Jump to content

McDermott

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    180

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by McDermott

  2. Posted

    Just now, kempy said:

    But, time to take off pink glasses and say that was still an edition where if you haven't seen two Holdings turn two you were mostly screwed. I really recommend to take old edition cards (or try some online stuff) to refresh "old good times". You'll be surpised.

    Due respect kempy, you've spent most of these discussions defending the game based on an edition that never actually came out.  Rose colored shades indeed.

    JJ48 reacted to this

  6. Posted

    1 minute ago, Ser Nakata said:

     

    The Naga, on the other hand, I could see as a playable faction when the time comes. It will depend whether FFG gives them an important part in the story or not.

    The problem i've always had with the naga, ESPECIALLY the second coming of the naga, was that they're supposed to be this dying nearly extinct race that has trouble breeding.   Putting them in as a faction implicitly puts their power on par with clans that field legions of troops, which undermines the whole nearly extinct race thing.

  9. Posted · Edited by McDermott

    56 minutes ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

    That is more size of the field doing the limiting than number of opportunities, and even then all it takes is the guy with a goofball idea or someone willing to roll with that goofball idea (possibly for a bounty) to win for that goofball idea to get chosen. Player skill does not equal willingness to take a choice seriously.

    Also a fair amount of the reason L5R was popular/successful was because of those story prizes. The story prizes were not the problem, it was more more failure to properly limit the scope of those story prizes and the ever growing amount of tournament results that were less story picks and more influence card design choices. So many tournaments had pick a keyword or name a card as a prize rather than make a story choice.

    Except that i can go on the jade hand's old page, and thumb through gen cons from 15 years of records and note that there are 0 hurr hurr joke choices made.  I can even recall most of the posts the players made about the WHYS of their decisons.  So while i have evidence that after nearly 2 decades no one has managed a joke choice at gen-con (and i suspect if i bothered to dig through the gen-con uk's and origins id say the same), you've got basically nothing backing up the idea that they'll happen anyway.   The reality is that people really aren't willing to put in the kind of effort required to test and prepare a gen-con championship quality deck, nor sit through the 12 to 16 hours of grueling cardplay only to crack a funny.  

  10. Posted

    3 hours ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

    There will always be people who go for the silly/unusual no matter how many choices are available. The moment AEG printed an elephant personality was the moment someone had the opportunity to start thinking, "What silliness can i involve this elephant in?"

    Number of opportunities will not prevent this sort of stuff being pushed. The only thing that can prevent this sort of thing is limiting the possibility for such choices to be made.

    I disagree with this entirely.  People pushing for that may exist but their ability to get the job done shrinks dramatically when there are only 1 or 2 opportunities a year and its a field of 250 instead of 40

  11. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Gaffa said:

    I played the game from its very beginning in Imperial Edition to its end, loyal Lion always.

    The low point was always, always, player factions dicking over other players, which was the whole problem of the "storyline-driven game". AEG never had a good hold on it after Jade (arguably after the Second Day of Thunder), and it only got worse.

    The big problem with the whole "storyline driven game" aspect of it was that story rewards ballooned out of control.  It needed to rein that **** in, every tournament did not need some story prize associated with it.  Hell having a prize for every kotei was probably way too much.  If your only opportunity to influence the story is at 1 or 2 100+ person events per year, and they're actually important story points,  you're liable to take them a little more seriously than say, mantis clan kenku ninja, or trying to get an elephant assigned imperial rank.

    Yandia, Laurence J Sinclair, Shiba Gunichi and 4 others reacted to this

  12. Posted

    3 hours ago, BigKahuna said:

     

    I don't really see how this reflects or has anything to do with Legend of the Five Rings.  As much as I love the IP, Legend of the Five Rings can be said to have been a marginally successful CCG at absolute best.  "Crappy" games as you called them like Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh, as well as stuff you have never heard of like Force of Will, Card Fight Vanguard, Dragon Ballz ... they all surpassed Legend of the Five rings by a margin so wide they aren't even in the same category. Legend of the Five Rings is a cult classic, one supported by a small dedicated community.

