My issues with Expanded Format

[sgtdraino]

Expanded has always been my format of choice, up until the point that I stopped playing around the Hunters expansion. Now, starting up again, I find it isn't so fun for me anymore. What I run into on Gemp:

1. Site manipulation decks. Holy crap, so annoying. I really like the mechanic of being able to choose which site you want to play, but I keep running into various decks that do crazy site manipulation. I'm sure you know the deal: Opponent stays one move behind you, replaces the site they are on, as well as the site you are moving to, to do stuff like always making it so you can only assign one minion, or wounding your guys every time you move, or stopping all healing, while they get to heal every time they move. I see no real counter to this strategy other than making a site manipulation deck myself, and/or doing a site control deck. I don't want to do either one of those things, at least not with every deck I make. I tried stocking Mount Doom, but unless I play it at site 1, I'll probably never get to play it at all... and even then it's only good for one region. Ideas?

2. "Skull" minions, i.e. the evil men culture, and the newer cultures in general. I've heard some of the other folks talk about how overpowered the later sets got... and holy crap I'm definitely seeing it. It seems like it's become really, really easy to get rid of free peoples conditions and possessions, and pretty easy to get rid of conditions in general, IF you're playing the right culture. And if you aren't, heaven help you.

3. Shadow side kills. Over and over, it seems like the opponents I play are primarily focused on killing using their shadow side, and are not concerned about getting to site 9 first. The deck is primarily geared to getting free peoples cards out of the deck as quickly as possible, and keeping their fellowship alive long enough to kill the opponent with Shadow. They'll bid semi-high, but still choose to go second. Because nobody wants to go first, they want to put YOU up front so they can run their site manipulation and kill you with shadow.

4. Bizarre choke combinations. Basically combinations of newer cards that enable the opponent to play a whole bunch of stuff, but add very little twilight. Clever? Sure. Broken? Probably. Not fun? Definitely.

5. Lack of originality. This one is kinda the end result of all of the above. I see the same basic strategies over and over. I feel like only a few things are effective, and anything that branches out from that gets obliterated. I feel like I'm playing a bunch of people who have copied the strategies they know work, and not really trying to come up with anything original. Maybe that's the natural end result of a game that has been dead for quite a while now, but it sucks.

And so, I'm ambivalent. I really like a lot of the newer cards and mechanics, especially the free peoples stuff, but I'm starting to feel like the potential for abuse, particularly with certain kinds of shadow sides and site manipulation, is so high that it hurts my ability to have a bunch of different kinds of decks that all at least have a chance of winning, which is what I find the most fun: Theme decks.

So what should I do? Should I finally just give up on Expanded and play something else? Or are there answers to the things above that annoy me, that don't force me to sacrifice originality?

[bibfortuna25]

That's why Movie Block is the best format for this game.

[Not a Zombie]

That's why Movie Block is the best format for this game.

No way, we all know how broken men in TT are, it's only a gentlemen's agreement that keeps those guys off the table. If it weren't for that, there would be no other decks

[sgtdraino]

I really feel like site manipulation is a big part of the problem. The crazy minion swarm/choke combos are bad to a lesser extent, but I think it's the site manipulation that really seals the deal. Not the mechanic that lets you choose what site to put out, but the strategy I see all the time now of repeatedly replacing sites with the same sites over and over again.

[bebpc]

  I see site manipulation like a way to survive against the Over Power shadow that Expanded have.Play against a Forest Nazgul(one of the most popular shadow in my opinion) if you dont find a way to get rid of the forest you ill have a looot of pain in the way to moont doom.
  And against tha F*&#$% wargs that can add infinte pull plus give strg and life and dmg and fierce for the minion.And this is the best case, bad is when u put a warg in that guy(Veteran War Chief ) that you exert to wound.Or Troll's Keyward, Keeper of the Beast that can add 20 twlight to play 4 troll.Site manipulation is a way to beat this in my point of view.
 There is some deck that take advantage and abuse of it and i know is boring play against it but is the way of the format.....
 I think in a competitive deck in expanded u must have  a little site control, condition remove, healing and cycling.You have to find a way to put all this in one deck to be competive with the shadow of expanded.But yeah people should make more fun deck and let this OP deck to leagues and stuf.
 

[Shelobplayer]

The only issue I ever had with expanded is that it uses a ban list that just makes no sense to me at all. Decipher obviously had no intention of updating their ban lists when the game was starting to fall, they just released the last block (in which they included sever of the game's most powerful cards) and left without editing their ban list according to the changes the Hunters block made to the game.

Some examples:
- Fortress Never Fallen is banned, while Namarie is legal.
- Both Erkenbrand's Horn and New Chapter are legal.
- Mordor Fiend still X-ed in standard even with The Dark Lord's Summons rotated out.
- Not a single card X-ed or R-ed from Bloodlines and up.

