Jump to content

radioactivemouse

Members
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by radioactivemouse

  1. I'll be honest, I didn't want to invest into IA. I already had X-Wing and I was already spending money on Netrunner, Warhammer 40K Conquest, and Star Wars LCG. The box intimidated me...and at $100, it was a pretty high price tag. But when I attended Star Wars Celebration, I met Steve Kimball (who just wrote an article about Mission: Red Planet) and he showed me IA. I was like...half paying attention because I was convinced I wasn't going to invest in it...in fact, I was more interested in Armada. He didn't even have to convince me...I played a few rounds and I was intrigued. It was...easy to play. In the few rounds I played, it was fairly intense and it was the intro mission. When Steve mentioned this was a progressive campaign where characters grow as you play, I was convinced. It's not a cheap game by any means. I ended up getting the game at a discount at a later convention and I started looking through the components. Obviously FFG quality...the miniatures of my favorite Star Wars characters made it worth the cost The game was the icing...like a thick, messy, slathered on icing that doesn't make you feel guilty. Like people said, there's a skirmish mode (1v1), which made me hooked. When I went to GenCon, I saw Boba Fett, Chewie, and Han...I had to get them. Now I'm waiting on the final group of miniatures to come in the mail until the Hoth expansion. The only cons I see is the setup time and rules. I've organized my map tiles in groups of 10 and in large ziplock bags. All my cards are in separate smaller packages and labeled (I'm planning on getting Battle Foam so I can start painting). As far as the rules, there's a lot of them. It makes sense in the end and is easy to explain, but figuring out the nuances (which cards go for which game type, when they are used, how long are they used for, etc) and the advantages/disadvantages of particular characters can be time consuming...especially when you're trying to learn the game without someone that already knows the game. My suggestion would be to play the game somewhere and judge for yourself. I've personally stopped getting more X-Wing, stopped buying Star Wars LCG, and I've totally concentrated on IA. That's how good the game is, in my opinion. Anyways, that's my story.
  2. You have a point. Maybe I need to play more games to really see the subtleties in the game. I know with Netrunner, I had to invest a lot of headspace because there was many ways to do the same thing. In addition, the bluffing was just...ever present. In Conquest, to me it seemed simpler, but with the same complexity. I'm not refuting your statement at all, I think maybe I'm not thinking deep enough.
  3. I ordered my second and third core months ago, and should have arrived yesterday (Friday Oct 10), but for some reason the train that had my order derailed and now it's delayed.
  4. "Analysis Paralysis", or AP as commonly known, is a condition where a player, during their turn, is mentally stuck on a particular game decision, extending the game time and frustrating the other player(s). It's prevalent in most games to some degree, but some games nowadays use "housekeeping" elements to help pass the time for players when it's not their turn. Things like allowing instant events to be played, drawing cards, drawing/mixing dice, and simultaneous turns help reduce AP, creating more flow to a game. tl:dr version:"Analysis Paralysis" is a term used to describe when a player is mentally stuck finishing their turn.
  5. You can't please everybody. A game doesn't have to be innovative to be good. Art is icing, the gameplay should be the core of the experience. My first impression wasn't that good for this game, but after I played it, I realized how this game works. A lot of subtleties, all decisions are crucial. That's capturing the heart of the 40k experience, in my opinion. Yes, it's not going to perfectly emulate the true 40k experience, but what do you expect from a card game? Netrunner is very complicated and a lot of people like that. Unfortunately, the complexity turns people away.
  6. I don't think it was a matter of how thought out it was as opposed to trying to create a game that would accommodate the diversity and depth of the Warhammer 40k universe. The fact that the designers made a fairly uncomplicated game (as opposed to Netrunner or Star Wars) just shows how much they've evolved as game designers.
  7. I never got into the EU characters. It's certainly good to see new characters, but without any frame of reference, I'm kinda new.
  8. I've been playing card games for over 20 years, Netrunner is a great game but I find that it takes a lot of headspace cause you're dealing with a lot of bluffing and you need to concentrate on your opponent at all times. Still, it's an amazing game and I'm still getting expansions in the hopes of getting into it again with someone more regular. Conquest is certainly more casual. As of this writing I've got 1 core set and have played 2 games. I've ordered 2 more cores online and I'm waiting for those while I get to know the game that I have now. A lot of people here talk about Star Wars, and that's a tad more casual than Conquest, though people have their own opinions about the specifics.
