Jump to content

Ephraim2

Members
  • Content Count

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Ephraim2

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , California, United States
  1. Picked up this game finally and got a game in today. One of the big questions that came up was about the star player deck. 1. Is the star player deck made up of all star players in a league? Or just the star players from the specific teams playing this game? 2. Should your Team Deck only have 12 players? and everytime you "draft" after a highlight you would discard a player to keep it at 12? Thanks in advance!
  2. First off, I agree with the comments about players. It doesn't matter how good a game is, if you can't find opponents it gets old fast. I've played a lot of card games and a big problem coming in late was all those good cards (usually rares) are difficult to find or really expensive, and they happened to be in the first couple sets you cant get anymore. If you didn't get those cards it was always an uphill battle, and not a lot of fun. You need to rethink that. CoC isn't Magic. This LCG system isn't like that. Everyone has the exact same cards, no rares, no uncommons, no limited stuff. You say your unsure about getting into this game late? Well, I think the game is much better now because of the amount of cards you can get. The different factions have developed almost unique identities and strategies to win. Its $15 a month. The cost of a pizza. Every month you get a few more cards and can play with decks until the next month. I still use the starter set cards. They are still good, not much creep. I would say get a starter and start working on the current sets, then go back and start filling in back sets you want. Theyre really not hard/expensive to find. FFG even went on a run reprinting almost everything.
  3. xfoley8 said: Thanks for your responses. After playing the game, it did, indeed, hit me that bombing with the bombers allows more than 5 units to attack a single territory. I still think the example in the rulebook is poor, but the advantage is clear to me now. I think your confusing combat with stacking. When you attack you move units to the edge of your territory and attack the territory you want. As many adjacent units as you want can attack a territory. During the Invasion phase, you can only move 5 units into a territory you now control (because of stacking limits). Bombers ignore the stacking limit on the territory your attacking. (If they have 5 unit you can plop a bomber down there and still attack a territory, you just cant stay at end without any ground units supporting attack.)
  4. Im sorry if this has been asked. I looked back a bit but didnt see anyone ask this specific question. I play and like Death Angel. I noticed that Corey Konieczka designed both games, and while reading the GoW pdf I noticed that the two games play with similar mechanics…Of course GoW looks way more complicated with board movement, health tracking, assorted weapons, and grenades. Is it a fair assessment to say if someone likes Death Angel, that chances are good that they will really like Gears of War? Am I way off in thinking these two games play alike? Thanks for any replies.
  5. The bomber can attack normally. It has the ability to hop over several enemy occupied areas and make an attack. and you as the attacker get to choose the unit that dies. Then during invasion phase, it can move 4 again. Bombers can move 8 areas a turn.
  6. dboeren said: The problem I have with Forced Foreclosure is that a lot of Location cards still work for your opponent after you take control of them because they affect everyone. This cuts into the number of problems the card actually addresses. I just think the upside of Forced Foreclosure outweighs the possible downside of the card. I've played too many games that were even until I broke them taking a location their deck needed.
  7. Meat Wagon may be a good addition. Its an attachment that can exhaust an opponent's character, and with all the cards you have to reduce skills you may be able to lockout some pretty big cards. Jack "Brass" Brady- I stick him in any syndicate deck. He's a solid card, and very annoying. Forced Foreclosure- Theres a lot of annoying location cards. If your playing syndicate, you might as well make them yours.
  8. dboeren said: I'd be happy to pay a reasonable amount to play online. FFG could do something like give the cards in the starter set for free, and then charge a small fee for each expansion or cycle. Say maybe $1 per expansion (normally only for bleeding edge players) and $3 per complete cycle, something like that? Rather then the whole "pay X per expansion", what if it was simply pay x per month for access to all the virtual cards? Like $9.99 per month and you can make decks with any virtual cards and play people. Whatever an online amount was, I'd say it would have to be less then the $15 people pay each month for the expansions.
  9. Magnus Arcanis said: online play = community growth = more players = more profit This is the problem. It is NOT equal. Online play may increase community growth, and get more players interested, but FFG doesn't see a cent because its free. What the missing link is: How would FFG encourage players, who are playing their game for free, to buy the physical version of the cards for actual money? Here's a solution that I've seen. I play an online version of another game. Its not a card game, but its a miniatures game. The guys who run the website that write the modules buy a bunch of cases and offer it to their players at a discount. .. Basically what they've paid for it. So players who preorder get the physical stuff for like 40% off, and the company make its money selling product. The online version of the game helps the company sell product. Of course this opens a whole new can of worms because the whole process leaves local brick and mortar stores, that sell the product, out of the loop, so they don't make any money. There are problems with this anyway you look at it. The very best way to encourage growth of CoC, as I said way back in my original post in this thread, is to make 2 basic decks and carry them around with you. Growing a play group isnt gonna just happen, it takes work. So, If your around human beings, mention the game, and see if they wanna learn it.
