Recommend
61 
 Thumb up
 Hide
26 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Corporate Nazgul rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chris Farrell
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lord of the Rings: Nazgul is Wizkids' latest boardgame foray into licensed property, after last year's excellent but badly produced Star Trek: Expeditions. In Lord of the Rings: Nazgul, the players play Sauron's most notorious servants, fighting the Free Peoples and killing their heroes, all the while angling to become the Top Nazgul. The box says the game is "semi-cooperative", but make no mistake – like The Republic of Rome, there can be only one winner, whether it be one of the players or the game system. All of which sounds intriguing, but the game is an epic fail. It's not clear what exactly the game is trying to say, it executes badly on its murky vision, it's not faithful to its source material, it's boring, and it's ugly.

In games everything flows from system design, so that's the easiest thing to look at first. The game takes the view that from the Dark Lord's perspective, everything is a battle. So far it's a promising premise. There are three simultaneous series of campaigns: against the Rohirrim, against Gondor, and against the Ringbearer (where the metaphor starts to break down, but never mind). In pursuit of these goals, it turns out that Ringwraiths are the striving middle managers of Middle Earth, building up their departmental fiefdoms with teams of Orcs, Trolls, Mumaks, and other various and sundry resources which they then decide how they wish to commit to the Gantt charts of conquest in service of their personal promotion opportunities.

This brings us to the one clever bit in the game, the battle cup. Once a Ringwraith has chosen which battle to commit himself to, he decides how many of resources to risk. You throw a cube in the cup for each (red for Mumak, green for Trolls, and black for Orcs, plus one special Nazgul cube to represent themselves). The game system decides how many Free Peoples to throw in – blue for soldiers and white for heroes. Additionally, the hero cubes are assigned an identity from a deck of 60 named heroes. Sometimes you get the vaunted Aragorn or Gandalf which will mean dizzying special powers, pain, and continued undeath for your troubles; sometimes you get the decidedly less fearsome Gondorian Captain. There doesn't seem to be much thematic rhyme or reason to how this happens, and the systems are confusing, so let's not dwell on it and move on. Once the forces are arrayed, the contents of the cup is settled and fixed. Each Nazgul can then in turn pick cubes (usually 1-4) from the mix based on his tactics rating. Picked cubes do damage to the other side (so if you pick a blue Gondorian foot soldier cube, the Nazgul forces suffer one point of damage; if you pick a special Nazgul cube, you do damage to the good guys equal to your current attack rating). Sometimes you can redraw if you have the right power card. Then, you throw the cubes back in and the next player repeats the process until everyone has had one try.

While there is a truly unwieldy amount of chrome welded on top of it, this is the core idea of the game, and the only real resolution mechanism it has. So what kinds of player decisions does it drive? Since Lord of the Rings: Nazgul is a "semi-cooperative" game, the game system itself is a player. At the level of each battle, the Nazgul players want to win the battle (which grants some VPs to everyone for showing up and serves to defeat the game system) and want to kill heroes (which are a more significant source of personal VPs, and your only lever against the other Nazgul present). So, you win the battle by drawing enough friendly cubes to inflict enough damage to wipe out all the defending heroes and soldiers. That damage is absorbed in strict priority order: first the walls, second the soldiers, lastly the heroes from weakest to strongest. So the only real opportunity you have is to be the person who inflicts the right damage at exactly the right time to wipe out heroes. Too early, and you kill soldier blocks, which personally gets you nothing. Too late, and there is nothing left, or only heroes too powerful to kill. Given the inherently chaotic way in which heroes appear and cubes are drawn, this is an extremely tenuous and oblique idea on which to base a game.

