|
I'd consider L5R more complex than AGOT or Doomtown. Doomtown approaches it, but it still doesn't match the sheer amount of stuff that you need to know in L5R. I imagine that FFG will aim to reduce that burden of knowledge without wrecking the core mechanics.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:07 |
|
|
Corbeau posted:I'd consider L5R more complex than AGOT or Doomtown. Doomtown approaches it, but it still doesn't match the sheer amount of stuff that you need to know in L5R. I imagine that FFG will aim to reduce that burden of knowledge without wrecking the core mechanics. I'd say mechanically L5R is more complex than Doomtown:Reloaded, but Doomtown has a much higher complexity of in game decision making. It's a lot harder for new players to gently caress themselves over in a single turn, or even a single action in L5R than it is in Doomtown. Or at least L5R's turning points are harder to see at the time they're made and you don't realize how screwed you are until a few turns later. It's possibly to make a comeback from being down an early province. Doomtown is a lot less forgiving when it comes to being down resources/dudes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
I dunno, I regularly saw players lose the game on their first turn in L5R back in the day.  Still remember that Kotei game where my Crane honor deck took all of a Crab military deck's provinces by 4th or 5th turn because he wouldn't sweep them appropriately. Then again, that was also when City of the Rich Frog existed. Killing all of his personalities in battle resolution was hilarious. (For those who don't know the game, things that should never ever ever happen to a Crab deck include "losing personalities and provinces in battle resolution to a Crane honor deck.") You're probably right that Doomtown is even more crushing though. I never got good at that game, but it felt like a sort of cold war where either side could push the big red button at any time (whether or not they'd win). Corbeau fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Sep 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
I've never quite been so paralyzed by a sense of "what the hell do I do now?" as I was while playing (original) Doomtown. That's not bad in-and-of-itself, but it does make the game feel way more complex compared to L5R, where I always kinda felt like I saw a path to victory.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Awesome posts, cheers guys. I'm not sure I have room in my life for another LCG beyond a core set, though. Will have to keep an eye on this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Lots of great info on l5r and I've always been interested, plus my lgs has massive tournaments for it at least one a month, so I'll keep my eye on it Got is already on pre-order and I check every day for more articles. Blah Does fantasy flight have more then one boat? As warhammer quest is also on the boat :/
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
L5R has an absolutely insane amount of bookkeeping for each combat. So many +X/+Y effects, abilities gained for a turn, remembering what abilities were used, etc, etc, what feels like 30 different keywords, lousy "natural language" templating, rulebook mechanics that you'd never find on a card, and every action being a solid paragraph of text. Couple that with AEG's notoriously problematic playtesting and the necessity of promo cards and it is amazing that it was still a fun game. Can't wait to see what FFG pulls off with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 06:59
|
|
|
L5R CCG is a very good game in need of a serious facelift and retooling. It suffers from 90's era card game design syndrome, but is very fun in spite of that. I remember playing in gold edition and squinting at all the sheer text printed on many of the cards. God help you if the card was a foil. You'd never know what it did! Thankfully all the good cards back then had very little game text! To help solve that, they started to put a lot of mechanical weight on keyword effects and the rulebook, but that has its own set of challenges and problems. I remember then they commissioned me to design the little bow icon for Ivory Edition and they were explaining to me what it would be shorthand for, I thought it was a step in the right direction. But I play games where symbols as shorthand for rules are common, I understand it wasn't popular with everyone. Templating was another weird thing for L5R. Costs and effects blended together in many editions and sometimes cards did unexpected things. I never really understood where other games had very clear templating that separated cost and effect ("The Spoils" and the old-school "Vs. System" comes to mind), for some reason L5R continued to struggle with their templating. Also, the card rulings team was a completely separate (volunteer) team from the general rules team, which also created some unexpected outcomes in rulings. I am not sure if it was like that later in the game. I hope I'm not making the game sound unfun. It's very fun! It's one of my favorites. I only mean to say that there's room for improvement, and honestly a total redesign was probably a long time coming. Fantasy Flight has my complete confidence in this arena. They won me over with Netrunner and Game of Thrones.  PJOmega posted:L5R has an absolutely insane amount of bookkeeping for each combat. So many +X/+Y effects, abilities gained for a turn, remembering what abilities were used, etc, etc, what feels like 30 different keywords, lousy "natural language" templating, rulebook mechanics that you'd never find on a card, and every action being a solid paragraph of text. Couple that with AEG's notoriously problematic playtesting and the necessity of promo cards and it is amazing that it was still a fun game. We used tokens and dice for all of our L5R book-keeping. There were even third-party companies making unique tokens and things for the game. ...Huh. Maybe FF including a bunch of chits would actually be more faithful than I thought...
