Broken?

[daisukeman]

Since I brought up the SoH being OP, I will defend it. 2 twilight for a 3 burden removal + a meatshield with unlimited splashing capability is OP. There is no other card in LOTR which removes 3 burdens and gives you a "pass" on a combat for only 2 twilight in any deck type. LR at least requires the use of elven events thus some form of dedicated freeps deck. Not trying to start a fight, just saying.

Yeah, I agree with jdizzy001 that there is huge potential and OP in the sense of Sam being so splashable for very little cost.
But, I understant that this character is supposed to provide that...

The bottom line here (at least what I would propose so that we do some other thing rather than just complain), is that:
Since Decipher seemed to have screwed up with some cards, and we the meta/community can creatively think of some "abusive" combos (OP, broken, whatever seems out of line of what other cards can do at max.. -> use common sense here), some errata could be included for some of these cases.
Specially, when it looks as simple as including a "limit X" part.

And, I'm in favour of this because just look at the options:
a) do not ban -> leads to non-creative decks, user rants, and general abuse/NPE.
b) ban -> too restrictive. card is no longer used. "too square" a measure and then again, narrows down deck possibilties.
c) errata with limit or effect's cost modification -> has to be a realistic but not a harsh modification so that the card is still used!
With forearmed, a limit -8 seems ok because it will be enough so that you still use it in your deck, but not as way too much for instance -18 with a sauron.
And limit -8 seems ok or something Decipher may have done, right (see undaunted)?
it was not there because at the time of the TT format, it was sheer-way-too-much-luck if you got a -10 tops.

I know there may be better examples other than Vilya or Forearmed but these were the ones I could think of from the top of my head...
 

[jdizzy001]

Forearmed is tricky. Clearly they never sought to limit its potential as the idea of making a minion -x was supposed to be a bit more random/lucky (which has been pointed out). However, in the same block they released all the elf telepathy cards so big D must have planned for players to be tactical. And since big hitters like the witch-king and the balrog have been around since FOTR someone must have said, "hey, what if Forearm gets used with the 'rog?"

Forearmed is also tricky (in stating that it is OP) because there are at least 2 ways to avoid the skirmish phase all together: Archery and wounding (as in ninja gollum). There is no denying that elf telepathy is effective, but of all the strategies out there, forearmed is not *that* OP. However, I will admit, my experience with elf telepathy is limited to movie block. I don't know how it fairs in different formats.

There is always Enduring evil as well. When it came out making a comp -9 (though horrible when it occurred) was never considered OP.

[sgtdraino]

Since I brought up the SoH being OP, I will defend it. 2 twilight for a 3 burden removal + a meatshield with unlimited splashing capability is OP. There is no other card in LOTR which removes 3 burdens and gives you a "pass" on a combat for only 2 twilight in any deck type. LR at least requires the use of elven events thus some form of dedicated freeps deck. Not trying to start a fight, just saying.

I dunno... there are so many ways to take off burdens in Expanded, I'm not sure I really think Sam would break it. Although, granted, the other means aren't quite as spashable as Sam. Shadowfax, GOTM is in many ways more effective than Sam, Jarnsmid, Barding Emissary is similar to a burden removing meat shield, as is Bilbo, Aged Ring-bearer. Then again, Sam on top of all these other means is probably too much, especially some of the healing/burden removing combos that can be pulled off with him.

And as far as instituting new errata or banned lists, MarcinS and co. are never going to do that. We've been through that a number of times. I think the best we can hope for is a new unofficial scenario that incorporates its own X and R lists, but good luck getting such a thing implemented on Gemp.

[dethwish07]

See, that is the thing: the LotR Tcg has always been too fragmented and divided by various issues and is one of the key reasons why we never formed a players committee akin to those formed by Wars and Trek players. So basically, we can play the official formats decipher left us as they left them...

And we can make house rules with our private play groups. If people have an aversion to playing against GLR or so given strategy like Horn filter, then you can make that known in chat and ask politely that people using those cards/strategies not come to your open table to play. And if someone wants to be a jerk and comes in against you with that strategy you hate, just concede the game and move on. If they repeatedly do it, report them for griefing.

