Jump to content

Xelto

Members
  • Content Count

    454
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Xelto

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

546 profile views
  1. Xelto

    Softening the Rules

    Poor wording on my part. Substitute "Abusing sloppy game design" for "Abusing the rules" in what I said. File leader isn't the answer. The problem is that the situations I'm talking about—one of your units is facing an opposing unit who is in total control of the situation, which can do a 'clever move' to cause your unit to lose its activation, unless your unit also does its own clever move (in which you risk losing your activation if the first unit didn't do a clever move)—doesn't happen every game. Probably not every other game. In most games there are enough other units on the board that can influence the situation that 'clever moves' come with more risks than just being a simple guessing game. It does, however, happen often enough that everyone here should be familiar with the situation. I don't mind losing the game because I got outplayed. I don't mind losing the game because of bad luck. But I hate losing the game because I lost a guessing game. And yes, I've had multiple games where I ended up conceding early after one of my high-cost units lost the guessing game and got mangled bad enough that I didn't stand a realistic chance of winning. They're really memorable events, but not the fun type of memories. Winning because I took advantage of a loophole isn't precisely satisfying, either, since I'm taking advantage of the design, not outplaying/outlucking my opponent. I've done it, since it's part of the game, but that doesn't mean I think the loopholes are any better when I win with them. Bringing this back to File Leader: there are builds that can use it effectively. But if all you're using it for is insurance, it's expensive insurance for a situation that doesn't come up all that often. And when it does work, all that ends up happening is that the guy charges at the initiative he normally would do it at, instead of delaying, so it's not much of a net gain. You're more likely to lose a game because you didn't buy something else with the points/upgrade slot than you are to win because you had your insurance handy.
  2. Xelto

    Softening the Rules

    My suggestion wouldn't take that away. If you select "Stand", but your opponent doesn't charge you, that's a botched dial. "Stand" isn't intended to stop bluffing or fog of war. It's intended to stop cheesy gain-advantage-through-rules-abuse guessing games. If I plan to have my unit hold their ground, they should be able to do so whether the attack comes at initiative four or at initiative five.
  3. I was thinking more on the lines of an extra wound. I'm not sure that the game needs more toughness-4 units.
  4. Xelto

    Softening the Rules

    At six points and sucking up your champion slot, I don't consider that a good alternative to poor game design. If it really comes down to it, I could get by with giving the Reanimates an initiative-9 melee attack, as they were the unit I always seemed to end up losing the coin-flip guessing games with early on. That would do about the same thing, without needing a new icon made. For my part, I got burned so often early on that if I hadn't been doing testing, I would have quit the game over this one specific issue.
  5. I've stayed out of this conversation mostly because I rarely play with or against Waiqar these days, so I don't have recent firsthand experience. But: we're trying to keep this guy's points and dial untouched, right? And he's theoretically more of an in-your-face frontline attacker, but doesn't have the greatest dial for it, if I understand the arguments correctly. Could the balancing be solved by upping his defense? Assume he's going to take a few hits before he can do his own hitting, and run with that?
  6. Xelto

    Softening the Rules

    It depends on what rule you're talking about. I've wanted to adjust the rules to remove what I call "rock-scissors-paper" decisions: ones where you know your opponent can do the same thing on multiple initiatives (usually charge), and if you fail to guess which initiative he's going to do it on correctly, you get punished, usually by having your action fizzle. As I mentioned elsewhere, I would like a "Stand" action (prepare for an attack) for most infantry units, so that if you anticipate being charged, you can counterattack during the charge. This still gives your opponent your opportunity to do something unexpected and possibly clever, but removes the head games from the game. Most other rules I don't really think need softening.
  7. Xelto

    The Land Endures

    Huh. I never had any problems with that. Though you're right, having colors on the cards would be useful. Why don't you post it here if you're serious about wanting it. I actually mostly like the movement templates, so I'm unlikely to take the idea and run with it. My gripe that I would like fixed is the rock-scissors-paper game of "Is he going to charge on initiative 4 (so I should dial in a melee attack), or is he going to play head games with me and charge on initiative 6, after my melee attack whiffs at empty air?" I would like to add a "Stand" command (early initiative, lets you counterattack if charged) to most infantry, some siege, and maybe the occasional other unit. That should mostly remove the coin-flip guessing game, while still allowing for surprise moves. I've got a few lesser ideas as well, but I think I mentioned them elsewhere already.
  8. Xelto

