Fallen Kingdom Strategy

[pixlepix]

So, I thought I might jump on the bandwagon. Here it goes:

First of all, I am just highlighting one of the possible strategies with FK. I assume that there are many other ways to play them, and I don't pretend to be the only expert on them. My strategy involves making use of the major strength of the FK: their ability to continue after the draw pile has ran out. Ret being able to raise dead is priceless, and LotD at the right moment can turn the game.

Unit reviews:

Skeletal archers:
IMO the worse units of the FK, only worth keeping around because they are ranged. Sure, they are a decent ranged unit, with a nifty ability. But a 1 cost unit just doesn't cut it with ret. Though, the fact that most of them are going to your discard pile can help you raise them to take a shot at a summoner or kill a critical common.

Zombie Warriors:
No one can debate that these are awesome commons. Pretty decent stats, 2 life is nice. But, the real killer is the the ability. Not only do you get another unit on the board, but it can often be behind enemy lines. Suddenly your opponent has a whole invasion to deal with. I strongly recommend adding more of these if you have more then one FK pack. I took out 3 SA and added 3 of these babies for my deck.

Reapers:
I can't get enough of these. A 3 life common with 3 attack is something you don't ever want to see. However, the reaper should never be killed by your opponent. Always kill them when there is a 25% or so chance that they will die next turn. Letting 3-4 magic get into the wrong hand is devastating.

Dragos: Pretty decent champion. Just don't send him into the middle of the enemies army. You want him to pick off commons and draining life.

Skhull: 3 attack is nice. Don't worry about his ability, its nice when it activates, and it might net you 1-2 commons, but it isn't game changing.

Elut-Bal: My personal favorite. Perfect at the beginning of the game, or the end. Mid game, not so good. But, 4 attack is really good, especially for a good summoner hit. Fairly frail though. SBB is decent, if he comes at the right time.

Forced Summon: A great card. Really game changing. Use the first one liberally, the second only if you can end the game quickly.

Legions of the Dead: Arguably the best event in the game. Summoning 3 commons from the discard pile is amazing. Effectively gives you 6 free magic: 3 from building the cards, and 3 from reduced summon cost. Really useful to build a shield around Ret.

Dark Sacrifice: Useful in certain situations. But not really worth saving.

Overall Strategy: You want to get to late game, when both draw piles have ran out. I usually build a bunch of magic. I probably build 2-3 magic per turn. Save only champs, LotD and FS. Heavy offense, and force the opponent to do the same. Then, you can keep summoning discarded units, and win the game.

[Infection Reflection]

This helps me a lot, because while I love using the FK, I usually don't win. Yay!:)

[pixlepix]

If you get on Vassal now, I'll show you how to play them

[Infection Reflection]

If you get on Vassal now, I'll show you how to play them

I don't have Vassal. Sorry!

[thenightsshadow]

I disagree that Skhull isn't a game-changer when his ability activates. It ruins common-based strategies with just one wrong die.

Example from three days ago:

VG vs. FK.

I played three Holy Judgments, and moved a priest up to Sairook, Elut-Bal, and Skhull. Skhull's roll succeeded, and while the other two Champs went down, Skhull survived. (Keep in mind this is when we both had about 2-3 cards in our decks left.

[Anoir]

I'm going to respectfully disagree with your thoughts on archers. I understand where you are coming from but I believe them to be the FK's best unit (until reinforcements).

That being said I play a magic denial strategy which can easily result in the other team being unable to summon a champion because the archers gave no magic.

[pixlepix]

I disagree that Skhull isn't a game-changer when his ability activates. It ruins common-based strategies with just one wrong die.

Example from three days ago:

VG vs. FK.

I played three Holy Judgments, and moved a priest up to Sairook, Elut-Bal, and Skhull. Skhull's roll succeeded, and while the other two Champs went down, Skhull survived. (Keep in mind this is when we both had about 2-3 cards in our decks left.


Okay, that might be critical :). And by its ability not being a game changer, I meant that the ability by itself isn't game changing. Sure, if it activates at the right moment, it can be pretty sweet. But, thats true of all abilities. I really see Skhull as good because of his stats.



I'm going to respectfully disagree with your thoughts on archers. I understand where you are coming from but I believe them to be the FK's best unit (until reinforcements).

That being said I play a magic denial strategy which can easily result in the other team being unable to summon a champion because the archers gave no magic.

