The Last Homely House
Undying Lands => Valinor => Topic started by: Invincible on February 10, 2014, 04:17:29 PM
-
I don't realy know where to put this, it's just that I realy feel like the rule of 4 should have been modified to include cards played from the draw deck, after all, the horn is way better than Elrond was... Anyway, Since Gemp is pretty much what's left of LotR TCG, NPE decks pretty much ruins a part of the fun of a great game on the verge of extinction.
Feel free to yell at me if you disagree, it's just that every time I play against this nonsense, I feel like I wasted my time.
-
Even when there's debate over an official rule, things don't change. There's zero chance of a change happening that ISN'T supported by rules.
-
Sadly, I know that all too well.
-
I used to feel like the Gamling Horn Filter was the only truly broken thing in Expanded... but now I'm not sure I really consider it all that broken. You just need to know how to counter it, how to beat it, and prepare for that. I can't even remember the last time I lost to a Gamling Horn Filter.
Probably the best overall counter is Mouth of Sauron + Rapid Reload, especially if you are lucky enough to get that going in your initial draw. As you know, those Horn decks generate a HUGE amount of twilight in the first turn, and the one thing they DON'T do well, is heal their limited number of companions. So wound the crap out of everybody, and then plonk down Tomb at Site 3. Archery will eventually kill the rest.
Gamling using the Horn to discard Followers to boost strength is also pretty key, so either kill his butt, or at the very least discard that Horn. There are plenty of ways to discard possessions, so use one of those to get rid of it.
The Balrog, Demon of Might at an Underground site is great for circumventing a lot of Follower hijinks. Just make sure at least one of his guys is Strength 7, or it's not worth your time. Cavern Entrance is, of course, also a great counter to this deck.
A well-timed Grima, Wormtongue can also help whittle down his guys, since he'll only be able to safely pile the Followers on Ringbound dudes. Just make sure you can play enough minions to take out other members of his fellowship. Grima also works great with Saruman's Power, if he's relying on using New Chapter later in the game to play more Followers and heal his guys.
Direct-wounding Orcs are also a great supplemental counter to the Horn Filter, once you've exhausted everybody. Who cares how strong they are? Exert to wound, and they're still just as dead.
The strongest thing about the Horn Filter deck remains its filter properties: He'll have a nearly pure Shadow hand with which to pummel you. Because of that, you will probably not beat him to Site 9. So... don't try! Accept the strategy he is using, and concentrate on murdering his fellowship.
-
Gamling Horn filter is annoying but it's nowhere near as powerful or as annoying as Madril or Gil-galad manipulation. Yes, site 1 is boring. I usually just read something for 10 minutes.
In addition to what sgtdraino mentioned, there's also Streets of Bree (which most decks should run anyway, thanks Woodhall Elf). The deck tends to play little help beyond followers, so blocking them makes things go poorly.
-
... The strongest thing about the Horn Filter deck remains its filter properties ...
Excuse my ignorance of Expanded cards and combos, but which is the key card(s) that provides the filter?
Presumably Gamling, Defender of the Hornburg is the Gamling in question, but it seems his ability can only be used once at start of Fellowship phase. Gamling's Horn does not of itself trigger card drawing.
-
Try Erkenbrand's Horn ;) Use it twice on Gamling, shove to another Rohan guy, use it on him. If you got New Chapter, you empty your freeps from your draw deck on turn one.
-
Try Erkenbrand's Horn ;) ...
Thanks Euk, I got the wrong horn. :roll: Awesome :o (I think). I can see where Invincible is coming from ... :-S
PS - I notice you joined the Sealed TT league, and played a game! Come on back, main thing is to play LotR ;D, not collect virtual cards (though that is fun too)!
-
Gamling Horn filter is annoying but it's nowhere near as powerful or as annoying as Madril or Gil-galad manipulation. Yes, site 1 is boring. I usually just read something for 10 minutes.
I use Madril myself, but taken alone, Madril is really not a strong strategy. There are a number of one-card counters, chief among them Ships of Great Draught, that easily drop into any deck. I don't normally have much trouble beating Madril decks. If you're not ready for this strategy, it's your own fault. Madril decks also generally don't create NPEs like making you wait ten minutes to do something, or choking you of twilight so you can barely play anything. I guess it can be a bit of an NPE to play powerful minions and watch them instantly disappear... but again you really should be prepared with one of the easy counters out there.
Gil-galad condition/event loop decks, on the other hand, can be very tough. One of the strongest things out there, IMO. And they make you wait every regroup phase, not just at the beginning of the game. Still, once you know their weaknesses, it is definitely beatable. Still tough though.
Smeagol/Aragorn choke decks are annoying and pretty tough.
Hobbit Hospital with its dozen-or-more conditions that are hard to discard can be pretty tricky, although most of the time I can now take this out with a little strategy.
More annoying to me is The Number Must Be Few deck, normally using tentacles. If you have a big fellowship, you can pretty much forget about getting to site 9. If you have a small fellowship, those tentacles are probably going to swarm you. This deck feels cheap to me because the Shadow truly doesn't require much thought or strategy, and it can be paired with pretty much any FP side, so your opponent will probably be able to move pretty fast, while you're stuck crawling with your hand jammed up with cards.
BUT IMO the toughest thing out there right now is the Powerful Guide deck. Very tough, no clear or easy counters.
Excuse my ignorance of Expanded cards and combos, but which is the key card(s) that provides the filter?
Try Erkenbrand's Horn ;) Use it twice on Gamling, shove to another Rohan guy, use it on him. If you got New Chapter, you empty your freeps from your draw deck on turn one.
Yeah, what they do is start two Hobbits, Gamling, and Smeagol. Site 1 is Dammed Gate Stream, which they use to pull Something Slimy, which they use to get New Chapter. Full setup at site 1, guaranteed.
-
I use Madril myself, but taken alone, Madril is really not a strong strategy. There are a number of one-card counters, chief among them Ships of Great Draught, that easily drop into any deck. I don't normally have much trouble beating Madril decks. If you're not ready for this strategy, it's your own fault. Madril decks also generally don't create NPEs like making you wait ten minutes to do something, or choking you of twilight so you can barely play anything. I guess it can be a bit of an NPE to play powerful minions and watch them instantly disappear... but again you really should be prepared with one of the easy counters out there.