    The Land Endures

    I've looked into dials. I found one place that could do them for between $2 and $5, depending on quantity ordered, after a $250 setup fee. They do cards, too, with widely varying prices, depending on size and paper stock. I haven't found anyone that does custom dice or trays yet, but I'm sure they're out there. However, there's this little issue of copyright. Game mechanics can't be copyrighted, so we could, theoretically, produce a very similar game. I'm not sure exactly how similar we could make it and still call it a different game (pretty close, if HEX: Shards of Fate is any indication), but on the other hand, if we're going that far, I've got some improvements I want to add in, which should differentiate the games anyway. (And that should work whether the group takes my suggestions either as-is, or in groupthink modified form.) But back to copyright: if we can't work out a licensing agreement with FFG, then the artwork, including most of the icons, would need to be replaced. The rules would need to be rewritten. Anyone wanting lore would have to redo that. Most of the unit names would need to be changed. Non-generic terminology would probably need to be changed. I see copyright as the most challenging issue with continuing the game on.
  9. I'll be there if real life lets me, though I'm not going to give that good odds. And I don't have enough experience with organized play to assist.
  10. Xelto

    Rune golems

    I think the general thoughts, if they came up, were that the larger formations needed to drop in price a bit. It doesn't fit thematically very well. If anything, I think that a unique upgrade slot would be better.
  11. Xelto

    Rune golems

    You can get up to 3 natural runes. And some Latari units have enough trouble scratching even a 4-toughness opponent. Of the ideas others have mentioned so far, my favorite is the collide=stun token. It doesn't require setting it up to use (something golems aren't great at), is thematic, and is simple to integrate. And it's not like golems need a large buff to be competitive, just a minor tweak.
  12. Xelto

    Rune golems

    From a different thread: That thread had some brilliant observations, and I didn't want to sidetrack it. But Rune Golems have been on my mind, so I wanted to take a closer look at them. The Rune Golem is actually the unit that kept me in the game. I was one of the alpha testers for the original game, and somehow, I seemed to always play Waiqar. I was underwhelmed by the game. All the units seemed to be the same... a similar set of marches, turns, attacks, rallies, and so forth for every unit (except that as Waiqar, my units were slower and later)... except for the Rune Golem. Looking at its dial, I could see that there was potential for something more here. I wasn't doing anything better when the Latari went on test, so I said "Why not?" and joined that test. It turns out that I'm a natural-born Latari player, and I never looked back. OK, enough personal digression. I like Rune Golems. But I understand why a lot of people think they're weak. Overall, they're slow. There's the potential for a burst of speed at initiative 4, but only if you get all the unstable runes to show. And since it's at initiative 4, some units can even clear out of your way before you get that speed burst: with no turns on their dial, you know precisely where they're going if they march. It's also possible that the golems won't be able to move at all until initiative 7, which absolutely sucks. On the other hand, with brutal [stable], if they do connect, they're going to hurt. And while they're vulnerable to mortal strikes, they're very resistant to chip damage. This is a combination that makes the easy and ideal fix (simply adjusting their points) problematic: if they're cheaper, you run the risk of people spamming them as either hard-to-hurt fire rune platforms, or just going with a large but slow army. I could see changing prices working with the larger builds where their lack of maneuverability is magnified, but not the single-unit forces. I also can't think of anything that fits into the less-easy but still not bad fix category (adjusting their abilities), because they don't have many abilities. Maybe if they got a unit-specific upgrade or two, that might work, but I'm having troubles thinking of any right now. And I prefer units to be able to stand on their own without requiring upgrades to be viable. Which moves me to the not-easy fix category (playing with their dials). Which I know isn't ideal. But if they got a blue, [natural runes] march at initiative 3 or 4 (which initiative determined after testing), it would complement their initiative-4 march [unstable]. The Daqan player wouldn't have to worry about being unable to move during the early-phase movement, but at the same time it wouldn't increase the units average speed much, since it can always get a late-turn march-2, so it should, in theory, keep the unit's "slow and clunky, but hard hitting" feel intact. I'm interested in hearing other people's opinions and alternate ideas. I like the idea I came up with, but I know that changing command tools isn't something to do lightly.
  13. That sort of defeats the point of scuttling horror. The problem isn't the sideways shift. It's the ability to shift in a wide selection of directions, followed by a charge, and it's the primary issue with Fleshrippers, as well. I still think the better solution is to have exiting terrain end your activation the same way that entering terrain does.
  14. Agreed. The more important focus should be on the overpowered first, then worry about people's laundry lists of wants. Trying to test too many things at once is really challenging. How are we supposed to vote stuff down? "Sad" responses? (This forum doesn't have an actual 'dislike' option.) And personally, I've heard more people complaining about rune golems consistently over the years than anything below #3 on your list. And I would put vanilla Reanimates ahead of the undead heroes, as well. And how do we determine if any changes decided on become official for any ongoing organized play?
  15. ****, the forums are my long reply. I'm at work, so the short version is: make sure the community is willing to follow you before going extensively into the changes you want. Little causes more confusion than a quarter of a group heads of in a different direction, builds up a good head of steam, then finds out that the other three quarters of the group isn't following them. Also, individual threads. Trying to follow alternate ideas, idea tweaks, and test results of nearly a dozen units in a single thread just doesn't work well. My vote is for allowing a community-run balance/thematic set of changes. But I want to make sure there's a strong agreement for it within the community first.
×