Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
awp832

New FAQ out

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Jobu said:

Keen Eye has to overcome one of Guardians weaknesses, being tight on resources (Zoey non-withstanding) and needed to be for something you want to do 2 or ideally 3 times in a single turn.  That depends on game state.  Fight multiple times or investigate multiple times.

Streetwise synergies well with one of Rogues strengths (resource generation) and you only need to have one test to make use of it.

Thank you. I had not considered those elements, but those are excellent points, and a perfect answer to my question regarding the choice

 

8 hours ago, Jobu said:

That being said, its not to much to ask that a company balances their cards.  I am paying for those cards and while I understand that a company makes mistakes, I do appreciate when they take steps to fix those mistakes in a methodical manner.  I prefer it to changing things on my own or ignoring cards that I feel are to powerful.  Not that I am incapable of doing that, its just that I prefer that the company does it.  Its kind of the same reason that I don't just make my own games to play.

Double on this. I've said variations on that regarding other games I've played for years. Good design is what I pay for, and that continues with good updating keeping me interested in paying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess the issue is nothing was that OP that it would break the game.  even with all the toys, Arkham LCG can still stomp you, especially if you venture into high difficulty.  There hasn't been an issue in Arkham like there was in LotR where cards were completely destroying or igoring the mechanics of the game.  Perhaps that is why the lists are optional.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SamWeiss said:

Double on this. I've said variations on that regarding other games I've played for years. Good design is what I pay for, and that continues with good updating keeping me interested in paying. 

Agreed. It’s a Living Card Game after all and the Taboo List makes the game feel fresh for me. I was already avoiding playing with Rex and Higher Education because of a general feeling that it made the game too easy (and the decisions therefore less meaningful). So I like that this gives an official way that I could choose to “fix” them. It’s a pretty bold step to admit that some of the cards designed might be a bit overpowered.

I also appreciate that FFG has taken steps to introduce this list early rather than waiting for too long. We’re still in early 4th cycle. I found that I got apathetic with LOTRLCG and Android Netrunner (and in fact quit those games) because of the lack of attention to overpowered cards. I mean it gets really boring putting Steward of Gondor in a deck because you basically never have a reason NOT to put it in your deck. Netrunner initiated a limited list after a while, but it was around the end of the 5th cycle I believe, and by then I had already lost my love for that game.

So props to Matt and team, I really like this idea :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't be using any of the limited, taboo nor dual class cards. Changing rules to accomodate is part and parcel, but when they're are badly thought out in the first place as were the "gold" cards, who says down the line they won't need another errata to errata an errata. I play this game for enjoyment and immersion in the Lovecraft et al mythos, not thumbing constantly through the FAQ to see if the original rules are no longer relevent. And needing to insert 'other'. Oh please, think it out before making a major card implementation. 

Five cards in a threat area, plus rules on agendas/act cards, plus rules on enemy cards (have they been erratated or not....). Do I need to check at the end of my turn, round, end of the mythos phase etc etc. Ok, it was there before, but not to the extent introduced in The Circle Undone. I mentioned it on BGG, this will probably be my swan song for AHLCG, FFG seem to be making it up as they go along.

   Though probably not related, since Nikki Valens left there seems to be a severe downturn in quality (and quantity) with the AH Product Line.

:( Bern 🙄

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, C2K said:

i guess the issue is nothing was that OP that it would break the game.  even with all the toys, Arkham LCG can still stomp you, especially if you venture into high difficulty.  There hasn't been an issue in Arkham like there was in LotR where cards were completely destroying or igoring the mechanics of the game.  Perhaps that is why the lists are optional.  

The Rita infinite deck, while requiring a lot of parts, did indeed break the core mechanics.

IMHO cards can be broken even if they don't auto-win you the game by virtue of crowding out everything else, and requiring active designing around.  LOTR is a good example of this.  There are a number of very powerful cards in the early sets that skew literally everything that comes behind it, whether it's player cards (Leadership tax) or encounter cards (how many enemies can Gandalf's arrival one-shot these days?)

