Just wondering what people's thoughts are on Martell?

In my local play environment we have a ton of Martell decks. Initially, this was because PotS was the only deluxe expansion anyone could get hold of. However, despite the current availability of all expansions except Kings of the Sea, Martell still sees more play than any other deck. Initially, we were all in awe of the KOTHH / Red Vengeance / Princes Plans / TRV / TVB decks, but as time has moved on some players have removed the agenda, removed the Red Vengeances, and even removed TVB and the decks are still extremely solid and difficult to break down. Other cards that see regular play and are a complete nightmare: Lost Oasis, Ghaston Grey, Poison Dagger, Alchemy Shop, Game of Cyvasse, Orphans of the Greenblood, Taste for Blood, Burning on the Sand, He Calls it Thinking, Venomous Blade and (recently) the Renown Sandsnake explosions...

There are also some extremely fruity character abilities that other houses could only hope to have on their side, yet there doesn't appear to be any obvious weakness here. Most of the characters are efficient cost for strength (as opposed to Greyjoy characters, who are expensive) and have a good amount of icons. The general consensus amongst the group I play with is that the Martell mechanics work very well, very well indeed, and that of all the houses these would be in the least need of a leg up when it comes to up and coming cards.

Unfortunately, FFG don't seem to agree as whenever a new set is released there are always some ridiculous Martell cards. Look at the latest few:

Tourney for the Hand - Dorea Sand, a new sand snake with a phenomenal ability (when you lose a challenge, your sand snakes don't kneel to attack) and is the very same pack is A Nest of Vipers, giving all your sand snakes renown ! Note that the trigger for A Nest of Vipers doesn't even need to be one of your own characters getting killed... The new Darkstar's not bad either.

The Grand Melee - The Vaith, what a horrible location. to come up against, and to add to the other horrible locations they have. This can absolutely ruin an opponents day. Doran Martell is also in this pack. He's expansion, but I don't think anyone would disagree that he's a playable enough card (not really any issues with this card tbh, but it's still good)

On Dangerous Grounds - Myrcella Lannister, what a brilliant little card this is. I love it, and I'm happy to see that Lannister got a card like that as it really fits in with how I see them. OH WAIT, SHE'S MARTELL TOO??! There's really NO need to have this card as Martell, you give Lannister some great title manipulation (Varys, Myrcella) and then dilute it by letting Martell have direct access to that mechanic? Madness, I know Myrcella has a place as a Martell card but NOT this version of her. I really hope this gets errata to Lannister only. And if she's not good enough for the Martell lovers, another ridiculous location is included in this pack.The Scourge. A location so horrible I refuse to mention it further.

Alright, I got a little excited there at points, and I do play Martell myself before anyone asks - but my concern is for the players who have no interest in playing Martell, who see this cards and think WTF?! I don't believe for one minute that this makes Martell unbeatable, it's just that you can bank on most Martell cards in a pack being excellent whereas a lot of other houses tend to get a more even mix. The only thing that stops a lot of Martell cards being auto include is the fact there's just so many brilliant cards and abilities. Anyhow, that's how I feel and I think they need to tone down some of the brutal Martell disruption so that players of other houses can continue to enjoy the game and provide worthy opposition.

Nitro Pirate said:

Sorry, meant to say Doran is expensive... with we could edit :-)

Nitro Pirate said:

Usually you can - button is in the top right corner of the individual posts. That said, most of the cards you're referring to that make them so solid have been put onto the restricted list - you're only allowed to have one of them (up to x3) in any deck. In particular, Burning on the Sands, The Viper's Bannermen, and Venemous Blade.

That said, Martell is certainly a strong deck. I think the new Myrcella, who is a 2-cost noble for them, is going to get Ghaston Grey banned altogether, although I haven't actually heard that from anyone; it's just what I want to happen.

It can be beaten, though it's not easy without Kings of the Sea available. Lannister hyperkneel has a good shot, since it can usually keep Viper/Arianne out of play. Greyjoy winter is usually what I would use to beat it - it's a pretty solid matchup, and hurts much of Martell's tricks, especially with Baelor Blacktyde and location hate - taking out Ghaston Grey and preventing their events from going off is a clear path to victory vs Martell.

WolfgangSenff said:

Agreed entirely.

I have to jump in here and say that I could not possibly agree more with the notion to ban GG.

Papa

Thirded re GG...It's silly.

I concur.

The Scourge location coming out is going to be brutal. I agree that Ghaston Grey is too strong with a 2 cost noble now, way too strong.

