• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About C2K

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

325 profile views
  1. I've seen competitive players quit GoT 2e because the first cycle took too long and the meta was stagnant. GoT was in a good place competitively from 2nd cycle onward. I've heard stories of how one sided Netrunner was during its first cycle, because runners had lackluster economy and breakers. Even Conquest needed a cycle to get in a good place. With L5R, you have clan loyalty, to the point where playing the best deck means forfeiting playing your clan. With the Hatamoto system, FFG wants clan loyalty to some extent. Considering from what I've seen in tournaments briefly over the weekend, two clans are dominant, four are in the middle, and one is at the bottom. Its not realistic to have all clans at the top, but, if the first cycle will allow there to be a 3rd or even 4th clan to be favored at a tourney and the others to have an outside chance, then it succeeded.
  2. I like it better than Emergency Cache (2). Still, I suppose you are better leveling other cards. It all depends what you are building up to.
  3. And if you are not playing it competitively, you can buy the packs at your leisure. You might not even want to buy all of the packs. Having played the other LCGs, sometimes I get packs that is uninspiring and not worth looking at till the meta changes.
  4. I think people are getting carried away. This seems like a 1 time thing to jumpstart the game. Game of Thrones 2e could have used this, as it took 1 cycle for all the factions to be tournament worthy. And with kotei arriving in such a short time, i think they want to add more variation to the tournament scene. As for deluxe boxes, they will probably follow the new GoT initiative of "when its ready, its ready."
  5. Luckily, Minh is a seeker, so she can use Old Book of Lore and No Stone Unturned to try and avoid the King in Yellow.
  6. Just remember, this is a game about "cardboard samurai". And the samurai battle cry was "Banzai!!".
  7. At some point in history, somebody has conquered and oppressed somebody. That's human nature. The Chinese, The Greeks, the Romans, the Turks, the Mongols, the Vikings, the Spanish, the Church, the British, the Japanese, the French, the Germans(Prussians), the USA, and of course, Russia. We should certainly remove the culture from all of these people away from the public eye because at one time, they did terrible things to a group of people. That's basically the argument here.
  8. For the record, Banzai means 10,000 years, as in "May you live 10,000 years". How is that offensive? Unless... life offends you??
  9. I think I would add Yorick to the list I made earlier. I think any Survivor so far can solo, because Survivors have ways to mitigate failures, and it helps make a solo run smoother.
  10. They might errata "Banzai!" to be instead referred to as "Here I come!" or "Not In The Face!"
  11. I think I will protest this change to the chant by taking a knee while they try to sell this new chant at the tournaments.
  12. It would have been nice for the Unicorn Stronghold to have an impact on the game like the other strongholds, rather than the "maybe, in certain situations... this might work..." build it is now. Considering the way the game has been revamped, they could have given all Unicorn personalities cavalry so that they can interact with the stronghold. I mean, sure, maybe stronger cards that key off the cavalry trait might eventually come out, but with the first personality they get in the dynasty packs being non-cavalry, I'm not holding my breath.
  13. 1. You can play this game solo, but it works best with at least 2 players. The reason being sometimes you will find yourself in a scenario where you will be wishing you had a second investigator(perhaps due to an investigators shortcomings or what the scenario throws at you). Though, I suppose you can always make two-handed decks like people do in LotR. 2. Replayability is high, especially in campaign mode. Different outcomes lead to different things occurring as you move along. I have had 4 different Dunwich Legacy campaigns going and they all went in different paths. The one thing lost, however, is the story shock, or rather the twists of the story. Otherwise the mechanics vary. Even then, instead of having a straight difficulty like in LotR, there are 4 varying difficulty levels if you think a scenario is too hard/easy. 3. It seems like they are releasing investigators at every Deluxe expansion rather than adventure pack(which is how heroes are released in LotR for those that don't know). Many of the Investigators are from the previous Arkham Files games, and with at least 50(?) characters out there you can expect more to be released. When Path to Carcosa becomes available(or if you got it at Gencon) there will be 16 investigators available to you if you have everything(I'm not counting promo Marie Lambeau, because 1. she is rare 2. she will be rereleased in a future deluxe expansion). If you get the Core, you will have 5 to start with. It should also be known you only need to buy two cores to have a playset of everything, where as in LotR, you might opt for a third to get that 3rd Unexpected Courage, etc.
  14. I play both. I feel Arkham Horror is more of a casual game than LotR. That said, if I really want a challenge, I look to LotR. LotR rewards precise card plays and recognizing combos and synergy. Arkham Horror has too much variance to rely on that, but rather your ability to adapt to the changing conditions of the scenario hold more importance. For LotR, you can always guarantee the the encounter deck will try to crush you based on its difficulty. In Arkham Horror, you can find yourself being rewarded or punished by the scenario based on how fortunate you are. You can see this in how the gencon events turned out, where as some groups did beat the Arkham Horror Epic adventure, but no one beat the LotR epic adventure. I love both games, and I collect both games, because while they are both co-op lcgs, they do play vastly different and encourage players to approach both differently.
  15. I don't see what the big deal is. Would you let some silly cultural perversion corrupt a definition that has been established for a really long time now?