  10. Magnus Arcanis said: Ephraim said: I'm sorry if I sound like the bad guy, but its seems to me that this whole free online version of the card game is ripping off FFG. They created the game, and someone wants to give people a free online version of the game. Didn't the music industry go to court about this, get a ruling in their favor, and go to the extreme of prosecuting fans who love their music? If there is a difference, there isnt much of one. All you guys who say it would encourage people to play the game, I 'd repy, sure it would, and FFG doesnt see a cent of it. Why would someone buy the cards when they can play it online for free? If you really wanna promote the game, make 2 decks and show it to people, so they buy it. There is actually a huge difference between this and music. Mainly because of the physical presence. People could share music online and put it on a cd or on their mp3 player and carry it around with them. Why buy the cd if I can download it for free instead? That was the big problem for music. Now you can legally download them... this is how the music is attempting to fight piracy. Piracy still happens, yes, but music companies are not losing nearly as much money. Card games on the other hand can't be ported from the digital world to the physical world. An onlline 'copy' is no where near the actual thing. FFG would lose out on some of those... just trying the game out people who only buy the starter but only those who would be intelligent and dedicated enough to go through the download, and figure out how to play without a teacher, and learn the interface. Not impossible, but for a bit much to ask of many a 'trying it out player.' On the otherside. online play attracts those who bought and love the product and seek to experience more. Evidence provided by serveral threads on this very forum. They seek online play due to lack of opponents. Without opponents... they stop buying cards completely. So wether online play exsist or not, that potential revenue is lost. However, if that person finds opponents, it increases the chance for continued revenue from that player. Example 2.. There exsist small communities of players. No matter how much you love a game, playing the same game against the same people gets boring. Being able to play different people, even if its online will extend their time playing the game. Thus generating more cash in a long term view. Example 3... Turns out, its a lot easier for a game company to attract new players to a game (without even trying) if there is an active community. People love games that other people love. An active physical AND online community are neccessary for a game to survive. The larger each community is, the faster it can grow. Thus the more money it makes. Example 4... Turns out... we live in a digital world. Those who don't conform will be left behind. Frankly we're not to far off where if games can't be played online... those games won't survive outside small circles of people... No one here wants to see the physical game disappear. We're not hoping for a replacement. We want something that enchances it. Being able to play online, overall, enhance the games life. Its a fact. A statistical fact. (no I don't have the exact stats on me) Provided that it is done well of course. A bad online experience could kill the game. Which, based on observance from other people complaints about the progam... perhaps that is the real reason they halted other attempts at online tournaments. I haven't used it myself, but perhaps it is that bad that FFG feels it would hurt the game more than help it. Perfectly reasonable. Just sayin. Brother I understand your points about CoC having a small community, and online would be a great way to get players together who never otherwise would get to play. Really, I do. I've played CoC a long time, and know what your saying about it having a small fanbase. Here's the problem...money. Regarding the music industry, you can download music today because $ is in the loop. Before, people would swap music online for free. The music artists got pissed because they weren't selling as much music. So, bands, that fans thought were awesome, like Metalica, sued them, and threw them in jail for introducing new people to their music. You can try and call a free version of CoC online whatever you want, or try and "technically" twist whatever you want. The problem is FFG owns the game. So, like those music artists, they should have a problem with giving away something they've created, for free, online. Im sure a lot of those college students who were giving songs to friends weren't making any money either, and simply sharing a good song they heard. The courts and the music industry didn't see it that way. They looked at it as stealing their property. The only way that this would work is if FFG gets $ for CoC players online experience- even if expansions had a gumball wrapper with a login code that you use when you login, so they knew you bought a CoC product.
  11. I'm sorry if I sound like the bad guy, but its seems to me that this whole free online version of the card game is ripping off FFG. They created the game, and someone wants to give people a free online version of the game. Didn't the music industry go to court about this, get a ruling in their favor, and go to the extreme of prosecuting fans who love their music? If there is a difference, there isnt much of one. All you guys who say it would encourage people to play the game, I 'd repy, sure it would, and FFG doesnt see a cent of it. Why would someone buy the cards when they can play it online for free? If you really wanna promote the game, make 2 decks and show it to people, so they buy it.
  12. Penfold said: Yep, the way it was phrased is the is no printed skill to check at all so it cannot even begin to resolve on them. So, because the card says "printed skill" you look at the actual skill printed on card, even when insane? Otherwise, if it just said "skill lower then..." it would consider insane characters as 0 skill?
  13. If I was looking for a first expansion to get after the core set, I'd say Secrets of Arkham, because it adds more cards to the factions in the core set, making each factions card pool larger. The newer expansion, Order of the Silver Twilight, is definitely one you'd wanna pick up. From now on, its a good chance that APs are gonna have cards for this faction, and it would take a really long time to collect enough cards to make a deck if you don't get that expansion. As for APs, I'd agree with whats been suggested. Start with the current ones and work your way back as the APs are reprinted in the new format (three of each card).
  14. I was wondering where these AP came from. This set always had two AP: The Mountains of Madness and Ancient Horrors. Now, its showing three more: Spawn of Madness, Kingsport Dreams, and Conspiracies of Chaos. So, the latest three are from CCG days huh?
×
×
  • Create New...