  9. Not really. But I was surprised that my local outlets didn't get their full orders. I'm glad I ordered 2 online and I got my third from a store so I could get make sense of the game before I got my pre-orders; I got the last copy at the last store I checked so I was lucky.
  10. I knew it would take time for Star Wars to actually have enough pods to truly have some dynamic, unique decks, but I also started seeing problems because FF started running out of canon universe characters and started using EU characters. It's not a bad thing, I just see it's becoming harder to keep pumping out pods when you're running out of characters to use.
  11. Netrunner is an amazing game, but it really takes a lot of headspace and I really need to be invested in a particular game to really get the most out of it. That, and I found that there was a really bad dynamic between groups that I played...one group, I was the best and I wiped the floor with them. Another group, I just got whipped ALL THE TIME. Maybe I wasn't as good as I thought I was... Still, I hate to admit it, but Star Wars LCG replaced Netrunner for me. I'll still play Netrunner and I'll still get the packs, but I play Star Wars WAY more and so much more easier to teach people (at least in my opinion). But I appreciate your post. It was exactly what I was looking for in a response! If anyone else could respond, that would be great.
  12. I've been a big fan of FFG's LCG line for some time now. I know that there are some games I just won't be able to fully get into. i.e. Game of Thrones I'll never catch up on even though I have all the house expansions and a core set...but I really love the HBO version cause it's short and concise. I've purchased Call of Cthulhu and Lord of the Rings...not bad. I've played Warhammer Invasion...it's cool, but not my cup of tea. The franchises I've been the most invested in are Netrunner and Star Wars. So basically I'm very familiar with the game mechanics of all the LCG games. But this game...I've really wanted to play this game in its cardboard glory for some time now. I did want to ask the people that have actually purchased the game (even the ones that have played it online) what their thoughts are on it. I've seen the tutorial videos, but you can't really judge a game based on the tutorial...you gotta see how the game flows in its function. So in a way I'm asking for a review, but not just any review. I'm asking the people that have played it (from GenCon) if it seems worth investing the time and money. I'm already purchasing the base set, but does the game have long term potential? My first impression (from watching the videos) is that this game can be over real quick if one player just places their warlord in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm looking to see if it's got good staying power; Star Wars LCG isn't too long, and can't be dominated in the first couple of turns (typically). I know it's long winded, but I've looked on the net and I've seen a few reviews, which helps, but I'd like to hear from the people here. Thanks!
  13. Understood, but it's easy to misunderstand the card text to think that the DSD is a damage counter.
  14. I've thought about it and this was my theory: As soon as Trench Run is applied to the Death Star Dial (DSD), Trench Run itself becomes an objective like The Heart of the Empire objective (10 damage and LS wins the game). Trench Run does not change the DSD into a damage dial, else the card will just be overpowered; LS could just slap the card down when the DSD is at 11 and win the game. Thematically, this makes more sense. It wasn't easy to make a trench run, but it was possible hence the 10 damage capability. It also makes sense that it can only be engaged during the Conflict phase ("You may engage the DSD as though it were a DS objective") since it was that way in the movie. I...think this is how the card works.
  15. Just two questions: If the LS plays Trench Run and the DS has no enhancement-killing cards, then (theoretically) there's no way the DS can win? If the LS plays Trench Run if the Death Star dial is at 11, does the LS automatically win?
  16. I kinda thought that...my initial impression was that this card had potential, but to my fear it's too much effort just to put a band-aid to the inevitable doom. I'd be better off concentrating on getting my own objectives from the DS.
  17. First of all, I want to apologize if this has been asked before, but I've tried searching for a topic like this to no avail. The card False Lead in the Decoy at Dantooine has some confusing text. "Interrupt: When enhanced objective leaves play, decrease the Death Star Dial by 1 (to a minimum of 1)" Does this mean the bonus tick of the Death Star dial gets negated (-1 from the card, then the +1 from the destroying of the objective = 0) or does the card effect change the Death Star dial by -1? Also, does the card completely negate the bonus ticks of the Death Star dial if the DS player has destroyed a previous objective (thereby granting a +2 bonus in normal rules) before the current one? In this case, is it only a +1 for DS or is it a -1 favoring the LS (completely robbing the DS of any bonus)? Thanks for the help
  18. While there are programs that can facilitate A:N, I don't think any kind of digital format will be able to recreate a true A:N experience. A big part of A:N is bluffing. Watching the opponent's movements, reading their moves, looking into their eyes when they play a card…all part of the game and makes victory/defeat that much more enjoyable. You're always learning something in a true one-on-one match. With that said, although you do get to experiment with card combos, get familiar with strategies, and see how different people play, digital A:N just…takes the real fun out of the game. At leasr in my opinion.
