Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » BattleLore - English » maybe to powerful
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 13:20
tkostek wrote on Wed, 08 August 2007 22:40

I doubt we'll see 'corrected' cards, but I do expect to see new, optional lore cards / decks. This would give folks the option to build a base deck, excluding cards they don't like.



Given the expandable nature of nearly every facet of this game, I definitely see this in the realm of possibility. The 'official' way I would expect it to play out, though, is that either there would be a completely new lore deck set to be used instead of the original one (likely with some similar or borrowed cards from the original deck), or an expansion of the original deck, say 2 more cards for each lore master that are then shuffled in with the original lore master's deck and the same number of appropriate cards are selected randomly from that enhanced deck.
      
gheintze
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 947
Registered:
August 2004
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 13:44
DOW has said that they are happy with the game as is. "Please note that this is NOT a recommendation to switch to this House Rule in lieu of the current card's design. Instead it is merely our official position on which House Rule we would recommend to folks who are bothered by the current design." By not recommending the house rule, they clearly think the current version is the best.

If you didn't like the ending of a book, would you ask the author to change it?
The game designer should not need to change the game in answer to the fans (assuming the game isn't broken). If the game plays the way the designer wants, I wouldn't expect it to be changed. Besides DOW has already stated that they won't address this issue anymore, so I wouldn't expect updated cards or PDF files. House rules will have to suffice for those who are unhappy...

The 2nd point I was trying to make (unsuccessfully apparently) is that the game is intentionally unbalanced and random. Magic is supposed to be a game changing event. Like the battle of Helm's Deep -- the good guy were getting crushed -- then Gandalf arrives with reinforcements and the tide of battle turns. It totally makes the movie when he comes riding over the ridge. Lore is like that -- the epic events that can turn a battle.

Geoff

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 13:48]

      
Faithful
Member

Posts: 82
Registered:
May 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:02
gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 07:44

DOW being happy with the game is not irrelevant. If you didn't like the ending of a book, would you ask the author to change it?
The game designer should not need to change the game in answer to the fans (assuming the game isn't broken). If the game plays the way the designer wants, I wouldn't expect it to be changed. Besides DOW has already stated that they won't address this issue anymore, so I wouldn't expect updated cards or PDF files. House rules will have to suffice for those who are unhappy...


This only holds up so far. There are plenty of examples where game rules have been changed when there is a new printing (i.e. second edition) of a game.
Game designers are human and therefore prone to mistakes like anyone else.

Just because something is produced a given way at the start does not mean it is the best.

I will state once again that I think DOW needed to take more time in play testing this game and all the cards. IF they had done so there would be very, very little need for a Compendium of card corrections/clarifications.

If other cards needed tweaking why not these two?

It is your choice to give DOW a pass on this if you desire, but I think anything that divides a community should be looked into as something a bit more serious.


gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 07:44

The 2nd point I was trying to make (unsuccessfully apparently) is that the game is intentionally unbalanced and random. Magic is supposed to be a game changing event. Like the battle of Helm's Deep -- the good guy were getting crushed -- then Gandalf arrives with reinforcements and the tide of battle turns. It totally makes the movie when he comes riding over the ridge. Lore is like that -- the epic events that can turn a battle.


I find it hard to believe they would make a game "intentionally unbalanced;" random, clearly.
I think the game is designed to be challenging but winnable on either side. It may seem Inherently Unbalanced, but I would think they worked hard at make it playable for all players. Therefore, I would think they made it as balanced as possible; even while giving distinct abilities to different units.

And regarding the connection to Gandalf coming over the hill; all I want then is a blinding flash of light when a given card is played! Smile

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 14:20]

      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:03
I second everything you've said Goeff Smile... very good explanations
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:19
ColtsFan76 wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 22:51

cebalrai wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 20:56

mvettemagred wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 13:55

Cebalrai,

You need to download some more music -- you keep singing the same tune. Smile

What tkostek said is the damage is spread around the board. I and others have may this point before, but it bears repeating.


I get it now. The above points which you've made over and over (and over) "bear repeating" while mine do not.

Gotcha.

ZING! One point for cebalrai!

Zero points for Cebalrai's position. The reason for my comment about him needing a different tune was because he repeats the same line over and over, but never adds anything new to the discussion. In my post I attempted to take his position, namely how many units are targeted and how many figures are lost on average, and by factoring in where combat is occuring and banners are at risk, show how HR/FF works out to be balanced with the other effects in the game. I hadn't seen this specific analysis done before, so I thought it valuable to added it to the discussion.

