Actually I think that Empire will be soon similiar to green decks from MTG where you have ability to put more lands before your opponent (the best economy). I really like this idea, but empire has already too good cards to make it work. Cards cost and loyality is already really low, why giving empire strong economy? Where are some drawbacks of Empire? I don't see any. Low cards cost, units with great abilities and 3HP for 3 hammers... Com'on. What's the point of this? Faction that should have great economy should be High Elves, or card prices and loyalities of HE should be switched with Empire. That will make much more sense. WHI designers, in my opinion you really made a big fail here. I think that nothing can be done now. The only really good solution will be redesign of game in some points (reprint I guess) but we all know its not gonna happen (or not gonna happen soon). Now we can just fight for bans or restrictions for some cards, but soon we will have almost all Empire economy related cards on this list... What's the point of that? You will just lose money that way. Unbalanced game will not last long, and we all don't wanna see this happening.

You made big mistake from begiining when you put this strange "pseudo rarity" system to core set, ulthuan and first battlepack. Many players just said "not thanks" to this game becouse they don't want to buy 3x of every product. This game could be so much more popular if core set will be full product not 1/3 as it's now. Please at least be fair to customers who bought your game and fix all what need to big fixed.

---

Your new forum troll

Jaszczurr said:

And so what? a faction that have part of the best part of the card control, part of the best "finish" cards also have and by far the best set up cards. And it's more and more truth as time pass.+ sion + zoo + .... stop !!!

Empire main lacking is the ability to burn 2 zone in 1 turn.

Jaszczurr said:

Again true but the deck archetype you are playing was for sure at the origin of the Restricted List. The deck is the one who suffer the most from the slow effect of the RL.

And even with this restriction, the deck is still strong, as said this archetype is still very effective against many others decks. So you are comparing the 2 factions dominating game from so long tome in fact. And why dwarf reclaim + ranger was so dominant? because he had access to the best set up cards + some of the best cards in the game before RL was created. And fore sure he has intrisic quality, can reverse the game with only a 2 cards combo, does not really, need ressources...

If you have "all" + fast start you are near to be unstopable that's it, no more comparing strategy, just comparing how I can draw faster or/and get better eco. Nothing about table control.

Your deck needs fast drawing to be in position to "reverse" the game. The more you draw the more your deck is efficient. You do all you can to draw as fast as you can. And card such as muck! (you don't play it but you could) just allow those kinds of deck to always be able to "try" desperate moves in any situtation as based on your and your potential draw you can generate incredible amount of ressource .

The game is actually "power icon" race.

Moreover and in a more general case the ability of being able to gather from 0 to 4 and more power icon in first turn just on the base of your first draw (even after muligan) just totally randomize the game. Maybe some factions are nearest to 0 or 4 no matter, start is important for the game and there is a lot of variance in those start.

stormer said:

Well... and now I cannot agree with you about Polish RTF deck against rush. With damage cancelation, Grombindal Elite, Beleguarded Scout and Slayers of Karak Kadrin it has to play a bit differently, still it has a big chances to win most of the games.

On the other hand I think you're partly right about a "good deck in the right time". That's at least how I think, Jaszczur can disagree, but with all those "anti mirror" empires on the table, we had kinda not so hard way to the final. Things could look different if any of us would face less "anti mirror" empire :-) Luckly we didnt (except French deck with pirates and inflitrate and that was really hard matchup, I lost with it in swiss, Jaszczur had a tie I guess, I finally won in TOP4)

Mamut said:

Guess your are talking of Van Klumpf’s Buccaneers, when you talk about pirates?

Empire needs to have storng economy. I even think that it needs the strongest economy to be able to compete with other races - it needs to have both kingdom and quest zone build up. Look at other races:

- Dwarf - decks can win by only using one zone - quest. In some games I didn't have to put units (or reviwe them with Reclaiming) to Battefield because Ranger kills them outright. There are still some strong decks that need to work on 4 resources to put Serpent Slayer in the BZ, but in general theay are weaker than RTF decks

- Chaos - good Chaos builds can win by rushing opponent and dealing some damage while having 3 resources the whole game. Their finisher - Unleasing the Spell is better THAN ANY OTHER EMPIRE CARD in terms of winning the game. Don't forget about Sorceror of Tzeenth, which generally is better 3-drop than Rodrick and a way better than Osterknaht.