     

    At one point L5r was running between 30 and 50 yearly tournaments with an average attendance of 40-90 players and tournaments at the major conventions that often had attendances exceeding 250, more if you count the side tournaments for people who didn't play in.   So i mean, small...mmmmmaybe, i kind of doubt anyone has actual numbers for it.  It was also a property that for a very very long time propped up an entire gaming company, and spawned a successful enough rpg that the setting got the d20 treatment back in 3.0.   So financially outperformed by pokemon and yugioh?  Yeah probably, but i think you're probably wrong with dragonball z, force of will, and card fight vanguard.

  13. Posted

    Ivory editon was the low point.  How could it not be? It was a massive rules change, and culminated in the sale of the property.   Some folks might cheer on an edition that didn't actually exist as way way better, but Ivory arc was so bad that it literally killed the game, something all the free gold/spells/followers/cards throughout the history of the game couldn't manage to do.

     

    And people will gripe about EE but the cold truth is that EE had the greatest faction balance in kotei wins of any arc prior.  I'm pretty sure spider was the odd man out.

    Yogo Gohei and mothchoir reacted to this

  14. Posted

    Just now, kempy said:

    Yes really, especially with Stronghold that was able to copy abilities from discard piles twice per battle, and sensei that ignored bowing cost on followers,  Personalities that tutored Naga Followers, personalities that create these followers, much better version of Peasant Vengeance and in environment without VtD. Yeah. that was totally bad decktype, lol.

    Loading a bad decktype up with overpowered cards doesn't make it a good decktype, it just makes it post ToE lotus.

  15. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Shiba Gunichi said:

    Let's not get our motives tangled here- Brand, not Story, basically decreed that there could be only nine starts due to how starters were being packaged. It was also decreed that Naga were returning. 

     

    Whether they decreed it or not it was a stupid decision.  If their strategy was midgame follower commander and shugenja pearl cards it was even dumber.  Midgame follower has been a bad to mediocre strategy from the dawn of time and they weren't going to manage to out shugenja deck the phoenix.

  17. Posted

    I dont know but honest to god don't add factions that are just reskinned versions of strategies other factions are supposed to be good at.  If you don't have a legitimately new way to play with a faction, don't add it.  If your new way to play is really close to something an existing faction already does, roll that **** into the existing one.   Dont make lion weenie=ratling swarm=naga blitz.

  18. Posted

    2 hours ago, Belechael said:

    Personally, I was hoping for the same rules with new cards, same as how the old non LCG GoT became the LCG GoT.

    What we are given now is a game with different rules and mechanics, with some similarities with the old one.

    As far as I am concerned this is a negative for me, and it will take a lot more information, even some playtesting with some actual decks that others will buy when the game hits the stores, in order to make a decision on whether to buy it or not.

    So far not so good, imho.

    The last edition's rules were literally the worst the game had ever operated under.  I'm unbelievably glad they didn't do this

    PlaguedOne reacted to this

  19. Posted

    2 hours ago, kempy said:

    But honestly, second part of Ivory (Twenty Festivals) was much, much better. Personalities got better actions, new themes appeared for every clan, Fate cards became most interesting. But except gold scheme much more interesting change of IvE+ was making Equiping as Open action. In midgame (or if you was goldflooded) you was able to armour your guys during oponents turn, and ready them to defend. That was huge change of game tempo becasue it forced attackers to gather forces instead spreading them against naked guys.  

    And all of this was just introduction for incoming Onyx who fixed much more, including additional 2 for 2 Legacy Holding, increasing average Province Strength of Stronghold's B sides, making all actions as Open (really surprising Ambush anyone?), totally removing "free gold" stuff, adding additional single gold boost for one Holding for players going second but for price of fliping their Stronghold back to Side A, making Unicorn SH 4G only, Naga with amazing comboistic Stronghold, much more interesting, deadly actions etc. Game was just meant to be like old good funny L5R but with new post Ivory ruleset. That difference between boring and bland Ivory and Onyx. was just abyssal.

    As someone who had opportunity to play tens if not hundreds of Onyx games have to say that knowledge of where this game ended was overwhelming.

     

    Due respect but fixing it after long time playtest and design players point the problems out, you ignore them and go half an arc with ivory base is too little too late.   There was a vast vast gulf that encompassed "better than ivory" and "As good as diamond or samurai edition".  You don't really get kudos for making choices you were warned were bad choices then backtracking after the consequences of those choices manifest. 