Still, at least it's simple and not too hard to grasp. Throwing cubes into the cup alters the mix in a straightforward way with some subtle implications, and there are a few – not many, but a few – choices in how to go about it. The problem comes in the truly vast infrastructure that is built on top of this. Every turn there are 7 distinct secret-and-simultaneous bids in which your Nazgul fills out his department by adding troops, getting actions cards, calling on the aid of the Witch King, altering turn order, leveling himself up (this is a WizKids game, so it's got clix figures in it whether it needs them or not – so your Nazgul's capabilities change over the course of the game), and so on. Every turn a number of side quests pop up with various benefits and costs – often reinforcements that you have to intercept or they will add to the difficulty of a plot line. There are mechanics for giving the players some control over committing Free Peoples Heroes to battle that are somewhat opaque. All this is far more chrome than the underlying game mechanisms can accept. At the end of the day we're just choosing a quest to tackle, then adding cubes to a cup and drawing them out. The number of cubes and number of draws rarely gets that large – a truly gargantuan battle might see 25 cubes in the cup with 5 draws of 3 or 4 cubes, but the players have huge incentives to make sure that never happens. More normal, once the game picks up some tempo, is 8-12 cubes with 3 draws of 3. This just isn't a very large canvas on which to paint. All the stuff on the table weighs the game down with baroque details – especially since the font sizes are again ridiculously small so you can't actually see anything – without making it interesting or thematic. It's just tediously repetitive.

The real killer though is that not only is the game boring, it does real violence to the story it is trying to tell, or at least the one it is theoretically based on. The Nazgul were Sauron's executioners. They did his bidding, killing his enemies, leading his armies, even doing his diplomacy. They were slaves to his will. They didn't try to undermine each other with inter-office petty politics. Roman senators, yes. American senators, yes. Nazgul, no. When Sauron wanted something done, he sent orcs. When he wanted it done right, he sent men. When he absolutely, positively, had to get something done, he sent his trustiest servants, the Nazgul. You could perhaps buy that to the extent the Nazgul had free will, they strove to outdo each other – Beowulf style – in Sauron's service. But the idea that they were constantly actively trying to sabotage each other is ludicrous.

This is just the beginning. Since this is a WizKids game, we get clicks. At the start of the game (pre-Weathertop), the Nazgul are puny, exuding no terror and unable to face down a Gondorian Captain and a couple companies of Soldiers. As the story goes on, they grown in power as they connive for favors from Sauron. I never realized Nazgul were all that interested in personal growth.

And then the details of the various game plotlines ... the Nazgul in the game personally take charge of the assault on the Rohirrim, which of course they never did. They command Mumaks, which they never did. Worse than that, the game doesn't even require them to deal with Minas Tirith at all. Even on the hardest levels, you can knock over Rohan, then hunt down the Ringbearer, and call it a day. Was not Sauron keenly focussed on Gondor, greatly fearing the One Ring might end up there? (UPDATE: it turns out we made a significant rules error. Even after you've re-aquired the One Ring, you need to complete all three quests – you just can't do Mount Doom until you've finished off Rohan or Gondor. This still doesn't make any sense, it just doesn't make sense in a different way. It also makes the game a lot harder. Good luck. My recommendation: you might want to play 2-3 turns to get the feel for the game, then restart. Because of the oblique nature of the cup resolution system, it's easy to get critically behind in beating the system in the first turn or two).

It is possible for a game to stray from the strict parameters of its source material if it can remain true to the story's emotional content. We won't get too worked up about quirky details if the big picture is clear. For example, we know from Tolkien's description of Weathertop that Gandalf alone could hold off all 9 Ringwraiths, at least for a time, and that Glorfindel was terrifying enough to cause them to retreat into the flood. We would forgive the game if, in the interest of giving the players some hope to feed their desperation, it made Gandalf somewhat less fearsome. But Lord of the Rings: Nazgul can't deliver the emotional punch, so we are left to look at this stuff.

Finally, I'll just say a few words on presentation. The Nazgul's sculpts are hard to distinguish (in the game's one concession to theme that perhaps should have raised questions about the wisdom of this entire endeavor), which leads to both significant playability problems and an inability to form an emotional connection as everyone is constantly trying to figure out which piece is theirs. The clix serve to make game-critical information much to hard to see. Font sizes are too small. The cards are not of high quality and the image grabs seem oddly murky. The board is a mess, with the quest tracks hard to identify and follow in addition to being just plain physically unattractive. All it all, it's not quite the disaster Star Trek: Expeditions was in the presentation department, but if that's your standard, that's bad.

As you may be able to tell, this game really bothered me. It strikes me as a version of a game which might have just emerged from its first playable playtest. It's nowhere near to being publication worthy. It needed more play testing just to figure out what it was trying to do – I don't think it's even ready to enter the phase of cleanup, polishing, and pruning.

