|
Kalko posted:
One of the cool things about Matchbox is that you don't even need to be a Cluever yourself to use it. A Fighter like Hank could take it and just activate it at the start of his Cluevers turn to let them investigate at -1 Shroud. It's great, a card every Survivor would want to take. The oddness of the scan made me think that Silver Moth was a Green-Specific weakness, which would make it pretty nasty but if it isn't then yeah it can either be crippling (imagine getting it with 5 sanity, yikes) or negligible. Imagine getting it as Calvin and it can just gently caress you if you don't get rid of it early enough. Fox Mask is ok, but not a must-have like Wolf Mask. You can definitely trigger it reliably if you want to. Nephthys fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Jan 11, 2024 |
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 13:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
I think Matchbox is so good that you are objectively wrong not to take it in any deck that has access. Triply so if you can consistently investigate well enough to Scavenge. Oh god, it being slotless and the way it's worded means you can have 2 in play and use both at the same time, too. This card is probably too good imo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 13:24
|
|
|
Nephthys posted:The oddness of the scan made me think that Silver Moth was a Green-Specific weakness,
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 13:53
|
|
|
Because you can play it during any turn but it only effects your location, Matchbox may also have some funny interactions with “highest/lowest shroud value” effects. Is there some huge difference between -1 sanity and 1 horror that I’m not seeing? I know that it limits how much you can heal, but it generally always seemed like an unnecessarily fiddly type of rule to me. The moth doesn’t seem that bad to me, not too much worse than other double action weaknesses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:22
|
|
|
There could be some encounter cards that affect max sanity. Matchbook is stupendous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:28
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:I double checked and all the class specific weaknesses say only take if you’re that color investigator. So the moth is for everybody! Yeah, I just did a double take on it I think. I can see the card art doesn't match the other green cards. Anonymous Robot posted:Because you can play it during any turn but it only effects your location, Matchbox may also have some funny interactions with “highest/lowest shroud value” effects. You can't soak -1 sanity. You can soak 1 horror and you can drop down to 1 sanity on your investigator usually without much worry if you have enough soak cards but if this weakness is in play that's not an option. It isn't that bad, it just limits you and makes sure you have to ensure you never get down to 1 sanity if you haven't drawn this yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:31
|
|
|
Can you also use Matchbox multiple times for the same investigation?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:35
|
|
|
Alan G posted:Can you also use Matchbox multiple times for the same investigation? If you can unexhaust it, I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:35
|
|
|
Or if you're in a scenario where there's more of those cards that lower your sanity, that'd be more dangerous of course. In the Innsmouth campgaign I've been playing, I had the minus 1 willpower, minus one sanity treachery come out on Tommy, decided it wasn't worth trying to get rid of for an action and a Willpower 3 test, came to regret that when he drew two more of them over the scenario. Now he had zero willpower and 3 total sanity, I was very thankful for the soak heavy portfolio I'd invested in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 14:37
|
|
|
What if everyone brings a matchbox to a campaign… Especially to ones where high shroud is supposed to be cleared away by extra objectives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:What if everyone brings a matchbox to a campaign… Especially to ones where high shroud is supposed to be cleared away by extra objectives. If you have 10 people do this in epic multiplayer, you can form matchbox 20.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 17:26
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Wait it says TURN? -1 shroud for the whole turn, even for another investigator? Card is insane wtf, I thought it was very good if it worked for just a single action. After the matchbox and guardian mask preview and the last cycle's balance I'm no longer excited about Arkham Horror. I used to have a group that met every week to play on hard difficulty but we've taken a long break, in large part because the card balance seems completely off. How did so many of these cards get printed? Edit: In retrospect I'm pretty sure I posted the same complaint last cycle. Sorry for making GBS threads up the thread. I'll just unbookmark it. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 17:37
