Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » BattleLore - English » maybe to powerful
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
One_Wolf
Junior Member

Posts: 2
Registered:
August 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 06:01
I am a newbie. Just played my first game tongiht. I am just browsning the threads to learn. I don't have an opinion whether the cards are overpowered or not as I have no experience yet. I also haven't read every post in this thread, but a handful from each page. Seems there is a lot of anger. Smile

My question is, for those who feel they are overpowered, is what is it that you want? It seems that several viable alternatives have been presented, via house rules, and have been listed on the DoW Lore Compendium.

Those that don't feel it is overpowered, why fight so hard and get angry at those that do? No problem with a discussion to disagree, but if someones gaming experience has proven to be less fun for all involved in that experience, why get angry at them?

I'm not being critical I just don't understand. Just the fact that there are those who say it is not overpowered means that the card can be used as written. If DoW were to offically change the card then those who liked it the old way would have to house rule to use it as originally stated.

So is it a battle over who needs to house rule? What if DoW, rather than calling it a house rule, called it an alternate rule? an advanced rule?

I guess what I am saying is, "Can't we all just get along?" Very Happy

-One Wolf

      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 06:14
One_Wolf wrote on Sat, 25 August 2007 22:01

Those that don't feel it is overpowered, why fight so hard and get angry at those that do? No problem with a discussion to disagree, but if someones gaming experience has proven to be less fun for all involved in that experience, why get angry at them?



Well, I would hope that my posts on the subject don't seem to be coming from an angry place Wink , but the main reason I tend to bother to post about this subject is in case people new to the game are reading - to provide a balance when I feel that too much of the negative perceptions of these cards are being touted, to explain why I feel they are just fine as is, in fact, IMHO a source of enjoyment in the game. I love playing against level 3 Clerics Very Happy

[Updated on: Sun, 26 August 2007 06:14]

      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 06:23
this is a very old topic that has streached over many threads and at the end of the day it is a matter of opinion and there realy no right or wrong opinion. the nay sayers are very vocal to the point that they bullyed the staff in to makeing a house rule which they did not whant to do and even this did not saticefiy the nay sayers it just gave them more mud to sling the pepole on the other side imo guess that there beloved game under attack and so lepeted to there defence. this is my take on it anyway Smile

i think allso there is a very small minority that are not intrested in a salution Confused

[Updated on: Sun, 26 August 2007 06:33]

      
germ
Senior Member
Cadet

User Pages
Posts: 106
Registered:
June 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 06:31
sdafilli wrote on Mon, 30 July 2007 02:47

Some wars are just not meant to be won... and neither are they always meant to be fair..... Wink

Just play again... pick a different scenario... and more importantly have fun (it's only a game) Smile


I tend to agree with sdafilli's reply. I too sense that too many people are taking this issue a bit too seriously. Like the dude said, so many solutions have already been given to solve this matter cough!house rulescough!. Some find That HR and FF are too powerful, some think they're ok, and that's fine! Do we need to discuss this any further? Rolling Eyes
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 06:47
ow lord i hope no one thinks im takeing it seriously Uh Oh
      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 07:16
One_Wolf wrote on Sat, 25 August 2007 23:01

Those that don't feel it is overpowered, why fight so hard and get angry at those that do? No problem with a discussion to disagree, but if someones gaming experience has proven to be less fun for all involved in that experience, why get angry at them?

As mentioned above, this is an issue that has been around for a long time and spread over many threads. So just reading this one may not give you a grasp of the anger or the context.

For my part, I fall under the category of thinking everything is fine. So here are my opinions on what you ask.

The reason I fought for the card so much in the beginning is that I have been on these forums a long time. I have read just about everything that pops up. I see the same pattern over and over again. Someone new comes into the game (any game - not just BattleLore) and harps about some point not being fair, horrible design, etc. Then they play the game some more, realize "the other side fo the coin" and then back down on that point. I myself was guilty of that and some of the early rulings that came out of Memoir 44.

So in the beginning, that was my attitude: the cards aren't broken, it's just a game, you'll find ways to effectively counter it. But then that was met with some pretty aggressive responses. The community here at DOW seemed to be pretty tight-knit. We could disagree but still respect each other. When BL came along, a whole host of people flodded onto the site. And with that, the gentlemen's respect we had went out the door. Long time members were criticized harshly, the whole debate turned ugly. So it went from a moot point, to a personal war for some.

Things have since "cooled down" a bit. The animosity for these cards has not disappeared though.I admit it breaks the pattern of those finally coming to accept a point in the game they previously thought was stupid. Some have agreed to disagree and moved beyond that, others have not.

Now we are at the point that it is just exasperating. The other camp wanted an answer from DOW, they got one. They didn't like it, so they keep posting. DOW isn't going to do anything about it. So now we just see this debate as a waste of time and space. Yet like a bad car accident, none of us will look away either. So it lives on.

I think most of us who think the cards are fine ar eto the point we are just hear to tease now. No one is going to convince the other side to change their way of thinking, so we just have fun with it and mock the topic.
      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Sun, 26 August 2007 11:12
Now this is a refreshing change of pace... Surprised

One_Wolf wrote on Sun, 26 August 2007 06:01


Seems there is a lot of anger. Smile


It is always difficult to read peoples true intensions on a forum, but I believe the correct word is annoyance, not anger.

One_Wolf wrote on Sun, 26 August 2007 06:01


My question is, for those who feel they are overpowered, is what is it that you want? It seems that several viable alternatives have been presented, via house rules, and have been listed on the DoW Lore Compendium.


All I'm asking for is an optional replacement card. Doesn't matter if it is available in a future expansion or seperately.

One_Wolf wrote on Sun, 26 August 2007 06:01


I'm not being critical I just don't understand. Just the fact that there are those who say it is not overpowered means that the card can be used as written. If DoW were to offically change the card then those who liked it the old way would have to house rule to use it as originally stated.


See previous answer

One_Wolf wrote on Sun, 26 August 2007 06:01


So is it a battle over who needs to house rule? What if DoW, rather than calling it a house rule, called it an alternate rule? an advanced rule?

I guess what I am saying is, "Can't we all just get along?" Very Happy

-One Wolf



Same as above...

------------------------

I don't agree with the previous answers to your questions. Or maybe I should say, I don't find them entirely accurate. But I will not start throwing mud, so I'll just tell you why I joined the discussion in the first place:
When I bought the game I played a lot of games, with different players. Every once in a while HR or FF showed up and was such a decisive factor that it ruined the experience for both sides. This resulted in some players dropping the game and others starting to talk about house rules. So I joined the discussion on this forum, in the hopes of DoW changing the effect of these cards. As it became apparent that DoW would not be doing so, I changed my opinion and has since then only been asking for an optional replacement card to add to the deck. I don't like to write on my cards, nor do I want a list of house rules for my opponent to keep having to remember(the changes to some of the cards in Epic-mode has proven difficult enough for some of my players). In the end, if there really wasn't any other solution, I would even settle with a PDF made available on this site.