Also, I'll say this: we as players have some power over the game... However, what we lack is authority. We can sit here and type all day abou how we should errata the x-list and unban all those cards... But no one (unless Decipher comes back from the dead and reacquires the lotr license) has the authority to do it.

I'll give this analogy: the paper the US dollar is printed on is not worth the dollar itself. Dollar bills have a value because we all agree they have a value. Unless enough lotr tcg players agree to whatever the proposed changes are, the proposed changes will have no value. The majority of lotr players would have to consent to any proposed changes for those changes to be legitimate.

So, really, if people want change, they should start trying to recruit like minded individuals and build consensus. But, honestly, knowing the community in the way I do, I'm not holding my breath.

Edit: Ftr, I played both Star Wars and Star Trek ccg's before and during their post-decipher players committee era. I'm fine with the idea of virtual cards, errata, etc. in theory and in practice if it can be done as adroitly as these two groups have done it. I'm not talkig about spitballing dream cards, but rather serious, competitive playtesting. Of course, there'd hafta be a committee around to form an R&D group for such things first...

[jdizzy001]

Since I brought up the SoH being OP, I will defend it. 2 twilight for a 3 burden removal + a meatshield with unlimited splashing capability is OP. There is no other card in LOTR which removes 3 burdens and gives you a "pass" on a combat for only 2 twilight in any deck type. LR at least requires the use of elven events thus some form of dedicated freeps deck. Not trying to start a fight, just saying.

I dunno... there are so many ways to take off burdens in Expanded, I'm not sure I really think Sam would break it. Although, granted, the other means aren't quite as spashable as Sam. Shadowfax, GOTM is in many ways more effective than Sam, Jarnsmid, Barding Emissary is similar to a burden removing meat shield, as is Bilbo, Aged Ring-bearer. Then again, Sam on top of all these other means is probably too much, especially some of the healing/burden removing combos that can be pulled off with him.

And as far as instituting new errata or banned lists, MarcinS and co. are never going to do that. We've been through that a number of times. I think the best we can hope for is a new unofficial scenario that incorporates its own X and R lists, but good luck getting such a thing implemented on Gemp.

I suppose it bears worth saying, all my posted are made from the movie block umbrella. Those three cards are certainly good ways to remove burdens, some of which are more effective than SoH. However, that being said, each of those cards require an additional cost to optimize. SoH is a stand alone 2 twilight for 3 burden removal plus meat shield. That is what makes him so good and "OP." By himself and without aid he can remove 3 burdens from any deck regardless of culture.

[dmaz]

And we can make house rules with our private play groups. If people have an aversion to playing against GLR or so given strategy like Horn filter, then you can make that known in chat and ask politely that people using those cards/strategies not come to your open table to play.

This point, dethwish, reminded me of something I wanted to develop after my prior posting

Like I mentioned before, there are certain strategies that generate that "aversion". You don't want to approach it because you know what you're getting into. These are the strategies that most people will find "broken". Personally I do find games against certain Gil-galad or Telepathy/Cirdan decks to be obscenely boring and mundane. (gotta admit it at some point, lol).

The argument that I would like to develop is that the cards surrounding these strategies, or dare I say, even the strategies themselves, are not broken. I would go so far as to say that they are not overpowered (a lot of people have been substituting "OP" for broken these days).

For an example:
John Doe, who hasn't really played much with or against elves (not a veteran of the game), tries out a Corsairs Shadow in Movie Block. He gets thwarted by GLR, because his opponent had placed her there to prevent possession and condition abuse (two very VERY strong Movie Block shadow strats, when not put in check).
So, he doesn't complain, he just decides that he'll use her in his deck too (you punch me, I punch you right?). However, he goes on only to have his Fellowship broken at site 8 by Besiegers, even though he WAS using his Lady Redeemed to discard the engines almost every turn.
How can this happen?? Well...it has happened and we will see it happen again whenever someone tries to use cards like GLR or Madril as "silver bullets" rather than building them into a carefully constructed fellowship strategy.

I know because I HAVE lost to Besiegers and Corsairs while using GLR. These are not "overpowered", "broken", cards. They are cards that were put into play to help certain fellowship strategies combat very strong shadow strategies. If you try to splash LR into a Gandalf/Hobbit deck, with 8 or 9 elven events, its very likely that you will still lose to an opponent who uses condition and or possessions, because they just KNOW how to play their shadow well, and KNOW when not to invest too much into the conditions.

