Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Alternating between overlord and hero turns is strictly a good thing. It will remove much of the discussion between heroes as to who should act first. Since hero players will have less information to go on, there will be less deliberation and the game will feel less like a puzzle game. If the hero players really "game the game", there was basically no chance at all that the overlord would win. Easily one-shotting the enemies, and denying the overlord any actions meant that correct hero activation would obliterate the overlord. This further added to the puzzle mechanics of the game since some hero team tactics were strictly better than others, and the game felt more like it was about finding these than to play the characters. With an alternating structure, the game will be smoother, the overlord won't have to wait for as long to play and it would if anything buff the overlord, since there is less of a chance of the heroes killing entire groups of his units. After playing imperial assault I decided that I will play descent in the same way, for these reasons.
  2. Guys please don't reenact the "whistleblowers of the apocalypse" again. FFG will do with descent as they may, and the life in this thread is an indication of people's interest in RTL.. Let's just settle with "time will tell".
  3. Your opinions deserve to be expressed, but your extrapolations are still wrong in my opinion. Playing the game, on a board, rolling the dice, but using an AI on a tablet does not get in the way of human contact. Especially not if this is the contact that the humans in question crave. As you said, it's not two different game modes, it's two different games. Introducing more ways to play games can only mean that more people get to play their kind of game, and if this means a rift in the gaming community then it's a necessity, not a side-effect. You mention that "it's more and more about what vision the company has", and that you have been "deceived". That's only because this product does not appeal to you. For some of us, it's still about buying a game regardless of who's publishing it. This conflict of ideals that you are portraying is not shared by other gamers who look forward to the product, meaning that this change of paradigm has not occured at all. It's still about the games, just not to you because this might not be a game for you. I am not challenging your ideals, just your apocalyptic tone. This is like saying "if you don't want to tackle people, why not play soccer instead of touch-rugby?", or "why eat chicken tikka masala if you want to eat british food, you can just eat <insert whatever> instead?". Descent has a nice atmosphere, nice items, interesting classes and the amount of components you get in the box for the price is in my opinion a good value. So for your question of "why play coop descent", my answer is "because it's fun". It seems like you want games to fit into cardinal types, with no cross-over whatsoever. I myself like the overlord mechanic, but my group doesn't. We all like descent though, and with this app we will all enjoy it even more. This app will likely allow us to enjoy descent more than any other coop game you can recommend, because we have been looking for coop games and many times we have come to the conclusion that Descent, as a coop game, would be the best for our group. Why would it be better for this kind of game to be offered by another title rather than through a Descent mod? Once again, I think this is due to ideals and growing up with a mod-heavy PC scene I see no problems just solutions and applications through modding. Modding is good. Modding is life.
  4. Indalecio, you might not realize it yourself but most of your arguments are of the slippery-slope variety. Furthermore, you mention that "you prefer" the old type of descent, which is a valid albeit moot point since it is your opinion alone. Your comment on this making some of the gamers "look bad" was a joke I guess. You also mention that "resources might be shifted towards new game modes" (not a direct quote), this is akin to the slippery slope argument but it is also wrong since it's a luddite-esque argument and if the market demands it, the market demands it. If resources were to be shifted to electronic development of descent content, it's FFG's prerogative. I also think you are wrong in saying that it is a problem that less traditional content will be developed. Look at all the descent content out there, if you truly have it all and played it all then you shouldn't gripe about new type of content for, not in your words, 'other' players. Apparently these 'other' players aren't as privileged in having content suited for them, and they deserve it as much as you do. It's wrong to categorize it into old and new, or analogue and electronic players because us players looking forward to this app and more electronic implementation of board games are not closer to modern FPS gamers on a "electronic-analog scale" than you are. It's not one-dimensional. This is a niche, as are all board games, and for many of us we look forward to seeing our niche demands being satisfied.
  5. Using technology in this way allows us to consume board games even more, even easier. The discussion should be about how technical and component heavy a board game can be before becoming an analog video game. Playing through Forgotten Souls all I felt was "this is awesome.. although a bit too clunky". Using many components while playing a co-op game often means that one person will do more manual labour than the others and that gameplay will not be seamless. Immersion is ALWAYS lost in any setting that is not real life. Sure there is a charm to board game pieces, and people can hate on "staring at a screen", but as someone who grew up with video games and reverse engineered my hobby into board games, I only see applications and solutions. This is awesome FFG, I can clearly see Descent hitting the table MORE with this app so ironically using technology makes for more use of an analogue game. For anyone truly worried that staring at a screen will be a hassle, put your tablet on the edge of the table or use chromecast or plug your PC to a big screen that is clearly visible from the gaming table. If you lack these electronical appliances the fact still remains the same:this app will allow for more Descent to be played around the world compared to what they could've developed in traditional content instead. There is already tons of traditional Descent content, what is needed is not more content, but different smarter content. Like this.
