LotR TCG Wiki → Card Sets:  All 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 → Forums:  TLHH CC

Author Topic: My issues with Expanded Format  (Read 18781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

September 02, 2012, 10:01:51 PM
Read 18781 times

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
My issues with Expanded Format
« on: September 02, 2012, 10:01:51 PM »
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?
« Last Edit: September 02, 2012, 10:03:54 PM by sgtdraino »
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

September 02, 2012, 11:32:17 PM
Reply #1

bibfortuna25

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1531
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2012, 11:32:17 PM »
That's why Movie Block is the best format for this game.
All cards do what they say, no more, no less.

September 02, 2012, 11:36:25 PM
Reply #2

Not a Zombie

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Ranger
  • Posts: 781
  • An intelligent Corporeal, Previously sweet_stuff
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2012, 11:36:25 PM »
That's why Movie Block is the best format for this game.

No way, we all know how broken [Isengard] 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 :P
No one loves you like I do.
--God

I'm imploring people I've never met to pressure a government with better things to do to punish a man who meant no harm for something nobody even saw, thats what I'm doing!

September 02, 2012, 11:41:51 PM
Reply #3

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2012, 11:41:51 PM »
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.
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

September 03, 2012, 06:53:09 PM
Reply #4

bebpc

  • *
  • Information Offline
  • Orc
  • Posts: 32
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2012, 06:53:09 PM »
  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.
 
« Last Edit: September 03, 2012, 06:58:09 PM by bebpc »

September 03, 2012, 08:34:09 PM
Reply #5

Shelobplayer

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 474
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2012, 08:34:09 PM »
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.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2012, 08:37:18 PM by Shelobplayer »

September 04, 2012, 12:31:33 PM
Reply #6

Haszor

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Villager
  • Posts: 287
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2012, 12:31:33 PM »
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.

November 05, 2012, 11:15:03 PM
Reply #7

Panch

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 101
  • Honorable lord
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2012, 11:15:03 PM »
Some examples:
- Fortress Never Fallen is banned, while Namarie is legal.

Its restricted I think :p
"The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword."- Eddard Stark

November 06, 2012, 06:08:22 AM
Reply #8

jdizzy001

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2012, 06:08:22 AM »
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.
*All posts made by jdizzy001, regardless of the thread in which they appear, are expressions of his own opinion and as such are not representative of views shared by any third party unless expressly acknowledged as such by said party.

I play LOTR SBG look at my minis!
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.124731667611081.33577.100002227457509&l=aeb5fa3bdd

November 10, 2012, 06:41:40 AM
Reply #9

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2012, 06:41:40 AM »
 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.
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

August 31, 2014, 02:16:09 PM
Reply #10

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2014, 02:16:09 PM »
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!  \:D/
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

August 31, 2014, 04:00:16 PM
Reply #11

Legion

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Horseman
  • Posts: 343
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2014, 04:00:16 PM »
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?

August 31, 2014, 05:55:05 PM
Reply #12

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2014, 05:55:05 PM »
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.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2014, 05:56:36 PM by sgtdraino »
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

August 31, 2014, 09:14:40 PM
Reply #13

dmaz

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Global Mod
  • Posts: 555
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2014, 09:14:40 PM »
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...

September 01, 2014, 01:04:26 AM
Reply #14

Shelobplayer

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 474
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #14 on: September 01, 2014, 01:04:26 AM »
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.

September 01, 2014, 06:48:16 AM
Reply #15

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #15 on: September 01, 2014, 06:48:16 AM »
And don't forget Easterling Pillager! As you know I get 9 guys out pretty fast, so Easterling Pillager can put 4 burdens on me every time he comes out. I've been corrupted more than once by a hybrid Corsair/Easterling deck that either got me before I could get GOTM out, or Maraudered GOTM and then nailed me with recurring Easterling Pillager.

I think maybe some people think corruption isn't as strong in Expanded because Twilight Nazgul are not as effective in Expanded as in other formats... but no, there are some very effective ways to do corruption... just not necessarily with Twilight Nazgul.

ETA: Just to give a good visual idea of the variety in Expanded Format, here's a breakdown of how often I encountered various strategies by culture, out of approximately 74 games so far:

 [Gandalf]
-/////////9
 [Elven]
-////////////12
 [Gondor]
-////////////////////20
 [Rohan]
-////4
 [Dwarven]
-///////////11
 [Shire]
-/////////////////17
 [Gollum](Free Peoples)
-///3
 [Gollum](Shadow)
-////4
 [Dunland]
-//2
 [Wraith]
-//////////////14
 [Moria]
-/////////9
 [Orc]
-/////////9
 [Raider]
-///////7
 [Men]
-/////5
 [Isengard]
-////////8
 [Uruk]
-//////6
 [Sauron]
-////////8

These are all different decks, too. I did not count it if it was a deck and player that I had played before.