Part of my issue with the current design is along those lines though... I don't want GG to be banned or restricted, although that now seem inevitable. Either that or the environment suffers for it... but testament to the strength and synergy of many Martell cards is the fact that they already have more restricted cards than any other house, but they keep having cards thrown their way that make the majority of people inhale through their teeth and shake their head.

There is no Martell hate here, just a desire for better balance. I know they haven't had their deluxe boxset yet, but Martell get way more love and attention than Lannister (lost Oasis should have been a Lannister card!!), but Targ are another House who really need to see a run of strong cards consistent with their house themes. They've had their boxset, and still no-one plays them. However, to get myself back on topic, Martell are also the first choice of many people to 'splash' into their decks to the power and general usefulness of their cards. I don't want to see people stop playing GoT because Martell stop them from playing their decks.

In all honesty, I have not seen GG really in full swing, but I recognize the potential threat. There is location control at the plot level, you have Fleeing to the Wall. You have Price of War and things like Climbing Spikes out of specific builds. I think the problem isn't GG itself, its that there are answers to all these answers inside Martell already. This is really the core of the problem - you can use character control or location control to keep down GG, its just those mechanisms are inherently weaker against the house GG is in. Furthermore, those same mechanisms really only work when your already winning the game. You can't can't hit off Price of War or Die By the Sword, or Climbing Spikes if your characters can't make it through a military challenge.

So run Martell summer, or have a way to deal with it.

That, and Damon Stone makes good ******* cards.

I really like to know where you come from Nitro (US i guess) because here in europe, Martell they aren't that outrageous at all, and they don't win tournaments. European champiionship took place last week end in castle Stalheck and saw no Martell win anything (around 120 players attended)

So I definitely can't get your point on Martell domination of the world, because it is a fact, that it is not the case.

Maybe in Europe we play the game like goats (that i am not sure either) and you have the best Martell players in your country/area but as you said Martell has already pay the price of its very good cards (most restricted) so no don't ban GG while other very strong houses have none on restricted

GJ winter is so strong (and make 1st place at european) because they dont have restricted, and play too easily Fear of winter, just as exemple

you say what? Martell cards are less expensive than GJ ones. See Boatswain, hopefuls, fishwinkers, fishermen... this is nonsense!

And Myrcella s still not out, you already want her banned, are you crazy people?

As usual when there are complainings after Gencon or Days, we have banned cards. But stop it guys. Learn to play against those cards, built new games whatever.. you cannot ban/restrict a card as soon as you consider it too strong.

I have the bitter and troublng feeling that we don't play the same game

GG is mad good, but it's not instant death. It's just the reason why you should have some sort of location control in every deck.

We can't ban everything Martell gets that is awesome. I think it's a cool mechanic.

Kordovan said:

Here's the slightly troublesome part of GG and Myrcella. Its a fairly strong repeatable way of dealing with bigger characters. Myrcella makes playing a large character troublesome against Martell with side order of strong attachment/power hate. This is in a house that also has a fairly strong repeatable way of dealing with weenie characters.

GJ is strong because of its good at resource denial. So is Martell, just in a different way. Myrcella also arrives at the same time of an interesting plot reprint that wipes the board of weenies yet still allows you her to combo with GG to take care of a large target. And do something tasty in melee on top of that.

Its interesting that this chapter cycle is about large powerful characters yet Martell has some fairly hefty hate to take care of those characters. GG/Myrcella+Icon Hate to take care of whatever's left is a lot. I'm not really advocating a ban or restriction but I'd feel more comfortable if Myrcella wasn't a Noble.

I'm from Italy and agree with Kordovan, you see Martell decks but not an overwhelming number. Also, Targaryen seem to receive a lot of love here, so I agree that there may be a difference due to playing style? Unfortunately unless someone who plays both in Europe and USA shares his experience with us, we can only guess also, it seems to me that people in Italy are more likely to try to find new solutions and esperiment rather than "this deck is good, so I'm going to use it even if it's identical to a lot of other ones", and sometimes this way you can find strange combos that work very well! Maybe because our enviroment isn't as competitive we are allowed a lot more freedom.

That said... I started playing Martell because I love them in the books and I wanted something very different from the Stark deck I played before, which was brutal and straightforward; I was starving for a bit of control, I got it and fell in love. Only after a couple of weeks from my first Martell deck I discoverd this issue.

My opinion: Martell cards are strong on their own, but a big part of their constant popularity is due to the slow but regular fleshing out of their subthemes. It's possible to run a House Dayne os Sand Snakes deck with good results even if you want to stick to the theme and don't include some powerful cards because the subthemes have very good synergies, while other houses are weaker in that regard. This also makes deckbuilding funnier for those of us who like thematic decks -> the popularity remains high. Unfortunately this is an area where players can do nothing, it's FFg that should help the weaker themes.

