I agree, first it was Game of Thrones, and now Doom. Do they playtest at all?

Have you tried the official FFG mods yet?

If so, care to comment on your findings?

Cheers,
T.

Agreed.
What's so wrong with the game???
I for one think the rules are straightforward... and clear.
The difficulty, for most people - like me, is high.
But the official difficulty modification does it's job.
Whatever level you are, you can play the game.

How exactly is this an "article"??

If you want to complain about FFG's playtesting, do it in the Personal Comments. If you disagree with the rules set, write up your own modifiers and submit it as an article or file.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

Francois,

What is wrong with the game is that it is unplayable with 4 players as written, and the last-minute taped-on "difficulty mod" is unsulting:

a) the difficulty levels above the "standard" levels are even more disgracefully unplayable. They were only put there as a way for the designer to get out of admitting that he did not playtest enough - i.e. to place his initial set of rules as the "middle-of-the-road".

b) it shows the designer's further unwillingness to attempt to come up with one complete, balamced game, and instead throwing some "mud" on the wall and seeing if it will stick.

If the mud sticks for you, that's fine, but when you see the painstaking effort, sweat, and hard work that desginers from all over the world put into perfecting their games, it is absolutely sickening to me to see this company attempt to get away with such shoddy releases.

WarCraft was objectively poorly balanced, and there was no "difficulty level" available to hide behind there (it is clear that one race should not be advantaged over the other). Doom is no different.

BalanceCraver (#88094),

I suppose that your name says it all. But not all players need a completely balanced game to enjoy it. My group didn't mind getting their rear-ends handed to them by my Invaders, because they had fun doing so. We do play with the difficulty mod now, and love it even more.

The boardgame fits the source theme perfectly. Many levels of DOOM, on medium difficulty, would take repeated tries at to learn exactly what was where and what could happen and what could be done about it. Lots of player-death and losing. While this might not be up your alley for a board game, I don't think the game is unplayable, and I don't see the difficulty mod as a cop-out. My Marine players actually want to try Nightmare sometime, for fun, knowing full well they'll likely never make it to the third room of the first level.


What my point is, is this: the game is not unplayable, it is unplayable for you. There is a huge difference. I certainly don't see Doom as a shoddy release, although it is certainly turning out to not be sweet to everyone's palate.

And that's fine, but it doesn't mean the game is bad.

ninjer (#88102),

I agree with matt, I think doom is balanced pretty well, even though in the beginning the marines did get wrecked, but after playing for a little while you get smarter with them and then they start to win if they play it smart. Plus, it always seems to come down to a great finish, usually having our marines be in the last room with one frag left, lots of suspence, i like it!!

jomayo112 (#88110),
I have to say, I agree with the craver here. I've played this game nearly a dozen times now. Me and my friends were trying to figure out a way, ANY way, that the marines could win in a four player game. We started off making our own VERY minor mods to the game, but no matter how much further we tipped the scales, it was still always ridiculously overwhelming for the marines.

When the difficulty cards came out, we gave it one more shot, and the marines BARELY won. I'm sorry, but if I'm playing on a difficulty where the marines are supposed to have an overwhelming advantage, and they can only win by a hair, in a game where everybody agreed that the invader player had also received more than his fair share of bad luck with the dice, then something is wrong.

I'm not saying that at the easy difficulty the game is unbalanced, it may be fine there. But there is no way the game is beatable, if the invader player isn't going soft, with the default rules and four players. We were all so frustrated and in mourning by the time that last game started, that it was like a wake for us. We were all thoroughly disgusted, which is a shame because we were having a blast up until about the fourth COMPLETE SLAUGHTER of the marines.

Like I said in my comments on the game, there is a gem of a game in there. I hope that the expansion fixes the issues. But we were all very upset with our experiences. I'm amazed that there are any groups who claim the marines can win a straight-out-of-the-box four player game. I couldn't do it solo-play, as a mental exercise. Even KNOWING the cards the invader player had at his disposal, and what he (I) was likely to do.

I'm firmly of the opinion that only an invader player who is playing very suboptimally can lose to three players. The difficulty "mod" is insulting. I wish they would post an official errata to change the problem. It's all the more a shame, because the game really is FUN.

eosapien (#88128),

If you play on the lowest difficulty setting the game becomes significanlty easier.
After having played the first level so many, many times.
The first time we used the difficulty mod (the easiest setting) the first level was a true cake walk. This time around the invader got "all his asses" handed to him

I for one like the challenge... It is an incentive to play (for me atleast).

ninjer (#88102),

I don't think the problem is the playability of the game. The game is perfectly playable and the rules are very clear.