      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 05:41
Amen. Cool
      
Shane Andrews
Junior Member

Posts: 18
Registered:
August 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 06:18
I understand that there are two camps in this debate.

What I don't understand is why people insist on attacking people like dbc, Cebalrai, and others. It sounds like (and correct me if I'm wrong) they just want an optional rule in the form of a card or even just a pdf. That's a perfectly reasonable request, which comes at no cost to the folks who are okay with the nuke cards. Let DoW publish five different optional substitutes - it's not going to effect anyone's game if they don't want it to. The nuke cards aren't fun for some people - people who appear to otherwise enjoy the game.

And yeah, I get it that house rules aren't a solution. Lots of people arent comfortable with them, including my friends that I play with.

Personally, I think the "nuke cards" can go a pretty much overboard unless the map is pretty clear. They're definitely the best cards in the game. But I still play this game and usually have fun.

I could really go either way on the issue though. But I really wouldn't mind at all if DoW made alternates for these cards. I would love to see what ideas they would come up with.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 09:01
they have an optinal rule many of them in fact and if DOW made a new card they wont please evry one if they whant a pdf the should make it them selfs and sheare it with use all Razz as for attacks on pepole the nay sayer are just as guilty of this Exclamation as sed before this is an old topic with a lot of histoy what would be out of order if a newbee asked the same question and halth a dozen pepole jumped down there thoat which has not happened Smile the oldschool nay sayer know DOW have put this to bed and they wont get what they whant a lot of them have stoped posting on these threads haveing vented there spleen...i have my own issues about M44 which i vented out on the m44 boards and evry one dissagred with me which is cool i sed my bit and feel alot better about it i sed my peice and have put it behind me Smile but if the nay sayer wish to contiue and dance the merry dance they should feel free to contiue and if pepole dislike the tone of these threads they should avoied them Cool

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 12:03]

      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 10:05
Shane Andrews wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 13:48

I understand that there are two camps in this debate.

What I don't understand is why people insist on attacking people like dbc, Cebalrai, and others. It sounds like (and correct me if I'm wrong) they just want an optional rule in the form of a card or even just a pdf. That's a perfectly reasonable request, which comes at no cost to the folks who are okay with the nuke cards. Let DoW publish five different optional substitutes - it's not going to effect anyone's game if they don't want it to. The nuke cards aren't fun for some people - people who appear to otherwise enjoy the game.


The "attacks" aren't directed at them directly, but rather they are attracting these "attacks" on themselves by their persistence on this topic. DoW have provided their house rule (good or bad) and have made it clear that they do not intend to either make cards, write up pdfs or anything else...

There's nothing wrong with voicing an opinion/initial demands etc, but once you've made your point, and especially when a response to this topic is provided by the designers themselves, one needs to understand that persisting on this topic gets you nowhere, especially if you take the path of persistence through trying to convince the other side. It's obvious that the two sides of this debate have strong opinions on the topic, and they probably won't budge (one side is happy to play cards as they are, the other side doesn't and have either resorted to house rules, excluding the cards altogether, or "wishful" thinking that DoW will bow down to their demands on these forums)....and there's nothing wrong with this.

As I was saying in a previous response, debating this point is simply a waste of time, and the only plausible purpose for persisting is attention seeking ... nothing more. Everyone just move on. Would be more constructive to write to DoW in person if you want to persist, but doen't be surprised if the response is not the one that'll make you happy.... cause that would be just ignorant of DoW's response on the matter anyway.

Quote:

And yeah, I get it that house rules aren't a solution. Lots of people arent comfortable with them, including my friends that I play with.


If it's not the solution, then I put the question up to those with this view, "then what IS the solution?" given that the designers themselves have made it clear what their "solution" is, and that if there are those that are still not happy, DoW have supported people resorting to their OWN house rules.

If one still not happy but refuses or cant come up with a solution of their own, given the situation, then you're just setting youself up to shooting yourself in the foot- either you give up on the game and conclude it's not your type, refuse to play it as a matter of principle cause you didn't (and won't) get the solution your hoping for from the 'horse's' (DoW) mouth, or just continue to nag over the topic on the forums..... (if that's the only way to get some satisfaction over the topic)

Quote:

Personally, I think the "nuke cards" can go a pretty much overboard unless the map is pretty clear.


If the map is pretty clear, then these cards are next to useless, especially given their cost as well... (probably better if they weren't even occupying space in the deck)

Quote:

I could really go either way on the issue though. But I really wouldn't mind at all if DoW made alternates for these cards. I would love to see what ideas they would come up with.


Sorry to disappoint you, but you'll be waiting a long, long time for DoW to change their mind.... As Rhoobarb said above, just make your own pdfs and/or cards... not too hard to do. Infact the time that some people have probably spent writing on this topic on the forums, could have been directed to just this.... Wink


Finally Shane-Andrews, let me welcome you to the forums and before ending, to assure you that the comments aren't "attacks" directed at you, but just that I felt that your post was appropriate to make some general comments, directed at the wider "DoW forums community"...that's all Smile


[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 10:07]

      
Shane Andrews
Junior Member

Posts: 18
Registered:
August 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 14:28
sdafilli wrote on Wed, 22 August 2007 12:13

Cebalrai, your tit-for-tat responses, are of a purely childish nature and beyond annoying, and have become a waste of time... this debate has long been over, but it seems that your persistence on this topic is purely for self-gratification/pleasure, and not constructive...

DoW, despite their reluctance, provided their house-rule. As you've said several times, you don't like it, and are probably demanding that another one is suggested "officially" by DoW (cause you and your gaming group just refuse to do otherwise). Face it, Cebalrai, you're not going to get that pleasure cause DoW have said that they won't change their stance. In fact Cebalrai, it probably wouldn't matter how many "fixes" DoW comes up with... you still will be in disagreeance... unless of course it's YOUR "fix"/house rule. Given that this won't happen, learn to live with what life has to hand you... alternatively, just go right ahead and play the game with whatever house rule you like best... why not even give it a name, "The Cebalrai Ultimate" ruling while your at it, if it will make you feel better...

