For those of you who did'nt get a chance to read this on the DB, read on.BEST ARTICLE EVER.

http://www.cardgamedb.com/index.php/index.html/_/game-of-thrones/game-of-thrones-strategy/combo-what-game-of-thrones-is-missing-r52

ALL I CAN SAY IS AMEN. You all need to stop complaining about what you guy's think is broken. It comes down to skill. If you cant construct don't play. The end

Btw not trying to be a jerk. Been playing this game for a long time. It just seems to me like every time agot gets interesting there is so much crying by bad players that FFG has no other option but to continue destroying the game, by erata, banned , restricting. PS Anyone up for some octgn.

A short summary or statement of why that article is the best might have made me more inclined to read instead instead of just "best ever" plus a huge block of text.

I think the problem is more on FFG's side than the players. As long as FFG keeps tinkering and restricting/banning/errata'ing anything that rises to the top, players will continue to expect this to happen and will continue to complain about anything that starts to appear to be a little too good.

First of all you should give a link not just copy twn2 article from anther web site. There is a reason why he published it there and not here right?

So please edit your first post and give proper link. Second I read this article and is very good as almost all twn articles. Returnign to the subject the issue here is I think too small size of chapter packs and quite big focus on one theme withing a block. It changes a balance between old and new builds. It could be avoided if good playtested but we all know that this involves money and time both are critical resources for each company

I don't assume that AGOT is well playtested so we must expect errates especially when new theme comes in play.

I think these boards are for discussing matters just as these, is something gaining too much power or making the game unfun? yes I know it's bad timing now that we just had big tourney and every "bad player is whining" about the winning thing being OP. It's only healthy for the game if people are interested and are debating wether or not something is too powerful or just in good power level with other cards and are any changes needed. Discussion and debate are needed and I don't like putting it under "whining".

Combos are well and good, but we also need ways to break that combo (and can have other uses aswell or they are just silver bullets against one deck) or else they are too powerful and ruin the game play experience. Currently some houses have no ways to deal with attachment hording characters. Yes it shouldn't be too easy to break combo and ruin someones decks win condition completely, but for me I think every house needs a choice of a card that could combat such a dominant strategy even slightly and the decks creator should have to think about what he might encounter, what strategy his deck needs to be able to counter, what weakness it needs to cover and things like that. Also as for AGOT I like the fact that this game isn't so much rock/paper/sciccors as for example MT:G, Every type has equal footing against each other thanks to the house differences and plots (depending of the deck build). Every house has its own strategy or many and work differently. I feel that current problem is that people don't try different builds enough, or are just not wanting try new things. Depending on meta you can have many competitive builds of a house without playing the overly popular and the most "powerful" deck that the house offers, you can build a very competitive martell without it being summer/maesters and the likes for other houses. If the current enviroment lacks diversity its more of some people picking up a "winning deck" and playing with it instead of trying own strategies. The more powerful cards we have the less diversity we would also have as there would be so many auto-include slots with occasional surprise cards added to the mix.

As for errata/restriction/ban, so far I have been happy with every errata/restriction/ban that FFG has done, they have always made the game more interesting and fun and it forces people out of that "stack powerful auto-include cards and call it a deck". THe most boring AGOT has ever been was when the north agendas were dominant, nothing beat the feeling of sitting to a table and seeing 6 agendas the opposite knowing this game will take long and be very slow as my opponent will have to go to 27 power to win. Yes you could build a deck against it but would it be fun if we were still playing against a deck using all the north agendas and placing huge armies for nearly no price at all to the table. Even with only allowed 3 north agendas it was not fun at all sitting across those agendas all the time. We had little testing of val+tls+heir to the iron throne and I can say for most of my own deck builds there were nothign at the time that I could do to stop that bararush from its tracks, only way I could have countered it was to play martell (stop the table full of vigilant guys with BoTS) and I don't find it very fun when we have 6 houses and I'm forced to play one to have any chance against very powerful and solid build. For receant changes I can say that Melee at the gates + pycelle and joust at the gates Luwin got very old very fast.

The game needs to stay healthy and fun, this needs opinions of how the game is currently played and some restrictions and erratas are needed to make sure we don't start this huge powercreep where we need more powerful cards to deal with the other powerful cards or even worse a silver bullet cards that are only good against one specific strategy.

berto said:

berto berto berto, is that Italien?

lalchant said:

you do realize how ridiculous this sounds, right?

jack merridew said:

Ire said:

+1. The article is quite good, too. Thanks Twn2dn, for your always-relevant and thought-out articles.

No I'm from germany. But if we are talking about OCTGN I set up Onliene League Site you are welcomed to register there and challanged me in official league

berto said:

lalchant said:

Is this FATMOUSE in disguise?

While the article itself was good, your post is like some kind of hideous OTT parody of the type of " Listen to me or shut up and die!!! " comments that he was complaining about.

LoneWanderer said:

What on earth are you on Luigi? You're so quiet in person lol...

I always love the "i want to complain about people complaining...on the internet" posts

Good, pretty well-written article though. MAYBE not the best ever, but still.

fhornmikey said:

The article was good but one thing to keep in mind is that saying Combo should be a deck type to balance Aggro and Control is easy but actually designing entire sets of cards to fit this mindset is a bit more difficult.

As far as OP goes, I about to ask if if lolchant was drunk, i guess he answered that

" DETROIT 4 LIFE!!!!"

Do you goto that pawn shop on the 8 mile that has a tv show? That pawn shop is not as cool as the one in Vegas with a tv show.

LaughingTree said:

rings said:

Also, to someone else's point about balancing combo, I agree 100% that it is very challenging. I also agree that it's important to error on the side of making combo less powerful, lest the game devolve into too many combo players essentially playing the game by themselves while their opponents sit by helplessly.

Combo certainly isn't at that point though, and we're a long way away from combo creating an environment full of NPE moments. In fact, the maester's cycle combos actually require that you win challenges, so I don't find combos like Maester Robert, Maester Killer, Joffrey Voltron, or most of the other maester-focused builds non-interactive (or at least not so non-interactive that they somehow break the game). Admittedly, the mill combo that will be available later in the cycle raises a few red flags, and there are a few others that I'm forgetting at the moment, but those can probably be balanced with a few minor tweaks to the agenda or collar (slowing the maesters down enough to make these combo decks more risky).

rings said:

Assuming you don't REALLY "love" such posts, yours qualifies as an "i want to complain about people complaining about people complaining...on the internet" post.

JackT said:

Exactly!!! I was thinking the same thing while writing it...and since you posted again I assume you are complaining about complaining about complaining about complaining and now I am...wait...how many...where is my infinity symbol?