Yes, it's definitely possible to play the FK differently, resulting in the SA being vary valuable. But, the way I play them, they contribute less then other commons.

[Infection Reflection]

If you get on Vassal now, I'll show you how to play them

Hey, I got Vassal. How about playing tomorrow? Let me know when a good time would be for you, and I'll see what I can do.;)

[Clarissimus]

Zombie Warriors:
No one can debate that these are awesome commons.

I'll debate that. Their ability is pretty cool, but swarming the board doesn't do much because you can still only attack with 3 units per turn. Now consider their attack is only 1, meaning that Infect is not reliable and they can't do much damage to heroes or walls. Also they are melee and you only get to move 3 units per turn. And they cost 2 magic to summon, meaning you pay a lot to get them out and they don't do much for you once they're out there.

I can understand that they might be useful in lategame situations with Raise the Dead and Greater Raise, but otherwise I never use zombies.

[Mookinizer]

I heard from a friend (and player) that the zombies are better placed defensively; the opponent common comes on your side of the field, you surround him, kill him, which raises a zombie in its place, then retreat. He said that only once all your zombies are on the board do you advance. I played a game with that strategy in mind and I believe it worked (I wasn't able to get them all on the board, but practically none of them died).

[Klaxas]

I heard from a friend (and player) that the zombies are better placed defensively; the opponent common comes on your side of the field, you surround him, kill him, which raises a zombie in its place, then retreat. He said that only once all your zombies are on the board do you advance. I played a game with that strategy in mind and I believe it worked (I wasn't able to get them all on the board, but practically none of them died).

i use them more offencively, but the key reason why zombies are good is not attack value its life. every time you turn an opponents unit into a zombie you are creating 2 more life points for the enemy to have to kill. even if your only attacking with 3 at one attack die each, you win by attrition. which is how the fallen kingdom win.

[Sauam]

I heard from a friend (and player) that the zombies are better placed defensively; the opponent common comes on your side of the field, you surround him, kill him, which raises a zombie in its place, then retreat. He said that only once all your zombies are on the board do you advance. I played a game with that strategy in mind and I believe it worked (I wasn't able to get them all on the board, but practically none of them died).

You are pretty correct on that play style, I too play as such, a lone Zombie is rubbish (like in real life) but 2 or 3 bunch up together is fearsome, they will be harder to take down and can focus fire ensuring them to gain some buddies, snowball effect style

I do hide them behind walls or behind acrhers if they are alone, than does some sort of sneak attack ala cloak style... archer are the best to be front line since they very likely waste your enemy attack and they are dirt cheap, plus range will bait them to move their unit forward, than bite them with zombie

[Tisroero]

I went over wall placement with a friend one night and came up with my own little invention I call the Necropolis.

Bare with me, I'm horrible at text diagrams.
____=
___=
____=
___S
Edit: apparently it doesn't let me create spaces in posts. anyways, wall placement is down and over to the east of the first wall, and up and over to the east, creating a Y-shape or fork. Ret-Talus is beneath the first wall, staying put.
Equal signs as walls, The S, Ret-Talus. First wall placement goes to the southeastern location.

What this essentially does is force your opponent to attack the western side of the board. Going after Ret-Talus to the east is now a fools errand, and he's safe from rider units as well. There are positions open for his summoning events, and you'll draw the enemy closer to you until you get the third wall card.

Now, the northernmost wall is there for two reasons: Offensive trap summoning, and creating a means to truly wall off the eastern side of the board. If you get both wall cards in your first hand, this creates a rather funny set-up. The East is yours. Punish anyone foolish enough to actually bother heading all the way out there, and keep the West strong. If your opponent actually thinks he's got a chance out there, remind him that your walls are summoning points, by killing the unit/s for magick.

The west is the most difficult part to fight in, largely because Ret-Talus is open to rider units if you don't keep up your defenses. This is where Zombie Warriors serve a true, planned purpose, which is to create barriers until you get your Champions out.

Draw them in, counter attack. Counter, counter, counter, surprise summon Elut-Bal, bring in Skull to terrorize the opponent, not to mention give you an offensive measure.
If your opponent sends a couple commons to the east, Dragos can serve a purpose as well(can't stand him).
This set-up will likely bring you to end-game, where the FK can dominate. Until then, make most offensive strikes with Skeletal Archers only, to keep the opponent's magick pile short. They'll spend their own commons for Champions, if that's their playstyle, to which you can respond by using your own champions, sacrificing your commons to heal your champions should they(and likely will) be damaged during scuffles.