Instead of delving deeper in an attempt to explain how his position is valid, all we keep getting is, "I lost 12 figures! There's no way I can win! What a broken card!" All I can conclude from his posts is he doesn't really want to look at this topic from all sides, but instead is blinded by the number of dice rolled by these cards. That's too bad, because this game is really more subtle than just max'ing out dice rolls and killing figures. Oh well, as much as I and others have tried to lead the horse to water...
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:23
To answer your question, gaming companies frequently consider modifying released games in response to player reaction. It's not about them being in love with their own creation, it's about making money. When people who purchase DoW's products aren't happy with what they're buying, they simply give their money to other game companies.

For example, in the two gaming groups I'm a part of, both groups (about 60 people) are completely soured on the game. Many folks have sold their copies on ebay. Only one person (after maybe a dozen original copies were purchased) bought CtA - but that only makes the HR/FF problem worse. Nobody is planning on spending anything else on the Battlelore system because the broken lore cards make it not fun for a large number of people. But they're spending insane loads of cash on games from Fantasy Flight.

And gheintze, why are you bringing up game balance? The game is asymmetrical and that's fine with everyone. You're arguing with nobody.

Your Helm's deep analogy is really poor. Gandalf showing up wasn't anything like a random card draw. He wasn't just randomly roaming around with a big army and happened to stumble onto his allies fighting for their lives. Quite the opposite - he strategically moved the army from one place to another to engage in battle with a height advantage. Nothing random about it.

Think again of Helm's Deep if right as the battle was getting good, a random mudslide killed/crippled the orcs. Then a scene with Aragorn standing around afterwards scratching his said saying, "Gee, that was lucky. Good thing we weren't standing there". This is the equivalent of drawing a silly randomly devastating card.

Dumb.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 14:38]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:25
sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 08:03

I second everything you've said Goeff Smile... very good explanations


His explanations, especially that analogy, are misleading and not even logical. Sad to see you cling to that. I take it that you never saw the movie, otherwise you'd already know that the ending wasn't settled by randomness. Confused

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 14:41]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:31
repost, sry. plz delete.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 14:35]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 14:34
[quote title=mvettemagred wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 08:19]
ColtsFan76 wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 22:51

cebalrai wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 20:56

mvettemagred wrote on Tue, 07 August 2007 13:55

Cebalrai,

Gotcha.

ZING! One point for cebalrai!

Zero points for Cebalrai's position. The reason for my comment about him needing a different tune was because he repeats the same line over and over, but never adds anything new to the discussion. In my post I attempted to take his position, namely how many units are targeted and how many figures are lost on average, and by factoring in where combat is occuring and banners are at risk, show how HR/FF works out to be balanced with the other effects in the game. I hadn't seen this specific analysis done before, so I thought it valuable to added it to the discussion.



You, and others have repeated your *exact* points *many* times. Seriously go back and read old threads and you'll see your points along with their counterpoints posted over and over many times. There's literally NOTHING new in your posts that myself and several others have not discussed before. Not going to just repeat myself because you don't want to get up off your duff to review previous threads.

And yeah, I'm going to keep my Zing point now. You just repeated your attempt at a power-play on me so I'll leave it at that.
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:04
Perhaps we can build a bridge between the camps by taking a tactical, stepwise approach. After all, this is a game of tactics. Smile

To that end, based on my latest analysis, do you agree that only 4-6 (33-50%) of the 12 figures killed will be in locations on the board where they could actually affect the outcome of the game?

If yes, do you still believe that a 7-Lore spell that kills 4-6 relevant figures is overpowered?

If yes, then so be it.

As long as we agree that it's meaningless to talk about the number of dice rolled and the number of figures killed without considering where the damage is done and how that affects each players ability to win banners, then we have some common ground after all! Very Happy

Personally, I'd rather see DOW put their time and effort into normalizing the wording on all Lore cards and firming up the Lexicon. This is what allowed M:tG to go from a set of poorly worded cards with lots of errata, to thousands of cards with clear, consise meanings. I enjoy all the Lore card effects, but am frustrated (like others) by the sometimes unclear wording.

EDIT -- And yes, I concede the zing point. While I thought my damage distribution analysis was different enough to be considered fresh, my poor choice of words clearly entitled Cebalrai to a point. I shall endeavor to be "fresher" next time. Rolling Eyes

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 15:14]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:14
No I don't believe those things at all because of the simple fact that units are important even if they're not in the front lines.

Units that aren't in the middle of the action on a given turn might turn out to be critically important in a turn or two. And weakened units moved to the back for safety that are then taken as banners by a random HR/FF card can very easily have a huge impact on the game.