- Orc - generally Orcs need to have 4 resources to play Trolls Vomit and Raise Dead, but with introduction of Squig Tracers they can easily rush and HAVE BETER STARTS THAN EMPIRE. With We'z Bigga Orcs can easily field Blood Dragon Vampires and dominate the board for only 3 resources.

- HE - there are some strong rush tactics that can work on 3 resources (Dreamer of Dragons Rush, or Spell/Star Dragon combo)

- DE - with Thief of Essence thay don't have to put ANY card in quest zone (apart from Offering of Hekatri and questing unit) Thay can work only on Kingdom.

Can Empire do the same? Can it work with empty kingdom or quest? I found that this is imposible for this race.

Can Empire burn two zones in one turn? No, but it can be done by other races.

Can Empire mess up oponent on their turn, to stop some kind of combo? In small amount yes - Called Back, and Call for Reserves, but comparing to other races it is almost defenceless.

Use the disadvantages of Empire to win with it. Don't try to control it, because you will loose.

@Shindulus

This game is not "power icon" game. Its "two zones burning" game.

Jaszczur

Ok if you prefer the more you draw/gather ressource the more you have chance to burn two zone before your opponent. According you gather enougth ressource as needed to do the job. You have your opportunities before and you have more opportunities.

That's it, drawing leads to victory. You get drawing by gathering power icon (for most of the faction).

Being able to only develop Kingdom while being able to draw a lot, like DE is a quite good strategy

Being able to only develop Quest while being able to gather a lot of ressource, like dwarves is a strong strategy

Being able to develop all and fast like empire is just better.

Let's talk about your result when facing 2 well played infiltrate a round? If you are not able to put your plan in place before he gets card disturbing you (in that case it's infiltrate but they are many others), you are in a very bad situation. That's right for dwarves that's right for any others decks.

A deck with no ressource / no draw just do nothing, draw/ressources always came from power icon at start.

Jaszczurr said:

Finally, someone that undertand it.

A lot of people talking about Zoo (empire card). I have not Zoo still, is not a selectionable card yet. When it appears, perhaps will see other cards of otrher factions that makes Zoo less interesting than now. If ifinally buy that empire is a few better than others... perhaps is the motivation for sell it 6 months later than Chaos BP!!! 6 months when other factions receive 10 cards more than empire.

So you seem to agree.

Now let be more carthesian, for your point of view what does make a deck win?

If it is not a story of drawing / ressource, we can guess that the power of your spirit is going for an important part of the result?

The possibility to destroy opponents zones... with 3, 8 or 45 resources. Some factions need more resources/draw to destroy a zone of your capital. Others can destroy you with few more than the always avaiable 3 resources of your kingdom. Empire need Friedich to win. NEED Friedich, nor DF. 3 cards in 50 of your deck. Without friedich is very very difficult to win for a true empire deck. Bacause as Jaszcurr says have no other way to destroy your zones. Other factions have another options. An HE or a Chaos decks can win the game with only 4 resources in KZ... can empire do????: NO

Remember is a forum and it's only my opinion, not an empirical true .

Vamosamorir said:

They are others, Hemmler is the one that cost the less and does not need any combination of cards. (but that's not really the point I am interested in).

Moreover ressources I am more generaly talking about card flow + ressource + damage potential... What I call so as to simplify the power icon gathering.

And what I say is that to get Hemmler you need to draw, if you only draw a poor number of card, you have a poor chance of getting hemmler and keep him alive. If your opponent draw faster he has a better chance than you to get his "hemmler" like card. Let's call "Hemmler" the card or the card combination that lead you to the victory.

As we know any card with power icon can bring draw potential or ressource potentiel, this drive you to the moment you draw "hemmler". For sure there are cards that allow you to gather "power icon" or equivalent in none conventional way, innovation, thief of essence, Unleash the spell and many other.