It's also important to note that often times a culture will have a number of different strategies that all center around that culture. For example, while [Gondor] is currently the most popular culture in Expanded Format, it is also the culture I have the most documented different strategies for (8 so far). Once you look at the breakdown of different strategies within the [Gondor] culture, you see there is variety within that culture.

Things seemed particularly balanced between the Shadow cultures, with [Wraith] being the one obvious frontrunner. Between the FP cultures, there are more clear favorites: [Gondor] and [Shire], followed by [Elven] and [Dwarven], with [Gandalf] not far behind them.

Based on the frequency of my encounters with them, these are the most popular strategies in Expanded Format, and how often I encounter them:

Free Peoples:
Hobbit Hospital 11%
Madril 8%
Archery 7%
Gil-galad Looping 5%
Three Hunters 5%
Condition Dwarfs 5%

Shadow:
Forest Nazgul 11%
Goblin Armory 8%
Uruk Hunters 7%
Demoralized Bomb: 5%
Skull Men Super Archery 5%

As you can see from the percentages, even with the most popular strategies, the chances of encountering any particular strategy are quite low. And there's ten strategies I haven't listed that each pop up about 4% of the time.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 09:28:05 AM by sgtdraino »
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

September 01, 2014, 06:35:26 PM
Reply #16

dmaz

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Global Mod
  • Posts: 555
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #16 on: September 01, 2014, 06:35:26 PM »
Ok, regarding the hyper-corruption I've been a little more convinced, but mostly because of Easterling Pillager. A lot of Expanded decks like big fellowships and the pillager would just brutalize them. This card can and does add those 4 burdens at once, with the only prerequisite being the existence of lots of companions (fairly common).

The orc strategies are a little more avoidable once you see what they are doing, and Lingering Shadow with Dark Fell About Him is so situational, I could only HOPE that my opponent's shadow strategy is as swiss cheese as that ;)
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 06:37:22 PM by dmaz »

September 01, 2014, 07:07:19 PM
Reply #17

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2014, 07:07:19 PM »
The orc strategies are a little more avoidable once you see what they are doing,

Are they? Unless you manage to discard Goblin Hordes, or somehow get that Mountain-troll out of his hand, he's going to recur that event on you ad infinitum.

and Lingering Shadow with Dark Fell About Him is so situational, I could only HOPE that my opponent's shadow strategy is as swiss cheese as that ;)

I dunno man, I could easily envision a [Men]/ [Wraith] hybrid deck that uses Rapid Reload to exhaust whoever has the most vitality, then plays Enduring Nazgul which can heal themselves in Skirmish, to easily be able to exert twice in Regroup to add something like 8 burdens all at once! Heck, sounds pretty easy to me! Man, you could even recur it each turn with that nazgul that pulls an event back into your hand!
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

September 01, 2014, 11:20:43 PM
Reply #18

dmaz

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Global Mod
  • Posts: 555
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #18 on: September 01, 2014, 11:20:43 PM »
Are they? Unless you manage to discard Goblin Hordes, or somehow get that Mountain-troll out of his hand, he's going to recur that event on you ad infinitum.

I guess I mean that once you understand your opponent's strategy, and it is based on something other than just eating wounds each site in archery, or resolving skirmishes, you can prepare to thwart it. Good fellowship site control or condition control will really cripple your opponent. These burdens are also conditional. I don't really find Bound to its Fate to be a very good card. If your opponent plays ANY kind of events the card just turns into: "Make your opponent discard a FP event of their choice"...whoopie!

I dunno man, I could easily envision a [Men]/ [Wraith] hybrid deck that uses Rapid Reload to exhaust whoever has the most vitality, then plays Enduring Nazgul which can heal themselves in Skirmish, to easily be able to exert twice in Regroup to add something like 8 burdens all at once! Heck, sounds pretty easy to me! Man, you could even recur it each turn with that nazgul that pulls an event back into your hand!

Now THAT would be a sweet combo to see. My opinion on this one could be a little off I guess...

