Recommend
18 
 Thumb up
 Hide
33 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BattleLore (Second Edition)» Forums » General

Subject: Expansions update! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Hubbard
United States
Mullica Hill
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
There hasn't been much info on the expansions for a while, but FFG updated the status from "In Development" to "At the Printer"!

18 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Garrett
United States
Laredo
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow! What a timely post! Now we do have an update. I haven't read it yet, though ...

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=5268
6 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Diana craciun
Canada
Ajax
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I saw a picture of a female warrior lashing her sword on the enemy but the miniatures all being represented by male fighters/mage.

is this accurate ? no female mini`s for the expansion ?

Thanks for clarification
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hubbard
United States
Mullica Hill
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
That's possibly art from a Lore card or the manual. The Blood Sister in the other expansion looks to be the first female miniature for the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Garrett
United States
Laredo
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In one of the Lore cards (I think it's Wall of Steel) there is a line of Citadel Guards. One of them has very feminine features and I think it's supposed to be a woman among the ranks. I mean, with all that armor, it'd be hard to tell, right? So you could pretend some of your Citadel Guards are women.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barks
Australia
Armidale
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Blood Bowl 4 ever wrote:
I saw a picture of a female warrior lashing her sword on the enemy but the miniatures all being represented by male fighters/mage.

is this accurate ? no female mini`s for the expansion ?

Thanks for clarification


The image filename is 'Agility Rune'.

I have to say, all these units are pretty cool and I'll struggle to fit all that I want into only 50 points.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Middleton
msg tools
Blood Bowl 4 ever wrote:
I saw a picture of a female warrior lashing her sword on the enemy but the miniatures all being represented by male fighters/mage.

is this accurate ? no female mini`s for the expansion ?

Thanks for clarification


It's a picture of Jain Fairwood, one of the characters from Descent. I'm not sure what she's doing making an appearance in Battlelore...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Santi Velasco
Spain
Mairena del Aljarafe
Seville
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JMiddleton wrote:
Blood Bowl 4 ever wrote:
I saw a picture of a female warrior lashing her sword on the enemy but the miniatures all being represented by male fighters/mage.

is this accurate ? no female mini`s for the expansion ?

Thanks for clarification


It's a picture of Jain Fairwood, one of the characters from Descent. I'm not sure what she's doing making an appearance in Battlelore...


...

...Heroes Expansion for BL2 confirmed!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hubbard
United States
Mullica Hill
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
JMiddleton wrote:
Blood Bowl 4 ever wrote:
I saw a picture of a female warrior lashing her sword on the enemy but the miniatures all being represented by male fighters/mage.

is this accurate ? no female mini`s for the expansion ?

Thanks for clarification


It's a picture of Jain Fairwood, one of the characters from Descent. I'm not sure what she's doing making an appearance in Battlelore...


Battlelore 2nd Edition takes place in the same setting/universe as Descent 2nd Edition (and Runewars) so I could see some artwork crossing over. Some were disappointed they didn't try and integrate the two games so you could use Descent heroes and monsters as legendary units in Battlelore and vice-versa... but the miniatures are different scale.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Daverman wrote:
but the miniatures are different scale.

For the Heroes, I'm not sure that's a big deal. In Runewars, the heroes are HUGE, for example. I think it can just make them stand out more, and kind of give a figurative-turned-literal "larger than life" feel to them

Aragorn may be the same size as the other humans, but he certainly SEEMS bigger when sweeping away hordes of orcs
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Garrett
United States
Laredo
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


So, about Ironbounds' Automaton ability, how exactly does it work?

Let's say I have an Ironbound in the left section. I play a card that orders three units from the right section. I decide to spend one lore to order my Ironbound. Does that count against my 3 orders for that command card? From the first announcement, I thought Ironbounds could be ordered on top of your command card, but now that we've seen the card, I'm thinking not.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B. L.
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just from the wording on the card I think it counts as one of your moves on the command card.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Wraith
United States
Ypsilanti
Michigan (MI)
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Budgernaut wrote:
Does that count against my 3 orders for that command card? From the first announcement, I thought Ironbounds could be ordered on top of your command card, but now that we've seen the card, I'm thinking not.


Yeah, that's tricky. "During your Order Step" can be thought of either way but I'm betting it's still on top of your Command card. After all, if you play the card that lets you move one unit in each section, then the Ironbound's ability becomes useless. You'd be forced to move the Ironbound and only have the opportunity to spend a whole Lore to move it one extra hex. That doesn't seem right. Instead, you should be able to move 1 unit in the same section AND spend a Lore to move the Ironbound, as well. Same principle applies if both of your Ironbound units are in one section and you play a card to that side (which means Ironbound could be REALLY powerful with certain Command cards, depending on positioning, which seems more in theme with the overall decision-making aspect of the game, i.e. Do I put all my Ironbound in one section to try to take advantage of that or spread them out for versatility?)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B. L.
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That makes sense too but why even mention that you move it as if it were any section? It would make more sense to leave the section part out.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm pretty sure that it still counts against your total, not "in addition to". I think the intent is that it lets you move them regardless of where they are, but if you could order them on top of your normal orders, you could easily abuse that, if you have several Automatons. For 1 lore, activating them on top of other units would be very cheap and you'd probably do it every turn if you could.

On the other hand, if you only order them as part of your order, just allowing you to order them out-of-section, the cost seems more reasonable for what it does.