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Who still has their Flying Tricycle honor counter or a stronghold printed on a block of stone? That was the first game I saw people doing 3d cards for too, cool idea. The AEG problems with templating for card costs/effects still exist in Doomtown which is really frustrating. I thought AEG finally got this sorted a while back with the "everything in front of the colon is a cost". Having iconography is a good idea in theory, but the bow symbol itself looks ridiculous. It's so loving big on cards and the detail doesn't immediately pop out so at a glance it just looks like a right angle. I'm not making GBS threads on you, props for the design just when you compare it to the M:TG tap symbol it feels awkward and since the only other symbol in the game is gold it comes across as even more out of place. If there was a whole series of icons implemented. As with many mechanics, it felt like AEG was testing the waters to see how fans would react. Another unfortunate symptom of the game and company being so close with the fans. I did like the flavor text in the cards though it was probably not good in terms of templating and deciphering how cards worked either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:Having iconography is a good idea in theory, but the bow symbol itself looks ridiculous. It's so loving big on cards and the detail doesn't immediately pop out so at a glance it just looks like a right angle. I'm not making GBS threads on you, props for the design just when you compare it to the M:TG tap symbol it feels awkward and since the only other symbol in the game is gold it comes across as even more out of place. If there was a whole series of icons implemented. As with many mechanics, it felt like AEG was testing the waters to see how fans would react. Another unfortunate symptom of the game and company being so close with the fans. No offense taken! Juxtaposed with the text, it does look pretty awkward. I made a whole slew of options but in the end, they went with the bowing samurai. I'm proud of the work, but maybe not the implementation. And it doesn't scale well. Probably could have benefited from a few more drafts, or a redesign of the card space to accommodate it. For obvious reasons, arrows were completely out of the question. I think that surprises no one. quote:I did like the flavor text in the cards though it was probably not good in terms of templating and deciphering how cards worked either. The size and placement of the flavor text on later cards drove me insane! Sometimes it's pushed all the way to the bottom of the card, leaving this huge gap between rules text and flavor text. Sometimes it's crammed all the way at the top, leaving a huge blank space. For cards like rings and events, the print-face is already fairly dark, so if the text is in the wrong place then it's pretty hard to read. It is also inconsistent between cards, varying in size, placement, and sometimes even layout alignment. I don't mean to be overly critical, but I do have to admit the placement of the flavor text always made me a little nuts. I sometimes wonder if it bothered anyone else, though. I'm trained to be overly-sensitive to layout stuff. As one of the guys writing the flavor text, it was often hard to judge how much space you had to work with because you were never sure how much space you would ultimately have. Mechanics were changing frequently due to playtest so you couldn't count on the space for flavor remaining the same, nor the size of the text, where it would go, etc. There were guidelines you could follow, but you couldn't always count on them. Maybe it was just harder for me, though. I'm kinda verbose. Spookyelectric fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Looks like the Tyranids are finally off the boat and officially shipping (aside from those lucky few who got them already at GenCon or the few copies that were mistakenly put on Amazon prior to general release). Weirdly, though, Thrones 2.0 core sets are still on the boat. The few remaining local Thrones guys are getting pretty frustrated at this point - though of course people expect there to be a resurgence once the new version of the game releases, some of the people who were eagerly anticipating Thrones and even playing around with the one or two core sets that came back from GenCon are headed back to other games. I feel like a quick release after GenCon could have capitalized on their momentum a lot more - Thrones 2 was completely dominant on OCTGN for a little while after its release, but is now getting beaten by both Conquest and Netrunner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
