http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=2207

My thoughts, if these cards which haven't even been out for a week already need errata or to be restricted then playtesting really dropped the ball.

Horribly dropped the ball.

Both very good. Play balance FTW.

I don't mind ANY house being good, I just care if a card:

1. Totally is out of what their house should do.

2. Gives a house a SIGNIFICANT advantage outside of their said strengths.

LTS met both. *shrug*

The agenda I don't know as much, since I haven't tested it. But from what I heard, a high amount of 1st/early 2nd round wins were happening, and it was very hard to counter (or, counter the counters). Again, I don't know for sure.

On the timing, yeah you never like it right after a card is printed - although TLS has really been 'out' for awhile. But, that is what you get with volunteer playtesting, and a game that is only played truly competatively by - what - 300, 400 people worldwide.

There is a thread on the WH boards about Magic having the same issue with a card, and they have paid playtesters and a huge budget. Erratta is part of CCG's, that is that. I remember L5R (Legend of the 5 Rings) touting in gaming magazines about 'no rotation' and 'no erratta'...six months later erratta, and probably a couple of years before rotation.

rings said:

TLS of course I meant. Although LTS DOES sound more like a banned substance Still a very powerful Bara card.

thanks rings (as always). i saw the changes and expected a s---storm of angry bara players. i'm glad you got the first reasonable word.

rings said:

~Like BotS?

rings said:

I actually think the timing is spot-on. No one likes or wants errata to ever happen, but sometimes it is necessary whether it's because of a misprint and/or balance issues. Either way, if a card needs to be changed, the earlier the better. No point in letting a wound fester. Nor do I see why people should be more upset over the change to Heir to the Iron Throne than the change to Khal Drogo's Tent -- both are how FFG would have printed the cards if they could again.

rings said:

If play testing is truly volunteer it probably does lead to poorer quality (less incentive => less motivation => lesser results). That said, the quality of the game could be worse for a bunch of volunteers. As you mentioned though, companies with larger budgets aren't perfect either. Errata is indeed part of CCG's.

rings said:

I'm normally one to cut alot of slack, and I'm not saying that each errata/restriction isn't for the best. However, if these cards require this now, 1 week after release without there being any major tournaments going on where they show their stuff, then it is troubling that it wasn't caught in playtesting. It isn't like TLS or Heir were comboing with some obscure cards no one remembers. Almost all of TLS combos were posted here on the boards within 30 minutes of him being spoiled and Heir screams Baratheon.

And I know everyone is happy about this because of play balance and although I disagree on TLS as a problem card (and for those who do think he is a problem I don't think the lack of Val does much to mitigate that), Heir was absolutely going to cause problems. It just bugs me that now I have to go explain to the more casual people in my meta that the brand new cards they are buying are already changed or restricted. They are not going to be happy, as they were already pretty unhappy about the restricted list (more for them to remember when building decks).

Darksbane said:

Oh, I agree with you on timing. I am very surprised it got through playtesting, unless they knew the restricted list was coming and therefore knew he would be ristricted. I don't think he is that bad on his own, but the combo with Val (and to a lesser effect, 3-4 other cards) was too much. Those other combo's are still there, but at least it isn't AS mindless as before. ~Heck, I was playing Summoning Season for goodness sake!!!

We will have to agree to disagree on TLS as a problem card. I think we all have had our say there

The more I think about it, the more I think FFG knew there would be a ristricted list awhile ago, and therefore let TLS be printed. ~And then silently read and laughed at our posts for a month. Having gone through the card design process, and seeing the other cards printed, I just can't imagine it getting through without that knowledge.

Not gonna fight the TLS battle all over again.

The Heir agenda being Targ only makes no sense from a game play perspective. Targ has always been the Tri-Con House. For them to get an agenda that eliminates a challenge type is like Lannister getting an agenda that eliminates intrigue challenges. Why aren't all you "House Purists" up in arms about it being Targ only? The agenda doesn't fit Targ in anything but a Dothraki build. Heir not being available to Stark or Greyjoy doesn't make sense from a game play perspective either since thay are the Houses to bes take advantage of it without breaking it. Greyjoy needs it probably the most.

Someone please explain the Errata on Support of Saltcliffe. Why was it necessary?

Once again, AGOT is back to being a control players game that Aggro playes get to participate in. It was nice to hope Aggro might get it's day in the sun, but I really should have known better after 6 years. Really don't care much about Regionals anymore because Control will handily dominate. Again. The more things change, the more they ever seem the same.