Avoid.
60 
 Thumb up
2.50
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hugh G. Rection
United States
La Mesa
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cfarrell wrote:
Gantt charts of conquest


laugh

Careful now, that might be the next big euro game at Essen 2012.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cfarrell wrote:
The box says the game is "semi-cooperative", but make no mistake – like The Republic of Rome, there can be only one winner, whether it be one of the players or the game system.

The real killer though is that not only is the game boring, it does real violence to the story it is trying to tell, or at least the one it is theoretically based on. The Nazgul were Sauron's executioners. They did his bidding, killing his enemies, leading his armies, even doing his diplomacy. They were slaves to his will. They didn't try to undermine each other with inter-office petty politics.


It seems to me that it's you who is doing violence to LOTR, not WizKids. If you insist that for everyone but the "winner", losing to the Free Peoples (i.e., personal annihilation) is exactly the same as triumphing over them but not being the Nazgul Lord at the end (i.e., vast power but not quite being #1 among your fellow dark servants), then of course you're going to get athematic results, because you're ignoring the relative value of the different possible outcomes.

Quote:
But the idea that they were constantly actively trying to sabotage each other is ludicrous.


So, don't do that!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Farrell
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK, let's set the value of a personal win at 1, and a game where the system wins (and everyone loses) at 0. We can then pick how to value a game where the system loses, but you don't win, somewhere in there (the rules sort of suggest you can pick one of the game's difficulty levels based on how much infighting you want to see, and so how the group might set that value).

I originally had a whole long paragraph in there about this, but it ended up not being that interesting. The game in evidence really only supports the players setting that value low-ish. Not too low; if you put it at 0 or .1 I don't think the game works either, it's too easy for someone who is way behind to skew things towards the system. Regardless, too many of the mechanics of the game are designed around the direct player-to-player competition. The game gives the players a couple opportunities to cooperate, but mostly it gives them the tools to hose each other. Unlike Republic of Rome, the cooperative-competitive aspects here are not in balance, or open to some player interpretation. The mechanics and calibration of this game portray significant, direct, zero-sum competition beneath a veneer of cooperation.

Anyway, this game doesn't work on a lot of levels. I think much more could interestingly be written about how thematic games can work or not work depending on how you dial the values of various different sorts of wins – Friedrich is a good example of a game where if thematically-allied players don't set the dial to zero, the game doesn't work at all. Lord of the Rings: Nazgul is also a different game depending on where you set the dial, but I don't think the game will work at all at the extreme values.

I'll also mention at this point that a purely cooperative variant of the game is also included in the rules as a learning game. I can't see it would be all that interesting, because that's just not what the game is, but it is included.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thematically and to give the game the right flavor and motivations, I think you should set it at 0.99. But I haven't played the game so I admit I don't know how well it works in that case. But it can't be worse than playing Sauron's thoroughly corrupted and controlled servants as willing to help the Free People win so that the Nazgul can be destroyed.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kiren Maelwulf
Canada
Richmond
BC
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I've only tried this game once but it was really tedious, to an extent I'm not sure I can ever devote time to another play. I think what really got me, is after the grind to get through the game, which felt like an eternity (so maybe the games theme of playing a tortured undead does work?) the mechanic to bring the game to a close at Mount Doom seemed horridly random.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
someotherguy wrote:
And, really, intercourse the "theme." My interest in this box of stuff is in how good it is as a game; my interest in Nazgul is exactly zero.


Whether you can enjoy any game is going to depend, in significant part, on whether you can approach it the way it was intended. There's nothing wrong with not being interested in the subject of the game or being able to take that point of view, but if you can't then obviously you should know in advance that you won't enjoy the game, there's no point in even trying it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Ashton
United States
Elmhurst
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I really liked this review. You started with the conclusion, which, in an odd way, drew me in. I wanted to see you justify your opinion, which you did very well. Most reviews bury the conclusion at the very end, and I find myself skipping most of the text to just see what the rating ends up being.

I do have a couple of quibbles with your theme complaints, but I think you were generally right on. Very few derivative works get the feel of Middle-Earth right.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Mercer Island
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A pointer to a thread explaining what about the ST:E production is a "disaster" would be helpful to me. That way I could understand your context.

