Jump to content

booored

Members
  • Content Count

    2,138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by booored

  1. Well Area Damage and Damage do have a keyword to identify them as separate. Still, I think it might have said something like combat damage if it was supposed to not effect area. which is why it isn't and also why it is unplayable in an decent deck, much like this other one. I guess we will see but I bet you it will not be in any high profile winning decks.
  2. wow, that value is way over rated I think. It isn't an advantage being able to win the command as well as activate the event, as you win the command anyway if you do nothing. That is sorta like saying it is a advantage as you also draw 2 cards at the end of the turn as a positive. So I do not think this really is a plus in anyway, though maybe makes it better than other "tap warlord" cards. It is true that loosing the command is among the reasons I dislike tap warlord effects. I mean Dakka Dakka Dakka! is nearly unplayable because of the loss of the command as well as the warlord. As for the "if you do not want to attack". If there is a unit there and you are taped you are opening yourself to being pinged by an enemy unit, effectively adding a wound to its cost in a way. Or you need to send it to a planet with out any enemy units or wait till you have initiative and attack first with a deployed unit as any following are taped on move, and it has to have a effect you want to trigger. Doesn't that increase the situational problems even more? I agree the tap warlord effect is lessened with the fact you can also win the command, but ... hmmm,.... still seams a REALLY high cost to me.
  3. Where is the fun in that! Card / Deck Theory is where the best chat happens! well yeah, everyone will test it, but this is the very trap of situational cards. If the situation doesn't occur, then it is dead, and would you prefer to draw somthign else? I'm still not sold on exhausting a warlord, I think it is (in most cases) a extremely high cost. One of the real problems with this card is the basic game speed I think. Like IF you have the exact planets you need, (already randomized) you also need the card. It could be powerful turn 1 in some situations. So you are looking at 3 copies to ensure turn 1 draw or close two it. If you draw it and there are no decent targets you have a dead card doing nothing. Also if you DO draw it you have to look at the speed of the game. You only start with 7 creds. We all know how tight those first turns are. Your basically saying that casting this card early, in addition to the convergence of events that has to happen to make it worth it and in your hand, you are also sacrificing a army drop. Now, is using a warlord tap, and not putting out a unit worth a temporary gain.. vs putting out a command unit and gaining a permanent board presence? I dunno... . . Well I think it is a revealed cost and I expect it to turn up as a cost for the length of the game. So yeah at some point every faction will have many cards with this cost on it, I expect.
  4. you know the more I think about "Tense Negotiations" the less I like it... lets break it down... 1 cost, 1 card slot, 1 Exhausted Warlord Carnath is probably the best target "Battle: Trigger the Battle ability of another planet in play." but what actual targets would you probably be looking for, considering it is at action speed? Iridial (heal unit), Ferrin (rout non warlord) look the strongest? Maybe that one I forget the name off to snipe a resource off them to disrupt their event plans, or fuel yours... Anyway, you got to remember that the warlord needs to be deployed at the planet, so you can not use this card during Deploy Phase at all. Plus you need to exhaust, plus the fact that the random planet thing means you might not have any targets you are interested in to trigger. So it is super situational, a bad thing. You have to have the right planet out, a reason to cast it AND be happy to sacrifice your warlords first combat turn. Hmmmm I dunno, this looked really cool at first but after some thought I have turned completely around on this one.
  5. Tense Negotiations seams like a very strong card to me.. though in general I dislike anything that exhaust the warlord, as that is a very strong cost. This one may be worth it though, will need some test play.
  6. I think the "Time" thing was a pretty decent idea. I hope that they continue to try new ways to shake things up. The great thing about the cycle system is that we only see it for one cycle, and if it is unpopular then it goes away, and if it is popular we see it popup now and then. The game is getting on now... with so many quest it is not hard to think that now and then one will come out you do not like. I wouldn't worry about it.
  7. Yeah, this is pretty much what I think as well. The LCG format is very ingrained now for veteran players and most of us know that the cycles packs are more than just "new cards". When a card is released in a single pack it is not as it appears to be, it is in fact part of the entire cycle. On a design point of view the card in pack 6 is designed at the same time as the card in pack 1. This game hasn't even formed yet. We are still in the middle of the first cycle so most of the planned card archetypes haven't even been given all the cards they require and this game hasn't even got 2 factions running yet. So the game is still in a fledgling state and it is WAY to early to make any real comments on if the game is "bad" or "good". There is no doubt the basic game is fun, but what most people on this form are talking about is the longevity of competitive play, which imo is a separate issue to "being fun". There are some worrying problems with this game, like the cost curve, rush speed and "richer get richer" problems for example, but there is no reason to panic. I think generally there are things to keep our eye on, but on the whole I am pretty positive about this game and think there is no reason to really complain to much. *yet*
