Jump to content



Photo

New Runewars expansion announced


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 sepayne7l

sepayne7l

    Member

  • Members
  • 567 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:57 PM

It's on the front page (as you can see).

Sounds cool- vampires, zombie dragons blood witches, ents and others. More cards and more fun.

No new races yet. But I'm sure this isn't the last expansion.

 



#2 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:25 PM

I think I will skip on this.

I made my own rules to combat the luck drawing factor without requiring more cards. My playgroup made 2 new units for each race while I designed orcs and dwarves as an additional race. We changed the way neutral units work. I even created simple warlord tokens that accompany my warlord variant, where heroes can lead armies.

 I am guessing this expansion was held up by the artist, Firedudewraith. Love his topographical work though, definitely worth the delay to get him again.

I find it funny at how similar Corey and I think. The variants I have posted on various sites pretty much do what this expansion most likely will do better. I am glad FFG was inspired by the community to turn these similar variants into professional work. But like I said, I have to skip on this one, because I have a special place in me that takes pride in the testing and long hours my friends and I put into our own creations.

Guess what I am trying to say is, I would buy this expansion in a heartbeat, if I didn't already have something similar. The art on the box cover is freaking amazing. That is one awesome talent FFG acquired.

Out of respect for FFG, I will not be posting my Runewars work or anything that is too similar to the variants added with 'Banners', because I feel, just like programs such as Magic Workstation, I could be endangering future sales. I care about the sales, because I would love to work with Corey someday on a game, I respect the artist, and I can't lie, but I still need dwarf and orc figures.



#3 Grove12345

Grove12345

    Member

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:38 PM

i think they copied the community bc they listened to them. If everyone wanted heroes to be generals, why not put that in the expansion?



#4 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 09:07 PM

Grove12345 said:

i think they copied the community bc they listened to them. If everyone wanted heroes to be generals, why not put that in the expansion?



I am not crusading against the expansion. f you see I stated that FFG's solutions will be more professionally done. I don't have the means to make new cards. They however do. I am merely responding to the news in my own fashion. I fully support the expansion and as always encourage the community to buy it.

.



#5 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,897 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 05:14 AM

 Who says that everything in the expansion will duplicate your efforts?  Even if you prefer your own add-ons, that doesn't mean there won't be enough in the expansion to warrant purchasing it and just not use the "overlapping" parts.



#6 HighHanded

HighHanded

    Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 08:45 AM

I'm going to buy it, but at the same time I am disappointed.

I'd prefer at least one new army to replace the elves with in 4 player games.

The new units look interesting though, and some extra map pieces are good too.



#7 Maerimydra

Maerimydra

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 08:59 AM

HighHanded said:

I'm going to buy it, but at the same time I am disappointed.

I'd prefer at least one new army to replace the elves with in 4 player games.

The new units look interesting though, and some extra map pieces are good too.

 

Why do you want to replace the elves? :)



#8 Maerimydra

Maerimydra

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 10:48 AM

Who's the designer of this expansion? Is it Corey? It's not mentioned anywhere.



#9 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,897 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 04:51 PM

Maerimydra said:

HighHanded said:

 

I'm going to buy it, but at the same time I am disappointed.

I'd prefer at least one new army to replace the elves with in 4 player games.

The new units look interesting though, and some extra map pieces are good too.

 

 

 

Why do you want to replace the elves? :)

Agreed; in the games I've recorded, the Elves are 3-1 in 4-player games.



#10 HighHanded

HighHanded

    Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 08:39 PM

Because no one wants to play as them.

Mostly because from the several dozen games we played the elves lost all but one of them I think.



#11 Graf

Graf

    Member

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 02:25 AM

Everyone expected new races/armies, but I'm really NOT disappointed that they are not included. All that new units and all that new possibilities to specialize and customize your strategy (think about the new harvest-supremacy-bonus) will offer enough possibilities to change the "style of gameplay" of the current armies. 

 

I really like the new title card. In early game, it will be a great alternative to the "Primarch of the Wizards Council".

 

I'm curious how the new recruit-dials (with all these new units) will be arranged. And I'm curious if the triangle units will lose their impact because there are so much "big" units in the game, now.

 

There seem to be no new neutral units, right?



#12 Sausageman

Sausageman

    Member

  • Members
  • 354 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:48 AM

HighHanded said:

Because no one wants to play as them.

Mostly because from the several dozen games we played the elves lost all but one of them I think.

My experience is that the Elves tend to be the best (or at least most successful) race.  Their archers are amazing, they have a 2 hit point and 3 hit point model (big plus), no hexagonal, 5 initiative piece (another big plus).  All in all, they are great.



#13 Nazroth

Nazroth

    Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 04:36 AM

1) Runewars Expansion is just that my dreams come true. Love this game from the beggining, and i know that whatever is in there - it is must have for every Runewars fan. I hope that '4th quater of 2011' proves to be the deadline. CANNOT WAIT TO HAVE IT!

 

2) I play miniature and advanced board games for more than 15 years. I also play Runewars since beggining, and played it a lot. Elves are not the easiest race to play, but they certainly are the most deadly tool of war seen in this game IMHO. Elves are the only race that has FAST&FLYING unit, which gives you many oportunities to lead quick attacks behind enemy lines, wreaking havoc in bad supported home realms and making your opponent pay for every little mistake he made. It is also a race of big amount of starting influ, that makes you far more advanced in the eearly stage of the game, when you want to attrack powerful allies like dragons and giants. The only true drawback is lack of food, so you may see yurself in a situation where there is no food around - but hay - every race could actually find itself in such a situation! Aaah and there is a thing - a hex thing that your army does not possess - so what? You've got cool FLY/FAS cavalry unit, mentioned earlier, and great archers, that quickly make a pile of junt with your enemy's army.