It's your choice (including your gaming group's and anyone else of similar opinion) to either play with a house rule, exclude the cards altogether, make your own cards, design your own game..... or, don't forget... you still have the option to never play the game again (until possibly, on the blue moon that DoW bends over backwards and implements YOUR suggestion...whatever that may ever be)

As to whether DoW has taken the correct stance on this issue, only time will tell through ongoing sales and the progression of this game.... for now it appears that there has likely been no significant detrimental impact...


Thanks for the Welcome!!! Smile

I think it was your post in the quote above that disappointed me. Cebalrai can be an aggressive debater and sometimes pretty blunt, but I don't see how his points are childish. All those other things about being annoying, self-gratifying, self-centered, and that all he wants is the "cebalrai-solution" are too much. And like he said in response, he does not have a solution in mind even, so where is he saying it has to be "his solution"? Your post just sounds mean-spirited. Crying or Very Sad

Since you keep posting the same thing, that DoW is not changing its mind, why don't you just stop posting then? At least until you have something else to say. These people either don't believe you, or they do believe you but are still holding out hope. There's nothing wrong with that IMO. And making post after post about how those guys are wasting their time and telling them they have no choice but be quiet is kinda mean-spirited too...

Like I was saying in my original post, just let people make their requests. Let them make 100 more requests. Let them make the same request 100 times. Smile It may be reality that DoW isn't going to budge, but it doesn't have to be your job to come here and try to silence people with negativity... Confused

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 14:32]

      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 15:04
I agree, that for someone coming onto the forums and reading this thread alone, my response to Cebalrai does come across "mean spirited" as you said... but in my defence, my response needs to be taken in the context of the long history of reponses by Cebalrai (and others, myself included), on this topic, spread over several threads on this forum...

Quote:

And making post after post about how those guys are wasting their time and telling them they have no choice but be quiet is kinda mean-spirited too...


Not "mean-spirited" just stating the facts, that's all... I don't mean to "silence" anyone fom posting, they can, and have the right, to post as often as they please...but unless they can come up with/discuss some other alternate "solutions", then imho the're just wasting their time...

I'm a believer of, if there's a problem (try to) fix it, if you can't fix it, or it's out of your hands (including after making protest attempts), then it's a waste of time worrying over it. What's the point of after clearly stating one's opinion, getting all worked-up over an 'unsolvable' problem.....??

As to why I'm still posting, I don't know.. maybe I'm just 'wasting' my time too... but more so to reiterate the alternative "solutions" to this topic.... but when people respond continuously without providing their own solution, I think this is more 'ill-spirited' and creating more "negativity" than for example, my responses (and demanding that DoW print new cards, create pdfs etc- something that one can do by themselves, when DoW have specified that they won't... this isn't a 'solution')

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 15:11]

      
Shane Andrews
Junior Member

Posts: 18
Registered:
August 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 15:25
There's nothing wrong with optional cards (pdf or actual cards) being the solution. I played Twilight Imperium 3 and watched FFG publish *optional* replacement cards for a couple things that weren't terribly popular. It worked out beautifully for everyone.

I think this is what dbc, cebalrai, and the others are asking for. Seems like the perfect solution to me. I don't buy your argument that these guys will never be happy. At least they get the benefit of the doubt from me. Smile

And maybe DoW will never print optional new cards. But so what? It's not helpful for you to make it your job to pound that into their heads. Especially not in a mean-spirited way. Smile
      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 15:52
Shane Andrews wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 22:55

There's nothing wrong with optional cards (pdf or actual cards) being the solution.


I agree it's not... it's just that DoW has said it won't happen....

Quote:

And maybe DoW will never print optional new cards. But so what? It's not helpful for you to make it your job to pound that into their heads. Especially not in a mean-spirited way. Smile


It's not pounding.. it's stating the facts. If it's seen as 'pounding' then they must be blind to reality.

What about the 'pounding' that DoW is getting, for demanding, for alternative cards/pdfs etc, when DoW HAS responded to their calls....???? I will say it again....just make your own cards/pdfs if DoW won't.... what's wrong with that? (I know that I'll be met with a response along the lines of "yes, but they won't be official",....but why do they have to be 'official'?)
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 16:04
Shane Andrews wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 14:25

There's nothing wrong with optional cards (pdf or actual cards) being the solution. I played Twilight Imperium 3 and watched FFG publish *optional* replacement cards for a couple things that weren't terribly popular. It worked out beautifully for everyone.

I think this is what dbc, cebalrai, and the others are asking for. Seems like the perfect solution to me. I don't buy your argument that these guys will never be happy. At least they get the benefit of the doubt from me. Smile

And maybe DoW will never print optional new cards. But so what? It's not helpful for you to make it your job to pound that into their heads. Especially not in a mean-spirited way. Smile


i have to disagree with you on this after been told one of my posts was unprofessional i whent back and read evry post on every thread on this subject and what i found was that any atempt to solve this problem was egnored or rejected out of hand. somthing what i found both sides where guilty of was when they gave there opinon it was "we" rather than "i" as if this gave there argument more whight i defantly think some of the nay sayer will never be happy. i think replacement cards will not solve this problem becos i think diffrant pepole whant diffrant things id like to see pdf sets of cards from those that can be bothered i for one whould defenetly down load them and give them a go Razz

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 16:21]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 17:03
Personally, I haven't observed anyone demanding anything from DoW. People have outlined a problem and asked DoW for optional replacements to HR/FF, but not demanding. I think there's a really big difference.

I strongly believe that an optional pdf would solve the problem. It wouldn't take much for DoW to recreate HR/FF so that they're still strong, but have less potential to be so over the top. That would make a whole lot of folks happy, even if it was only "mostly better" in people's eyes. Personally I'd be thrilled with anything in that direction.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 17:10
sniger sdafilli,cebalrai you guys ROCK Twisted Evil
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 17:18
I rock because I'm cool. Sdafilli rocks because I demand him to. Cool
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 17:20
cebalrai wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 16:18

I rock because I'm cool. Sdafilli rocks because I demand him to. Cool


Laughing hes a poet and he didnt even know it Laughing

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 17:20]

      
player281608
Junior Member

Posts: 14
Registered:
November 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 19:53
I personally like the two cards just as they are. Especially since they force a defensive minded player like myself to accept the possible consequence of "camping out" and trying to get my opponent to break themselves against my positions. Grant it...more opponents have rolled poorly when they used them against me than those who have rolled very well. So I'm inclined to feel they're not a problem. I feel the cards fall into the "High risk/High reward" category. If you're willing to burn the lore on an expensive card that is not a forgone conclusion...be my guest. That just means you have less lore to move your creature "out of section" (which I am much more afraid of anyway) if your gamble is a bust. I feel the same about chain lighting. I've had it save my bacon and had it make me wish I'd saved the lore for a more certain outcome.

