(posted this first at agotcards so there might be some references to the site in the text).

Something that I notice a lot these days and well before is that somethings are commented to cards always. Some of these things are house specific or playstyle specific and I feel the need write a wall of text here about it. If you feel like add a comment if I'm clearly wrong, if you agree, your own opinions or just things that frustrate you.

I'll go to the house specifics first

Stark:

1) "Stark only has one build and that is siege." This just boggles my mind when I keep on reading it. We have had receantly and before many Stark variants that have been on top placements and they have had nothing to do with siege. I take siege is most dominant in certain metas and that way some forget that there have actually been successful city of shadows builds, search builds, heck I have even seen very well constructed and played KotHH decks that I would say are top tier. Also currently I feel like Stark has the most opportunities in the enviroment as it can do: character control, location control (steal, destroy or blank) and attachment control (this without maesters).

2) "Stark is one in the bottom tier". This I hear most from the US players where Stark isn't as popular as in EU. Also thanks to Twn2dn and Thrones times I have statistics to prove that Stark isn't on the bottom. Since we can see from Thrones times that Stark has been on top a lot. Also as wildlings are raising their heads from the snow mountains so we might see the rise of the stark/wildlings decks again.

Lannister:

1) "Well Lannister has gold for this...". Most posted comment on badly costed Lannister cards. I know that one of the main Lannister theme is gold and the other one is draw (and the draw theme gets weaker everytime neutral or some other house gets draw). The problem now is that Lannister rarely gets to enjoy of this house theme. Problem comes in when you compare the cards to other houses cards they are 1)lower str 2)less icons 3)allies 4)combination of these for the price of what other house can get for cheaper.

2) "The Lannister box is the best box there is". I would hold these for a month more before saying. If my memory serves me correct the community has always stated this of the most newest box, hell even Targaryen box was best for a while, but then sometime after its release it was deemed worst.

Martell:

1) "Well with Martell draw..." I would like to hear what is this godly Martell draw. There once was such thing but I barely ever see people running Viper's Bannermen these days. Other cards they have that they can use to draw with are: Flea bottom scavengers, house messenger, palace spy, princes plans, Oberyn's guile, informed acolyte, bronze shield. Everyone of these are either very costly for the effect, very conditional and barely ever repeatable. I think this misconception comes from the fact that the neutral themes have fitted Martell like a glove. Thou these cards are then again neutral and can be played in any deck so the "Martell draw" isn't so Martell, but neutral draw (summer agenda + Samwell, valyrian steel link + pyromancer's cache).

2) "GG", sigh, here it is again. I have before opposed this card aswell, but now that I have played more against it and with it I only see it as an undercosted card that restricts what kind of nobles Martell can get in future. Nothing that would break an enviroment. Where I have problem with this card is, is the fact that everytime Martell gets some new card it seems to start "omg this totally breaks GG!" which just seems funny. A deck completely surrounded on running GG can be easily broken (not by every decks mind you, but I doubt this kind of deck could win consistantly as its too weak against other controls). Especially now when Greyjoy is gaining on popularity there is more location control running in the meta. Also if this card really annoyes you I would advice that you build a Greyjoy cancel deck and laugh your ass of when your opponent returns N to his hand and you cancel the effect.

3) "This card is OP since with these 4 other cards it creates a combo". This is the kind of reaction we get for Sand Snakes usually, other close example is poisoned spear. This is not just Martell, but seems to happen to Martell the most. A knee jerk reaction on a card that does nearly nothing on itself, but when combined with many cards creates a powerful combo. yes the combo might be powerful, but calling something so conditional broke is another thing.

Targaryen:

1) "Targ is top, people just don't know how to pilot it". I hear this a lot on here and on the FFG forum, yes Targ is harder to run than some other decks and can even be the hardest to run. The problem just is in the house. The Targ just like the Lannister cards aren't as aggressively costed as other houses. Also many times I will see people mentioning on some powerful Targ effect, but these effects are usually very card or resource inefficient aswell. These powerful effects (like burn) can easily create an illusion to non-Targaryen player that the deck is godly unbeatable beast in the right hands. The problem is the player is not at that moment noticing how much the Targaryen has worked to get that effect played, how he needed that terminal burn with the other burn just to get rid of one of your characters, how easily you could have disrupted it if you had seen it coming etc. The point I'm trying to make is, Targaryen seems more powerful than it actually is for those who don't play the house themselves. From the inside, it's often quite clunky and slow.