That's my one concern with calling them optional.  What's the baseline for design going forward?  Will Seeker cards be based around Higher Education being hard to get, or easy?  Will costs assume you've got access to the best money maker in the game?  It would be helpful to know if respecting the Taboos is standard, and ignoring them is easy mode, or if they're optional, and using them is harder mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does anyone see building Rex without Doc Chris now?  I think I will still use him with Rex.  Daisy, I am not so sure.

I don't think I have ever used Doc Chris with Ursula or Minh.

4 minutes ago, Khudzlin said:

I'm surprised Mark "draw your whole deck" Harrigan isn't on the mutated list with a once per round limit (instead of his current once per phase limit). 

I never saw that as a big deal as you have to take damage to trigger it so its sort of self balancing.  Plus Sofie has a dark side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Buhallin said:

That's my one concern with calling them optional.  What's the baseline for design going forward?  Will Seeker cards be based around Higher Education being hard to get, or easy?  Will costs assume you've got access to the best money maker in the game?  It would be helpful to know if respecting the Taboos is standard, and ignoring them is easy mode, or if they're optional, and using them is harder mode.

It's optional.  The baseline is to ignore the Taboo List.  The Taboo List is a variant. If respecting the Taboo List was standard then it wouldn't be optional.

Though ultimately it doesn't matter even if this was standard to be honest.  This is a co-op.  No one is going to come down to your kitchen table and yell at you for house ruling stuff.  I've ignored Matt's rulings in the past.  For example I thought the ruling where Yithian's can't spend XP was way to harsh and unfun.  Therefore I just ignored it.  The big effect going forward is that OP events will need to be explicit about whether they are respecting the Taboo List or not. 

I think my whole point yesterday was I'm perfectly fine with the power level of these cards being out of wack in this sort of game.  I see nothing wrong with that.  You wanna give someone a leg up because they are struggling with the game then let them play Rex or purchase Key of Ys.  If you find those cards not fun then just ignore it.  It's like Outlands in LOTR.  It's there if you want to feel powerful.  I would never mention the Taboo list in a new player thread or someone complaining about struggling with the game.  Especially newer players that don't have a full play set of everything released.  I think these changes greatly cripple those players so they shouldn't even consider it.  Though for someone who does own everything, is really good at this game and wants this sort of policing of the card pool then it's a great thing to adopt.

 

Edited by phillos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jobu said:

So does anyone see building Rex without Doc Chris now?  I think I will still use him with Rex.  Daisy, I am not so sure.

I don't think I have ever used Doc Chris with Ursula or Minh.

[...]

I never saw that as a big deal as you have to take damage to trigger it so its sort of self balancing.  Plus Sofie has a dark side.

I have seen Doc Chris with Minh (a partner's deck, not mine), not sure about Ursula.

Mark is hands down my favorite investigator since he came out (I've played mostly Guardian since the beginning of the game). I've played a lot of games with him, and Sophie's dark side rarely comes up (partly because I play 4 healing cards in addition to Home Front). Another of my favorite cards is Beat Cop (2), which allows you to trigger Mark's reaction in any player action window (and it's already a good card on its own), because the damage doesn't have to end up on Mark himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillos said:

It's optional.  The baseline is to ignore the Taboo List.  The Taboo List is a variant. If respecting the Taboo List was standard then it wouldn't be optional.

I think the question was more along the lines of "When Matt designs a new Seeker card does he assume Dr. Milan exhausts when deciding how many resources a Seeker is likely to have?". I don't know his design process, so I have no idea how much this impacts his thinking for new cards. Certainly I would imagine he won't use Higher Education or Streetwise (as originally printed) as a comparison for deciding how many xp a card should cost or whether a level 3 card is appropriately powerful.

24 minutes ago, Jobu said:

So does anyone see building Rex without Doc Chris now?  I think I will still use him with Rex.  Daisy, I am not so sure.

