I would rather have power cards restricted instead of errata'd. Errata should be done to correct templating issues, not to nerf a power card. If something is too powerful for the environemnt, or skews it to far, restricting that card is a good solution.

I recently rebuilt my Martell deck and added a second TVB, which sped up my draw considerably. 7 cost isn't that hard to get these days. And I'm actually glad that it got restricted -- it makes it more challenging for me to build a deck.

I can also see a day when the word "Restricted" is added as a keyword. Designing a card to be restricted isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Twn2dn said:

I disagree.

I feel the restricted list is the ideal solution precisely because your "perfect world" is not practical or realistic. In the real world you will never find a situation where all cards are perfectly balanced in a game where new cards released regularly. That might be hypothetically, theoretically possible, but it is 99.9% impractical for the real world IMO.

Thus, the Restricted List really is the best/ideal solution to the problem because no matter how hard a collectible company tries, there will always be imbalanced cards that get published.

bloodycelt said:

Even with that errate TVB still deserves to be on the restricted list. Unless you don't think Val deserves to be on the Restricted list as is.

LaughingTree said:

Really? I'd not think of TVP as game breaking in any way especially if the "bypass the draw cap" issue is settled. Well priced at 7 STR with two icons and steath and deadly, but no game breaker.

The way i see it is...

There are a few different ways that the restricted list is being used. The first, and more obvious one is to balance the power levels in the metagame. right now there are alot of martell cards on the list, and really... martell has pretty much been dominating the scene (barring the period of the imba maesters path). There isnt much history to go by, but i like the idea of it being a "living" list, where cards may come or go depending on the strength of other houses. Burning on the Sand is a good example of a card which i can imagine becoming unrestricted should martell somehow become underpowered (it could happen :S)...

The other way it is being used is... Its a convenient way of keeping two cards apart. specifically Val and TLS. without the existance of the other, i doubt either would make the list. but because of their combo, its their way of "easily" allowing both to be played as they are printed, just not together.

In theory, its a good idea. but in practice, using the list in the first way, prevents players from using otherwise "balanced" cards that have been restricted for the second reason.

I was throwing around the idea of having multiple lists, like restricted list A and B. and you were allowed to have a restricted card from BOTH list. Power cards would all be on list A, cards like val & TLS would be on list B.

Probably just complicating things, but its a thought...

I like the restricted list. It may not be the perfect solution, I doubt there is one, but it has gone a long way to addressing a lot of problems. I think if the list does become too large then the next step would be two lists and you can choose one card off each rather than one from a single large list. It could still temper the cards that combo without effectively banning others.

Guys - if TLS never saw print:Val would still be on the list. She is overpowered neutral draw - its not like eveyr deck runs Threat. Personally, I don't liek her effect becuase I don't like discarding cards as a cost - and it has hurt me way more than it has helped. But she had the efefct of making 90% of the decks she was in better, and in Houses that already had substantial card advantage motifs built in, liek Lannister and Martell - she really put them over the top.

The combo with TLS is unfortunate - but not the reason she is on the list. The two cards need to be considered distinctly and not as part of a pair.

And rings: you know my point: if you are not playing rudimentary character control, you'll lose to Brotherhood as quicly as you will lose to rush, TLS or no. he's just another character, he's going to be knelt or Milked anyway - and (thinking baout it) Lannister is a better matchup to ahndle him tha Martell is. Interesting - maybe if he comes back we'll see less Martell and more Lannister from the cotnrol side of things.

Stag Lord said:

Really? She put Martell over the top? I had just started with the game when Val had her time in the spotlight, and I never really played that much with or against her, but i don't think I'd *ever* play her in Martell. Least not in the Builds I'm running. Just the thought of having to discard a HCiT or Cyvasse or Red Vengeance or Burning or Prince's Plans or *name of powerful event* because of her makes me want to throw up.

Also, I don't quite understand why people can't just play with TLS? Why does he absolutely have to come off the Restricted list? What other restricted card do you absolutely have to include in a Bara Rush build over TLS? Sure, the Cache OOH is nice in Bara, but it's not like it was a staple in Bara decks for many a year, right?

Ratatoskr said:

Val was the ice on the cake in several caharchter and attachment heavy wilding decks. Of course she´s not that useful in a deck with 15+ events or a lot of high costed charachters. Also she was the kind of draw you always included if your inhouse draw wasn´t just enough to hold up with e.g. Lannister draw power.

And i would happily loose a good event to play two much needed charachters and or attachments with Val. Also discarded cards mustn´t be lost necessarily, besides TLS there are recursion cards in nearly every house.

Ratatoskr said:

I agree if you want too you can play TLS, since there are not that many cards on the restricted list necessary for Baratheon. But i think since Baratheon has´t that much reliable draw it really hurts that you can´t play the pyromancer´s cache and Narrow escape if you play TLS.

Hi, first of all I'm going to put my opinion in context.

My meta (small group of friends) is not a competitive....tournament wise.....meta. We bought all the cicles, deluxe expansions, and 3 core sets. Each of us selected the houses he liked (before knowing wich were stronger against each other). In particular, I selected martell and bara.....so I usually play against Targ (burn or attachment control), Stark (Direwolfs or Army siege), Lanni (kneel), Greyjoy (Discard or Choke).

Also, we allowed, since we play casually and more melee than anything else, 2 restricted per deck.

Yesterday, after reading the forums about how broken the combo Val TLS was, i tried it in my summer asshai deck. In it I also included Kings Landing, the plot that draw and then discard 3, well summer...duh..., and the rhllor attachment...... all for drawing.

My impressions:

Kings Landing is a bit expensive but by far the most consistent draw engine in this deck , cause i have a lot of kings landing locations and is easy to stand using shadow and the 1cost 1 gold location that stand shadow crests.

Val dies, or gets discarded, very easily (remember that only I have de martell VB weenie killer)....i couldn't use the combo in 3 games.

Targ: burns her and / or TLS,

Stark: kills her and / or TLS,

Lanny: kneel TLS, and

Greyjoy discard either one before i can play both. With choke they are expensive and probably cannot be recuced (the cost obviously)

Besides, its a two variable five gold combo......i think it is easier to use tommen out of house or golden tooth than this consistenly. So my conclusion is that both are not that overpowered, and easily disrupted, and could be taken out of the restricted list.

There are a lot of worse combos for the game. For example motley crewwman and every discarding card greyjoy has.

Cheers

I've played a lot of matchups vs martell summer, and in quite a few matchups, the game really swings when the bannermen finally get out. They are just tough to handle, and even if you do handle them, they end up drawing massive cards.

The only way I've been able to limit their effectiveness is to try and cancel their response. Not all houses can do that.

choco said:

For whatever it's worth, I enjoyed reading your post from a casual/non-competitive POV. Thanks!