In a recent game I observed, a player had his Hill Giant killed while it was in the back and away from the fight. Seems pretty darn relevant to me.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 15:18]

      
gheintze
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 947
Registered:
August 2004
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:14
Cebalrai,

I apologize for not writing well enough to explain the points I'm trying to make.

Good luck, and I hope that you enjoy your Fantasy Flight Games.

If it's OK with you, I'll keep playing and enjoying BattleLore.

Geoff

      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:15
Faithful wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 05:02

gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 07:44

DOW being happy with the game is not irrelevant. If you didn't like the ending of a book, would you ask the author to change it?
The game designer should not need to change the game in answer to the fans (assuming the game isn't broken). If the game plays the way the designer wants, I wouldn't expect it to be changed. Besides DOW has already stated that they won't address this issue anymore, so I wouldn't expect updated cards or PDF files. House rules will have to suffice for those who are unhappy...


This only holds up so far. There are plenty of examples where game rules have been changed when there is a new printing (i.e. second edition) of a game.
Game designers are human and therefore prone to mistakes like anyone else.

Just because something is produced a given way at the start does not mean it is the best.

I will state once again that I think DOW needed to take more time in play testing this game and all the cards. IF they had done so there would be very, very little need for a Compendium of card corrections/clarifications.

If other cards needed tweaking why not these two?

It is your choice to give DOW a pass on this if you desire, but I think anything that divides a community should be looked into as something a bit more serious.


What Geoff keeps pointing out (and correct me if I am wrong Smile ) is that the affect HR, etc. have on the game is intentional and not a mistake, so DoW will not be "correcting" it from that standpoint. Not trying to base an argument purely on semantics here, so Faithful, if you mean something else by using that term, just disregard this or clarify as you wish, but you do refer to the rather extensive compendium entries, and I think that is two different things. There are a few actual errors in the compendium that are addressed, but those are to correct unintended affects of the cards and speak more to the complexities that arise with the interplay of the lore cards and other game mechanics, as well as other lore cards. The main purpose of the compendium is to expound on interesting cases that may arise during the game and establish common (and hopefully consistent) rulings so players know what to expect when they arise during a particular game. Rulings/explanations which could not possibly be included on the text of those cards.

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:20
gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 09:14

Cebalrai,

I apologize for not writing well enough to explain the points I'm trying to make.

Good luck, and I hope that you enjoy your Fantasy Flight Games.

If it's OK with you, I'll keep playing and enjoying BattleLore.

Geoff




Your writing seems fine to me. You just used a flawed analogy to make your point.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:25
[quote title=toddrew wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 09:15][quote title=Faithful wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 05:02]
gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 07:44



What Geoff keeps pointing out (and correct me if I am wrong Smile ) is that the affect HR, etc. have on the game is intentional and not a mistake, so DoW will not be "correcting" it from that standpoint. Not trying to base an argument purely on semantics here, so Faithful, if you mean something else by using that term, just disregard this or clarify as you wish, but you do refer to the rather extensive compendium entries, and I think that is two different things. There are a few actual errors in the compendium that are addressed, but those are to correct unintended affects of the cards and speak more to the complexities that arise with the interplay of the lore cards and other game mechanics, as well as other lore cards. The main purpose of the compendium is to expound on interesting cases that may arise during the game and establish common (and hopefully consistent) rulings so players know what to expect when they arise during a particular game. Rulings/explanations which could not possibly be included on the text of those cards.




If that's his only point then I'm in agreement with him. It's not even a debatable issue really - DOW said they did not make a mistake writing these cards so of course we have to believe them.

What myself and many others are asserting is that the HR/FF element of the game is just poor game design. They play out (sometimes) in ways that are very un-fun to many people. Therefore we're hoping for an optional game update.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 15:26]

      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:27
cebalrai wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 06:20



Your writing seems fine to me. You just used a flawed analogy to make your point.


This post is making me late for work, but I have stopped myself from typing it out one less time than the number of impulses to write it Laughing

I also am in accord with Geoff's analogy, as that is an accurate illustration (if not a lock rock solid logical proof Razz ) of how I view the more "magical" of the lore cards. How it can be interpreted as a flawed analogy is beyond me, I can't think of any that would be better, maybe others that would serve as well, but I think (opinion here) that you are expecting way too much realism from a fantasy board game. I think HR/FF/etc. do a very good job of a game mechanic that apporiximates a "real-life-fantasy" event.
      
gheintze
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 947
Registered:
August 2004
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:29
Thanks Toddrew -- that's part of what I was trying to point out.

