Jump to content

letsdance

Members
  • Content Count

    97
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About letsdance

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , vienna, Austria
  1. the game wouldn't be any worse for "casual gamers" if they had provided a better balancing. i don't understand this panic at all. anyways, i started modding cards because i'm sure it's not possible that future APs will fix the balancing issues. northern trackers, burning brand... too many things already out there, that absolutely kill many possible great ideas. they already started using "cannot be affected by player cards" and "cannot be prevented" as work-arounds. so don't be afraid, there won't be anything else. as a side note... usually the majority doesn't really know what it wants. they think they know something, of course. but when they get it, they aren't content anyways. just look at politics
  2. jhaelen said: Untergeher said: Sorry, but did I miss something? It hasn't been a year since the game came out and we haven't seen all of the adventure packs of the first cycle, but we're already talking about banning cards? Is this really happening? Seriously... come on! Yep, I think you missed something: Look at who stated that opinion You can safely assume no one else shares that opinion. i share his basic oppinion. i just have a different approach to solving it: i started modding the cards. many of them. for example, all titles, signals, skills are conditions, unexpected courage is unique, costs 3 and no character can have more than 1 condition attached (suddenly the choice to play one of these condition cards involves some planning and decisions). gimli gets +1 attack for every 2 damage. gandalf is an event. many more... not all cards need to be totally balanced, but with some streamlining of their power, the game became more interesting to us. the choice, which cards to use or remove became much harder. i also boosted some of the too weak cards, but mostly i reduced the power of the overpowered player cards to increase the challenge. i also modded the encounter deck. i detest the banks of anduin effect for example, so i replaced it with a serious location. i always hated that East Bight patrol is a tree card, when the East Bight is Wilderlands, so i shuffled some cards around (more spiders in spider deck, more orcs in orc deck etc). i also modded some stats. again, in general i increased the challenge and we like it better that way. this game has such a great potential. it is good the way it is published, but it could be so much more. i'm trying to get my version there.
  3. a quest has 1-4 cards. 2 additional quests would mean like 5 cards less in the encounter deck. no one would miss that. it does not reduce the player cards at all.
  4. DurinIII said: Hey, not a bad idea Glaurung. That would be cool if they could somehow make a quest function as both easy or hard. I am not putting forth how they would do that. for example, when playing down the anduin, put 2 trolls in the staging area instead of 1 i wish they would release MORE quests. as people have shown, the cards available would allow for many quests to be designed, but they stick to one quest per AP. this would also satisfy people better who want easier/harder quests. they could easily make 3 quests per AP with different difficulty levels. as it is, the game has much potential, but only a fraction of it is used.
  5. we removed most possibilities to get devoured because it's more fun to us this way. and/or play without martial law. that takes away from the theme, but it makes it easier, removes annoying moments and speeds up the game.
  6. Woz said: By no means have I ever played a solo game where I'm thinking if I have Northern Tracker I win. If not, I lose. location flood is a problem of multiplayer, not of solo games. in posted my fix here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=201&efcid=4&efidt=530016&efpag=0
  7. richsabre said: i tend to really get into things i enjoy- this game especially, so i think im going to follow/play this game for as long as my interest lasts, but how many of you intend to buy every expansion for the foreseeable future?i like the basegame but i didn't buy any expansion =) (i think they are overprized and have too low replayability - yes i did play them)
  8. Bohemond said: do a better job of presenting a challenge over the whole of a scenario (instead of just at the beginning).carrock doesn't have much more than the beginning, does it?
  9. mine are here (just cards from basegame used): http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/68050/custom-scenario-helping-friends http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/69557/letsdance-custom-scenario-2-the-escape
  10. locations are only an issue if you don't have a northern tracker. then they don't really matter anymore. that's why i always play blue when we try a new scenario. like i said, we didn't setup the decks, but i do use the rule that allows me to (once) redraw my start hand, if i want to. for blue that is when i don't have unexpected courage or a northern tracker.
  11. Iver said: You will wonder, but it took me and my wife 3 tries before we managed to beat "Gollum" recently and the new packs are all difficulties 6 or higher.... my friend that i play LOTR with, and me have beat gollum and carrock at first try, with monosphere decks as they are shipped in the basegame + these expansions, not even removing the worthless cards. but in my oppinion, the main balancing issue is not the difficulty of the quests. it's the huge gap between the powerful and the weak cards. every card should have a situation (1) where it's needed. and every card should have a situation (2) where it's not needed. for some cards i don't ever see (2) happening (which is the worse problem). and for some cards i never see (1) happening. i understand they are trying to make (1) true with future expansions, which seems a bit artificially to me (they should instead focus on other things). but anyways, balancing should exist in the basegame without any expansions.
  12. again a scenario, that tries to raise the difficulty while going through the stages. it needs just the basegame and is high difficulty (like 7). available for download on BGG: http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/69557/letsdance-custom-scenario-2-the-escape
  13. Woz said: But you did comment on 2 players.northern trackers are absolutely required to win scenarios with certain player numbers. for the gollum expansion scenario it seems you even need them in 2 player games. true. though i put an "it seems" here, because i'm not sure. after playing HfG twice we decided to bag it again and leave it there, unless we want to use parts for a selfmade scenario. that's not really enough to make a qualified statement. but i don't think the problem persists with 2 player games in general, just if you have unlucky draws and in HfG because it has a very high percentage of locations.
  14. i've played it twice yesterday (2 player monosphere decks with just all cards for that sphere from core, HfG and CatC). it seems there are 2 possible strategies, both include spending a few turns in stage 1 to power up a bit: 1. keep threat low, using blue, and then kill the trolls off single. this was quite easy using red + purple decks. we've been lucky with draws, but considering that we used non-customized decks it looks like it's not hard to do. the main problem is getting enough quest points with 3-4 trolls in staging area but with faramir that was easily solved and we could even explore the carrock in 2nd round. 2. play purple and get the ally quick. he's so overpowered that the fight isn't really hard with him. we played our 2nd game with green + red and didn't have the resources to buy him and enough threat to be attacked by all trolls as soon as we hit stage 2. still, the fight was surprisingly close, but we would have lost it even if our threat didn't go to 50 because of the trolls special feature. with the ally i am sure we would've won. the scenario solves one basic problem of the basegame, which is the game being too hard at start and then too boring in the end. in CatC after you beat the hard part, it's already over. i like that, altough it makes for short games (especially if playing the low threat strategy). it also gives you some time to power up at the start, but while imposing a danger to you (similar to what i tried in my custom scenarios, so i like that too).
×
×
  • Create New...