There's no "tech" in this game - it's fantasy-based.

I'm not sure you understand what "trolling" is... because that was it.

ddm5182 said:

Running Reclaiming the Fallen means that you don't (normally) lose to creature control. Son of Grungi is obviously not good, you'd much rather run Serpent Slayers, Longbeards or Dragonslayers at 4 cost. That's about it for Dwarves from this pack. You don't really need the pilgrims but it's worth remembering them.

As for the Outpost, the big difference it makes is that the Thrower deck doesn't even need to Flames slower decks like Dwarves unless they have a toughness guy on the table. In general, you don't necessarily have to wait to kill them in one turn. If you have an Outpost out or other tempting support removal bait like Contested Stronghold, you can probably just an early Thrower since if they had removal they would have used it. 8 resources is easy to reach, and that's 16 indirect damage. Do that twice and you win. Against the Orc ramp to Grimgor plan, if you draw early Demolitions you can actually outrace them and kill them before Grimgor hits whereas previously you had to just hope they didn't draw him.

“Ah aha ahhh STOP IT! Can’t you see that you two are in love?” – Kramer

ya only way i can see bt losing now is at its own game, meaning a unitless [units = you rely on to deal damage at least] deck. Until Wrath of God - The Support Version comes out, bt will always have card advantage from more usable cards & less 'does not apply here' ones. So ya, mirror, but making it obsolete with a new type coming in by ... banning it? That's one option, but not the best imo - why not allow for another unitless type AND give more support removal to the masses? BT is still vulnerable by relying on only 3 cards in its deck to win - more instances w/ Order in Chaos - but still that's a big enough exploitable weakness that i dont think it should be banned.

As for a unitless type, I'm going to work on DE milling/discarding / Orc control to try to limit the number of throwers they get in the first place and use pillage, maybe burn it down, or that quest they have to destroy all supports to clean up. Don't think they're there yet, so probably more handicapping of bt while i play now ( a slower more control-ish type that requires a lot of educated guessing, that i find fun to play and is more like the Buckeyes than USC

Artemus Maximus said:

f7eleven said:

An expected reply from one of our best Trolls here. Amusing.

Clamatius said:

I find myself in agreement with Clam on this one. It's not even just the 3 cards, it's the entire package which involves recycling cards and tons of multipurpose cards as well. Best bet might be to just Errata the usage of the RBT's power.

So what is the freakin point of this thread? KUDOS DDM you broke a game. Caused hate and infighting among players. And now want peace? Fang is right. Anytime anyone disagrees with you, you just turn around and shun them or worse make accusations against them.

You remind me of THAT GUY...the guy that makes all magic players look like 'holes. Seriously why should I care about this game or answer your question? Tyrant.

Am I being too harsh? Seriously I could come in here and proclaim that I have the answer to thrower deck and YOU would reply "proof or dint happen". Then I could give a valid excuse like "I can't because I am popular in my group of tourney players and they know I post in these threads." Then you (who hasn't posted your deck here for anyone) would call me a liar.

Well...choke on this! A Chaos epic tactic is coming out that destroys all target opponent's developments at the cost of destroying all of the player's units. How does that factor into your brilliant deck. I am by no means defending Fang here. I just want you to see how quickly one card changes a game.
I am holding back these scans on purpose just for you. So everyone here now has to wait thanks to you. I will provide a bit off info on the card. First can't see cost or name. Second can't see set number. Border is Chaos though.

Next time you think you have the game all figured out with your awesome deck show the forums the solution to countering it. After all....you are that good RIGHT? Besides if you or Clam and anyone for that matter think you have discovered a broken part of the game PLEASE do the game a favor and email FFG so that they are aware of the issue. Also instead of posting the broken deck try posting a deck that counters that deck for when people start coming across it.

PS: I would have posted the scans for 4th waystone had you refrained from "Haters gonna hate". I don't know you in person so I am not sure if I can hate you. I have plenty off friends that act like you do in these forums, so I for now I am indifferent towards you. And I am not your GUY...BUDDY (south park humor )


EDIT: For the record a "troll" would be the equivalent of a magic player coming into these threads and posting hate towards this game and not backing it up or sticking around to see reactions. Fang is not "trolling". Had Fang said this "people that play BT decks are stupid". And then stuck around just to cause fighting between the entire forum, then he would be "trollin'"

Wytefang said:

Obviously I would ask you for proof if you claimed to break the format...? Do you take that as an insult or something?