  19. Star Wars vs. Netrunner. Definite pros and cons to both. I'm currently playing both games and current with expansions right now. Let's start with Netrunner since it came out first. Netrunner: Pros: It's a deep game. Period. A lot of the game is not necessarily in the cards, but in the mind game trying to psyche-out your opponent or out-think them. The cards facilitate some great strategy and it's a very well thought out game. In addition, I really like the theme and every card fits within the scope of the game. With that said, there's potential for a lot of longevity. It may not have the most recognizeable theme, but whatever theme it has is executed perfectly in this game. Every corporation/faction has very distinct strategies and the influence points add a lot of spice to the game. Some have regarded this game as the "perfect card game", and I would be mostly in agreeance. Cons: It's a deep game. Playing a game makes my mind hurt (but that's probably cause I'm not a very good bluffer) and a game can last anywhere from a few turns to well over 2 hours, which makes a "quick game", not necessarily "quick" or "convenient". Finding people to play may be a bit more difficult since people are not as familiar with Netrunner as they are with the Star Wars universe, but whatever community there is are hardcore. If you really want to go tourney, it is highly recommended you get 3 core sets so that you can get the maximum amount of cards available. Star Wars: Pros: It's a strictly timed game. This may sound like a negative, but you ALWAYS know where you are in the game via Death Star dial. This is great for determining if you can "squeeze a game in" or not. No matter what, a game will never go longer than 24 "turns" (12 light, 12 dark)…unless it's a really, and I mean REALLY rare circumstance. Irregardless of certain card combos, you really feel up against the wall if you're Light Side and you really feel like you have some measure of "control" if you're Dark Side. Deck Building is far simpler: at least 10 objectives per deck. Each objective MUST have its compliment of 5 cards, so you'll never run into weird deck sizes like 61 or 49. Just the fact that it IS Star Wars just puts it as a positive. You'll get people to at least WANT to play based solely on the fact it's Star Wars. To maximize the cards, you only need 2 core sets, and there's not too many "extra cards" to feel like you've wasted money when you've bought the second set. Cons: The obvious con that comes to mind is the awkwardness of some card combos which makes for some inconsistent theming issues. Rancor can defeat an X-Wing? Commit Han Solo to the Force? It goes without saying. You need to just flow with it and if you're that picky about the fact that some weenie Interrogation Droid can somehow stop a Y-Wing from attacking, then just simply don't play. I just laugh it off; it's a GAME. In addition, there's so many "extra" stuff in this game it's ridiculous. With Netrunner, you can at least use an iPad app to organize credits, virus counters, etc. But Star Wars, you NEED the focus, damage, and shield tokens, force cards, Death Star dial, and Balance…thingie (you might even need "+ damage capacity" tokens because of the new cards in the expansion) JUST to play the game. Lose one piece (with exception with focus, shield, and damage) and it's not a complete game. It's a little much, but it's their way of getting around the tap mechanic and also provides a way of delaying a card a few turns. Overall, as with all FFG games, you need to make sure you're organized and keep track of all your chits…since there are many in both games. I typically have to commit more mind power to Netrunner than I need with Star Wars just because bluffing is such a huge part of Netrunner. I've had really good games and some overwhelming victories/defeats with both games, so challenge is fairly even with the scale tipping slightly to Netrunner. Both games are asymmetrical (each side has different objectives) in nature, but Netrunner is FAR more asymmetrical than Star Wars. As far as teaching the game, I have to give it to Star Wars being easier to teach/learn. Most of the cards are the same (as far as format) between Light Side and Dark Side, so the only real divergence is in the objectives. Netrunner's Corporation cards are just completely different than the Runner's cards…they are even played differently. Regardless of how "easy" people say Netrunner is to learn, they cannot argue that it requires its own game lingo and for some that can be hard to process on a first (or more) playthrough. I know the Star Wars theme can be inconsistent, but let's face it, does anyone know where I can find a ship that can do the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs (or whatever that meant)? Explain how a measure of distance somehow equaled a measure of time and I'll somehow explain how a Rancor can take down Home One. All kidding aside, I am not siding with one or the other game. Both have great pros and cons. Hope this helps.