Any "power icon" that you gather "cost" you something more or less important.

Innovation / Unleash the spell : the card you put in dev transforming it later in ressource/damage

Thief of essence : ressources used to play it + the card itself

But there is 1 constant in the game 1st turn variance between a good and a wrong start is for a great part determinating for the result of the game. That's why all players keep in mind to create a deck with a good proportion of some cards, why we do not put too much high cost cards in the same decks ...

One of the 1st goal of any deck is to at least have descent start, allowing to start the "drawing machine" or to start the "engine of your deck". Empire has by far the best, the most efficient and the most constant pull of set up cards to get a good start. I am not talking about turn 2 3 4, and the potential ressource that they can have. Ok empire need great ressource, they have such cards, allowing theim to have great amount of ressources in the midd game.

But currently they also have "turbo start" ability that no other faction have. Making all faction "equal" on the developpement in the very first turns will help some deck that have strong strategy but that always miss the 1 or 2 turn that make the difference be more efficient and this will open the meta game.

Look at Dwarf deck, very classical in fact, it has been striked hard by the RL, it just has been slowed, but the strategy and main goal are the same. What's the interest of cards such like Forge/Sion/... They are ONLY card made to make you lead "the race of power icon gathering". And you tell that power icon gathering is not important? So why don't you want to put forge + sion (because this will soon or late bring the same problems) in the RL?

Are not you bored of always keeping 3 slot for Contested Village in all your deck with the only purpose of having good start? Forgot "fast start cards" focus on strategy cards this will lead to a more interesting game.

Vamosamorir said:

Sorry if I seemed more agressive than ironic, know that we are talking on a forum, that we are not using our natural langages (and obviously it's not my natural langages ). As already said we all want to play a game as good as it can, we all have the same goal .

Vamosamorir said:

It seems you forgot some other options...

Friederick is not the only "finalizer" in empire decks...
for example another great and versatile finalizer is Pistoler + Shrine to Taal in Kingdom.

The point his: Empire is the best control deck in this game, the smarter in resources managent and playfield control...
If this deck takes control (and it usually can do this very quickly) there's no way to get out from the "web", even if you are a good Rush or another Control.

There's only hope for a very focused combo deck, if the combo is enough strong to close the game (like the dwarf RTF winner)

stormer said:

Vamosamorir said:

It is not good that DF is in all competitive order decks. It is auto include in Dwarf and HE decks...

ANy other whining about empire is just lack of skill

Jaszczur

The problem of DF can be solved increasing by one his loyalty cost, better than restic it

Vamosamorir said:

Excuse me, but i would like to hear your opinion of possibilities to break the "web".

Don´t get me wrong, but i can´t imagine that many ways, if the turn starts with 3 ressources and 1 card. And i would be interessted to learn/hear some of them.

I know, that it isn´t something important for statistics, but i could add these to the discussion:

To the best of my memory, there where 17 players at the german championship (nice event, maybe lower quality) one month ago. Something about six, seven or eight Empire-decks (i am not sure about this), and four of them finished in the top4. There where solid DE- and Kairos-Decks. And they lost against the Empire.

Right now, after Stahleck, i am happy about the RTF-Deck. If this Deck beats empire, but loses to DE or Chaos, this situation will create space for some new ideas and decks. I am not sure, if this is enough to break the dominance of Empire, and i hope, that FFG has some sort of solution or thoughts about the problem. But after the experience with the game, i believe that there will be other decks to beat in the future. Maybe we need to wait another 4 or 5 month...

Sorry for the confused post. No time to settle my thoughts...

DB.Cooper said:

But aren/t you the one that said something along the lines of , "lets wait for Stahleck, that will be the final answer"? Didn't you?

Yeah I'm interested too.

I always had problems with Hidden Grove/Electors/Long Winter that eliminated my 1st or 2nd turns. Kairos was also not at his best when development control hits the table. In newer days Call for Reserves/Osterknacht Elite/Rodriks loops is getting on my nerves. When the empire player is good at development control it's also not assured that you can use your Burn it Down to get rid of Church of Sigmar or otherwise reducing empires economy.

