Enochi

Dear lord I hate this game...

33 posts in this topic

And I want to like it so very very much. I love the IP and I even played the original game for awhile back in 2004. But **** its incredibly frustrating. So much luck factor the Dynasty cards, so frustrating as it seems everything is so conditional that everything depends on if you have the right card at the right time. Forgive me for not being coherent much but I don't even really know how to describe how annoying I am finding this game. There is way too many things to keep track of in this game. Ill try and write some more latter when I be more descriptive of my problems with it but right now I am just to frustrated.

Ide Yoshiya, shadowsama and Quizoid like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Are you playing with a single core, or multiple cores? Because there's a huge difference in luck factor there, and playing with full playsets makes your deck much more consistent. 

ADD: If you love the IP and even with more cards find this isn't your cup of tea, there's always Battle for Rokugan and the L5R rpg coming soon. 

Edited by Zesu Shadaban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. At least in this game you don't get gold screwed.

Sure your opponent can have all power cards out and all you get are vanilla but you won't be losing bad. I never had a game where I felt I had absolutely no chance of getting back, and I've had games where everything seemed great and in the end winning or losing by a thread.

I honestly think for the most part this has been the most balanced version of L5.

And I remember the old l5 being more complicated then this with more things to keep track of. Are you sure we are talking about the same game?

Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but in the old days there are just matchups that you can't win no matter your cards. IE playing dishonor against Oni, or that crazy Crane Honor Running deck that could hit 40 by turn 3. What about that dragon unli stand, break 4 provinces in one turn with one peep? The list goes on man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually feel the dynasty cards cycle quicker than in O5R. Anyways, having to keep track to multiple things because of the multiple victory conditions is what makes the game great, or at least what it made it great in our community.

LordBlunt and Fu Leng like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Barbacuo said:

I actually feel the dynasty cards cycle quicker than in O5R. 

They do. Most decks in the CCG needed to buy one or more (gold-producing) holdings on turn one. Now that the game's economy is static rather than additive, we're getting to the fun of the game immediately, which is recruiting samurai and doing stuff with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, building your deck in such a way to shave down the amount of luck involved is part of the deckbuilding/skill process :) It takes skill to make your deck efficient and dependable, and to make what you draw work. If the whole thing falls apart because you are missing 1 or 2 cards, it probably was not that strong of a deck to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the time when people say this game is all about luck I feel it points to the decisions they are making and the decks they are playing.  When I lose in this game I do feel like I lost because my opponent played better than me.  The conflict deck in particular right now needs to be finely tuned to a strategy and you need to be piloting it in concert. 

It is a game where you have to keep considering a lot of variables as the game goes on to make sure you are making efficient choices.  I can see that complexity being a turn off for some people.  A game like Netrunner you can really play in such a way that you can distill the board state down to a keeping track of couple major elements and still play competitively.  That's not true for L5R.  Also it does on average run longer than most card games of it's type.  That might put some people off.  That's fine.  Not all games are for all people.

Edited by phillos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There most certainly is a luck factor in this game, but that is also every game that relies on shuffling and/or dice. Dynasty flops haven't changed from what I know of the old game, besides broken provinces still providing people and holdings in this version. And yes, there is a lot you have to consider, which is also a lot of games. Where this game differs mostly is the nuance of the economy and when to persue a win in a conflict or to let one go. That isn't a bad thing, nor it is also for everyone. I hope OP has and will play several games before giving it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the fixed economy and methodology to drawing cards, I would say this game has less randomness to it than the old game.  I've gotten holding flooded twice, but that is a choice of running more holdings (Crab).  You can avoid this completely since holdings are optional and not required for a functioning deck.

I would agree it is very very important that you are clear whether or not you are playing single core vs 3 core too.  Single core is a good way to introduce the game, but not a good way to play it.

thorrk likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think there is much less luck involved in the LCG than CCG or MTG for that matter.

I think the problem for most people is that this game has such a huge decision tree that in the beginning you feel like you're losing because of bad RNG. After you get a lot of reps in you start to realize all the poor decisions you used to make.

I swear, I lost probably 10 of my first 12 games but now with over 100 games under my belt I win probably 70% of the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People that ***** about luck in any game generally just need to git gud.

This game has a pretty low luck factor. You draw about 1/4 of your deck to start the game from confict. As for dynasty none of the characters that get played end up staying forever. Recovering from a weak opening is easier here than other games.

Tlfj200, Hos, thorrk and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two issues with this game, Game Length and Turn Structure Complexity.

I am hoping that Game Length gets better as the card pool increases.  While it isn't obvious, the decks we are all using are very inefficient compared to what we will be playing after we have more cards to work with.  With that increased efficiency, the games should get shorter.

The turn structure is something that I feel we will get used to, even if it isn't as clean as I would like.  I think that there are several things that could be removed or streamlined to help clean up some of the clutter.  However, after playing with it a bit it isn't too bad, certainly not bad enough to cover up all of the greatness elsewhere in the game.

I have no idea what the OP is talking about with luck being too much of a factor.  It isn't any more of a factor than it is in any other card game, and is much less of a factor than it was in the L5R CCG.  I do think that it's more of a factor than it will be after we get a bigger card pool and decks can get more focused, but I feel the "luck level" right now is nowhere near as problematic as the OP seems to think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I kind of get what the OP means by luck, you have somewhat limited control of the cards that you draw or appear from your deck, especially coming from a background as Netrunner player, you had more freedom and options with your actions (tutor cards etc).

A lot of people who have played NR also commented that this game isn't for everyone.

I think my best way to describe the game is that it's very swingy, and yes luck on what cards show up in a match is a quite a factor in this game and I think it's just part of the nature of this game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of this has to do with the size of the card pool at the moment.  Clans are certainly better with three cores than with one, but there are still a lot of cards that require characters with specific traits, and there aren't always enough characters with those traits to make a consistent deck with them. 

Decks will become much more consistent as the card pool expands, and the Imperial Cycle dump should help with that.

Tebbo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The art of controlling how much fate to spend and how much to save for the future is hard to grasp in this game. It’s a big departure from other mainstream ccg where having your killer combo out doesn’t neccesarily win u the game.

Most who don’t get it finds it more comforting to attribute it to luck. 

Togashi Gao Shan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, clanmccracken said:

Or the ever classic "Lose one providence, and never be able to recover from it?"

ROTFL. Sou you say that Lion, as attacking first, with higher chances to kill province first,  won everything in CCG? :D:D:D 

Yogo Gohei likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, clanmccracken said:

Or the ever classic "Lose one providence, and never be able to recover from it?"

 

I only ever hear comments like this from people that clearly didn't actually play the CCG on any sort of competitive level.  Losing a province was not the end of the world.  The game definitely had a "snowball" effect, but it was nowhere near as pronounced as people have been claiming for the past few months.

kempy and Mercuric like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't lose when you lost one province. However, if you lost 3 units on the defence versus the opponent's 3. You're placed on a huge back foot trying to catch up to a net 3, with one less card draw in your provinces. You're far more dependent on the fate deck to play your way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now