, so maybe this is a matter of opinion/personal experience.) Even when I have pulled off 2x Support after winning a power challenge with Viserys on round one (probably the best case scenario for that card), the two extra gold I took from the opponent each marshalling phase didn't seem to make as big a difference as 2 other cards would have. And Support is especially bad late game, since by then the opponent will likely have enough resources out not to miss one or two (or at least feel the effects so badly), and there will be other problem locations that Support doesn't touch.

All this said, I admit it's been awhile (at least 2 months) since I've taken a critical look at Support as a deck-worthy card, so maybe it's time I take another look with the last couple of chapter packs included. (Not as a way to restrict draw, mind you, but in a completely different role altogether.)

Perma steal of a resource is a no brainer for a POW strong deck. It may well be the least of the location hate events - but its still **** good.

Like an A compared to a couple of A++ cards.

Twn2dn said:

So is anybody else kind of ticked that frozen solid is now House Stark Only? What was the problem with playing with this card out of house? You had to pay 3 for it. 3 is totally worth it while limiting it to be played too easily out of house. I don't really understand why they limited it so much.

Wrecking Ball said:

very much so. I'm not sure what the rational was. I guess maybe they were worried about the new house card and playing it 'OOH' for 2.......its seems like a stretch but its the only thing I can think of.

Maybe Nate/FFG figured it'd be better for balance and/or flavor reasons if houses had house-specific ways of dealing with locations?

I have no problem with "Frozen Solid" being house Stark only now. I like Twn2dn's "flavor" for house-specific rationale. Works for me.

If you want to keep "flavor" house specific why don't you just make everything house only? IMO that doesn't make any sense, keeping flavor specifity is what the gold penalty is for.