Some things that lately changed: the new Chaos Quest is really good because it forces the empire player to also place units in zones with support and not only going relying on buildings and tactics to slow or control the game enough to win. But I only played like 5 matches with the new Chaos cards. I also slapped my face when taking a more detailed look on Unleashing the Spell. I played it in the time when it was released but it was Kairos time then and I didn't want to loose my precious developments. I had a great misunderstanding in the rules text because I had in mind that you have to sacrifice all developments after playing the Spell (X = number of my developments) which was obviously wrong. So it turns out it's a great counter against massive Rodriks use and can be a lifesaver when used on a strong unit.

I also think the structure of BP release doesn't matter. Yes each faction gets 10 cards but that doesn't mean anything when you divide the cards into casual/theme play and cards that really are gonna played in strong decks. So it's not that much of an impact. 2-3 cards per pack have the potential to enter into the more competitive decks but the rest are mostly theme or nearly useless ("awesome now I can play an indirect dmg orc deck").

I wouldn't title empire as unbeatable but because of their good starting hands and resource management they really draw constant while with Chaos sometimes you only can play one Sorcerer which isn't the best opening against some decks. Also a lot of playing experience helps but I'm interested how DE or Orc (non rush) have a chance. With DE I really feel helpless with my targeted single unit effects that empire can defend so well against. Sometimes with early Shades/Beastlord can disorder the empire players handcards so that you aren't target of a Verena for some time but when the draw engine is installed empire usually comes back and wins. I would appreciate a way to get more developments into play especially for destruction that have nothing besides Dwarf Slaves (DE) and Light of Morrslieb (expensive and fragile).

Doc9 said:

I was that guy!

Ok, Empire deck didn't win, but there is an answer:

- 2 decks on 3 were Empire

- Top 16 was made by 80% Empire

- The winner deck was an anti-meta, Jaszczurr did a great work but he built a strong combo deck focused against Empire...

What does suggest this?

1) Empire is the winning meta, there is no Control smarter, no Control is strong like this (the Jaszczurr deck is not a control deck, is a combo-based deck);

2) Almost everyone knows Empire is the strongest deck, so there are always too many "blue decks" in tornaments;

3) If Empire strength is well known, there is always someone who wants to break the meta by building an anti-meta.
It's not easy, but if you strictly focus your deck against Empire, maybe you can do it, and suprise factor would be on your side.
By the way, if you know that 70-80% decks are blue, it's easiler because you haven't to worry about other decks (like Rushes, for example)

A card game in which there is only a winning meta shared by 3 players on 4 and in which only sometimes you can find in tournaments an anti-meta is not what I want... that's boring, if you like this you can play "yu gi oh", for example...
but I'd like to find something different in Warhammer Invasion.

it is clear that we will not agree because we have different visions.
This is a hypothesis. FFG accepts your premises and ban Verena and DF and restricts RR.
If within two months, for instance, Chaos mastering tournaments(like empire now) with a new card, and I propose to ban the hypothetical new card and the sorcerer and restrict the last quest. What I can expect from FFG response? and from this forum?
What's the way? Ban/ restrict 3 cards every 3-6 months?. Or try to rebalancing the game with new cards?

Hey, but for you it does not matter what would be result of Stahleck, if Empire won, you would said: "So now you see they are broken", and if Empire lost now you say: "That's the proof they are broken, because anti empire deck wined". It makes me laugh soomehow. What's your point, if 80% top was Empire? 80% of whole tournament was Empire, so it is statisticaly an absolute ; ) Do not try to force some bans/restrictions, only becaouse you have unhealthy meta. We do not have such a problems here in Poland, Wroclaw. We bring not-empire decks to Stahleck and won everything ; ) Timothy won with DE, I won in Regionals with Orc deck against banned VTHC deck, when everybody was thinking that those decks were unbeatable.

Stormer said:

What does suggest this?