So if we know that Madril/GLR/Gil-galad aren't technically broken, then what's all the fuss about? Well...even though the cards themselves aren't broken...when they are used carefully, and inserted into a meticulously developed and thought-out deck, the results can be devastating for an opponent. You can't call the Madril strategy broken, just because sgtdraino figured out a way to develop his Fellowship side so that all of the drawbacks to using IB as a key strategy were minimized. This is essentially what he did. As he himself pointed out, his deck is not invincible. There are ways to combat it.

NOW, before you go off and say "well that's not fair, I don't want to have to add x3 Ships of Great Draught just to avoid my shadow getting killed by him", just remember that you probably don't play a copy of Grima, WT in all of your decks, and yet you have the chance of getting run over by dwarves bearing 8 cards each. Also remember that it's even more unlikely that you have a Grima, CC, and yet you know there are some killer rainbow fellowships that will laugh at your Nazgul deck. Maybe you think that in expanded your Nazgul deck won't need those Morgul Gates or Dark Approach...there's so much twilight anyway, right? So you save a few slots and you lose to a Lone Smeagol Ringbearer deck.

I think you see my point...there are hundreds of competitive combinations in this game, and many counters. Many decks are super strong. But that also might make them weak to that rogue card that no one saw coming.

What sgtdraino has done with his deck (if you have played him), was tried to make a very solid "jack of all trades" deck, if you don't mind me using the term. It addresses all of the major threats in any strong Shadow OR Fellowship he goes up against, while yet, not investing too far into one of those to make a KILLER strategy based on one little thing. If your fellowship loses to him, it's likely you've been methodically beaten down over the course of at least two sites, as opposed to coming up against one giant bomb. I think what he's done is extremely clever, and definitely groundbreaking for the game...BUT the fact still stands that there, in fact, exist, some strategies that could overcome him or anyone if you aren't prepared for it.

As one final example, I want to share what I recently tried to do with a card that I came across called, Ted Sandyman. I noticed that he was a Hobbit minion, and looked at all shadow cards involving hobbits. Maybe you yourself already realized that Ted can trigger Fool of a Took!, which takes out one of the major drawbacks to using that bomb strategy in normal competition - the necessary presence of another Hobbit. In expanded its not unheard of to see masses of Gimli RB or Galadriel RB decks. Ted Sandyman put the trigger for this event completely in my control. Sgtdraino helped me by suggesting that  I develop my deck into a fellowship with a Horn filter, to cut down on the set-up necessary. There are two to three other cards that are involved in the bomb (you might get to see it sometime ), but basically, if you keep your fellowship alive, IT WORKS. It was entertaining watching a Gil-galad deck spend sites 2 - 6 fiddling with all of those tokens and conditions like it actually mattered. Once the bomb when off, there was really no chance of Galadriel surviving.

So...why is Ted Sandyman not broken? Because there ARE COUNTERS. If you have PATHS, A New Light, the right Gandalf, or even White Arrows, you may or can beat the shadow. I just go into the game risking that they don't have those cards, because they aren't as commonly played as a Greenleaf would be in Fellowship Block.

But isn't that the risk in any game? Your opponent MAY be carrying the right cards to take you down...and because none of the cards in your deck or your deck itself is actually broken, he COULD take you down...but you just gotta do the best you can with what you have and hope he doesn't have those cards sometimes

Sorry for the lengthiness...I usually just dump all at once as opposed to spacing out my thoughts haha

[dethwish07]

I wish I could give dmaz a lot more than one gold for that post, lol. Dmaz, I feel like you have effectively communicated my sentiments on the topics in a much more coherent, less ramble-y way than I have, so thank you. I agree with you about Sgt's deck being groundbreaking and good on you guys for developing the ted sandyman / fool of a took strategy.

[sgtdraino]

Like I mentioned before, there are certain strategies that generate that "aversion". You don't want to approach it because you know what you're getting into. These are the strategies that most people will find "broken". Personally I do find games against certain Gil-galad or Telepathy/Cirdan decks to be obscenely boring and mundane. (gotta admit it at some point, lol).