[Mookinizer]

I finally read one of your posts man. lol. This strategy sounds good to me! ;)

[r0gershrubber]

Bare with me, I'm horrible at text diagrams.
____=
___=
____=
___S


If you use the "code" feature, you can force the text to have uniform spacing. For example:



____=
___=
____=
___S

[Tisroero]

Yeah, this board is pretty foreign to what I'm used to.

[Infection Reflection]

Yeah, this board is pretty foreign to what I'm used to.

But forums don't have nationalities!;)

[Tisroero]

Aaaauuuuuggggghhh....

[Mookinizer]

I don't know that guy Tisroero, Seriously!! :D

[BiPolarBear]

Dark Sacrifice: Useful in certain situations. But not really worth saving.


Best card in deck with early champions, can't kill 2 champions that are regaining life...

[sitnam90]

I have not yet had the pleasure to use Reavers or Cultists enough to be especially knowledgeable about them, but I doknow plenty about the rest of the deck. I generally prefer the more defensive nature of base Fallen Kingdom.

Zombie Warriors are one of my favorite commons, and I think they play well with champions. Their stats are a bit expensive for 2 magic, however the potential to get out free zombies could save the FK a great deal of magic. Since you infect from ZW in your discard pile, I hardly ever summon a ZW. Simply build, summon a champ or another common, then use a ZW on the field to get that infect chain going. If your ZW on the field dies, then you have Ret ready to Raise another. Really a great unit IMO, especially against commons.

Skeleton Archers are awesome because your opponent almost gets no benefit in killing them. You can get a wound or two, even a bit of magic, and when you opponent retaliates you have a 2/3 chance to put em in your discard for later use. Works well with any FK strategy IMO, and the cheapest FK unit and only ranged unit.

I don't like Reapers, but I see their uses. Good health, great option for Greater Raise. I'm just not high on their ability, as the risk of giving the opponent multiple magic from one Reaper is to great for me. Same reason I don't use Blarf.

Phantoms are fun units, but not something I'd really rely on. I throw one in all of my FK decks however, because when you finally roll that 6 it's suich an exciting feeling, I got a half health Ruka one game, and was able to DS his health up with ZW's. Got four champs that game :Dr

For merc commons, only one I especially like for FK is Vermin. Cheap and very effective against groups, Vermin have done me a lot of good for damage dealing and crowd control. You can't raise them since their mercs, but 2-3 in a deck is a good number

My current deck uses Khan Queso, Malovolence, and Skhull. I like Mal for her damage potential, and DS works perfect to counter Cursed Blade. Skhull is an all around good champ, and his ability is pretty good for area denial and controlling the initiative. KQ is awesome for 3 magic IMO. 4 health, 2 attack, and a good AOE ability. Really a great deal, and with plenty of magic from buildinmg ZW's, getting 3 champs out is easy for FK

[esper88]

Zombies are 2 cost when summoned from a wall and 0 cost when "summoned" from another Zombie. Ret can get them out for ~1 cost, but they're going to be poorly positioned to actually get to something with 1 life left.

So basically, if you zombify one unit for every zombie you summon, you end up with an average cost of 1 magic per zombie, with the power of forward positioning. The more zombies you create off of that, the greater your chain gets.

The thing about it is, even though the zombies are free, they actually are not because they're giving the opponent 1 magic. Dark Sacrifice and Summoned by Blood aside, you'll probably be giving the opponent a decent heap of magic.

Did the zombies do enough damage to counteract this? Odds are they didn't because of their 1 attack. So in the end the opponent is going to be fine killing off your weak zombies as they amass magic.

Keep track of the number of zombies you get out via walls vs. zombifying. See if you get better than 1 magic cost average per zombie. I don't think you will, but if you do then you're playing the zombies effectively.

A lot of people like zombies over reapers on instinct, but once you realize that the zombies are a bit so-so, you start embracing that third life of the reaper, and thereby (at least I believe) become a bit better with the FK.

[Kaiser Cat]

It is always worth noting that in addition to its normal cost, every FK unit can be played with a 1 turn delay (2 for moving) for 1 magic.