I loved the L5R chat the past two pages, that was awesome guys. I found an old Crane Clan deck I bought as a kid, and was always curious about the game. Looking forward to it. Add me to the list eagerly awaiting GOT 2.0 to land at LGS's. Looking forward to my first LCG.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Fetterkey posted:Looks like the Tyranids are finally off the boat and officially shipping (aside from those lucky few who got them already at GenCon or the few copies that were mistakenly put on Amazon prior to general release). Weirdly, though, Thrones 2.0 core sets are still on the boat. Yeah, seems like this can't have been how they planned it. I'm wondering if they underestimated demand and determined that it would be better to push the whole release back slightly and print more core sets vs shipping and likely immediately selling out. Or maybe their logistics is just super impacted right now. Another rumor floating around is that they had to free up a bunch of warehouse and shipping space to meet anticipated demand for X-Wing Core Sets leading up to Force Awakened. Creation and Control for Netrunner is finally shipping, and has been out of stock for like half a year now I think? I've been giving my buddy the cards from that to play with because not having that pretty much gimps like every Runner deck
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Sorry for the double post, but some news from AEG posters on BGG regarding L5R sale to FFG, reasoning, and how it relates to Doomtown: Reloaded:quote:AEGTodd said it was the large & complex tournament infrastructure that L5R has, lots of overhead they don't want anymore and which doesn't apply to Doomtown. Ed Bolme posted:I'd wager it's because, politically, FFG can do things (like take a 2-year hiaitus and change core mechanics) that AEG couldn't get away with. Dug out from https://www.boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/45829/fantasy-flight-games-purchase-legend-five-rings
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Fetterkey posted:Looks like the Tyranids are finally off the boat and officially shipping (aside from those lucky few who got them already at GenCon or the few copies that were mistakenly put on Amazon prior to general release). Weirdly, though, Thrones 2.0 core sets are still on the boat. Meanwhile, in the four months between the end of the Warlord cycle and FFG finally releasing Tyranids, the delay has smothered all interest in Conquest around here with a pillow. Although to be fair, a not-insignificant chunk of players were GoT guys who had jumped ship, only to get GoT2 less than a year after Conquest released and jump right back. I'm only slightly disappointed, because I like Conquest far better than Netrunner (both LCGs have big problems, but at least they're different problems), but the only LCG with a steady playgroup here is Netrunner and I haven't been able to muster up the desire to play that game in months. At least I still have X Wing, and to a lesser extent, Armada. I really like the concept of LCGs, but FFG's execution of the format is really burning me out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Does ffg have multiple ships or what? Both game of thrones and warhammer quest card game say on the boat Got both pre-ordered and would be a bit miffed of there is a huge delay between the 2 despite one boat
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
Devlan Mud posted:Meanwhile, in the four months between the end of the Warlord cycle and FFG finally releasing Tyranids, the delay has smothered all interest in Conquest around here with a pillow. Although to be fair, a not-insignificant chunk of players were GoT guys who had jumped ship, only to get GoT2 less than a year after Conquest released and jump right back. ANR had a die down after the first big expansion was released and the unscheduled lull. Star Wars is up in the air. What I want from FFG right now is a true organized play system and judge program. Being able to find tournaments without the FBook meander would do wonders.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Kinda seems strange that the new FFG Warhammer Quest Adventure Card Game is on the boat but there has been next to no info released about it. I guess now that I'm checking it out on the site it doesn't even seem to be an LCG. That's too bad, I would love another co-op LCG. I have a feeling they are going to see how well it sells before deciding to expand it at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:Does ffg have multiple ships or what? Both game of thrones and warhammer quest card game say on the boat I don't think 'on the boat' means anything more specific than 'is in transit and we don't want to be more specific'
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:ANR had a die down after the first big expansion was released and the unscheduled lull. Star Wars is up in the air. Netrunner also had IIRC a like six month delay between core set and the first cycle coming out, which made lots of people really mad at the time. In some respects I consider this a good sign, though, because if Netrunner overcame these same obstacles and is now doing great, perhaps the same will be true for their other games as well. (Star Wars Armada, on the other hand, basically died on the vine with my group because most of the planned initial release got split into a separate "Wave One", which was then substantially delayed, so people got bored of the rather dull core set only environment and weren't playing anymore by the time the new wave was actually out.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