My second point is that fantasy battles (as in Lord of the Rings and other numerous books that I've read) hinge on the unexpected, tide-changing moments. This is what I believe DOW was trying to capture in the Lore cards.

Again, this is not poor game design. This is exactly the effect they were looking for.

Geoff
      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:49
I will now "third" Geoff's comments.... (having seconded him earlier) Wink Very Happy
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 15:58
<This post was based on Cebalrai's last post. I didn't get it in before the others, so it seems a little disconnected from them.>

Good, good! This discussion is finally turning toward battlefield tactics!

If you want use HR/FF to take out weakened units that have been rotated back, you obviously must wait until later in the game to use it. Definitely a good strategy, but still dependent on a terrain-heavy board and lots of luck. With my luck, I'd miss the already weak units completely, and instead pluck a couple of figures from out-of-reach archers. Mad

You can also use HR/FF early to weaken several units spread around the board, then use your Command cards to chase down and eliminate those units. Of course, by the time you can typically cast HR/FF, melee has broken out in several areas of the board (your opponent isn't sitting back waiting for you to launch HR/FF). So, by using your Command cards to chase down weakened units, you have less orders available to manage the melees where your opponent is beating on your units. Also, unless you happen to have green/blue calvary near the weakened units, it can take several turns just to engage them. Unless you have a handful of Forward/On the March cards, you can't order units in every section every turn. There is an opportunity cost to following this strategy. I agree it can still lead to victory, but I see it as very situational, and definitely not a guarantee.

Since examples are always helpful, and you presented one with your Hill Giant game (luckly to get the critical on that one, eh?), I'll offer up my lasted game. My buddy and I played Goblin Gold last weekend, which has 15 Forests and 3 Hills. Naturally, I took a L2 Cleric. I could have take L3 Cleric, but didn't want to put all my eggs in one basket. Luckily, I got both HR and FF in my initial draw. I kept FF, and took 2 Lore every turn so I could cast it ASAP. I should have won easily, right? Instead, I felt compelled to cast Evade first, because my opponent's Goblin Spear Bearers (supported by the Band) were mauling my right flank. (Due to the setup of the scenario, they were able to engage my units on the second turn)

By the time I was able to cast FF, my opponent countered it with Dispel Lore. I rolled the dice anyway, just to see what would have happened. The spell targeted 10 units, and would have killed 7 figures, only 3 of them in realistically accessible locations. There was so much I need to do on my right flank, that switching focus to try to chase a 3-figure unit in the left/center section seemed foolish. I already had 1- and 2-figure units on the right flank that I was engaged with, so that was were readily available banners were to be found.

I ended up losing 6-3. Would an early FF helped? Definitely. But I still would have lost. My buddy rolled amazingly well all game. His first roll with the Spear Bearers took out a full red infantry (that's right -- 4 dice, 4 hits).

We played Goblin Gold again, and this time I took a L2 Wizard. I was able to Fireball his Band, which allowed me to break up his support and have better results on my right flank. Even with all those Forests, that Fireball was definitely more helpful than FF.

I think the new tactics involved with the new Goblin and Dwarven units will make shotgun spells like HR/FF less relevant, and put the focus on more targetable spells, like Fireball, Portal, etc.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:01
It's fatally flawed because Gandalf showing up was not random. Drawing HR/FF *is* random. Apples and oranges, get it?

Geoff insists on comparing Gandalf's calculated military movement with the dumb luck of drawing HR/FF. Two totally different types of events in the game.

Gandalf even told Aragorn he'd be there at that exact time (first light) so it wasn't even unexpected. There's really nothing these two things have in common.

But that point aside, there are dozens of other lore cards do a fine job of simulating these fantasy battle elements. But HR/FF step out of the standard set by other lore cards by a mile. There are ways they could have been worked where they could have kept the magical aspects that Todd mentioned without having such a high potential to single-handedly determine games.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:12
mvettemagred wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 09:58

<This post was based on Cebalrai's last post. I didn't get it in before the others, so it seems a little disconnected from them.>

Good, good! This discussion is finally turning toward battlefield tactics!

If you want use HR/FF to take out weakened units that have been rotated back, you obviously must wait until later in the game to use it. Definitely a good strategy, but still dependent on a terrain-heavy board and lots of luck. With my luck, I'd miss the already weak units completely, and instead pluck a couple of figures from out-of-reach archers. Mad

You can also use HR/FF early to weaken several units spread around the board, then use your Command cards to chase down and eliminate those units. Of course, by the time you can typically cast HR/FF, melee has broken out in several areas of the board (your opponent isn't sitting back waiting for you to launch HR/FF). So, by using your Command cards to chase down weakened units, you have less orders available to manage the melees where your opponent is beating on your units. Also, unless you happen to have green/blue calvary near the weakened units, it can take several turns just to engage them. Unless you have a handful of Forward/On the March cards, you can't order units in every section every turn. There is an opportunity cost to following this strategy. I agree it can still lead to victory, but I see it as very situational, and definitely not a guarantee.