Regarding GG, I think an elegant solution that would keep it useful without banning or restrictiong it woul be an errata (here in italic) along the lines of: "Return a Martell character you own and control to your hand to choose an opponent's character of equal or lower cost . Return that character to its owner's hand." This way if you want to return a higher cost noble you have to sacrifice more. But I really don't understand the issue, GG is surely a great card BUT I haven't seen it played a lot, often there are locations more essential to your deckt to include! You also have to consider that different meta and playing styles mean different cards and decks.

I think often there is a huge uproar when a card which is good on its own is revealed that is completely exagerate, because you have to consider the card as part of a whole deck: sure, maybe it's a ver good card, it has synergies with other cards, but if it doesn't make the final cut, well, then it isn't as good as it seemed at first

I had a look at the spoilers for the Lannister set, and would you believe it, people are alredy saying that it's outrageous, that Lannister are going to be the next n° 1 house, that "card X should be banned!!!"... based on 7 cards.

Banning cards always seems like a bit of a shame.

But equally, restricting Ghaston Grey won't help unless they also restrict the new Myrcella (just as an aside, why is she not Myrcella Baratheon? or even Myrcella Waters as a Crownlands Bastard)

perhaps the best thing to do is to restrict the Martell House card?

We can all agree that GG is a strong form of repeatable control. But there are multiple reasons why it should not be banned or even restricted. First, they are many ways to handle locations : Price of War, Nightmares, Condemned by the council, Pyromancer's apprentice, Favorable ground, etc... And those are just the neutral options. In house there are a few more. No decks should be built without a couple of any of these cards as there are many very powerful locations around right now.

Furthermore, Martell isn't the beast it used to be last year. In Europe it hasn't won anything this year, save for a regional in April, but that was before the restriction of burning and bannermen. I am not mentioning the Spanish Championship, since that was more measters than Martell that won it. As Kordovan said, maybe all the European Martell players are bad, which is possible. But on the other hand maybe the meta has responded and corrected itself with people finding a way of dealing with the dominant archetype.

Looking at the meta on the whole, some cards seem much more overpowered than GG. Take Meera Reed for instance, she can single-handedly solve any problem you will face. Annoying location? Maester with chains? Pesky attachment? She can do all of that. And she's repeatabe too. But you can deal still deal with her. Just like GG. Many houses have overpowered cards : Black cells (stronger than alchemis't guild hall), Northern Cavalry Flank (% str deadly non kneeling for 4? With no drawback?), Newly made lord (Passive uncancelable location destruction?) and the list could go on and on...

I think part of the problem is that players see playing against Martell as a NPE as Martell has always been a solid control house. It's definitely not the only NPE out there though. Try playing a GJ winter choke deck. You don't even get to the point were your cards are cancelled or bounced, you don't even get to play them. Yet we will have to learn to adapt to that deck and find ways of beating it. Think of Lanni or Bara shadows, massive NPE as well. Yet both these archetypes have less restricted cards than Martell. Why? Because they are not sucessful? At least here they are still very strong archetypes, in fact the final in Stahleck was GJ winter choke vs Lanni shadows.

Maybe a good solution would be to have GG have to kneel as a cost, avoiding multiple uses per turn. That way the people calling pfr a ban would be happy and we would just soldier along, as we always do...

I think too that martell has some incedibly strong cards, and just keeps getting more. (also they have the best plot to close a game with)

The poor showing in Stahleck was surprising, but i guess the European meta has simply adjusted to martells strengh.

The strongest builds were almost anti-decks to the usual martell:

Stark siege (the most commen deck at the torney): It´s just faster, and too hard too control, besides meera and frozen make it even harder.

GJ-winter: Martell is too slow, and GG is way to expensive to use agianst choke.

Lanni shadows (2 in the top 8): just outdraws and outcontrols martell (besides those 2 top decks were just really well build and had great players playing them)

So It almost feels like there is a bit of Rock/paper going on. With martell tearing some decks (esp. renown rush wich was really underrepresented, probably because of this) und the above decks owning martell.

TL/DR Martel has too powerfull cards anyway

Calling Martell Outrageous is a bit of a stretch, given that they haven't dominated either of the recent tournaments (the Martell that did win DoI&F melee didn't run GG). I think what's being called an NPE is "I don't like playing against control decks".