FFG update on AGoT2E: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2015/9/16/winter-is-coming-1/ Production issues, release is mid-October
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2015 23:04
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:FFG update on AGoT2E: Well that is what happens when you print stuff in china. If it gets state side and something is wrong you have to do the much longer shipping cycle again.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
alg posted:Star Wars is in the "state" it's in now because FFG has bungled the release schedule for 2 years. The broken cards would still be broken even if they didn't have other cards you had to play with them. Then you just end up in a Jackson Howard situation. I think the broken cards in Star Wars exist because they think they can balance broken cards against other weaker cards in the same pod. Also I hate the pod system and have around 2/3ds of the StarWars card pool. Played it quite a bit. I like the way combat works, I like edge battles, and the force struggle, but I don't like the double randomness of the the game [the command and objective deck both being random]. I honestly wish they designed the objectives like the Plot deck in AGOT and the Command deck was buildable just like the AGOT deck is [no pods] and then kept the unique combat, tokens, edge battles and force struggle mechanics. Also correcting problems in the metagame is so much easier when you can restrict one card, and not have to do things like restrict an entire pod.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
tijag posted:I think the broken cards in Star Wars exist because they think they can balance broken cards against other weaker cards in the same pod. I hated the pod system at first, but I really like the way that you need to build decks with it because the restrictions make the decks that people play end up being much more interesting. If you could choose your cards the Sith deck would literally never have changed beyond the core set, except to add in Force Storm. There honestly haven't been that many restrictions/errata; certainly not to the extent that L5R has but if you compare it to Netrunner than sure, I guess it's a lot. Restricting an entire pod can be brutal but honestly it's better in most cases than single cards because it shakes up the metagame that much more. I think the majority of the "broken" cards in Star Wars aren't broken in the sense that Magic cards can be broken. I think the point is more to keep the game constantly moving and mixing up what people are playing and not let the game reach a state where everyone is playing the same thing in order to be competitive. One of the guys in the group complains that his players won't stop make anything new and are playing the same Sith/Jedi decks that have been popular since Between the Shadows came around and I think this is the kind of thing that they want to prevent. Obviously no matter what players are going to default to whatever they feel has the competitive advantage but I think shaking the tree with errata is something that's good to do. In this day and age everyone has access to the internet and can get that information much quicker, groups will talk about it and the investment in the physical property has equal value so nobody has to worry that "their" cards are going to be worthless because of the errata. Having played competitive Star Wars and Netrunner for the first two years of their lifespans, Star Wars has had a much healthier meta game that due to product delays was sometimes shifted even without new cards introduced. I think back on how many tournaments I had where players would tell me that they were trying something new but knew that faction X was too strong. Never ran into that problem in Star Wars; people would constantly be trying new things and swapping pods out to see which ones worked better or counter opponents choices.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:I hated the pod system at first, but I really like the way that you need to build decks with it because the restrictions make the decks that people play end up being much more interesting. If you could choose your cards the Sith deck would literally never have changed beyond the core set, except to add in Force Storm. There honestly haven't been that many restrictions/errata; certainly not to the extent that L5R has but if you compare it to Netrunner than sure, I guess it's a lot. Restricting an entire pod can be brutal but honestly it's better in most cases than single cards because it shakes up the metagame that much more. We are looking at the same cardpool and meta and coming to opposite conclusions. I'm not sure what to think of that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