I find it interesting that FFG printed "toned down" versions of cards for Twilight Imperium. I'd be interested to know if they lost money on the printing. A sign would be if they have done it since with other games. I couldn't imagine enough people buying the "toned down" version of cards to be worth the cost of a print run.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 20:32
FFG made a pdf for a couple alternate cards. So it cost them only a tiny bit. Then when they made the expansion they simply printed up the optional card with several other new expansion cards.

The equivalent would be a scenario where DoW tossed in (optional) re-writes of the nuke cards when they publish the long-awaited lore card expansion where there are already going to be 40 new cards or whatever.

[Updated on: Tue, 28 August 2007 20:39]

      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 21:06
sdafilli wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 10:05


There's nothing wrong with voicing an opinion/initial demands etc, but once you've made your point, and especially when a response to this topic is provided by the designers themselves, one needs to understand that persisting on this topic gets you nowhere, especially if you take the path of persistence through trying to convince the other side.


New players have also entered the discussion. It is not only us old nay-sayers who keep this thread alive. Every time a new player post on this topic, it seems to me both camps are drawn to these pages...
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Tue, 28 August 2007 21:35
For the benefit of newer members, I have continue to contribute to this topic because I felt some of the original detractors of these cards weren't looking at all the balancing factors that make this type of "shotgun" mechanic balanced with the other mechanics in the game. Originally, I thought these cards to be unbalanced, due to the facts, rightly pointed out by cebalrai and others, regarding the high dice potential and the probabilities involved in killing a particular number of figures. Just looking at those two factors, these cards seem way overpowered for the price. It wasn't until others, including Eric from DoW and Richard Borg starting pointing out the other balancing factors, that I saw the big picture.

Like most games, Battlelore is about investing your actions in a way that gives you a better chance than your opponent to kill off the required number of UNITS. Every choice you make, from how you allocate your War Council tokens, to how you manage your command cards, to when you pull the trigger on your Lore spells, to which units your order when, all impact your success on the battlefield. Based on this, here are some of the balancing factors for HR/FF:
- To get full effect, you have to devote (typically) half your War Council tokens to one Lore Master. Thus, you're either going to ignore several other Lore Masters, making most of the lore deck more expensive, or you're going to shortchange yourself in command cards. This is the "all eggs in one basket" strategy.
- It seems the costlier Lore spells give more control over the application of the damage, leading to more effective unit elimination. You may kill a lot of figures with HR/FF, but you make not impact the area of the battle that you really need to at the time you get the spell off. It's the mortar analogy, rather than the sniper.
- On some boards, these cards will be next to useless, so over the course of many games they will only see use in some of those games.

What keeps getting dismissed by those who dislike HR/FF are the these and other factors that balance these cards "in the big picture."

For those who have been following this topic for some time, I know I haven't said anything new. But I hope this post helps newer players to see other sides to this discussion.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 02:35
how about this for an idea for RR,FF,RH.AHEM
intsed of the cards readihg ;
Target:All enemy units on,or next to........
it could read ;
Target:All units on,or next to........
      
pjwhyman
Member

Posts: 33
Registered:
February 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 11:43
Roobarb wrote on Wed, 29 August 2007 12:35

how about this for an idea for RR,FF,RH.AHEM
intsed of the cards readihg ;
Target:All enemy units on,or next to........
it could read ;
Target:All units on,or next to........


I think thats an excellent idea, though you might want to reduce the cost of the spell if its going to be omni-directional.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 13:48
pjwhyman wrote on Wed, 29 August 2007 10:43

Roobarb wrote on Wed, 29 August 2007 12:35

how about this for an idea for RR,FF,RH.AHEM
intsed of the cards readihg ;
Target:All enemy units on,or next to........
it could read ;
Target:All units on,or next to........


I think thats an excellent idea, though you might want to reduce the cost of the spell if its going to be omni-directional.


the only reason i wholdnt whant to change the lore cost is cos im trying to find ways of geting around the cards with out changeing them to much you cold block the word enemy with out to much fuss but crossing out the lore cost too may look a bit messy
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 17:12
The "low-probability, high-impact potential" (Eric's words, not mine) mechanic of HR/FF/RR in the context of other Battlelore mechanics has been analyzed to death. We've also heard many opinions on the topic.

So, I propose a survey. I think players fall into the following categories w.r.t. these cards:

1. The cards are broken. Players in this category don't want these cards, as written, to occur even once in any game, regardless of the damage dealt and effect on the game. In short, they simply can't play the game with the cards as written.

2. The high-end damage potential is too high, but the cards aren't broken. These players wish the cards didn't allow for such a wide range of damage potential for a cost of 7 Lore. However, they understand that mitigating factors, such as the opportunity cost of dedicating half your War Council to the Cleric, the percent chance of drawing and playing the right card (if it's even in the deck), and variable terrain density, make the high-end damage outcome a sufficiently low-probability event over the course of many games, that they can live with the cards as written. In short, these players understand the 'nuke' effect, while not great, will only occur occasionally, and they're okay with that.

3. The cards are fine as written. These players are fine with the wide range of damage potential. They understand the cards were meant to be useless in some scenarios, and uber-great in others. They understand to get the full effect of these cards, players must make other sacrifices on the War Council. They also understand these cards allow less control over where the damage is dealt than other Lore cards. Sometimes they want to try for the 'nuke' effect, and sometimes they opt for Lore Masters with more targeted spells. In short, these players actually enjoy the occasional 'nuke' effect in a Battlelore-type game. They see no problem with it.

I'm interested to know which category the active posters feel they align with, or if you feel there is another category. I'm a category #3 player, but that doesn't mean I'm right or wrong; that's just how I feel after several months of analysis, discussion and playing the game.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 17:32
mvettemagred wrote on Tue, 28 August 2007 15:35

For the benefit of newer members, I have continue to contribute to this topic because I felt some of the original detractors of these cards weren't looking at all the balancing factors that make this type of "shotgun" mechanic balanced with the other mechanics in the game. Originally, I thought these cards to be unbalanced, due to the facts, rightly pointed out by cebalrai and others, regarding the high dice potential and the probabilities involved in killing a particular number of figures. Just looking at those two factors, these cards seem way overpowered for the price. It wasn't until others, including Eric from DoW and Richard Borg starting pointing out the other balancing factors, that I saw the big picture.