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Because you can play it during any turn but it only effects your location, Matchbox may also have some funny interactions with “highest/lowest shroud value” effects. Cards that prevent a horror can't prevent -1 sanity. Agnes and Calvin don't benefit from -1 sanity, but do from a horror. You also can't put -1 sanity on an ally or other asset. So -1 sanity is strictly worse for you than a horror, but not by a whole lot. It is fiddly because it's another thing you just gotta remember rather than be able to mark with a token like horror damage. Huh, I guess the Composure assets don't die to -1 sanity but would to 1 horror (unless it's direct horror), so that's the one case where -1 sanity can be better than 1 horror. So to be extremely technical, and who are we card game enjoyers if not people who love being extremely technical, -1 sanity is strictly worse than 1 direct horror, but not strictly worse than 1 horror. But only because of the Composure assets. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 23:03
|
|
|
I don’t believe this scenario has ever actually happened to me (somehow,) but let’s say I have 4/6 sanity and I am dealt -1 sanity. Is my sanity value now 4/5 or 3/5?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 23:09
|
|
|
4/5.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 23:11
|
|
|
Y'all are missing that the worst part of that weakness is taking up an accessory slot. Coincidentally, I'm running Parallel Agnes and Parallel Monty in The Scarlet Keys, and after the first scenario it's obvious they both need to spend 3XP on Relic Hunter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 00:32
|
|
|
I assume Parallel Monty would want to spend 6 xp on two relic hunters at some point surely? He can run so many cool ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 00:37
|
|
|
 The final mask, and the final official preview. It has the worst replenish condition out of all of them but it's still a slotless +2 to a Seeker's main stat, so like all the masks, it's good. These masks do represent power creep, but how much impact that will actually have on the game remains to be seen. I missed the details on Matchbox and I now agree it's busted. It does feel like we've seen fewer outright broken cards revealed than in TSK, but the age-old question remains: what do you do when these cards exist in the game? Do you add them to your own personal taboo list with the Forbidden trait? I've been happy to do that for Drawing Thin, but there are a lot more edge cases where the card isn't outright broken but just completely invalidates a whole class of other cards, like the Cyclopean Hammer. I remember feeling disappointed back when that one was revealed, and it does feel like EotE was the beginning of the "modern" problems with card balance, but if I sat down and thought about it I'm sure there are a lot more examples from earlier sets. But then, it's been possible to break the game over your knee with specific lists and combos since the first or maybe second expansion. I've never had any interest in playing the game that way, and the fact that it can be played like that has never really bothered me, but I have to admit, the number of poorly thought out cards in TSK did make me lose some confidence in them, like more than ever before. AH is a very mature game now, and I still think the overall level of power creep is quite low, especially when compared to other games (not that I can think of anything to compare it to myself - it's just a feeling I've picked up from various bits of commentary over the years). One thing I do wonder about is whether or not the designers are making these cards with the assumption that every player has a complete set of cards. I would bet that they don't, in which case it might explain why some of the more overtuned stuff gets printed, but I also understand they can't just always deliver "pretty good cards"; it's not desirable from a business or gameplay perspective for there to be no exciting new cards to play with, and "exciting" does often correlate with "strong" (and power spikes are a core part of the game experience with the whole XP mechanic, though that doesn't really apply to L0 cards like Matchbox). So yeah, I do think they get it right more often than not, but it still sucks every time they miss the mark. Kalko fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 00:51
|
|
|
Kalko posted:
I think card releases are so infrequent and there are so many unexplored archetypes that the designers are happy to support those decks rather than power creep. I do have my own personal taboo list when I play two-handed, but I also like playing investigators who can't take the broken stuff, such as fighters that can't take Cyclopean Hammer or cluevers who can't do the Scavenging 2 loops. It's going to be harder when I play with other people, like my friend is a photographer and I know he wants to play Darrell if we ever get around to playing. The bright side is he won't be good enough to break the game, at least not in our first campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:13