We appear to have different definitions of powerful and annoying. In my mind, anytime I have to run a silver bullet card ONLY for a particular thing, with no benefit to the rest of my deck, that makes the thing too powerful. It's like needing Erland during the Palantir of Orthanc - Moria era. Madril has several bad points:
1) He's free in the starting fellowship. It is no surprise that the most annoying card in Movie Block, Galadriel, Lady Redeemed, is also free. Free bonus starting companions are really bad.
2) He inverts something that should help the Shadow. Threats are supposed to hurt the FP player, which is why they're costs. It would be like printing a companion that was strength +1 for every twilight token. I know about the Gandalf, The White Wizard, but that's capped.
Gil-galad condition/event loop decks, on the other hand, can be very tough. One of the strongest things out there, IMO. And they make you wait every regroup phase, not just at the beginning of the game. Still, once you know their weaknesses, it is definitely beatable. Still tough though.
Smeagol/Aragorn choke decks are annoying and pretty tough.
Hobbit Hospital with its dozen-or-more conditions that are hard to discard can be pretty tricky, although most of the time I can now take this out with a little strategy.
Yes, Scouring of the Shire is a bad card because it blocks things too easily - I wish it said "other condition". So is Deceit, though Ninja Gollum has fragility issues - though there was a point around Set 8 where I splashed Clever Hobbits without Smeagol because things were getting bad in my meta. But there are site-based counters and Saruman's Power for those decks, including Gil-galad. There's no site-based counter to Madril.
More annoying to me is The Number Must Be Few deck, normally using tentacles. If you have a big fellowship, you can pretty much forget about getting to site 9. If you have a small fellowship, those tentacles are probably going to swarm you. This deck feels cheap to me because the Shadow truly doesn't require much thought or strategy, and it can be paired with pretty much any FP side, so your opponent will probably be able to move pretty fast, while you're stuck crawling with your hand jammed up with cards.
BUT IMO the toughest thing out there right now is the Powerful Guide deck. Very tough, no clear or easy counters.
I'm in the minority that likes swarm decks, because plenty of people call them "cheap" on Gemp. I find them in flavor - massing hordes overwhelm the good guys. And I used The Number Must be Few to win a state territorial.
One of the design challenges in LotR is making it possible to play small, medium, and big fellowships. Some formats don't do that. For instance, Towers Block has Uruk archery to punish small fellowships, and only Southron Commander for crowd control, so almost all decent decks play piles of companions. In Fellowship Block, very small fellowships can't survive because Uruks are undercosted and Moria is very cheap, while Nertea, Enquea, Savagery to Match Their Numbers, and Greed make large fellowships dicey. Savagery is overpowered (I would make the +4 in this skirmish but not the fierce one), but it makes the best fellowships medium sized. There's good in that.
In Extended, there are too many counters to shotgun Enquea in Madril's hands (What are They?, Ithilien Blade, Steward's Legacy, Sapling of the White Tree). The Number Must be Few is one of the few available counters. It would be fairer to require spotting a minion of any type, which would give the FP more chances to remove it, but it's necessary. I do well in Towers Block but watching people dump companions is not that exciting.
-
We appear to have different definitions of powerful and annoying. In my mind, anytime I have to run a silver bullet card ONLY for a particular thing, with no benefit to the rest of my deck, that makes the thing too powerful.
And in my mind, a card to which there is no silver bullet is far more powerful than a card to which there is. Counters to Madril have a benefit to the rest of your deck, because Madril is part of the Expanded meta. Powerful Guide is also part of the Expanded meta, and there is no silver bullet for him.
Madril has several bad points:
1) He's free in the starting fellowship. It is no surprise that the most annoying card in Movie Block, Galadriel, Lady Redeemed, is also free. Free bonus starting companions are really bad.
Smeagol is free. A bunch of Ents can be free. Galadriel, Sorceress of the Hidden Land is free (but sucks). A free starting companion is not in-and-of-itself "really bad." And there's always some sort of cost, even if that cost is the extra twilight when you move. In Madril's case, you have to spot two other Rangers in order to play him. Heck, frankly I'd rather start with one less companion, but I gotta have the redshirt ranger in order to make Madril "free."
2) He inverts something that should help the Shadow. Threats are supposed to hurt the FP player, which is why they're costs. It would be like printing a companion that was strength +1 for every twilight token. I know about the Gandalf, The White Wizard, but that's capped.
Everything in LOTR is about inversions. Twilight helps the shadow player, but you add twilight in, because it enables you to play your cards. Taking wounds is bad, but sometimes wounding is a cost of doing something. There are various companions that get stronger for each wound they have, no difference there. Having a whole bunch of threats is risky. A Madril deck with 9 threats suddenly facing a Greed attack or an underground Balrog is in serious trouble. But you take the risk of the threats, because of the inversion factor, because of the advantage that risk gains you. No different than taking the risk of adding a whole bunch of twilight, in order to gain the advantage of playing a whole bunch of cards.
Yes, Scouring of the Shire is a bad card because it blocks things too easily - I wish it said "other condition". So is Deceit, though Ninja Gollum has fragility issues - though there was a point around Set 8 where I splashed Clever Hobbits without Smeagol because things were getting bad in my meta. But there are site-based counters and Saruman's Power for those decks, including Gil-galad. There's no site-based counter to Madril.
A site-based counter would be inferior to a counter you can reliably use at more than one site (like Ships of Great Draught). Even a bomb like Saruman's Power generally only holds up Gil-galad for a turn.
I'm in the minority that likes swarm decks, because plenty of people call them "cheap" on Gemp. I find them in flavor - massing hordes overwhelm the good guys.
I have nothing against swarm decks in general, just specifically The Number Must Be Few/Tentacle deck, that plays no minions if you have 7 guys, or swarms your Fellowship if you have less than that. That, IMO, is cheap.
And I used The Number Must be Few to win a state territorial.
I'm not surprised. But did you go to the extent of not playing any more minions once you had The Number Must Be Few out? That's the NPE I'm talking about. They play TNMBF, and then that's it. And because there's not very many ways to discard conditions outside of Maneuver or Skirmish, and because the few ways that are available are not widely used (and also not that great), once they get TNMBF out, you probably won't get any opportunity to get rid of it, or ditch your extra guys. They use tentacles so that they can swarm if they need to, but also because they can play them out of their hand and they instantly get discarded at non-Marsh sites.
In Extended, there are too many counters to shotgun Enquea in Madril's hands (What are They?, Ithilien Blade, Steward's Legacy, Sapling of the White Tree). The Number Must be Few is one of the few available counters.