Like most games, Battlelore is about investing your actions in a way that gives you a better chance than your opponent to kill off the required number of UNITS. Every choice you make, from how you allocate your War Council tokens, to how you manage your command cards, to when you pull the trigger on your Lore spells, to which units your order when, all impact your success on the battlefield. Based on this, here are some of the balancing factors for HR/FF:
- To get full effect, you have to devote (typically) half your War Council tokens to one Lore Master. Thus, you're either going to ignore several other Lore Masters, making most of the lore deck more expensive, or you're going to shortchange yourself in command cards. This is the "all eggs in one basket" strategy.
- It seems the costlier Lore spells give more control over the application of the damage, leading to more effective unit elimination. You may kill a lot of figures with HR/FF, but you make not impact the area of the battle that you really need to at the time you get the spell off. It's the mortar analogy, rather than the sniper.
- On some boards, these cards will be next to useless, so over the course of many games they will only see use in some of those games.

What keeps getting dismissed by those who dislike HR/FF are the these and other factors that balance these cards "in the big picture."

For those who have been following this topic for some time, I know I haven't said anything new. But I hope this post helps newer players to see other sides to this discussion.



- "In the big picture" losing mass units is almost always a big deal.

- All your eggs in one basket? The cleric deck has a lot more level-scaling cards than other loremasters. So nuke cards aside, there's simply much more of a reason to stack cleric levels than levels in anything else. Levels of cleric are simply worth more than other loremasters because of this. Add in the fact that the cleric deck is the best, and you'll realize that this basket is overwhelmingly better than the other baskets.

- When using HR/FF, you know what units you're going to hit. It's all the ones your opponent has standing next to the terrain type. And if you're mainly going to be targeting units not in the direct action, oh well it was only 7 lore and you just ruined your opponents' ability to rotate troops and made their cavalry pretty useless. And maybe you took a banner or two on a weakened unit.

- Yes in some maps some of the nuke cards will have little use. I'm only concerned about the maps that have a decent amount of terrain, which is most of them. Smile


Meh, Mvettegard has already made this post and it's already been responded to. But I'm bored.

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 17:38]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 17:35
mvettemagred wrote on Wed, 29 August 2007 11:12

The "low-probability, high-impact potential" (Eric's words, not mine) mechanic of HR/FF/RR in the context of other Battlelore mechanics has been analyzed to death. We've also heard many opinions on the topic.

So, I propose a survey. I think players fall into the following categories w.r.t. these cards:

1. The cards are broken. Players in this category don't want these cards, as written, to occur even once in any game, regardless of the damage dealt and effect on the game. In short, they simply can't play the game with the cards as written.

2. The high-end damage potential is too high, but the cards aren't broken. These players wish the cards didn't allow for such a wide range of damage potential for a cost of 7 Lore. However, they understand that mitigating factors, such as the opportunity cost of dedicating half your War Council to the Cleric, the percent chance of drawing and playing the right card (if it's even in the deck), and variable terrain density, make the high-end damage outcome a sufficiently low-probability event over the course of many games, that they can live with the cards as written. In short, these players understand the 'nuke' effect, while not great, will only occur occasionally, and they're okay with that.

3. The cards are fine as written. These players are fine with the wide range of damage potential. They understand the cards were meant to be useless in some scenarios, and uber-great in others. They understand to get the full effect of these cards, players must make other sacrifices on the War Council. They also understand these cards allow less control over where the damage is dealt than other Lore cards. Sometimes they want to try for the 'nuke' effect, and sometimes they opt for Lore Masters with more targeted spells. In short, these players actually enjoy the occasional 'nuke' effect in a Battlelore-type game. They see no problem with it.

I'm interested to know which category the active posters feel they align with, or if you feel there is another category. I'm a category #3 player, but that doesn't mean I'm right or wrong; that's just how I feel after several months of analysis, discussion and playing the game.


A poll is useless. It represents nothing since it cannot poll a representative sample of the gaming community.

Also, the poll options are extremely biased towards your own point of view.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 17:58
im somewhere between 2and 3 i wonder what this guy see him self as



Phloids Problems with Forest Frenzy, Hills Rumble & River Rage Fri, 25 May 2007 01:02

I have been promising to write a comprehensive article detailing all the reasons that a good portion of the BattleLore playing community think that DoW should issue an "official" fix to the Cleric Lore cards Hills Rumble, Forest Frenzy and River Rage. Listed below are the problems that these cards cause in an otherwise very well rounded game.

1. The cards' two separate scaling mechanisms can cause them to be too powerful. Out of all the Lore cards, only these three have two mechanisms that change their power level so significantly. They scale with both the level of the player's Cleric Lore Master and with the particular battlefield's terrain density. This causes a problem in that when both scales are on the high end, these cards just become ridiculously powerful. Why do these cards have two scaling mechanisms when almost no other cards do? Did they need to be this overly powerful in these situations? DoW may have been acknowledging this issue with their suggested "house rule" by limiting the dice rolled to two for each unit regardless of Cleric level. With the official Lore decks as written the Cleric has 6 cards that scale with level, while the Wizard has 4 and the Rogue and Warrior have two each. The house rule suggested by DoW lowers this to 3/4/2/2 which brings it closer to balance between the Lore Masters, but most players feel that there should be more Lore cards for all characters that scale with level and not fewer. The proposed fix, although somewhat better, is still unofficial and still has very strong damage potential on maps with a high terrain density. It has been noted several times in various on line forums that these spells can still be quite powerful even without a Cleric (2 dice rolled per unit).

2. The low-probability, high impact card effects increase the luck factor drastically. This particular problem is the fundamental idea behind the card and why they are as powerful as they are. The game designers made these cards to be very situational, but when a good situation arises, these spells can often cause the game to swing dramatically. DoW has stated that this is the intent and indeed most of us agree that it can be a decent mechanic. But with these cards, especially Forest Frenzy and Hills Rumble, the situation comes up a too often and the damage they can deal to a player's army can be game breaking. This causes several issues with the game but the one that is the most important to keep in mind is the luck factor. More than any other Lore cards these three are either not very good or too good. They can demolish an opponent that is using the terrain to his advantage or on a terrain heavy battlefield. On the other side, if a player draws a Hills Rumble on a battlefield with no elevated terrain or a River Rage on a field with no water, then it is a wasted draw. The cards are highly situational and therefore increase luck in the game. It is feast or minor hunger pangs with these cards.

3. The cards are out of balance with themselves. We've established that these cards increase the luck factor because they are situational. They are either good or bad, but when they are good they can be really good, and when they are bad, they are merely inconvenient. Drawing one of these cards when they are useless is not nearly as game breaking as a getting a Forest Frenzy off and rolling 20 to 40 attack dice against your opponent's army. A wasted Lore card draw is unlikely to cost anyone a game of BattleLore. But losing 8 or more figures to one lucky card pull often is. Therefore these cards are not well balanced even within themselves.