I'm ok with some deviation from the theme, since I'm only passingly familiar with the LotR source material. "Mumakil? What's a mumakil?" (Yes, I had to look it up when I first started reading about this game.) And I can be ok with bureaucratic cube-pushing.

The things I don't like about the game so far, based on reviews and previews, are:
1. I'm not interested in a semi-co-op with screwage
2. Unclear how well the pure-co-op rules work
3. Doesn't seem to support 2 players (even as a pure co-op)
4. Clix bases are hard to read and use
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek VDG
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The game isn't as "back stabbing" as you make it sound. After all, the Nazgul must work together to win.

Nazgul, in some ways, plays like Defenders of the Realm. The group as a whole is facing a threat and need to win as a group. Secondary to that, is "being the best winner".

So, there isn't (or shouldn't) be much sabotaging of the other players, but rather the attempt to optimize your own gameplay. You want to assign the order of cup draws so that you get to kill the heroes (rather than army cubes) for their VP. You don't want the other Nazgul to fail, or else you risk the entire group losing. As the player who took Saruman, you want to give other players the "easy" heroes that are worth less VP, and give yourself (assuming you can take them) the tougher heroes worth more VP.

Second ... the Nazgul do need to face Minas Tirith. It's a big (and tough) spot on the board in the Gondor campaign, with lots of walls, armies, and heroes. It is probably the most difficult location on the board (unless you count Mt. Doom, which is just heroes vs Nazgul). In order to win the game, all three campaigns must be completed. This means that the Nazgul *must* complete Minas Tiirth. So, I am not sure why you suggest Minas Tirith could be ignored.

Lastly, the game works just fine as pure co-op. If you don't like the "semi" part, ditch it and play pure co-op.

Notes:
1) 2-player doesn't work because there aren't enough Nazgul to be able to complete all the campaigns in time. You could easily play pure co-op with 2 players, each using 2 Nazgul.
2) Pure co-op plays just fine. It plays a little different, since there is no secret bidding. The game can still be tough to win, especially on the hardest setting.
3) The only thing I dislike is the lack of a 'storyline'. The Nazgul can work to complete any of the three campaigns (Rohan, Gondor, Ringbearer) at the same time. I think it would have been better, thematically, if they had to complete them in order. It seems a little odd to, say, have captured the Ringbearer (i.e. completed the Ringbearer campaign), yet still need to complete the other two campaigns. Game-wise it works, since you cannot win if you don't work on multiple campaigns at the same time (due to time pressure), but for a story-immersion reasons having a linear path essentially following the books/movie would have been more fun.

All in all, though, our group of 4 is enjoying the game. In fact, it was requested by everyone to play it again tomorrow night.
7 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Spezzano
United States
Geneva
IL
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great review.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Luub
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dvang wrote:
The game isn't as "back stabbing" as you make it sound. After all, the Nazgul must work together to win.
...
Second ... the Nazgul do need to face Minas Tirith. It's a big (and tough) spot on the board in the Gondor campaign, with lots of walls, armies, and heroes. It is probably the most difficult location on the board (unless you count Mt. Doom, which is just heroes vs Nazgul). In order to win the game, all three campaigns must be completed. This means that the Nazgul *must* complete Minas Tiirth. So, I am not sure why you suggest Minas Tirith could be ignored.

Oh, haha. We played it wrong. We made the crazy assumption that if you killed the ringbearers, you won the game; and the rules say you only have to finish one of the other tracks to go to Mt. Doom.

But it turns out you do have to finish all three tracks to win.

Now, I know people are going to say "well, you played it wrong so your opinion doesn't count", but honestly this makes the game worse. Instead of barely winning, we actually lost horribly. Which means that even the small amount of backstabbing we did engage in was far too much; you basically can't possibly win this game without total cooperation. Which just makes determining the actual winner even more totally random than it was the way we played it, if that's possible.

So this is a cooperative game that randomly assigns a "winner" at the end (unless everyone loses). I don't like cooperative games anyway, so I don't like Nazgul; but I also don't like overly-chromed games where the players never get to make any meaningful decisions based on actual information. So I don't like Nazgul.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
squonk wrote:
Which means that even the small amount of backstabbing we did engage in was far too much; you basically can't possibly win this game without total cooperation. Which just makes determining the actual winner even more totally random than it was the way we played it, if that's possible.