Greyjoy:

1) "omg this thing is so good in mill". Milling cards are seen nearly always very powerful. Milling your opponent can be a frustraiting thing. It's mostly Psychological effect thou as you are thinking "well now I missed that card gosh darn it". The problem is that in a game of thrones milling isn't a victory condition on itelf. Milling seems more powerful than it actually is. When you are milling a well build deck you will always hit on good cards because that deck is filled with good cards and most likely it wont effect the game as much as your opponents more powerful control effects or characters. The main problem here also is that barely any card does mill and take effect on mill at same time which leads to a mess. Also raiders are overcosted when compared to other characters.

2) Quoting my friend WWDrakey here "Ever heard anybody cry "OMG, Totally Broken!" for a new GJ card? Huh. Me neither. Wierd that." Greyjoy seems to be the only house that is now quickly gaining on powerful cards that, well, people aren't just talking much, it just seems people ignore this house mostly. Imagine the outcries we would have if the new Alannys was a Martell card

Baratheon:

1) "The new cards are bad for Baratheon, but I think Baratheon players are not looking for new strategies." Something also posted fairly often. This is by definition erroneous... Unless of course you mean 'old undiscovered strategies', which might be possible. Then again, the game is suffering quite a bit from power creep currently, so the hidden gems need to be quite shiny and very well hidden.. Baratheon for sure has now taken the short end of the straw (just compare to any cycle of cards in these CP's, Bara has the weakest ones). In a house as weak in draw as Baratheon cards need to usually be strong by themselves and relying on card interactions is quite dodgy. You're only drawing 2 cards each turn and rarely get the intrigue to defend your hand from the strongest characters available for the house. So finding a hidden gem from the past is unlikely for baratheon

Now for my not house specific ones.

"This card SUCK! we have card with this title and it is better!" This statement is just plain ignoring different builds. Very rarely there are unique characters of which only one sees play and others not at all. Nearly always Every different uniq character has its place in a theme deck or in a completely different setting as the old one. Point is again knee jerk reactions to new characters with same title as old ones.

"I never play [insert housename], but the just spoiled [insert card name] is broken!" Just like in my Targaryen example. When a player who never touches a specific house is ready to rule that some card which might be in reality very conditional is to him completely broken (the card might actually be very powerful against their house of choice). This is ignoring the greater house balance in the game completely. Often based on misconceptions about deck construction or card pool with the house in question. A good example would be a powerful new event for Martell (would have to be really stellar to even get a chance against the existing ones) or a new location for GJ (ditto). Another good example would be a new non-setup attachment for a House/build that is already too heavy on non-setuppable cards (events, large armies).

There my rant is over

Since I largely contributed to the ranting as well... I have to say that...

"Nice rant! Agreed on all points."

I don't normally enjoy reading rants on these forums, but I found this one entertaining I personally haven't seen the level of complaining on these forums that it seems you have noticed (excluding complaints about Martell/GG), but I tend to agree with your characterizations of the statements.

On Baratheon specifically, I think Bara's rush builds are still very strong, but the overall house weakness has more to do with the metagame. Bara rush was the only deck I lost to at Black Friday (7 games). The problem with Bara is that it's rush is easily repelled by some popular control builds. Against other aggro decks, for example a GJ deck, I think Bara tends to do better, doesn't it? I know my Bara rush deck wins consistently against tier-1 GJ winter and maester decks...it just loses consistently to Martell and Lanni. Other aggro decks, like Stark siege and Wildlings, tend to do better against Martell and Lanni though. If we see a reemergence of Wildlings or growing popularity of aggro more generally, I think this metagame change will be a good thing for Bara, and we'll also see Bara decks begin to do much better at tournaments. For the record though, I wouldn't be opposed to Bara getting a bit more support for non-rush builds.

With regard to Targaryen, my guess is that increasingly efficient cards like Meereen Tourney Grounds are going to make the deck gradually easier to build/play. That's likely going to result in more Targaryen decks at tourneys, and those will probably be more successful. Cards like Lyanna + Meereen Tourney Grounds + Shadow Parasites are very easy to play resource wise (no influence/heavy resource requirements) and require less combo-ing than traditional burn. If more cards like this come out, I imagine we'll see a lot of players pick up Targ in coming months.

Stark

1) Agreed. They definitely have lots of builds, especially with Alliance becoming more popular.

