Jump to content

Arma virumque2

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Arma virumque2

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Silicon Valley, California, United States
  1. Thanks, guys. I've obviously been away from the scene for a while. Is there any particular reason the cardgamedb forums are better?
  2. The boards here have MUCH less activity than I remember from the early days of the LCG. I'm just curious -- is this a reflection of a smaller player base, or has the activity just moved to other sites?
  3. I did a Google search and can't find a record of anyone posting this document online. Is that something that would be possible?
  4. Thanks! Have you tried that out, or are you extemporizing? When you say "standard Melee," do you mean also including title cards?
  5. Does anyone have any experience with (or suggestions for) 2v2 team play? I'd like to play with my kids, but I think they would be less overwhelmed (and have fewer hurt feelings) if they knew from the outset who their ally was, and didn't have to worry about an ally's sudden but inevitable betrayal.
  6. I've come to the sad conclusion that my life is too busy to allow me time for deck building. If I'm going to continue to have fun with my WHI cards, I'm going to have to fall back on copying decklists from the Internet. But because my collection is old, I have to find old decklists to experiment with. My collection goes through Fragments of Power (BloodQuest pack #2). According to BGG, this was published May 30, 2012. Does anyone know where I can find tournament write-ups (including decklists) from around that time, or shortly before? I checked Deckbox, but the "Top Decks" list doesn't go back that far in time. And I couldn't find a search function that would help me find decklists from the date I'm looking for, or weed out good decks from experimental decks. Thanks in advance for any advice.
  7. Thanks for the reply. I checked your website and found the comment(s) you're referring to. Appreciate the tip.
  8. Arma virumque said: I don't understand why the announcement says "maximum legal number of fifty-five player cards." What is that referring to, particularly the "legal" part? Bump. I can't tell if nobody knows the answer to my question, or if there's an answer out there so painfully obvious that people are avoiding the topic out of embarrassment on my behalf….
  9. I don't understand why the announcement says "maximum legal number of fifty-five player cards." What is that referring to, particularly the "legal" part?
  10. My experience has been with A Game of Thrones (LCG era only) and Warhammer Invasion. Both of those games had substantial errata and rules clarifications. By comparison, I was very impressed when I read the rules for Star Wars LCG -- they were much cleaner and less ambiguous than my prior experiences. My guess is that some level of errata is inevitable. However, banning is quite unlikely. FFG's preferred solution in other LCG's has been the creation of a "restricted list." The equivalent for Star Wars LCG would say something like: "The following 5 objective sets are restricted. If you select one of these objective sets in your deck, you may not include any of the others."
  11. LORDs_diakonos said: I was hoping to get a rulling from FFG here FFG doesn't give rulings in the forums. However, they will give a ruling to you individually if you click on the link at the bottom of the page that says "Rules Questions." If you receive an answer, and if you post both the question and the answer (exact quotes, please) in this forum, it's almost as good as having them respond directly.
  12. richsabre said: if you only own the core set it would be incredibly difficult rich That confirms what I suspected. It's too bad, really, because this is a game I could happily play on occasion, and I would enjoy some variety, but it didn't make my list of must-buy-everything-that-comes-out games.
  13. For those who have given an opinion on the difficulty, are you playing with decks that use the full card pool released to date? How challenging would this be as an expansion for somebody who only owned the core set, for example, or maybe the core plus deluxe expansions but not the chapter packs?
  14. I agree that the "buy in" cost is a barrier for some new players. And I agree with Rings that there are a lot of players who either know that they're completionists, or they're not wholly comfortable with the idea that they couldn't afford to be a completionist if they wanted to. My suggestion would be to repackage the oldest chapter packs into big box sets -- for example, 3x of all the cards in the Clash of Arms cycle, packaged in a single box. I don't know what FFG's cost for printing cards is, but we know they can afford to sell cards with a retail price less than $0.18 per card. (That's the retail cost per card for a deluxe expansion.) If FFG charged $60 for a Clash of Arms super-expansion, that would be $0.16 per card. Since R&D is already paid for, I suspect that's a price they could live with. And it would be a 33% savings for a new player trying to catch up on old chapter packs (compared to $90 for six chapter packs).
  • Create New...