Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Battles of Westeros» Forums » General

Subject: Played a few more games now rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andy Watkins
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I very much like this game, and most of the mechanics work well. I have 2 criticisms, one more serious than the other.

Minor criticism - MORALE i have yet to play a game where it makes the slightest difference, it is hassle to try and keep remembering to update and it is pointless. NOT a well implemented mechanic

Makor Criticism - HEROES INDESTRUCTABILITY Commanders with a capture rating of 2 are fine. Those with 2 and tough or 3 are far too difficult to capture, and those with capture rating 4 basically have a force field which makes them indestructable. They are not "Heores" they are "Gods" which is stupid and really annoying. This latter factor is really putting me off the game.

Does anyone have any sensible house rules for toning down the stupidly indestructable heroes.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tycho Terziev
Bulgaria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
(sigh) here we go again...



2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian McCarthy
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
andywatkins1963 wrote:
I very much like this game, and most of the mechanics work well. I have 2 criticisms, one more serious than the other.

Minor criticism - MORALE i have yet to play a game where it makes the slightest difference, it is hassle to try and keep remembering to update and it is pointless. NOT a well implemented mechanic

Makor Criticism - HEROES INDESTRUCTABILITY Commanders with a capture rating of 2 are fine. Those with 2 and tough or 3 are far too difficult to capture, and those with capture rating 4 basically have a force field which makes them indestructable. They are not "Heores" they are "Gods" which is stupid and really annoying. This latter factor is really putting me off the game.

Does anyone have any sensible house rules for toning down the stupidly indestructable heroes.


As for the first point, I may implement a house rule that moves morale every time a unit is forced to retreat, just move the morale track 1 space for every hex retreated. That would be in addition to normal morale changes.

I also think I want to try a rule where retreats go directly away from the attacker's hex, rather than toward a certain side of the board. That would give the attacker more control over where potential retreats might happen.

I see what you're saying about the heroes/gods. Robb Stark particularly is a blatant offender as he can zip around the board as a cavalry unit and has a capture rating of 4 as the King in the North.

It also bothers me that Maege Mormont and Gregor Clegane have command ratings of 1, meaning they can only play one leadership card per turn. This severely hampers the fun for me and I really don't see the point. None of these commanders are so poor leaders. I would raise Maege to a command limit of 2 and Gregor to a 3, as he was reputed to be one of the most battle worthy commanders in all the books.

As for the Gods point, I would cap off all capture ratings at 3 if it bothers you. I'm already planning to give Karstark a capture rating of 3 and take away his toughness, since that ability is frequently amazingly better than just having a capture rating of 3, to the point where he just owns Addam Marbrand every time.

So yeah, you're not alone. You can find other examples of these types of discussions popping up both here and on the FFG forums for the game. I think we're only going to see more of these types of complaints as more people experience more aspects of the game.

I love this game and I think that we the fans should rally behind making this game more balanced, interesting and fun.

Thanks for starting the thread. Ignore the people who are saying that these comments have been done to death. The more people that know about these problems and the potential fixes, the better chance that this game will have a lasting fan base.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Gaskill
United States
Bridgeton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't have a problem with these issues but as been suggested
it easy enough just to "House Rule"anything that makes the Game work better for you.

As to the Commander Ratings they seem to fit whats in the books,
but if you feel otherwise just change them to a level you & your opponent agree on.

OD
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian McCarthy
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
UlyZed wrote:
KenToad wrote:

Thanks for starting the thread. Ignore the people who are saying that these comments have been done to death. The more people that know about these problems and the potential fixes, the better chance that this game will have a lasting fan base.


They have been done to death.

I've been more than civil. Saying I should be ignored is pretty rough. There's nothing wrong with having different points-of-view.

I believe the default should be to give the game the benefit of the doubt in the early stages.

Tom Lehmann commented in the Race For The Galaxy forums that it's much more constructive to frame these issues as 'I'm having problems with this, does anyone have a method for dealing with it?' rather than 'this is broken, the game should be fixed'.

You don't agree with me, but I hardly think you've proved your complaints are the gospel truth.

There's nothing wrong with variants. I love the Catacombs system but think the game sucks as is. However, its a far cry from latching onto anyone who has a minor issue and recruiting them to a cause.

I think its worth presenting the notion that there are fans of the game who believe the design and development is sound at this stage, and even if you don't agree, that there are certainly at least two schools of thought around here.



The part of my comment that you quoted was more directed at the comment right before yours. Sorry, I thought that was more clear. You had constructive information to add. The previous poster did not and was obviously trying to shut up the original poster by feigning some kind of irritation with redundancy, which I don't believe this thread is.

I really value your comments. That doesn't come through sometimes over these wires, but I think you've presented your argument clearly and I believe I understand your reasoning. Further, I think we both want this game to succeed and be the best it can possibly be. I think we have different ideas of how best to help that happen.

So, in response to what you're posting, I would like to ask you if you've had the chance to play any of the scenarios with leaders with a capture rating of 4 yet?

Here's something fun to try: take 6 dice and roll until you have at least 4 of any combination of red flags and Valor hits. It took me 26 tries to do that. Once or twice I got three or more flags, but remember Robb Stark is a red cavalry unit, he will be able to run right back 3 hexes and attack again.

This feels completely out of flavor with the books, where every Hero is all too mortal. These guys in A Song of Ice and Fire aren't Aragorn or Legolas and that's part of what makes the reader identify with them.

In the Game of Thrones series, we know that even the most high and mighty pathetically fall down and die. And it would have been totally silly if Robb the King in the North had been presented as this kind of unstoppable force on the battlefield. We would hear reports of archers saying "Don't bother firing arrows at that guy. We might make him retreat a little, but really he's beyond us."

Why should these characters be virtually indestructible on the battlefield in this game?

That's why I and the original poster are saying that something's irritatingly wrong. And that's why I suggested that the max capture rating should be 3.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Shields
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
...If you play this game thread as an all-in bloodbath, you aren't doing it justice.


Ken Toad's comments have value to me, as is the thread subject. I thought he was not only civil, but respectful & appreciative of the game. I enjoy his query of the game structure as part of his commitment.

I don't know many gamers who bring a game to life as much as Ken Toad and I want to know what he thinks.

Ken Toad - if you want to try out some house rules, I hope you give them a whirl & report back.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
badalchemist
United States
San Antonio
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe the Lannisters will get some special
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Musician
units that score additional hits toward capturing Robb.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
andywatkins1963 wrote:
I very much like this game, and most of the mechanics work well. I have 2 criticisms, one more serious than the other.

Minor criticism - MORALE i have yet to play a game where it makes the slightest difference, it is hassle to try and keep remembering to update and it is pointless. NOT a well implemented mechanic

Makor Criticism - HEROES INDESTRUCTABILITY Commanders with a capture rating of 2 are fine. Those with 2 and tough or 3 are far too difficult to capture, and those with capture rating 4 basically have a force field which makes them indestructable. They are not "Heores" they are "Gods" which is stupid and really annoying. This latter factor is really putting me off the game.

Does anyone have any sensible house rules for toning down the stupidly indestructable heroes.


Great points, succinctly made.

A friend and I have noticed these as well in our plays and we have toyed with a couple ways to deal with them—none of which we have implemented pending match plays through all of the scenarios:

1. SEPARATE MORALE TRACKs: Each player has their own track. When you eliminate enemy units or capture enemy Commanders, the enemy loses morale. When you give yourself a boost with a Rally chit, your Morale goes up.

Since there is a three-spot cushion between the joined tracks as is, maybe give each player one or two additional spaces for the own track to represent that initial buffer. Or try it with the buffer left out altogether.

2. HERO HITS: When you attack a lone Commander and inflict hits but not enough for a capture/kill, then you put one "hit" marker on the Commander's card. Whenever he is attacked again, this hit marker is added to the total number of hits rolled in the next attack. If that doesn't finish him, then another marker goes on his card which is also applied to the next attack, and so on.

So the more times he is attacked and hit but not captured/killed, the greater the likelihood of an eventual capture/kill. That means your mightiest commander can wade into the fray for awhile, but they can't stand up to relentless assault when the rest of their unit has melted away.
4 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian McCarthy
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Brady,

Thanks for weighing in. The hero hits idea is brilliant! I think that will increase the tension in this game considerably. You can even use objective markers to show the hits, throw wolf markers down on the Lannister leaders and vice versa, so you don't even need any extra bits.

I don't like the morale idea, though, seems to be a big change for very little payoff. Plus, I think it would need some balancing as to how many points each player should have and whether it will be a rout or not. I also think it's cool how you can use flag tokens to increase your morale and decrease your opponent's morale. It's like a battle cry or something. I imagine Braveheart.

I also think the morale track is not really broken. I would like to see retreats changed so that there is some better payoff for the attacker, but morale in general is not affecting my enjoyment of the game. It is weird how it doesn't seem to matter at all in most games, though, unless someone forgets to do the resetting thing leading to a rout. Morale's effect on tactics has been trivial at best, so far.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
KenToad wrote:
I don't like the morale idea, though, seems to be a big change for very little payoff. Plus, I think it would need some balancing as to how many points each player should have and whether it will be a rout or not. I also think it's cool how you can use flag tokens to increase your morale and decrease your opponent's morale. It's like a battle cry or something. I imagine Braveheart.


We haven't tried it ourselves, so I can't speak to how well it would work, either. But I noticed that with a joined track, your morale goes up when the enemy's goes down, and vice versa. It makes sense that morale for a force can fluctuate up and down, but it doesn't make sense to me that they are directly related in that way between two opponents.

KenToad wrote:
I also think the morale track is not really broken. I would like to see retreats changed so that there is some better payoff for the attacker, but morale in general is not affecting my enjoyment of the game. It is weird how it doesn't seem to matter at all in most games, though, unless someone forgets to do the resetting thing leading to a rout. Morale's effect on tactics has been trivial at best, so far.


A while back, I toyed with the idea of a d10 for BattleLore and making blue and greens easier to hit, the Westeros does it, too. The difference was that instead of three green hits, my special die had two green hits and a green flag.

The reason being that green troops may be green, but they aren't valorously stupid. They know they can't stand up to the shock of cavalry or of heavy infantry chopping them up. They'd probably run first. A green flag that only affects Green troops shows that they wouldn't stick around for a slaughter if they could run from it first.

Depending on the situation, running (green flag retreats) can also be a problem for Green Troops. Against infantry, you may get away. Against cavalry, you'll probably get ridden down as they run after you.

I think you and Andy bring up good points. While I think a new game should be given a fair shake as-is without changes, I also think house or special rules between experienced players are a good thing if it brings them back to the table for more plays.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian McCarthy
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alex,

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I'll be really curious to see what you say after Scenario 7, particularly what you think of Brady's house rule of having leaders get a single wound if a hit or multiple hits is scored against them in an attack, thereby reducing the number needed to capture them by 1 for each wound on successive attacks against them.

It would likely still take 4-5 attacks to take down a capture 4 guy. But at least then there's some point to attacking that commander's unit, besides just the random chance of rolling flags.

This also makes sense to me thematically, as the Mountain has more guys to defend him initially and would even be more difficult to capture than Robb, although neither would be impossible, particularly after multiple attacks.

I'm not certain where you're coming from with accepting the Mountain's command limit of 1. He has a pretty good set of leadership cards to add to the deck. Why can't he use them better? One of his cards is a mass attack where he orders his and every unit adjacent. Yes, leadership cards can be used by any commanders, but they are supposed to be at least thematically linked to the specific commanders that added them to your deck.

No commander, IMO, should be so limited, not even Maege. If they're so bad, why even be a leader?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tycho Terziev
Bulgaria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am sorry if i offended someone .It wasn't a conscious effort to shut the OP.It was me venting my frustration.I admit that i am prone to impulsive posting and i apologize for that.Great interpretation Alex btw!


5 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Watkins
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi all,

Thanks for all the posts, I think in the end this post was worth making for two reasons.

1) I do want to keep the pressure up on Fantasy flight to fix any issues with what is a very good game

2) and FAR more important Brady came up with what i really wanted. An excellent house rule that fixes the commander indestructability problem. I am going to implement that house rule immediately.

thanks guys, really helpful.

Andy
PS Remember on the morale track all I was saying was it was a bit pointless, it doesn't break the game in any way at all. The uncapturable commanders i think does. Did until Brady's fix anyway

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian McCarthy
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cool, I'm going to implement Brady's leader house rule, too. I like the idea of a leader being super strong but taking some hits along the way. Can't wait to stick some arrows in the King in the North. I think that may make the game a perfect 10 for me.
 
 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.