  20. Messenger said: I just realized: Crypsis has yet one big advantage we're overlooking: It breaks any kind of ICE. That means no more searching or drawing to try to get to your other icebreakers. You don't have to wait to prepare to make runs against fortified servers. Even with Special Order around, it's still a good few steps quicker than a deck that uses several different icebreakers. Similarly, as a program, it eats up only 1 memory slot but as a three-in-one, that's like 3 programs occupying the space of just 1. I still think the cost in clicks to load a virus counter is quite a pain, but I'm beginning to wonder if Crypsis is fairer than we think. It asks us to spend time to use it but it may be no different than if we spend time on its replacements. It may be hitting the "just right" spot as far as cost and performance is concerned. It's definitely a clutch card, not really meant for a singular offensive, but more of a filler until you can get a more efficient icebreaker. The question is whether or not you want to actually PUT it in your deck. With my Shaper deck, I got Tinkering, Diesel, and Special Order cards to account for any icebreaker deficiencies card and my Anarch deck relies more on viruses, so I don't normally run Crypsis. Still, like I said in my earlier post, I have seen it used efficiently and it's seen its share of wins in my group; the main strategy being that filler icebreaker that the runner just couldn't get up to that point. So it's not completely useless, but it's definitely a double edged sword card.
  21. signoftheserpent said: Is there any way to make this overpriced card suck less? If there's nothing coming out of the stack and this is the only icebreaker you have (believe me, I've seen many games like this), then it suddenly becomes the best thing you've got.
  22. I'll bite. My friend and I have been working on a Netrunner vid/podcast. I suppose doing articles will help me get some exposure as well as some community support.
  23. Messenger said: As per the topic. Mine would be the new Criminal identity, new Corp identities, and Criminal decoder ICE. New Criminal Identity. Gabriel Santiago isn't bad, but I chafe at how his ability is so focused on the Corp's HQ. It's a solid, fitting, and flavorful ability but I'd like to see a Criminal who is more flexible when it comes to target selection. New Corp Identities. We already have Whizzard and Chaos Theory; the Corp needs some love! Criminal Decoder ICE. Criminals don't have any in-faction way for defeating code gate ICE beyond using Femme Fatale to specifically target them, and that's only against one particular instance of a code gate. A little outside their faction, their only option is Crypsis, which isn't geared specifically for code gates and is slow to use. Criminals have to dip into another faction's 'breakers to beat code gates efficiently. I really don't like seeing previews…it's like looking at candy through a glass door I can't go through until it's "ready". I'd rather see the caards in my hands because until it's released, I can't do anything with it and there may be other cards not shown that are better than the one previewed.
  24. Toqtamish said: radioactivemouse said: It's really decieving. While I agree with most of your other points this one I do not as the contents of the core set as well as what the quantities of each card are were put in a PDF file on the FFG support page for the game weeks in advance of its release. It's context…I meant it's decieving because not having 3x cards "seems" like it's a bum deal when it's really not. I meant it in a good way and I wasn't referring to the actual amounts of cards that are in the set.
  25. It's really decieving. The completionist in people want that 3x everything, not really knowing that the base box comes with what you need. I got 3 core sets and after I started moving towards making tournament-level decks, I found I never really needed more than 1 core set in the first place. But the availability of 2 more core sets just allowed me to make 2 more decks with enough cards left over to look at and develop future strategies. In the end it was win-win for me instead of "oh boo hoo, I had to buy 2 more cores so I could get 3x every card" But, consider the alternative. I've played Magic since the 90's and I was never really satisfied because I was never able to even complete a set, despite the hundreds of dollars I pumped into that game. I can buy 2 boxes of boosters (at about $80-120 respectively, depending on the set) and STILL not get even 1 copy of every card. I bought my first Netrunner core at $40, the other two I found online at $25/each. That's $90; I have 3x every card PLUS extras for making more decks. I don't think this is a matter of FFG being fair as much as it is people are just whiny. Does this mean I'm not irked at the fact FFG didn't put 3x every card in the core? No, I was a little concerned, but the bottom line is the core is meant to get people in the game, not to fulfill every completionist's dream, and I can understand that. Hey, if you want to go hardcore, buy 2 more cores. I did. It's not like you're going to have to buy 3x of every data pack from now on or have to buy a full box of data packs just to try and find a card you want to put in your deck. It's (buying 2 more cores) the only real outside purchase you're going to need, IF you need it at all.
×
×
  • Create New...