I think he is still very good for Rex, the money can fuel Hyperawareness or Higher Education and the +1 Intellect boost is nice since I'd be wanting to try and trigger his now once-per-round ability whenever possible. Alice Luxley could be a good alternative, but I think I'd probably be more likely to go with Dr. Milan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Assussanni said:

I think the question was more along the lines of "When Matt designs a new Seeker card does he assume Dr. Milan exhausts when deciding how many resources a Seeker is likely to have?". I don't know his design process, so I have no idea how much this impacts his thinking for new cards. Certainly I would imagine he won't use Higher Education or Streetwise (as originally printed) as a comparison for deciding how many xp a card should cost or whether a level 3 card is appropriately powerful.

That was my answer.  If it's optional then it's not standard.  If it's not standard then Matt needs to respect that in his future card designs. 

Though as I said before I could care less if he does or if he doesn't.  Just give me fun and thematic cards to play with in this game.  That's my preference.  Don't feel hamstrung by past card designs.  None of this stuff was ruining my or my playgroup's experience with the game so in my case it's fixing something that wasn't broken.

Edited by phillos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sindriss said:

I wonder if he is going to design more OP cards now that he can just relegate them to the list if they become problematic.

Hit the nail on the head. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am sure he is doing his best.   There are hundreds of AH cards.   Sheer probability suggests that some cards will be stronger than their cost would suggest and others will be weaker.   It's not easy to design a small handful of game cards on a monthly release schedule and know that if they are not all perfectly well balanced they will face the critical ire of the fans.    Give the poor guy a break.  

It seems to me that the Mutated/limited list is fully optional, and will likely not be taken into consideration when designing cards.   But I also think that assuming players always have their strongest in-faction cards in-deck and in-hand/play is not something that the designers are doing when it comes to balancing new cards.  I havent seen any evidence of that in AHLCG.

Sometimes cards are just allowed to be good.   I run Emergency Cache in practically every deck I make regardless of faction (sometimes I skip it in Mystics b/c of Uncage the Soul).   That doesnt mean I think the card needs to be nerfed.   It's good.  People use it.  People like it.   that doesnt mean it's a problem.

Edited by awp832

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, awp832 said:

It's good.  People use it.  People like it.   that doesnt mean it's a problem.

I think this depends on the card in question.  Milan crowded out every other Seeker ally because he was so good.  The permanent boosters made taking any resource-for-stat cards redundant.

If a card takes up a limited slot (like an ally or neck slot) and is far beyond anything else, I think it is a problem.  Same for cards which provide the same functionality.  Ideally those should be in the same league, or provide other tradeoffs.  When there are obviously and clearly better options the only balancing becomes a choice to self-limit.  Which can be done, obviously, but players really shouldn't have to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don’t see taboos affecting card design choices. They’re optional and specifically are a new list precisely because they are NOT errata. I’m sure Matt will be thinking about design only using the cards as they are officially intended and not optional play modes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Soakman said:

I really don’t see taboos affecting card design choices. They’re optional and specifically are a new list precisely because they are NOT errata. I’m sure Matt will be thinking about design only using the cards as they are officially intended and not optional play modes. 

The voice of reason. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is curious, I asked FFG about how Adaptable interacts with level 0 Limited cards (it's never been completely explicit what "swap" on Adaptable meant in the first place, the intent that you replace up to 2 cards with other eligible level 0 cards without spending exp to do so was clear but it's not like "swap" is defined in the RR). My initial assumption was that essentially it doesn't work, but it's not clear why that would be the case.

The answer I got is essentially: you could use Adaptable to swap in Machete or Elusive without paying the Limited surcharge but really, why bother playing with optional rules if you're just going to bypass them? But they will be addressing it in a future FAQ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Allonym said:

If anyone is curious, I asked FFG about how Adaptable interacts with level 0 Limited cards (it's never been completely explicit what "swap" on Adaptable meant in the first place, the intent that you replace up to 2 cards with other eligible level 0 cards without spending exp to do so was clear but it's not like "swap" is defined in the RR). My initial assumption was that essentially it doesn't work, but it's not clear why that would be the case.