Control is incredibly powerful, but I think Aggro has a place in the game. I play aggro myself, quiet effectively. And is Bara Power Rush not a form of Aggro?

How many Aggro decks have won major Joust events in the US? How many control decks have won major Joust events in the US? With Heir being relegated to Targ only, Aggro took a big blow. But that's AGOT. Always has been. Heir and TLS actually had a chance of breaking that lock. Won't happen now.

Darksbane said:

Who knows what really happened. Maybe play testing really did drop the ball. Maybe the card was designed after the majority of play testing was done and was just sent to the printers (Alec did mention it went threw several designs). Maybe the play testers did see the problems, but the designers ignored them or, as I just mentioned, it was too late to change anything. We'll never know. What I do know is that I'm glad FFG is showing more willingness to quickly address cards than they have in the past.

rings said:

~I guess they wanted to torture us even more then by not putting it on the list when it first came out.

kpmccoy21 said:

I actually think it's pretty Nedly. The Targaryens are the "Heirs" to the Iron Throne, and just because you can't initiate all 3 types of challenges doesn't mean you can't have a good representation of all 3 icons in your deck. I can see it doing well in a MIL/POW heavy deck (i.e. Dothraki, Dragons). I wouldn't underplay the efficiency the Agenda can add to some Targ builds. They're also may be some unforeseen INT/POW build?

As for Stark and GJ. Stark has Siege and GJ...I think (and hope) they'll get their day soon enough. i certainly don't think they *needed* Heir, nor did they *need* Siege.

Also, would you be this upset if Heir was printed as House Targ only? For all we know this was as much of a misprint as Khal Drogo's Tent missing it's unique banner flag.

kpmccoy21 said:

~Because do you really think you need your character to stand more than 3 times a round?

To stop abusive combos; especially infinite combos. I can't think of anything else other than "oops forgot to put this in." Dobbler already posted a nasty one with Bran on agotcards.org. it mills your entire deck in the same phase.

Again, just curious, would you be as concerned if Support of Saltcliff was printed with a 3x round limit, or if it was printed with a 3x limit, then errata to remove it?

kpmccoy21 said:

~6 months of Wildlings/NW Aggro wasn't enough?

I think hyper-anything is bad. We've seen Lanni take a hit with it's control shenanigans by putting Castellan on the list. Hopefully both sides will be reigned in appropriately/equally.

I didn't know about the abusive combos with SoS, It was a genuine question out of ignorance. I was thinking about extra challenge effects like the plots and epic events when I asked the question.

Didn't Alec beat the Wildlings with Hyperkneel to win GenCon last year? So actually Wildling shelf life was fairly short.

My issue with Heir being Targ only is that it really doesn't fit Targ. Targ has always been the TriCon house since AFoD. Why would they want to give up a challenge which they have the icons to cover. Nice for Shagga types, but doesn't feel right for Targ. Part of what makes Aegon's Blade and the new Samwell attachment feel right is that they reinforce that TriCon aspect of Targ. Heir does not. Has nothing to do with it being errataed or printed on card. If TLS is out of place in Bara, then Heir is out of place in Targ. Don't disagree on the nedly aspect, though it's nedly in Bara or technically Lannister as well.

I've been hit by Dobbler's mill. It's harsh. Glad that got changed, personally. Also been hit with some broken TLS combos, so it was nice to see it put onto the restricted list. I still think Aggro has a place but you have to play a bit of control with the aggro to help counter their control and you really have to think outside of the box with how you use certain cards. Despite never having won a major event, the right player, with the right deck, and the right plots could pull it off.

Fotonurth said:

Sure, but I'm talking about a consistent chance to be competetive for an extended period. Bara won Kubla twice in th last 5 years with Rush, but no one really considers them a consistent, viable deck build; and immediately after Bara won the first regonal, the deck build was errated into being 2nd tier. I don't doubt the theoretical truth of your statement, but past history really doesn't give your theory much hope.

I'm new to the game, so I'm still learning a lot about the meta. And what I do see is a lot of control. But with this next cycle, and the Targ Box, I think Aggro has a shot, if not 2011 in 2012 when we also have the Lannister box. I look at some of the stuff from aCoA and I see things like Maester of War, being played a lot in this next cycle. I'm running clansmen right now, and my first tournament where I constructed a deck and played I went 2-2. (Was a Hand of the King). But only encountered one control deck that evening.

Does this person know that Wildlings was THE DECK to beat at regionals, worlds, and various other tournaments last year? Regardless of placing in tournaments, it was one of the strongest decks that the LCG has seen so far, right up there with Lanni Kneel (Pre-restricted list). Siege decks reigned up after the stark box was released. The shenannigans with the epic phase lasted for quite a while.