  6. I will try to present my argument without whinging. I bought the hired guns pack, and I guess I should've read the information more clearly, but was disappointed to only see 2 miniatures. This makes for some weird price scaling in my opinion. Thus far, there are no "deluxe" alternatives, rather, someone who wants all the minis needs to buy a basegame/expansion with the villain packs in question. This means that in order to deploy 4 hired guns (2 regs, 2 elites) you need to villain packs. The strange thing is that while you do this, you will get duplicates of all other components. I would understand if FFG sold "large and small" villain packs, or even allowed us to buy boxed expansions with enough miniatures for a higher price. But forcing us to buy wasteful components, while a good business move, just leaves an empty feeling as a collector/enthusiast. If this sounds like whinging, maybe it's because it is whinging. In either case, the agenda deck for this pack seems like great fun, and I think the general idea of mini-expansions is good.
  7. some spoilers below. Sure he is squishy. Although in the campaign you get to summon him with 12+1+threat HP. In the mini campaign that gives him 17 HP. In my opinion heroes can always take down any enemy they feel like if they focus, but that's also the point of the mission. With troopers attacking, him following, possibly focusing, and then using firing squad I managed to take saska from somewhat hurt, to wounded, to incapacitated. Sure she is weak, but that burst damage is not common as IP. Boba on the other hand I found had versatility without being particularly imposing. Not only that, in the missions so far that I've used him, he didn't really have a strong presence since the heroes didn't necessarily need to take him down. Somos allowed for me as IP to position him and actually nuke a character. More thematic, and more relevant for the heroes. Also, heavy stormtroopers and e-webs are also troopers. firing squad on two heavies allows for some good blast damage. I personally see Kayn as much more viable and dangerous than Boba, who at the most can be a nuisance.
  8. Good attack, can focus adjacent troopers and firing squad? The only downside is the relative lack of surge abilites and health, but in my opinion this is more than compensated by his damage output. Almost find him a bit OP to be honest.
  9. If you have all the expansions, and a conversion kit, you have a crapload of heroes and monsters. You have a crapload of tiles. There is more than enough to go around. You don't need "more" to create "more". Someone else can do the math, but the amount of variation that can come from that amount of variables is ridiculous. Especially when you can have A BOOK FILLED WITH TEXT THAT CAN ALTER BASICALLY ANY OF THESE. I think this announcement is excellent. GJ FFG. I expect this to be cheap though.
  10. good to see life in this forum, thought this game was forgotten. now that people are here I don't need to feel like such a 'geek'. Paycheck is due this friday. If anyone wants something to do this weekend, log in to this forum to HEAR ME ROAR/rant.
  11. Glad to see Team Manager gets yet another upgrade. My rant will not be about "moneygrabbing" or anything of the sort. It's about balance. It seems that the game to begin with is very unbalanced. You could blame it on theme or "lulz factor" but IMO in the long run this game suffers from these issues. Some people don't want like the game because of this, since it does take a while to play, has a lot of randomness with simulated feel of strategy. Meaning a lot of people get hurt when they lose even if it isn't "their fault". Complaints: 1. Some teams are too good. The skeletons are good, the humans are good. But more importantly.. 2. The dwarves suck. I get the theme, but they have too little pass, and they don't have many heavy hitters. Their heaviest tackler is a 3 with dauntless, this basically means "4 against 4, 3 against 3 or less" which in any nonesoteric case is worse than 4. I get that 4s are reserved for "monster type" players, but this could easily be adjusted by giving it a downed tackle or other skill. This way, if you fail your tackle you could still go for high risk high reward type of play which is fitting for the dwarves. As it is now it's too much risk for not that much reward. The dwarf with 3 star power and strip ball could have a skill that allows it to pass if it succeeds in tackling and still have the option of using strip ball instead of tackle. Now it's just a tackle or sh*tty pass. These are just suggestions and I am trying to say that it is possible to fix the dwarf team without straying from the theme. Also, 2 of their team upgrades are matchup actions that either require your players to be downed. Too situational for too little. One of these allow you to stand up a downed player, which for the dwarves isn't as useful as for other teams, since they lose less star power on falling down. 3. The vampires need a buff of some sort. Instead of letting the vampires feast on their own players, you could let the linemen sacrifice themselves. This way, the vampires would get their buff without sacrifing their whole action on attacking their own units. Maybe this would stray from the "play a card, read the text, pass the turn" playstyle, but adding a tiny tiny bit of timing complexity won't hurt the game and won't stray too much from the style of the game. 4. It's good that foul play will add the team upgrades from sudden death, but honestly they need to add more for the old teams. Either replacements for the units, giving the original six teams downed skills or adding more team upgrades. The original six teams are still fun to play, but no way nearly as fleshed out as the newer teams. 5. The stadiums and all other additions are nice, but some people will not play with these because of the "too much fidgeyness" factor, meaning there is a risk the expansion will be just 3 more teams. I think this is fine but it could be much more. Balance adjustments and old team improving is therefore even more important. 6. Just a quick glance at the new teams and they seem a bit too powerful. Hopefully I'm wrong. TLDR: Retrofit the old teams. If possible, also add more team upgrades. If the game has gone to print too bad. Everyone knows I'll buy this expansion anyway. I have been hoping for balance fixes since forever though, and I was really sad to see this expansion didn't offer that.
  • Create New...