As a totally novice LCG player who never played Magic or any other CCG, I love the pod deckbuilding mechanic. Recently I've been playing some Netrunner and deckbuilding on a card-by-card basis, especially with faction splashing and influence costs, is extremely overwhelming. I really want to get in to the meat of Netrunner deckbuilding but there's a pretty decent barrier to entry for inexperienced players. I wasn't the biggest fan of the Star Wars LCG but I wish more games incorporated a style of deckbuilding similar to what it has.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Radioactive Toy posted:As a totally novice LCG player who never played Magic or any other CCG, I love the pod deckbuilding mechanic. Recently I've been playing some Netrunner and deckbuilding on a card-by-card basis, especially with faction splashing and influence costs, is extremely overwhelming. I really want to get in to the meat of Netrunner deckbuilding but there's a pretty decent barrier to entry for inexperienced players. I really like Conquest's mix of pod deckbuilding (with the warlord and signature squad) and individual card selections. The different warlords and signature squads give a strong starting point to build a deck, and then you can customize the rest around that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Fetterkey posted:I really like Conquest's mix of pod deckbuilding (with the warlord and signature squad) and individual card selections. The different warlords and signature squads give a strong starting point to build a deck, and then you can customize the rest around that. I like everything about it except for the one-of cards. Getting your one-of support card out (or attachment, depending on the Warlord) on turn one without your opponent being able to is far, far too strong for a number of warlords in a game system that doesn't play 2 games out of 3.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
S.J. posted:I like everything about it except for the one-of cards. Getting your one-of support card out (or attachment, depending on the Warlord) on turn one without your opponent being able to is far, far too strong for a number of warlords in a game system that doesn't play 2 games out of 3. Yeah, that can be annoying for those warlords who have really powerful 1x cards - the variance is a bit much. This was really bad in the Core Set days but has gotten better since, and it looks like they're printing more cards that mess with supports and attachments, which should substantially ease this dynamic. I personally wish the signature squads were a bit larger, maybe ten card signature squads with two copies of the supports and attachments? (On the other hand, that would lessen the interesting "Does my opponent have his 1x three shield card in hand?" dynamic, and make warlords with bad signature supports or attachments much worse.) Fetterkey fucked around with this message at 07:53 on Sep 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Fetterkey posted:Yeah, that can be annoying for those warlords who have really powerful 1x cards - the variance is a bit much. This was really bad in the Core Set days but has gotten better since, and it looks like they're printing more cards that mess with supports and attachments, which should substantially ease this dynamic. I personally wish the signature squads were a bit larger, maybe ten card signature squads with two copies of the supports and attachments? I would prefer something similar, but the issue would still be the text printed on those cards. They've printed a lot more support cards worth using and so playing anti-support stuff is sometimes worth the 2-3 card slots as long as it's an event for the shield. Tau, Ork, IG and, to a degree, Chaos all really like putting supports in their deck lists. The other factions can basically ignore them unless they want to put a 1 of cost reducer in the deck though, which sucks, because the other factions tend to be the most powerful ones
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
I think the WH squads would've been better as a 4x Unit, 3x Event, 3x Support format. Deck defining, no insane variance on 1x of an attachment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
Fetterkey posted:I really like Conquest's mix of pod deckbuilding (with the warlord and signature squad) and individual card selections. The different warlords and signature squads give a strong starting point to build a deck, and then you can customize the rest around that. I do like it as well (except for the singletons mentioned). I would've liked a less strict variant of it for netrunner as well, where each ID had a few cards(3-5?) that belonged to them. Other IDs could still use their cards, but had to pay influence. In a way it sort of resembles the mini factions we're getting now, but they would also be part of a normal faction. I guess it wouldn't be that dramatic of a change gameplay-wise, but I really like the flavour of pod, that Gabe would be the one using his Desperado etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