|
|
|
I don’t worry about meta-breaking cards and power creep, personally, because I can’t remember all the cards in this game and I don’t usually netdeck (though I am in my current campaign.) I’m not interested in making zero-drag cyclopean hammer decks more than maybe once, so I just don’t. My group is also just not that good at the game. That’s not to say that y’all are wrong for not being smoothbrained. The best games should stand up to rigorous testing from their most engaged players. But as a cooperative game with a massive card library, I don’t see the existence of a card like matchbox damaging the health of the game for most players. It is worth noting that this is the first card set designed completely by the new AH designer. I wonder if their campaigns will be meaner as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:23
|
|
|
Since the two friends my wife and I were playing with are no longer in town, and she wants to continue playing Vincent, I thought I would play Mark Harrigan and be our fighter (even though quite a few people had a lot of positive things to say about a particular Akachi deck). I decided to go with the list from the same user who made the Akachi list: https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/37361/mythos-busting-mark-beginner-deck-guide-series-1.0 But I'm not really loving the Butterfly Swords, at least not their 2XP versions, and while I like the 5XP versions, which the deck creator doesn't plan to upgrade into, I feel like I could just be playing Cyclopean Hammer for that XP investment. What direction would each of you take the deck if you were to use it as a base? So far I've upgraded the two Beat Cop and am sitting on 4XP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:29
|
|
|
I think the masks are designed to be must takes for theme reasons. you’re going to the weirdo Island why not join in? You’re in a better position than ever if you don’t want the new player cards. They split the investigator cards from the encounter ones, you can just buy the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:44
|
|
|
I don't worry about balance in a pve card game. If there's a card I don't want to use, I just don't use it. If my friend wants to use a broken deck I just let him. I'm not gonna get upset that we're winning too much. I think the Mouse Mask's condition is better than most of the other masks but it's also very scenario dependent. sirtommygunn fucked around with this message at 01:49 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:47
|
|
|
Kalko posted:I missed the details on Matchbox and I now agree it's busted. It does feel like we've seen fewer outright broken cards revealed than in TSK, but the age-old question remains: what do you do when these cards exist in the game? Do you add them to your own personal taboo list with the Forbidden trait? I've been happy to do that for Drawing Thin, but there are a lot more edge cases where the card isn't outright broken but just completely invalidates a whole class of other cards, like the Cyclopean Hammer. My playgroup mostly enjoys playing different decks every time, so while the fighter could just take Cyclopean Hammer again in his Zoey deck, instead he's gonna try "fishing for crits" by rolling two chaos tokens with Butterfly Swords (5) in hopes of getting Zoey's +dmg elder sign. Yeah it's suboptimal compared to the Cyclopean Hammer but the point of the deck isn't to be optimal it's to try this weird new idea. (trip report on that btw: it mostly sucked except that I was playing Carson Sinclair so I got to draw a few extra cards over the course of the campaign. I think the extra damage truly mattered about one or two times in eight scenarios.) So the "broken" cards aren't exactly taboo'd but we do play with them less than we "should." Batterypowered7 posted:Since the two friends my wife and I were playing with are no longer in town, and she wants to continue playing Vincent, I thought I would play Mark Harrigan and be our fighter (even though quite a few people had a lot of positive things to say about a particular Akachi deck). lol that you posted about Butterfly Swords while I was typing this, Batterypowered7. You're right that Butterfly Swords (2) sucks rear end, and that Cyclopean Hammer is a more powerful choice than Butterfly Swords (5). But you've got 5 base fight and Beat Cop, so you don't necessarily need a +3 weapon like Hammer. You might want to go into Runic Axe. But Cyclopean Hammer is still a very good choice. Or you can keep your basic weapons forever and focus on grabbing other stuff, like Vicious Blow (2) and such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:55
|
|
|
I took Cyclopean Hammer and Key of Y’s out of rotation while they were waiting for their taboos. It’s not something I normally do, but they were breaking the game to the point of making their owner’s decks boring to play. For Matchbook I won’t bother. Yeah, it’s really good, but it’s not game breaking. I’ll leave it in and wait for an update.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 02:41