Again, you know, if you take the attitude that the Nazgul are all 99% winners even if they aren't the 100% winner, you would probably enjoy the game more. But you seem ideologically unwilling to do that.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Farrell
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow, ouch, you're right - you need to complete all the tracks. I totally misunderstood this, I somehow assumed once you captured the Ringbearer and re-aquired The One Ring, you were done. My mistake.

In which case, be aware: this game is hard And really long. It was almost intolerably long played to the completion of only two quests.

While admittedly somewhat embarrassing, this doesn't alter the substance of my review or my opinion, or give me any desire to try it again. The game still balances far, far too much on the narrow thread of drawing the right cubes at the right time, is repetitive, and is boring. It's still a-thematic, just in a different way.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Farrell
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
squonk wrote:
Now, I know people are going to say "well, you played it wrong so your opinion doesn't count", but honestly this makes the game worse. Instead of barely winning, we actually lost horribly. Which means that even the small amount of backstabbing we did engage in was far too much; you basically can't possibly win this game without total cooperation. Which just makes determining the actual winner even more totally random than it was the way we played it, if that's possible.


Actually, it's even worse than that. Again, you have to look at what the game is, what its mechanisms are saying. Nazgul is a cooperative-competitive game. According to its rules and marketing copy, the player with the most VPs wins. The game has blind simultaneous bidding. The game has you routinely dishing out damage to other players. The game has you torpedoing other players' quests by assigning them big, powerful heroes. You can play games however you want – you can play Here I Stand as a cooperative game, or Pandemic as competitive if that's how they work for you – but the essence of Lord of the Rings: Nazgul is competition. There is cooperation too, yes, but the mechanisms are competitive.

What I might complain about, with my more complete understanding, is that it makes it much too easy for someone who is not winning to simply torpedo the rest of the game. Since, as Josh points out, and as I allude to in the piece, points are essentially randomly given out, someone is going to be in a position where they know they simply can't win. Not just suspects, but knows. That person isn't going to find it very hard to sabotage the other players.

I think it would have helped if the rulebook had been more straightforward about the goals of the game (the rules really are terrible). If I suspect that what they really wanted was basically a collaborative game where one person is designated the extra-special winner, that might have been helpful. But honestly, that's some other game entirely, not the one they designed.

As I say, this game needed to figure out what it was trying to do.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien
Australia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bugger, I pre-ordered this based on the previous positive review which has since been updated to a not so hot review after their second play. Own fault as I had my doubts after reading the rules but I do love LotR and I liked the idea of drawing the cubes ...

So, any chance this would be playable solo? or failing that surely we can come up with an enjoyable variant?

Otherwise, my copy should arrive this week so if solo play isn't recommended and an enjoyable variant can't be made, anyone interested in a currently still in shrink copy - Buyer Beware
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Mercer Island
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I sure wouldn't sell a NIS copy yet. This review has several complaints:
1. Ugly (subjective)
2. Not true to the subject matter (not important to everyone)
3. (Maybe) way too hard (after one incorrect play??)
4. Extraneous mechanics piled on (after one incorrect play??)
5. Boring (after one incorrect play??)

It seems to me that this game (like many co-ops) is a race, but it's not clear that the reviewer played it with that mindset. It also seems to me that there are enough variables that it would take at least a couple (correct) plays just to really understand how it all works together.

I appreciate the review (and well-written negative reviews in general). But to me so far this review is merely a data point, waiting for additional data to either back it up or refute it. Of course, I like several games that many people don't (Vanished Planet, Bombay), so I don't believe everything I read anyway.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
steven riola

joliet
Illinois
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've bought a lot of games in the last fews years, but rarely have I broken open a game, read the rules, played through it three times then boxed it up and immediately put it on my trade list. (This was played as a 2 player for one game, and 2 games with 3 players. Table opinion was to literally throw it away or use it for the fire pit.)

It's going out for a trade next week.

I agree with most of this review, this was hands down one of the worst board games I've ever played. (personal opinion...)

