Jump to content



Photo

Banners of War oversights for Lead Publisher


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:36 AM

I try to keep quiet and keep my tongue bit, but I cannot stay silent this time. 

FFG prides themselves as the "Lead Publisher in Board, Card, and Roleplaying games". 

I would think after being a customer and very loyal fan since Battlemist, they would be able to back those words up. However, I just purchased the new Banners expansion. 

Every addition was exactly what the game needs and takes no additional learning to implement. The expansion is a blast and I still recommend it, despite the following issues I have. So why the "U mad bro" attitude?

As the Lead Publisher in all of Gaming, I would think this company could afford to make the game a little bit user friendly and pay more attention to the product. 

A few examples of Lead Publisher's laziness and lack of care for customers and their product. 

Waiqar's Capital Stronghold is obviously the first glaring issue. They didn't even use the right art. Take a look in the rulebook for the expansion and you will see they actually reused the elves capital and didn't even notice this after applying the purple screen layer to it. 

After including a replacement card for nearly every component for the base game in the Chaos in the Old World expansion, I would think FFG would include updated order cards. A harvest card to remind me that I can purchase development cards during harvest order. Or gaining commanders from the rally support card. 

One of the new region tiles has a space for a large mountain that isn't punched out. 



I just felt compelled to voice my opinion...as ignored as it will go. 

I always recommend FFG products to my friends, co-workers, and other inspiring or new game designers, because FFG does develop very fun, interesting, an semi-original games. I am left to wonder why they still have errors and issues in the product lines when other major and non major companies have so few errors. So, even with heavy criticism towards the company's lack of care for this expansion, I still MUST recommend it as the perfect supplement to a great game. 

I don't even desire anymore races after this expansion because so much variance has now been added.

 

Kudos

Corey and Andrew for the great rule concepts brought to the base game. 

Luke 'Firedudewraith' Edlin for the continued excellence in the region tiles. 

The fans for pouring in enough loyalty and support to warrant this expansion. An expansion which gives us more of what we desired to be added through our various variants and idea posts in the community forums.



#2 z22

z22

    Member

  • Members
  • 43 posts

Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:47 AM

I agree on the mountain tile and order card issues. Even though they are minor issues, this just screams of cutting corners to trim $1 off production costs. They couldn't cut out the mountain area and supply an extra mountain piece? And they couldn't supply a new order card?

I'm a big fan of Runewars and preordered the expansion as soon I could. I received my game a couple of days ago and noticed both of these issues too. ;(



#3 KevinBakon

KevinBakon

    Member

  • Members
  • 151 posts

Posted 18 November 2011 - 10:18 AM

I JUST glued the mountains into the base game tiles 2 weeks ago.  Sunuvagun....

The order cards are a bummer too.  My gaming crew are not all hardcore rules junkies, so there will no doubt be some confusion in the game to come on when to develop and recruit.  Maybe I'll just write it onto the old cards....

I'm glad to hear you're liking the game mechanics so much.  My game store said they'd call me if it came in this week, but I haven't gotten a call yet.  Looks like I'll have to wait until it gets delivered next week.  Dagnabbit!



#4 SolennelBern

SolennelBern

    Member

  • Members
  • 944 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 04:02 AM

Well with all this (which seems a lot of oversights...), is Banners of War still a good buy?



#5 Mestre dos Magos

Mestre dos Magos

    Member

  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 12:47 PM

Curator said:

After including a replacement card for nearly every component for the base game in the Chaos in the Old World expansion, I would think FFG would include updated order cards. A harvest card to remind me that I can purchase development cards during harvest order. Or gaining commanders from the rally support card. 

 

I agree with your post, but for this paragraph. You are aware that the cards in the Chaos in the Old World Expansion are not replacement cards, but they are for a variant game, right?

 

If yes, I might have misunderstood your meaning, and in this case I apologize.



#6 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 04:44 PM

 Personally, while I think new order cards may have been neat, I don't think they are "necessary", but would have just been a nicety.

The Harvest one is pretty easy to remember, and I suspect even for Newbies; the card says you can build developments, and while it does refer to strongholds, that should be enough of a reminder that you can build development cards.

Admittedly, the Rally Support isn't QUITE as easy to remember, but even that shouldn't be too hard to serve as a reminder, since Commanders are directly related to heroes.

I don't have my copy yet, but the mountain thing does sound like a bummer, but even that doesn't detract from the gameplay.

 

IE, while these concerns may be valid, if they are the primary issues, they are relatively minor, which I think means that the expansion overall WAS done rather well.  I certainly wouldn't use any of these concerns as reasons not to buy the expansion.



#7 KevinBakon

KevinBakon

    Member

  • Members
  • 151 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 05:16 PM

 I just played our first 4p game with the expansion tonight.  It was a blast.  The developments and the new units were my favorite additions, but all the new tactics and seasons and stuff were great too.  I would absolutely recommend a purchase.  