I hope that one way or the other, the reference guide with the expansion has an entry to clarify one way or the other.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ray
United States
Mansfield
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Matthew 10: 29-31
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe that would tie in with your command card. So if you had 'move 2 on left flank' and he was in the middle...you could move 1 on the left and the Iron troop. He could be moved like 'he is in any section' and that would be left flank, because of your mom and card.
For strategy, they might be wise to keep together because it could be a front you are always able to advance.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hubbard
United States
Mullica Hill
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
I was curious about that too... it seems less useful than initially hinted at. Not to mention I assume it's useless if you play a command card that doesn't involve sections, like Desperate Ploy or Battlelore.

The armor ability is toned down too.

As an aside, I would happily pay 1 Lore to move a Chaos Lord more than 1 hex
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B. L.
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the reason for the ability is to further mitigate the C&C complaint of not being able to move the troop you want because of the cards.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barks
Australia
Armidale
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
And would it move 1, or two?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Barks wrote:
And would it move 1, or two?

Two. It's ordered as normal, giving it the normal 1 move, but then it gets to move an extra hex as well, so 2 move.

So even if the Ironbound is in the section you ordered anyway, you could use the ability to give it the extra move. You could even use it this way if the card you played wasn't a section card.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barks
Australia
Armidale
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So:

I can order an Ironbound normally and it can move 1.

I can order an Ironbound normally, add Lore, and move 2.

I can order an Ironbound by spending a Lore, and move 2.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giulio
Italy
Scandiano
RE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
May I say that I don't like the Citadel Lancers "Trample" ability?



I don't like it thematically: if I have to take Middle Age as the real-word reference of this fantasy setting, then what we know is that basically the only way an infantry line can resist a cavarly assault is precisely by NOT retreating. In fact, many middle age battles have been won by the infantry keeping position when facing a cavarly assault, and many have been lost by not being able to do so. In my opinion an ability inflicting an extra damage IF the target is forced to retreat would have been much more appropriate for a heavy cavalry unit.

Moreover, I don't like this new ability also with respect to the general game mechanics: the game rules conveyed very effectively the idea that SUPPORT is GOOD. This is a very natural idea, which is easy to remember and provides a nice characteristic trait for a game system. We players tried to learn how to manouver our troops in order to grant them support and shaped our strategy accordingly. Now all of the sudden, support is BAD. We have to avoid it. It is surely true that this new ability increases variety. My feeling is, however, that it does so by sacrificing some internal consistency. Like a chess variant in which a new piece is introduced, that you should NOT capture. Different yes... but rather silly.

P.S.: and the way in which the rule is written in the card seems to suggest that the extra damage is also inflicted to a supported Immovable units... which would be extra-silly. I suspect that what they meant is "cause 1 damage for each retreat ignored BECAUSE of the support"... end if the support is two hexes away? That is, it supports AFTER the first hex retreat?.. Alas, the lost beauty of internal consistency
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oskar 10101
Netherlands
Den Haag
flag msg tools
g1ul10 wrote:
May I say that I don't like the Citadel Lancers "Trample" ability?

I don't like it thematically: if I have to take Middle Age as the real-word reference of this fantasy setting, then what we know is that basically the only way an infantry line can resist a cavarly assault is precisely by NOT retreating. In fact, many middle age battles have been won by the infantry keeping position when facing a cavarly assault, and many have been lost by not being able to do so. In my opinion an ability inflicting an extra damage IF the target is forced to retreat would have been much more appropriate for a heavy cavalry unit.


But isn't that exactly what happens ? Cavalry tramples, causes damage when succesfully forcing attacked units back, also when these are supported?
I.e. the not being able to retreat reflecting this and only if the attack results in a retreat and that retreat is ignored does that cause a damage ?

Also this effect only is printed on this unit type.
So the support principle still applies to other unit types attacking.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giulio
Italy
Scandiano
RE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, yes and no. Flag is a generic result, any attack can generate it. The point is not that men on the battlefield can panic and get killed as a consequence, the point is that units which are well supported should have a LOWER probability to panic and, consequently, should incur in lower losses.

"Sir, the enemy heavy cavalry is approaching!" - "Let's break our infantry lines then. Fast. Why I still see shields raised and spears set? This is going to be a massacre! We have to scatter our troops in small separated groups in open field... this is the only way we can hope to survive their charge!" Is it just me, or it does REALLY sound silly?

And let's look at it in game terms: what the historians tell use about cavalry charge, is that its effectivenesses depended as much on the terror that mass of galloping steel infused into the enemy than on the actual number of people they were eventually able to kill. In BL2 there is already a rule for terror: the ability of the chaos lord. It is nice, simple, extremely powerful and totally useless against supported troops. This is precisely the way it should be in a tactical game: you can overcome the weakness of your troops by a wise and careful positioning.

A few numbers: the Citadel "super-hero" Lancers have almost 30% probability (8 out of 27) of killing a supported 3 figures units right away from their first charge. The poor Chaos "puppet" Lord just around 11%.

There is a nice possibility, however: maybe it's a typo. Maybe they wrote "supported" but they meant "unsupported" and they wrote "ignored" but they meant "not ignored". If it were the case, then I think the unit would be well balanced and similar in strength and "spirit" to the Flesh Rippers, which in fact cost the same.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hubbard
United States
Mullica Hill
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
I think they seem fine as-is, but gameplay will tell. Yes, they have a great alpha-strike set of abilities if they can hit a unit at a distance that's boxed in but that's it. They're still at risk of being counterattacked if they don't manage to eliminate their target since it can't retreat.

Like the Fleshripper Brutes, they seem like a unit that's meant to hang back and strike when the moment is right. They hit harder in the right conditions, but Brutes seem more generally useful and pursuit is a very powerful ability.

It's likely the expansion only contains 3 of these units, and being supported is still advantageous against every other unit in the game. Just keep an eye out and maybe loosen up your formations if Lancers are around.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.