The reason I still see Easterling Pillager a step above the rest is that it punishes big fellowships, and when the big fellowship IS there, the burdens are guaranteed (unless they are playing Melilot Brandybuck or something)
Dark Fell About Him has way too many variables for me I guess... 1. you have a way of exhausting a companion with decent vitality. 2. Your Nazgul actually makes it through the skirmish with enough vitality to use the event. 3. You can play the event (Wise Guide). If they are playing 9 companions, Ent Horde for example, you need to get these three to work in conjunction, exhausting Ent Horde to get all 4 of the burdens out. If you are playing Beasterlings all you need is to spot another Easterling to do the same. Just my cost-benefit analysis ;)
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 11:22:24 PM by dmaz »

September 02, 2014, 03:43:38 AM
Reply #19

Shelobplayer

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 474
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #19 on: September 02, 2014, 03:43:38 AM »
I dunno man, I could easily envision a [Men]/ [Wraith] hybrid deck that uses Rapid Reload to exhaust whoever has the most vitality, then plays Enduring Nazgul which can heal themselves in Skirmish, to easily be able to exert twice in Regroup to add something like 8 burdens all at once! Heck, sounds pretty easy to me! Man, you could even recur it each turn with that nazgul that pulls an event back into your hand!

That's pretty much how I used Dark Fell About Him (plus Dark Horseman + Saruman, SOS). Throw in Throne of the Dark Lord and Mount Doom for easy -2 resist, Final Strike for protection.

September 02, 2014, 06:08:11 AM
Reply #20

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #20 on: September 02, 2014, 06:08:11 AM »
I dunno man, I could easily envision a [Men]/ [Wraith] hybrid deck that uses Rapid Reload to exhaust whoever has the most vitality, then plays Enduring Nazgul which can heal themselves in Skirmish, to easily be able to exert twice in Regroup to add something like 8 burdens all at once! Heck, sounds pretty easy to me! Man, you could even recur it each turn with that nazgul that pulls an event back into your hand!

Well, I just tried a test of this, and couldn't ever pull it off. I think I made my Shadow too complicated though, not enough nazgul.

I don't really find Bound to its Fate to be a very good card. If your opponent plays ANY kind of events the card just turns into: "Make your opponent discard a FP event of their choice"...whoopie!

As always, it depends on what kind of deck you're facing. My deck only has a few events, and they're pretty important. If I discard them without using them, I'm in trouble. I sure don't want to get rid of OGTDA!

The reason I still see Easterling Pillager a step above the rest is that it punishes big fellowships, and when the big fellowship IS there, the burdens are guaranteed (unless they are playing Melilot Brandybuck or something)

And it's a much simpler combo to pull off. Plus you've still got other Easterling tricks that add burdens.

Dark Fell About Him has way too many variables for me I guess... 1. you have a way of exhausting a companion with decent vitality.

Not generally a problem with Rapid Reload and/or Mumak Commander, GATS.

2. Your Nazgul actually makes it through the skirmish with enough vitality to use the event.

With the Enduring guys, generally only a problem if he's both strong, and has damage bonuses. Otherwise they'll heal enough to exert in Regroup.

3. You can play the event (Wise Guide).

If they're playing with Wise Guide, that's who I'm hitting first with Rapid Reload. I've also been trying Grima, Servant of Another Master to both get an extra exertion on somebody, and disable Wise Guide if necessary.

No, the problem I ran into when I tested it (only once so far), was simply getting the right cards in hand. Also, ideally you want to get Lingering Shadow on an unbound guy with decent vitality, and the only way to do that is if that guy fights a Nazgul. That's where Between Nazgul and Prey comes in... but now I"m running into too many events and not enough minions. So there's definitely a balance necessary to pull off this strategy that I have not found yet.

If you are playing Beasterlings all you need is to spot another Easterling to do the same.

Exactly. Most of the time, simpler is more effective.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2014, 06:10:21 AM by sgtdraino »
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

September 02, 2014, 08:37:39 AM
Reply #21

Carl333

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 142
  • "But it is not this day. This day we fight!"
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #21 on: September 02, 2014, 08:37:39 AM »
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...

Challenge accepted.
"Do you ever wonder why we are here?  Maybe you're here because it is the only place you fit in.  Maybe you're here because you have nowhere else to go.  Maybe you're here because deep down, you want to be here.  It doesn't matter why you're here.  All that matters is that you are here!"

September 02, 2014, 05:40:05 PM
Reply #22

dmaz

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Global Mod
  • Posts: 555
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #22 on: September 02, 2014, 05:40:05 PM »
After looking through all of the cards again, I think I'm being a little overly critical of these corruption strategies.

