richsabre said:

I think Eowyn is neither better nor worse than the majority of heroes. In fact, there are very few heroes that I feel stand out as either better or worse than the rest. I can't stand Denethor, for example, but I know other people really like him. Beravor seems to me like the clear winner, but you have to build a deck around her to take full advantage of the possibilities of card draw. Boromir's ability to ready whenever he wants is simply nuts, but unless you can ensure you benefit from it, it's not worth the threat increase.

That said, Eowyn excels at questing, as everyone knows, and one of the strongest, simplest decks to play through the initial cycle (and Khazad-dum) was a Rohan deck:

Heroes: Eowyn, Theodred, Dunhere (Starting threat: 25)

Allies: Snowbourn Scout x3, Westfold Horse-Breaker x3, Escort from Edoras x3, Gleowine x2, Miner of the Iron Hills x2, Daughter of the Nimrodel x2, Faramir x1, Eomund x3, Gandalf x3 (22)

Attachments: Dunedain Mark x3, Ancient Mathom x3, Steward of Gondor x3 (9)

Events: A Test of Will x3, Stand and Fight x3, Sneak Attack x3, Will of the West x2, Dwarven Tomb x3, The Galadhrim's Greeting x2, A Light in the Dark x3 (20)

With Eowyn and Theodred committed to questing, you could make lots of progress each turn, and Dunhere would take care of enemies in the staging area. Galadhrim's Greeting and Gandalf would drop your threat so that you didn't have to engage enemies, Dunedain Mark would boost Dunhere so he'd be strong enough to overcome defense strengths, and A Light in the Dark could force enemies that engaged you back into the staging area for Dunhere to attack. Without a Lore hero, the Lore allies need to be played by Stand and Fight, of course, but they each provide valuable, situational effects: card draw, condition removal, and healing.

It seems there were a lot of variants on this deck that saw play, each tweaking the core base by 5 cards or so, and Eowyn was crucial to all of them (as were Theodred and Dunhere). Low starting threat and high starting willpower are the core of the deck.

Agree 100% about Beravor. If your deck is designed for it she is just stupid, it is impossible to loose.

Thorongil said:

exactly , she is kind of like training wheels for new players. Allowing them to get a handle on one of the game play aspects early on. We all know that the hardest part of this game is the initial rounds b4 you get your allys out and she takes that pressure off, but as any Eowyn deck player will know that by mid and defiantly by end game you are questing for a billion times more than you need.. often over questing even. This means her abilities is completely useless, as she is now a wasted utility slot. Deck builders soon noticed this as the card pool grew that there are simple so many better options to replace her with, options that carry a useful function though out the entire course of the quest. While I still think she is good for noobs to get a handle on the game, once you are comfortable I strongly encourage you to swap her out and it will not be long till you are getting much better scores with out her and having more fun, as lets face it, questing isn't the coolest "trick" a card can do is it?

Eowyn is neither strong as some folks believe nor as weak as others maintain. She is certainly not a requirement for solo deck building; However she is not simply a crutch for new players or weak deckbuilders. She's very good at what she does - questing...not only with her strength but because her power gives her flexibility to provide variable quest strength - a nice feature in scenarios where you want to control the pace of your progress. Get Faramir and Elfhelm in with her and questing by herself, with Faramir in support as needed, gives you the ability to deal with threat from 4-7. She does this at a fairly low threat level as her other stats are weak...which is fine as she is a specialist.

To say that you can replace her questing prowess easily with card combos is correct but completely misses the point that by playing her you free up deck space to include combos to deal with other aspects of the game.

Bottom line is that it's personal preference.

Woz said:

no, many people completely misunderstand this.... . the point is that in a deck that where she run by end or mid game she is irrelevant, as you simply do not need her questing ability in nay way. You could nvr tap her again and not notice a difference, so she becomes a empty slot, that you could run a card that has a valid effect till the end of the game. The argument that you can place other cards as that she frees up questing abilities in your of no consequence as you always end up with a deck that over quests due to card pool. There are a few scenarios that she is good in, Massing is one of them, due to the extreme start position in a solo game, but as any massing player knows as you add more players again this becomes less and less important.