The answer I got is essentially: you could use Adaptable to swap in Machete or Elusive without paying the Limited surcharge but really, why bother playing with optional rules if you're just going to bypass them? But they will be addressing it in a future FAQ. 

Thanks for taking the time to ask, I was curious about that. The answer is what I expected: they are optional rules so if you aren't going to play by the spirit of them then what's the point of using them at all. Nice to know Matt feels the same way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, awp832 said:

It seems to me that the Mutated/limited list is fully optional, and will likely not be taken into consideration when designing cards.   But I also think that assuming players always have their strongest in-faction cards in-deck and in-hand/play is not something that the designers are doing when it comes to balancing new cards.  I havent seen any evidence of that in AHLCG.

cf Crack the Case. If you consider Milan Christopher to be the baseline for Seeker resource generation, it's pretty weak. For investigators who don't have Milan, or who use the new Mutated version, it's much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this, the less I'm sure what the point is.  If it's all voluntary and none of it is going to affect card design (player or encounter) going forward, a lot of it feels pointless.

Some of the changes do provide a developer-suggested middle ground short of just not using the card at all, but others (like Ace in the Hole) seem explicitly geared towards shutting down particular degenerate combos.  My choice is to use the Taboo list which prevents me using the combo, or... just not use the combo.  And assuming we ever get anything on the actual Forbidden list, it's exactly the same.

I'm also not sure all the "Everything will be designed like this doesn't exist" really holds either.  Does anyone think we'll get a new round of permanent 3 XP boosters like Higher Ed, or another Seeker card that generates resources as well as Milan?  At the very least, the list represents an acknowledgement that those cards were design mistakes and I have a hard time seeing them repeat those mistakes just because the list is voluntary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The point is that it was created for players like you Buhllin who appreciate an attempt to perfectly balance the player card pool.  Use it if you think it will make your experience with the game more enjoyable.  For anyone who finds the idea of it punishing or a chore to use then they are free to ignore it.  I think it's exactly the right solution for the more relaxed nature of the cooperative LCGs.

Edited by phillos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, phillos said:

I think it's exactly the right solution for the more relaxed nature of the cooperative LCGs.

Since I can't like a statement twice or extra like it, I strongly agree with this sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine the purpose was to acknowledge that the game had design errors and that the game would be "better" (more balanced, encourage greater build diversity, provide the expected level of challenge, provide a broader design space for new cards) with their changes, but implemented in such a way as to stave off the cries of "it's a co-op game, balance doesn't matter!", "if you don't like it don't use it!" and so forth.

Or, to put it less combatively, to create a "legacy" and "standard" format, to borrow from Magic, so that those who enjoy playing with all the power of the cards they enjoy are still catered to.

I think we'll see a lot of cards that cater, intentionally or not, to the "taboo" format of play: We already have seeker resource allies (Charles Ross, Esq.) despite the fact that Milan made them essentially pointless; we already have a wide range of pay-to-boost cards printed after the permanent boosters; we have seen a number of new level 0 weapons even though Machete overshadowed them from the get-go. Playing with Taboo instantly makes a wide range of other approaches viable - rogue builds that don't just dump everything into Streetwise, for example. Rather than designers taking one mode of play or the other as a baseline, I think the Taboo is more of a release valve to avoid needing to course-correct with future card releases, either by creating other options of equally high power or by compensating for them - essentially, they won't need to overcost all of Seeker to compensate for Milan in the same way as how Leadership was overcosted in LOTR to compensate for Steward of Gondor. If that creates certain imbalances, they can address that with the Taboos down the line I guess. I certainly would much rather see new and interesting designs rather than cards to compensate for the dominance of Milan and Key of Ys, say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...