(Draw a unit, put it in your magic pile, use it and the one magic to pay for RtD, you can attack with the unit next turn and move it in 2)

[Aleph]

By esper's zombie math, should we more heavily consider Phantoms in a champ-heavy metagame? For a true cost of 2 they give a 1-in-6 chance of nabbing a champion. Assuming that an average champion has a true cost of 6, a Phantom that only lives for one turn has a 1-in-6 chance of delivering a 12 magic return... giving them a (highly tortured math) average true cost of 0.

Granted, that's a lot of averages thrown in there, when in actual gameplay it's either "Oops, I won!" or nothing, but they can encourage enemies to focus fire on them in preference over deadlier targets rather than allow them a second chance to possess.

[sitnam90]

I really don't agree with Esper88's analysis of the ZW as so-so at all.

For instance, your opponent killing your zombies doesn't apply to how much they cost the FK player. if so, then just about every unit in the game being killed should apply to their magic costs. And this is under the assumption that the ZW will get killed. Atleast for myself, I'm able to get atleast one of my champs out early game and start threatening the opponent, and in doing so give my opponent a higher priority target then the ZW's. The ZW themselves aren't a huge offensive threat, but when used in conjuction with a champ they work just fine as a meatshield and a support option, paticulary as the ZW's your creating via infect can be DS'd the next turn should the champ get in trouble. They work paticulary well with Malevolence in this way, as she can often leave tough units with one life left for Infect fodder, and the use of DS counteracts cursed blade. In most of my games, it seems I get most of my zombies out at some point but DS does more to keep their numbers down then my opponent does.

As for Reapers... I just don't like Soul Harvest. The potential to give an opponent multiple magic for one kill is very risky in my eyes, and much more costly then you made Infect to be. I do admit that if they had a different ability I would use them, as summoning 3 as bodyguards for Ret-talus is probably the best use of Greater Raise. I just have been burned to many times by Reapers and Blarf to really like them.

I think another reason for my love of ZW's is my opponents playstles. My two main opponents play common heavy, which ZW excel at fighting commons

[Aleph]

So... do you like Zoms because you like Zoms or because you hate Reapers?
You say above that you don't have much / any experience with the reinforcement options for FK, but I think the FK needed their reinforcements as badly as any of the factions.

Reavers don't really grab me - we're considering a house rule that in addition to Undying as written that they would always go to their owner's discard pile any time they would normally go to the opponent's discard pile so you could Raise them.

Cultists, though... whoo, man. Clearly the other terrifying candidate for Greater Raise, each one capable of swinging to less than 3 attack dice before dying. That's 3 Zombie turns accomplished in a single round + dying.

[sitnam90]

I think I made it pretty clear I love ZW's. Don't get what that first comment was about

And that is a clear oversimplification of Cultists over ZW's. When a ZW uses its ability you gain another unit, saving you magic, gaining board control and allowing you to build zombies as easy magic without much hesitation. When a Cultist uses its ability you lose board control and give the opponent magic without a guarantee of magic in return. Cultist seem to be great units, but accomplishing 3 zombie turns doesn't even make sense because they are different units with different roles. The Cultist will never accomplish a zombie turn because it's a fragile unit that is designed to get killed to hurt the enemy. The zombie is more of a standard 1av/2 health meatshield unit which also serves the role of making your magic expenditure more efficient. Using ZW effectively gives you free units, an easy source of magic, and fodder for DS and SBB. Cultist are much more straightfoward in application as offensive units, excellent for a round or two and then using their ability for one last wound. But stating that you get 3 zombie turns in one is a gross simplification.

[esper88]

Just as a kind of disclaimer, I do realize that zombies are good, and this is ultimately a matter of preference.

The problem with zombies is that they're magic efficient, which is an FK theme, but they're always in the thick of the action. So when you zombify something, odds are it's on your opponent's side of the field and the opponent will be able to retaliate and kill zombies before you can pull off a neat Summoned by Blood or Dark Sacrifice trick.

Whereas if you use the strategy I use, which is basically summoning a Reaper through Ret-Talus every turn, you get to retain those tricks. Reapers are the pokers that go after the champs by slowly creeping from the back. Or they keep cycling with Dark Sacrifice so your champs get healed.

What cultists do more than anything, is give the FK a very reliable way to deal with commons. Obviously CG are the common deck to beat, and if you've ever used Cultists against them you know what I mean. You get 1 attack which will probably hit and kill, and then 1 counter attack that has a good chance of getting you another magic. This anti-commonness complements the reapers in a good way. Cultists are also pretty good against champs, but they tend to throw magic at the opponent.

