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.