| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
Claim the Iron Throne and the lands of Westeros!
| Page 2 of 5 (64 messages) | « First page... 1 2 3 4 5 ...Last page » |
zorzogoth said:
The Greyjoys have very strong character cards and may seem to overpower the Lannisters at first look. But I don't agree that it is a hopeless battle for the Lannisters.
Maybe the following strategy might help.
You should leave Riverrun open for Greyjoy in the first round, since it's impossible to defend it if Greyjoy wants it. Instead go for Harrenhal. Move your 1 infantry and 1 cavalry into Stoney Sept. (has now 3 unit army) Then move two infantry from Stoney Sept into Harrenhal. Leave a cavalry in Stoney Sept for support.
Next round if a muster has happened :
you buy another infantry at Harrenhal and two infantry at Lannisport. The greyjoy will likely have bought a cavalry in Riverrun and units in Seaguard if he took that one.
If a bidding for the tracks occurs, try to remain high on the iron throne track, so you can attack before greyjoy does. Also Try to hold on to the Raven token for the special orders and hope for the greyjoy to loose the Valyrian sword.
Place a raid token on your boat to counter a raid or support on the Greyjoy boat, a support in Lannisport , a support +1 in Stoney Sept, a march +1 in Harrenhal.
You'll now be trying to attack Riverrun with Kevan Lannister. This will give 6 str for the 3 infantry, 1 from Kevan, 1 from your march order, 1 from your support in Stoney Sept and 2 from your Cavalry in Stoney sept. Also give a support to Lannisport for the two infantry units over there they add another 4 from Kevan. This will be an attack worth 15 .
Greyjoy can get 15 theoretically but this will be very difficult for him : 5 from units in Riverrun, 1 from the sword, 2 from defence (if he even has this or if it isn't raided by your boat) , 1 support from his boat (if not raided) , 1or 2 support from the infantry in the territory north of Riverrun, 4 being his highest card.
Kevan is your friend, use him
The Lannisters should not have to go to such lengths to simply be a playable faction. FFG screwed up and made the Greyjoys way too powerful and the Lannisters way too weak. Look at the Jaime Lannister card, 2 Strength and 1 Sword. What a joke. Is that supposed to be his stats with only 1 hand? Serious lack of playtesting for this one.
I agree that I would have liked to see more flavour on the Lannister house cards.
I don't think it's impossible for the Lannisters to do well, and they are certainly not weaker then Greyjoys although I think they are possibly one of the hardest to win with. They start with the Raven token while Greyjoy can't even use a star order in a 6 player game. They also start high on the iron throne track. They have a very good supporting area being Stony sept.
Also there are very good Lannister cards :
* Kevan Lannister : boosts infantry
* Gregor Clegane : three swords
Not fantastic, but ok :
* Tyrion : situational but it can be good
* Tywin : extra power tokens are ok but a little bit boring
* The hound : two towers are ok
* Jaime : only one sword is a little boring for him
bad :
* Cersei : very situational
I played two 5player games as Lannister recently. In the first one I succesfully took Riverrun, Harrenhall and Blackwater then expanded into searoad marches. But Tyrell was too quick to conquer 7 cities, since Baratheon was an inexperienced player. My strategy in this game was to talk Greyjoy into a war with the Starks. Both fought hard against each other and Winterfell switched sides two times, leaving both very weakened. I hesitated to go south, because I was preying upon the north and preparing myself to crush the weakened Greyjoys and Starks.
The second game I again took Harrenhall ,Riverrun and Blackwater, supported by the Stony Sept. My navy was just about to make a crushing attack against the Greyjoy navy, before Tyrell conquered 7 cities again due to Baratheon playing bad (also a new player)
There was another game by another group that evening in which I saw the Lannisters crush the Greyjoys and march north. Greyjoy got obliterated by the Lannisters and an opportunistic Stark. Since it was already late they stopped the game prematurely.
That's three games in which Greyjoy did poorer than the Lannisters.
zorzogoth said:
I don't think it's impossible for the Lannisters to do well, and they are certainly not weaker then Greyjoys although I think they are possibly one of the hardest to win with. They start with the Raven token while Greyjoy can't even use a star order in a 6 player game. They also start high on the iron throne track. They have a very good supporting area being Stony sept.
I played two 5player games as Lannister recently. In the first one I succesfully took Riverrun, Harrenhall and Blackwater then expanded into searoad marches. But Tyrell was too quick to conquer 7 cities, since Baratheon was an inexperienced player. My strategy in this game was to talk Greyjoy into a war with the Starks. Both fought hard against each other and Winterfell switched sides two times, leaving both very weakened. I hesitated to go south, because I was preying upon the north and preparing myself to crush the weakened Greyjoys and Starks.
The second game I again took Harrenhall ,Riverrun and Blackwater, supported by the Stony Sept. My navy was just about to make a crushing attack against the Greyjoy navy, before Tyrell conquered 7 cities again due to Baratheon playing bad (also a new player)
There was another game by another group that evening in which I saw the Lannisters crush the Greyjoys and march north. Greyjoy got obliterated by the Lannisters and an opportunistic Stark. Since it was already late they stopped the game prematurely.
That's three games in which Greyjoy did poorer than the Lannisters.
The Lannisters should be one of the most powerful factions as it is in the books. "Possibly one of the hardest to win with", you say? You have lost the arguement with that statement, ser.
You gave three examples of someone who is new or does not know how to play as the Greyjoys. If you played against someone who knew what they were doing, the Greyjoys would spank the Lannisters every time unless they got seriously lucky with tide of battle cards and somehow a mustering card never comes up. Your navy was going to make a crushing attack!? Dude, if I was playing Greyjoy you would never have a navy.
Its unbalanced, simple as that.
