Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Poll: Classic vs. purely cooperative Descent
It may just be my perception, but it seems that there are a large number of people who, having played the coop modules for Descent, never want to go back to the traditional Overlord setup. There is another large population that seems to exclusively play the solo/coop variants of the full campaigns, as evidenced by the unparalleled traffic those topics get in the variants forum.

Given that such a (seemingly) large percentage of Descent players do not play the game according to its intended format (2-4 players vs an OL player,) my main question is "why?" Are the solo playstyles that wonderful, or is the official playstyle that bad? Is it really as large of a percentage as it appears?

Please leave comments to explain your answers. I hope this will be a helpful community discussion.
1. How do you usually play Descent?
Classic: Heroes vs. Overlord
Automated Overlord
Cooperative Adventures (Nature's Ire, etc)
2. Why do you play the way you do?
  4: Very important 3: Important 2: Not very important 1: Unimportant/ Not a deciding factor.
Group size- hard to get enough players
Playtime- Cooperative is shorter
No one wants to play Overlord
No fun when the Overlord wins
Story/ Narrative
Best RPG experience
Fun to face an intelligent (not automated) opponent
      111 answers
Poll created by zaltyre
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
I was under the impression more people play with the classic format. The poll seems to support this.

I think the forum traffic creates the impression about co-op because people that favor that have more to talk about.

I enjoy playing against (or as) an intelligent OL that has creativity and throws strategic surprises. When an expansion that supports "classic" play style is released I feel no need to post anything as my wants have been met.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AbsoluteXero wrote:
I was under the impression more people play with the classic format. The poll seems to support this.

I think the forum traffic creates the impression about co-op because people that favor that have more to talk about.

I enjoy playing against (or as) an intelligent OL that has creativity and throws strategic surprises. When an expansion that supports "classic" play style is released I feel no need to post anything as my wants have been met.
I may absolutely have the wrong idea based on forum traffic- unfortunately, that's most of what I have to go on, as FFG doesn't exactly publicize the sales numbers for the different expansions. People could also be buying all the competitive expansions, and playing them with solo/coop variants.

I am surprised (pleasantly) by the poll results so far.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
C F
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
"Cooperative Adventures (Nature's Ire, etc) "

Does this include fan coop variants? That's what I play the most, otherwise I play classic.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dawid
Poland
Cracow
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Personally I'm completely not interested in coop variant. In fact I will refuse to play any purely coop game. For me gaming is about facing other players. No system will replace a person. Coops always comes down to optimization, learning how the system works and working around it. Completely not fun to me. I always think about coops as collective solitaires.
I voted out all factors as unimportant except the last one.
Also, some of suggested answers seams completely odd to me. "No fun when the Overlord wins"? Seriously? I think it's almost the other way around. 4 players jointly beating one guy - disputable whether it's fun or not. If that guy wins - this is indisputably a reason to congrats.
I said "almost" because I do think that it is fun to win as heroes. It would be totally not fun to me, if the only thing that heroes could beat was the game. But I already said that.
Generally, who wins is a secondary matter to me. For me Descent is all about emotions and epic situations that come up during play. And they are possible only with real people. Trying to surprise and being surprised back and forth is what I love in this game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Campo
United Kingdom
Manchester
lancashire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
how can not getting players be an uniportant factor
even getting 1 player is 100% important for solo play :-)
getting 4+ is proving very hard in my parts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lumin wrote:
"Cooperative Adventures (Nature's Ire, etc) "

Does this include fan coop variants? That's what I play the most, otherwise I play classic.
Yes. To be clear, the three choices are supposed to be:

-There is a human player playing OL.

-There would be a human playing OL, but it is automated with a variant.

-The form of Descent that is designed to not have a human OL, but instead has activation cards, peril cards, loot track, etc.