Also, please scan the deck building forum, I post lists there all the time. So I'm not really sure if you are confusing me with someone else maybe when you say I have never posted decklists?

As for your claiming to have spoiler info or name dropping etc, I don't really care. That's not why I post here. I post here to share info with other players and work together to 'solve' each format. The cool thing about CCG-style games is the format is constantly evolving, so even if you claim some incredible card is coming that totally wrecks all my best deck ideas, it doesn't change a thing about the puzzle I'm working on now, which is how to build the best deck given the cardpool we have.

I sincerely apologize, again, for letting Wytefang drag me down into his nonsense. I hope everyone will read this thread and glean the useful bits of info, because there has actually been some good discussion here. For my part, I will try and avoid his garbage in the future, and I completely recognize our back and forth in this thread makes us both look like retards. So, sorry. He's tough to ignore given how often he posts, but I'll do my best...

Just so we're both clear here, DDM, it's your behavior (tone, language, and attitude) that drags down these threads - not the person who you antagonize into then responding angrily. Realize that and improve on it, and it's all good, imho.

I don't think you're unintelligent (not by a longshot) and I think you have a good feel for the pulse of the game. However, many of us also sport those same traits and bring as much if not more experience to the table concerning this fine game. Start by being willing to acknowledge that others' perspectives are just as valid as yours (even when you don't agree with them) and finish by either disagreeing politely or just not commenting at all. Basically, read the way that Clamatius posts in these forums and follow his lead. He clearly knows his stuff but he somehow manages to engage in discussions without sounding totally arrogant. That's the ticket right there.

All that most of us in these forums are asking of players such as yourself (or your twin F7Eleven) is that you respect those who may know as much as you two think you know or that you respect other opinions in general, regardless of the experience levels brought to the discussion. That honestly shouldn't prove so difficult, should it? I wouldn't hope so.

Nuff said. Let's all move on.

Cool deal, you get the last word. *Now* can we get back to discussing Silent Forge and the impact its going to have on the meta, please?

I'm actually excited by this battle pack the more I think about it. It means either thrower is getting banned (yay, what a fun meta that would be!) or we get to collectively focus on some really weird problems like how to get an edge in the thrower mirror; at the very least, I am reasonably sure anyone who cares about optimal deck selection in the format has to play thrower now (even if only to try and crack it). From a playtest pov that sounds like infinitely bad EV, but the theoretical problems are interesting at least. Next week I'll get to work brewing up some weird stuff abusing Will/Long Winter shenaningans, but I'm really interested to hear others' results in the meantime experimenting with weird tech in the matchup. There *has* to be a hole in the armor somewhere.

I wasn't as impressed by this current battlepack, in all honesty. The bizarre obsession with Dark Elf cards that remove a power icon has go to go...it's utterly useless as things currently stand, particularly when it comes to the timing of most of the cards with that particular power. So hopefully they'll find something else to reinforce for the Dark Elves as more packs are released. Sure it can help keep your attackers alive, I guess, but it's a pretty plodding strategy, all things considered. When you factor in all the kill cards in Destruction, this power seems pretty darn pointless. If your opponent wants your attackers dead, there are WAY too many ways to do it these days, again, especially for a Destruction player.

On a different note, not sure why the release of this battlepack makes you think that BT will be banned? (The outpost card making BT too powerful, perhaps?)

Mirror matches are a crap-shoot, really - it just comes down to which player put more anti-mirror cards in his deck (or so it seems to me). I like to slip in a small surprise or two for mirror matches but really they can be hit or miss, from what I've seen.

ddm5182 said:

ddm5182 said:

I think the game needs a new way of flipping developments up, a reinforcement mechanic (think of the way Voldo in UFS used combos). Maybe wood elves could come with traps as tactic cards that get played face down as developments (representing natural forests) and then can be flipped face up and set oof the trap but at the cost of destroying the card. At the same time I think more development destruction cards are the answer to BT. A card like sacrifice target unit and destroy X number of developments in target player's corresponding zone. X is equal to cost/power/defense of the sacrificed unit. What is destruction got a card that wrked like BT but instead of destroying units destroyed developments?

BT relies on developments to deal its damage. Correct? So that is the weakness imo. Unfortunately my town doesn't see much constructed at tourneys since we use a custom draft format.

They could add a chaos unit that destroys a development when it enters play or even cards that destroy developments when they are discarded.

I see the development mechanic being underplayed in this game for as unique and essential as it is to the game. Making the choice of loosing health for abilities or reinforcements would add more strategy to the game imo. Also more could be done with quests in the game. Maybe Bretonnians knights will have the ability of playing quests to them rather than limiting units to being played to quests.

I like to discuss winning/breaking decks here with others. So please dont stop posting them ddm512.

If players want a meta based only on their thoughts, follow the "our meta is fine" thread and dont look on the web.

jogo said:

Clamatius said:

let me clarify

I'm not saying that having a single route to victory is a weakness (as I think you'd agree, having MORE than one and not focusing on one route is weaker in this game) but that having only 3 cards that do that is the weakness. How else are they going to hurt you if those 3 cards are gone? Make them (and the ones that bring them back from the dead) unobtainable and you win. Period. That's A LOT easier to do if there were 3 than if there were 25, don't you agree? It certainly does matter that there are only 3 actual cards that can end your game in a deck.

If you use fast & focused discarding in conjunction with milling, you can reduce the actual card amounts by half easily. Consequently & unfavorably this has the possibility of increasing the chance you'd see the BT played in a game of course, which means you'll still need support removal (which i never meant to abandon). However, once you get rid of it, you don't need to worry about others as much, freeing up prime real estate in your deck. Yes, BT still just needs one out to win....but that's no different than any other tactic i've ever heard of, so that alone can't discount this approach. The difference with this strategy vs. all others is that instead of thinking of how to solve the problem by reacting to it, I'm thinking of how to solve it by preventing it in the first place and using reactionary methods as back-up (since apparently they're not good enough at this point). Neither is this milling/discard strategy right now i doubt, as I acquiesced, so we're talking about theory. You'd have to make a VERY strong case to convince me that the following approach:

A) You reduce the chance that they'll draw any particular card (let's say RBT) at some point by sending it directly to the discard pile from the deck. B) You reduce the chance that they'll play it once drawn by discarding it from the hand first. C) You reduce the chance of it being in play for long by destroying it.

is worse than:

A) just waiting for them to be played and then trying to get rid of them.

Especially with the BT deck, you'd always be behind. Of course any deck would have troubles playing catch up. If milling & discarding is your strategy to win, it's going to naturally do the job of a deck with a TON of support removal - and as a side effect at that. And then since you're going to win by decking - go ahead & put in a some of support removal too for the ones that get through - how many cards are in this type of 'milling' deck that get rid of BT & OiC -VERSUS- any other deck with major support hate? The opportunity for much more, is my point. And you aren't filling your deck up with every support removal card you have that do only one thing that is not directly related to winning.

Fine theory. Have a list that successfully punishes thrower for playing only 3 win cons via milling?

@Curator: Its pretty clear your vision for these forums is very different from the vision of most, or at least many, of the people who post here. You're coming off like a jerk right now and not really contributing anything to the thread by railing on every other poster while we try to have a productive discussion. Please contribute a bit more constructively.

@ DDM Nah...I have done more than enough for this site. Although my productivity for this game I will admit could use some work. I think I will try to stick to the topic at hand.
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
No point in discussing Silent Forge release date since it is out. I think March of the Damned will release the end of this month and arrive around the 28th. A bit off topic, but I am interested in what others think about more Bretonnians showing up to counter the undead? At the same time should a new race enter through adventure packs to pester the lizardmen? I remember Skaven always being a pest to Lizardmen to the point of archenemies. Then Tomb Kings came to the game and because of how close Khemri was to Lustria they became new archenemies. I hope they just stick to Skaven, brettonians are semi making up for lack of new faction like horde got.

Do you think we will see some Bretonnian knights this cycle?