If one were to downgrade the Greyjoy knight, I think Stark’s should be as well. It doesn’t make them more vulnerable to Baratheon, since they have to win the sea battle before they can send any troops north. But it slows down Stark’s growth just a bit to match the lessened threat of being rushed by Greyjoy. I don’t think anyone has real balancing concerns as between Stark and Greyjoy.

As for Tyrell, they are clearly the weakest and begin entirely at the mercy of Westeros cards in a way that even Lanni isn’t. Still, I do think even a little buff can have a huge impact when it comes to starting positions. An extra fort for Margaery would be a less drastic change than a ship, while still changing the dynamics - a turn 2 rush from Martell could still conquer the sea and open up Tyrell’s home territory, but it would not also wipe out his entire sea strength in the process.

What I think you also have to take into account is that the goal should not be to create a total stalemate in the opening rounds. In addition to making for more boring, inert games, this actually would have the effect of unbalancing in favor of Tyrell.  They have better lands in which to grow and consolidate, which makes them a greater endgame threat. Part of the dynamic is that Martell should feel pressure to extend themselves early on to stop their rivals from Growing Strong.

Last edited by Ser Hodor on 2017-Nov-23 16:51, edited 2x in total

If one were to downgrade the Greyjoy knight, I think Stark’s should be as well. It doesn’t make them more vulnerable to Baratheon, since they have to win the sea battle before they can send any troops north. But it slows down Stark’s growth just a bit to match the lessened threat of being rushed by Greyjoy. I don’t think anyone has real balancing concerns as between Stark and Greyjoy.
Nice point! I agree!

What I think you also have to take into account is that the goal should not be to create a total stalemate in the opening rounds. In addition to making for more boring, inert games, this actually would have the effect of unbalancing in favor of Tyrell.  They have better lands in which to grow and consolidate, which makes them a greater endgame threat. Part of the dynamic is that Martell should feel pressure to extend themselves early on to stop their rivals from Growing Strong.
Yes, you are right, but I think an additional ship would not transform the south in a stalemate. Martell still would have the advantage in sea.

I haven't read the entire argument but your point is completely invalid: Tyrell is not sitting ducks on round 2. He can QoT the march at ESS, if something like no muster/no clash happens round 1.
Now, if that happens round 2 AGAIN, then Tyrell is sitting ducks.
At this situation, yes, it is a problem. But this only happens at around 15% of the games, at most.
Also, Martel might not want to attack him at this point: It's too late, since Bara will have an advantage this way (much easier to start putting pressure on Martel now).

At any case the houses are very unbalanced if players don't know what they are doing. Otherwise, it is completely balanced in my opinion (players can always focus on the leading player..)

Last edited by ArchDemon on 2017-Nov-25 04:39, edited 1x in total

Using QOT to remove the march in ESS 1) only works if Martell didn’t muster his ships such that he can take WSS immediately 2) probably loses Tyrell a land unit when they are already behind on that front.

He can QoT the march at ESS, if something like no muster/no clash happens round 1.
Martell plays first, mate. He can take WSS before Tyrell uses QOT.