The updated order cards were not as much of a problem as I expected.  No one switched commander abilities, so that was not an issue this time.  As Sigma said, the development upgrades are exactly where you'd expect so that was fine.  However, the mountain tile was a significant problem.  We're trained to recognize that mountain border, so it kept getting overlooked.  We resorted to placing a pile of damage tokens there as a reminder and even then someone forgot.  I'm going to cut out a slot for a mountain with my exacto before we play again.  

Beside that, everything was peaches and cream.  

 



#8 SolennelBern

SolennelBern

    Member

  • Members
  • 944 posts

Posted 23 November 2011 - 05:19 AM

Could we simply cut the mountain hole ourselves?



#9 allenkwest

allenkwest

    Member

  • Members
  • 44 posts

Posted 23 November 2011 - 07:44 AM

For me when it comes to that mountain spot, It looks more like a cliff or a drop down into the valley to me. It is more for the drop of the elevation, not a steep climb like the base game that creates that red border.



#10 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 23 November 2011 - 04:54 PM

Although it  is your right to do so, I think you guys let FFG get away with too much. Runebound required a second edition. Descent Quests Book required 10 page FAQ. Then Sea of Blood map was missing the whirlpool and instead had two dungeons entrances. Runewars came with replacement components and even then had the error on the tiles with the number of giants. 

 
I guess it just bothers me more than others that other lesser know game developers make error free games or at least games without illustration errors, because of how competetive and tight the industry is, but FFG feels they can exclude themselves from the same market because they are popular.


#11 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 24 November 2011 - 04:43 AM

 I've bought games from many companies that have errors, some bigger than others.  Z-Man, CGE, FFG...  I've yet to find a "perfect" company.

For me, the gameplay is FAR more important than niggly production issues.



#12 Nyxus

Nyxus

    Member

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 26 November 2011 - 12:37 PM

I hate to be adding fuel to Curator's fire but I ran into a couple of issues myself with the expansion.

The 8-city conundrum:  In a 4-player game without using the rise of the free cities variant, it's possible, not likely, but possible that all 8 tiles with cities on them are dealt out to the players.  With only 7 cities in the original game, one city space would either have to be replaced or go without.  Without an official explanation, one is left to speculate as to what should be done in such a case.

The beastmen in the mountain:  With the expansion it is quite possible that all five tiles with beastmen areas are selected.  If this happens, you would need 10 beastmen to fill all the areas.  With only 8 beastmen figures in the supply, it's impossible to do this. I'm assuming there's a typo on one of the two new beastmen areas.  The mountain area, 10D, with its 2 ore resources seems too obvious.  In all other cases, we have a giant or dragon inhabiting such an area but here just 2 lowly beastmen.  Why?  I'm going off on a limb here, but I think that area was meant to be the abode of the 4th dragon but they didn't catch the typo before it went to print.  Until I hear an official answer, I'm housing 10D as the 4th dragon area so that extra dragon can finally see some play.  That poor dragon with the bent wing that's been sitting out since I bought the game now finally has a reason to be in the box.



#13 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 26 November 2011 - 03:08 PM

FFG likes the heat I guess. Burn fire burn. 

Wow I didn't even catch all of this...LOL. Still on FFG's side Sig? Guess I better get busy editing the tiles too. The cards can wait. 

GLAD I BOUGHT 2 RUNERWARS. 

I already replaced the undead tokens with actual reanimate figs and added an additional mountain. Working on new harvest and rally support order cards with new info that can just be sleeved over the originals and be taken out when playing the base game. The undead capital is fixed and I posted it already. My co-workers are going to be ticked that I am fixing FFGs mistakes while having a game of my own I should be working on. 

In all seriousness, I know it sounds like I am angry, but that is just the internet that makes me appear that way. Honestly, ask yourself, would I post fixes for the oversights found in FFG's products if that were true? 

I just hate mistakes and I know others do to, so, I fix them and provide the fixes for free in support of the game and the community.



#14 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 26 November 2011 - 07:18 PM

Nyxus said:

The 8-city conundrum:  In a 4-player game without using the rise of the free cities variant, it's possible, not likely, but possible that all 8 tiles with cities on them are dealt out to the players.  With only 7 cities in the original game, one city space would either have to be replaced or go without.  Without an official explanation, one is left to speculate as to what should be done in such a case.

I'm still waiting for my copy to arrive, so I don't know what the 3 new tiles have; looking at the rules, though, it looks like Tiles #10 and #11 have city icons printed?  If so, then yes, it is remotely possible in a 4-player game that this could happen, and a clarification should be made; I'll ask Corey and put it in my document.  (I need to get these questions batched up and sent, it's just been a busy week and I wanted to wait until I got my copy).

If only one of tiles #10/#11 has a city icon, though, this couldn't happen, since only 6 of the original tiles had cities.