Another advantage of not using zombies is that you don't have to think as much. You don't have to set up zombifying, which can be stressful at times. With a bunch of independent units you can just kind roll with it and be more adaptable.

[Aleph]

I think I made it pretty clear I love ZW's. Don't get what that first comment was about

And that is a clear oversimplification of Cultists over ZW's. When a ZW uses its ability you gain another unit, saving you magic, gaining board control and allowing you to build zombies as easy magic without much hesitation. When a Cultist uses its ability you lose board control and give the opponent magic without a guarantee of magic in return. Cultist seem to be great units, but accomplishing 3 zombie turns doesn't even make sense because they are different units with different roles. The Cultist will never accomplish a zombie turn because it's a fragile unit that is designed to get killed to hurt the enemy. The zombie is more of a standard 1av/2 health meatshield unit which also serves the role of making your magic expenditure more efficient. Using ZW effectively gives you free units, an easy source of magic, and fodder for DS and SBB. Cultist are much more straightfoward in application as offensive units, excellent for a round or two and then using their ability for one last wound. But stating that you get 3 zombie turns in one is a gross simplification.

The first comment was about, if you don't like Reapers and aren't playing reinforced FK then you're kinda stuck with Zoms. Deciding Reapers > Zoms or Zoms > Reapers =/= either one being good.

It is totally an oversimplification of Cultists over Zoms - for reasons you mention that favor Zoms, for reasons Esper mentions that disfavor Zoms, and for effective Zom use leaving you significantly vulnerable to CUEs. However, it's a fair assessment of their offensive power differential, and, in the context I made that statement in, why they make good replacements for Reapers as a LotD summon.

[sitnam90]

The problem stated about Zombies being to offensive is assuming that it iis the FK player who is being offensive in the first place. With my normal FK deck, I don't really try to go on the attack until the draw piles start getting low, using most of my deck defensively. So much of the time when I zombify it's on my side of the board. I also think your forgetting about the fact that ZW's, shouldn't really be used alone. Their quick buildrate gets champs out quicker, and ZW in turn teamup just great with champs because they are meatshields/DS fodder and the champ can weaken enemy for a dezombify.

I'm not against Cultists by any means, I just don't happen to have a lot of experience with them yet.

[Aleph]

The problem stated about Zombies being to offensive is assuming that it iis the FK player who is being offensive in the first place. With my normal FK deck, I don't really try to go on the attack until the draw piles start getting low, using most of my deck defensively. So much of the time when I zombify it's on my side of the board. I also think your forgetting about the fact that ZW's, shouldn't really be used alone. Their quick buildrate gets champs out quicker, and ZW in turn teamup just great with champs because they are meatshields/DS fodder and the champ can weaken enemy for a dezombify.

I'm not against Cultists by any means, I just don't happen to have a lot of experience with them yet.

I do see an important distinction between offensive power of a unit (how good it is at killing things) and offensive use of a unit (pushing into enemy territory). Cultists high attack power makes them reliable common killers and threats that cannot be long ignored, whichever side of the battlefield they are on.

I hear your point on how using Zombies on your side of the field could limit some of their vulnerability and clog the lanes, which I acknowledge being particularly important for Retty if you're going to be using FS. Personally, I am often still leery of flooding the board with 1 attack commons if my opponent is packing CUEs. That may have to do with the factions I see a lot, though.

I do get the champ heavy play of the FK - both for their Events driving it and their ability to dump hand after hand for magic allowing them to cycle through faster. In light of that, I would prefer to be setting up Anica's killshots whenever possible instead of a Zom's.

I think some of this is just the difference between pre and post reinforcement FK. I really wanted to like the FK when they first came out, but they've really only come together for me with the reinforcements. Before that I felt like they supported champ heavy play but wanted to face mostly commons. Now I feel that they have significantly better balance, and their core mechanic allows you to run whatever toolbox you need to deal with whatever your opponent puts on the board.

[sitnam90]

I hear your point on how using Zombies on your side of the field could limit some of their vulnerability and clog the lanes, which I acknowledge being particularly important for Retty if you're going to be using FS. Personally, I am often still leery of flooding the board with 1 attack commons if my opponent is packing CUEs. That may have to do with the factions I see a lot, though.
That is my main concern about using ZW's, but it tends to be the problem with my style of gameplay. I think FK somewhat nullifies CUE's because they can keep fighting long past the expiration of their draw pile. A CUE may be a short term boost, but in the end it pnly delays the inevitable if the opponent can't get Ret-talus down and it turns into a war of attrition.