Since examples are always helpful, and you presented one with your Hill Giant game (luckly to get the critical on that one, eh?), I'll offer up my lasted game. My buddy and I played Goblin Gold last weekend, which has 15 Forests and 3 Hills. Naturally, I took a L2 Cleric. I could have take L3 Cleric, but didn't want to put all my eggs in one basket. Luckily, I got both HR and FF in my initial draw. I kept FF, and took 2 Lore every turn so I could cast it ASAP. I should have won easily, right? Instead, I felt compelled to cast Evade first, because my opponent's Goblin Spear Bearers (supported by the Band) were mauling my right flank. (Due to the setup of the scenario, they were able to engage my units on the second turn)

By the time I was able to cast FF, my opponent countered it with Dispel Lore. I rolled the dice anyway, just to see what would have happened. The spell targeted 10 units, and would have killed 7 figures, only 3 of them in realistically accessible locations. There was so much I need to do on my right flank, that switching focus to try to chase a 3-figure unit in the left/center section seemed foolish. I already had 1- and 2-figure units on the right flank that I was engaged with, so that was were readily available banners were to be found.

I ended up losing 6-3. Would an early FF helped? Definitely. But I still would have lost. My buddy rolled amazingly well all game. His first roll with the Spear Bearers took out a full red infantry (that's right -- 4 dice, 4 hits).

We played Goblin Gold again, and this time I took a L2 Wizard. I was able to Fireball his Band, which allowed me to break up his support and have better results on my right flank. Even with all those Forests, that Fireball was definitely more helpful than FF.

I think the new tactics involved with the new Goblin and Dwarven units will make shotgun spells like HR/FF less relevant, and put the focus on more targetable spells, like Fireball, Portal, etc.


What if your opponent drew the FF and smacked off 12-15 of your units with it? That's easy on a map with 15 forests. Then your game would turn from a 6-3 battle into a complete rout that you had little say over. Fun fun fun!

Individual examples are meaningless though (despite what you say) because myself and others have dozens of examples to counter. If you want, I can recall an old example of when someone rolled 48 dice on an FF card. Are you convinced now that HR/FF is a game-breaker? Nope. Therefore this type of discussion is not helpful.

You're obviously okay with a certain amount of games being determined by HR/FF while for many people it's really lame. I don't think I really have anything else to say to you. Smile

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 16:18]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:14
ack, repost again. My internet is slackin' please delete

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 16:15]

      
gheintze
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 947
Registered:
August 2004
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:18
[quote title=cebalrai wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:01]It's fatally flawed because Gandalf showing up was not random. Drawing HR/FF *is* random. Apples and oranges, get it?

Geoff insists on comparing Gandalf's calculated military movement with the dumb luck of drawing HR/FF. Two totally different types of events in the game.

Gandalf even told Aragorn he'd be there at that exact time (first light) so it wasn't even unexpected. There's really nothing these two things have in common.
quote]


Cebalrai,

I'm not trying to debate the specifics of random vs. non-random events (or of Gandalf's ride to Helm's Deep for that matter). I'm was just using that as an example of a battle-turning event and trying to make the point that DOW is attempting to recreate that. Fantasy battles change based on the incredible and that's what makes it entertaining.

Besides, one could make the argument that drawing HR/FF is not dumb luck. A player could calculate the odds that they would get the given card -- likewise the opponent needs to take that risk into account when planning their moves. Successfully commanding an army requires planning for the unexpected.

Geoff

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:25
[quote title=gheintze wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:18]
cebalrai wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:01




Cebalrai,

I'm not trying to debate the specifics of random vs. non-random events (or of Gandalf's ride to Helm's Deep for that matter). I'm was just using that as an example of a battle-turning event and trying to make the point that DOW is attempting to recreate that. Fantasy battles change based on the incredible and that's what makes it entertaining.

Besides, one could make the argument that drawing HR/FF is not dumb luck. A player could calculate the odds that they would get the given card -- likewise the opponent needs to take that risk into account when planning their moves. Successfully commanding an army requires planning for the unexpected.

Geoff




Of course you can try to calculate the odds of getting a certain card. It's STILL luck. Calculating that you have a 40% chance to draw HR doesn't make it anything more than a random chance.

