Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

A Touch of Evil: The Supernatural Game» Forums » General

Subject: How replayable is this game? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
jonathan schleyer
United States
Manhattan Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All,

I am getting very interested by this game. I was wondering how replayable it is in solo/2 player co-op mode?

Thanks for your advice!

Provence
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anders Kernel
Denmark
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmm...

I believe it is a very entertaining game with a lot of replayability. However it is first and foremost made for competitive gaming and secondly for cooperative. I think it shines the most with 3 - 5 players competing. I have played it solo about 5 times and lost the interest of playing it solo again (right now). I have played cooperatively 3 times with two players and we agree that unless you play with the scarecrow, it is too easy (the scarecrow is one of the 4 villains, and he puts the most time pressure on you).

I still think it is a great game and will play it for a long time and buy the expansions, but it can be too easy cooperatively.

Cheerio.
A
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Low
Australia
Footscray
Victoria
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Like LNoE, I find that replaybility drops when you've got games with fixed scenarios/villians. In this case, there are 4 villians.

Sure, the replaybility comes via playing it co-op or competitively or playing the advanced game (which everyone should do).

Ultimately, once you know the villian's 'weaknesses', it will a matter of just wandering around to tool up on investigation points, buying good equipment (silver shot, musket etc) and then smacking down.

Having said that, the game isn't overly hard to play so I don't mind replaying it if I want a light brainless dice-rolling 'Talisman-style' romp.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Merchant
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I pre-ordered AToE after become addicted to LNoE (thanks for the GH expansion Shawn!) but I wasn't won over by this game.

Relative-to-LNoE: passivity and "unseen" nature of the villain, the lack of "plot" diversity, the sense of a random walk around the board, the near-zero** influence of players over what happens to the village elders and, frankly, a "who cares" in letting your character die (KO'd), and a "who cares" in defeating the villain in the showdown.

To me the board is too "flat" in that there is little zonal advantage (eg. in LNoE bad guys south you head north). I think the problem is the villain cannot unduly influence the game board. I wonder if someone could think of a adversarial variant where one player could control the villain?

** Note: I know heroes can investigate secrets and accuse before a showdown but it hasn't so far had much of an influence.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jonathan schleyer
United States
Manhattan Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So would you all recommend LNOE vs ATOE?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jess Newman
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alexmerchant wrote:
I wonder if someone could think of a adversarial variant where one player could control the villain?

I think a variant where someone can play a villain is a fabulous idea. I think there are a few reason's that FFP didn't make the game that way, though:
1. It would seem half-baked, like a rethemed version of LNOE, with one player controlling a different set of monsters.
2. It might overshadow LNOE, as it would basically be the same but with more variety.
3. As it is, this game fills a valuable niche: it's a shorter, simpler version of Arkham Horror with a different style. Some would say it still has all the problems of AH, but really it adds a competitive mode, which is nice.

I do agree with you that a playable villain would add a lot, and probably ramp up the excitement, too. I just think that FFP made the right choice by making a different game than just remaking LNOE with more b-movie monsters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jess Newman
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
provence wrote:
So would you all recommend LNOE vs ATOE?

zombie
At this point, I would recommend LNOE, as it has a lot of fan-made scenarios on the Geek, some of which are as good as those in the game (try bodhiwolf's "LNOE the movie" and "Adam & Eves"), as well as the "Stock Up" supplement, two free web scenarios, and the Growing Hunger expansion, which all make LNOE one of the most replayable games you could possibly own. I've played LNOE about twenty times, and I'm neither bored nor have I even played all of the scenarios I've downloaded and printed.

As far as AToE, I only bought it three days ago. I have played it four times since buying it, though, once against each villain. Three of those games were co-op, to really get a hang of it, and I can say that that is by far an inferior way to play compared to competitive. The villains have nice variety. The overall components are better, nicer to look at. It's fun to play, but not as quick as LNOE as there is more going on. (it really is Arkham lite, but there are still a lot more things to remember than in LNOE) It's not really the party game that LNOE is, it's more of a game for fans of cheesy old horror movies or people who like Arkham Horror but don't always have 4 hours.

So I say get LNOE and wait for some more fan-support, web content, or expansions to come out for AToE. Then, when you are a certified Zombie Overlord, get AToE.
 
 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.