Nyxus said:

The beastmen in the mountain:  With the expansion it is quite possible that all five tiles with beastmen areas are selected.  If this happens, you would need 10 beastmen to fill all the areas.  With only 8 beastmen figures in the supply, it's impossible to do this. I'm assuming there's a typo on one of the two new beastmen areas.  The mountain area, 10D, with its 2 ore resources seems too obvious.  In all other cases, we have a giant or dragon inhabiting such an area but here just 2 lowly beastmen.  Why?  I'm going off on a limb here, but I think that area was meant to be the abode of the 4th dragon but they didn't catch the typo before it went to print.  Until I hear an official answer, I'm housing 10D as the 4th dragon area so that extra dragon can finally see some play.  That poor dragon with the bent wing that's been sitting out since I bought the game now finally has a reason to be in the box.

You mention that 10D has the 2 beastmen.  Are there beastmen in either Tile 9 or another area in Tile 10?  (I can't tell by the low-res image in the online rulebook).  If not, this one wouldn't be a problem, as in the base game, only 3 tiles have beastmen (1B, 6A, 7A), each with only 2.  (Unless, of course, I goofed in making my spreadsheet).  If Tile 9 or another Tile 10 area DOES have 2 more beastmen, it could be an issue.

Although, I do have to admit, your final bit seems a bit... odd.  Basically you are saying that until you hear an official answer, you are assuming that the tile 10D is a misprint?  IE, you are waiting for official clarification that what it says is actually true?  Not that it's bad, it's just strikes me as kind of backwards to assume it's wrong unless told "nope, it says what it means and means what it says" :)

 

I'm excited to get my copy, in any case.  Should be loads of fun!



#15 Katsue

Katsue

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 04:34 AM

The 2 ore tile with the beastmen was displayed in the very post announcing the expansion. I just don't see how it can be a production error. (It's also clear from that image that there are two tiles with cities.)



#16 Nyxus

Nyxus

    Member

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 04:38 AM

sigmazero13 said:

 

 

I'm still waiting for my copy to arrive, so I don't know what the 3 new tiles have; looking at the rules, though, it looks like Tiles #10 and #11 have city icons printed?  If so, then yes, it is remotely possible in a 4-player game that this could happen, and a clarification should be made; I'll ask Corey and put it in my document.  (I need to get these questions batched up and sent, it's just been a busy week and I wanted to wait until I got my copy).

If only one of tiles #10/#11 has a city icon, though, this couldn't happen, since only 6 of the original tiles had cities.

 

 

That's right.  I should've been more explicit.  Areas 10B and 11C have cities.

sigmazero13 said:

 

 

You mention that 10D has the 2 beastmen.  Are there beastmen in either Tile 9 or another area in Tile 10?  (I can't tell by the low-res image in the online rulebook).  If not, this one wouldn't be a problem, as in the base game, only 3 tiles have beastmen (1B, 6A, 7A), each with only 2.  (Unless, of course, I goofed in making my spreadsheet).  If Tile 9 or another Tile 10 area DOES have 2 more beastmen, it could be an issue.

I'm excited to get my copy, in any case.  Should be loads of fun!

 

 

11A which is a 3 Food area has 2 beastmen in addition to 10D. 

sigmazero13 said:

 

Although, I do have to admit, your final bit seems a bit... odd. Basically you are saying that until you hear an official answer, you are assuming that the tile 10D is a misprint? IE, you are waiting for official clarification that what it says is actually true? Not that it's bad, it's just strikes me as kind of backwards to assume it's wrong unless told "nope, it says what it means and means what it says" :)

 

 

Yes, well...  A 2 Ore area just doesn't seem right having anything less than a dragon.  :)



#17 Katsue

Katsue

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 04:40 AM

Nyxus said:

Yes, well...  A 2 Ore area just doesn't seem right having anything less than a dragon.  :)

I'm more worried about the idea that an area with three resources is defended by two triangle units.



#18 Curator

Curator

    Member

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 06:40 AM

Katsue said:

 

I just don't see how it can be a production error.

 



I can. Look at the elves and undead capital art. This was carried through the entire development of this expansion. This image is from the preview for developments. It is also in the rule book. 

 



#19 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 11:39 AM

Katsue said:

Nyxus said:

 

Yes, well...  A 2 Ore area just doesn't seem right having anything less than a dragon.  :)

 

 

I'm more worried about the idea that an area with three resources is defended by two triangle units.

I don't think it's THAT odd; in the base game, the 3-food area is guarded by 3 sorcerers, and personally I think 2 beastmen are better (or at least equal to) 3 sorcerers, as sorcerers may be hard to kill, but they hardly do any damage (and are just as weak to routs as anything).



#20 Katsue

Katsue

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:05 AM

Curator said:

 

Katsue said:

 

I just don't see how it can be a production error.

 



I can. Look at the elves and undead capital art. This was carried through the entire development of this expansion. This image is from the preview for developments. It is also in the rule book.

 

 

To be honest, that looks like a deliberate reference to the Lord of the Rings to me. The name of the Elven capital is very similar to Ithilien, which is the region where Minas Morgul (The Tower of Black Sorcery) lies. Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul were twin cities before the latter was captured by Sauron, and looked very similar.

I'm open to correction by those with more knowledge of Terrinoth's history, of course.






© 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