Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cfmcdonald

  1. The new mechanic here is "if you paid using only X resources." I think this will have a pretty significant effect on deckbuilding choices.
  2. Why the assumption that a Loki nemesis rules out a Loki villain? Is there a rule that prevents two copies of a unique enemy with the same name from being in play? I don't see one. The "Unique" entry in the rules reference only discusses player cards.
  3. What's this saga anduril people are talking about? The only narsil/anduril card I know of is "Sword That Was Broken." I don't see any Anduril in ringsdb. To me that's the #1 missing card from the game.
  4. Yeah it seems like the allies in this cycle are ridiculously undercosted and/or totally ignoring color pie. I don't get it. The Merry/Pippin allies in Shadow in the East are also totally crazy.
  5. There are several possible other uses of Infighting, such as moving damage from low defense enemies that you can easily damage to high defense enemies that you can't, or moving damage onto enemies that are otherwise hard to attack (e.g. they hide in the staging area). There may also be enemies that punish you when you attack them, though I can't think of any right now.
  6. You wrote, "Even if the Horn exhausted, like you want it to, you could repeat this combo for a couple turns," which to me indicates that you think Horn of Gondor would be overpowered if they had just added "Exhaust to..." to its original text. Again I can't see how getting 1 extra conditional resource a turn could possibly be OP, given that there are plenty of other ways to do this, or even to get them unconditionally (Resourceful, Steward of Gondor). If getting > 3 resources per turn makes Silvan cards broken, the problem is not the resource generation.
  7. You are talking about a 5+ card combo which has almost nothing to do with Horn of Gondor. There are lots of ways to get extra resources. You could also just have Steward of Gondor in play, and get 2 more resources for free without having to pull any ally shenanigans. In what world is an exhausting Horn of Gondor broken but that isn't?
  8. Yes, but based on what I've heard the scenarios are not very satisfying when played in this way, because of the many effects where the other player/team is supposed to choose for you.
  9. I'm curious why they're pushing this angle? Hoping to pick up competitive LCG players? Based on what I've seen online it seems like many/most existing players play solo, and will have no use for these kits.
  10. I would like to see something more grounded that doesn't end in a confrontation with a great old one to decide the fate of the world in a realm beyond time and space.
  11. I really like the Taboo List alternative they've come up with for Arkham Horror. It's optional for those who want to shake things up, it doesn't invalidate any printed cards, and it allows a lot more experimentation (e.g. if they find they've over-nerfed they aren't stuck with that decision, and if they've under-nerfed they don't have to issue yet another errata, as with Erebor Battle Master).
  12. They should just put a "limit X per round/phase" on every effect they print. It would solve a lot of problems.
  13. There is a penalty to restarting if you've accumulated any victory points, in which case they are lost. But if you are doing well on your last run you could always stall on unlocking the final pillar to rack up VP. Overall, I agree, the design is a bit flawed here. There should be some cost to spending additional time unlocking the cave. Luckily I never ran into trouble during the scenario, so only had to do it once.
  14. Yes, the procedure should be "declare target lock, pick target, measure. If target is not in range, action failed." This matches pretty much every other procedure in the game, and I have no idea why they made this strange procedure for target lock. It would be like being forced to boost in some other direction if your chosen direction is blocked, and you only fail if you try left, right, and forward and none is possible.
  15. One can only hope they'll also go full circle on difficulty levels for those who just want to build fun decks. <Currently beating my head against Lost Realm and Saga campaign and feeling pretty down on the game>
  16. I've never seen/played with those cards. Again, since this is a non-competitive game that many people play in progression mode, many (most?) players of Hama decks will not have these cards either.
  17. You can? I don't think I've ever come anywhere close to emptying my deck. Maybe in "Riddles in the Dark." This goes back to the point that it makes little sense to design errata around the needs of a handful of hardcore power gamers in a co-op game that is mostly played solo and has zero organized-play/competitive play element. I'd like to see errata that "fixes" some of the most frustrating quests that seem nigh impossible to beat for my single-handed solo decks.
  18. This is exactly right. The "fix" to Hama now makes a Hama + Thicket combo relatively *more* powerful as a way of using Hama. Shutting down the whole combat phase for 4 turns off one copy off Thicket is still great, and probably covers half the game. It barely solves the problem it was intended to solve. Meanwhile someone who wants to use him in a 'normal' way to recur Feint/Goblin-Cleaver, etc., gets screwed.
  19. What they are trying to do is provide a counter to Spark of Rebellion. Please understand what the card actually does before going on a rant.
  20. I'm still completely perplexed by your analysis, which requires you to consider the opportunity cost of a card *against itself*. The *value* of Emergency Cache (III) is that it is so flexible, allowing you to trade off between resources and supplies as needed. Sometimes resources will be more valuable, other times supplies, other times a mix will provide the overall greatest value for the group. The fact that you can freely convert resources into supplies is an advantage, not a cost. But I expect we will continue to talk past each other, so I will leave it there.
  21. Exciting or not, it gives you a lot more deckbuilding flexibility. If you are interested in building strong decks or having a lot of deckbuilding options, a 2nd core is essential. If you mainly want novelty/variety, I agree it's not the best choice.
  22. A second core set copy will give you 80 new player cards to play with in deck building. No other $40 expenditure on the game will give you that much. e.g. Dunwich Legacy for $30 will give you 40 new player cards. if you look at level 0 only cards, Dunwich looks a bit better (58 vs. 34), but the core set is still the better value.
  23. Or if Extra Ammunition gave you the option of 3 ammo or 20 resources, it would be a worse (less efficient) card?
  24. I don't understand your math. The new EC is 0 resources for 4 supply, which is, if you want to go there, infinite times more efficient than Extra Ammunition. The go-to for this card IMO is not Strange Solution, it's Flashlight.
  25. I find the boards are plenty brutal as is, and will take every break I can get.
  • Create New...