It's funny you used the word "boring" there, because that is another word I hear thrown around quite a bit. Most often I hear it from an opponent when I'm kicking his #$&*@!, and his strategy is being completely ineffective. He'll say, "Ugh, your deck is so boring," or "what a boring deck." In this instance, I tend to interpret it as a code word that means, "Wow, your deck is really hard, and I can't seem to do anything against it. I must vent my frustration somehow." So, what are some thoughts about this word? What do we think it means when people use it on gemp?

I could understand it to mean a deck type that we commonly see a lot. You guys most likely know the archetypes: Dwarf Choke, Hobbit Hospital, Elven Telepathy Looping, Smeagol Choke, Ent Horde, Powerful Guide, and yes even Madril (although I swear I see a lot more variation between different Madril decks than among the other archetypes). So, in that sense, I could see something qualifying as "boring" because it's something we've seen a lot, and isn't really trying to be innovative. Of course, some of that is unavoidable when you're talking about a dead game.

I could also understand it to mean a deck strategy that forces you to wait for long periods of time doing nothing, such as Horn Filter, Gil-galad Looping, or other strategies that take long strings of actions before the other player gets to do anything. Sitting around watching the screen can indeed be boring.

So what does that word mean to you, in terms to LOTR TCG?

The argument that I would like to develop is that the cards surrounding these strategies, or dare I say, even the strategies themselves, are not broken. I would go so far as to say that they are not overpowered (a lot of people have been substituting "OP" for broken these days).

I've noticed that too. "Overpowered" might be another term worth taking a closer look at, and one that I feel is too often applied to cards that don't really warrant it.

So if we know that Madril/GLR/Gil-galad aren't technically broken, then what's all the fuss about? Well...even though the cards themselves aren't broken...when they are used carefully, and inserted into a meticulously developed and thought-out deck, the results can be devastating for an opponent. You can't call the Madril strategy broken, just because sgtdraino figured out a way to develop his Fellowship side so that all of the drawbacks to using IB as a key strategy were minimized. This is essentially what he did. As he himself pointed out, his deck is not invincible. There are ways to combat it.

HAHAHA!!! Thanks man, you flatter me. Yes, my deck is largely a bunch of redundant failsafes developed over time as counters to various things that have screwed me over in the past.

I think you see my point...there are hundreds of competitive combinations in this game, and many counters. Many decks are super strong. But that also might make them weak to that rogue card that no one saw coming.

Indeed. Particularly any deck that is overly-reliant on just one (or a few) strategies.

What sgtdraino has done with his deck (if you have played him), was tried to make a very solid "jack of all trades" deck, if you don't mind me using the term. It addresses all of the major threats in any strong Shadow OR Fellowship he goes up against, while yet, not investing too far into one of those to make a KILLER strategy based on one little thing. If your fellowship loses to him, it's likely you've been methodically beaten down over the course of at least two sites, as opposed to coming up against one giant bomb. I think what he's done is extremely clever, and definitely groundbreaking for the game...BUT the fact still stands that there, in fact, exist, some strategies that could overcome him or anyone if you aren't prepared for it.

Wow, thanks! That's very kind of you to say. Yes, it's true, my deck generally doesn't "bomb" in the sense of large groups of minions coming out. Instead it tends to whittle down Fellowships by attacking whatever key strategies they are relying on, and then finishing them off once their strategy has been disabled. The "bombs" of my deck come in the form of whatever minion is custom-built to #$&*@! with the opponent's strategy. My Gollum cards tend to be pretty good at pulling out whatever minion that happens to be, and then recycling it.

As far as weaknesses go, I'd definitely say I'm still weakest against Forest Nazgul. Sixth of the Nine Riders played over and over wreaks havoc on me, and there's really no way I can think of to stop it. Third of the Nine Riders using Buckland Homestead over and over is another issue that I can only partially deal with. And if anybody has any bright ideas about these guys, I'd love to hear them here:

http://lotrtcgwiki.com/forums/index.php?topic=8811.msg86339#msg86339

Otherwise, my Fellowship is sometimes not the fastest-moving in the world. For whatever reason, I am loathe to let my guys get killed, and as such I tend to be cautious. Sometimes the opponent will simply outrun me, and for whatever reason my Shadow isn't able to take him out. Normally this is a draw issue, and every deck is occasionally just going to get a bad draw.

As one final example, I want to share what I recently tried to do with a card that I came across called, Ted Sandyman. I noticed that he was a Hobbit minion, and looked at all shadow cards involving hobbits. Maybe you yourself already realized that Ted can trigger Fool of a Took!, which takes out one of the major drawbacks to using that bomb strategy in normal competition - the necessary presence of another Hobbit. In expanded its not unheard of to see masses of Gimli RB or Galadriel RB decks. Ted Sandyman put the trigger for this event completely in my control. Sgtdraino helped me by suggesting that  I develop my deck into a fellowship with a Horn filter, to cut down on the set-up necessary. There are two to three other cards that are involved in the bomb (you might get to see it sometime ), but basically, if you keep your fellowship alive, IT WORKS. It was entertaining watching a Gil-galad deck spend sites 2 - 6 fiddling with all of those tokens and conditions like it actually mattered. Once the bomb when off, there was really no chance of Galadriel surviving.

Heh heh, Ted was a clever idea. Dmaz, you've said you're probably going to forgo the Horn Filter because it's just too cruel, and are instead going with Dwarf/Gandalf, right? Well, I've got another suggestion: Add OG Glamdring to potentially use Gimli more than once per turn, one Saved From the Fire, any version of Smeagol you want, one copy of Captured by the Ring, one Gollum, Dark as Darkness, one Evil-smelling Fens, and one Led Astray. Once the rest of your bomb is ready, use SFTF to burn Smeagol and take those three Gollum cards (except Gollum) into hand. That will enable you to swap any of your sites for Cavern Entrance, as well as adding 3+twilight, 1 threat, and getting 2 more Moria minions (Fens plays Goblin Sneak, Sneak puts a guy under your deck, then your event puts all that in your hand). Whaddaya think? Wouldn't be any worse than waiting to draw Nelya, and this way you get more minions for less twilight. Oh yeah, and start Dammed Gate-stream to pull Deagol and get Glamdring right away. Thoughts?

So...why is Ted Sandyman not broken? Because there ARE COUNTERS. If you have PATHS, A New Light, the right Gandalf, or even White Arrows, you may or can beat the shadow. I just go into the game risking that they don't have those cards, because they aren't as commonly played as a Greenleaf would be in Fellowship Block.

Yep. Although I would note that my suggestions would make your deck immune to A New Light, since those three Gollum cards are not minions. With those three in hand, you can use Fens to play Ted from discard. But I don't see a way around PATHS, that would magic bullet this deck I think.

[dmaz]

I wish I could give dmaz a lot more than one gold for that post, lol. Dmaz, I feel like you have effectively communicated my sentiments on the topics in a much more coherent, less ramble-y way than I have, so thank you. I agree with you about Sgt's deck being groundbreaking and good on you guys for developing the ted sandyman / fool of a took strategy.

Thanks very much! And thanks for the continued contribution to the topic. A lot of your points are what get my mind working

It's funny you used the word "boring" there, because that is another word I hear thrown around quite a bit. Most often I hear it from an opponent when I'm kicking his #$&*@!, and his strategy is being completely ineffective. He'll say, "Ugh, your deck is so boring," or "what a boring deck." In this instance, I tend to interpret it as a code word that means, "Wow, your deck is really hard, and I can't seem to do anything against it. I must vent my frustration somehow." So, what are some thoughts about this word? What do we think it means when people use it on gemp?

So what does that word mean to you, in terms to LOTR TCG?

More or less, I suppose, I was taking more of a literal standpoint on the word. Whether I'm winning by quite a bit, or losing, I still often find all of the setting up and fiddling with tokens/cards on the top of the draw deck process with Elves kind of mundane and or boring. I have to give them that the strategy is very effective and can be cool how it works so well, but for some reason I can't get around the "well here we go with all of the elven nonsense" feeling...haha not sure if that makes sense...it's definitely a personal problem that I have, not any problem with the game or the cards...maybe if I tried actually playing WITH them it would leave me a little more open minded...someday!