|
|
|
LifeLynx posted:I think card releases are so infrequent and there are so many unexplored archetypes that the designers are happy to support those decks rather than power creep. This is largely my approach as well, I take investigators who either can't take or don't get as much out of the broken stuff. I don't play that regularly though (I tend to binge it once or twice a year) but if I did play a broader range of investigators I would probably just taboo a few other things too. Good point on the unexplored archetypes. Last time it was "reduce to zero" and "clue drop," and this time it's parley, which I'm looking forward to. Anonymous Robot posted:It is worth noting that this is the first card set designed completely by the new AH designer. I wonder if their campaigns will be meaner as well. This is my forever wish. I want the game to be harder, especially the final scenario. The last two campaigns have had wet fart final scenarios in terms of difficulty, like they've been balanced around the possibility of players failing everything beforehand. Or perhaps they simply haven't been balanced around the possibility of players min/maxing the gently caress out of everything and coming in with a shitload of XP and every narrative advantage. Either way, I'd personally prefer it if failing to win the campaign was by far the most common result*, but I can see how that kind of design goal wouldn't have broad appeal. * If I reflected on why this appeals to me so much I'd probably recall all those times when the game came down to the wire and I won against all the odds, and how satisfying and just plain exciting that felt. But I think a big part of those wins has a lot to do with unfamiliarity, like when you play a campaign for the first time you have no idea what's going to happen and you're just winging it the whole time; that's the most enjoyable the game gets, for me. And then I spend a heap of time trying to build a well-oiled machine that can handle anything the campaign can throw at me across multiple attempts, which kills most of the novelty factor but does reward me with the insight I gain from spending hours with the investigators and their decks, and I really enjoy that aspect of the game too. Also, a campaign can feel fresh again with different investigators, which is no small feat of design work and one of the reasons AH is so replayable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 03:51
|
|
|
I think another point lightly mentioned above is people tend to deck build differently. My friends for example pick an investigator "because they look cool" and we get a new set and"i haven't played blue in ages". There's nothing wrong with this, they just don't pick for stats and only occasionally because they have a good/cool ability. Likewise they don't exactly scour every card and compare them (neither do I to be fair). We use the arkam cards app to get the deck list for an investigator with our card set and throw togerher something that might work. I think it's unfair to ask the campaigns get harder in general. Myself and my group play for the theme and (when it's good) story more than the challenge. Also if campaigns start getting more difficult, how do you expect new players to pick up the box with ~one investigator boxes and not have a terrible time? I think there's maybe room for a new difficulty, like a challenge mode, that alters some of the actual mechanics in the campaign rather than just changes the chaos tokens. That would be really cool, but also a fair amount of design effort and text on pages. Feels like something that could be home brewed but would be a pain to test for balance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 09:18
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd love it if the campaigns could have more granularity when it comes to difficulty, like adding new or alternate card sets instead of just having bigger negative tokens or a bit more doom on the agenda. One thing I really liked about TSK is how it let you choose to tackle a difficult scenario early on if you wanted to. I do think Standard is designed for people who only have the campaign box and the core set, and that's a good thing. My quibbles about wanting it to be harder are pretty minor because I do think the current difficulty system works well and I can still find plenty of challenging stuff to tackle in a two-handed game on Hard. But still, I hope Feast has a better finale than the last two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 10:20
|
|
|
The keys finale was lame. They should’ve found a better way than giving you tons and tons of assets in the final adventure, or had a way to get them out of your play area.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 17:03
|
|
|
