Just some food for thought since nobody has really posted much here lately. I, like many other AGOT'ers play other LCGs, and in particular Netrunner. I am a little shocked how popular its become and this is kinda cool ( http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4323

).

While AGOT is my first love, I wonder why AGOT hasn't really reached the heights that Netrunner has. Sure Netrunner is new, and perhaps the Wotc association has helped, but doesn't AGOT have an advantage just based on pure exposure?

Perhaps since the shift towards casual gamers AGOT is doomed to be an afterthought kept alive in a competitive nature by the few die hard players. It seems that at least for now, Netrunner is where to go if you're looking for strong players and competitiion. I don't mean that as a slight to anyone, its just in MI some of the better players are semi/pro Magic players so the level of competition is quite high here.

I wish that AGOT had 240 players for Gencon. I wish we had some sort of tour. For as long as I rememeber, there have been the new LCGs on the block but eventually, AGOT would prove its staying power. I just regret that for the life cycle of this game, it only took Netrunner one year to eclipse anything AGOT has provided in an organized play fashion. You can't blame FFG, they are riding the hot hand. I just wish we would get a little love in that department too.

EDIT: I like the news messenger type bag prizes. Something different is always welcome.

Netrunner isn't a new game and had a built in audience. Comparing the two is like apples and zucchinis. Thrones had its biggest field in its existence at gencon this year. It's in the best spot it's ever been in. Hard to complain just cuz a diff game is drawing better. That's like Oprah complaining that she doesn't have Bill Gates money.

I agree with Dennis that the games are not easily comparable, but the OP's point stands that it would be nice to have some 'special' touches given to AGOT as well- I suppose it's possible that an 'Iron Throne Tour' or something is in the works, we can cross our fingers.

The Gencon Netrunner tournament had 188 participants, not 240. The Thrones tournament had a waiting list, and some people couldn't get in and still managed 107 (I believe).

The disparity is not as large as you make it out to be. While this new Tour of tournaments sounds pretty neat for Netrunner, so far it's basically the only support Netrunner has received that thrones has not - and who knows, we may get something similar.

IF you want some numbers to make the Netrunner people jealous, wait till Stahleck!

Good points guys. I have to disagree a bit though with a couple of thngs:

Netrunner isn't a new game and had a built in audience. Comparing the two is like apples and zucchinis.

Netrunner isn't new and while I get a few guys might have played in back in the day, I doubt that there is that many people who actually played that original 17 years ago. (yikes, I'm old). AGOT hasn't had over 10 years between publishing like Netrunner, so I'm not sure that their built in audience had much to do with it.

The Gencon Netrunner tournament had 188 participants, not 240. The Thrones tournament had a waiting list, and some people couldn't get in and still managed 107 (I believe).

The disparity is not as large as you make it out to be. While this new Tour of tournaments sounds pretty neat for Netrunner, so far it's basically the only support Netrunner has received that thrones has not - and who knows, we may get something similar.

IF you want some numbers to make the Netrunner people jealous, wait till Stahleck!

Netrunner had over 200. The tournament was broken into different pods, but for purpose of national championship I'm almost sure that they had 240 or more. Maybe I'm wrong.

Regardless it seems like the OP for Netrunner is evolving, while for Gencon this year AGOT got titles for Melee and a Melee plot for Joust. I'm not mad or anything, just wish over the course of this game (and it has never been in a better place I agree) AGOT would get something like this tour.

Netrunner had over 200. The tournament was broken into different pods, but for purpose of national championship I'm almost sure that they had 240 or more. Maybe I'm wrong.

188 people started the tourney (240 tickets were available and accounted for but not all got used--apparently there was a glitch in the ticketing system that let unbought tickets for events stay on Wish Lists after they should've been returned to the pool, but there's not much way of knowing how much this was a factor). I was one of them. The elimination rounds were held the next day, but there was only the one "pod." There was mention made of looking into doing "flights" next year to make the tournament fields more manageable but they just did the one this year.

AGoT is doing very well. It's not just the size of the GenCon field that shows it, either. We forget easily that 'competitive' players are a tiny portion of the whole; there are loads of, for lack of a better ternm, casual AGoT players still buying and playing the game. ANR, which (obviously) I love is also doing very well. The fact that they're doing a special 'tour' for it and not AGoT in no way suggests that there's something amiss with the latter.

And who knows? Maybe AGoT will get something along the same lines. There's plenty of time between Worlds and Regionals and, strange though it is to say it, FFG's organized play program has definitely gotten better over the last year.

Netrunner had over 240 registered in advanced, only 188 played.

The OP for AGOT is evolving; the alternate art cards for the game's night kits, the stone house cards - each LCG is getting roughly even support there and it's much better than the last few years. For AGOT, there was a promo card for Joust (summoning season), one for melee (the 6 titles, although alt art is generous), playmats for the top 16 in melee, playmats for the top 16 in joust, shoulder bags for the top 8 in joust, trophies for the top 2, and that's not counting any later prizes in melee I didn't see - prize support was better for agot overall than for netrunner (although granted, we had two tournaments).

If I recall correctly, my brother playing netrunner got an alt art card, a playmat (and maybe a second alt art card?) for making top 16 in the tourney.

Netrunner is a pretty bad game that has the potential to be good soon. There are only about 80 cards that are competitive for use in Netrunner T1 decks right now. This is boring to me.

I plan to play thrones for a few more years (i.e., win a few more tournaments) while netrunner actually builds up a card pool. Then I will evaluate if netrunner is actually worth it or not.

tl;dr - I like the T1 thrones card pool and do not like the T1 netrunner cardpool.