The Number Must Be Few is not a Madril counter, because Madril does not require 7 companions to be effective. And all Shotgun Enquea needs is a Ships of Great Draught, and maybe a little condition removal, which the Nazgul have in spades with Buckland Homestead and Ulaire Nelya, Third of the Nine Riders. In other words, there are plenty of counters to Madril. The Number Must be Few is a counter to big fellowships, not Madril.
-
More annoying to me is The Number Must Be Few deck, normally using tentacles.
...
Yeah, what they do is start two Hobbits, Gamling, and Smeagol. Site 1 is Dammed Gate Stream, which they use to pull Something Slimy, which they use to get New Chapter. Full setup at site 1, guaranteed.
Thanks for an interesting couple of posts sgt (and ramolnar!) on Expanded combos. =D>
I had never thought of using The Number Must Be Few in set 1-10 blocks. Plenty of punishment for big fellowships there anyway. Presumably the tentacles to which you refer are from Ages End - I have never managed to get the MoM tentacles to work well (or at all actually ;)).
As for Horn filter, fascinating as it is (and I do like discovering new (to me that is) combos), none of this encourages me to try anything after set 10.
-
I don't know how many of the folks around here play Magic: The Gathering (nor what level of competition they play at), but I think certain formats in LotR TCG are fairly analogous to certain formats in MTG.
Lotr Expanded : MTG Legacy
Lotr Standard : MTG Modern
Lotr Movie : MTG Standard
Now, to break that down:
In MTG's Legacy format, players can construct decks using cards from every set and product in the game's history (with the only exceptions being the Unhinged and Unglued silver bordered sets). There is a banned and restricted list for this format. In spite of this, Legacy obviously has the highest power level in MTG as far as formats go. Turn One wins are quite possible. However, there are certain cards that keep such things in check. An example of one such card is Force of Will (and by the way, this card is bitched about constantly... usually by casuals and people who don't want to spend the money on them, lol). Obviously, turn one wins aren't really a thing in LotR (okay, okay, so there are some insane decks in open format that can filter the deck, make the move limit +8 or more and get to site nine on their first turn, but that is neither here nor there).
Now, like MTG's Legacy, Lotr Expanded has some powerful combos. The ones being discussed in this thread, such as the Madril/IB style decks, Horn filter decks, and Gil-Galad cycling, etc. And while they are powerful, there are tools at everyone's disposal in expanded to address these issues. This is why building your deck to suit your meta is so important. In MTG, they have a sideboard of 15 cards for this purpose. And while we don't have a sideboard in Lotr, we still have the option to include so-called silver bullet cards in our decks. Take a look at deck lists you can dredge up from any major tournaments in years past. If you inspect those lists carefully, you will find silver bullet cards, i.e. meta choices.
To continue with the format analogies, Lotr Standard : MTG Modern.
In Modern format, players can use all cards printed in standard legal produces since the 8th edition core set and the Mirrodin expert set. Reprints in non-standard legal products of cards that did appear in standard at some point are also legal. This is kinda like Lotr's version of rotation.
So, since standard in Lotr is King block and forward, power level greats pretty high towards the end. Modern is considered a "turn 4 format" meaning the game should be ending around that point (or at least that is what people say, and it is quite possible with combo decks like Kiki Jikki and Splinter Twin decks, the Urzatron decks, and the Melira/Non-Melira Birthing Pod decks). Modern's power level in magic compared to Legacy is to Lotr Standard compared to Expanded. Powerful cards and combos available thanks to high-powered sets. But again, the tools a player needs to play against the field are there.
Lastly, MTG's Standard to Lotr's Movie. In MTG's standard, power level is tightly controlled by Wizards of the Coast. During the movie block sets, Decipher was also much more careful about power level. I think the comparison of Anduril, Flame of the West to Anduril, Sword that was Broken is a good one for obviously demonstrating power creep. And power creep tends to have an inevitability in it unless you do like Wizards does and intentional make low-power-level sets to break up a constant stream of powerful sets. Combo decks are basically not printed in MTG standard (meaning control, aggro, and midrange are the field).
I seem to be rambling a bit, but my overall point is this: Yes, formats have power levels. Some are higher than others. Some are lower. Every one has the tools they need at their disposal. We just hafta build our decks for the meta, rather than in a vacuum. When I build my decks, I hafta assume that pretty much everything that can go wrong, will. Then I have to tune my deck to address as much of that is as feasible and then just take my losses to the things I can't address.
Anecdote:
Earlier in my lotr tcg career, I loved playing Last Alliance Elf/Gondor (ever since the FotR set released, basically). Then, King block rolled around and Corsair Marauder was printed. Jeez, did I hate Marauder... Discard one of my freeps possessions and get two tokens on their Black Sails?! Well, yeah. Tossing a ton of possessions on your freeps to tank them up was a big deal and shadow sides needed a way to deal with that (we had Grima earlier to try and address the same thing). I was frustrated as I loved to play decks that made heavy use of possessions, especially when Corsairs were so popular. But it occurred to me, what if I build a deck that took away their advantage of discarding my possessions? I wasn't the only one to see this. Elf/Gondor decks began to rely on artifacts, forgoing possessions almost completely. And those that did this performed really well.
Anyway, I realized we have a finite number of sets to work with, so there aren't going to be new decks popping out of the woodwork. But! We hafta adjust to what other people are playing. Does that mean we hafta put our pet decks aside? Maybe that is what it takes to win for that period of time until the meta shifts. Maybe winning isn't as important and we just hafta take our licks and enjoy playing that pet deck and just do the best we can against the opposition. And maybe in some cases, we just hafta realize that our deck isn't good. For example, I wanted (and still want) so badly to make a deck using Final Count and My Axe is Notched with Defender of the Free Peoples. The closest I have ever gotten to it working was throwing a Gandalf + TMAYOD package in their. But guess what... It still sucked. Sometimes things just don't work.
I don't think rules or formats or banned/restricted lists need to be changed. We have to. If a strategy is really that oppressive, the meta should shift to hate it out. Then another deck will be top dog for a while until the meta shifts and hates it out. Granted, I'm grossly over-simplifying this as the cycle is more complex than that but you get the gist of it.
