Jump to content


Can any one give me a run down on the 3 lcg?

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Pantomime



  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 19 November 2009 - 08:30 AM

I love all 3 franchises almost equally. Can any one give me a technical run down on how each is play, card pool, strategic value. I find it sad that I can sell 4 pieces of cardboard for $160 total (baneslayer angels). I plan on using the proceeds to get into one of these living card games. Thanks 

#2 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 November 2009 - 09:25 AM


Let's try to do this

I highly reccomend you to take a look to the great videos you find on each mini-site here to have a GAMEPLAY overview on the games...

What I'll try to do is a list of PRO/CONS to understand what type of game you're going to find, all right?

The best thing is: take a look at the videos (You find them typing the card games names on Youtube) and then read what I wrote for a deeper understanding.

NOTE: I'm not natural english, so It may difficult to write a complet and still short review of each game.




- Great art and environment

- Possibly the funniest/most creative resource system in the history of CCGs

- Interesting mechanic of the "3 cards per turn" that implies difficult choices 

- 4 different types of "combat", each one with its own effect

- Easy to find combinations and interactions


- Too fast. More than occasional blow ups.

- When you're "losing", it's difficult to get the game back to your side.

- Too many "auto-includes" and "ultimate" cards.

- Too much early combos.

- Occasional umbalancing between factions (7 factions are not simple to manage).


Overall: great game with a great art. You find all the misterious flavour of Lovecraft's Tales. Easy to learn and "less" hard to master than the other LCG games, IMHO. Lots of weird combinations, intimidating monsters and twisting card effects to improve each kind of strategy.

The occasional blow outs and the "inner power" of some "auto-includes" makes the game too fast. Sometimes the focus on the games is: "Put down a couple of strong guys and win." 

Not bad at all as a game, but honestly, I'm chagrined. (I quit playin' it).




- Insane Strategical depth

- The Plot deck (almost uncontrollable surprising effects outside the main deck)

- 3 different types of "combat"

- No need to play 3x everything

- There are not "ultimate cards". Each card is useful, noone is essential.

- Shared turn between player and long, deep turns.



- It's not simple to master at all

- someone may find Agot games "too long".


Overall: i love this game. I like it for the "lenght" of the games, for the deep strategical choice you have to make EACH single card...No t1 combo decks, no devastating auto-includes...Lots of different decks and possibilities. 

No doubt about it: the Best game I've ever played.




- Interesting and funny "3-zones" system

- Total choice in managing resources/card draw

- Easy to learn...

- "Last in, First Out" (the Stack in MtG) system is a good point for lots of players


- as usual: "Hard to master"

- "Last in, First Out" system (the Stack in MtG) is not a good point for lots of players

- Some Blow outs (not too much).

Overall: wonderful, fresh new games, that introduces some new mechanics and concepts, a great card design and some tactical depth that's really needed in Card games with an environment like this.


Please ask everything you wanna need and I'll try to go deeper than this.

Hope it helps ;)

#3 FiendishDevil



  • Members
  • 411 posts

Posted 19 November 2009 - 09:31 AM

AGoT has the largest cardpool. CoC has the second largest. Invasion has the smallest as it is the newest.

However, being the newest, it is easy to acquire all the Battlepacks and easier to get into the game.

Invasion is the LCG that plays the most like M:TG compared to the other LCGs.

#4 Pantomime



  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 19 November 2009 - 09:41 AM

Some really good info here. Hats off to you both. It seems Thrones is the most balanced? I was thinking about picking up a core set of each, it is probably better to focus on just 1? are the rules freely availible? 

#5 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 November 2009 - 04:51 PM

 You find any possible resource (rules, FAQ and Videos) at the mini-sites, so no problem.


I'm currently playing AgoT and W:I...It depends a lot in the type of playing you're lookin' for. 

If you're into an active meta (or a potentially active one) focus on 1/2 of 'em, if you don't have "money" troubles...

The fact is that once you've decided I highly recommend you to buy multiple copies of the core set if you wanna go a bit competitive (3 copies in Agot, 2 in W:I).

In Agot you have all 1x stuff in there (with the exception of a couple of 2x...In W:I you have some 2x and some 3x so a couple of Core Sets could be fine to start...


Then, there's another point of view: Warhammer: Invasion is a fresh-new game...It's not a right way to decide, but it's an help. With a new game you've the possibility to understand it from the beginning, buying just the Core Set and the first BP. Less money, more chance to jump in quickly. 

With the other two, you have to put a little more effort (more cards to purchase, more options to understand).