Ignipes wrote:
Personally I'm completely not interested in coop variant. In fact I will refuse to play any purely coop game. For me gaming is about facing other players. No system will replace a person. Coops always comes down to optimization, learning how the system works and working around it. Completely not fun to me. I always think about coops as collective solitaires.
I voted out all factors as unimportant except the last one.
Also, some of suggested answers seams completely odd to me. "No fun when the Overlord wins"? Seriously? I think it's almost the other way around. 4 players jointly beating one guy - disputable whether it's fun or not. If that guy wins - this is indisputably a reason to congrats.
I said "almost" because I do think that it is fun to win as heroes. It would be totally not fun to me, if the only thing that heroes could beat was the game. But I already said that.
Generally, who wins is a secondary matter to me. For me Descent is all about emotions and epic situations that come up during play. And they are possible only with real people. Trying to surprise and being surprised back and forth is what I love in this game.


It's been said that if you've got 4 v 1, when the 4 win, only 1 person is upset. When the 1 wins, 4 people are upset. I don't subscribe to this thinking, I enjoy the competition regardless of the final winner- I was just citing it as a possible reason that people avoid having a human OL.

Milarky wrote:
how can not getting players be an uniportant factor
even getting 1 player is 100% important for solo play :-)
getting 4+ is proving very hard in my parts.


That choice is there to tease out whether you would play competitive descent if you could, but you play solo/coop because you can never get enough people.

Thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dawid
Poland
Cracow
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
zaltyre wrote:
It's been said that if you've got 4 v 1, when the 4 win, only 1 person is upset. When the 1 wins, 4 people are upset.
This is odd thinking to me. In most games there usually is only 1 winner and rest are losers. If loosing was to upset me I would probably not play at all.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
alex
France
flag msg tools
Your "reasons" are really coop oriented.

I like to play the overlord more than heroes, for many reasons,
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dawid
Poland
Cracow
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rugal wrote:
Your "reasons" are really coop oriented.

I like to play the overlord more than heroes, for many reasons,
What does it have to do with anything?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Silidus
Canada
Ontario
flag msg tools
I think he means that;

Playtime- Cooperative is shorter
No one wants to play Overlord
No fun when the Overlord wins

Are all asserted to be true statements by your polling options, ergo, it is no fun to play the overlord, and it's either something you consider, or not.

Better options may have been;

Playtime
More Fun to Play
More Fun to Win (as Heroes)
More Fun to Win (as Overlord)

etc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Silidus
Canada
Ontario
flag msg tools
Ignipes wrote:
zaltyre wrote:
It's been said that if you've got 4 v 1, when the 4 win, only 1 person is upset. When the 1 wins, 4 people are upset.
This is odd thinking to me. In most games there usually is only 1 winner and rest are losers. If loosing was to upset me I would probably not play at all.


This.

The fun is in playing the game, not winning the game.

If the people you play with only have fun if they win, then this is not the game for them...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wholeheartedly agree. However, having met people like that I am curious whether or not that is a common mindset- it looks like it is not so far.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Rockwell
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As my gaming collection grows, I am not finding the time to play descent as much as I want. I don't want to hijack the thread, but I have a question...

I love the length of the base campaign. Are the co-op campaigns as long? Intro quest, 3 ACT 1 quests, Interlude, 3 ACT 2 Quests, Finale...

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
papagamer72 wrote:
As my gaming collection grows, I am not finding the time to play descent as much as I want. I don't want to hijack the thread, but I have a question...

I love the length of the base campaign. Are the co-op campaigns as long? Intro quest, 3 ACT 1 quests, Interlude, 3 ACT 2 Quests, Finale...

Not nearly. It can take 1-3 hours per quest in the regular style, depending on how your group plays. On the other hand, an entire co-op adventure takes only a few hours. You download the rules from the FFG page, and this includes the encounter layouts- each one is much smaller than a traditional "encounter," usually just a tile or two. I included that question in the poll specifically because the co-op adventures might provide some a way to get Descent on the table when time is a big constraint.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Danish
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
zaltyre wrote:
I included that question in the poll specifically because the co-op adventures might provide some a way to get Descent on the table when time is a big constraint.


This is one of the main reasons I really like the coop modules. In addition to supporting short time periods, they allow some nice experimentation for trying different heroes in similar situations (though not identical). Doesn't replace the other options but I am really glad they released the coop modules and hope to see more!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, it is nice to use the coop modules to test out hero/class combinations, as you get multiple objectives (kill, search, test, race) in a shorter period of time even than playing epic play quests. Still, now that there is a slightly more significant number of responses, it's fascinating that only about half of the voters primarily play with a human OL.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.