Jump to content

Reedmooley

Members
  • Content count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Reedmooley

Recent Profile Visitors

187 profile views
  1. Yeah, modeling knife, files and green stuff are your best friends here. But those SoN minis are really cheap/lousy looking, when compared to other H&M and expansion boxes stuff. Even mantic "Kings of plastic garbage"armies are better casted. This is the only expansion I find just plain ugly in terms of miniatures. Unfortunately I don't think there is a chance to avoid that, maybe I will try to fix them somehow or get some proxys for those two.
  2. Well- first production run had those two almost faceless, kinda melted, no noses, disfigured eyes etc. Thats why I look forward to the last printing- last LotW print run is very nice, very sharp details. Definitely better quality. Scale is of course smaller than H&M latest boxes.
  3. Thx:) I dunno what that means, maybe the (20)16 July 10th. Still those minis look a bit better than the ones I've seen. And well, Tinashi and Orkell have really ugly sculpts.
  4. Thanks TryFal, can you please check print date on the box? There is a bar code on the box right bottom side. There should be a production date as marked here:)
  5. I've not seen any photo of recent reprint minis from that box either. Reprint of LotW made on the same production run as SoN have a bit better casted monster minis(less mold lines and overall smoothness), sculpts are unchanged, but details are more crisp, especially on the softer tan colored dragon hybrids. Still the original print run of LotW was of nice quality, and it was fun to paint that stuff. LotW re-release is on par with Chains that Rust or recent H&M packs quality.
  6. Hi there Anyone got a recently reprinted (end od 2017) copy of SoN expansion? Does the quality of hero and monster miniatures improved over the "melted zombie face" heroes from the ones that ware present in first production run?
  7. Well ok, I do understand that. Good point. I prefer IIed for faster pace actually. For the exploration -I liked first edition of Doom over first Descent for that mechanics etc. Can't wait to check the new one.
  8. On ebay I see only one SoB "new and foiled" for 50 Euros in Europe. Pretty much the price I saw that stuff around on local market. But- I'm not paying attention to collecting 1ed offers. One can get everything. But the question is- why? If you're not a collector, I don't see any proper reason to buy into 1 edition stuff. Only aspect I like more than current one is that I was able to put absolutely everything into core game box with DIY insert:) But it was pain to keep it shelved in my flat along with TI and Starcraft . But larger box get you +5 to respect on board game party;) Now, lets get back to topic:)
  9. If you both would mind- my desired expansion is mountain/ice themed or desert one:) I stated that out in second post of this thread. I like the Sea of blood-tropical jungle(some of existing map tiles would also work) scenery, but not definitely the "nautical combat" and other mechanics that are indeed clumsy. I've played SoB, along the others expansions long time ago and enjoyed it- back then. But II ed. has been more crafted and rid of most I ed. flaws. Shortly after release of SoB whole line was killed by FFG, and no other 1ed. reprint saw a daylight, for any expansion or the core game(as I can tell, maybe there was some printing made, but I don't remember any). I don't think that sole SoB alone was the cause, but the FFG financial trouble, around that time they killed also DUST, Tannhauser and few other product lines. It took them around 3 years to get back into that kind of stuff. If one was unable to get the core game, then there was no reason to get SoB and RtL expansion- RtL is also the box expansion one can get out new and foiled by today(or was able not so long ago). And still its best scoring expansion for 1ed Descent by BGG. Most people tend to go after legacy stuff in release order anyway. I've sold my whole first edition of Descent stuff without regret when second edition came out. Especially for poor minis that was just plain ugly. So I don't really focus on that legacy stuff. In my opinion, they could extract anything that worked out nice(monsters/lore) in Sea of blood/Island of dread for Runebound expansion. And remade the ships/travels part into something that can be done solely in app- for example hex map, with island system, whirlpools, underwater caves/locations, or shore to be reveled(ever played first parts of Final Fantasy series?- kinda like world map from that stuff) maybe random generated . Just don't kill mindlessly the themes that have some potential. We all can agree that straight implementation would not work in this case as 1&2 editions are whole different games.