All this is telling me is that the other campaigns' finales are pretty up there, because I thought Edge's was fantastic and perfectly thematic for both a continuation of the previous story and the vibe of the campaign as a whole. The first two times I went through it had absolutely perfect endings, with Natcho getting dragged down by Tommy Malloy and fist-fighting him as the mirage consumed them both on Attempt Number 1, and Eliyah dogsledding Harvey outside on Attempt 2. Really, really good memories tied to that sequence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 19:20
|
|
|
Yeah I generally liked the scenarios I played in TSK but not the finale, making two entire encounter decks only to discard one after what in my memory was like 3 turns or something like that was irritating as gently caress. I feel like the finales are generally weaker scenarios. Dim Carcosa is the only one I'd say I unquestionably enjoyed, the two Dream Eaters one were cool too but I have a feeling they could feel very swingy and crap, I may have just got lucky.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 19:35
|
|
|
Dream eaters A is way too hard and random unless you specifically build for encounter deck manipulation, dream B is super easy if you have any movement at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:20
|
|
|
I thought Edge's finale was great from a design perspective, definitely one of the best, it was just really undertuned and lacked much in the way of challenge, even on my very first Standard run. RtTCU's felt dangerous, even with my highly tuned deck, and Innsmouth's did as well, though that might have been because it was the one scenario in that campaign I didn't play a heap of times when I did my Hard run. Carcosa is legit dangerous, a lot of stuff can go wrong there very quickly, and I remember liking the theme of TFA's but I don't recall much about the experience. I still haven't beaten that one with the "true" ending so I'll go back again one day and give it a proper try.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 06:34
|
|
|
Supposedly a leaked weapon in the new box for Guardian, from the mythosbusters discord, there's some other stuff too but I can't be arsed copying/pasting it all. Katana Level 0 Guardian 4 cost Fist icon Weapon, Melee Uses 2 hand slots Action: Fight with +2 strength, if you succeed by exactly 2, you may exhaust this weapon to deal +2 damage Free action: You may exhaust this to fight with your agility instead of Strength Obviously could be bullshit but at least one other person is corroborating it independently. If it is real... who the gently caress is it for? Some people have said it'd surely be fake but then someone else quipped that making a terrible level 0 guardian weapon wouldn't be that odd and I can't disagree. Anyway, the succeed exactly by x archetype and support that we've seen in this box is mainly in seeker and we've not seen much of it really, since the initial reveal with Kate and the chemistry set/microscope stuff, Joe and Roland would be the only ones who can use that side of it with any predictability or you just rely on pure randomness of course. Unless there's a future guardian who is going to be a high agility precision type character but then put that poo poo in the box with them. Give Wilson a weapon that works for him, maybe a gun that you've printed a bunch of support for recently but not made any accompanying goddamn guardian guns. (complaint withdrawn if there is a guardian gun in the set, unless it's shite too). thebardyspoon fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
Based on chemistry set, we’re gonna be seeing some cards that allow us to modify our results. Or everyone has to bring along the psychic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 22:00
|
|
|
The agility option and succeed by gimmick make me think it’s a stealth rogue card?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
The agility option is terrible though? You can't use that and the ability to do extra damage at the same time. If this is true then this is clear binder fodder. Two hand slots, you can only use it once per turn and its super hard to trigger the extra damage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 23:27
|
|
|
Oh yeah, I didn’t factor in that both features cost an exhaust.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 00:32
|
|
|
To be clear the effect is supposedly that you exhaust it to do an additional fast attack, not to modify the normal one. So you can attack with it three times and if none of those succeed by 2 you can exhaust it to do one extra 1-damage attack. So if you can pass all tests it's a 4-5 damage/turn ammoless weapon, not amazing but not out of curve for level 0. NRVNQSR fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
Don’t underestimate the value in being able to do 3 damage in one action. Level 0 weapons can’t do that generally and it’s a big break point. Especially in Forgotten Age. That said it all comes down to how consistently you can do it. This thing might be the first weapon you want to combo with garrote for 2 health enemies, 4 health enemies and failing to do 3 in one swing to 3 health enemies? Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 12:28
|
|