I'll tell you: In a healthy meta there will be always one-two archetypes that are dominating, and then, there will be two groups of players

- one who want to master perfectly those archetypes and be a specialist in mirror matches

- second, people who want to break those archetypes, so they will start their brain processes to make some anti-meta decks

(- plus casual/flavour players, but we are not talking about casual play here)

What happends next?

Deck A is dominating archetype, let's say Empire right now

Deck B is an anti-Empire deck, but somehow weak against some other decks, lets call them Deck C

We have a tournament, what ind od build you chose? A if you want to be strong and win, most of the players with lack of skill, also chooses A. That gives you a handicap. But if you predicting a lots o A, and if you are a skilled player, you will try to make deck B, to beat A, and pray to avoid C (but it should be not so many C, due to A dominating the meta.)

Tournament is dominated by A, it is normal, but B wins. What next?

People are playng more B, but it is weaker, because A is no longer so dominant, so B can become A, and C becomes a B. So old A, becomes a C...and so on. That's a healthy meta. That is should be in my opinion.

And again, I agree, that Empire has a very good cards, somehow better than other factions, but also they are easy to play for everyone, they do not demand such a skill to play, like HE or Chaos fe. I agree, Derricksbur Forge is to strong, and should be restricted, but that's all. No other card.

stormer said:

Why do everybody knows better how and why have I made my deck? It was not designed against Empire as meta in my city is empire-free. It is really hard to win with numerous Chaos decks, that eat empire for breakfast

For me empire is kind of deck-checker which can evaluate if the idea is good or not. If the deck is weak than it will loose 99,999% against the best control deck - Empire.

Wait till FFG restricts/bans Verena/Rodrick and everybody will want to restrict Unleashing/Sorceror of Tzennech, or some dwarf card. I still have to write it over and over again - restricting DF will bring balance to the game (in terms of controling decks).

Jaszczur

Jaszczurr said:

I agree, Jas, DF is a great boost for the very beginning... and you put it in your Dwarvern deck!

But i think it's true you were focused on empire... for example, did you put beleguered scout in your deck? Without that card you can't resist against a good rush... and i didn't see that card in the list posted on this forum (but maybe the list is not right, or maybe you tought nobody plays Rush in an european! )

stormer said:

The deck I played:

www.deckbox.org/sets/103954

I had 2 Belegueded Scout but they are not neccessary for rush decks. You can easily stop them with Karak-Kardin, Stand Your Ground, My Life for the Hold, Dwarf Ranger and defensive Reclaiming the Fallen. They are as an alternative to sacrificing units under developements and only seldom to stop rushes.

In 80% of the times that I used them I was targeting my own units only to have more units in graveyard (to trigger quest, Burying the Grudge and have more units for Reclaiming).

And for the anti-empire theme once more. For 100 games that I played with this deck before Stahleck only 2-3 of them were against empire. I was more focused on Chaos/DE/Orc meta than any types of order decks.

Jaszczur

Ok, the one i saw was slightly different...

Now I have some questions for you, if you want to reveal your secret strategies :

- Why just 1 Pilgrimage?? It's a useful card, but only one... what does it mean? Couldn't you put 2 more?

- No Long Winters? What can you do if your tombs make go down your "Reclaming the Fallen" as developements?

- It seems you count on toughness ability... i think it's strange if you want to sacrifice most of your units... is that because of Chaos "shots"?

stormer said:

No secrets from my side (as I won't be playing this deck ), so:

- 1 Pilgrimage is just a metagame choice. Normally I play 3 because of amounts of Manfred and Hekatri that I have to face in my meta. It wasn't usefull during Stahleck as it is kind of dead card against empire.

- Long Winters are not needed - in the worst case you get 2-3 Reclaimings or Ancient Debts as a developements but it is againts math You can always win without Reclaiming, though it is quite hard. The main problem is that it is another tactic and I hate to have more than 12 tactics in ALL my decks.

- without Toughness I have auto-loose against Chaos and in mirror matches. It is very important againts Hounds, Plague Bombs, Dwarf Rangers, Sorceror of Tzenneth, and all HE indirect decks.

Jaszczur