I think some of this is just the difference between pre and post reinforcement FK. I really wanted to like the FK when they first came out, but they've really only come together for me with the reinforcements. Before that I felt like they supported champ heavy play but wanted to face mostly commons. Now I feel that they have significantly better balance, and their core mechanic allows you to run whatever toolbox you need to deal with whatever your opponent puts on the board.
I can completely agree on this part, as it seemed many players were having trouble winning with pre-reinforcement FK. They are certainly a different faction to play and require much different practices to get right. They just seemed to click for me however, hence why I haven't seen the need to really try Cultists more (although I intend to)

[iglew]

I think FK somewhat nullifies CUE's because they can keep fighting long past the expiration of their draw pile. A CUE may be a short term boost, but in the end it pnly delays the inevitable if the opponent can't get Ret-talus down and it turns into a war of attrition.

I don't agree with this at all. CUEs are about a gain in magic (particularly Magic Drain, but the other ones, too). Ultimately, magic is draw pile. The FK can keep fighting long past the expiration of their draw pile only to the extent that they have magic. If you run out of magic and run out of event cards, there's no more Raise the Dead. And unless your opponent is foolish, you can't rely on him to feed you the magic by throwing out weak commons for you to kill.

On the flip side, any magic gain your opponent gets from the CUE is that many fewer cards he has to build, which in turn means his draw pile lasts that much longer.

[killercactus]

If I'm playing Anica and zombies, I'm probably ok with my opponent playing reinforcements for me to infect / spirit drain. Magic Drain sucks, but Ret has it too so if you play both of yours (and if you're playing EB and Dark Sac, you will), it's a wash at most. Into Darkness sucks though, as you lose 2 commons that you can't raise anymore. However, SE Swordsmen are great targets for Infect and Spirit Drain anyway.

[sitnam90]

If I'm playing Anica and zombies, I'm probably ok with my opponent playing reinforcements for me to infect / spirit drain. Magic Drain sucks, but Ret has it too so if you play both of yours (and if you're playing EB and Dark Sac, you will), it's a wash at most. Into Darkness sucks though, as you lose 2 commons that you can't raise anymore. However, SE Swordsmen are great targets for Infect and Spirit Drain anyway.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts right here.

[esper88]

I just played a few games with the following build:

Mundol
Anica
Elut-Bal

4x Apprentice Mage
5x Skeletal Archers
4x Cultist
4x Reaper

I did it with a lot of skepticism in mind. I thought 4 Apprentice Mages would be way too much and that I would eventually hedge it down to 2 or 3. I didn't want to impede the Raise the Dead engine. I had speculated that Mundol could be the ranged champ the FK lack before the Apprentice Mages were even released. So he has his use outside of the boost for the Apprentice Mages.

When testing this build the main thing I looked for was how it affected late game. If the prevalence of Apprentice Mages made it so you were forced to summon only Skeletal Archers late game, then the deck would be deemed a failure and the Apprentice Mages would be cut back.

All of that aside, the deck really worked. You just summon the Apprentice Mage as soon as you get it, behind a wall preferably. Then you let Elut-Bal and Dark Sacrifice earn you a +1 for every Mage. It worked very well and there wasn't really any loss of efficiency.

Mundol did well also. It's nice to have a ranged option in the FK. I only boosted an Apprentice Mage once, but it was very sweet when I did. Ultimately the boost is just icing on the cake. Mundol is a vanilla Jacob Eldwyn, and I don't find myself depending on Rain of Heaven too often. He fit well.

I think the Apprentice Mage combo deserves some attention. This build might be the sweet spot, but I definitely think more people should give this a shot. It might just make the FK a whole lot better.

[Phoenixio]

It might just make the FK a whole lot better.

A perfect faction can't become any better. :p

Joking aside, I think using Apprentices is a good idea, but it has its cost.

On the plus side, you get free units, and they make awesome fodder for Elut-Bal and Dark Sacrifice. It allows you to play champions more easily.

On the negative side, you take away a lot of versatility. One of the strength of the Standard FK is that they can build commons aggressively and Raise them back later. If you do it well early, you'll have an array of different commons available in your discard so you can Raise the adequate tool at the right moment. Putting in 4 Apprentices takes away some of that versatility, as you can't Raise them, and you'll want to play them instead of dropping them, so you have less magic out of these units.

As for Mundol, I've never personally really felt the need for a ranged champion, but I totally understand why it'd be useful. I don't know if Mundol is fit, or if I'd go for a cheaper one like Sairook, The Seer or Etch. Etch and Anica together could be very deadly as you'd get a lot of magic for your commons and for Raise, but that's another style entirely.

[PePe QuiCoSE]

The only problem this has, once again, is the lack of A Hero is Born. I would put an owl somewhere there.

[glenn3e]

I need some FK strategies against Phoenix Elves. The lack of FK units able to pressure Eileen is kind of disheartening. Couple with the fact that Elut-Bal can die in one turn to multiple Burns is worst. Do you move Ret-Talus out to a forward position behind a Wall and spawn Raise?

[thenightsshadow]

I just advance fearlessly, letting Anica, Hulgorad, and Skhull absorb the blows. No forced Summon, just pure raw summoning in Elien's half of the board. Otherwise, I find this matchup is pretty difficult.

[glenn3e]

I just advance fearlessly, letting Anica, Hulgorad, and Skhull absorb the blows. No forced Summon, just pure raw summoning in Elien's half of the board. Otherwise, I find this matchup is pretty difficult.

So you build your Commons? Kill off all your starting lineup? Or save them for Dark Sac...

[thenightsshadow]

Pretty much use the starting line-up as fodder or as magic for Elut-Bal, and protect Ret by shielding him with champions.

[glenn3e]

Hmm, I figure vs PE, to change the Champions to Malevolence and maybe Hulgorad. Expensive but tough ones that can't be one shot-ted so Dark Sac can come into play.

[jwalker]

I prefer a deck vs every faction. Don't like modifying right before the game :(

I'm thinking about changing my FK a little bit once my Merc deck arrives. However I cannot really decide which champ to replace

Anica: love her early game and against low life factions.
Skull: great overall champ with good stats and fear helps keeping him alive. Also he can be nicely used to protect other champs/units.
Elut-bal: I think he's basically the weakest champ considering his price. However his ability is often very useful. You will always get him out and might even be able to use MagicDrain afterwards. Don't know if I really want to loose his easy to get 4 dice. Often he dies fast however and I can't heal him in time.

I want however include Mundol or maybe Hulgorath. I feel I need a ranged champ especially against these turtling factions. Maybe I start with a deck like

Mundol
Anica
Skull
5 Archer, 4 Zombis, 2 Reaper, 4 Cultists, 3 Apprentice Mages.

AM can either give you a big round with Mundol or nicely sacrified. However AM scream for using Elut-Bal. So give me some imput what you think might work best.

[PePe QuiCoSE]

I'm sure you can't go wrong with Apprentice Mages in the FK. Also Mundol looks ideal too, as you said, for their really needed ranged champ. I guess if you go that route you can fill the other slots with whatever and you'll be fine :P

[esper88]

After a few more playtests, I did find that 4 Apprentice Mages starts to detract from the Raise the Dead engine in certain games. However, 2 AM does nothing to the engine. I'm happy with them at that level- You can basically make up the -1 advantage Dark Sac inherently has. Just fight the temptation to use them aggressively or you'll probably overextend.

Mundol is alright, and definitely viable as an option- but the FK champs are already pretty tight. And you pretty much never get him out with the Apprentice Mages anyway (even at 4 AM).

It's a nice little tune up to the FK. Let's say that.

[brightknight_216]

Hmm, I figure vs PE, to change the Champions to Malevolence and maybe Hulgorad. Expensive but tough ones that can't be one shot-ted so Dark Sac can come into play.


In general, I would say go for Malevolence if you want some dynamic in the FK mechanism. I like the fact the fact how Malevolence will wound herself after her attack and then later is healed through Dark Sacrifice.

Putting Hulgorad into FK deck can be useful but I find it destroys the flavor of the FK deck as they are not the type to rush in for the kill IMHO or the faction that is play "in your face" kind of strategy. So I don't really see the synergy if combined with FK faction. Nevertheless, I believe it is more of a personal taste and perhaps some other can really find Hulgorad to be very practical with FK faction.

However, if playing against PE, Hulgorad is always a good choice to rush into the enemy line and then use him smash Prince Elien with FOUR dice for the win.