    And due respect, adding factions after removing one with a current and passionate fanbase doesn't get kudos either.  Bringing Naga back and killing mantis wasn't going to do the company favors.  Naga as a faction were basically ratling+ lion military and had been gone for a decade+, their players had moved on to other games or factions.  Maybe it was different in onyx but i kind of doubt they were designed without some sort of sliveresque strategy to the faction.

     

    Pretty much everything I've seen on this LCG paints it as better mechanically than ivory.

    Sparks Duh reacted to this

  20. Posted

    On 4/20/2017 at 9:01 AM, Suzume Tomonori said:

    As someone who has never played Ivory Edition I am curious, what was it about that edition that killed the game scene do you think?

    Ivory edition came with a massive rule set change and a massive design philosophy change.  

    First and foremost gold pooling altered the way you purchased things.  You really didn't have to think about how you'd assign your holdings as much, and raw gold amount became more important.  This came with the design philosophy change that every clan should pay the same gold for each point of force on a personality.  This point IMO is where design really crapped the bed.  They didn't change who went first, so suddenly clans that always went first were producing force at the same rate as clans that always went second.  They also removed the blood money rule (where you could pay extra to ignore honor requirements on personalities and proceeded to print otherwise playable personalities that required 2-3 turns of proclaiming your 1 to 2 ph personalities before you could buy a 3/3 with an ability.  Fate wise it was basically an array of bow or straighten and +2 or -2 force pumps.   Ivory edition was basically gold edition without any of the powerful or fun cards included.  It was the Hida Kuroda nonexp of arcs.

  21. Posted

     

    2 hours ago, VernonBroche said:

    Hello, 

    I have literally no experience with L5R or the Rokugan setting but I have been reading comments on the AMA and Youtube that would make you think FFG personally killed the children of some L5R fans. As an FFG fan I'm interested in exploring each new game they make, but having no history or prior knowledge of L5R beyond the fact that it was a fantastic eastern setting, I can't tell if the established playerbase from the old games are eagerly anticipating this game or not. What is your point of view of the general reception since the reveal article?

     

    Uh, welcome to L5R, the game where a factions playerbase actually accused AEG of conspiring to screw them out of a story prize because their (internet tallied) information did not match up with the information the company had.

  23. Posted

    1 hour ago, Mirith said:

     

    A lot of people would say that L5R at the end of when AEG had it had also already failed.  Not everyone.  A number of people still played, but I do know that Ivory killed L5R locally for me (I think the various network of players went from something like 20-30 to 4 diehards).  It even got to the point where at least one of my friends vowed to never give AEG money again.

     

    To be honest people who dispute that ivory killed L5R are deluding themselves.  It was a bad edition full of bad rules changes that i know for a fact went through over the objections of a number of experienced CCG players and tanked the game.   They could have renamed every card in samurai edition, nerfed a handful of the problem cards from that arc and released it nearly unchanged and it would have been better for the game than Ivory was.  AEG could have stuck with the design philosophies of Diamond or samurai edition, looked at those cards and strategies and  kept near to that and we probably wouldn't be seeing FFG have it today.

     

    This, honestly looks so much better than the Ivory arc, that even if I don't have the time to play with any seriousness i might pick it up on the off chance i do get time eventually.

    Kiseki and Hidatom reacted to this

  24. Posted

    6 hours ago, judoka13 said:

    1. The removal of enlightenment: Removing it as a core win condition is a blow to the flavor of the game. If they make a card to make it an alternate win condition, then that makes enlightenment seem gimmicky rather than something worth striving for.

    As opposed to every other incarnation of the game where you dinked around, drew half your deck and fiddled at unopposed provinces til you won and if you screwed up the timing on the rube goldberg machine you could take yourself out of the game entirely?

    Vlad3theImpaler, JJ48, Yoritomo Kazuto and 6 others reacted to this

  25. Posted

    7 hours ago, the eigensheep said:

     

    Sure, but meaning something isn't specific at all. Maybe the 40K minis/LCG crowd has little crossover. Maybe it only appealed to 40k players since it's an established IP. Maybe players didn't like getting steamrolled when they played more experienced players. Who knows? The game ultimately died due to licensing issues.

    The game mechanics were excellent, regardless of it's limited success.

    I'd say the biggest problem with WH40k is that it requires doing business with games workshop and they're just universally terrible.

    Magus Black, Yoritomo Kazuto, Aephix and 4 others reacted to this
×
×
  • Create New...