On silver bullets specifically: They are incredibly important! Ulaire Enquea, LoM is the most well-known silver bullet of all time. I grant you he is versatile and has no cultural enforcement, so he is flexible (and his stats just make him solid). However, he exists to threaten big fellowships (just like Greed and Cantea, Black Assassin do). Just like Wormtongue exists to threaten tanking up your freeps. Just like Chief Councilor threatens decks that splash multiple cultures for powerful versatility. Just like Demon of Might addresses careless giving of twilight and the use of speedbump freeps characters. Saruman's Power and Sleep, Caradhras are there to stop decks that rely on many conditions. There Number Must Be Few exists to stop large fellowships from just running wild down the site path. All these things exist to counter certain things, and in turn, they all have things that counter them. That is the way this works. The game is about who can eek out as much advantage from all of this.
Lastly, we (those of us who have played the game at least little while) know what we are getting ourselves into when we step into a game of a certain format. You know when you go into Movie that you may very likely see Dwarf/Sauron discard or Besiegers... You know going into Expanded that you may very likely see Horn Filter/Troll Swarm.
Don't want those two copies of Ships of Great Draught to have no use beyond removing Madril's threats? Throw in a few copies of Castamir of Umbar, or perhaps Southron Commander, or even Desert Lord? Corsair Brutes? With the exception of the last one, all those minions are quite good even if they aren't playing Madril and you have no threats to put tokens on Ships of Great Draught with...
And with people playing decks as large as they do these days (which is really foreign to me), what is another couple cards if it helps you play better in a matchup you are expecting to come up against? I realize there is no perfect deck (though it sounds like Sgtdraino's Madril deck might be getting there? Honestly, I think win percentage might likely speak more to his skill as a pilot as opposed to solely the deck's raw power).
In conclusion, try not to feel like you waste your time even when you play against Horn Filter and Madril. Try to appreciate it on a deckbuilding level. At least that is what I try to do. Card interaction thrills me. I could get beat over and over again and I'm fine. I just love to see cards interact. (For those familiar with magic, it is probably obvious I'm a major Johnny at heart, but am willing to put my Spike face on).
Sorry for this mangled attempt at a post. I hope someone gleans some value from it on some level or other. Remember, you have the tools. And if you think you don't, raise the issue to this community and let us work together on addressing so-called "problem" cards.
-
Well-said, dethwish. Just one question:
The Number Must Be Few exists to stop large fellowships from just running wild down the site path. All these things exist to counter certain things, and in turn, they all have things that counter them.
I have yet to find a counter to The Number Must Be Few that I'm happy with. Any ideas? My deck is designed to get 7 or more companions out very quickly, and generally TNMBF/tentacle decks don't reveal what they're doing until you plonk down that 7th guy. Once that happens, it's too late. Their MO is to never play any more minions that last past the Shadow phase, so unless you're packing condition removal that works in Fellowship or Regroup (which tends to be sucky condition removal to start with), you're up doo-doo creek. You won't have the opportunity to discard the conditions, nor will you have the opportunity to get rid of the extra guys. I've added Radagast to help somewhat, but all the opponent really needs to do is plonk down another TNMBF and the move limit is back to 1 again. I suppose I could make sure I'm at a marsh so any minions they play will stick around, but if they're smart they just won't play any that turn. I'm trying to think; TNMBF is a Search card... are there any magic bullets that specifically target Search cards?
-
No, there aren't. At least, not in any way that will help in this circumstance. You are running gandalf, so perhaps some New-Awakened are necessary. Or, since you are running site manipulation, Introspection. Obviously these aren't as powerful as things like Deep in Though or Grown Suddenly Tall, but they will address TNMBF in circumstances those latter two will not. Alternatively, you could just roll with the move limit reduction and focus on getting the shadow win (which from what I have seen, your deck can do).
-
No, there aren't. At least, not in any way that will help in this circumstance. You are running gandalf, so perhaps some New-Awakened are necessary.
Yeah, I tried that for a while. New-awakened is just so incredibly weak compared to Deep in Thought, it's really not enough to deal with the conditions that mess with me. Also, often-times I'll find New-awakened forcing me to discard one of my own conditions, since it requires you to get rid of exactly two.
Or, since you are running site manipulation, Introspection.
Again, just not powerful enough. Only nails one condition, and the opponent gets to pick what it is. With that as condition removal, I'd be at the mercy of other more-popular metas, like Ninja Gollum, forest Nazgul, Sauron orcs, Orc orcs, and Uruks.
Obviously these aren't as powerful as things like Deep in Though or Grown Suddenly Tall, but they will address TNMBF in circumstances those latter two will not.
Unfortunately they are just way too weak in other ways. I'm trying to think: If there's a card that I can use to exert Gondor guys during Fellowship, I can kill off down to 6 by moving Ranger Cloak around. That would solve the problem.
ETA: It looks like Soldier's Cache is probably my best bet for that, although it will take a couple of turns to do, since you exert guys in Regroup. It does potentially work well with my deck though, so that's good. Still thinking about whether or not to actually put it in...
Alternatively, you could just roll with the move limit reduction and focus on getting the shadow win (which from what I have seen, your deck can do).
Unfortunately that is probably the most viable option. Tricky, since (like I pointed out earlier), TNMBF/Tentacles can be paired with pretty much anything, and it doesn't have to move fast, it just has to stay ahead of my 1-move limit.
Thankfully this deck type is not really that popular yet. I rarely encounter it. If it starts to become more popular, I may have to get more serious about countering it.
-
The point of this topic was purely to discuss the fact that some player abuses some strategy that in other circumstances would never part of this game. If Decipher would not have been in so many lawsuits and everything, they would probably not allow for a loop that lets you empty your entire free people. Part of the beauty of LotR TCG is that you have both FP AND Shadow sides and its 100% unnatural to play most of the game with only one side.
I've seen the game evolve since the very beginning and while I was a bit pissed with the escalation we saw after set 7, I could enjoy myself even if I immediately saw how flawed the castamir was (cost lower thant the witchking except on site 3 and is stronger in many was... now way I thought). Then I saw Durin III and ask myself why would I bother with any other dwarves, this one is WAY better, so were Gil-Galad and Elendil although you could not start them.
But as the game went on, not only did we saw an escalation, but D stopped to playtest as much as they did before. That causes loops like Gil-Galad HK, Horn Filter, etc. When the community complained, their answer were not satisfying (like what they did to frenzy of arrows).