Just because the Dark Fell About Him combo requires a little more preparation doesn't mean I should dismiss it completely. After all, inventing new potent and deadly combos, as well as developing a way to pull them off is one of the best aspects of this game!

Also @Carl333, looking forward to seeing your super corruption deck :)

October 14, 2014, 05:40:00 PM
Reply #23

Panch

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 101
  • Honorable lord
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2014, 05:40:00 PM »
So whats a good deck to use against shadow site manipulation ? Something with OGTDA or Well-traveled?
"The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword."- Eddard Stark

October 15, 2014, 06:03:07 AM
Reply #24

Vordan

  • *
  • Information Offline
  • Orc
  • Posts: 27
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #24 on: October 15, 2014, 06:03:07 AM »
both are good, and if the fp has some burned removal Get On and Get Away can be splashed by any fellowship, i'm surprised i don't see more of that (even if it's R-listed in expanded)

October 15, 2014, 04:28:55 PM
Reply #25

ramolnar

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Troll
  • Posts: 187
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #25 on: October 15, 2014, 04:28:55 PM »
both are good, and if the fp has some burned removal Get On and Get Away can be splashed by any fellowship, i'm surprised i don't see more of that (even if it's R-listed in expanded)

Because a single copy restricted card is way too uncertain. I can't discard it from my opening hand, and I can't rely on it.

Also, a lot of site manipulation is back-side site manipulation. My FP can advance to any site I want, but then in shadow phase I get hit with Steward's Tomb or Pelennor Flat or Isengard Ruined or Cavern Entrance. Or in their FP phase they just switch the site underneath me. There's only one Mount Doom in my adventure deck - and to play that there are cheaper options like Thror's Map and Pathfinder.

October 16, 2014, 11:30:26 AM
Reply #26

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #26 on: October 16, 2014, 11:30:26 AM »
You might find a few ideas here:

http://lotrtcgwiki.com/forums/index.php/topic,8278.0.html

Generally, while some players might not want to hear this, I've found that the most effective way to counter site manipulation, is by using site manipulation yourself. It's simply part of the Expanded meta, part of the general strategy of the format, so it's something you're going to have to plan for.
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

October 16, 2014, 04:20:25 PM
Reply #27

Panch

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 101
  • Honorable lord
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #27 on: October 16, 2014, 04:20:25 PM »
Thank you guys for replying! I really appreciate it
"The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword."- Eddard Stark

January 26, 2015, 05:53:08 PM
Reply #28

simplegarak

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 146
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2015, 05:53:08 PM »
Something I'm curious about.

I can see the appeal of Rapid Reload, but I'm surprised more decks don't seem to rock Greed (a card I love to drop on decks that run a lot of threats).  What is it about the expanded meta that shuts it down?

January 26, 2015, 06:41:53 PM
Reply #29

Shelobplayer

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 474
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2015, 06:41:53 PM »
Something I'm curious about.

I can see the appeal of Rapid Reload, but I'm surprised more decks don't seem to rock Greed (a card I love to drop on decks that run a lot of threats).  What is it about the expanded meta that shuts it down?

Greed is an amazing card indeed, the problem is that uruks in general are not. The best uruks are generally aggressively costed vanilla-ish fighters, and those are not great for expanded, because every better expanded deck has solutions for them. Generally you expect more from your minions in expanded than winning skirmishes, and that's where uruks excell. I can see some multiculture uruk deck doing alright in expanded, but honestly, the unupdated ban list is not really fair for them. Keeper of Isengard and Savagery to Match their Numbers wouldn't be overpowered in the format at all imo, but would make uruks competitive (still I doubt they'd be ahead of most well established shadow strategies).

January 27, 2015, 02:43:45 PM
Reply #30

ramolnar

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Troll
  • Posts: 187
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2015, 02:43:45 PM »
Something I'm curious about.

I can see the appeal of Rapid Reload, but I'm surprised more decks don't seem to rock Greed (a card I love to drop on decks that run a lot of threats).  What is it about the expanded meta that shuts it down?

Uruk Hunters (the best version) crush some Fellowships, and often get site 2 stops, but all the good decks will eventually set up and start winning. Also, they cannot deal directly with Madril. Therefore they cannot be Tier 1. A well timed Greed will hurt Madril - it's one of the few things that does - but the timing is tough, even though when I see Madril I automatically mulligan without Greed. After that, though, most of the men are hunters, and so you're just playing Trackers against Gondor - decent at best.

As for Greed, there's quality Maneuver condition removal - Namarie and Gladden Homestead. Or playing against 9 companion Ents, there's not enough pool. Greed looks nice, and it trips up a few decks, but it's not good enough.