Actually, if you think about it, AGOT had a built-in audience too, from the previous iteration of the game. It was huge back in the day, much bigger than it is now. I remember the big rotation of Ice and Fire (and I'm sure a lot of others) incensed a lot of people, and made a lot of people quit. I think it just never recovered from that blow.

I think the post that Darknoj just put up could very well be the beginning of our "pro" scene. I'm really happy about it, and invite everyone to participate.

This is blasphemy to some, I know, but a rotation might not be a bad idea for AGoT, provided that tournaments have both a "Legacy" style (i.e., all cards considered tourney legal, with the ban, errata, and restricted lists) and also a limited format (perhaps the core set, deluxe expansions, and the last full chapter pack cycle).

Yes, yes, I know that some AGoT themes have taken a long time to develop and thus would not be viable in the limited format. So, players could play both or either style.

^Blasphemer!

As the person who has been espousing the viewpoint that AGoT needs to compare itself to Netrunner and MtG to gauge its health, I appreciate this thread!

I think one of the major issues with AGoT is that it is pretty much in direct competition with MtG. They're both primarily deck-building games that require skilled execution. AGoT has the advantage of being more consistent due to more cards drawn, but is far less fun to participate in (I've discussed opening boosters and how randomness makes a game more fun before and been rebuked, but it is what it is). MtG has a lot more exposure, too, so when a new player is presented with options of similar games, the only reason to pick AGoT is the theme. Anyone who the theme doesn't appeal to will probably go for MtG.

Netrunner has the advantage of being made by Richard Garfield (so percieved quality is exceptionally high). It additionally is the antithesis of MtG. You can have a great deck and make bad play decisions and lose much more easily in Netrunner. There is a constant risk/reward assessment and it is always in flux. There is also bluffing. I always feel Netrunner is a far more dynamic game than AGoT when playing it.

The real thing that sets AGoT apart from MtG (and what I hope gets promoted more) is melee. AGoT is the only game available that currently has a legitimate multiplayer tournament format. THIS is it's only real draw to someone who is comparing it to MtG. That's why you'll often notice that newer players are either ones who know what the series is or players that have played a CCG/LCG before and are looking for a new game (let's see if that gets countered, haha. I could be wrong).

That being said, AGoT is definitely on an upward trend. The community has been working to legitimize it, though I still think the biggest issue stems from the codification (or lack thereof) of many rules and rule concepts.

As the person who has been espousing the viewpoint that AGoT needs to compare itself to Netrunner and MtG to gauge its health, I appreciate this thread!

I think one of the major issues with AGoT is that it is pretty much in direct competition with MtG. They're both primarily deck-building games that require skilled execution. AGoT has the advantage of being more consistent due to more cards drawn, but is far less fun to participate in (I've discussed opening boosters and how randomness makes a game more fun before and been rebuked, but it is what it is). MtG has a lot more exposure, too, so when a new player is presented with options of similar games, the only reason to pick AGoT is the theme. Anyone who the theme doesn't appeal to will probably go for MtG.

Netrunner has the advantage of being made by Richard Garfield (so percieved quality is exceptionally high). It additionally is the antithesis of MtG. You can have a great deck and make bad play decisions and lose much more easily in Netrunner. There is a constant risk/reward assessment and it is always in flux. There is also bluffing. I always feel Netrunner is a far more dynamic game than AGoT when playing it.

The real thing that sets AGoT apart from MtG (and what I hope gets promoted more) is melee. AGoT is the only game available that currently has a legitimate multiplayer tournament format. THIS is it's only real draw to someone who is comparing it to MtG. That's why you'll often notice that newer players are either ones who know what the series is or players that have played a CCG/LCG before and are looking for a new game (let's see if that gets countered, haha. I could be wrong).

That being said, AGoT is definitely on an upward trend. The community has been working to legitimize it, though I still think the biggest issue stems from the codification (or lack thereof) of many rules and rule concepts.

what means codification? im too lazy to look it up.

Replace with 'formalization' and it will make more sense; either one is fine though.

Dictionary.com says!

2b is more of what I'm suggesting. There's a lot of stuff that is still not printed. I also think simplification of what is printed needs to happen, which is somewhat connotated by codification.

I hate the way dictionary.com presents all it's stuff now. It makes it so hard to copy/paste.

what's a noun?

What's a dictionary?

what the **** is the internet?

what's a noun?

meh cant embed you tube videos, i fail

http://images.wikia.com/mk/images/2/25/Anchorman_well_that_escalated_quickly_966.jpg

Looks like we aren't getting a tour

http://fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4332

It's a shame. I wish there was an Iron Throne Tour and also a Balance of the Force Tour.

Sweet Cirrhosis Tour 2014!

FFG are only just coming around to the idea that Organised Play needs a little more than throwing a 'Kit' at people. Imagine how we feel in the UK and Europe, we get no Arkham Nights, no Event Centre of course I appreciate that the USA is a big place and that some of you folks might actually be further away from these things than we are, however you don't have to cross the Atlantic.

We have been pushing Game of Thrones for three years now and have a yearly event where we give away around $800 of prizes on the day (first prize is the Hound's Helm this year) but we get nothing in the way of help or support from FFG for doing it. If we put that kind of money into MTG or Yugioh we would be looking at a turnout of 300 rather than 50. We don't do that because as gamers at heart we REALLY LIKE the idea of a level playing field and also really like the game itself.

I think that 2014 may well be the turning point for FFG and it's OP support. If they see good attendance and lets face facts here an increase in sales directly related to the exposure that OP can give, much more may be coming our way in 2015.