I recently purchased Second edition, but have yet to play (or first edition). I'm looking forward to getting a game in January. Anyway, the errata for first edition suggests switching Tyrells and the Greyjoys positions on the fiefdoms track so that the Greyjoys don't start with the sword. Is the switch advisable for second edition as well?
Orctavius said:
I recently purchased Second edition, but have yet to play (or first edition). I'm looking forward to getting a game in January. Anyway, the errata for first edition suggests switching Tyrells and the Greyjoys positions on the fiefdoms track so that the Greyjoys don't start with the sword. Is the switch advisable for second edition as well?
I think people are somewhat overstating Greyjoy's military prowess at the beginning of the game. Yes, Greyjoy is dangerous, but that just makes him more of a target during the first few turns.
I'd suggest, before you introduce house rules and the like, to just try it with your gaming group first. Get some games in, gain some experience with the rules and mechanisms, with the kind of directions your games take and with how much influence diplomacy has in your games. If you feel Greyjoy is still unstoppable then, you should try developing some house rules. But experience will give you a better handle on what adjustments you actually need to make the game work better for you and your group.
Remember though, that the game is supposed to start off with houses on unequal footing. Certain houses are supposed to be have certain advantages, while others have certain disadvantages. This isn't a case of different styles, but equal strength. Accurately analyzing the situation and forming alliances against whichever house is a danger right now, is what A Game of Thrones is all about.
The beauty of this game is that those advantages and disadvantages can change from one turn to the next. House card effects can screw with your best-laid plans and an ally flipping sides and unexpectedly giving their support to your opponent, can quickly turn things around. If people were effectively equally powerful at any given time, there would be no point in negotiation or even supporting a battle that you're not directly involved in.
Five tons of flax!
Joe Dizzy said:
Orctavius said:
I recently purchased Second edition, but have yet to play (or first edition). I'm looking forward to getting a game in January. Anyway, the errata for first edition suggests switching Tyrells and the Greyjoys positions on the fiefdoms track so that the Greyjoys don't start with the sword. Is the switch advisable for second edition as well?
I think people are somewhat overstating Greyjoy's military prowess at the beginning of the game. Yes, Greyjoy is dangerous, but that just makes him more of a target during the first few turns.
I'd suggest, before you introduce house rules and the like, to just try it with your gaming group first. Get some games in, gain some experience with the rules and mechanisms, with the kind of directions your games take and with how much influence diplomacy has in your games. If you feel Greyjoy is still unstoppable then, you should try developing some house rules. But experience will give you a better handle on what adjustments you actually need to make the game work better for you and your group.
Remember though, that the game is supposed to start off with houses on unequal footing. Certain houses are supposed to be have certain advantages, while others have certain disadvantages. This isn't a case of different styles, but equal strength. Accurately analyzing the situation and forming alliances against whichever house is a danger right now, is what A Game of Thrones is all about.
The beauty of this game is that those advantages and disadvantages can change from one turn to the next. House card effects can screw with your best-laid plans and an ally flipping sides and unexpectedly giving their support to your opponent, can quickly turn things around. If people were effectively equally powerful at any given time, there would be no point in negotiation or even supporting a battle that you're not directly involved in.
The Greyjoys are fine. Its the Lannisters that are the problem. Their house cards suck, like seriously, and their starting position is precarious at best. Also, you say that this game is supposed to start off with houses on unequal footing. That is incorrect. The Houses have different advantages and disadvantages, but they are meant to be balanced. They are not. The Game of Thrones LCG is an example of a well balanced game in the SoIAF genre that still represents the factions accurately and makes it fun to play any of them and still have a fair chance to win.
Well, you assume that the houses are supposed to start off balanced, but the game fails in doing so.
I assume that the houses are supposed to start off-balance, and the game succeeds in doing so.
I don't think we're much in disagreement here (except for the degree), it's just whether one considers imbalance between the starting positions a flaw or a design choice. I obviously consider it to be the latter.
Five tons of flax!
Joe Dizzy said:
Well, you assume that the houses are supposed to start off balanced, but the game fails in doing so.
I assume that the houses are supposed to start off-balance, and the game succeeds in doing so.
I don't think we're much in disagreement here (except for the degree), it's just whether one considers imbalance between the starting positions a flaw or a design choice. I obviously consider it to be the latter.
In my opinion its irrelevant if the unbalance is intended or not. Its of course a question of preference for you as a player or your group. Me myself would prefer the factions more equal but different and therefor I'm always interested to read about other players solutions to the "Lannister-problem".
Is there anyone who has tried to exchange Greyjoys knight for a third footman?
Joe Dizzy said:
Well, you assume that the houses are supposed to start off balanced, but the game fails in doing so.
I assume that the houses are supposed to start off-balance, and the game succeeds in doing so.
I don't think we're much in disagreement here (except for the degree), it's just whether one considers imbalance between the starting positions a flaw or a design choice. I obviously consider it to be the latter.
Uhhh, why would you assume the houses are supposed to start off-balance? That makes no sense at all. Also, if they did start that way, the Lannisters would be much more powerful than the Greyjoys if it were supposed to resemble the books which you dont seem to have read.
Its like having a Lord of the Rings game and Sauron is a weak little bitch or Frodo having the same stats as Legolas or something. It doesnt represent the story correctly and it also makes for an unbalanced game experience. It fails on both those levels.
However, if you look at the FFG Game of Thrones LCG, the houses are balanced just fine and the flavor of the books is there as well. Its not hard to draw a contrast. Im hoping FFG will fix this somehow, as the game is seriously flawed at the moment.
I would really like an FFG representative to comment on some of these concerns. The opinions of the sheep do not concern me ;)
| Page 2 of 5 (64 messages) | « First page... 1 2 3 4 5 ...Last page » |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS