The Last Homely House
Middle-Earth => Archives of Minas Tirith => Topic started by: jdizzy001 on June 01, 2011, 10:27:12 PM
-
So I hear namarie is really bad. I've never faced it since I usually play movie block, but what makes namarie so horrid when compared to say sleep caradhras or deep in thought? I'm not looking for a debate, just an explanation. thanks
-
To me it's like being able to discard whatever conditions you want every site (sticks around as a condition, easily loaded up, non-unique), potentially before the Shadow player can use them (e.g. Shadow and regroup actions). Just too many advantages rolled into one, and not really fair to the Shadow player.
-
i agree with ES, and just add: token abuse.
-
Namarie is too easy to abuse since it does not clog your hand, and it's too reusable. Also, it can pick off the conditions you really need off the table, whereas Sleep Caradhras costs an exertion, more twilight and nukes your own conditions, and Deep in Thought also costs more and is more difficult to pull off, since it needs a but of work. Not to mention, there MIGHT be some instances where yu want SOME shadow conditions off the table, but not ALL of them, since they might be crippling them more than helping. Last, but not least, Namarie has no spotting requirement at all, meaning you can play it in any deck that has hunters in it. DOn't get me wrong, I think the card is awesome, and I like splashable cards to make people think outside the box a little, but perhaps it should have a built-in clause that prevented you from adding tokens to it, and/or it could be a unique card.
-
Namarie has no spotting requirement at all, meaning you can play it in any deck that has hunters in it.
I agree with you that it's really powerful but you do have to spot an elf hunter in order to use it.
-
which in standard is about as hard as dying in an avalanche. not very.
-
I didn't say it was but IF you can kill any elves they have your good :hey:
-
I played standard before I ever played movie. When I started playing movie I couldn't believe how people complained about standard so much. Discard all conditions pfft.
However, there is a lot more success in movie with condition based shadows then there is in standard. Wierd? Yes.
Namarie basically forces you to build shadows that do not use any conditions at all, if you want to be competitive on a regular basis.
So in conclusion, I have no idea what I'm talking about, all of these mass condition removing cards stink and cripple too many shadows. And let me bag Saruman's Power and Ulaire Nelya Third of The Nine Riders with Buckland Homestead as well.
Let's just remove condition removal from the game. -.-
-
@MD: See Scouring Of The Shire, Deceit.
But I agree, I hate all these discard all conditions cards, my favorite condition discarding card? A Fool's hope, love the idea, and also Brooding On Tomorrow just cause you actually have to try in order to discard conditions.
Lothlorien Guides is also a perfect example of what a condition discarding card should do.
-
The Biggest atvantage from namarie is that is creates no handclog. You play it, and thats it for now. When you need it, you can use it (or reinforce in the meantime). GST or Sleep, Cahadras needs to be in the hand, they cost more, they also nuke your own stuff and either cost a lor or take exertions.
-
Of all the post Hunters cards that are considered overpowered, Namarie is one I think is just fine.
It requires you to have an elven hunter in play to discard a condition, I think that's enough of a restraint. Plus, it's not abusable on its own, you gotta reinforce tokens with some other cards or play several hunters. I don't see anything wrong with it.
-
You know, until you compare it to Traveler's Homestead, which costs two tokens and a gandalf character to play. And is rare to boot. (Namarie is Uncommon)
-
Just because it's better than Traveler's Homestead doesn't mean it's broken. Just because it's an uncommon that is better than a rare, doesn't mean it's broken either, the game is filled with bad rares and killer uncommons.
Seclusion (uncommon) is better than Secret Sentinels (rare)... does it make it broken?
-
The real reason this card is broken IMHO is cause its infinite on-demand condition removal with Gilgalad, HKOTN. All you need is 2 namarie and a couple hunters.
-
Why was leokula thumbed down for saying he does not think Namarie is too powerful (I thumbed it up again)?!? People, you REALLY need to grasp the whole "thumbs" concept. His post was not offensive, not unhelpful in any way, it was just his opinion and he wasn't being a jerk about it or anything, simply, calmly stating he does not agree with people all over the boards claiming the card is broken, he simply thinks it's powerful (and btw, if anything, that's a HELPFUL post, it might shed some light into people that, perhaps, the card is powerful but not broken). Geez.
-
Why was leokula thumbed down for saying he does not think Namarie is too powerful (I thumbed it up again)?!? People, you REALLY need to grasp the whole "thumbs" concept. His post was not offensive, not unhelpful in any way, it was just his opinion and he wasn't being a jerk about it or anything, simply, calmly stating he does not agree with people all over the boards claiming the card is broken, he simply thinks it's powerful (and btw, if anything, that's a HELPFUL post, it might shed some light into people that, perhaps, the card is powerful but not broken). Geez.
I second that, this isn't facebook
-
its also not gladiators...
-
you mean like American Gladiators with the giant ear swabs?
-
more the roman ones where the emperor and everyone would thumbs up or thumbs down you.
-
And either way, you'd get killed.
-
The real reason this card is broken IMHO is cause its infinite on-demand condition removal with Gilgalad, HKOTN. All you need is 2 namarie and a couple hunters.
Throw in Leaving Forever and you have something that really is broken.
-
I think of "broken" generally as cards that break accepted gameplay (e.g. the Gil-galad loop), cards that distort the meta so badly that maybe only 2-3 decktypes are competitive (possibly in rock-paper-scissors form), and staple cards that when played first, determines who wins.
Namarie isn't broken, IMO--regarding the loop, I think that's an issue with Gil-galad. But I also wouldn't consider brokenness to be the sole criteria for reworking something. For example, Decipher talked about cultural enforcement, cultural strengths/weaknesses, cards being too versatile, etc. when explaining their X-List choices. If fixing a card (doesn't have to be Namarie) would make the environment "better," then maybe it doesn't matter so much whether or not that card was actually broken.
-
You are probably right on the fact Namarie is not broken, but it is defenitly a NPE (negative play experience) card.
Namarie has the same kind of power as Ulaïre Enquea had in movie block. The mere present of it shater the meta. The shadow player now must take that card into account while building his deck.
But honestly I think most of the Hunters block card are beta version of what they should have been and way too strong compare to the rest.
In a hunter block format where shadow condition are not that important, Namarie is not a problem. It is just a boring card like countless other in that block.
-
You cannot compare Namarie to shotgun Enquea. Enquea was a protection against big fellowships protecting a ringbearer too well, while Namarie nukes everything that is condition based.
-
I think you miss my point, I do not compare the 2, I compare the impact they had/have
In movie block you can't go big fellow (unless you have enquea protection).
In hunter block you can't go condition based deck unless you built around it.
So to take your own expression
Namarie nukes everything that is condition based.
Enquea nukes everything that is big fellowship.
Same KIND of power
-
not exactly true. i have and have seen MANY movie block decks run 9 comps in movie block. ent decks, knight decks, rainbow decks, anything with shadowplay, merry's sword, or preparations.
don't get me wrong, you see plenty rule of 5 going on, but also a healthy dose of "drop 9 comps and just try to catch me" countless times i've just dropped all my splah comps ranger of the north son of hamfast greenleaf, etc. and just made a run for it.
-
You can build around Shotgun Enquea. You can't build around Namarie.
-wtk
-
I agree that Namarie is more absolut than Enquea, but you had/have to take those card into account while building your deck.
I am not comparing those 2 cards, I am simply saying that they have somewhat of the same "impact" on the meta.
Namarie, don't play condition (wich is boring by the way)
Enquea find way to wound/exert it before it kill your main companion. (wich is more challenging)
-
I find no conditions a lot harsher than 6 companiosn to be honest.
-
I never play shotgun enquea to hope for a big fellowship, I play it when I have a deck that can get me 5 burdens fast so reguarless of the companion count I can get me some death. Enquea in my opinion is alot easier to counter either keep the fellowship 5 or fewer (if you go more then have protection and there is quite a bit of that reguardless of the culture you play) and/or introduce burden removal which isn't all that difficult either. Namarie on the other hand kills any thing with a condition and its more difficult to counter cause they get first maneuver action hence trtashing a shadow condition that could take it out and its more difficult to play an event during shadow phase because you have to wait for what can possibly come and that can clog a hand. You have to either get setup or get lucky from your opponent to effectively use Enquea but Namarie is a 1 card (next to no setup involved) deck killer.
What I don't understand is they let Namarie hang around to keep people worried but they get rid of Orkish Smith which is/was probably the best counter for it. Sure lets get rid of 1 of the only cards that can keep Namarie at bay so it can be an even worse card to see played against you.
Complaining about this card or that card won't change crap anyway it's here it's not going to get errata now or ever or ever be x-listed or not, only thing we can do is hope our opponent plays the game for fun and tried to avoid the NPE crap. Again we always have the choice to say if you run this card or that card find another opponent cause I'm not looking forward to playing that cause its no fun.
Take my gold call me a noob for giving my 2 cents, its all good. SEARCH FEATURE FTW!!!!!!
NK
-
You guys talk like everybody can just toss 4x Namarie into their decks and wipe the board consistently... you gotta be playing several hunters for that, or I'm missing something.
I honestly think Blood Runs Chill is MILES better than Namarie, plus it also discards minions, so it's more versatile and nobody says it's broken.
-
Agreed it is required to spot hunters, but its not really that hard to run a Hunter version of Legolas and toss in a Throngil in nearly any deck to have the option of consistant condition tossing. Thing with BRC is it is a regroup actions and that gives the shadow a 'better' chance to avoid losing what they wanna keep around byhaving minions survive to save their conditions/possessions/artifacts and BRC gives the shadow person the choice. Not to mention you have to exert a dwarf twice and he has to have decent damage bonuses to make it brutal.
I'm not saying I think something needs to be done with namarie. I don't see it as broken I see it as NPE cause a deck that does run it can toss what they want with no real drawback like BRC has and with it being a condition it self you can use it several times where as an event that does the same gets played and is gone til you run into another one. I can deal with facing a Namarie in a deck it's just no fun to play against is all I'm saying and its ALOT harder to counter than Shotgun Enquea IMHO.
I think the real reason people want to call Namarie broken lies in Gil-Galad. It however woulda been nice to see a pretty little bullet next to the word Namarie to make it unique, but then again that has been mentioned before.
As far as I'm concerned the game can be played however you want it to be played. If you are worried about NPE/OP whatever decks/cards play them yourself and have no fun. As for me I prefer stupid decks that make me and my opponent laugh when it works 1 out of it's 100 games. I play to have a good time cut up with my opponent and 9 times out of 10 lose the game trying to make something work that takes too much to pull off. I'd much rather play and laugh the entire time than have a loop deck or something that works 100% of the time and wins for me at site 2. If your that competitive than enjoy your high win to lose ratio and I'll enjoy my pitiful 30 something percent on GccG and know at least I had a fun and enjoyable time raking up the loses :up:.
NK
#$&*@! if any1 wants to play an open deck against me and make me play a FOtR deck lets do it. I bet that would be a quick game and I bet at the end I will still have a smirk on my face and enjoy yet another 9.00 on GccG :up:.
-
Open vs Fellowship? Or Hunters vs Fellowship perhaps...
-
Open vs Fellowship? Or Hunters vs Fellowship perhaps...
Doesn't matter to me what's 1 more loss when you have so many.
NK
-
Oh yeah and your 500 just bought you and nice piece of forum gold :up:.
-
Open vs Fellowship? Or Hunters vs Fellowship perhaps...
Doesn't matter to me what's 1 more loss when you have so many.
NK
Amen to that! sounds like your win/lose ratio is the same as mine nappy
-
Open vs Fellowship? Or Hunters vs Fellowship perhaps...
Doesn't matter to me what's 1 more loss when you have so many.
NK
Amen to that! sounds like your win/lose ratio is the same as mine nappy
Yeah its pretty bad, but at least I can say I had fun losing every single one of them :up:. My win/lose ratio goes something like......Not enough/Holy crap is that even a number.
-
After reading all your long-winded tiring discussion on this topic.... I just have to say, :cheers: I Love Namarie!!!!!! :cheers:
-
GarrisonofGondor, you are still alive??
-
Actually believe it or not... yes :) It's been a while but, I'm back =D>