Jump to content

MrBody

Members
  • Content Count

    286
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MrBody

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Massachusetts, United States
  1. I enjoyed my time with it, but after playing all the scenarios 3-4 times each we're mostly done with it until expansions come out. It just doesn't have the variable setup and unfolding that Eldritch did.
  2. Weird that Tommy is near the bottom, while...Daniela is at the very top???? o_O We've always considered Daniela to generally be a flat out weaker version of Tommy.
  3. Some kind of randomization for the scenario objectives. I know they have to fit together as a narrative, but they could do something with it. Like have Acts I, III, and III for each ancient one, with like 3 possible cards for each act. Each act will generally fit with the others when placed in order. You don't quite know which one you will get each act. Would massively bump up replayability which I think is the biggest issue right now. (please dear god don't reintroduce overly-punishing encounters or skill impairments, or fifty different unique asset decks)
  4. Well, the investigators are pretty all over the place power wise right now. Tommy/Calvin/Marie are hands down better than everyone else, while Rex/Dexter/Norman are hands down worse. Once we knew the scenario objectives, the only real challenge left to the game was trying to beat them using "the garbage three" investigators. Maybe little expansion tweaks that balance out some of the more blatant original investigators (Calvin is just ridiculously good, Rex is ridiculously bad). 2nd edition especially had the power creep problem. The violinist (Patricia?) was ludicrous. You had unique items that blew all previous weapons away and gave the same (or better) benefits as spells but with zero of the risk or cost.
  5. I'm guessing people are mostly using Tommy for the harder scenarios, because no way should he be showing up on the bottom 3 win rates.
  6. Trends/bits from past expansions you hope won't show up in expansions? Out of control unique assets decks- Eldritch got insane with its dozen different categories of unique asset decks that really didn't end up adding much beyond the simplicity of a single asset deck. Flipping spells/items- This was a mechanic that sounded interesting at first, but after 5 years of it in Eldritch and Mansions, I'd be happy to never see it again. Just slows the game down. Super long reckoning phases- No proliferation of reckoning effects to the point that they take 10 minutes to go through. Power creep- Overpowered items/investigators from expansions that render older ones obsolete. Skill impairments- Please, just don't. Getting impaired skills was often worse than death. Bumbling around with a crippled investigator was more punishing than just getting killed and starting with a new one. They were frustrating and not at all fun. Overly punishing encounters- I like encounters exactly where they are right now. Make a check for a nice boost or fail for a reasonable penalty. I don't want past Arkham/Eldritch encounters of ridiculously punishing stuff. ESPECIALLY encounters that are all about avoiding punishment with no reward. Clue encounters that do not give clues- Nothing was worse than the clue encounters in Eldritch that didn't give you the clue even if you passed the test, wasting an entire turn. It's hard to see how they could do this with the new AH3 clue system, but I hope to never see it again. Encounters that don't do the thing the location says it gives- I love how 90% of the encounters right now actually do the thing the location says it will do, with each one having some little twists to make it different while still giving the thing to you (general store might let you buy all the items you want, or only one item but at half price, etc). I much prefer this to Eldritch having maybe a 25% chance of encounters doing the thing that the location space advertises.
  7. Wormhole Reconstruction (Law) For: All systems that contain either an alpha or beta wormhole are adjacent to each other. Against: Each player places a command token from his reinforcements in each system that contains a wormhole and 1 or more of his ships. This has to be some kind of oversight to not state that 'against' only counts for Alpha and Beta wormholes. The against condition is practically game over for a Creuss player. It seems blatantly unfair to lock out delta wormholes (even locking out the systems with the Creuss A&B wormhole generator tokens seems unfair). Couldn't find an errata on the site. Is there one floating around that clarifies this? It seems like an oversight that Creuss are meant to be immune to any game effects that lock out wormholes, but the wording of that ability doesn't cover having a command counter put on the system. Wasn't their ability wording in TI3 that no wormhole laws affect them?