I think aggro has been well represented, just as much as control decks have.

I missed out on the silliness of wildlings, but I've heard stories.

Wow, HUGE announcement sort of dropped in unexpectedly.... A few thoughts.

1. I like the TLS restriction. I'm a little confused by the agenda errata...I don't hate it, but I think it might have been fine if put on the restricted list. Of course, given that Pyromancer's Cache was first banned then later restricted, maybe this errata is just temporary for regionals? (FFG felt the agenda would have too large an effect, forcing decks to play or tech against it?) For the record, I do agree with kpmccoy's thoughts about Targ as a traditional "tricon house." Honestly, I was VERY worried about what the agenda would do to the environment - and I don't think it's as clear cut as saying this was a "pro-control" errata or anything, there were definitely legitimate concerns that I think are addressed. I do think it was handled somewhat poorly though, bringing me to...

2. This was a HORRIBLE delivery on FFG's part. Where was the well-formed explanation for the FAQ? This was, quite honestly, one of the worst news deliveries since CCG transitioned to LCG. The write up for the Targ expansion was similarly disappointing, but at least the cards themselves are interesting enough to get one excited. Honestly, FFG could have done A LOT to help us understand why they decided restrictions/erratas were the right course of action (both the act and the timing), and they REALLY fell short. Moreover, the primary problem with Heir's errata (I think) was that FFG's marketing department first spoiled and talked up Heir to all the non-Targ players, and then the designers made the choice to errata before it was even out. The errata would have been a minor issue if the errata were announced AT THE SAME TIME as Heir was spoiled. Instead, the new agenda got peoples' hopes up, only to dash them against the rocks seemingly arbitrarily. Very poorly coordinated on FFG's part, and a failure in all respects.

3. On the whole aggro vs. control debate, I think people are correct in saying aggro is (and has been) very strong for awhile now. On the other hand, I think kpmccoy raises a good point about a specific type of aggro - "rush." In other words, it's unfair to say aggro has been the ugly cousin to control in FFG's design, but I do agree that Bara rush specifically is getting held back. For me, this seems justified...Bara rush was slated to suddenly receive several new tools that (1) mitigate a major weakness, and (2) speed up the deck itself. These would have had major environmental consequences. Again, the major issue, I think, was that FFG publicized all these *great* cards, managed to get people worked up on both sides, and then seemingly decided as a *black box* to reign Bara in. This left supports (at best) confused about timing, and dissenters INCREDIBLY frustrated about the (alleged) pandering to "control players."

Husemann said:

It was the deck to beat, and Lanni control beat it. Twice.

Sorry for the double post...forgot to mention the new GJ attachment. Yeah, I think others have the right of it about the errata attempting to prevent an infinite loop. When this was spoiled, I talked with another player (his idea) about running an infinite loop with a 4-card combo that involves Bran + Frostfang Peak + two attachments (1 for the trait, the other for the standing). It sounds gimmicky, but the other player assured me it could go off consistently on round 2, and sometimes on round 1...so long as the opponent didn't have immediate attachment removal. (In other words, it wasn't nearly as good against Targ.)

I think standing 3 times each round will prove more than enough for anyone not trying to "break" this card.

I agree. To me, the errata to "Heir to the Iron Throne" essentially turns Dothraki into one of the more powerful aggro decks, potentially.

skeletonator said:

Which shows that it still beat all the other decks, control and aggro both, to make it to the top 4 at worlds.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that the pilot is more important than the deck. (Not by much, but good players are good players for a reason). Wildlings was the go to deck for many of the top players and represented VERY well at all tournaments it was played in.

My point is, aggro has had it's time in the sun just as much as control. I'm not saying control isn't favored a bit more but aggro is still very viable.

Twn2dn said:

Quoted for truth.

It was obvious to me TLS would be on the restricted list, and would be there soon, so I have nothing to say about that.

But I am severely disappointed by the Heir erratum. I agree that it's probably ridiculous in Baratheon (haven't played it in a Baratheon deck myself), but I loved it in other houses (e.g. it made my Lannister Clansmen deck much more viable), so I would have prefered an "Any house but Baratheon" erratum.

The agenda is titled "Heir to the Iron Throne" - lets take a step back here people. This means that it should be run out of Targ (for Dany), Targ (for Rhaegar), Targ (for Viserys), or Stark (for Jon Targaryen Snow, First of his name). The shoe fits.