I'm not going to address the comment about planning for the unexpected since it's been discussed ad nauseum in other threads. The "you shouldn't be putting your units near terrain in the first place" people make me laugh...

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 16:27]

      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:35
cebalrai wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:12


You're obviously okay with a certain amount of games being determined by HR/FF while for many people it's really lame. I don't think I really have anything else to say to you. Smile

I'm sure you and your friends have also had just as many games where you never drew HR/FF, or it was countered, or the board was light on terrain, or you rolled bad, or by the time you were able to draw and cast it the outcome was already decided, etc.

You're right, I enjoy the big bang of a FF, just like I enjoy the drama of a well-timed Sneak Attack. I've seen many Lore and Command cards, properly played, turn the tide of a game. Even my seemingly insignificant little Evade spell was a big surprise to my opponent, and allowed me to rotate my weak unit back and hold my right flank, which was about to collapse.

But I forget, you don't want even one game determined by HR/FF. Since Battlelore is a game where one lucky roll, one lucky draw, one lucky anything at the right time can start the dominoes falling toward victory/defeat, this game definitely isn't for you and your friends.

As long as other players recognize the low probability HR/FF will influence any single game, then they can decide for themselves if they can live with the occasional big bang spell. In over 40 games, I've still only seen two big HR/FF spells, and both times the player casting the spell lost the game. Maybe in the next 40 games it will occur more, but I doubt it.
      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 16:55
Please stop!!!!

There are two camps. DOW just happens to fall in the camp with the majority here that says the game is not broken. The cards are not broken. Regardless of your opinion. It does not seem that DOW would want to change that. And DOW is listening to their fans: the ones that have no problems with the cards as they are now. If they replaceds the cards, they would alienate a larger portion of their audience.

This is not an errata. This is not a lack of playtesting. A game of this size and magnitude are going to have clarifications. Richard Borg has probably been playing C&C: Fantasy for at least a decade, if not longer. I saw articles on the game coming out dated 6 or 7 years ago. From Eric's explanation, this was one of the first games DOW wanted to produce and took on M44 first to get their feet wet.

If anything, them being TOO familiar with the rules made them a bit lax with the wording. As such, it seems those with experience with M44 and Ancients have a better time dealing with the rules than those coming in cold to the system.

Broken records aside, DOW has caved to the pressure and posted a houserule to deal with the situation. And even after they did that, some people still weren't happy. I don't think they are going to do any more than that. The problem is, your "cause" is too fragmented on a solution. Go discuss it amongst yourselves on what the correct wording should be and then present it to DOW. You aren't going to convince those that are united in thought that these cards aren't broken. You might - just might - convince DOW. Failing that, try getting blank cards. But really, DOW doesn't "owe" you this fix. The cards play how they intended them to play. The majority of players are fine with that.
      
mvettemagred
Senior Member

Posts: 266
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 17:07
ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:55

Please stop!!!!

Sorry, ColtsFan76, I should have never jumped back into this debate. It's just more fun than working. Smile
      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 17:11
The reason this discussion is so difficult is the fact that some people have experienced HR/FF to be game deciding in a number of games. Some players find this effect all-right while others don't!
That seems to be the issue, right?
We have discussed strategies to try and avoid the card even being played, but this has not solved the situations where the cards have popped up anyways and decided the outcome of the game. We have looked at the possibility of using house rules, but they don't solve the problem in every situation (tournaments, out-of-the-box games etc.). What more is there to discuss?
Why can't we simply acknowledge that the two different camps have their own playing style and preferences? And why is it such a big deal to have one camp asking for optional replacement cards, that would help them and their friends to enjoy the game, while not even hurting the other camp?


      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 17:13
mvettemagred wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 17:07

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:55

Please stop!!!!

Sorry, ColtsFan76, I should have never jumped back into this debate. It's just more fun than working. Smile

Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
      
sdafilli
Senior Member

Posts: 206
Registered:
April 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24
Even if DoW came up with a 'replacement' card, what stops an opponent saying "well i want to play with the original/replacement card, otherwise I don't want to play"?

Of course, you could find yourself in a camp where both of you agree to play with one card or the other.... then what's the need for a replacement card, if an agreed upon variant would suffice just as well? (especially given that DoW have repeatedly specified that that's how they intended, and continue, to want to play these cards)... and there have been several (and good ones mind you) variants suggested on the forums (including the "official 'unofficial' DoW variant")

But we can see that people are still not happy...neither will the likely be if a replacement card came out (cause it might suit one group but not another... each group would want a piece of recognition by demanding their favourte variant)

So common sense suggests either: don't buy the game, stop playing the game and sell the one you have (or keep it and let it collect dust), play as it is, or pick an agreed upon variant.... OR (yes there still is one more option) join the "whingers" group Very Happy

You see? Soooooo many options....... which one will you chose?

