Jump to content

Cannibal

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cannibal

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Utah, United States
  1. I am listening, I just have nothing further to say. I haven't played the game and others have and those people believe it's not an issue. For the record I don't consider one card change (uptown/downtown) based on a prior scenario result to satisfy my concern (although it does help a little in that you get at least two playthroughs where you don't know what's under every single every card's hidden side); the woods example appears more perfectly suited to address my concerns (but is again only a portion of one "map" in one scenario) but it shows the designers were considering these things as well. I'd expect future full length (non-introductory) scenarios to incorporate these excellent features to an even greater extent based upon what we (the community at whole and not playtesters who had it in advance) NOW know. For the record I did not know these things when I wrote my original post, because... well nobody really knew these things as Arkham Nights hadn't happened yet! Also my main intent was to get people to ask the designers if they already had such plans, my secondary intent was to ask if others were concerned/interested in this issue as well. On that second note it appears the rest of you are not concerned/don't view this as a problem. Good for you. My intent was NEVER to criticize the game (critique maybe) as some here seem to think. @florianhess: I re-watch countless movies and re-read great novels as well. I however do not tend to re-watch/read mystery movies/novels more than twice because the narrative structure is different and the surprise is a key element of enjoyment. Do you also enjoy watching good movies like The Sixth Sense for "bazillions" of times? Or does it cease to be as interesting at some point? If not... than bully for you! Congratulations! For myself, similarly I expect my in-game excitement over revealing the Study/Hall/Downtown card during the course of a close nail biter of a game will be much higher the first time when the result is unknown then during subsequent play throughs. If the designers didn't think an element of surprise was fun (it is!) then there would be no reason to include double-sided cards with different hidden and revealed sides.
  2. What makes you say that? This is exactly what they did with the LOTR Nightmare decks. Would make perfect sense. Honestly, it would make MORE sense. While you might think it would perfect the game, many players would not want be so impressed by the duplication of "Oh, THIS Attic reduces my Agility by 1, but THAT Attic reduces my Intellect by 1. Variety!!" If you do, cool - I wouldn't find that it adds much, personally. Which is why POD is a perfect choice for it. Much lower production costs, or even true on-demand printing, means that they can take something like that which has a more limited base of interest and still produce it. You're right. I was unfamiliar with FFG's POD position on LOTR but have since done some research. I think I was thinking of print and play. My response to your second point is that maybe they shouldn't buy that expansion then? But POD lower production costs help here as well. Thanks.
  3. Are you making my argument for me? ;^) Because I have precisely said that I am arguing for a new type of expansion that would require broad based community support (a market) to succeed. A POD situation is pure fantasy. That is why I was asking who would be interested in such a product. However, should a large enough market arise for a location based expansion arise I doubt that FFG would just leave money on the table. After all, it's not like they haven't gone the expansion expansion route with Arkham before... https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameexpansion/93465/arkham-horror-miskatonic-horror-expansion PS: I haven't even played this game, so I'm not qualified to pass a final verdict on it (my headline was more to get interest). That being said you need to get off your high horse if you think that "it doesn't mean the games not 'perfect'". I've got news for you, it's not perfect. No game is. And yes having a hidden location that is only "hidden" once, is a flaw. It may be a minor or a major flaw. It may be a flaw that bothers you, or doesn't bother you but bothers others. It may be a business influenced decision. It may be the exactly correct business influenced decision to have made for the long term survival of the product line! But it's still a flaw. And if it makes you feel better, I apologize for using the clearly inappropriate word "perfect" in my headline. "How to make a good game better" just sounds so much less sexy? ;^)