2) In the current US meta, Stark is in the bottom three. In the EU meta it might be different, I don't know. I don't play in EU. The US has always been a very control oriented meta and the fact that MOST stark decks tend to be challenge and character oriented makes them a bad house right now. However, I think that a Stark deck could still win a tournament since the gap isn't that big between the bottom house and top house.

Lannister

1) I would have agreed with you on this until the Lannister box came out. In my opinion, and I could be very wrong here, Lannister gold production just got a HUGE shot in the arm. Its definitely the tipping point for me to go ahead and let Lannister have to spend an extra gold on something that other houses get for cheaper. I also think the cards in this box tend to actually be better costed than previous Lannister cards. The Lannister Iron Throne?! Two gold?! Really?! That card is one of the best priced cards in the game.

2) You are right, I could be wrong here, but I think it is the best box. It not only has the highest quality of cards, but it easily gives the most options to the most houses. I honestly couldn't find five cards in that box that I would NEVER play. Plus going through there I found a ton of cards that I'm going to be either using Out of House or neutrals that I'll use in other houses.

Martell

1) Yeah the draw that Martell uses is mostly neutral. Really the House Messenger and Viper's Bannerman are the stand outs here though. They get around the draw cap which is pretty rare these days. Compare that to Baratheon draw or Greyjoy draw.

2) Agreed to a point on GG. On the one hand I do believe that people need to just start running more location control, but on the other hand I do feel like it is a bit over powered. I think the big thing that makes GG so good is the context that it is in. If this was a Baratheon card that worked off of Baratheon nobles, I wouldn't care. Baratheon doesn't have too much control as it is. The fact that this is a Martell card is pretty amazing. You don't have to build a deck around GG, you just kinda put it in with a few nobles you probably weren't running before. Its the fact that this is just one more control card that Martell gets that is pretty amazing. The 2 gold Myrcella is really going to put this over the top for me.

3) Yeah I'm totally OK with things like the Sandsnakes. I tend to run Power of Blood which just screws that deck over pretty hard. People probably need to start running some event cancel anyway.

Targ

1) While you bring up some good points on how Targ is missing some key cards to be competitive, I still feel like they are better than people give them credit for. Yes they are definitely not the top house, and I would still put them in the bottom three, but they aren't THAT far away from the top three. I could see them being in the top three after Beyond the Narrow Sea. They really don't need that much help. A stronger character base will help them immensely.

GJ

1) Yeah milling is dumb. I don't really have much else to say here. haha

2) The fact that GJ is getting great cards isn't that big of a deal. Again its all about context. You're **** right I'd be pissed if the new Alannys was a Martell card! Martell has enough awesome cards and control. Giving them one more is just a kick in the nuts to the other houses. I feel like GJ has needed some better cards, and they are getting them. I think people are definitely underestimating how strong that house is right now though. I'm pretty sure they are in the top three houses.

Baratheon

1) The problem with Baratheon is the fact that they just don't have the draw. I've been going over my decks and I honestly think its back to Baratheon Summer for these guys. If you don't want to go summer you're stuck with things like Dragon's Tail (which is really a lot better than people realize I think) and Knights of the Realm and Bay of Ice. Not really something that is going to compare to other houses draw. I still think that if they had some sort of way of granting renown for a phase they would be a lot better. Hallowed Ground would be perfect! I also think there are a few fringe deck ideas that people haven't looked at, but not sure how well those would work anyway. See Who Is Stronger + Maester's Tower?

Neutral

1) Yeah, but after Joffrey #8 I really start getting annoyed. Not that the card isn't good, but just because I want to see other Lannister uniques.

2) Yeah I will go ahead and agree with you on that one.

your take on targ is probably the reason behind most of these gripes actually. players who play gg, burn, bara power rush, etc know their weaknesses but when you are facing them, it is harder to see. for me, personally, power creep is really the only major issue the game faces now... andhas probably always faced to a degree. well, and reverse power creep for those odd cards that always appear in a pack that just seem so conditional or slightly over cost compared to everything else people just pause and have to ask why they were released in the first place. recent example for me was the bolton outrider, which isnt a bad or useless card... just hard to wrap my head around when compared to every other 2 or less gold cost character with the bolton trait and way less obviously effective slash valuable than the small jon, new arya and meera reed. the outrider is probably balanced well enough, or perhaps actually better balanced than the other recent dare i say more power creeping cards but that reality doesnt make it feel less underpowered. that why question is probably emphasized by the lcg format too, since less good cards take up an important slot in our 10 dollar for 20 card investment...

I might have a more detailed response later, but re: Greyjoy getting good cards: Shhhhhhh! We like people not knowing.

I agree with you Ire, 100%. "Nice" rant (if there can be such a thing)

Lannister:

and the draw theme gets weaker everytime neutral or some other house gets draw
Until pyromancer's cache, Tommen, and GTM are phased out, or neutral versions with the same utility come out. Lannister will always have the most reliable draw. Reliable is the key here. Lannister can hit their cap in the marshalling phase every time with 0 effort before anything else happens. All draw is nice, but challenge phase draw, or draw based around responses is not the most reliable(best) draw.

Problem comes in when you compare the cards to other houses cards they are 1)lower str 2)less icons 3)allies 4)combination of these for the price of what other house can get for cheaper.
This is just silly. Yes on the allies, but everything else is reaching. Lannister is built around effects. If I asked to to do your best to build a character-lite or control deck, would you build it out of Stark? Character strength and efficiency is not the defining factor of this game.

2) "The Lannister box is the best box there is".
Yeah, I agree with you here. I believe it is a good box for sure, but hype definitely plays a big part.

Rave said:

For this reason, I have no problem with Lannister's draw becoming less dominant over time. Evening the card-advantage mechanics out a bit allows designers to explore real house differences, like different control mechanics (kneel vs. burn, etc.) or different trait-based themes (Sand Snakes vs. Direwolves). Those themes tend to be a lot more fun to play around with than intentionally creating situations where one player has more cards + gold to play, and the other player has to rely on getting lucky to win.

Sorry, don't mean to hijack this thread...just wanted to add my own "rant" on a common misperception

I agree with most of it. However...:

1. Ghaston Grey is really good. 1 cost. Cheap nobles running around. The non-restriction of use. The combo with VB for control (and other cards). I don't think it is 100% broken, but it is good enough to be restricted so a Martell player would have to choose between repeatedly controlling large characters, around most immunities, for a lower cost OR controlling the smaller characters repeatedly for lower cost

2. There are horrible cards. There just are. Any game has them. Not every card can be a winner!

3. I tend to agree with you on the Lanni box to be honest. After the agenda and the Iron Throne, I was hard pressed to find anythign that hit my Top 5 listing. Lots of solid cards (i.e. Kevan, Doubting Septa) and lots of situational-could-be-awesome cards (i.e. Only Game that Matters). But it is a very consistent box, that will probably have more cards played than any box I can think of off the top of my head.

Twn2dn said:

Yeah, I get what you mean, but I think its necessary. Lannister at it's heart is a control house, and control needs draw to function. The majority of Lannister's control is in marshalling, so they need to get the draw quickly and have it be reliable. If Lannister got the majority of their draw in the challenges phase, like Stark does, they would make them pretty horrible, because they couldn't answer Baratheon and Stark's challenge phase threats in time, where it doesn't really seem to bother Stark that much. They do have challenge phase options, just like Stark or Baratheon have marshalling phase options, but at it's core, they are best at kneeling out threats before they happen.

I also think this is why we have the little +1 and +2 gold lannister weenies. So that Lannister can put more control cards in their location base without sacrificing their gold curve.

Also, Lord Tywin is one of if not the best tacticians in the kingdom, so I think it would be feasible that draw is one of their strengths.

I have to say I disagree with you on Bara. Bara decks seem SO focused on rush, that everything else seems to be ignored by its top players. If the top Baratheon players are not playing the other deck types it is hard to determine if the House has problems or if it is just that specific build which is not winning as frequently because of the metagame.

Twn2dn said:

Wait. Are you saying Draw=Win?

In every game, Draw = Win. That's just the way it works.

But I think he was saying that every house can draw, just like every house can win. It isn't special.

Best plot ever created?

That's right Counting Coppers!!!!!!

Hey, who let Darryl in here?

Kennon said:

~Wait, *you* aren't Darryl!?

sWhiteboy said:

It is not that simple. Some decks are able to win without extra draw, if they are fast enough (e.g., RDW in MtG). Bara Rush was able to work like that at some point in AGOT.

AegonTargaryen said:

Bara has some draw via Knights of the Realm. Furthermore, most decks have access to draw via the set up phase. The typical rush deck has enough low cost cards to increase the odds of you having a large set-up thus giving you additional free draw at the start of the game.