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 18:27]

      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:07
sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24

Even if DoW came up with a 'replacement' card, what stops an opponent saying "well i want to play with the original/replacement card, otherwise I don't want to play"?

It is not DoW's problem if players can't agree on what rules to use. If they offered optional cards the problem would be out of their hands.

sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24


Of course, you could find yourself in a camp where both of you agree to play with one card or the other.... then what's the need for a replacement card, if an agreed upon variant would suffice just as well? (especially given that DoW have repeatedly specified that that's how they intended, and continue, to want to play these cards)... and there have been several (and good ones mind you) variants suggested on the forums (including the "official 'unofficial' DoW variant")

I believe I have covered the problems with variants in my previous post.

sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24


But we can see that people are still not happy...neither will the likely be if a replacement card came out (cause it might suit one group but not another... each group would want a piece of recognition by demanding their favourte variant)


I don't think that would be so. I have hardly seen anyone continue to complain after FFG made replacement cards to their games - optional or not.
But yes, that is a possibility.

sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24


So common sense suggests either: don't buy the game, stop playing the game and sell the one you have (or keep it and let it collect dust), play as it is, or pick an agreed upon variant.... OR (yes there still is one more option) join the "whingers" group Very Happy

You see? Soooooo many options....... which one will you chose?


Since this thread was started by a new member, I still find it worthwile to discuss the flaws and merits of the game.
I will continue to play the game, while at the same time being annoyed, every now and then, by a problem that could easily be fixed by the designer/publisher without hurting or alienating any players.
      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32
dbc- wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 12:07

sdafilli wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 18:24

Even if DoW came up with a 'replacement' card, what stops an opponent saying "well i want to play with the original/replacement card, otherwise I don't want to play"?

It is not DoW's problem if players can't agree on what rules to use. If they offered optional cards the problem would be out of their hands.

Really? I don't think so! They offered an optional houserule and almost as many people are up in arms about that as the original cards! So what do you want DOW to put on a reprint? IF DOW created a set of cards they don't think were broken, and then gave you ANOTHER option, AND you still don't like it, what should they do???? I really don't want them wasting their time to keep trying to figure out exactly what a handful of people want and try to please them. Let them work on expansions and new games.
      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:42
ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32

Really? I don't think so! They offered an optional houserule and almost as many people are up in arms about that as the original cards!

People are still discussing house rules because the one offered from DoW was only an "official" unofficial house rule.

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32


So what do you want DOW to put on a reprint?

The cards as they intended them to be...
I'm only asking for an optional replacement card. I really can't see the problem with this.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:46
mvettemagred wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 10:35



But I forget, you don't want even one game determined by HR/FF. Since Battlelore is a game where one lucky roll, one lucky draw, one lucky anything at the right time can start the dominoes falling toward victory/defeat, this game definitely isn't for you and your friends.


That's just the thing though. Myself and the other people in my gaming groups are completely fine with a few lucky rolls or timely lore card draws. That goes with the territory.

We just believe that the nuke cards are on a whole other level than the rest of the game.

So here's to asking for an official (printed) variant! Very Happy
      
Zeal
Senior Member
Second Lieutenant

Posts: 214
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:52
ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 08:55



Please stop!!!!




Aww, come on it was like political theatre in miniature. (No pun intended)

I applaud anyone who can find that much passion about a subject. Even when I completely disagree.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Posts: 232
Registered:
August 2005
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:54
I'm actually surprised we haven't seen a lore card expansion yet. Seems like that would be a really simple, cheap, and enjoyable early expansion.

Also it might address the general cleric weirdness. Why is the healer/protector also the best offensive council member as well? Why are there hardly any warrior lore cards that take level into account when the cleric cards scale to such amazing heights?

I'd like to see these sorts of balance issues improved upon in addition to redesigned cleric nuke cards.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 19:54]

      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 19:59
dbc- wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 12:42

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32

Really? I don't think so! They offered an optional houserule and almost as many people are up in arms about that as the original cards!

People are still discussing house rules because the one offered from DoW was only an "official" unofficial house rule.

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32


So what do you want DOW to put on a reprint?

The cards as they intended them to be...

They are the way they were intended to be. Please tell me you can comprehend that. Set aside my personal feelings on the subject, set aside your personal feelings. DOW printed them exactly how they wanted them to be. They printed them exactly how Richard wanted them to be. You obviously don't like the intent, but the intent is what it is.