You can still purchase 1x each Core Set, try the games and see how they play to choose. Not a bad move...But once you'll jump in (and you'll do somewhere, believe me eheheh) just by multiple copies of the CS (obviously, ignore this part if you're not interested in competitive play at all.


Anyway, if you can build up a little amount of money for the upcoming Christmas and you're gonna play "hard", go Agot and W:I. 

Think about the fact that I play competitive Agot with 1x CP a month (I started with 3x Core Set, though)...I purchase some singles when I get the chance and that's it.

In W:I I'm more likely to purchase 3x everything, for its "different" deckuilding approach (less options, more consistancy). 


Let us know what you think and your doubts, in order to help you a bit more, if needed.




#6 vermillian



  • Members
  • 882 posts

Posted 20 November 2009 - 03:33 AM

More and more I'm finding AGOT games to be a bit longer than my attention span has been recently... Many cards CAN get in to play and linger around mucking things up, and the fact that battles are three tiered makes for significantly confusing decisions.

Three tiered battle:

AGOT has up to three icons on each guy. These guys will 'kneel' to attack or defend in struggle. You can initiate each kind of struggle on your turn (pending availability of guys in play with those icons). You can bring as many or as few guys as you want, but only guys with those icons. In a struggle attackers strength is compared to all of the defenders if attacker wins that comparison he gets to execute the nature of the struggle.

The three icons, which determine the nature of the struggle, are Military, Intrigue and Power.

Military struggle win means the losign side must choose and destroy X of their characters.
Intrigue means loser must choose and discard X cards from hand.
Power means loser must hand over X power to the winning player.

X is the CLAIM value on the attackers Plot card (a card that changes by own choice each turn).

Power is the games end goal. Get to so much power and win the game. Power is gained by card effects, being unopposing in struggles, having the most strength standing at the end of the turn, and other card effects.

It is a great game. I have just been witnessing longer game lengths than I enjoy. That's not to say games can't end quickly, they just, recently, tend not to.

Though AGOT makes for a great (long) multiplayer.

#7 dormouse


    LCG Designer

  • Members
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 20 November 2009 - 05:50 AM

Point of clarification, the Intrigue challenge forces a random discard of X cards, the loser does not get to choose them. Convention has the winner the cards from hand to "randomize" the selection, but the looser could just as easily shuffle the cards around and then lay them out face down and one.

AGoT is my favorite card game ever... though W:I is quickly gaining.

I'd suggest picking up a Core Set of each and giving them both some play for a month and figure out which is the one you find yourself gravitating towrads more. When you figure that out decide if you want to play competitively or just socially. If you want to play competitively, by a second Core Set (I don't think you need AGoT x3) and then by all the Supplement Packs of the most recent cycle. Get a solid idea of what kind of decks you want to build and what factions you want to concentrate on and then buy additional Supplement Packs that feature important cards for your faction and the type of deck you want to play.

The great thing about the LCG model is because you don't need a full playset of every card, just the ones that matter to you, you only have to buy the packs those cards are in. The cards you have that you don't want/need you can sell or trade so you can get the ones you do want or need. And even if you are like me, and refuse to choose a faction, you can buy everything you need for a very reasonable price (your $for two M:tG cards will buy you two Core Sets and 8 Supplement Packs at full price, and that is before you start looking at places like Cool Stuff Inc).

You also have the choice of playing one competitively and one socially and it still being cheaper than playing M:tG competitively.

"words are like arrows, once loosened you cannot call them back"

#8 Pantomime



  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 November 2009 - 07:06 AM

Just an update, I picked up a copy of each core set, should get here by wednesday. I will read over the rules until then. Once my wife and I get a few games in I will post what my analysis of each system is. 

#9 Toqtamish



  • Members
  • 3,515 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 05:21 AM

I have recently got into the Agot and WI and I have the core set for both and one BP/Cp for each so far. You could really play 2 quite easily as the BP/CP are quite affordable. I play on buying two of each a month and the occasional third one. But even then you are spending alot less than the typical CCG and especially MTG where some cards are worth almost as much as LCG's the complete game.

#10 Rakshasa



  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 11 December 2009 - 12:53 AM

I rate Call of Cthulhu as being the most like a board game, and the one that you least need to expend money on additional cards for - maybe choose one or two extra packs you like the look of and add them in, but in all honesty the core set plays really nicely on its own.

Again, Warhammer has the advantage of being new so you'd be getting in at the beginning. Also, it's quite short to play through and I think fun.

I haven't played A Game of Thrones since it was collectable, so can't really say how it looks these days.

© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS