Recommend
46 
 Thumb up
 Hide
31 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Warhammer: Invasion» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Warhammer Invasion Review from New LCG/CCG player rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I do not have much experience with these types of card games. This isn't really because I have actively avoided them. My wife and I bought some Magic cards 5 years ago or so and tried to get into the game but it never really launched past our initial investment. There were so many cards available and the deck building was intimidating to us.

When Blue Moon came out we thought that it would be a good way to get the CCG feel without the huge money sink that Magic could be.Unfortunately it did not go over well. We played the base box set several times but it just didn't click. I can't really describe what it was we didn't like about the game, it was more of a combination of everything about it that just didn't seem to feel right.

So it was with some reservation that I picked up Warhammer Invasion. My wife and I love fantasy. She reads R A Salvatore, Robin Hobb, Tolkien, etc and we play Everquest 2 together. I have always been fascinated with the Warhammer Fantasy Universe. I tried the tabletop game in the past, I play Blood Bowl, and I enjoy reading the roleplay books. With all these things working in my favor, I figured that Warhammer Invasion had to be a good choice.

What really sold me on the card game was the tutorial on the Fantasy Flight Games website. I was especially intrigued by the idea of defending three areas and the total lack of "land" cards prevelant in other games. The "land" cards are what killed my enthusiasm for Magic because I felt like it added too much randomness into the game. Having a card you really wanted to play but couldn't get on the board because you haven't drawn enough land cards to play it was very frustrating. I could be totally off base and completely missing another level of strategy in this other card game but it was something that both my wife and I perceived to be an issue.

Since others have already covered the components, I won't go into great detail here. If you have ever seen other Collectable or Living Card Games, these are standard fare for the genre. The lack of borders on the cards allows the artwork to be a bit bigger and most of it is quite good. The one thing I will say is that the fluff on the cards is quite funny. My wife and I would say the phrases in funny voices for a chuckle while playing. The Orcs are especially humorous and as trivial as it sounds, the fluff added to the theme and increased our enjoyment of the game.

Speaking of theme, this game has it in spades. With the three areas of the Capital Fortress to defend, the units, the support, and the tactics, it really feels like you are waging war against another player. The rich background and different play styles make this an engaging game that allows you to suspend your disbelief for a few moments and really get into the game. My wife called the Dwarven Fortress Mithral Hall and her Dwarven Hero, Bruenor Battlehammer (sure it's the wrong lore, but who am I to argue with her when she is having fun?). I guess what I am trying to convey here is that you needn't be familiar with the Warhammer Universe to get enjoyment out of the game.

How does it play? Really well. Again, I am not a CCG veteran so I am unfamiliar with many of the tactics used in other types of games but in Warhammer Invasion most of the choices in strategy are logical. Early in the game you have to decide if collecting more resources or drawing more cards is more important to you. If you have some high cost cards in your hand, it may be worth placing units or buildings in your "kingdom area" (allows you to use hammers on card to draw more resources at the beginning of each turn) in order to draw more resources next turn. Alternatively, it may be a better idea to put it in the "quest area" in order to draw more cards. Later in the game you have to decide if it's worth completely taking out a portion of the wall (leaving your opponent only needing to defend two areas) or damage multiple areas until you are sure you can completely destroy both in one turn. The tactics cards are great and there are lots of GOTCHA moments where a player who is seemingly doomed will come back for the victory. Another thing I really like is that you aren't wasting a good card if you lay it somewhere other than your battlefield. That unit can also defend that area when attacked. This really opens up more options and it keeps the game from becoming a straight out slug fest with units smacking each other until one side wins.

The four races in the game all play differently. The Empire is very mobile and can move units from one part of their capital to another. They can also deflect attacks. The Orcs smash things really well but aren't as good at building up their capital. They also fight even better when some of them are hurt. The Dwarves are the masters of defense. And Chaos are masters of corruption and quickly striking undefended areas. You can't use the same tactics with different races. If you try to fight head to head playing chaos, you are going to lose. However, corrupt their units and you bypass their defenses to destroy their wall.


Overall Impressions- 9/10

I really like the game. We played 5 games in a row last night and I plan on playing again tonight. The unique victory conditions and the subtle strategy that can bee employed make playing an enjoyable experience. My wife is thrilled that we have a two player game that she not only likes but can also whip my butt at. It's fast, fun, and relatively inexpensive. If I can have this much fun playing straight out of the box set I can only imagine how much fun it's going to be to get some new cards.

The only negative thing I can say about the game is that I am concerned about the durability of the cards. They aren't cheap or overly flimsy, it just seems that since this is something that I plan on playing quite a bit, it will probably be a good idea to sleeve the cards.

Also, some of the cards have phrases that leave me to believe there is going to be a 3 or 4 player option. I am curious to see how this will work. If anyone has more information on multiplayer (more than two) games, please let me know.
35 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Good review - you hit on some cool things that I failed to mention in my reviews. It's such an addictively fun game - that's one thing that really surprised me and it's the reason I knew I was playing a great game. When I unintentionally end up playing a game WAY past my preferred bed-time, that's when I know it's a really fun game.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Horton
United States
Birmingham
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great review!

I currently have the Game of Thrones LCG that I play with my wife and was on the fence about whether to get this one or Call of Cthulhu to try out next.

Your review has convinced me to settle on Warhammer: Invasion.

Hopefully Cthulhu wont devour me for my lack of devotion. goo
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the review, Ben! I hadn't given any serious consideration to picking this one up, but when a fellow wargamer says it's good...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
yosemite wrote:
Thanks for the review, Ben! I hadn't given any serious consideration to picking this one up, but when a fellow wargamer says it's good...


Well I play Wargames for a different reason than I play Euros or Ameritrash. I am a big history buff, so recreating historical battles and trying to put myself in the shoes of that commander is a satisfying experience for me. I like to try to face some of the same decisions that he had to make and see if I can perform as well as my historical counterpart.


Warhammer Invasion on the other hand, is played for pure fun. Sure there are some elements of strategy and tactics in the game, but this is no World in Flames or ASL. I would call it a medium weight game though because of the deck customization possibilities and some of the more advanced strategies that can be employed.

The mechanics are simple enough to learn in 10 minutes but there is enoguh going on to keep you thinking for a long time.


Most of all, I enjoy the social element of playing games. For me, a chance to sit down face to face with my wife or friends and spend time joking, laughing, and just generally not taking anything seriously is quality time. This game allows me to do that and as a result I enjoy it quite a bit.


Ben
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Embark wrote:
yosemite wrote:
Thanks for the review, Ben! I hadn't given any serious consideration to picking this one up, but when a fellow wargamer says it's good...


Well I play Wargames for a different reason than I play Euros or Ameritrash. I am a big history buff, so recreating historical battles and trying to put myself in the shoes of that commander is a satisfying experience for me. I like to try to face some of the same decisions that he had to make and see if I can perform as well as my historical counterpart.


Warhammer Invasion on the other hand, is played for pure fun. Sure there are some elements of strategy and tactics in the game, but this is no World in Flames or ASL. I would call it a medium weight game though because of the deck customization possibilities and some of the more advanced strategies that can be employed.

The mechanics are simple enough to learn in 10 minutes but there is enoguh going on to keep you thinking for a long time.


Most of all, I enjoy the social element of playing games. For me, a chance to sit down face to face with my wife or friends and spend time joking, laughing, and just generally not taking anything seriously is quality time. This game allows me to do that and as a result I enjoy it quite a bit.


Ben


And the FUN is what gaming is all about for me!!! I'm thinking I'll just have to give this one a go.

Thanks again!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Bowler
United Kingdom
Stockport
England
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great review, I've been waiting for this for months now and its still not out in the uk. I was worried that I wouldn't like it because I don't like traditional CCG's like Magic. The only one I really like is the Star Wars TCG from Wizards of the Coast. So I'm glad that someone else who doesn't like Magic said so many good things about this game
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi again, Ben! Just a quick update...after reading your review, I checked out the video on the FFG site. THEN I toddled off to my FLGS and picked up a copy!!! Looking forward to getting this to the table!

Thanks again for a most convincing review!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dan,

Thanks for the update. Hopefully you enjoy the game.



Ben
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Freddy Dekker
Netherlands
Friesland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

I was under the impression this is a 2-4 player game, four nations four players, seems logical enough.

But from your review I understand it's not.

You are supposed to pick one nation to play with?
Or maybe even pick two nations, allthough I must amdmit that might make things mightely confusing.

Good review, ever more convinced I should buy this one.

Allready changing my 'to buy' list dropping other games to put the money, saved doing so, to better use.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi, Ben! Played three games with a friend Friday. My Dwarves won all three against his Chaos!!! (REALLY unusual for me to win that much!) We played one game yesterday in which my Empire narrowly lost to his Orcs.

I REALLY enjoy the game!!! Many thanks for helping get me started on it!

By the way...in your experience, are the Dwarves especially tough or Chaos sort of wimpy? Or are those first three games an anomaly?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damon Stone
United States
Dallas
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dwarves are tough, they have staying power. Chaos is not a direct confrontation race. Chaos is insidious, corrupting units and attacking where your opponent is weakest. If they try and match unit for unit on the battlefield against Dwarves of Orcs they will get smashed. They should build up their KZ and QZ fast outdrawing their opponent and with enough resources to start executing their strategy. I'm not suggesting leave the Battlefield undefended, but it is not nearly as important to build up until you are drawing 4-5 cards and pulling in 5-7 resources.

What gets most people in the wrong mindset are cards Like Savage Gors (Cost 2 Loyalty 1 Power 1 HP 1 - Battlefield. This unit deals 2 additional damage while attacking if you have 2 or more developments in your battlefield.) and Bloodthirster (Cost 8 Loyalty 5 Power 5 HP 8 - Damage cannot be cancelled. Forced: After your turn begins, each player must sacrifice a unit in this corresponding zone.) and that they are "Destruction" aligned. The assumption is they are a raging battle faction, ultra aggressive. This isn't true. These cards are best played after you have established a very strong presence in your other zones.

Actually Savage Gors sort of enhance the best strategy for you, deploy units in your Quest and Kingdom zones while dropping a development each turn in your battlefield. When you get two of them in there that is when you start dropping Savage Gors who suddenly are ridiculously damaging for their cost forcing your opponent to start paying a lot of attention to defense. Then you can corrupt a unit or two and the Gors can get in and deal damage directly to their capitol. If you are drawing four to five cards a turn now you'll run across your other two Gors pretty quickly if not have an additional one already in hand.

They are a hard race to play because they require more management than the other races (though an experienced Empire player may argue that). You can't just "play a creature, attack your opponent, win the game."
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sagitar wrote:

I was under the impression this is a 2-4 player game, four nations four players, seems logical enough.

But from your review I understand it's not.

You are supposed to pick one nation to play with?
Or maybe even pick two nations, allthough I must amdmit that might make things mightely confusing.

Good review, ever more convinced I should buy this one.

Allready changing my 'to buy' list dropping other games to put the money, saved doing so, to better use.


It is primarily a two player game. There are supposedly some multiplayer rules in the works that allow more than two to play but I haven't seen or heard of anything official as of yet.


There are four races included in the box set. The game is designed a a Living Card Game. The concept is similiar to the Collectable Card Games like Magic the Gathering or Pokemon or any of the countless other games out there. The difference between the Living Card Game and Collectable Card Game is that in the LCG there is no blind buy in. There will be booster sets released in the future but you will know up front what cards they contain.

With the Warhammer Lore, there are multiple factions but they all pretty much fall in two catagories. Order (Good Guys) and Chaos (Bad Guys). With the Warhammer Invasion Cardgame it is possible to build your own deck that includes more than one faction, provided that the factions are from the same catagory (Order or Chaos). You cannot mix Order cards with Chaos cards to create a deck.

This box set is a kind of starter set. However, it is a good game on it's own and it's completely possible to play and enjoy many games without ever buying another card.


Ben
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
yosemite wrote:
Hi, Ben! Played three games with a friend Friday. My Dwarves won all three against his Chaos!!! (REALLY unusual for me to win that much!) We played one game yesterday in which my Empire narrowly lost to his Orcs.

I REALLY enjoy the game!!! Many thanks for helping get me started on it!

By the way...in your experience, are the Dwarves especially tough or Chaos sort of wimpy? Or are those first three games an anomaly?



Dan,

From a new player's perspective I think the Dwarves are the easiest faction for people to get their feet wet with. Chaos seem a little underpowered but I have managed some success. What I have done in games I won was completely abandon any defense of my battlefield and concentrate on building up my Kingdom and Quest zones early in the game. Once I start drawing in excess of seven cards a turn and have a lot of resources coming in, I work on corrupting their defending units and striking quickly. You cannot stand toe to toe with the other factions or you will lose units. It's been a few days since I have played, so I can't remember names of cards off the top of my head. The way I played was wait until I knew I could destroy a portion of their wall in one or two turns. Corrupt their defending units and strike hard and fast.


Ben
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gary Bradley
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Scotland
flag msg tools
Quote:
I was especially intrigued by the idea of defending three areas and the total lack of "land" cards prevelant in other games. The "land" cards are what killed my enthusiasm for Magic because I felt like it added too much randomness into the game. Having a card you really wanted to play but couldn't get on the board because you haven't drawn enough land cards to play it was very frustrating.


This comment intruiges me. And it's not the first time I've heard it. Personally I think it is coming from people who did not take much time learning how to build Magic decks properly. How to caluclate the number of lands based on mana curve and deck size. How to make the correct mana curve in the first place. How to get the colour distribution correct when your deck is multi-coloured, and so on. i.e you just curse the shuffler and bad luck, and damn the game rather than actually opening your mind to the idea it might be your fault and that you can do something about it.

These are the people who build a 100-card deck with 35 lands and an average spell casting cost of 3.5, and then condemn the game as too luck-based because they keep getting mana-screwed!! It's THEIR fault, and a tiny bit of research would tell them how to fix it!!

Personally, if I could just play any card in my hand face down as a land....WOW that would totally dumb down the game!! It would remove all consideration for colour-screw and land-screw from Magic deck-building. On turn 4 I'd know for a fact I'd have 4 resources? Yuck. That would definately make Magic a lesser game.


Anyway, I disgress (as usual). As a Magic-head one thing that worried me about this game is the fact that you can easily influence the number of cards you draw each turn. In Magic, it is a general truth that the player who draws the most cards wins. So how does this game mitigate against that kind of thing? Or prevent it being an issue?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I guess it's a good thing this isn't a Magic Review then huh? Did you miss the part where I said that deckbuilding was intimidating and I didn't know how to do it?

I am not as familiar with Magic, so I can't really answer your question. I do know that it's relatively easy to manage how many cards you draw each turn. Simply place units or buildings in your Quest Zone. You add their hammers to the number of cards drawn. The caveat is that if you run out of cards to draw, you lose the game.

Ben
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks, Ben! From my experience with Dwarves in other Warhammer-based games like Blood Bowl, I know they're usually TOUGH. Thanks for the suggestions for Chaos. They make a lot of sense! I'll be trying that approach SOON as this game is going to see quite a bit of table time...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ruvion .
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
GaryB wrote:
...It's THEIR fault, and a tiny bit of research would tell them how to fix it!!

Personally, if I could just play any card in my hand face down as a land....WOW that would totally dumb down the game!! It would remove all consideration for colour-screw and land-screw from Magic deck-building. On turn 4 I'd know for a fact I'd have 4 resources? Yuck. That would definately make Magic a lesser game.

Anyway, I disgress (as usual). As a Magic-head one thing that worried me about this game is the fact that you can easily influence the number of cards you draw each turn. In Magic, it is a general truth that the player who draws the most cards wins. So how does this game mitigate against that kind of thing? Or prevent it being an issue?


I do not understand how playing a card face down each turn as a resource would dumb down down the game...right after you mentioned that only a tiny bit of research would be needed to fix it. It probably wasn't a smart aspect of Magic to begin with if only a tiny bit of research was needed to fix it, if you ask me. Concept of "Land" is only a quirk of MtG for better or for worse...I suspect dropping it for something else does not make the game dumber, just as keeping it does not make the game any smarter...but it just wouldn't be Magic for Magic fans without it, I figure.

To answer your question regarding card advantage...I can understand how card draw is all important in the Magic environment where you only draw one-a-turn barring card effects. I'm no expert, but Invasion seems to make card draw just another resource among many other resources competing for your attention. Albeit it is a very important resource when all things are considered; however, it is the juggler that juggles ALL of these elements best who wins this game, not just one or two. Hope that answered your question.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damon Stone
United States
Dallas
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not sure if I should reply to you. We seem to be at odds so much.

I lead off with this not to try and insult you, but to explain how you come across to me, in hopes that my assumptions and biases presented up front will allow you to read what I write next understanding that I'm not trying to be an ass nor confrontational, though it may (and sad to say probably will) come off that way.

Mana screw is a fact of Magic. No amount of deck manipulation can remove this aspect of the game unless you go so far as to reverse the effect and you are drawing plenty of mana but not enough of the other cards to win the game. You can run a statistical analysis which will tell you what probability you will draw a given card based on how many times it appears in your deck and you can extrapolate from there how much of each color/type of land you need to optimize your deck. None of that means you will see the required amount of mana in the minimum number of turns you need it in order to play the cards in your hand. Luck of the draw (otherwise known as randomization and probability of draw) will always allow for you to loose a game based purely on your inability to play what you have in your hand.

When I talk about mana-screw that is what I mean. I don't mean not drawing any land, I mean not drawing enough to play the cards I have in an optimal fashion that will keep me in the game. There are too many deck builds in Magic where if you are essentially out of the game for two turns you might as well scoop.

It is incredibly frustrating for a newer player to loose repeatedly in this manner until they understand how to properly optimize their deck. It still sucks after you are an experienced player to watch your deck crap-out knowing that statistics are on your side and switching any other card for a mana producing card would through off your draw ratios. The seasoned Card Gamer recognizes this as part and parcel of the medium. That this is that luck factor every deck has and sometimes you are the fly and sometimes you are the windshield. You have done everything you can to remove this piece of randomness the game interjects.

But what if the game helped you? What if it was further minimized? What if you had a guaranteed amount mana every turn as decided upon by you on a turn by turn basis? What kind of decks could you create? What kind of decks could your opponents create? It would change the fundamental way decks are built and it would change the game itself into a completely different kind of strategic vehicle. Now imagine that card that guaranteed you a certain amount of mana, also had other stats and text which could greatly effect the game. Do you go for the high mana producer with lower stats and little to no additional ability, or do you go for one with a minimal (or even 0!) mana for a much stronger, even game altering effect?

What if every card in your deck could be used for mana or for its stats and text? HOw would that change your deck building? What new decisions would you have to face? Suddenly you have easy access to mana but at what cost? Did you just convert one of the cards you will need to win a few turns later into mana to put up a defender? When you can only have a limited number of a specific card in your deck each time you turn a card into a mana producer you suddenly alter the probability of drawing that card later.

What happens when 2/3 or your card types can be used to provide mana AND still have their text and stats available, but doing so locks them into a limited defensive position?

The thing that Eric Lang's games have over Magic is they increase the amount of in-game decisions each player has to make. It is no longer about bringing in the most refined deck (or someone else's net-deck) but on the player and their ability to constantly manage their resources and the decision tree. Each card played is now controlling or influencing another aspect of the game.

I really enjoyed Magic for years. What "ran me off" wasn't the game itself. I could deal with the various card abilities, game restrictions, and deck builds just fine. It was watching a 13 year old play with $300 decks while I was paying rent and making car payments while putting myself through college and losing to vastly inferior players with more money... and the poor sportsmanship that started cropping up at local game nights not to mention city and regional tournaments. In short the secondary market and immature players (or in some cases as old or older than I but without the social skills God gave a badger) are what reduced the amount of fun I was having. So I created a limited environment league manned by my friends and some of their friends and not open to anyone else. I lasted another year or two and just finally left it behind when I moved.

I found AGoT after I moved back and have loved it since. CoC while I'm not nearly as wild about, I do enjoy the few games a year I play of it (a friend is deep into it so when we hang out it gets played). Warhammer:Invasion is swiftly becoming my newest love and may earn a spot next to AGoT.

I have met some awesome people through Magic, and some truly wonderful experiences. I don't hate the game, quite the contrary, like my first love I will always think of it fondly. But I'm a different person now with different tastes. Things that I thought were the norm with Magic and the way things should be, I started to see as design choices, and in some cases flaws. I don't expect you to see them as flaws, you are still in love. But my girlfriends laugh may sound grating to you but to me it is endearing and brings a smile to my face.

HAving easy access or control over your "mana" does not damage a game at all. It does not make it any less inherently fun to play, nor does it make it easier. It simply makes it different. That may be a difference you dislike, which is fine, but that is your opinion.

As to drawing additional cards, what makes drawing the most cards more likely to ensure victory in most games is that it is almost always asymmetrical in access and implementation. Because everyone can draw a massive amount of cards if they choose to play that way, it greatly mitigates the imbalance. Also because investing so heavily in your QZ means you are by necessity leaving gaps in your BZ and/or KZ you will find very quickly your hand full of cards you can't afford to play, or possibly worse kicked out of the game before your massive draw has been able to pay dividends.

If you haven't played the game yet I encourage you to do so. I think the game will surprise you and make you start to question some of the truisms that you have from Magic.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Conley
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Life is too short not to live it up a little!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dormouse wrote:
Dwarves are tough, they have staying power. Chaos is not a direct confrontation race. Chaos is insidious, corrupting units and attacking where your opponent is weakest.

They are a hard race to play because they require more management than the other races (though an experienced Empire player may argue that). You can't just "play a creature, attack your opponent, win the game."


Thanks for the tips, Dor! Much appreciated! I likely stated that the Dwarf vs. Chaos games were our first fumbling attempts with the game. Clearly, there's much more to explore in terms of strategies...and I DO like THAT in a game! Then there will be the expansions to absorb...

Thanks again! Good stuff!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brad Miller
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dwarves are insanely tough. I get down a Contested Fortress, and two Keystone Forges, and snipe at my opponent until I can get a Mountain Brigade or one of my heros or those nasty Troll Slayers. Don't defend, cancel 2 damage a turn and heal two as well. Nasty. Orks can get the job done with WAAGH and some of their other supports, but so far Chaos and Empire have just gotten PWND!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gary Bradley
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Scotland
flag msg tools
Quote:
What if you had a guaranteed amount mana every turn as decided upon by you on a turn by turn basis? What kind of decks could you create?


Boring and predictable ones in my experience. There was/is less variety if you play Magic that way. Incidently this comment *is* from experience. There is a Magic variant that allows you to play one card per turn face down as a land able to produce any colour of mana of the face-down card. Hence it removes both mana and colour screw from the game.

It's a very casual format, but I did play it quite a lot many years ago with flatmates who were "mana screw haters" and would not play the real game because of mana screw. It's abysmal in comparison to the real game, as they eventually came to realise when I gradually managed to force them to play it the correct way and taught them to build decks.

I'm a rogue deck builder and despise using netdecks to enter tournaments. Yet despite buiding my own creations, I'd say I flat out lose due to mana screw (or flood, which is usually equally fatal) only very very rarely indeed (and win because of it just as much). I don't even consider mana screw a negative aspect of the game as it happens so infrequently in the grand scheme of things. In fact I don't even think about it till it comes up in threads like this - it's SO not an aspect of the game.

But then I took plenty of time and read plenty of the books available that help with deck building, statistical analysis and so on. In short I taught myself to play the game and play it well, over about 12 years*

* I used to play Contract Bridge to competition level, but found Magic had far more depth, and switched back in the late 90s. I'm also pretty old (pushing 50) which makes me kinda stand out at Magic tournaments.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Embark
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GaryB wrote:
Quote:
What if you had a guaranteed amount mana every turn as decided upon by you on a turn by turn basis? What kind of decks could you create?


Boring and predictable ones in my experience. There was/is less variety if you play Magic that way. Incidently this comment *is* from experience. There is a Magic variant that allows you to play one card per turn face down as a land able to produce any colour of mana of the face-down card. Hence it removes both mana and colour screw from the game.