I can compare this situation to society. When the government does not try to fix a problem because they don't care, the community can change it, they can boycott among other things. That is pretty much what I intend to do with the horn, especialy on gemp since it takes forever to wait for that shenanigan to be over. I just glad that some players have the decency to not play these decks so we can have some fun (the same can be applied to LR by the way).
-
"The Number Must Be Few is unfair."
"No, Madril, Defender of Osgiliath is unfair."
"No, Durin III and/or Castamir and/or Lady Redeemed are unfair."
To me, this is another one of those opinions vs. opinions thing. If one card/strategy annihilates your deck, you probably need to change your deck, or deal with what being stubborn brings. Calling it unfair doesn't seem very productive or "cool" to me.
I play mostly Movie, and 99% of decks I play against these days (on Gemp; fortunately, playing in paper is still bliss) are the same high power Fellowships with the same high power Shadows, so I get it. It's no fun to lose at site 2 against Castamir or have Dwarves and/or LR and/or Dauntless Hunter tear apart your Shadow and double over and over and over, but yeah, I expect everyone to be as nauseating as possible with their card and play choices, so I try not to fall into traps.
Sgt, I'm going to be honest with you. I've never played w/ someone who used 6+ companions (or 5+ in Fellowship) that felt it unfair when they got destroyed for doing so. It may not be an official rule to play less than X comps, but I think it's fairly understood that if you have more, you risk hefty punishment, and I'm pretty sure that's by design. Now, I'm not trying to troll with this post (I'm merely a tease w/ a horrible sense of humor), but there is a very simple counter to NMBF: stop playing 7 comps. I don't think there needs to be any other counter. There's no cultural enforcement for playing less than 7 comps. Anyone can do it! ;) Is Gemp chuck full of people doing so? Yup. I don't know why. My decks are all goofy, for-fun-only decks, but they almost always win the second my opponents plunk that Xth comp down (really, that's about the only time they DO win, hahaha).
So, in other words: "No, playing the same, stupid OP netdecks is unfair." ...And boring. ...And maybe I'm going to switch out all my Shotgun Enqueas for NMBF. :twisted:
-
To me, this is another one of those opinions vs. opinions thing. If one card/strategy annihilates your deck, you probably need to change your deck, or deal with what being stubborn brings. Calling it unfair doesn't seem very productive or "cool" to me.
I agree with this sentiment.
Sgt, I'm going to be honest with you. I've never played w/ someone who used 6+ companions (or 5+ in Fellowship) that felt it unfair when they got destroyed for doing so. It may not be an official rule to play less than X comps, but I think it's fairly understood that if you have more, you risk hefty Punishment, and I'm pretty sure that's by design.
And while I'm happy to try and help Sgtdraino, Zurcamos is quite right in that this is by design. It also doesn't surprise me that a swarm deck would try and make use of a card like TNMBF when facing large fellowships, as actually pulling of a swarm is harder in such circumstances. Perhaps if Sgt suspect the opponent to be on TNMBF Tentacles, then the best thing to do would be to also play things a little closer to the vest until they reveal a little more of their game plan. Or perhaps the Soldier's Cache strategy to kill off one's own companions would be an option.
Lastly, on the note of Sgt's options for TNMBF, I'll say this: New-Awakened is definitely not as strong a card as Deep in Thought overall (and I'm not suggesting you remove Deep in Thought). However, in the case of this particular match up, the seemingly worse New-Awakened is actually more useful as it can actually be used in the difficult circumstances the Sgt. describes. I realize its not an amazing card and it has drawbacks like possibly having to discard one of your own conditions. You will hafta weigh your options. Is TNMBF tentacles prominent enough to include a subpar card to counter it? Are other less direct counters (the Soldier's Cache approach) available that would not lower the overall card quality of the deck? Is TNMBF a game-breaking enough card in that matchup that your deck MUST address it or flat out lose? Those are my thought processes anyways.
-
But as the game went on, not only did we saw an escalation, but D stopped to playtest as much as they did before. That causes loops like Gil-Galad HK, Horn Filter, etc. When the community complained, their answer were not satisfying (like what they did to frenzy of arrows).
Honestly, while there is obviously some power creep in later sets, I don't see it as a problem. My deck has cards from almost every set in it, and that shows that cards from every set remain useful, in certain situations. There are some powerful combos in Expanded, but I still don't think anything in Expanded is as unbalanced as LR is in Movie.
they can boycott among other things. That is pretty much what I intend to do with the horn, especialy on gemp since it takes forever to wait for that shenanigan to be over.
I used to boycott Horn Decks, but eventually I discovered it felt much more satisfying to savagely beat the person who was playing them. ;) There is at present no deck type in Expanded that I think is unbalanced to the point that I will just quit if I see my opponent is playing it.
"The Number Must Be Few is unfair."
"No, Madril, Defender of Osgiliath is unfair."
"No, Durin III and/or Castamir and/or Lady Redeemed are unfair."
I don't think any of the above things are unfair, with the possible exception of LR. I'm still amazed that she remains legal in Movie, yet Decipher had the presence of mind to X-list her for Expanded.
To me, this is another one of those opinions vs. opinions thing. If one card/strategy annihilates your deck, you probably need to change your deck, or deal with what being stubborn brings. Calling it unfair doesn't seem very productive or "cool" to me.
I agree. With the exception of LR, I don't think I've called any of this stuff unfair. I do think TNMBF/Tentacles is cheap, in much the same way that the Horn Deck is cheap, but not necessarily unfair.
Sgt, I'm going to be honest with you. I've never played w/ someone who used 6+ companions (or 5+ in Fellowship) that felt it unfair when they got destroyed for doing so.
And you still haven't. However, I think you would agree that Decipher's intent with TNMBF was to punish the Fellowship until they ditched some of those guys (like with Enquea), not to leave them stuck with 7+ guys for the whole game and unable to do anything else about it, because no more minions get played.
It may not be an official rule to play less than X comps, but I think it's fairly understood that if you have more, you risk hefty punishment, and I'm pretty sure that's by design.
More companions is risky by design. However, the whole concept of LOTR TCG revolves around the idea of recreating the Fellowship of the Nine. As such, I do think full 9-companion fellowships should be a viable option. If the game was engineered such that nobody ever played with more than 5 guys because you instantly lose if you go over, then that is not in the spirit of The Lord of the Rings.
Now, I'm not trying to troll with this post (I'm merely a tease w/ a horrible sense of humor), but there is a very simple counter to NMBF: stop playing 7 comps.
