Recommend
20 
 Thumb up
 Hide
33 Posts
Prev «  1 , 2  | 

BattleLore» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Difficult to learn, easy to master rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tarjei Aasen
Norway
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
toddrew wrote:
But, for example, saying that only 1/3 of the cards will affect a particular unit is inaccurate and misleading, tilting the perception of the game as more chance oriented than it truly is.
All right, so I will modify myself slightly. You are right that more than a third can affect one specific unit at one specific spot, but a large portion of those will be of the kind that moves only one unit (most of the tactics cards in their alternate use, for example) and is thus mostly useful in a "this-card-is-not-useful-so-I'll-use-it-up-quickly-and-hope-to-get-something-good" fashion and not in a "now-watch-my-master-plan-unfold" fashion.

A more relevant comparsion would be how many of the cards that can move two units of a specific type at a specific spot. If we are taking, say, a pair of blue infantry on the right flank, then there are between 15 and 20 cards that can do that (4x Attack Right, 3x Patrol Right, 2x Advance Right, 2x Surround, 2x Forward, 2x Blue Banners and then potentially BattleLore, 2x Foot Onslaught and 2x Counter Attack depending on the circumstances).

That's between one quarter and one third of the cards. Not impressive.

You can use more cards and just move a single unit, but that isn't likely to be especially good and in general you'd want 2+ units.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Rewoldt
United States
Loveland
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TarjeiAasen wrote:
A more relevant comparsion would be how many of the cards that can move two units of a specific type at a specific spot. If we are taking, say, a pair of blue infantry on the right flank, then there are between 15 and 20 cards that can do that (4x Attack Right, 3x Patrol Right, 2x Advance Right, 2x Surround, 2x Forward, 2x Blue Banners and then potentially BattleLore, 2x Foot Onslaught and 2x Counter Attack depending on the circumstances).
EDIT: had a bit in here that didn't make much sense, as I misread the post The next part was the same though:

But, this all gets away from the idea that if a player is counting on the next card drawn to be able to complete their plan set in motion, it wasn't very well planned at all. Sometimes this will be due to impositions and pressures placed by the opponent, but often, especially amongst greener players, it is due to ignoring the hand that is shaped during play and not taking those "recovery" turns and bolster position with a Scout play, then deciding which of the two cards drawn best builds ones hand in the effort of the "now-watch-my-master-plan-unfold" moments which permeate the game.
If one is going to depend upon those two blue units to do something particular useful, one should have in hand a couple of cards that will be able to order them.

Building offensive along the section lines is also prudent, as this greatly increases the likelihood that a particular card drawn will be a useful one.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tarjei Aasen
Norway
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, but the hand management isn't particularly strong in this game, since you might keep on drawing cards for quite some time without getting anything useful for you. So your "recovery" period might extend for longer than you can afford to.

Just because hand management is a mechanism involving tactics doesn't mean that every implementation of hand management mechanics is successful. Yatzy has hand management, but rarely do you see it toted is a game with a lot of interesting tactics because of the random factor.

There is a difference between being a short guy with a funny hat and conquering most of mainland Europe.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Rewoldt
United States
Loveland
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TarjeiAasen wrote:
Yes, but the hand management isn't particularly strong in this game, since you might keep on drawing cards for quite some time without getting anything useful for you. So your "recovery" period might extend for longer than you can afford to.

Just because hand management is a mechanism involving tactics doesn't mean that every implementation of hand management mechanics is successful. Yatzy has hand management, but rarely do you see it toted is a game with a lot of interesting tactics because of the random factor.

Which is why comparing BattleLore to Yahtzee in this respect isn't very helpful to anyone.

At this point we may be talking about very different experiences with the game, as I would find it very difficult to accept an argument that the hand management isn't particularly strong in this game. It is central to carrying out a successful battle plan. Are you suggesting that a player who simply plays the next card off the top of the deck has a similar chance of winning as a player who carefully constructs their hand and sets up a series of plays within that hand relative to the situations present upon the board? Because that is simply not the case.

If that is not what you mean by saying that the implementation of hand management mechanics are not successful in BattleLore, what do you mean by that comment?

EDIT:
Aha! Potential epiphany for me here: I think that the disconnect between what I am trying to convey and the frustration that some get from this game (and other C&C games) may be rooted in the desire to consistently be able to order specific units turn by turn. That is not the best way (or, in my opinion, a way at all) to tackle the situations presented upon the board. Rather it is to position ones forces in such a way that multiple options will be available in the following turns that will accomodate as many of the possible results of the current turn and opponent's turn which will occur in the interim. Depending upon specific units to stick around for that period and be available for the next turn one has is a bit shortsighted. Especially if lore is involved where the possibilities become even more varied.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Street Deacon
United States
Tennessee
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I'm still kinda new to this game but I love it. I agree with what others have been saying. You need to do some of the of the later adventures, and try the battlelore version with magic.

I also agree with you about the first adventure. I didn't like the first one either. My nephew beat the crap outta me with luck. Lucky cards and lucky rolls. I was the French side and he was the English. Per the rules, he goes first. He plays "Darken the skys". He has like 5 archers that get to attack twice, with my 2 best units (Red calvary) within range. With lucky rolls, he kills them both in a single turn. So before I even get to take my first turn, I lost my 2 best units, and my opponent is halfway to victory.

LOL, I don't remember much about the rest of the game, but I'll never forget that first turn he took. I remember I fought hard and took 2 of his units. Then on his last turn he took 2 more of my units (battered units with only 1 figure remaining).

LOL, but yea man, don't judge the game on that first adventure.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Moffett
United States
Toledo
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I found Agincourt to be especially interesting because of it's lopsidedness. The English historically won that battle and if the English player holds formation and gets some Green Banners or Darken the Skies the battle is over, just as history claims. However, as much as I dislike the French, they are the interesting army to play in that battle, precisely because of their disadvantage. Less command cards, heavy cavalry (their ace in the hole) starts in range of the English firing line and the French commander has to make as best use of his cavalry as possible (try to get it behind the forest and use it to flank) while trying to preserve and maneuver his infantry across the field. I found it fascinating and challenging. The second scenario was also good and I plan to try the third scenario tomorrow.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Gambrell
United States
Iowa City
Iowa
flag msg tools
I am new to Battlelore but I picked it up because I think the command card system is actually necessary to avoid people "solving" the system.

In my experience, most wargames are not chess. Chess cannot be solved. Combat, however, often can be "solved", meaning that in situation A, you should always do B. Often this is not apparent to novice players, but veterans will eventually realize that there are only really one or two viable responses to a given situation.

In a game where you have complete freedom to move your peices, you are always free to employ whatever game-breaking strategy might exist. It is an intellectual challenge to come up with this strategy, but once you have found it the fun quickly drains away.

The fun of Battlelore is that basically the rules are always changing depending on the command cards and lore cards you get, so you can't just employ the same tactics every time.

Also, the game plays VERY rapidly for a wargame. The #1 reason I cannot play Warhammer and other complex wargames is I can't find anyone who has 3-6 spare hours to play a wargame every week, and I don't really want to hang out at a gaming club. I think the OP kind of missed this point. It is probably the main advantage of the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
F. P.
Netherlands
flag msg tools
Lol @ Todd in this topic.
You rather nicely argumented your opinion there, i did expect a more appropiate answer from the OP since while you try to give arguments OP only answers with basicly: I do not agree with you this game is lucky! But i don't really give good points for it.

TBH i found it a bit weak after Todd makes multiple efforts to explain how and why he thinks this game is not that luck based which some good arguments. I think it's a bit disprecptfull if you only answer back with"Yeah whatever you are wrong, it's still luck" that isn't an argument it's an opinion and for your opinion you need arguments. If you have an opinion without any arguments well it's pointless than.


To add something, i know what the OP is trying to say. TBH i think your friends are just a bunch of whiny little....... I have a few friends who are the same(i played alot of competive online games) and hardcore boardgames. Now a long story short in my experience if people start to complain about luck they are not very good losers(but people who complain about luck rarely are). But more importantly usually they just fail to see the possibilties that the games gives them(experienced gamers or not), they fail to see the right way the game is played, the right "state of mind". Now i have third edition spacehulk and some more of my "hardcore friends(i call em the whiny lucky club)" don't like spacehulk because they think it's based on luck and luck plays the biggest part in the outcome. I think they are retards, everything you do up until that moment of the dice roll isn't luck.

Now again i totally get what you mean by to hard for casuals to luck based for pr0's. But maybe you need to introduce the game a bit better. As stated get into the right mindset or go play chess i guess.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Prev «  1 , 2  |