So yeah, their ban lists are totally out of date, and in my opinion movie block (and bloodlines standard) are the most enjoyable formats, because they are played with ban lists made for those formats, not older ones. And yes, some of the new sites deserve to be X-ed imo.

[Haszor]

So what should I do? Should I finally just give up on Expanded and play something else? Or are there answers to the things above that annoy me, that don't force me to sacrifice originality?

Honestly, if you're looking for creativity, I'd check GCCG.  I haven't been there in a while on account of my computer not working with it, but a good number of the players there are casual at best, and thus don't really care about winning every single game, so they come up with new ideas that aren't super powerful.  I've played games in expanded against some really odd decks that are actually quite fun to play against.

[Panch]

Some examples:
- Fortress Never Fallen is banned, while Namarie is legal.

Its restricted I think :p

[jdizzy001]

I second bib's comment. After I saw a troll swarm deck I swore off everything post set 10. Movie for me please. However, I have seen some gross movie decks too. If I ever do play anything post shadows again it will be open. Go big or go home, that's my motto.

[sgtdraino]

 I see site manipulation like a way to survive against the Over Power shadow that Expanded have.Play against a Forest Nazgul(one of the most popular shadow in my opinion) if you dont find a way to get rid of the forest you ill have a looot of pain in the way to moont doom.

The worst Forest Nazgul decks I've encountered use their own site manipulation, sometimes combined with Gollum, to get out all the forests they want. To me, the best counter for those guys is to simply discard their conditions that make them stronger for every forest. Even so, I agree they are one of the most powerful things out there.

And against tha F*&#$% wargs that can add infinte pull plus give strg and life and dmg and fierce for the minion.And this is the best case, bad is when u put a warg in that guy(Veteran War Chief ) that you exert to wound.Or Troll's Keyward, Keeper of the Beast that can add 20 twlight to play 4 troll.Site manipulation is a way to beat this in my point of view.

Here again, for me simple condition discarding is more effective. How does site manipulation help you? Often they play guys that either make a site underground, or let them swap the site for an underground site.

I think in a competitive deck in expanded u must have  a little site control, condition remove, healing and cycling.You have to find a way to put all this in one deck to be competive with the shadow of expanded.

I agree. And I find I do need to mitigate my earlier comments a bit, as even after all that, I still find that Expanded is my favorite format. Through trial and error I finally managed to put together a deck that is truly competitive, and I didn't have to copy somebody else's deck list to do it. I still have some complaints about the lack of originality, the lack of variety, of seeing the same strategies over and over... but I guess it is just the nature of the beast. I wish I could have ten different decks that could all be competitive, but that's just not realistic, unless I want to just copy the various other popular strategies out there.

So yeah, their ban lists are totally out of date, and in my opinion movie block (and bloodlines standard) are the most enjoyable formats, because they are played with ban lists made for those formats, not older ones. And yes, some of the new sites deserve to be X-ed imo.

I've heard some pretty ugly stories about Lady Redeemed in Movie Format. Can't speak to Bloodlines Standard, never tried it.

Aside from site manipulation, the most abusive (and most abused) strategies I've seen in Expanded are:

1. Gamling/Horn/Follower decks
2. Gollum/Deceit decks
3. Orc Troll Swarm/Demoralized decks
4. Skull Men Super Archery decks
5. Hobbit/Scouring decks
6. Elf Archery/Eowyn decks

Obviously the free peoples strategies listed are often combined with the shadow strategies listed, and often site manipulation is mingled with the above to make it even more horrific. Forest Nazgul are also one of the strongest things out there, but I don't see them as a "cheap" strategy in the same way as the other things listed above (except when combined with hardcore site manipulation, of course). Gollum I think would be balanced, except for Deceit making it essentially impossible to get rid of their conditions. Gollum also has the biggest monopoly on the site manipulation.

[sgtdraino]

Expanded has always been my format of choice, up until the point that I stopped playing around the Hunters expansion. Now, starting up again, I find it isn't so fun for me anymore.

It's official! I now have NO issues with Expanded Format! I've come to believe it's the most balanced with the most variety of any of the official formats out there.

I still have some complaints about the lack of originality, the lack of variety, of seeing the same strategies over and over... but I guess it is just the nature of the beast.

Not anymore! After long and careful observation, I've documented more than 70 different viable deck strategies players routinely use in Expanded Format. Sure, some strategies are more popular than others, but I still see them all on a regular basis. And I'm still encountering new ones all the time!

I wish I could have ten different decks that could all be competitive, but that's just not realistic, unless I want to just copy the various other popular strategies out there.

