I just wanted to spark up any comments people had about the popularity of control decks and the meta of decks, I remember getting the core set and the only option available to us was swinging hard during the battlefield phase. Now decks rely on indirect damage, development shifting, board destruction, until control and destruction etc. I'm loving all these control decks but I feel bad for my friends who prefer the blunt approach which is not really an option in this modern climate.

There's still a few decks that can do the blunt approach but your game has to be spot on the concept that "SPEED KILLS". Orks and Dwarves all the way in those catagories. The other four factions relly heavily on a control scheme that ties in with the complex yet so simple way that the game runs. Everything is about timing and disrupting key ingrediants in your opponent's combos. It's nearly impossible to control everything all the time but it is possible to slow up your opponent to the point where even with a reset card he/she is still hanging on by a thread. Now one doesn't have to go that far but I'd have to say cards like Burn It Down, Demolition, and Pillage are still some of the most sought after cards in the game today and they're from the core set. FFG could mitigate this and make a fair bundle by pulling key cards from the core set and first battle pack cycle and making a compilation set with 3 of each for sale. That would nicely bring a lot more new players into the game by bypassing the initial cost of getting enough good cards for a good price.

Hi everyone!

Just a moment of pure "reasoning", hoping to use this thread even as a general guide for new players...

This game has two faces; "positioning" and "war", as I call 'em.

The positioning part gives the game kind of a "control tendence": players "place" and "plan" stuff tryin' to get out the best from their decks considering "their" strategy and the opponent's. This aspect tends to be "control-like" and that's the main reason why I like it a lot.

We can say that "everyone" plays some control, even aggro-decks, that, especially in a competitive environment, have to take into account lots of variables.

The other part is "war": the game is a strong "unit-based" type of game, where you play stuff in order to pull out the "bosses" and...simply...destroy.

Even if someone denies it, this is an important and dominant aspect of the game. You have to "kill" and "destroy". This is Warhammer.

The union of these two "faces" gives us a play perspective easy to enjoy, but hard to master, where every deck is kinda "Aggro-Control" archetype, made by a "war" part (defend and destroy) and a "planning part" (collect resources/cards and try to get as soon as you can your "best pieces").

In a game like this, full of funny interaction, is pretty easy to see Control Decks get the...control of the meta, from time to time. Every card game has its own "control era" and it's often pretty long...

I remember the "hybrid" era of the FFGs games (CoC and Agot) and even last year (the first one) for Warhammer...Started with Aggro Decks on top of the world (when the game is "basic" the strategy does too, and it's easier than ever to get some "badasses" and burn every capital you face )...But when the card pool gets bigger, that's when control decks (or similar) start to shine...

The magic word is "options". When you get more options, you get more combos and often more combos ends up becoming the "usual" locks for control decks...

You lose because you're slow at the beginning...But when the game goes on and survive the initial rush, the story ends.

See what happened at various card games worlds...Magic? Blu/Black control won for years...Agot? Lannisters destroyed metas...CoC? Yoggy/Shub, Mono Cthulhu...All big/fat control decks.

This game is a bit different...

In this game, pure Control decks are pretty hard to master...Verena (everyone knows what I think about it ) is an exception and that's the only thing I'd have worked on if a was an FFG employee..It's a PURE control deck and it's pretty fast in getting control of the table. That's not good.

But Verena aside, I really like the "weird" equilibrium between aggro and control aspects in every single deck...Dwarves seems pretty "control-ish"...BUt that's not completely true...There were times when they used to win with furious attacks with Dragonslayer + Longbeards + Troll Slayers, and that's everything but control-ish

Orcs? I don't like rush...That's why I started playin' the Aggro-Control archetype (I've to say noone used to play them in that way around my meta) and that was the proof that this game ends up workin' fine with this kind of tuning.

Ok...So?

So, the game behaves perfectly when you explore both ways and I suggest everyone to try lots of different stuff...Play, play and play, because this game is all about fine tuning and tough choices in deckbuilding...I feel like deckbuilding here is one of the most difficult I've ever seen, compared with other card games...

And that's what I like the most. More than ever, a bad choice can be a lost turn, and a lost turn in warhammer: invasion is one-half a game loss...