Obviously. But you do realize that this was not intended to be the counter to TNMBF, yes? Decipher did not create the card with the intention that players would never dare to put that 7th guy down, they created the card to punish players until they kill off back down to 6. They did not anticipate a scenario in which the Shadow player would simply not play any more minions for the rest of the game, because prior to the inception of the new tentacles and the new Watcher, doing that would leave your hand extremely clogged. The TNMBF/Tentacle deck circumvents the spirit and intentions of the card, in much the same way that the Horn Deck circumvents the spirit and intent of Gamling and the Horn. In many ways these two decks mirror each other in terms of what they do.
I don't think there needs to be any other counter. There's no cultural enforcement for playing less than 7 comps. Anyone can do it! ;)
Plonking down a 7th guy should potentially really hurt you. It should not, however, create a situation in which you automatically lose the game. TNMBF/Tentacles is not quite to that level, but it's close.
So, in other words: "No, playing the same, stupid OP netdecks is unfair." ...And boring. ...And maybe I'm going to switch out all my Shotgun Enqueas for NMBF. :twisted:
Generally when I hear somebody call a deck "boring," what they really mean is that it's too hard for them to beat.
And while I'm happy to try and help Sgtdraino, Zurcamos is quite right in that this is by design.
It was not designed with the intent to be used the way TNMBF/Tentacle decks use it.
It also doesn't surprise me that a swarm deck would try and make use of a card like TNMBF when facing large fellowships, as actually pulling of a swarm is harder in such circumstances.
It is, essentially, the perfect companion to Tentacle Swarm, which is already an incredibly strong swarm tactic. It is not hard to swarm 6 guys using Tentacles, and thanks to TNMBF, if they've got more than that, they automatically lose, unless they somehow manage to kill the strongest Fellowship you can think of.
Perhaps if Sgt suspect the opponent to be on TNMBF Tentacles, then the best thing to do would be to also play things a little closer to the vest until they reveal a little more of their game plan. Or perhaps the Soldier's Cache strategy to kill off one's own companions would be an option.
That is indeed my strategy. These days, if I see tentacles, I assume it's a TNMBF deck. However, most of the time it is too late to limit the companions. After all, I'm already starting with 6, so as soon as I get one more out (which normally happens on the first or second turn), TNMBF has me in its grip. I am currently experimenting with Soldier's Cache to see how effective this works as a counter... however so far I can't say for sure that I've encountered a TNMBF deck for testing purposes. I did go up against a Tentacle deck and lost (got swarmed), but TNMBF never came out, so I can't be sure that this was the strategy. In truth, I think I panicked on that game, and got too focused on trying to get rid of my own guys, instead of making the guys I have as strong as possible.
Even so, Soldier's Cache is still not super-great as a counter, as I've noticed these decks are using Saruman, Black Traitor to ditch any condtion that poses a threat to them. Black Traitor is, of course, one of the few condition discard options to which there is no counter (unless you're hobbits, ha). I could use Seeing Stone of Minas Anor instead, that would be harder to get rid of... but that card doesn't really complement the rest of the deck.
Lastly, on the note of Sgt's options for TNMBF, I'll say this: New-Awakened is definitely not as strong a card as Deep in Thought overall (and I'm not suggesting you remove Deep in Thought). However, in the case of this particular match up, the seemingly worse New-Awakened is actually more useful as it can actually be used in the difficult circumstances the Sgt. describes. I realize its not an amazing card and it has drawbacks like possibly having to discard one of your own conditions. You will hafta weigh your options.
I've already been down that path. The deck can only afford to allot a certain amount of space to condition removal. I've tried completely replacing Deep in Thought with New-awakened, and found that it is just too weak against more prominent opposing deck types. It doesn't discard enough conditions, it targets your conditions as well as the opponent's, and even the fact that it plays during Fellowship instead of Maneuver is, in most other situations, a pretty big disadvantage. I tried just putting in one or two New-awakened, but found that then I simply don't draw it quickly enough to help me out in a TNMBF/Tentacle situation.
Are other less direct counters (the Soldier's Cache approach) available that would not lower the overall card quality of the deck?
Soldier's Cache definitely doesn't lower the quality of the deck. In fact, it may make it even better. I'm experimenting with taking out Follow Smeagol in order to put in Soldier's Cache. So far, I like it. I haven't used FS as much since adding One Good Turn Deserves Another, and Soldier's Cache can work very well as a token machine in Regroup before moving to Mithlond. However, it is vulnerable to getting discarded in the right circumstances. I think I just need to get a procedure worked out.
In theory, I could successfully counter TNMBF trap with a three-card combo: Ranger's Cloak, Shadowfax (primarily to get the threats up, if I don't already have them), and Soldier's Cache. If I can get out all three of those, at the next Fellowship I should be able to immediately kill down to 6. All three of those cards are pullable using either Deagol or Something Slimy. I should go for the possessions first, since they are harder to get rid of. Soldier's cache last, and then even if he cancels it, I can still kill down to 6.
Is TNMBF a game-breaking enough card in that matchup that your deck MUST address it or flat out lose?
Possibly. As I mentioned earlier, TNMBF/Tentacles can be literally paired with any FP strategy. Is my Shadow so strong that I can definitely kill any FP strategy out there? Probably not. Especially if the opponent is out in front, and confident that I'm only going to be able to move once per turn for the rest of the game. Think about it: As long as he's in front, he never has to double again. So, in order to beat this combo, I would need to be able to kill or corrupt his Fellowship with him only single-moving each turn, with a Fellowship as powerfully strong as he can manage. Perhaps Gil-galad looping, or Hobbit Hospital.
HOWEVER, at the same time, I firmly believe that there is a combination of cards and strategy out there with which to counter this, probably something along the lines of the procedure I outlined above. We'll see! :)
-
This is one of the best things about this game. There's no perfect deck. Certainly there are weak ones, but no deck is going to beat everything. You can try to have an answer to every card in your deck, but that makes it so huge you'll draw none of them and lose more often than not. If you're set on using 7 companions you'll have to accept that TNMbF will come out on occasion. It is perhaps a little unfair that the shadow can still cycle by playing minions that get discarded, but if the shadow does so, it will have no other conditions on the board. Brooding on Tomorrow will therefore take it out, and can be pulled with Something Slimy. It's a good card, and would not just be useful for TNMbF.