That is the one thing that remains true. The only way I could have ten different competitive decks, would be if I copied other effective strategies... but heck, that's because this is a dead game, and most of the effective strategies out there are things that have already been thought up and played, for which players already know what the most effective cards are. That's not a problem with Expanded Format, that's just a problem with no new cards being made anymore.

Aside from site manipulation, the most abusive (and most abused) strategies I've seen in Expanded are:

1. Gamling/Horn/Follower decks

No problem. Hit 'em with Rapid Reload and Archery, they die hard.

2. Gollum/Deceit decks

Very beatable, thanks to Gladden Homestead and a condition bomb.

3. Orc Troll Swarm/Demoralized decks

Not invincible either! Ironically one of the best ways to beat these, is to simply exhaust all your guys and don't heal them! With less twilight, the piddling few minions they can play probably won't be strong enough to beat anyone.

4. Skull Men Super Archery decks

Not so tough, if you know how to heal lots of wounds every time you move!

5. Hobbit/Scouring decks

A couple of Saruman's Power and you'll be scouring Hobbit blood off the ground.

6. Elf Archery/Eowyn decks

Allow me to introduce you to Cavern Entrance, and The Balrog, Demon of Might!

So, long live Expanded Format! The best LOTRTCG format of all! 

[Legion]

Site manipulation is what makes an Expanded deck viable.  A deck that allows itself to get hit with the opponent's choice of sites right up to 9 is going to lose to a deck that is designed to take advantage of that.  If you go through with Barliman Butterbur, PPP pulling Speak Friend and Enter to play Mithlond every turn along with a method of recurring Travelled leader (normally Grimbeorn and axe) whilst simultaneously forcing your opponent into the terrible sites (Steward's Tomb etc) you almost certainly cannot lose to a player who innocently ignores site manipulation.

You really have changed your tune, Draino.  It was not so long ago that you were saying that site manipulation was the scourge of Expanded.  Now you're the one whom I see doing it the most.  It's become a necessary part  of the game, and in my opinion that stifles it.  Decipher did bring out some pseudo rules in that if you didn't obey them you could be punished, such as the "Rule of 6", the "Rule of 4 FP cultures" and the "Rule of don't weigh Aragorn down with too much stuff or Grima's gonna make you pay" and all of those I can live with.  however, the "Rule of a Steward's Tomb is Never Good" or RoaSTiNG for short doesn't seem to fit in there.  Also it destroys the flavour of the game.  I started at The foot of Mount Doom, but went all the way back to a nice B&B in the Shire in one day only to find that because another Frodo decided he wanted to pay his respects that I've woken up in a strange tomb!

I play a fair amount of Expanded, and some of my decks have decent win rates.  And it is nice to see that some people have more original ideas (which is what you'd expect given that there is a decent pool of cards).  However, Decipher had given up with the game by that point and there are a lot of holes (Namarie is fine but FNF is restricted being a perfect example stated above).  I prefer Fellowship block, where I have a sufficient variety of decks to keep me amused, and nothing can annoy me (not even horn with 3x NSSttS anymore).  The only culture I don't play is Isengard (well, Uruks-my Lady Udomiel/Isen Orcs deck is great fun), which ironically is the most popular.  If I'm being objective, I might say Movie is the best overall format for viable options, but even there the threat of GLR does limit Shadow possibilities.

I think the real thing is that Expanded could have been soooo much more fun if a few cards didn't ruin it.  Most of them involve forms of site manipulation, but the thought of a card like Gothmog, Morgul Leader in Fellowship block is just crazy.  And not just because he only appeared in the last film.  Can you honestly say that Shadowfax, GotM is healthy for the game?

[sgtdraino]

Site manipulation is what makes an Expanded deck viable.

There are plenty of viable Shadow strategies which do not use site manipulation. Gil-galad Looping and Hobbit Hospital are two (IMO) tier 1 FP strategies that also rarely use site manipulation. Dwarf decks are also very competitive, and rarely use site manipulation. So no, in my opinion site manipulation does not define whether or not a deck is viable. Granted if your deck can do site manipulation that is an advantage, just as doing lots of Archery is an advantage, or canceling skirmishes is an advantage, or removing burdens is an advantage, etc. Site manipulation is simply another dimension of Expanded Format which must be taken into consideration when deciding upon a strategy.

A deck that allows itself to get hit with the opponent's choice of sites right up to 9 is going to lose to a deck that is designed to take advantage of that.

I have lost to decks that did not incorporate any site manipulation.

If you go through with Barliman Butterbur, PPP pulling Speak Friend and Enter to play Mithlond every turn along with a method of recurring Travelled leader (normally Grimbeorn and axe) whilst simultaneously forcing your opponent into the terrible sites (Steward's Tomb etc) you almost certainly cannot lose to a player who innocently ignores site manipulation.