Calling for the ban of GG... well, I'm a staunch supporter of "let the meta handle it", as the last two CPs have added some fairly nice location hate: Bandit Lord, Captain of the Iron Fleet (admittedly not great vs GG). With Edric Dayne, you were setting up a two card, 4g combo for recursive bounce - pretty good, but not game-breaking (except maybe a final nail in Brotherhood's coffin).

The trouble is Myrcella - having her around makes you twice as likely to draw the "cheap noble" part of your combo, and it's even cheaper! I haven't seen how it plays out yet (none of us have!), but it's enough to make me edgy. Still, there are many solutions I'd consider before banning; errata changing the phase of GG, requiring GG to kneel, requiring the noble to be standing, adding a one gold (or influence) cost to GG.

I'd just toke to point out that Martell won two weeks ago the Spanish Regional, and a pretty similar deck made 6-0 at Stahleck, so yeah, they are not outrageous, but they are as strong as they should.

TVB in restricted list has been a really strong hot to the power level of the house. But a bit of draw for them could put them over everyone again, so I don't like to dismiss them.

Why is Gaston Grey that overpowered?

The end-result is: Pay (2,3) gold if you have a useless character in your deck (Edric, the new Myrcella I hear is coming out). or Pay 4/5 gold for Arianne or TRV to return a character to it's opponent's hand which can be saved by a duplicate or loyal guard.

1. It's repeatable but it effectively costs gold.

2. It can be saved from.

3. While the location is cheap, its unique and can be discarded by every location-hate card out there, and frozen solided.

------------

Let's compare this to the other removal cards that IMHO are more efficient and better:

A Game of Cyvasse - 0 cost, kneels yours and an opponent's character (if they can), and bounces a character - so a net gain in my opinion.

A Lannister Pays His Debts/I'm You Writ Small - Both of these are good because if you are doing poorly all you need is the opponent to attack and win (the former), or the opponent to defend (the latter). And you gain a character advantage.

Lannisport Brothel

Alchemist Guild Hall

Kingswood Trail/Black Cells

Bear Island

The new lanni attachment that just uses your power to pay for stuff.

Gaston Grey because it costs 1 gold is decent enough to include in every martell deck, but unlike the prior cards I listed. This card either forces the player to reduce his deck efficiency by putting in enough noble-crest cards that would not normally be in a martell deck, or have a hard decision in returning a 4/5 cost character to hand. I just don't see Ghaston Grey being a problem card. Martell is going to become a problem with all the new icon-hate combined with A Game of Cyvasse - similar to Lannister hyper kneel. And what that caused was an errata on Alchemist Guild Hall and restricting the castellian. I would say Cyvasse would be the next to be restricted. With better icon hate, that event is going to have less of a risk and is much more efficient than GG.

I'm not necessarily on the "GG is was OP" bandwagon... it might be, especially with the new Myrcella, but right now every House is getting some really good cards; this sounds a lot like what happened with TLS, calls for restricting and such before the card even came out. But nonetheless, bloodycelt, I'm not sure that I consider that list comparable to GG.
Game of Cyvasse - arguably better than GG since it doesn't require a N character; arguably worse since it can be cancelled a lot easier, can only be used once, and does require you to have a high-STR I character.
The two Lanni events - doesn't help at all against CBK characters (Bara Power of Blood) or if the character you want to remove has Deadly (TLS for example) or if the character you want to remove doesnt participate in the challenge (TLS for example). Neither event provides the kind of spot character control that GG does.
Brothel, Guildhall, KW Trail - none of them removes a character from play; yea, they are control mechanics, but there are standing effects and such to get around them. Guildhall also requires a Shadows investment, the cost is the same as the new Myrcella (assuming your Shadows card is 0-cost) but its a Limited Response, i.e. not only can it only be used once per Round, but it also prevents you from using other LR for the entire Round as well. Black Cells is probably a relatively fair comparison, but requires the Shadows investment again, and departs from the typical Bara Rush strategy, unlike GG which can be slotted into a Martell deck fairly easily.
Bear Island - really, you think this is comparable to GG? not even close, restricts your deck SO much by not working once you have non-Stark cards in play, costs 3, and doesn't work til Dominance.

The real problem I see with GG is that the effect is difficult to cancel, and the location destruction everyone seems so keen on pointing out is not as reliable as they claim it is... Price of War, for example, requires you win a M challenge with a W crest character; assuming you managed to do this and the W character didn't get sent back to your hand by GG, the Martell player can still HCiT the event. Same for Condemned by the Council, assuming you can even get an I challenge through against a House filled with I icons. Pyro Apprentice only works if they have no gold... yes, there are some answers (Newly Made Lord is pretty awesome) but when you add GG into their existing bag on tricks, Martell just keeps looking better and better.

bloodycelt said:

Responses in order to your reference:

1. You didn't factor in the net loss of gold that your opponent suffers. I'd sure pay 2-3 gold each turn to remove a character from challenges and give my opponent -4 gold each turn as they replay that character.