  10. Ok, I will explain my point. Lets use the biggest resource of clean data I'm aware of-the BGG detailed ratings page. English is not my native language so sorry if I made some misspells. But raw numbers are universal. If you have any better survey method, fell free to recalculate that if you want. I will be happy to read it. Sea of blood-is rated 7.4 by BGG community. The number of BGG users that declared owning the game is 2901 people and it was rated 641 times since its implementation into database of BGG. So thats about 30,5% of owners that took their time and rated the title. Rather small number, isn't it? Of that 30,5% there when placed into NPS satisfaction rating(1-6 Detractors,7-8-Neutral,9-10 Promoters), we have a 148 Detractors, 344 Neutral and 149 Promoters. So even if we just throw out the neutrals(that is standard of most NPS surveys) you get a tie between the promoters and detractors as set of 23.2 and 23.1 for the group of people who did mind to rate it, NPS is 0,1%, from 30,5 percent of all declared owners in that BGG source. Biggest group, 53,3% reviewers was neutral to positive and gave it 7 or 8 rating. If you count neutrals+positives you get 76,5% of reviewers neutral to happy with their game. The highest rated expansion for 1ed. Descent is Road to legend with rating of 8.0, own by 4372 of BGG users, and rated by 2107 of them. Thats 48.1% of owners who gave it a rating. Of that 2107 we see Detractors:276 Neutrals:1005 Promoters:829. That gives us a score D:13.9 N:47.63 Pro:39.29 in the group 48.1 percent of reviewers who own the game by BGG base. NPS for Road to Legend is 26.21 for the group of . Again 47.6% of reviewers was neutral to positive. If you count neutrals+positives you get 86,5% of reviewers happy with their game. In both cases, more than 50% of owners did not even rate the title. Mostly because they just want to play it, or have other fun things to do instead of spending their time on sites such as BGG and do ratings/reviews. And that was my point when I wrote that I don't always trust in such data. P.S. As for pirates theme in fantasy setting. Don't mistake "Pirates of Caribbean" type of Jack Sparrow thing with for example, LOTR Corsairs of Umbar or Greyjoy's House from GOT. They seem to fit fantasy theme quite well. Almost every big fantasy universe have corsairs/pirates in that kind. Even Conan the Cimmerian dealt with corsairs in some stories. P.S.2 Antivaxxer plot -man that made my day Good one.
  11. Bucho, nationality has nothing to do with this discussion. And no, I'm not American. It just seems you cannot accept any other opinion that is different from your own. EOT for me.
  12. I do recognize it, but I don't dismiss something because of some internet reviews, I trust my own experience and live contact with product more than some internet hype. I don't see the Sea of Blood remake a bad idea from a start. Like Jopan said above, it's decent theme and I would be happy if we get some of that kinda stuff incorporated into IIed.
  13. I'm not making fun of people who do write reviews, but if you consider them as part of gaming community- they are maybe 1% of all buyers. If you check BGG profiles of most active revievers, they are game collectors rather than game players. When you write a review?-When you don't like something. If you get well with a game-you will probably just rate it, and go back to have fun with the stuff. Sea of blood was maybe bad balanced, but it had a strong sides: graphics, nice box content, familiars etc, fun new mechanics, campaign etc . And it was quite well received by people who was frequent players of 1ed. and by frequent I mean they gathered and played it in my workplace at least 3 times in a week for some long hours for two years I've worked there. The same type of frequent players as D&D guys used to be back in 90's. Most of people can go ahead of some flaws (by homebrews for example) to get more fun from their game, and don't give a dime on reviews. It was also the last produced expansion, and most of people gather expansion in their release order. That is the reason of people getting it as last expansion IMO, not because it is that bad. You may think otherwise and I understand that.
  14. It was just not ment for "Sunday warriors". Hardcore 1ed. players that used to frequent my work place back in the day ware just amazed by this expansion. They even created up whole campaigns based of the "road to legend" and "sea of blood" combined that took them few weeks to play. Whole first batch of these expansion boxes sold the same day we got them into our store.
  15. I remember when Road to legend and Sea of blood came out(**** just realized that was around 10years ago). Problem with both expansions why they are not so popular as previous ones was not related to rules. Box brought very nice stuff but as I can remember it did not contain any new monster and heroes minis and that was the point where most people tend off from this box when it comes to buy something new. It was targeted for advanced players who like to play long, and self made campaigns, and not the Sunday Warriors who play one or two encounters a year. When it first got into the shop I used to work at the time, all 6 boxes delivered sold out the same day it arrived, same as Road to legend some time before that. And that was in Poland, where client base for this game(1 ed only available in English, with clumsy bootleg self translated manuals etc.) was rather small.
×