4. The cards are out of balance with the other Lore cards. These cards cost 7 Lore to play "in character." The other Lore cards that deal damage directly to units cost 8-10 Lore to play and have generally less upward damage potential. Granted that Fireball, and Creeping Doom are not situation dependant, but they can roll a maximum number of dice far below that of Hills Rumble, Forest Frenzy and River Rage. Only Chain Lightning has similar damage potential, but it is dependant on two circumstances that are less likely than having units near terrain. It needs all targeted units to be in a line or cluster and to continue to roll a hit with every sequential target. It seldom finds more than 5 or 6 units in such an unbroken line and will often fail to roll a hit, ending the spell. This damage potential is little compared to the 10 or more units that the terrain Lore cards can hit in a given situation. It will be noted that these other direct damage Lore cards are more precise than the terrain Lore cards that deal their damage over a wide area and some may say that this helps balance these cards with each other. It must be taken into consideration that players will often cluster their troops around terrain in order to utilize its defensive properties and this common strategy.

5. The cards break thematically from the role of the Cleric character. The Cleric is a fantasy priest that gets it's origins from role playing games; most notably the Dungeons & Dragons game. Their magic comes from a divine source and is centered on healing, protection and destruction of opposed theologies (good vs. evil). Although there are spells that can cause damage to others, most of them are weak when compared to the spells of the wizard and sorcerer classes. The class in D&D that has spells revolving around the land and the natural world is the druid. The druid is also a divine spellcaster so thematically the Cleric in BattleLore is the closest fit for the spells Forest Frenzy, River Rage and Hills Rumble. In this the Cleric fits, but how it doesn't fit is that these spells, and in this case Chain Lighting joins them, are more powerful or on par with the spells of the Wizard Lore Master. The healer and holy man should not outshine the Wizard in his damage dealing potential. Not only do these individual cards show themselves to be more powerful than the Wizard's two direct damage Lore cards, but the Cleric also has two more direct damage spells than the wizard does (Cleric's 4 to a Wizard's 2). Also, to better illustrate that the Cleric is misthemed in BattlLore, I should point out that in D&D the Chain Lighting Spell is a high level wizard spell that the cleric does not have access to.

6. The cards cause terrain that should be used advantageously to become a major liability. Nearly all war games have some system to designate how the terrain affects a battle. It is an important part of strategy in both real life combat and games made to simulate combat. BattleLore is no exception. The game is designed so that units can take cover in a wooded terrain hex or on top of a hill to gain a defensive advantage. These locations are often used as a strategic defensive position and are very important to the intricacies of the game. The power of the terrain attack Lore cards ruins this important strategic element. Many players and DoW themselves have suggested avoiding placing units in or next to terrain as a counter strategy to these contested Cleric Lore cards. The presence or mere possibility of these cards being in the Lore deck causes many players to toss aside traditional war game tactics just out of fear of these overpowering cards. Avoiding terrain, may at times limit the destructive capabilities of these cards, but a player also takes a strategic disadvantage by not being able to implement terrain tactics to his benefit. No other Lore cards in BattleLore cause such a disruption to the standard play of the game. Not only does avoiding terrain break traditional tactics, but often you can not avoid terrain when you would want to. Certain scenarios are packed so tightly with terrain that a player would not be able to circumvent every forest and hill hex on the map and still expect to fight a battle. There is also nothing stopping a Cleric playing opponent to hold his own troops in or behind a series of terrain hexes and force the fight on his turf just to use these cards to full effect.

7. The game can become a cat and mouse between the Cleric and anti-Cleric war council strategies. These cards are often so powerful as to make many players favor the use of a 3rd level Cleric on their war councils in every game with a decent amount of terrain. A tactic often suggested to combat the Cleric and these powerful cards is to choose a war council that has a good chance to counter these cards and does not have a Cleric. By not taking a Cleric you decrease the chances of these cards finding their way into the Lore deck by diluting it with other cards. This tactic has been suggested by the designers and play-testers as well as many players on the forums. Most players suggest taking levels of Wizard and Rogue for the chance of getting Dispel Lore and Foiled as well as Spy. Some suggest taking all three of the non-Cleric members to further dilute the Lore deck. These are solid strategies to be sure, but the problem is that it causes a dichotomy where one player always takes the Cleric and the other plays anti-Cleric. Since players choose their war councils in secret the players might both end up with anti-Cleric councils or both have 3rd level Clerics. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as some players claim that taking a 3rd level Cleric and hoping that you get the killer card first is the best way to combat a Cleric council and the anti-Cleric councils are not necessarily weak against other non-Cleric councils. Most of the time strategies and counter strategies are healthy for a game, but in this instance that is not the case. The problem here lies in the fact that anti-Cleric councils exist and are frequently discussed when no one ever suggests an anti-Warrior council or and anti-Wizard council. Why? Because these other Lore masters do not have ridiculously powerful cards that need to be strongly combated with counter tactics as the Cleric does. This is a clear sign that these cards are a problem and often unbalance not only an individual game of BattleLore, but the entire metagame surrounding it.

8. All suggested countermeasures are either inane, reliant on luck, or force avoidance of otherwise desirable tactics. There is plenty of talk about how to avoid or lessen the effect of these cards on one's army both during set up and play. All of these countermeasures contain some sort of flaw or are far from guaranteed to work. The suggested tactic of avoiding units in or next to a terrain hex breaks the basic strategy of the game and puts the player at a defensive disadvantage when unable to use terrain strategically. Many times avoidance is impossible or severely limits movement on the board. Creating an anti-Cleric war council in order to thin out the Lore deck and hope to draw counters not only creates a poor metagame, but it is also unreliable. Sure, you have decreased the odds of the cards coming up, but dumb luck may allow your opponent to draw the card he needs and essentially end the game with a single Hills Rumble or Forest Frenzy regardless to your countermeasures. If you don't have one of those key counter cards your council may provide, your opponent's good luck could still wreck your army. There is no way to avoid these cards completely and they can be so powerful that when chance still doesn't go your way, you may as well give up when the land turns against you. Another tactic that has been suggested several times is to use your Replenish Lore action to take two cards and discard one. This tactic is meant to dig quickly through the Lore deck trying to get these terrain attack cards into your hand before your opponent acquires them. You could potentially do this, but there is nothing stopping your power hungry opponent from doing the same thing, which puts you back into the battle of luck you were in to begin with. You might get lucky and you might not. None of these tactics work reliably and lose you something in return. Although these kinds of tactics are not necessarily ineffective against a non-Cleric war council, there is little desire or suggestion for players to do so. It is only these three Cleric cards that demand this sort of attention to countermeasures and that is a clear issue.