tijag posted:We are looking at the same cardpool and meta and coming to opposite conclusions. Well I think it's just different strokes kind of a thing. I'm arguing that you're wrong, I think it's just such a drastic change from what people expect from most games that it puts a lot of people never get over it or see the benefits. I still play other games and don't mind being able to fine tune a deck down to 3-5 cards, but where as in Magic for example, that leads to a meta that lasts until the set comes out, in an LCG that can last beyond a year. Not that Star Wars doesn't have a problem of a deck being too powerful and being always in competition I just find the pod system is a better solution that forces changes of at least 5-10 cards because I don't mind giving up total control. For some people being forced into certain choices by the pod system is not something they like and that's fine. I think the system is one of the reasons I've had so much fun with it because I've had a lot more fun being forced to use poo poo cards in games to win, than just relying on my awesome cards. It kind of reminded me of why I liked playing draft because I got to use so many more cards than I ever did in constructed. This doesn't mean draft is superior to constructed it's just different and I think if people give it a chance they can see there are a lot of benefits to it. I agree that Conquest was a good balance, except the 1 offs; they were just too inconsistent. Personally I'm hoping L5R looks more like Conquest than Star Wars from a deck building perspective, because I really like the idea of tying a faction together in a whole package of "House Guard, Champion, Clan Sword, Retainer, etc" would be much more interesting thematically and really help to differentiate it from aGoT as a game where you aren't just using whoever fits into your decks but the core of your deck is always your clan stuff and then you build on top of that. If there's one complaint I have with Star Wars it's that your faction is almost always the least represented part of an objective deck that contains mutliple factions and that's kind of dumb but because of how the resource system works that's how you have to build. I ran a Navy deck for a long time that was 8 Scum and 2 Navy Objectives and I felt really stupid saying "This is a Navy deck."
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
For the people that have played it, how well does AGoT2 do greater than 2 players? I'm fairly intrigued as I would love a competitive card game that I can play with the girlfriend but can still bust out when others are over. I vaguely remember playing the original LCG core set years ago but it was taught extremely poorly and didn't go over well with the group.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
It's pretty good. I've played with 3, 4, and 5 and although the games take longer, it was engaging, you had difficult choices to make, and somehow table talk and debating moves and strategies ("you shouldn't attack me, attack him!") was fun. You can easily fall into the trap of ganging up on one player, but that usually ends in disaster and king making. The strategy of Role-selection adds a good bit of depth to an already deep game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Apparently someone at ffg posted the game is shipping now them edited the post to say soon Most everyone is saying within 2 weeks now expect agot2e will be released Thinking of just bumping my order to 3 copies of the core game and dropping warhammer quest for now, as no new info for 6 weeks and no idea on release date
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
To nobody's real surprise, Call of Cthulhu is dead. PS: Where the gently caress are my tyranids?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:To nobody's real surprise, Call of Cthulhu is dead. I'm not surprised, but am somewhat saddened. I love the art, and liked the FFG promoting a more grounded game. But a single company can't really be invested in that many games occupying the same market. We've got Netrunner, GoT 2.0, WH40k, Star Wars, and now L5R is a huge chunk of "people playing card games not named Magic."
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
I just bought my second core set of 40k 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:07 |
|
|
It's interesting that they ended the game at ~1500 cards. That's the high water mark for a M:tG Standard Constructed cycle (1.5 years) and what they projected the card pool would peak at for the FFG LCG 4 year rotation plan. If CoC were at all popular I would have probably checked it out because the big card pool is actually pretty appealing. Right now, everything outside of Netrunner just doesn't feel like it has enough cards for me. I'm mildly hyped for AGoT2E but I'm already sick of the Core Set meta and I don't even have the cards yet, lol. Netrunner has hit 800 something cards and is starting to actually feel "right" in the sense of there being a big pool of interesting things to brew up. I kind of don't want to play an LCG until it has at least a year's worth of stuff, but by then the hype may have all flown away to the next thing It would be cool if these games could launch with something a little more aggressive in their first year. Maybe keep the Core Set the same size, but print twice as many cards in the first year as they normally do
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 03:27
|
|