I don't see a "definite" line between rush and control here...I just see an hybrid core that can tend to a side or another, but I always feel like the best choice, in the end is in the middle ground and every single tournament showed how the winning decks were the ones where deckbuilding tended to that compromise.

Ok, this is a little "philosophy" for W:I...Not so useful, not so useless, not so IT, but still a guideline that helped me a lot understanding the game and making "RUSH/AGGRO FANS" friendly with the game.

Hope it helps.

DB

DB Cooper - Loved your post (always do - they're always insightful and fun to read). However, Dark Elf was working well for Control around the same time as Verena appeared to be. And it's just as decent at it in many ways. Those hexes and Soul Stealer (PRL - pre-restriction list) made for one nasty deck if you knew what you were doing.

Wytefang said:

Agree, Wytefang.

Sometimes I appear a bit "over-confident" or the like in what I write just because that's my "nature" when I speak about things I like/love and I do love this game so much.

Anyway, There are exceptions, obviously and obviously I'm not the "meta-god"!

My post was about the lovely tendence to "compromise" that I see in strong decks. Maybe it's the first game where the "rule" is the "Aggro-Control" archetype...

Then, God Bless control decks. They're the reason why I play card games ehehe

Love to read your opinions too.

Yes there are no useless posts from DB.Cooper

Like that part about orc rush because it was the same with me. Always disliked it because it was all about having good starting hands, lay your stuff into play that you have on hand and a bit maths when it comes to attacking. Now it's more tactical when you have more options and the possibilty to disturb your opponent while you are getting a bit ahead. Against empire it's funny when you can use Hidden Grove against your opponent or punishing an early (or better said "not enough developed") Verena with your control options. Within the first games of the new Orc decks I lost some games were I did mistakes but after that I thought "I should have played it save!" and I would have won. Playing this game for a while now but as long as I can still learn and explore different deck types it's a fun hobby. In the last weeks I won 1 or 2 games with orcrush development control while opponent decked himself and I had well developed zones and only avoided getting my zones burned. There were some more "unusual" play results and I think in the next months that will go on.

I also read that other post in another thread where it says that your italian players won't publish their decks. Seems like quite the competive scene you have there and I don't quite understand why it is such a drama to let others know or discuss about decklists that are successful. I mean whi is not a game where national and international tournaments (or prices) are common frequently. The deckbuilding section in this forum is not that lively already. There are beginner players who want to have their decks evaluated by the more experienced ones but often the cardpool isn't complete and that's making it hard to give tips because not everybody knows which card was in the related battle pack or expansion.

Deck building is a really important factor in this game. Rules are relativly easy to understand but overall the game and involving combos/synergy is deep. So blunt approach can be good at the beginning to learn the game mechanic but there are other games when one doesn't want to play such a tactical focused game.I could even get my girlfriend to play this game and she does great, even give the good players here a hard time as long I can give her a playable deck and an aproximate outline + goal.

Hi grille! Happy to see that, in a way or another, we agree around here.

And, let me go a bit OT, I missed a lot the discussions on these boards...Had a lot to do with our national activity this year...But here I am, back to the roots.

Ironically, I've not enought time to test/play a lot, so, what remains is...just...philosophy!

Anyway...I'll ask if anyone would like to post his lists: I definitely agree with you about posting deck and discussing decklists...

I try to explain with another little OT why I think they won't do that...There's the chance that we obtain the possibility to "send" the regional winner to the worlds (as a prize)...And for such a great event (we're not sure about it, but we're tryin') they'll do the best they can to...just...win.

They playtest A LOT, more than you can imagine (I'm referring to different metas and players) and Verena is, right now, their focus...

I posted a list on the BigV's post about "stopping" Verena...that's the list I tested...Not so strong, maybe, but it's a good starting point.

We can discuss Verena anyway, if you're curious...I'll try to give you some hints without spoiling (respecting the "good job" of our guys ).

Anyway...Things are changin'...A lot. We'll see fat guys hit the table (spoilers are all about big sexy guys ) and with a so "developement-focused" cycle, I hope the "extremes" will get one more kick...Rush will suffer a bit more against well protected capitals.

I don't see dead dwarves, BTW...I can see just some non-forced buildings, and that's just GREAT!