9. The cards often suck the fun out of a game of BattleLore for both players. This is probably the worst part about these cards and their effect on the game. Most games of BattleLore are exciting and engaging throughout. Even if the dice are just not going your way there always seems to be something holding your attention to the game. This all changes when a devastating Forest Frenzy or Hills Rumble is played. A close game can go to a landslide victory in a single lucky draw. A player feels so helpless and pathetic to lose 14 figures to a single card when there was little he could do to stop it. Even if all suggested counter measures were taken, this could happen to anyone with the luck of the draw. It is not fun to lose a game to a single card like this. It is an unsatisfying game experience and it will leave most players with a hollow feeling in their stomach. Many players have felt this from the other side as well. Unassumingly a player plays a Hills Rumble for the first time knowing it is going to be a powerful play and it ends up being stronger than they expect. Both players are dumbfounded as the game suddenly swings so wide that it is nearly over. Maybe the players are more experienced and one of them draws a Forest Frenzy and looks to see that 11 of his opponent's units will be affected. Many players have reported feelings of guilt as they play the card, knowing that it will decide the game. It feels cheap and unfair, leaving cold feelings not toward either player, but toward the game of BattleLore for allowing such a thing to happen. "That sucks, man. Want to try it again?" "Not really."

10. The cards have the potential to scare new players away from the game through a bad experience with them. Several players have told stories where they were teaching the game to new players and the game was killed by an untimely Forest Frenzy or Hills Rumble. In these instances, when the new player saw himself lose to an overpowered and destructive card and by no fault of his own, it created a sour opinion of the game. Not only do these gamers not become avid fans of BattleLore and buy their own copy, but their friends often have a hard time convincing them to play again. Some players are pensive about teaching the game to new players while using the Cleric Lore Master, because they don't want them to be turned away from the game. If this sort of game ending potential existed in many of the most popular multiplayer boardgames of today, many of them would not be played. Even with a low likelihood of occurrence (even much lower than the potential of HR and FF) they would be considered too luck based and random. Most players would choose not to play it after witnessing a near complete luck based win.

11. These cards are the only elements of BattleLore that are seeing a fervor of debate regarding a problem in the design. There is obviously some sort of problem with these cards. This is evident for many reasons, but the one that stands out the strongest is the debate about them and the number of players who have complained or shared a story about how these cards have ruined their enjoyment of an otherwise great game. Although it is true that many players do not consider these cards much of a problem, some of these players tell how they combat these cards by taking an anti-Cleric council, avoiding getting near the terrain and by digging through the Lore deck to grab these cards before your opponent gets them. There are several threads on the Days of Wonder forums, the Boardgamegeek.com forums and Battleloremaster.com forums about this issue and it is been hotly debated for months. Players have been calling for change and official rulings while others have stated that the cards are not a problem. Days of Wonder representatives, including Richard Borg, have made appearances to give advice and statements as to their take on the subject and finally loosely suggesting a house rule for those of us who think that these cards are too powerful. All this talk and discussion; all these arguments and house rules, have been caused by these three thematic and mechanically similar cards. No other part of BattleLore has been subjected to this type of scrutiny and debate. Problems with the rest of the game are minor or non-existent. It is these three cards that are a broken part of an otherwise near perfect game. They are broken and un-fun and the public has acknowledged the problem repeatedly. Even those forum posters who disagree have only justified a fix by increasing the visibility of the issue through continued debate.

12. Proposed house rule and countermeasures don't actually fix the problem. Taking an anti-Cleric war council only succeeds in making a "too powerful" but situational card, more dependent on luck. The cards are stronger than they should be and no matter what steps you take to avoid them, when they do appear, even if they appear less often, they can seriously ruin a game. Avoiding terrain does not fix the problem either. The problem is inherent in the necessity to take these steps to avoid or lessen the effects of the cards. Short of changing how the card works in the game, nothing in the game can fix the problem. In order to curb some of the heat they were taking on these cards DoW wisely decided to issue a "suggested house rule" although denying the need for one. They propose that people who are unhappy with the way the cards work should limit the cards to two dice against each target regardless of Cleric level. They may have chosen this house rule for several reasons. They may have chosen it to reduce the level dependent Lore cards to a more balanced level between the Lore Masters. They may have chosen it based on the argument that the spells have too much damage potential in the hands of a 3rd level Cleric. Or they may have chosen this house rule, because they could claim it as original because no one on the forums had posted that particular idea as a house rule proposal up to that time. Who knows? But does it fulfill the need we as a community were asking for? Many would say that the spells are still powerful in this "fixed" incarnation. It still targets the same number of units and only reduces the total amount of dice rolled against them. It has been noted (and eluded to by R.Borg) that even without a Cleric on your council; these cards can be quite strong. This fix only reduces these spells to this level of power. That might be good enough for some players, but what may not be good enough is its unofficial status. Most players highly dislike house rules. They want to play only by the official rules and some gamers are resistant to official errata from sources they have not read themselves. If someone where to run a BattleLore tournament and wish to institute this house rule, he would probably come up against resistance from the players because it is "not official" or "the that's not what the card says." When teaching the game to new players, no one wants to say, "I'm playing these three cards with this house rule because they were too powerful." It doesn't shine a very good light on the game. For these reasons many players want a more official fix to the problems with these cards. Whether DoW issues official errata or, more desirably, reprints the cards and makes them available in a future expansion or through the mail, either would do a lot to cool the fervor created by dissatisfaction with these cards.




And that is all I have to say.



Pirate am i faning the flames..you bet ya Pirate

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 18:42]

      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 18:03
cebalrai wrote on Thu, 30 August 2007 01:05



A poll is useless. It represents nothing since it cannot poll a representative sample of the gaming community.

Also, the poll options are extremely biased towards your own point of view.



Mvett- shot down in flames.... on take-off....

Shane Andrews- care to comment? "mean-spirited"? "negativity"? "silencing people"?.... I rest my case...

Cebalrai- when will you learn not to bag others if you're not going to provide an alternative? useless to you but maybe not to others... if you don't like it, just don't participate....

As for it's representativeness, are you sure it represents "nothing"? It may not be representative of the WHOLE gaming community (but mvett wasn't trying to do that anyway, cause it's virtually impossible through this means), but it may well be more representative of the BL FORUM community.....(where all this debate is occurring), and that may be useful in itself...