January 28, 2015, 05:20:01 PM
Reply #31

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2015, 05:20:01 PM »
I'm surprised I don't see Greed more often. To my thinking, it's a must-have card for Uruks in Expanded. If the opponent isn't ready for it, it can win the game. It's a great tactic to use against Madril, since Greed works even if there are no minions present. Especially if you get it out early, it can drastically cripple a Madril deck.

I do try to counter Greed, primarily with Albert Dreary. I can grab him with A Wizard is Never Late. I also use Gladden Homestead, though of course that only saves you for a turn or two.
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

January 29, 2015, 02:30:56 AM
Reply #32

Shelobplayer

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 474
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #32 on: January 29, 2015, 02:30:56 AM »
I could see Greed working well in an  [Orc] deck with Grishnak, Treacherous Captain and some splashed Uglúk/Mauhur, but straight uruks are just in a horrible position in expanded.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 07:53:53 AM by Shelobplayer »

January 29, 2015, 07:28:29 AM
Reply #33

bibfortuna25

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1531
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #33 on: January 29, 2015, 07:28:29 AM »
Uruk hunters (with Violent Hurl) can pack a nice punch, but they're just so bland and powerless against the most powerful FP strategies.
All cards do what they say, no more, no less.

January 29, 2015, 11:56:15 AM
Reply #34

dmaz

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Global Mod
  • Posts: 555
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #34 on: January 29, 2015, 11:56:15 AM »
Something I'm curious about.

I can see the appeal of Rapid Reload, but I'm surprised more decks don't seem to rock Greed (a card I love to drop on decks that run a lot of threats).  What is it about the expanded meta that shuts it down?

Greed is an amazing card indeed, the problem is that uruks in general are not. The best uruks are generally aggressively costed vanilla-ish fighters, and those are not great for expanded, because every better expanded deck has solutions for them. Generally you expect more from your minions in expanded than winning skirmishes, and that's where uruks excell. I can see some multiculture uruk deck doing alright in expanded, but honestly, the unupdated ban list is not really fair for them. Keeper of Isengard and Savagery to Match their Numbers wouldn't be overpowered in the format at all imo, but would make uruks competitive (still I doubt they'd be ahead of most well established shadow strategies).

This is a great point. You do see greed in FotR Block now and then, but manuever condition discarding is more prevalent there as opposed to expanded which seems to have more fellowship/regroup ways of dealing with conditions (at least from what I've seen so far).
But the issue with Uruk-hai is a reasonable question - they stink so much in Expanded because they lost the cards that helped make them competitive. I can understand why they are x-listed in Movie and Towers Standard, but like you pointed out, the Fellowships you see running around in Expanded deserve to be challenged by KoI and StMtN

February 01, 2015, 08:38:31 PM
Reply #35

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2015, 08:38:31 PM »
Interesting you'd say that, bibfortuna. Maybe they're just extra-tough against my deck, but I usually find [Uruk] Hunter decks to be pretty tough, able to throw out a lot of really tough minions for what (to me) doesn't seem like that much twilight. Again, maybe they're just more effective against me. Then again, tough as they are, I still usually win against them... unless they get lucky with a Greed.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2015, 07:43:58 PM by sgtdraino »
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir

February 02, 2015, 10:00:46 AM
Reply #36

ramolnar

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Troll
  • Posts: 187
Re: My issues with Expanded Format
« Reply #36 on: February 02, 2015, 10:00:46 AM »
Interesting you'd say that, bibfortuna. Maybe they're just extra-tough against my deck, but I usually find [Uruk-hai] Hunter decks to be pretty tough, able to throw out a lot of really tough minions for what (to me) doesn't seem like that much twilight. Again, maybe they're just more effective against me. Then again, tough as they are, I still usually win against them... unless they get lucky with a Greed.

My strategy for Hunter Uruks against Madril:
1) Do I have Greed in my opening hand? If not, mulligan.
2) Do I have Greed on the mulligan? If not, concede.

It's not that bad, but it's close. There are three problems:
1) Minions will never become not roaming so they can always be taken out with Ithilien Blade.
2) There's no wound protection so Aragorn's Bow will slaughter minions.
3) Finally, if a minion gets to a skirmish, there are multiple Hunter men around to block the best effects. Sure, I might get something through with multiple pumps, but I can't hold three pumps until site 5-7 when I can get a minion through.

Many Madril versions run 4 Ithilien Blade and Aragorn's Bow. I have 3 bows. You run none, which hurts you against this type of midrange deck.