-
TNMBF can still be played with legolas, fm and still won't clog, it's been there a long time and it never was a problem.
-
You'll always be a turn behind like that. Ottar and Elrond, Lord of Rivendell would be better.
-
This is one of the best things about this game. There's no perfect deck. Certainly there are weak ones, but no deck is going to beat everything.
Exactly right!
You can try to have an answer to every card in your deck, but that makes it so huge you'll draw none of them and lose more often than not.
I dunno, I think my deck comes pretty close to doing this, and still manages a good draw most of the time.
If you're set on using 7 companions you'll have to accept that TNMbF will come out on occasion.
Yep. I just gotta be ready with a counter-procedure.
It is perhaps a little unfair that the shadow can still cycle by playing minions that get discarded, but if the shadow does so, it will have no other conditions on the board.
Why would they have no other conditions on the board? Even if their only condition is TNMBF, it's not unique, so they could play out 4 of them. These decks also routinely use Evil-smelling Fens, although they don't play it unless they're going to use it that same turn.
Brooding on Tomorrow will therefore take it out, and can be pulled with Something Slimy. It's a good card, and would not just be useful for TNMbF.
Unfortunately, Brooding on Tomorrow would probably not be good enough. As I mentioned earlier, these decks like to run Saruman, Black Traitor to get rid of problem conditions. They will just discard Brooding on Tomorrow, and continue to play out their 4x TNMBF.
TNMBF can still be played with legolas, fm and still won't clog, it's been there a long time and it never was a problem.
You'll always be a turn behind like that. Ottar and Elrond, Lord of Rivendell would be better.
Both true. However, the hitch is that both of those options steer you towards certain FP strategies, which in turn have certain vulnerabilities. With TNMBF/Tentacles, any FP strategy can be used with it. Also, back in the heyday of those guys, the kind of super-swarm that Tentacles can do did not exist.
-
Hmm, I somehow missed your post, sgt. I was here looking for which of mine received more negative gold, as usual, and much to my infinite joy, I found this!
I don't think any of the above things are unfair, with the possible exception of LR. I'm still amazed that she remains legal in Movie, yet Decipher had the presence of mind to X-list her for Expanded.
I agree. With the exception of LR, I don't think I've called any of this stuff unfair. I do think TNMBF/Tentacles is cheap, in much the same way that the Horn Deck is cheap, but not necessarily unfair.
"The Number Must Be Few is cheap."
"No, Madril, Defender of Osgiliath is cheap."
"No, Durin III and/or Castamir and/or Lady Redeemed are cheap."
Fixed?
However, I think you would agree that Decipher's intent with TNMBF was to punish the Fellowship until they ditched some of those guys (like with Enquea), not to leave them stuck with 7+ guys for the whole game and unable to do anything else about it, because no more minions get played.
More companions is risky by design. However, the whole concept of LOTR TCG revolves around the idea of recreating the Fellowship of the Nine. As such, I do think full 9-companion fellowships should be a viable option. If the game was engineered such that nobody ever played with more than 5 guys because you instantly lose if you go over, then that is not in the spirit of The Lord of the Rings.
Obviously. But you do realize that this was not intended to be the counter to TNMBF, yes? Decipher did not create the card with the intention that players would never dare to put that 7th guy down, they created the card to punish players until they kill off back down to 6. They did not anticipate a scenario in which the Shadow player would simply not play any more minions for the rest of the game, because prior to the inception of the new tentacles and the new Watcher, doing that would leave your hand extremely clogged. The TNMBF/Tentacle deck circumvents the spirit and intentions of the card, in much the same way that the Horn Deck circumvents the spirit and intent of Gamling and the Horn. In many ways these two decks mirror each other in terms of what they do.
Plonking down a 7th guy should potentially really hurt you. It should not, however, create a situation in which you automatically lose the game. TNMBF/Tentacles is not quite to that level, but it's close.
It was not designed with the intent to be used the way TNMBF/Tentacle decks use it.
You talk a lot about designers' intentions and the "point" of the game, most of which sounds like opinions/assumptions, many of which I don't necessarily agree with. This makes me believe I don't actually need to "realize" anything!
P.S. Don't be like that. You sound just like...
*GASP*
You know, at any given moment, you are nearly perfectly emulating another notorious member of the site, but never the same one as before. Don't make me get my tin foil hat again, draino, 'CAUSE I WILL DO IT!!!
Generally when I hear somebody call a deck "boring," what they really mean is that it's too hard for them to beat.
I saw you discuss this in the other thread too. Playing 10 games of a format, and 9 of them are against the "same, stupid OP netdeck" (as one one mighty goodlooking person purposefully and ironically referred to such things) is boring. Move to another format and it happens again, and believe it or not, it's still boring. When it happens a third time, I realize I've played way too many games in one sitting, and when the sour taste leaves my mouth, I go back to paper only for a while.
P.S. Did I ever say anyone was beating me with their boring decks?
P.P.S. You do realize that, generally, when I hear someone make so many comments about other people calling a deck "boring," I might think that that person probably frequently hears that his/her deck is boring (especially if s/he only ever seems to talk about just one "cheap"/"unfair"/whatever Madril deck), and what s/he really means is s/he really likes Justin Bieber AND Mily Cyrus. A lot.
-
Hmm, I somehow missed your post, sgt. I was here looking for which of mine received more negative gold, as usual, and much to my infinite joy, I found this!
You seem to be suggesting that I gave one of your posts negative gold. That is not the case. However, due to the false accusations and tone of your current post, I will indeed be giving it negative gold.
"The Number Must Be Few is cheap."
"No, Madril, Defender of Osgiliath is cheap."
"No, Durin III and/or Castamir and/or Lady Redeemed are cheap."
Fixed?
<shrug> I guess. I don't think Madril is all that cheap, though. He forces you to start with a certain number of companions, requires other cards to be useful, and is fairly easily countered by a single card with no culture enforcement, not to mention various other cards. Like I said before, I can't even remember the last time I lost to a Madril deck.
You talk a lot about designers' intentions and the "point" of the game, most of which sounds like opinions/assumptions, many of which I don't necessarily agree with. This makes me believe I don't actually need to "realize" anything!
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I think the context in which the cards were released makes that pretty plain. TNMBF / Tentacles only works due to Watcher in the Water, Many-tentacled Creature, one of the last cards ever released for LOTR. It is generally held by the community that Decipher was perhaps not as thorough as they should have been, with anticipating problems these later cards might cause.