Until now, the game was a lot about "starting hands" and that's something I don't like...Who starts has a lot of advantage, especially with a good hand...

It's normal, but the starting hand has to be less important than this...

And the direction the game design is taking is exactly the one I expected (and I guess everyone did): a game where even with the "perfect hand" the most important factor is HOW you manage to play it.

As I wrote (sorry for the auto-quote), this is a game of "planning" and "fighting": if one of these two aspects is missed, there's something wrong.

I guess FFG should take it into account every time a new expansion is out, 'cause using this "50 planning/50 fighting ratio" is the right "ratio" to analyse the game state, BP after BP, IMHO.

I'm not that curious about Verena decks as I already estimated its strength and played it after the release of Omens of Ruin. It was more about that "I won't tell" mindset but ok if it is really about going to worlds then we have to respect that. I also think that dwarfes could get easily into that top 8 tournament from you but when everybody is scared from the start and 80% play empire of course the top 8 is crowded by Verena decks. I mean they have a lot of cards to place developments and can give them a challenge.

DB Cooper, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone win your tournaments by making a pure-Verena "hate" deck. A deck that's not so much focused on beating any other deck but Verena. Like I said before, I don't care how good people think that Verena deck is, any dedicated "Hate" deck against it will find success.

So by the sounds of it, a hate deck against Verena would have: Tactic cancelers, Support & Unit destruction, and Development destruction/removal, or also card removal (from your hand).

Everyone can go to worlds, so what is that special about it? I would prefer European Championship in Stahleck anyway, nicer location, good people. And worlds is in August, we have April now. Battlepacks will ship to us and change the flow.

Anyway, if they do so much testing, has someone of them simulation software?

jogo said:

Hi Jogo!

Just to be precise...Everyone can go to Worlds...yes...But my aim is to send the winner "for free". We're tryin' to obtain this prize. It's a big prize, 'cause you have a couple of funny days at GenCon, you meet the guys of the boards and play the "big one".

About testing: the stronger metas are from to different cities and when I talk about "top players" I'm referring to those to metas...They test "live" at their local shops, play 3-5 times per week...That's an advantage, I guess...

Wytefang: Verena Hate? That's what I'm workin' on...Not that anti-Verena centered, but...kinda...

My heart is broken, but I have to: stop the empire!

Three difficult clues (I don't want my opponent discover my secret project...)

1- They''ve weird ears...

2- they're "evil"...

3- they're name starts with "d" and ends up with "arkelves"...

Guess!

jogo said:

I would love to attend the Stahleck championships someday - Jogo's right, it seems incredible. Though I liked GenCon too, despite the disappointing prize support.

Yeah, I would have to agree that it really does take a combination of the two playstyles in order to get the upper hand. Beardburn'a with damage on him is "old school" in the sense that you are relying on a big beatdown unit to destroy your opponent. But it takes a certain amount of control in the form of pillages, smash go boom, foot of gork, etc. to help Beardburn'a reach his goal. Maybe with the exception of pure rush, I'm not sure that a beatdown deck can work without a certain amount of control. On the other hand, a pure control deck, one that doesn't rely on good 'ol units to hit the enemies capital, is going to have a long hard trudge getting to the goal of two burned zones without the units. It really does take the two seperate aspects of this game to make an effective deck that is going to win. And that's why this is such a great game.

I am contacting Wolfgang at the moment to get more details, but you should definitly try to come. Especially if you are european and consider going to GenCon, Stahleck will be much easier(no usa visa problems, hotel booking etc.) and cheaper (around 80€ for two nights + full meals). I think we can get more people than last year, advice a bit DB.Cooper. And I really would like to play some rounds with forum guys.

Beating was Verenas problem in the games I played around her. My opponent built beating on hemmler and protecting him with iron discipline and disdain. Probably working against other races, but empire can find holes in his armor.

Jogo, how hard would it be for an American to attend (as far as Visas or whatever)? If they had a passport would it be easier to attend?

When is Stahleck again?

http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/EinreiseUndAufenthalt/StaatenlisteVisumpflicht_node.html Says you do not need a Visa, if you are from America.
I do not know the date too, Wolfgang has not answered yet. I will aks him, if he has more information for non-european-guests.