On the Ted Sandyman side street topic, I HAD been tinkering a deck using Gollum just because of the versatility that his cards bring, but I had completely forgot about SftF working because Smeagol is the same culture, haha.

I've played two games like this so far and won both...however I never used SftF just due to being able to get through all the cards in the deck fast enough. Another problem that it would create is that if I wanted to use SftF, say, mid-game, if would mix up all of the cards that I have already placed below the draw deck. AND I wouldn't really want to use it opening game, if I drew it starting hand, because I would just be setting myself up to hold cards for the whole game.

That being said, using Gollum has been great with Evil Smelling Fens to ensure another two minions. In one game I wouldn't have won without him (the guy boromir RB and x3 Banners Blowing + another event haha).

My only issue is that Led Astray doesn't let me replace their site if they play pathfinder/SfaE/use smeagol. I'm tempted to replace Nelya with the Led astray, merely because of Gollum's versatility with ESF. If they are controlling sites, I will use ESF to fetch Nelya. If they have no ability to site playing (maybe an elf deck), then I can toss Ted to bring back later.

Anyway, it's still a work in progress, but thanks for the many tips along the way I think it more broad brushstrokes, whereas you have the deeper know-how about the game and how cards interact.

[dmaz]

Mostly @ sgtdraino and dethwish -

I spent some time trying to make a Movie deck that would be as effective in Movie as sgtdraino's deck is in Expanded.

While the fellowship had some clear limitations, and I ended up having to go with all elves to keep the culture count low and keep survivability high, I was able to make a shadow that has killed three times in a row.

Here's a replay. You can kind of fast forward till around site 5/6/7, and even then you can get the idea with it going fast.

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=dmaz$0e5d0kzf9lclw5zy

The shadow is a mishmash, and the large deck of 40/40 is able to cycle somewhat decently due to x4 Alliance Reforged and a combination of low cost minions/ESF/Gollum cycle pulls/Morgul Squealer. The nice thing about ESF (just like you use in your expanded deck) is it's ability to let you never be afraid to discard minions, because if you get an ESF out, you have the ability to repull whatever minion hurts them the most. I've used it for both Grimas, as well as Morgul Squealer...hoping I can use it for Sauron some time.

While I make some clear mistakes in that replay (I'm still learning a lot of aspects of the deck, as well as my own fellowship), you can see how it can be potent

I mostly posted this here because after Grima came out the second time he kept saying "stupid broken Grima". I pointed out that the real culprit card here is Evil Smelling Fens, haha. Still since the combo was called "broken", I thought I would throw it down here. There are many counters to my shadow, but I'm trying to make it so that they would usually need to have the right combination of cards in hand AND on table to make a solid stand, or be able to double without getting spanked.

[sgtdraino]

I spent some time trying to make a Movie deck that would be as effective in Movie as sgtdraino's deck is in Expanded.

Ha! You know, in the last Expanded League, sgtdraino's deck really didn't do that awesome! I feel you, though. I'd like to do the same thing, but still haven't really found my footing in the Movie format. A guy made a deck for me that does pretty well, but that's really not the same as coming up with something yourself.

While the fellowship had some clear limitations, and I ended up having to go with all elves to keep the culture count low and keep survivability high, I was able to make a shadow that has killed three times in a row.

Cool. I watched your replay, but can't really get a feel for how it works yet.

The shadow is a mishmash, and the large deck of 40/40 is able to cycle somewhat decently due to x4 Alliance Reforged and a combination of low cost minions/ESF/Gollum cycle pulls/Morgul Squealer. The nice thing about ESF (just like you use in your expanded deck) is it's ability to let you never be afraid to discard minions, because if you get an ESF out, you have the ability to repull whatever minion hurts them the most. I've used it for both Grimas, as well as Morgul Squealer...hoping I can use it for Sauron some time.

Sounds pretty good. You've inspired me! Maybe I'll take another shot at a Movie deck I really like.

I mostly posted this here because after Grima came out the second time he kept saying "stupid broken Grima". I pointed out that the real culprit card here is Evil Smelling Fens, haha. Still since the combo was called "broken", I thought I would throw it down here.

Yeah, Fens is great. I really wonder if the best Shadow for movie might be a hybrid of Ninja Gollum, with various silver bullet minions.