I do foresee a time in the future once the card pool opens up more were she again will become relevant. A time were you can field many more specific spells with no aid to questing. In a deck like that you can rely on her ability for the entire game, but as it stands now there is simply not enough cards, no matter the combo of cards you always end up with a overly powerful quest deck.

booored said:

Hey Boored - I understand your point. I simply disagree with it. Here's why:

1) Back of the envelope analysis - Eowyn is 4 quest power with 5 if needed and cards in hand; This is at least the equivalent of sending 3 allies questing (figuring 2, 2, 1 Will allies). In general, I'm sending Eowyn rather than those 3 allies who are doing other things for me like defending, attacking or kicking off special abilities. I'll take that trade. Yes, you can send 2 and buff them with a combo to get there, but that leads to my second point...

2) I primarily play a Purple Blue deck (green splashed in to have a chance at JtR). For a while I played some of the blue quest/quest bumping cards, but I've pretty much pulled them all - for the reason you state. I don't need the questing allies or quest buffs. Since I'm using allies, attachments and events for other elements, I usually don't have an overpowered quest deck. Eowyn is usually the key questor for me through game's end. I can concentrate on cards that give me attack, defense, threat management, versatility, etc. Sure I've got the Stone but if you have Aragorn and blue in, you play it. Faramir is great for questing bumps, but he's a rock solid ally. Northern tracker is another rock solid ally who quests for reasons other than will. Other than those 3 I don't think I have any in that relate to questing (I'll check the cards later).

Long paragraph but in summary, I've got an Eowyn deck that does not do in most games (and I've probably played a couple hundred with it) what you say will always happen.

3) She's a specialist so you do use her for a niche, making her fairly useless for other things. However you can offset that by combining her with versatile heroes like Aragorn and Imrahil in my case. Those heroes handle the other stuff and can complement questing if needed. She makes a great 3rd with them.

4) Her ability scales up with multi player. Add 1-3 questing power depending on players. This can be critical when you are running with others that may have weak questing.

5) There are scenarios where her high and buffable will are important - She probably won't die in a snowstorm on Caradhras; She can help control the progress on CatC, great for final Escape tests in Dead Marshes, etc.

I was going to type up a detailed argument, but I will settle for "what Woz said."

im in the middle here

while i do not think her the supreme master of questing and all round solo play as arathorn was saying, hence my earlier reply, i still think she has alot of merit in my solo decks

i usually use her when paired with tactics and a heavy fighting deck, so that as woz says i have a good quester in a non-questing deck

this is evened out in the end then, as without a massive amount of willpower coming off one hero, it would be a questing-empty deck

the main reason i dont use her is because i sort of burned her out during last year when my strategies were crappy and i just had a very linear view of the game that barely utilised combos- so i used to think along the lines of - big questing card, big figting card, thats it.....whereas now im better at getting cards that work well together

well, maybe i am being a bit hard on her. I mean we have all used her. I just think that she has some real short falls in the utility dept. I like having all my heroes serve a function for the entire game. As I said I think she is going to get better as the card pool opens but for example... Bifur imo OWNS her... he only quest for 1 less with Dain on the field and has mana fixing and is lower threat.... and higher attack.... great example of a card (admittedly needing a support card.. but most people run dain when running dwarfism deck.. or probably should.)

booored said:

a classic example of advice i didnt heed until i realised how awesome it was

booored said:

When I am deck building, I focus heavily on ensuring that the deck can do well in both the mid/end game as well as the beginning. If you are searching for high scores, I could possibly understand your perspective. If you are aiming for win percentage, I couldn't disagree more. Heroes are the only way to guarantee early game capability, and the early game is the most critical time to survive/prosper. If you are depending on a card draw to decently quest or fight, you are wide open to a poor deck draw derailing the game quickly + you are further restricted on when to mulligan. A pool of capable heroes gives you longer to get your engine running and Eowyn makes this equation much simpler to the point that you can essentially pick any two other heroes and know that questing is covered early on. One of the things that makes Beravor so absurd is that she is so effective at being part of an engine in the mid/end game while also offering up solid questing and fighting at the beginning. You could make a similar argument for a few other heroes (Gloin comes to mind), but it is hard to imagine Eowyn not being at least a middle of the road hero.

Boored,

To be honest, I think your point is more of personal preference. Nothing wrong with that. I love the versatility and utility of Aragorn and Imrahil so I kinda play to that with the deck and let Eowyn do her thing. First time we see a card that allows Will to be used for AT or Def instead or draw your will in cards/reduce your threat by the will of a hero - you get the point- she'll definitely jump in powers

Rich,

I understand your view. I also have a couple other decks that I run with to give a bit of variety. They play very differently, and I don't use the same hero in any of them - even if it results in a "sub optimal" line up.

Beano,

Good point. I love the game - hate both scoring systems. I only worry about Ws and Ls.