The critique has some momentum, nice. I won't answer everything here because I don't really care but I will address two things:

1. I don't offer free advice for game development. If companies want my advice on how to fix/build/design their game, they will have to pay me. Knowledge is not free and it shouldn't be. This is not a charity. You don't like it? Good. I don't really care. I spend lots of money, lots of years and lots of brain-cells to get my diplomas and master's. I won't demean my efforts by offering "free" advice to companies that make millions or billions, in the case of video game companies.

2. Yes, I REALLY love Dragon and no, I DON'T REALLY love attachments. I am FORCED to play with them because of the Dragon mechanics that are heavily focused on attachments. My problem is not that the clan is focused on attachments but in the fact that it is focused on said cards in an ATTACHMENT HATE meta. The same would be felt by, for example, Scorpion players if they played in a meta that favoured strong and varied honour-gaining mechanics, by Crane if they played in a meta that strongly punished honoured characters, easily, etc. You get the point. The recent Koteis and championships have shown that Dragon are last or second to last in each (my condolences to Lion players, I feel for you) and part of the reason is the restricted list and the attachment-hate. As a prediction on the future of the Dragon clan I will say to Dragon players: Don't count on the Clan pack. The recent Unicorn clan pack has shown that if a clan is weak to start, it won't get better or it will gain a marginal boost. The same will go for Dragon. The new "mechanic" that FFG wants to introduce (Fate management/mobility/something....) will fail utterly. It is too convoluted, requiring many cards to even do something and even then, that something has minimal impact in the game. The Dragon clan, like the Unicorn clan, ultimately was designed as a perfect splash, nothing more.

Edit: I just remembered that I saw someone saying that it was wrong, in the original version of L5R, to put all your eggs in one basket due to the mechanics that favoured character removal. As a followup I will say that this strategy is the correct strategy in every card game due to the simple fact that this gives your opponent only one target to focus on. It has been true in all the card games that I have played and it is true in this one too. That's why Dragon was weak as a clan to start with because it focused heavily on an outdated and tactically wrong mechanic of creating a "super-character". They won a few championships in the beginning of the game, when everyone was still learning the new mechanics and whatnot, but eventually, the tactic went stale and predictable enough to be countered easily.

Edit #2: Since the Krakow European Championship has ended, it is clear that the restriction of Spyglass had a serious effect on the Crab clan (which was the reason for the restriction in the first place)....Not....Day 1a Crab takes 2nd place, Day 1b Crab takes 3rd place, Day 2 Crab takes the title of Champion. Oh, and just to recap on the previous discussions, guess where Dragon is placed.

On 8/24/2019 at 8:14 PM, Folkvar said:

...

I think you are wrong with your analysis of the situation. There is probably less attachment hate played atm. than on most parts of new L5Rs lifespan. You are right that the RL and erratas hit Dragon more than any other clan. Dragon won Koteis, because their card pool was much stronger compared to the field than before. The cardpool was especially strong after the release of Mitsu and Void Fist and I don't think that Dragon had a single negative matchup until Niten Master and Void Fist were restricted. Predictability is not a problem if what you do is simply better than what your oponent can do.