Game of Cyvasse- Net card loss, as you've used your event, but they have the character to play again. Also, if they have a higher STR intrigue character, you effectively can't play it. Can also be saved from, which you seem to list a negative for GG. As an event, can be canceled rather more easily. Cyvasse is great for a number of reasons, but surely isn't hands down better.

A Lannister Pays His Debts- Similar to Game of Cyvasse in that it requires a certain gamestate in order to be played. Also, you've knelt a character of your own and removed one of theirs, while Cyvasse might kneel an extra character of theirs as well. Also, ALPHD as a kill effect can be saved against by considerably more cards than return to hand effects. As an event, can be canceled rather more easily.

I'm You Writ Small- Again, you're dependant on your opponent playing along for you to be able to play this. While that normally happens, GG requires no more interaction from your opponent than that they have characters on the board. As a kill effect can be saved against by considerably more cards than return to hand effects. As an event, can be canceled rather more easily.

Lannisport Brothel- The first one that I think is actually an apt comparison. The Brothel does cost slightly more, though likely not enough to matter. Still, the ability for GG to also essentially give your opponent -X Gold next round is HUGE in the comparison. Also, GG can be used in the middle of a challenge to return characters to hand and alter combat math, which Brothel just can't compare to.

Alchemist Guild Hall- Hmmm... in the general ballpark, but a less apt comparison than Brothel. Thanks to the Limited Response and kneeling itself, you'll only be triggering AGH once per round, and GG does have the option to be used multiple times if you have characters for it. While GG requires pretty specific cards as does AGH, GG returns those characters to your hand in order to be replayed and set up the combo to roll again. AGH either requires new cards to bring out of shadows each turn, or a pretty specific usage of Sister of Truth, and sadly, the Sister will be unable to participate in challenges when used that way, unlike your nobles with GG. Does work with the Trail as well, however.

Kingswood Trail- Due to putting itself back into Shadows, sets itself up for repeated use, and thus offers a worth comparison. Unfortunately, bringing it out of Shadows each round costs you gold, without also costing your opponent gold the way GG does.

Black Cells- See Alchemist Guild Hall entry, but subtract the part about being a Limited Response.

Bear Island- Similar to Brothel, a much more worthy comparison. However, Bear Island has much farther reaching deckbuilding restrictions in order to get use out of it than including 6 low cost nobles. Also, Bear Island is a kill effect, which is the only type of removal that's saved against by every character save in the game. It does at least get bonus points for being permanent removal. Too bad it has that non-Stark targetting restriction. GG can hit anyone at all.

Slander and Lies (Lannister attachment)- I'm not really quite sure why this one is in the discussion. Flogged and Chained would have been much more appropriate. S&L does nothing at all for character control, though it is quite an amazing way to control power flow, and if it sees play at all on top of GG, is pretty much the final nail in the coffin of Brotherhood decks.

Also, my mind is blown at the idea that Cyvasse is more efficient than GG. In the purest card game sense, efficiency is measured in terms of card advantage and thus card counts. You will always have a net loss of one card (Game of Cyvasse itself) when used, while GG will never have that penalty, no matter how many times you use it.

Kennon said:

Well put. To add some other uses Ghaston Grey has over most of the 'comparatively powerful' cards listed:

Ghaston Grey can be used to save a noble character from certain death if you know you'd otherwise lose them to claim, and causes your opponent a setback at the same time.

Negative attachment removal from one of your noble characters.

Using it to returning one of your stolen characters back to your own hand.

There's almost no end to how versatile GG can be. There are plenty of limits to those other cards.

However, as it got a mention, Bear Island does have a great rule which should maybe apply to GG as a less savage way of reducing it's effectiveness? I doubt it would make much difference, but it may be more acceptable to Martell players than simply restricting / banning it. Personally, I can live with it the way it is as long as they remove the 'Martell' from the latest incarnation of Myrcella (she should say 'Lannister Only' imo). They'd still need to be careful with future noble releases tho.

Kordovan said:

I'm from the UK, North East. We only have a small pool of GoT regulars on Teesside (around 15 people) but many are successful competitive gamers, and we know strength when we see it.

A few of us will be going to play a joust tournament in Sheffield next Saturday, so it'll be interesting to see what type of decks they like in the slightly less North than North.

I'm betting it's Martell.