  8. They don't have a frickn search function on that site. lol That is pathetic. Someone like you who likes to make archive type threads why would you ever do that on cgdb when they will get buried and never even be found again with search!!
  9. hate CardGameDB... here are the images. Ork Warwagon, Dominions, Tyranid Swarm are all by Ameeeeba @DeviantArt Advancing Salamander Terminators is by Art of Justaman @DeviantArt STC Foundlings is by Jub Jub Jedi @DeviantArt These images do look legit... I didn't check them all but the Nids one has "My illustration for Fantasy Flight games." in the description.
  10. I think you just need to make it longer maybe? This would give you time to allow all the hosts to contribute a little as well as have more time to move past just simple card evaluation, which at the moment is all the show is and you know.. we can all read already. Sound was good and the hosts seamed confident for the most part. I think you should keep at it, lots of room to improve but shows promise.
  11. I think in you are decking yourself there could be a problem with your command deployment. The problem is that command struggles are just as important to deny as they are to win. I've nearly decked myself a few times, but even so I also won the games that time pretty easily. Unfortunately the game speed seams to be increasing, but as a side effect I think the self decking will not be that much of a problem.
  12. problem with those ideas is that the transport cards already exist, and do not have any effects like that. So it has to be some kind of event or w/e that targets the keyword. Also, do we need another "cheap unit" enabler.. what we need is a way to get the game to be more viable for the expensive units.
  13. one of the guys sounds like Red Rupee. This cast is ok I guess. Way way way to short and all they do is card evaluation. Also there are so many hosts that no one gets a chance to really talk, even less so as there is one guy that basically dose all the talking and everyone else says things like "yeah, your right". Pretty bad effort.
  14. ok... I'll give it a try Rapid Deployment (event) • 1 Shield • 2 Cost • Deployment Action : Select a transport and all army units but one at the same planet. You must move the transport to an adjacent planet depositing a single army unit from the original selection until the the selection runs out. Combat Evac (Support) • 2 Cost • Limited • Reaction : After a unit would receive damage exceeding its health, exhaust this unit to move 1/2 (rounded up) of that damage to a transport unit at the same planet and then move both the unit and the transport to HQ exhausted.
  15. Traits by themselves have no innate meaning. They are basically a way to split the card pool into separate design spaces. While "transport" doesn't mean anything, it dose allow that trait to become a target. It is the grouping of targets that define what the trait "is about". So in short it may not mean anything it is just good planning to keep the design space as open as possible
  16. Balance in games is not only misunderstood by many on a design level, but most of the comments in this thread do not even seam to take into account that this is a co-op game and a thematic one at that. The spheres shouldn't be (and aren't) balanced and they hopefully never will be. As a co-op game we are forced to make sphere decisions based on that spheres specialities. This is how it should be. If you started putting cancels in tactics or card draw in or w/e it would massively alter the entire way the game plays. Basically I read parts of this threads and what people are in fact saying is.. "I like X Sphere, I wish it did more so I didn't have to splash" which imo it kinda ridicules in a game that is totally focused on co-op.
  17. That plague warlord is bonkers, chaos is just a little to highly costed even with the cultists cost reduction. Still I predict the the plague warlord to be a major player, sooner rather than later.
  18. I feel with Zogwort's pack, this could actually be considerd as a competative deck for Straken: Hope you like it! Yeah, I've tried practically this same deck, as I said.. IG has gotten better but it is still way behind the bell curve. In fact I would say this is a perfect example of a deck that shows exactly why IG is so weak. I expect IG to pick up in the future but for now I can not see any reason why you would bring IG to the store over some of the other factions.
  19. I dunno I really want IG to work but I just can't get a IG deck running at the moment. I think it has gotten better but still seams one of the weakest factions.
  20. ahh cool.. I was like "what the **** is he talking about!" hehe
  21. But more importantly AM just went next level Narr, cards fade in and out of power. Text gets errata, effects get banned and changed, powercreep replaces. Art is the only constant that lasts for ever.
×
×
  • Create New...