I see both sides of the issue on this, but I think here are the dealbreakers as far as Lannister is concerned.

Regarding Ships:

1. Victarion clouds the whole discussion:
  This is literally the "I win" card for naval battles.  As you point out, Greyjoy can take it at anytime.  Lannister knows that if you want the sea, you will find a way to take it with this card. This is nearly ALL completely independent of what Lannister does.  Because of that kind of power, Lannister's perspective is "Why are you afraid of a battle you can guarantee a win with?"

2. 3 ships is reasonable, but 4 is not.
As a Lannister, I need those ships to lockdown Searoad Marches and scare away Tyrell from eyeing my territory up. Searoad is just so scary. Tyrell, equally wants me to stay out of there. So, the best way to enforce non-aggression are unraidable ships. This also protects against Queen of Thorns because you can have a support in both Stoney and Sound further marking the territory as a no-go zone.


3. Hand Economy

Why is 3 ships ok? Because I can play Def+2 (and support +1 in port) for a combat strength of 7 before cards, whereas Grejoy likely will have only 5 or 6 before cards. As Lannister, I know you need ships for Stark, but you can 180 instantly and attack and I might never see it coming. Since you get to ambush me, I deserve the opportunity to, essentially, force the use of Victarion on victory, rather than letting you gamble on a lower card. That's my one advantage: that I know you have to play your one-trick pony and I can hold on to my better cards for a counter-attack. You know that too. And it helps keep the peace, because an attack using your best battle cards might not be productive if a good counter-attack is waiting.

Regarding Riverrun:

1. So, are you taking Seagard in this Scenario? Because, if so, you are asking Lannister to sacrifice a heckuva lot of early momentum on trusting you. A fair deal I've seen is typically both sides start with no more than a footman at Riverrun and Seagard.

To not take Riverrun is a big nerf, because it's one of the best territories in the game: A stronghold, barrel, AND a crown? What is not to like? If I'm Lannister, my momentum depends on Riverrun to quickly boost supply, muster Knights for Stoney, and/or crowns for Game of Thrones. By denying that option, especially in the early game, is digging a massive hole for me. Complicating matters further, by the fact that if Greyjoy takes Riverrun from me, I can punish you for it next turn--since I can prepare for your moves with the Raven.  Lannister simply has zero incentive to accept such a handicap in the early game.  It's similar to the Tyrell/Martell early game in that the settled alliance spots are based on the fact that Martell can make a credible argument that the end result is bad for Tyrell. As Lannister, we both know that unless Muster and Clash hits, I'll just consolidate power and wipe the force out. So why should I surrender what is, for all intents and purposes, mine?

Those are my thoughts. 3 ships in Golden Sound, no more than a footman in Riverrun and Seagard. That's pretty fair for everyone.

Last edited by JukeboxHero on 2020-Jun-08 22:39, edited 1x in total

But I think my point is stressing the question that your analysis appears to overlook by my estimation: Does Greyjoy really want war with Lannister either?  Since we're discussing the opening alliance moves here, I think we have to recall the primary concerns of what options are for both sides.

Lannister Defensive Position:
Let's assume Lannister plays it safe in the opening move.  They have the plus +2 Defense, +1 Support for a total of 5 combat strength.  Greyjoy, at most, in challenging the sea can sacrifice ALL movement (at least in thronemaster) to generate 2 combat strength.  Of course, with Balon, they guarantee the win here, at the expense of their best card and the blade, and now, with two Lannister ships in Sunset and no guarantee of muster the next round, PLUS the possible scenario that Lannister will bring out at least one more (if not 2) ships into port, plus the possible move to Riverrun shoring up a possible catastrophic muster opportunity effectively ending the game for Greyjoy.

Let's not forget Lannister's cards either. As you rightly point out, some of them are soul-crushingly good in the right situation (only if said situation comes around).  So again, WHY does Greyjoy want the fight in the first place?  Additionally, as we've discussed, Greyjoy's single thing they do well is win battles. Period. They have the best cards and the blade to do it.  So early on, with no clash, I just have serious trouble believing Greyjoy has anything to fear from Lannister that they could not hold off for one turn that wasn't already telegraphed (unless it's a backstab in mid battle with Stark and some cards already spent--but even then, that could be anticipated minus bad Westeros cards (but that's every strategy, I suppose.)

This brings me back to the question I had about the placement of troops--in the opening move where Lannister does not take Riverrun, does Greyjoy still get Seagard? If Greyjoy is double moving ships, not taking Riverrun is fine.  That's palpable given that Lannister still has the CP* advantage and can move on Blackwater faster if need be or just CP for the impending clash as a viable alternatives.

If Greyjoy's first move, however, is to move the boat out of Port, and move a footmen to Seagard--what possible game ending muster can there be?  There's still a ship in IMB?

If the first move is...what? One boat to Sunset, and a Footmen to Seagard?  If that's the move, and no muster hits, GJ is dead in their tracks anyway, and wouldn't they be better served taking Flint's for the muster straight to Sunset?  Because with no muster anyway, it might then be in the best interest of Lannister to start the war if the right card comes up.

I must be missing something calculating moves that Greyjoy would make, because with the errata change, I really think Greyjoy is disincentived to move on Lannister barring some great Westeros cards.