  8. By comparison, here's the Yin devotion ability that goes out of its way to say that it's the Yin player who chooses the target. http://i.imgur.com/oJedG6U.jpg I've read arguments that say it's because "hits" are an exception so the Yin ability had to list the exception. I'm not sure I agree with that. My view is that it basically comes down to what I think is ambiguous wording that could go either way, coupled with the precedent of the Yin ability having to spell out that a auto hit/destroy player gets to pick the target. Balance wise, getting to choose means guaranteed dead war suns, dreads, and carriers and coming out way ahead in material exchange (not to mention stranding infantry and fighters by blowing up carriers).
  9. The wording doesn't specify and it could go either way. Looking at one ability that definitely lets the ability-owner choose is the Yin's devotion ability, and that makes it a point to explicitly point out that the Yin player chooses. "Produce 1 hit and assign it to one of your opponent's ships." If it had just said "produce one hit", I think most would assume that the target gets to choose. The Exotrireme ability is like if they left out the part about getting to assign it, but yet the wording is still ambiguous. Official call on this? (personally I think the N'orr getting to pick would be a little crazy)
  10. Red bonuses can be useful, but it's often conditionally so. I just think they pale a LOT in comparison to what the other colors give you. I only ever get red techs for the prerequisites for other techs (mostly cruiser II and sometimes destroyer II, maybe war suns if I think I can swing it). I highly prize planets with a red tech specialty because it means I can just skip getting the reds I don't want anyway. Barring prerequisites, then other techs like neural motivators, hyper metabolism, gravity drive, transit diodes, and integrated economy blow the reds out of the water.
  11. Red seems by far the weakest unless you're planning on war suns. All the most useful combat techs moved over to unit upgrades. Plasma Scoring- Even less useful than anti-mass deflectors. Magen- Honestly this seems like the most useful of the red techs. Why only tier 2? Duranium Armor- "At the end of the second round of space combat, repair a single unit that was damaged on round one." A space battle would have to last 5 rounds for this tech to mean otherwise. How often does that happen? This is way less useful than Magen. Assault Cannon- A useful bonus, but tier 4? The same tier as Integrated Economy and Light Wave Deflectors? Then there's green techs. Am I the only one who thinks neural motivator is better than almost all the rest of them? It's without a doubt better than Dacxive animators (what are those going to get you, 2? 3 infantry over the whole game?). A good action card is better than a command token, so neural motivators is conditionally better than tier 3 hyper metabolism. I'd say the all around best tech is cruiser II. Having units with capacity and greater than 1 movement is one of the strongest factors in Twilight Imperium. Cruiser II gets you movement three infantry carriers AND a combat boost! It's the TI3 hylar laser, type IV drive, and stasis capsules (one of the most useful TI3 techs) all in one single tech! Even the prereqs aren't bad! It's rare that cruiser II isn't my early go to tech.
  12. Yeah symbols with some relevance rather than arbitrary ones. Who the heck goes by shape for tech icons rather than color? Just imagine explaining that to new player. "Okay there's double triangle, circle with triangles, computer mouse with triangles for buttons, and capsule pill. Don't get those mixed up with the circle with smaller triangles, circle with a circle, and halo tiara even if they're all the same colors right next to each other." "What means 'industrial' again?" "THE GREEN DOUBLE CIRCLE! OH MY GOD IT'S SO OBVIOUS! This is why we never invited you to play TI3, Frank!"
  13. Seems like they're really screwed if they get stuck with a red system between them and Mecatol, especially a super nova.
  14. They have red/blue/green vague symbols to denote planet type yet also use the same colors (with different, but still vague symbols) for planet tech specialty. The only real way to easily tell them apart is the planet type symbol is next to the planet name while tech symbol is next to the resource value. They really should have made it clearer. Either use different colors, have a colored letter 'T' for tech specialty, or something. Instead of colored symbols for planet type, use a picture of a factory for industrial, a city for culture, and a volcano for hazardous. Constantly running into confusion with new players thinking the planet type icon is a tech specialty. It would be a welcome improvement if any eventual reprint addresses this.
×
×
  • Create New...