  4. To address some of the points raised: First, this same principle may have been shown in a preview (woods) where there are multiple copies of a location card that looks identical on the unrevealed side. Although it's unclear to me whether you shuffle these before the game and add only one (my idea) or if you simply have 3 copies of a generic location in the same game and you have to search each one to find what you need (appears more likely). In any case this simply proves my point that having multiple different hidden sides improves replay ability because it forces you to guess/play differently. The question is whether we are satisfied with this being a one-off 3 card diversion in one particular scenario or whether we'd like the whole campaign to have that feel. Second, for those concerned with clutter/value I was clear that I DON'T want this to be part a a "regular" campaign box/cycle. It would be beyond foolish to thin the card pool in normal sets to give duplicate locations - that's why FFG didn't do it! Frankly, that's why they didn't give a full duplicate player card set in the Core Set either, they know variety is more important. I'll want that variety in full play sets of new player cards each cycle too! It's foolish to think that FFG will just design/test/create 112+ new location cards and just "include them for free" either. What I'm saying is that I want a separate campaign location expansion that I can buy to give me the replay ability I want (encounter and player deck reshuffling already provides this to some extent - but set locations allow players to abuse foreknowledge). I'm also saying I want this enough that I'd rather delay the 2nd campaign several months (and then delay the 3rd, etc.) in order to make room for this location expansion box. I figure I'll get much more re-use out of playing the entire 8 scenario campaign indefinitely than I will by playing the first two scenarios of the next campaign a few times a few months earlier. Now your opinion may differ, that's fine. If you only expect to play each campaign once, or if you don't really think you'll send the investigator with the flashlight to the -4 shroud room while his partner without the flashlight searches the -1 shroud room (really?), or if you can't be bothered to send your Guardian with the shotgun to the location the big Boss will spawn (REALLY?!!)... then I think you would be right to think that new locations won't benefit you much. Ultimately it's about what you value in a game, and how you prioritize those values. No one is wrong to prioritize different types of content, and whether there is a consensus for or against this type of multiple versions of location content is what I want to know. Thanks.
  5. Like many of you, I have been following the pre-release of Arkham Horror: The Card Game with great interest. However, despite the great majority of news being very exciting there is, in my opinion, one apparent major flaw in the game as we know it, namely: The revealed side of location cards will only ever be an unexpected surprise for your very first play through. After that for your next several dozen, or even hundreds, of games you will know exactly what's behind them and it will be almost impossible not to let that affect/dictate your game play. The solution is obvious, although implementation may vary. We need Fantasy Flight, later down the road, to sell expansions that focus primarily on providing us with multiple duplicate locations with unique hidden sides. Will they? Following production of a complete campaign, for example The Dunwich Legacy, we will have on average 8 scenarios. If we assume that on average there are 7 locations per scenario we will end up with roughly 56 distinct location cards (7×8=56). If we create 2 new versions of each separate location that leaves us with 112 new cards that now allow each location a possibility of 3 unique possibilities that can be shuffled individually and selected prior to set up in each game. While this may seem small (only 3 possibilities per card) it actually results in 175,616 different possible unique campaign layouts! (56 sample points with 3 different possible positions each = 56^3 = math nerds check me on this!). Compare this to the currently possible 1 (and only 1!) combination for the locations as they are now. My preferred take on a solution is as follows: Following each campaign cycle Fantasy Flight Games releases a big box "campaign" expansion for that specific campaign. Included are the approximately 112 needed new location cards to make a complete set of 3 possible versions for each card. Fantasy Flight's big box expansions usually have about 165 cards in them (Dunwich has 156 with 5 small player cards), that leaves us roughly 50 cards to play with (minus extra costs for double printing all locations). I propose they use those 50 card spots to provide "Nightmare" versions of existing playsets; i.e. "Nightmare Ghouls/Rats" that would completely swap out a original Ghouls/Rats playset, etc. That way you could bump the difficulty in any given scenario by swapping out one or more "Nightmare" playsets according to taste. Possible alternatives include providing 3 new cards for each location (168 cards) for a total of 4 unique, or instead doing 2 full campaigns with one box (224 cards likely with a higher price point) The question Fantasy Flight needs to ask itself is if there is demand for such a product. Well forum, is there? Make your voice heard now! I for one know I would snap up a product like that! Think how much it would improve replay ability between campaign cycles!
  6. In the past editions of FFG's 40k RPGs they have usually released a free demo starter scenario with pre-generated characters and quick rules; i.e. "Edge of Darkness", "Broken Chains", etc. I am very interested in getting a new group together for the upcoming release of Dark Heresy 2nd edition, but would like to use something matching the new rules to demo with them first. Can anyone working with FFG comment on whether/when we can expect to see a new free demo scenario for Dark Heresy 2nd edition (rough estimate of how many weeks/months before/after Core Rulebook release) ? Thanks in advance!
×
×
  • Create New...