Jump to content



Photo

Changes I hope to see in the future


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 HolyGigi

HolyGigi

    Member

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:03 AM

First a few things about me so you know where i come from: I own all the AP/expansions and have about 100+ games done so far. The vast majority of those games were 3 or 4 player games. 

What will come next might sound like a rant, but its not :). I really love the game and cant wait to get the next expansions. So here I go:

- Treacheries: they are fun, add a nice tactical element to the game (should i block this one, or maybe wait because another might come and be even more damaging) but in some of the AP you really have added way too many. Just killed the Barlog yesterday and we got 6!! in a row. It was a 4 player game, but still. They just make Eleonor a must in every game, and this is not fun. Also, 12+ APs later, we still only have 2 ways to respond to treacheries: 2 Test of Will cards and Eleonor. I really hope you guys add some new cards that would help with this. Maybe an ally that can block a treachery but gets discarded after, sort of like the way we block shadow cards.

- Locations: Why are almost all locations, with very few exceptions, bad? Give us some good locations, like we have in the first quest from the core game. Make a character ready, add 1 resource to a hero, give bonus to attack/defense/willpower for that round, let us search x cards from the deck and keep one, or any other good effect. 

- Secrecy: really good and thematic idea, but you need to expand it more. Right now, the only reason I would consider going for a secrecy deck would be to put out Resourcefulness as early possible and then absorb the threat of another player. 

- Difficulty balance: some quests are almost impossible solo, while in 3-4 players they become a walk in the park. Others, tend to get more difficult the more players you have.You need to do two things here:

           -  Provide a difficulty rating based on the number of players. Right now, all scenarios come with one  DR: 5 (for example). But that scenario might be a 5 solo, but a 2 in 4 players. Just add 3 more ratings there: 2 player, 3 player and 4 player games.

           - Add a different way of balancing a 2nd, 3rd of 4th player. Right now, we just reveal one more card. This makes most of the scenarios easy, since we already have 3 other heroes that can quest/fight. In my games, usually we have 1 guy questing, 1 guy fighting, and 2 guys doing both of those things, as needed. In a 4 player game, most scenarios can be won by slowly questing in the begining while everyone gathers allies and attachments, and when we think we're ready, we go full speed. Unless a bad cad draw of treacheries happen, nothing can really stop us.

 

Quality of life

- FAQ: on BGG there is a very useful FAQ posted. Good for anyone, but especially for new players who might have questions about certain abilities or how they trigger. Maybe add a QR code & link on all Expansions/AP  to it? Shouldn't take much space and would really help out. Just check the LOTR forum on BGG, most new players keep asking the same questions. They are clearly not well covered in the manual so why not provide everyone with more detailed information?

- Errata: Some cards and abilities have been changed in the last year, mostly because they were overpowered (Ziggy, Berevor). Just provide us with the new cards in the next big expansion box. I still play with the cards as they are written, and I personally know at least 2 other gaming groups that do the same. Again, check BGG and you will see that most people play the cards as they are. It is silly to explain to someone that what he reads on the card is not actually correct, he has to go to a website and check a PDF for the real version. Its not like there are so many changed cards that cost can become an issue. 

Long post, I know ;)

 

 



#2 lleimmoen

lleimmoen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,682 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:03 AM

 Some very good points in my opinion.

Treacheries. I totally agree that there is too much emphasis on this in some games. And as the only two ways of prevention come in the Spirit sphere, this really makes games without Spirit nigh impossible, which I do not think is good. I hope we do get new ways to prevent this. More options are always good it seems.

Locations. I really enjoy those that are tough on players but come with benefit once you explore (or travel to) them. Locations are also what makes the game thematically very interesting to me. And are often feast for the eyes. The art dept. has been very good at this.

Secrecy. Really needs larger pool. I do not want to boast but I have had success in many different ways with this game but it has hardly ever come through secrecy. The idea is really interesting, and so are some of the cards, Aid, Light, Gilthoniel, for instance, but the card pool is seriously lacking. I have tried to express this many times that what it lacks most is allies, the strategy really needs allies of say cost 3 and discount 2 to overcome the opening disadvantage of only having two heroes. Right now you have several options for three hero secrecy deck (all including Glorfindel, likely the most valuable hero in the game) but even that brought little success (or even excitement) to my playing experience.

Finally, I most agree about the re-print of the errata cards. I have spent a lot of money (for my wallet) on this game. And I am more than willing to spend much more. Do not give us the new versions for free, just include them in the new packages. I know this is not going to help people who only bought the core set for instance but those can still play with the original prints anyway as with limited card pool the cards aren't as broken. 



#3 Cunir

Cunir

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 03:14 AM

i agree with pretty much all you said. but i would like to see some more variety in the encounter deck too. at the moment we've just got enemies, locations and treacheries, but why can't we have events too? you could have some cards come up that completely change the quest. maybe an event can come in like fog which splits your party up into two different staging areas like they did in Foundations of Stone (fog is a lousy example, but you see what i mean). what i want most of all is some new mechanics, to make it more expansive and interesting



#4 lleimmoen

lleimmoen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,682 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 04:25 AM

what i really like is the objective mechanics in the likes of the rangers in massing at osgiliath… that set has some great encounter cards, none being obviously bad at all times, only bad under certain circumstances; and the rangers really spice it up



#5 monkeyrama

monkeyrama

    Member

  • Members
  • 145 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 10:48 PM

lleimmoen said:

what i really like is the objective mechanics in the likes of the rangers in massing at osgiliath… that set has some great encounter cards, none being obviously bad at all times, only bad under certain circumstances; and the rangers really spice it up

Totally agree. This isn't done enough in quests. I really like quests that sometimes throw you some help, but require some risk taking to do it - it's a very neat mechanic that the ranger can come to your side when revealed as a shadow card, making it a risky, but sometimes rewarding, move to let a shadow card through.



#6 The_Big_Show

The_Big_Show

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 22 October 2012 - 07:24 AM

More beneficial locations would be nice. The game doesn't need to be so difficult all the time. Sometimes fun is more importance.



#7 StrangeLibrarian

StrangeLibrarian

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 08:54 PM

+1 for Locations. I think they're great fun, add tons of flavor, and are a nice, flexible way to make the scenario unique.

If beneficial locations would be too easy, I would like to see "trade of"-locations that gives you a mixed bag of good and bad - like giving you a wound and a resource when traveling to it, or something. Maybe "optional"l locations with zero threat but some other kind of challenge (Guarded?) with a potential reward.

Or maybe there is things like this already? I just started playing quite recently, so I'm still with the Mirkwood cycle.



#8 richsabre

richsabre

    Tea Drinker of the West

  • Members
  • 4,776 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 12:48 AM

StrangeLibrarian said:

+1 for Locations. I think they're great fun, add tons of flavor, and are a nice, flexible way to make the scenario unique.

If beneficial locations would be too easy, I would like to see "trade of"-locations that gives you a mixed bag of good and bad - like giving you a wound and a resource when traveling to it, or something. Maybe "optional"l locations with zero threat but some other kind of challenge (Guarded?) with a potential reward.

Or maybe there is things like this already? I just started playing quite recently, so I'm still with the Mirkwood cycle.

there are- in the hobbit

there are locations that require using resoucres but give bilbo resources when explored.

there are also 'nice' locations such as hobbit lands and troll camp which are nice to keep around for stalling, or for a required action

rich


My Deviantart profile. Infrared Art http://richsabre.deviantart.com/

My Portfolio http://richardbyers.portfoliobox.me/

 





© 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