In any event, I'm convinced I now have an effective counter to this strategy, so it no longer really concerns me.
You know, at any given moment, you are nearly perfectly emulating another notorious member of the site, but never the same one as before. Don't make me get my tin foil hat again, draino, 'CAUSE I WILL DO IT!!!
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. If you check the internet for "sgtdraino" and "Sgt. Draino," you'll see I've been a consistent internet presence for a very long time. The name doesn't change.
I saw you discuss this in the other thread too. Playing 10 games of a format, and 9 of them are against the "same, stupid OP netdeck" (as one one mighty goodlooking person purposefully and ironically referred to such things) is boring. Move to another format and it happens again, and believe it or not, it's still boring.
That's highly unusual that you have played 10 games, and 9 of them are against the same deck type. I don't think that has ever happened to me. But then, I tend not to play Fellowship, so maybe that's why. :)
P.S. Did I ever say anyone was beating me with their boring decks?
Did I say they were? No I did not. I was speaking from my own personal experience, and in my own personal experience, when someone I'm playing calls my deck boring, they are usually getting a pounding from me, and finding their own deck ineffective.
P.P.S. You do realize that, generally, when I hear someone make so many comments about other people calling a deck "boring," I might think that that person probably frequently hears that his/her deck is boring
Not frequently, just occasionally. Usually by people that are losing badly. I can only think they are venting their frustration, since my deck is not like any of the other Madril decks I've seen people playing.
and what s/he really means is s/he really likes Justin Bieber AND Mily Cyrus. A lot.
Now you're just being silly. :)
-
You seem to be suggesting that I gave one of your posts negative gold. That is not the case. However, due to the false accusations and tone of your current post, I will indeed be giving it negative gold.
I definitely wasn't trying to sound like I thought you were doing it in any of my posts. I haven't looked closely, but I think that this post was the first negative I received while talking to you. Now, I imagine that's the first thing that the person who IS doing it will run and change, but no, I was just calling out to the delightful person who is delightfully clever, mature, and delightful. I wanted him to know he was getting all the love and attention he deserves, so he can grow up to be a successful adult in the world, possibly POTUS.
<shrug> I guess. I don't think Madril is all that cheap, though. He forces you to start with a certain number of companions, requires other cards to be useful, and is fairly easily countered by a single card with no culture enforcement, not to mention various other cards. Like I said before, I can't even remember the last time I lost to a Madril deck.
...And once again, that's consistent with the point of my teasing, and I'm the authority on the point of THAT game.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I think the context in which the cards were released makes that pretty plain. TNMBF / Tentacles only works due to Watcher in the Water, Many-tentacled Creature, one of the last cards ever released for LOTR. It is generally held by the community that Decipher was perhaps not as thorough as they should have been, with anticipating problems these later cards might cause.
Yeah, like pretty much all those icky Expanded cards...
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. If you check the internet for "sgtdraino" and "Sgt. Draino," you'll see I've been a consistent internet presence for a very long time. The name doesn't change.
So, YOU'RE notorious? Dun, dun, DUN! The plot thickens!!!
I don't REALLY think you are the people I have/haven't named. We've joked about it in the past. You probably didn't think it was funny then either, but I did. :'(
That's highly unusual that you have played 10 games, and 9 of them are against the same deck type. I don't think that has ever happened to me. But then, I tend not to play Fellowship, so maybe that's why. :)
I'm probably exaggerating a bit, but not TOO much. It was Movie, then TT, and THEN Fellowship. I know the TT deck was Dauntless Hunter, but that's no surprise.
Did I say they were? No I did not. I was speaking from my own personal experience, and in my own personal experience, when someone I'm playing calls my deck boring, they are usually getting a pounding from me, and finding their own deck ineffective.
Nor did I say that you did. Seriously, sgt, why so serious?
Now you're just being silly. :)
That same sillyness is present in every word I place on this site, just about. I rib a lot, maybe rougher than I should at times, but my tone isn't intended to be taken the way you seem to take it, and I'm not saying it's your fault. Heck, I don't know if *I* like my tone. Maybe *I* am the one creating other accounts, so I can give myself negative gold.
No, I don't think so...
P.S. Be honest, draino, are you me? Did I create your persona just so Zurcamos would look good and get more positives? If so, it isn't working. Well, not the gold part. Lawlz.
-
I definitely wasn't trying to sound like I thought you were doing it in any of my posts. I haven't looked closely, but I think that this post was the first negative I received while talking to you. Now, I imagine that's the first thing that the person who IS doing it will run and change, but no, I was just calling out to the delightful person who is delightfully clever, mature, and delightful. I wanted him to know he was getting all the love and attention he deserves, so he can grow up to be a successful adult in the world, possibly POTUS.
lol. Just for that, I'm giving your post positive gold! :)
The previous one keeps its negative gold though. ;)
Yeah, like pretty much all those icky Expanded cards...
lol. I still think Expanded is a more balanced format than Movie, which has LR, The Shire Countryside, non-restricted Bill Ferny, and various other atrocities. I also think it's got more variety than the other formats too.
So, YOU'RE notorious? Dun, dun, DUN! The plot thickens!!!
Notorious is probably too strong of a word, but I like to think I've made a bit of a name for myself.
I don't REALLY think you are the people I have/haven't named. We've joked about it in the past. You probably didn't think it was funny then either, but I did. :'(
It's hard for me to be in on the joke, when I don't know what you're talking about.
I'm probably exaggerating a bit, but not TOO much. It was Movie, then TT, and THEN Fellowship. I know the TT deck was Dauntless Hunter, but that's no surprise.
Interesting... I note that Expanded was not mentioned.
Nor did I say that you did. Seriously, sgt, why so serious?
My mistake. You were responding to my post, so it sounded like the comment was directed towards me.
That same sillyness is present in every word I place on this site, just about. I rib a lot, maybe rougher than I should at times, but my tone isn't intended to be taken the way you seem to take it, and I'm not saying it's your fault. Heck, I don't know if *I* like my tone. Maybe *I* am the one creating other accounts, so I can give myself negative gold.
If "ribbing a lot, maybe rougher than I should" is something you make a habit of when posting on this site, then I can't say I'm too surprised that you're catching some negative gold over that.
P.S. Be honest, draino, are you me? Did I create your persona just so Zurcamos would look good and get more positives?
lol. No. But then, if I am you, of course I would say that!