Bomb said:

What sets an LCG apart from a CCG like M:tG isn't that all players have equal access to all cards ever printed at all times. Rather, it is that at any single point in time, all players have equal access to all cards. There is no pre-determined scarcity built into any single set or product arc (like that created by the "common-uncommon-rare-chase" commonality structure; effectively dictating that people who spend more are more likely to have greater access to the best cards), but between sets, product arcs, and print runs there can be questions of availability.

The LCG model was intended to create equal access within a chapter pack series, not equal access to chapter pack series, particularly historic ones.

ktom said:

I suspect that Clash of Arms hasn't been reprinted is because they would have to devote time to fixing certain cards. At minimum they would have to redesign Jaqen and Compelled by the Rock like they did with Blood of the First Men. On top of that they could also take some time to tone down some of the restricted cards since the majority of the restricted list is from this cycle.

ktom said:

Easy to say if you're someone who's been in from the beginning and has access to all the cards. As someone who just picked it up in the last 6 months or so, that seems like a pretty ridiculous argument.

In the end, from my perspective, it looks like, "I should have access to all the cards and the newbies should be limited because it will give me a competitive advantage."

While I can't speak to the idea behind LCGs in general, it seems to me that if you're going to allow players to play cards from all packs in tournaments, you have to provide a level playing field (of access to the cards).

It's not just the most powerful cards (aka Jaqen), it's the options. Surely a tournament winner doesn't want to win because he had an advantage in deck construction and was able to make a Winter deck when no-one else in his meta had the proper counters? The example is best illustrated by the Seasons mechanic, which was *not* readily available and is being reprinted. While Clash of Arms doesn't really have mechanics as far-reaching as seasons, it's just a matter of scale - the principle is the same.

Tournament wise, it seems to make sense to keep all cards legal for tournaments in print. For new players wanting to play competitively, the idea of being at an inherent disadvantage in card selection is a barrier to entry. For development time/production costs, reprinting an old set costs you no designer time - just the printing costs.

I can't think of a good reason to let cards fall out of print while they're legal in tournament play, and I can think of many many reasons against it.

The argument that LCGs can't/won't "Grow" if they continue to allow equal access is ridiculous; each new set adds to the card base and adds options. Power creep (inevitable) ensures that some cards are effectively "rotated" out. New cards build on mechanics established by previous sets (eg; Seasons) or benefit from key cards in earlier sets (Old Nan).

-Istaril said:

This is about right. Cards wax and wane in popularity based on the living nature of the game. Hell hatchlings feast is almost too inefficient these days to make the cut in most burn decks. Never would have said that last year.

Professor Nomos said:

Not sure I would say it this year either

Ratatoskr said:

When it's competing for event space with forever burning, incinerate, field of fire, dragon support etc, it becomes either a card you must have or a card you don't need. It's not a card you just throw into a burn deck automatically anymore.

SethB said:

Which - oddly - is the argument others are using here on the other side. "Cards that were great a year ago are considerably less competitive or efficient today." So why do we expect FFG to keep cards from four years ago on the shelves, just so that people feel they have access to an advantage that virtually no one uses, even if they do have access to it? Quite honestly, the "I don't have access to the Clash of Arms, and everyone who does has an unfair competitive advantage over me, even though they rarely use those cards anymore" sounds more like a collector's argument. "I want them because I want them, but I'll say I need them instead."

Here's another side to it: If you keep all of the Chapter Pack cycles in print, you eventually start discouraging new players from joining the game because they think they need to invest in the entire history of the card pool in order to play and/or be competitive. We already great questions on the boards about "how much do I really need to buy?" And the answer is usually "not as much as you think; don't bother with the historical product, except maybe there 2-4 CPs because of these 10-15 cards." That answer, I might add, is coming from the same people who say "everything should always be in print and on the shelf." That sounds pretty contradictory to me. If I only need to invest in 2 packs from Clash of Arms to be competitive, and those 2 packs really only for 2 cards per House I want to play, why do we need to keep the other 108 cards in print when we are actively discouraging new players from buying them?

I think the solution is to update and/or create new expansion boxes and include reprints of the vast minority of cards that stand the test of time in those, rather than keeping the entire cycle of all CP sets in print at all times.

Ktom, thanks for the more comprehensive answer.

While I see what you mean, and we're both arguing that competitive cards should be available to everyone. You say they have no obligation to reprint cards no one uses - and there, fair enough - but it's hard to predict which cards "no one will use". Had I picked the top competitive cards from Seasons, I would have left out the Reinforcement events, played to great effect in Greg's GenCon deck. Picking which cards to reprint again takes designer time and effort, and the generation of a new boxed product. I could understand choosing to no longer distribute old sets (only make them available directly through FFG) to save on production costs for lower-demand sets.

The argument about new players is a solid one; there are probably more new players intimidated by the sheer volume of cards one could buy than there are new competitive players irked by the lack of availability of a few cards. I think that's a much deeper problem with LCGs, and one that releasing box-sets of the tried-and-true cards only acts as a stopgap measure, delaying the accumulation of that "sheer volume", but not preventing it.

Ultimately I think there needs to be some measure constraining the number of sets that go into building a deck; either a rotation (which I oppose), or a deck building restriction (eg. can only use core+2box+3cps in any given deck, which I support) - which will allow both the designers and the players to work with a more manageable card pool which does not simply grow steadily larger without affecting card accessibility. But that's starting to drift away from this topic into another…

ktom said:

As you mentioned ktom, while they originally were planning on "no reprints," (a decision that I think they wisely changed) that was also in an age of falling interest. When FFG was trying to find a way to keep the game alive without the cost of producing a random-packaging product when blind-buy was losing its allure for most. I think one of the other issues that CTP mentioned in his "Epistle" to the community was making a product that would be a attractive to retailers. The limited print run was supposed to keep the number of SKUs down for retailers, with each cycle eventually replacing themselves. Now it can be a pain for them to keep everything in stock, in comparison to having say six different boxes of boosters. I'm curious how sales are for FFG on a individual CP basis. I know our FLGS can order individual Chapters from their distributor, but it's gotta be a delicate balance to keep them all in balance w/r/t attractiveness.

I'm in very much in agreement with your suggestion on the expansion box idea, ktom. I think an equivalent to the old school premium starter is a great place for FFG to continue in lieu of the house boxes. And I'm certainly inclined to a card pool limitation in deck construction… althought things like shadows & seasons do create certain RPS issues when you have cards like No-Shadows Bob and the Black/White Ravens. if they don't create genericly good answers you can lose matches based on simple lack of solutions. Or decks end up failing to clash. But I think that's something to worry after we deal with a card pool that's reached the size we have now.