 

ELVES are freaky... and i can see why is that in a four player game they're 1/3... becouse they are best race to play.

 

I actually play Undead (love their stoicism:P) but Elves win most of our games. Where there is a fight of three - fourth will be the winner, Elves are everywhere at once, especially where they're most needed at a time and can conquer your runes ina blink. That is why the Dragon Runes winning condition is so important - Elves where made this way so that they are equal to other races:)

 

But what are we talking about? Expansion is on the way and it'll tip the scales over upside down!

 

CANNOT WAIT TO HAVE IT!

 

Regards.

 

 



#14 Railarian

Railarian

    Member

  • Members
  • 96 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 05:53 AM

 It needed to have 5-6 Players. Get dwarves and Orcs in there! Agh well... Probably not the last expansion right?!



#15 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,897 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 11:47 AM

Railarian said:

 It needed to have 5-6 Players. Get dwarves and Orcs in there! Agh well... Probably not the last expansion right?!

I guess I disagree that it "needs" 5-6 players, in fact I don't think the game would WORK as well with so many.  Too much open space, not enough interaction.



#16 Nazroth

Nazroth

    Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 05:05 AM

Must disagree - with portals there would be plenty of interaction:)



#17 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,897 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 05:09 AM

Nazroth said:

 

Must disagree - with portals there would be plenty of interaction:)

 

 

Depends on where the portals are.  There are only 4 of them, and they are just as likely to be bunched together as to really be put in strategically useful areas.  And it also takes time to find them; there are many games where several of the Exploration Tokens are never explored, and if some of those are Portals, that's just going to make it harder.  And it also assumes that all 4 portals are placed on the map at all.

Plus, Portals are a liability for the attacker; it takes 1 influence to make the attack, but if you end up having to retreat, it takes another influence to move back.

Also, using Portals would assume that the players don't destroy them; I'd be likely to destroy a local portal if I was worried about other players moving through it to attack me.

They can HELP, but they won't SOLVE the problem, especially if you don't use the Exploration Tokens OPTIONAL rule.



#18 Maerimydra

Maerimydra

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 09:37 AM

sigmazero13 said:

 

Railarian said:

 

 It needed to have 5-6 Players. Get dwarves and Orcs in there! Agh well... Probably not the last expansion right?!

 

 

I guess I disagree that it "needs" 5-6 players, in fact I don't think the game would WORK as well with so many.  Too much open space, not enough interaction.

 

 

What makes you think that the rules for the map setup would remain the same in a 5 or 6 players game? Just saying... :)

P.S.: I'm happy with Runewars as it is, but I don't think that an expansion that allows more players would break the game. Look at Twilight Imperium, from which Runewars borrowed a lot of ideas, with it's 8 players capacity. Sadly, more players means less active gaming time for all players.



#19 Nazroth

Nazroth

    Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 01:26 PM

I'm not only player - i also sell boardgames in Bard Centrum Gier Kraków, Poland - and must say that runewars is a marble of sort. Twilight Imperium  - great game with looots of possibilities, but gaming with 5-7 friends is a little bit one way gaming. Withous even temporary allies you can't win. Runewars is evidently based on Twilight Imperium, but it seems that it's creators went to hell and get back only not to make same mistakes twice. So we have a game that is fully interactive, with hightly reduced 'awaiting oponent' moments, strategic, economic and with adventure motives - it is a titan.

They made it perfect (well almost) and didn't made same mistakes. Now we all haveour order cards - it makes 'choosing orders' much quicker, than in TI. We do not need piles of junk to keep track on our resources, and do not use dices either. It was very difficult to play a 8 player game of TI with only basic dice set.

 

Runewars took everything that was ever good and popular in all those BIG FFG GAMES, and untill now it had only two drawbacks (for me).

1) shaking faction sheets (all about those arrows, just glued some flat legs under the sheet and it stoped annoing me).

2) NO EXPANSION!

Damned - it is so good that it finally is here (almost here).

 

All this crap to say: Dont believe that making Runewars 'up to six' 'll make any difference. Maybe they will just barrow more of TI rules - like jump holes, don't know - underground passages? pre-destined on specific area elements, or maybe some other cool ideas. Up to now Runewars is a hybrid of Heroes of Might and Magic and Twilight Imperium. There's a plenty of ideas to explore.

Deep in my heart i know that whatever they choose to put inside this, and another expansion - it is my duty (as a RWS Lover) and it will be much funn to buy it.



#20 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,897 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 03:10 PM

Maerimydra said:

Look at Twilight Imperium, from which Runewars borrowed a lot of ideas, with it's 8 players capacity. Sadly, more players means less active gaming time for all players.

Yes, and I think TI3 is significantly WORSE and LESS FUN to play with 7 and 8 players than it is with 6.  It supports 8, yes, but does not support it well.  Honestly, after having played a few 7/8 player games, I will never do so again; the downtime is too much, the interaction drastically drops, etc.

I see where you are going, but that analogy doesn't work for me, but in fact for my part reinforces MY point - Runewars would NOT be a better game just for supporting 5 and 6 players, but would in fact lose some of it's luster.






© 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