It's a very casual format, but I did play it quite a lot many years ago with flatmates who were "mana screw haters" and would not play the real game because of mana screw. It's abysmal in comparison to the real game, as they eventually came to realise when I gradually managed to force them to play it the correct way and taught them to build decks.

I'm a rogue deck builder and despise using netdecks to enter tournaments. Yet despite buiding my own creations, I'd say I flat out lose due to mana screw (or flood, which is usually equally fatal) only very very rarely indeed (and win because of it just as much). I don't even consider mana screw a negative aspect of the game as it happens so infrequently in the grand scheme of things. In fact I don't even think about it till it comes up in threads like this - it's SO not an aspect of the game.

But then I took plenty of time and read plenty of the books available that help with deck building, statistical analysis and so on. In short I taught myself to play the game and play it well, over about 12 years*

* I used to play Contract Bridge to competition level, but found Magic had far more depth, and switched back in the late 90s. I'm also pretty old (pushing 50) which makes me kinda stand out at Magic tournaments.


You are comparing apples and oranges. It seems to me that you and I are approaching this game from completely different angles. I am looking for a fun way to spend 30-45 minutes with friends and family. You seem to be looking at the tournament scene. To be honest, you strike me as an elitist on some holy crusade to enlighten the unwashed masses.

I do not lke Magic. I highly doubt that anything you say will ever change my mind. There are numerous reasons that I am not a fan of the game. I didn't list all of them because (and this is a shocker here) this isn't a review of Magic.

When I want to play a game that requires studying books to glean enough information on the best way to play, I will play ASL or World in Flames or one of the many wargames that are sitting on my shelves.

This isn't that serious. It's a fantasy themed card game that gives me an excuse to sit at my kitchen table and enjoy some time with friends.

I encourage you to continue to enjoy your card game of choice. However, I ask that unless you have something to contribute that relates to my review or Warhammer Invasion, that you stop posting in this thread.



Ben
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damon Stone
United States
Dallas
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have to say Gary that playing Magic with alternate rules is never going to give the experience of a game that is designed with these factors in mind from the beginning. FFG's Call of Chtulu game has a very interesting decision tree because of this feature and the cards were designed with this possibility in mind, the whole game was. As an end result it plays far better than Magic does with this grafted on mechanic.

Have you played it?

Have you played this one yet?

Are your opinions on this game and the other LCG's from personal experience over weeks, months, and years of playing or based on assumptions?

These are honest questions. Your opinions differ so far from those who have played CoC and AGoT, and even W:I, even those who did not like them, that I am trying to figure out if you are really that much of an iconoclast or if you are operating from a theoretical standpoint.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Seachrist
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Embark wrote:

From a new player's perspective I think the Dwarves are the easiest faction for people to get their feet wet with. Chaos seem a little underpowered but I have managed some success. What I have done in games I won was completely abandon any defense of my battlefield and concentrate on building up my Kingdom and Quest zones early in the game. Once I start drawing in excess of seven cards a turn and have a lot of resources coming in, I work on corrupting their defending units and striking quickly. You cannot stand toe to toe with the other factions or you will lose units. It's been a few days since I have played, so I can't remember names of cards off the top of my head. The way I played was wait until I knew I could destroy a portion of their wall in one or two turns. Corrupt their defending units and strike hard and fast.


First of all, good review, Ben. I really wish the MtG discussion would have remained elsewhere, and it's not here through any fault of your own.

In your followup comment, I think you nailed the essence of playing Chaos. What looks like good battlefield opening speed is better served as multiple power symbols in the kingdom and quest zones.

I'd actually disagree about dwarves though--I'd go with orcs as the most straightforward, and since they're as strong as they are, if the opponent isn't immediately going for resource and defense buildup, the orc newb player gets the healthy glow of a few victories to help formulate good first impressions.

My friend Bob started off playing dwarves against another friend playing orcs--the dwarves seemed underpowered to him at first until he figured out how to strike a balance between resource management and defense. Ultimately, the orcs won a few more, but the dwarves started making a healthy comeback in later games.
 
 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.