You can't ignore it, any more than you can ignore a deck that does high Archery, or a deck that can discard all of your conditions. What you do, is prepare for it. All part of the meta. Just kill Barliman, or sabotage his system some other way.

You really have changed your tune, Draino.

Yep! I think that's very clear from the first post in this thread.

It was not so long ago that you were saying that site manipulation was the scourge of Expanded.  Now you're the one whom I see doing it the most.

It was a natural evolution. I went on a quest to see what could be done to counter site manipulation, and the ultimate answer was... counter-site manipulation.

It's become a necessary part  of the game, and in my opinion that stifles it.

The variable sites of Expanded Format are an intentional new dimension of strategy for the game. IMO they don't stifle it, they add to it. Sure, because of the variable sites, some strategies that were effective in earlier formats are no longer effective... but that is the nature of different formats. You have to work within the meta you are operating, and Expanded meta (thank goodness) has a lot of variety to it.

however, the "Rule of a Steward's Tomb is Never Good" or RoaSTiNG for short doesn't seem to fit in there.

With the massive healing abilities many Expanded decks possess, a Steward's Tomb on a sanctuary (or two) acts as a balance. Those who play me know that I often play Steward's Tomb on one or both sanctuaries... and more often than not, it ain't healing me either! You learn to do without.

Also it destroys the flavour of the game.  I started at The foot of Mount Doom, but went all the way back to a nice B&B in the Shire in one day only to find that because another Frodo decided he wanted to pay his respects that I've woken up in a strange tomb!

The quest to destroy the ring can be a long and winding road, and in LOTR TCG, the Fellowship never did get to Mount Doom until Set 15 came out, and they finally made a Mount Doom site! So, ironically, the only way to actually dump the ring at Mount Doom, is to play with the new variable site path!

I play a fair amount of Expanded, and some of my decks have decent win rates.  And it is nice to see that some people have more original ideas (which is what you'd expect given that there is a decent pool of cards).  However, Decipher had given up with the game by that point and there are a lot of holes (Namarie is fine but FNF is restricted being a perfect example stated above).

Decipher's not perfect, but I think they continued to make some great cards, right up to the end. I agree that FNF shouldn't still be restricted... but does making it restricted break the game? Naaaah. There's other options.

If I'm being objective, I might say Movie is the best overall format for viable options, but even there the threat of GLR does limit Shadow possibilities.

I'd be interested to see a comprehensive list of Movie strategies, to see which format truly has more variety. I started a thread for that, but lately haven't had the interest to do much with it. Focused on Expanded, for now.

I think the real thing is that Expanded could have been soooo much more fun if a few cards didn't ruin it.  Most of them involve forms of site manipulation, but the thought of a card like Gothmog, Morgul Leader in Fellowship block is just crazy.

Well, that's the point isn't it: He's not in Fellowship block. He's in Expanded Format, where the FP have the means of challenging him.

Can you honestly say that Shadowfax, GotM is healthy for the game?

Absolutely. There are some major corruption decks in Expanded Format. You have single cards that are capable of adding 3 or 4 burdens at a time! GOTM balances that out. And just like any other card, if you really feel that challenged by GOTM, then use a strategy to get rid of it!

PS - Ya took my gold for expressing my opinion about the format? Sheesh. Ya Corsair! Well, I ain't gonna take yours, so there.

[dmaz]

Absolutely. There are some major corruption decks in Expanded Format. You have single cards that are capable of adding 3 or 4 burdens at a time! GOTM balances that out. And just like any other card, if you really feel that challenged by GOTM, then use a strategy to get rid of it!

Which corruption decks? The only time I've seen corruption actually work in Expanded and work well was Enquea with BaNaP...but the power level of GOTM vastly surpasses this kind of strategy. If Gandalf has GOTM and one simple event in hand, he can basically remove all burdens at the mere cost of exerting twice...on top of that he would get to heal every companion of your chosen culture, other than his own.

I've never complained about GOTM, but then I've never played corruption in Expanded. Thus, I have yet to see a corruption strategy that actually justifies the raw power of GOTM, imo...

[Shelobplayer]

A Dark Fell About Him + Lingering Shadows can corrupt a ringbearer in one shot. Isengard Underling + Bound to its Fate can be looped with Mountain Troll strategies almost infinitely, Orc Miscreant riding a Relentless Warg combined with Bound to its Fate and Isengard Underling is pretty powerful too. Besides, corruption decks should be built with GOTM in mind, it's very easy to add threats with stuff like Eternally Threatening or Black Land Chieftain.