Quote:

I'm only asking for an optional replacement card. I really can't see the problem with this.


And what happens if they do print "optional" cards and they make the official "unofficial" rule official by printing it on replacement cards? Will you leave this alone? Will you stop talking about the cards? And if yes, want about the remaining voices that still have problems?

My point is, replacement cards do nothing if you aren't going to like what is on the cards. And from the reaction of what DOW floated out there as a fix, you won't like that either. Printing the words on a card isn't going to make everything magically disappear.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 20:01]

      
dbc-
Senior Member

Posts: 180
Registered:
December 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 20:17
ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:59

dbc- wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 12:42

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32

Really? I don't think so! They offered an optional houserule and almost as many people are up in arms about that as the original cards!

People are still discussing house rules because the one offered from DoW was only an "official" unofficial house rule.

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:32


So what do you want DOW to put on a reprint?

The cards as they intended them to be...

They are the way they were intended to be. Please tell me you can comprehend that. Set aside my personal feelings on the subject, set aside your personal feelings. DOW printed them exactly how they wanted them to be. They printed them exactly how Richard wanted them to be. You obviously don't like the intent, but the intent is what it is.


I know they printed the cards the way they intended them to be. Maybe I should have been more clear, let me rephrase:
While I would not mind to see another version of the cards in print, all I'm asking for is an optional replacement card. In other words, DoW can keep the cards as they are, I don't mind. Just put some optional cards in a future expansion and you will hear no more words from me (on this subject Smile )
Sorry for any confusion in my previous post.

ColtsFan76 wrote on Thu, 09 August 2007 19:59


Quote:

I'm only asking for an optional replacement card. I really can't see the problem with this.


And what happens if they do print "optional" cards and they make the official "unofficial" rule official by printing it on replacement cards? Will you leave this alone? Will you stop talking about the cards? And if yes, want about the remaining voices that still have problems?

My point is, replacement cards do nothing if you aren't going to like what is on the cards. And from the reaction of what DOW floated out there as a fix, you won't like that either. Printing the words on a card isn't going to make everything magically disappear.

I can only point to my experience of other games from other companies, as I have said before. I have not seen any discussions continue after a company has issued some kind of fix to a game I have personally played.
      
Faithful
Member

Posts: 82
Registered:
May 2006
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 20:24
I have no trouble with HR or FF, but I do stand up for the side that sees them as an issue.

Why? Because there are too many people that are condescending, arrogant, and exhibit disdain toward those that do not hold "their" position.

Let DOW talk for them self. They really do not need others to defend them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

Now to Colt, I really do believe there was too little testing, or too few testers. There are way too many corrections/clarifications to think these cards were all printed as intended and correctly.

It is not HR or FF that stopped me from buying future BL items it is the lack of thought that has gone into the writing of the cards.

With all the expansions coming out I can only see more and more additions to the compendium.

I personally see it like publishers that release buggy software. They have to make patches to make the product what it was intended to be from the start.

Card issues are like the bugs, and corrections are like the patches.

Rushed, buggy software is unacceptable and so are rushed, buggy cards.


      
izack
Junior Member
Cadet

Posts: 6
Registered:
August 2007
Re:maybe to powerful Thu, 09 August 2007 20:30
cebalrai wrote on Fri, 10 August 2007 01:54

I'm actually surprised we haven't seen a lore card expansion yet. Seems like that would be a really simple, cheap, and enjoyable early expansion.

Also it might address the general cleric weirdness. Why is the healer/protector also the best offensive council member as well? Why are there hardly any warrior lore cards that take level into account when the cleric cards scale to such amazing heights?

I'd like to see these sorts of balance issues improved upon in addition to redesigned cleric nuke cards.


Seriously, i feel the Cleric as a class is overpowered. I've only had one big game deciding spell in the games that I played and that was a RR targeting 8 units with about 12 casualties. My opponent cast a HR after that, but only managed to hit 4 units. My spell was a game turner; combined with my next 3 command cards they bagged me 3 Flags, with 2 more opposing units on the verge of collapse.
Now both of us start try to start with as many Cleric levels as possible, I don't think that's the way it should be.
Seriously isn't the Wizard supposed to have the Nuke spells? Cleric has better and more Offensive direct damage dealing (RR,HR,FF,CL not to mention MoT) and Healing spells than the Wizard (only FB and CD). What's the point of the Wizard? Maybe if there were more counterspells in the pool that would help, but not by much.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 August 2007 20:34]

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