How do we know if the WHOLE gaming community really has a real problem with these cards? Has it been put to the test? If so, how, when and by who? OR do you, your gaming friends, and a few forum people who don't like these cards make up the "whole gaming community"?- I don't think so...

C'mon Cebalrai, how would YOU go about doing a poll on the general gaming community? With great difficulty I suspect.... If you can, let's hear your suggestions....if you can't, don't shoot people down....

Mvett- as for your poll, I'm in between 2 and 3- I don't think the cards are way too powerful, certainly not broken, but they could've been worded better to fit in more thematically (house rule#8 on Cebalrai's thread made more thematic sense to me)

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 18:06
I'm silencing nobody, nor did I sling words like you did (ie childish).

I'm just saying that the poll wouldn't tell us much since there are only a few people who would answer. It doesn't even represent the forum community, since only a minority of posters would vote. Not to mention even people who have barely played BL or even never played would be able to vote.

My other point that you didn't address, was that the poll is poorly written and biased. #1 is given a short, very extreme description, which probably represents nobody. Therefore the poll would show that almost nobody feels the cards are a major problem - and *poof* you have results that say whatever you want them to.

I feel free to be rather critical of polling for the reasons stated above. How would I do it? I wouldn't do a poll. Therefore I am not bound to make my own poll. So there's no need to try to challenge me to make a better one.

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 18:21]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 18:24
If you have to have my suggestion, put the 12 extensive points above as poll option #1. It's much more accurate than the extremely slanted description that Mvettegard came up with.

I guess it just shows how poorly he really understands our point of view really. I'd encourage Mvette to read the (long) post above.
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 18:38
i think you both misread mettemagreds post

I'm interested to know which category the active posters feel they align with, or if you feel there is another category. I'm a category #3 player, but that doesn't mean I'm right or wrong; that's just how I feel after several months of analysis, discussion and playing the game.[/quote]

he is not trying to put it to the vote hes asking if those that eho feel strongly if they fit in to these cateorys to lie in between is valide or you can use phloids 12points as a short hand

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 18:57]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 18:54
Survey... Vote... Poll... Same thing. I know he's not attempting to prove anything right or wrong. I guarantee you people would use survey results to dismiss the people who have a beef with the nuke cards.

Mvettegard has always posted loads of anecdotes of games where nuke cards were played in an effort to prove his point. Watch how fast he uses some (slanted) poll results to do the same. Smile

Besides, it's 100% crystal clear to Mvettegard where the active posters stand (and he said he only wants to poll active posters). He's read their opinions about 50 times by now. What other purpose could he have besides trying to marginalize the opposing point of view? He already has every little shred of information that this poll could possibly provide...

But maybe I'm missing something? Smile
      
Roobarb
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1004
Registered:
May 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 19:21
cebalrai i think you ,are prsonaly im on cards are fine i sed i was some where between 2(when im geting waped by one) and 3(when im wapin some one else ) there are new pepole reading these posts all the time thats why diged up phloids old post so a nubee can say im a 3 or a p,3,5,6,11 we can use it to try and move the debate along Very Happy this is my fave topic becos pepole feel so strongly and at the end of the day it all subjective ie in the eye of the beholder
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 19:48
Cebalrai,

You're missing my point about the "all eggs in one basket" comment. With the standard level-6 War Council, putting 3 levels into ANY Lore Master is putting all your eggs in one basket, IMO. In non-Epic Battlelore, I never go with less than a level 5 Commander. I've found 4 or less command cards to be too constrictive. That leaves only 4 levels for Lore Masters and creatures. If you put 3 in one Lore Master, you only have 1 left. If you have a creature too, then you've left the other 3 Lore Masters at level 0. Worst-case scenario, your opponent has Warrior/Rogue/Wizard but no Cleric, meaning you must cast 75% of the Lore deck out of character. Even if your opponent has all four Lore Masters, 63% of the Lore cards would be out of character.

Since forests typically are the most common terrain element, FF has the greatest chance for a large figure kill count. In the worst-case scenario (opponent has no Cleric), you have a 46% chance that FF isn't in the Lore deck. Assuming it's in the deck, you have a 50% chance to draw the card. This assumes even card draws during the game, and you get through the entire Lore deck (rare, in my experience, due to game length and Battlelore card reshuffles).

I know shortly after Battlelore was released, everyone was talking about the L3 Commander/L3 Cleric strategy. However, it seems the other Lore Master cards are getting more love lately, and I suspect players are seeing the benefits of spreading out their Lore Master tokens.

Maybe you still think L3 Commander/L3 Cleric is a good strategy, but I don't like staring at a handful of out-of-character Lore cards. The benefit of the big Cleric cards just hasn't made up for the many opportunities lost due to out-of-character cards being too expensive to cast when I needed them. And when I have cast them, I found myself short on Lore if and when I drew the big Cleric cards. Hmmmmmm, more ways this game is self balancing... Twisted Evil

Maybe I should start a poll on War Council makeup... Razz
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 20:32
I've personally never been a big fan of the L3 Cleric/L3 Commander, although it's effective. L3 Cleric/L2 Commander plus a L1 Wiz or rogue is the way to go I think.

The cleric deck simply has so many more level-scaling cards than the other decks that it's hard not to justify stacking multiple levels of it. Compare that to the warrior with almost no cards that take your warrior level into consideration...

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 20:34]

      
gheintze
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 954
Registered:
August 2004
Re:maybe to powerful Wed, 29 August 2007 21:06
I'm not quite sure why I'm entering the fray again Confused but here goes ...

This whole affair is getting a little crazy -- on both sides. Although I'm fine with the cards as written, I can see why some discussion of their merits is deserved.

However, as much as it is discussed, DOW is not going to fix anything, offer conflicting PDFs, etc... They have stated so numerous times -- most recently in the answer to Coltsfan's open questions thread. They have made it clear that you are welcome to house rule it, but they won't help out anymore.

Even if some of you think that this is a bad business decision -- it is their decision and I don't believe that any amount of discussion or polls will change their minds. After all, it's their game and the rules are as they want it.

We need to agree to disagree and stop flaming each other. These posts full of namecalling and accusations of childishness are ridiculous. Nothing on this thread is productive anymore.

I hope that this discussion can be put to rest and that people can go back to enjoying battlelore. This incessant bickering will probably turn more people off to the game than the cards will. Rolling Eyes

Just my 2 cents -- happy gaming,

Geoff

[Updated on: Wed, 29 August 2007 21:15]

      
Pages (6): [ «  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  >  » ]     
Previous Topic:Epic or CtA?
Next Topic:PDF- Compendia, 2007.12!
Goto Forum: