Check out the new FAQ. Both bolt throwers are now once per turn. Discuss.

Faq yeah!!!

It's definitely a great start.

Ok, so double post. But here are the actual substantive changes in the FAQ if you don't want to read it.

Repeater Bolt Thrower -> 1/turn. Plus a free typo (James, you may want to fix that ).

Reaper Bolt Thrower -> 1/turn.

Iron Discipline -> Can now counter Attachments.

The damage redirection section is tweaked but it's more a clarification than anything else, I think.

The best part of this is they just nerfed (banned) dwarves' only bad matchup.

Good start, still a long way to go.

ddm5182 said:

Hmmm, interesting. I don't have as much experience with the Dwarf/Orc matchup as I should, how does Grimgor fit into this matchup? Not enough oomph?

This does shake up the metagame though, very cool. It will be nice to not have to worry about that random deck while deckbuilding.

The Orc/Undead control deck makes good use of Grimgor vs. Dwarves - you usually blow up their kingdom. The big problem for that matchup after Silent Forge is that it is very hard for the Orcs to beat Reclaiming the Fallen because you kill all the actual dwarves. Once they burn a zone you won't be able to stop RtF getting the second one short of ripping a Bloodthirster to block.

ddm5182 said:

Question, how many decks that could potentially beat Dwarfs were discarded or never seriously considered because they would get eaten alive by thrower? Is it possible that there is not just one but a couple of decks that could challenge Dwarfs that no longer have to fear Thrower decks?

Wytefang's Empire discard deck seems to potentially be a better idea now that Thrower is no longer as useful as it was and therefor no longer the ideal Empire build. Same resource engine, but no longer equal regard to development needs if I understand it correctly.

I should say I'm not saying his deck is the match for Dwarf, I haven't tried it, I just remember it being dismissed because Thrower could do the same general thing with less moving parts andthere harder to disrupt.

Even with the bolt thrower only being usable once per turn now, why is the card now worthless? Indirect damage is a strong theme in the High Elf Faction, and it seems like the bolt thrower would still fit into a high elf deck that focuses on indirect damage. Making a unitless deck may not be a good idea any more, but I think the card still has uses.

@SeanXor, its not worthless. Look at Clamatius' "High Elves Gone Wild" build. Its probably worst than Descendant of Indraughnir there in the high-cost finisher spot, but its a viable consideration.

@Penfold, you tell me man. I think Wytefang's deck is terrible, its easily disrupted (far moreso than thrower ever was) and *easily* played around, especially from a dwarf deck that can sac its own dudes to grudge thrower. You're more than welcome to sleeve it up and give us some reports. If results are positive, it is generally very easy to get me to change my mind. Clamatius has a couple ideas of what we can try vs. dwarves, and we might get around to playtesting those soon, but I've basically given up on beating them in the current cardpool. RTF is just absolutely devastating to all destruction strategies, and while I really like the High Elf indirect deck, it is just not fast enough. There might be an empire build with some game, but I'm dubious.

can't wait to see some of the builds now that maybe weren't plausible with the previous throwers.

i'm actually tweaking an undead/orc/de combo deck that abuses come into play effects and leave play effects, i'll post a list as soon as i have one i'm happy with

ddm5182 said:

You're certainly welcome to your opinion about my deck (despite my strong suspicions that you think it's "terrible" for other, less altruistic motives, but that's neither here nor there and it's not worth the effort to even go there) however play-testing here has proven that you're wrong (anyway) in your assessment of its quality.

It's not as good as I originally thought it could be against everything but it's so far from "terrible" that I had to chuckle at this particular word choice.

Thanks for the kind words, Penfold, about the deck.

Wytefang said:

But, didn't you just "go there" with that very comment? It must have been "worth it" to some degree.

Yeah, I guess it was.

Post some walkthroughs vs. dwarves?

Clamatius and I arent even playing W:I anymore becuase we've given up beating dwarves. If you think you can beat them, I'll take ideas from anywhere at this point. Freely admit I havent playtested the matchup, but the theoretical holes in your strategy are pretty glaring, and obvious to more than just me (as you'll recall from the feedback you got in your "slow-roll my deck for 3 weeks" thread). If it doesn't turn out that way in practice, cool. I'm open to changing my mind. Post a couple game walkthroughs turn by turn when you have some time?

The main problem, and I realize it will sound like a cop-out of sorts, is time. I just don't have much right now, honestly.

All I can say is that Dwarves definitely prove very problematic for the Mill deck (though it can still win with a good start, like any deck) - at least to some extent, but to every other type of deck, it's pretty dangerous (though Empire could prove tricky depending on how many of certain tactics are used). So my main gripe is simply that "terrible" is a pretty unfair word for you to use, if you're being honest about it. I don't recall a ton of people pointing out a lot of glaring holes but I've not gone back to read that thread for quite a while either, so perhaps I'm not remembering it very well. I'd label it as the best of the Mill decks, that's for certain, but also just as "good to almost very good" in quality. No more, no less and that's basically based on a lot of play-testing at the time. I'm not sure how the most recent battlepack (the one from right before MoD) affected it since we've not played much for the past month, sadly.

We've also taken a small break from playing as much as we used to, simply due to a lack of new cards AND due to a lack of availability from my friends who play as of late (one got a girlfriend, one got a job - yay, life!). Sigh. With this new set hitting any day now, though, I imagine will do some renewed W:I gaming.

Maybe that's for the March owners since gencon but the rest has fun in playing new decks. Of course dwarf is quite unbeatable but we don't play them that much and empire and high elf got some nice additions too. The only thing that hurts in the main order vs destruction matchup is that buildings are too strong and order has so many ways to remove them against destruction (maybe orcs excluded).

Well the other hugely GLARING issue is that Destruction has yet to be given ANY kind of Tactic canceling card. I understand that from a design perspective, you don't always want or need symmetry between factions and such but in this case, it's badly crippling Destruction to not have its own High Elf's Disdain. Sigh!

I really agree with grille that, order have powerfull support controler card and as order had obtained more and more unit control card with the time, destruction still do not have different ways to control support.

And as the card that destroy support are used most of time to slow opponent ressource/draw it leads most of the deck to be "support control" because it is a strong strategy to get advantage on your opponent whatever he plays. And as there are more and more cards in the order to do that it is harder and harder for destruction to counter Order deck as their advantage on unit control disappear with each BP.

The support control card are no more made to destroy a specific support that give a great advantage or make part of the opponent strategy to win, but they are played most of time as a "destroy land". And both dwarf and empire get the biggest advantage in this way.