My main concern with the game is the balance. Most of the games I played were over by the time the marine players entered area 3/4. By that time the marine's would have already suffered 2 or 3 frags with the challenging areas still to come.

I believe I played the invader in 3 of our games. The first time I played as ruthless as possible. The second time I took it easy and the third time I was actually helping them instead of using the full force of the invader. I send zombies running in the opposite directions while making funny noises just to make sure the marines would make it to the last area, so i could finally see a cyberdemon on the board. This way all the fun is ruined for the invader player as it is impossible to lose this game. There is no incentive for the invader to think about moves.

I think a good game should be tight untill the end with both players having to make decisions that matter and both players being able to win in the end. Dice-luck will always be an issue but i can live with that. You will win some and lose some due to bad or good rolls, but with the current rules you will always lose, and dice will have nothing to do with it. [hmm maybe this is one positive side to the imbalance].

The "mod" they "constructed" is indeed an insult. [nightmare mod right!!!!!] Instead of taking 5 minutes to make a pdf file they should take the time to play the game and fix the balance problems.

I still love the game and there is a great game in there, but the balance issues need to be adressed.

Merkowitz (#88219),

I agree. The rules are VERY well written and they are very good. I think the designer made a good job up to that point. What I don't like at all is the balance. You guys must be kidding when you say Doom is balanced. I also like that the marines have a tough time and even that they have less than 50% chances at winning. But come on, guys! Doom comes with only five scenarios and several of them are unplayable because of balance issues.

The difficulty mod is an attempt to fix it, but I don't like it as I find it very unelegant. I'd rather play with the Cheat Codes that someone posted in an article some time ago and I converted to cards similar to the official difficulty levels.

Finding the difficulty levels or the Cheat Codes BEFORE we bought the game was the playtesters' job. Shame on them!

I think that the BGG community should be able to agree on a default set of rules. After having played Doom around twenty times now, I'll say that most new players won't be thrilled to play a game where they're getting their asses handed to them. It takes a certain type of player who's willing to lose after three hours, and the odds of consistently finding new players who are willing to lose start diminishing over time.

In response, I've been following the BGG suggestions that come up and agree in codifying the most common.

Modifications which I'm using to great success:

#1. The "Fully Loaded" rule. All weapons come with one ammo counter.

#2. Marine players get to pick their own cards.

#3. I suggest particular combinations of the cards in #2 - one for the chainsaw warrior, another for the front guard, and a third for the rear guard.

#4. Using campaign rules. Yes, weapons can break but it's a rarity. In return, the players have a shot at higher levels.

#5. Using the "Hey, Not Too Rough" difficulty level. With the aforementioned changes, it seems to balance out the game.

#6. Pulling the Invader's punches. Monsters only attack things they can see. Monsters only come around the corner if they've had a grenade lobbed at them, they saw another monster get shot, or they heard the Marines coming. My rule of thumb is six spaces for hearing, though this is obviously not a hard and fast rule. The Imp, Mancubus, and Archvile will fire as soon as they see Marines coming, no matter how irrelevant the distance.

Did you guys miss the post by Kevin W. where he stated that he has played the first scenario over 40 times?

I've noticed that Doom is a very subtle game where moving 1 space can have a profound impact on the game. It takes practice to win as the Marines.

Mike Z

for me, part of the appeal is the lack of marine/invader balance. it's not fair, but it's not meant to be fair! the marine players know their chances are slim and this evokes the horror atmosphere. and the actual gameplay is superbly weighted- tactical and efficient.

this isn't an issue of gameplay. this is an issue of victory conditions. the solution- and it's so obvious i am positively flabbergasted that no-one has mentioned it- is simply to change the frag total needed for an invader victory. if it peeves you off that the marines lose too quickly, simply say that the invader needs more than six frags to win.

in fact, the majority (two-thirds) of my games have ended with the invader scoring six frags just as the marines enter the final sector... i suspect that upping the invader requirement just to seven would have resulted in a dramatic up-shift for the marines.

voila, a mod.