Additionally, this has possibly one of the worst card stocks I've ever played in a game.



4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike McRoberts
United States
Lansing
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Love the game- Played co-op once and just barely lost (3 player)
Played 3 player semi-coop and won on T9.

Breakdown of meanness- what I recall...
I was able to sabotage one player with a card of power twice, keeping him from gaining favor once and VP on a second occasion.. He was alone for the first attack. Fighting along side my Nazgul during the second. He was player 2 and I player 3. With very few forces defending, I forced him to redraw cubes and not kill the defending heroes. He broke down the wall and killed 2 armies while I was able to then kill 2 heroes and take the VP and favor.
I was set upon by a very high ranking hero once, to keep me from victory points. I lost the battle and was forced to take damage and retreat with little to show for my effort.
On a 3rd occasion, I was able to play a face up hero(tree ent) to keep a player from taking out many weak heroes. The ents low value and strong defense protected several weaker heroes (Mery, Pippin, and Rohan soldier)

Throughout the 9 turn game, we attacked one another about 6-7 times. One player never did attack anyone- but did withhold aid on 2 occasions. I too withheld aid on two occasions. At other critical moments we gave full support to each other, just to beat the game.

One favorite aspect of gameplay was the turn order bid. Making another player attack first and take out a wall and a few troops was great, set yourself up as player 2 and kill heroes to gain VP and favor- very cool.
We also enjoyed the cup and cube pulling mechanic.

There is quite a bit of strategy to this game if properly played. We all found it very engaging as a Movie supplement. This is not loyal to the books. This is strictly a movie based game. Usually this is the complaint of LOTR games. Players wish that the books were honored more than the films.

I sadly, came in 3rd place- early in the game I failed to take the Pelanor Fields during 2 separate solo attacks. Lost to 1 army/1 hero on the first effort, and 0 army/1 hero on the second.(VERY BAD CUP DRAWS/LOW LEVEL NAZGUL COMBO) No VP- very few favor to spend after such failure. 3rd time a charm, but with help, so I had to share the meager VPs. The remaining turns, I did draw much better.

Scores- 32 winner, 26 second place, 24 me- Game was close, and you never know it the leader will complete his secret quest.

Sorry all- FUN FUN FUN GAME!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Andrews
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
peakhope wrote:
I sure wouldn't sell a NIS copy yet. This review has several complaints:
1. Ugly (subjective)
2. Not true to the subject matter (not important to everyone)
3. (Maybe) way too hard (after one incorrect play??)
4. Extraneous mechanics piled on (after one incorrect play??)
5. Boring (after one incorrect play??)

I take you don't realize he already pointed out playing it correctly made some of those points worse.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Mercer Island
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rigor Mortis wrote:
peakhope wrote:
I sure wouldn't sell a NIS copy yet. This review has several complaints:
1. Ugly (subjective)
2. Not true to the subject matter (not important to everyone)
3. (Maybe) way too hard (after one incorrect play??)
4. Extraneous mechanics piled on (after one incorrect play??)
5. Boring (after one incorrect play??)

I take you don't realize he already pointed out playing it correctly made some of those points worse.

I worded my Point #3 based on the reviewer's assessment of correct play, but I don't put much stock in a guess of how easy or hard a game is without having played it correctly. Point #2 (for those who care) is apparently more true when played correctly. I don't think #1 would be affected, and playing correctly might invalidate #4 and #5 to varying degrees.

The review may well be accurate, and it might make me hesitate before buying a copy. However, if I already owned a copy, I would absolutely play it myself before getting rid of it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
peakhope wrote:
However, if I already owned a copy, I would absolutely play it myself before getting rid of it.


Really? Even though one person on BGG doesn't like it?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien
Australia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Everyone has different needs. I loved epic board games (aka Civilisation) when I was young but these days I just don't have the time. I was willing to give this one a go if it was great but in these early days this one isn't looking so good. Over time I'll be surprised if it averages beyond a BGG rating of 7 - as always take those ratings with a grain of salt.

There is a new comprehensive review which sheds positive light on the game but I will still keep this one in shrink for now. Personally I don't really care that the Nazgul are sticking knives in each other’s backs. I am also willing to play a complete co-op but then you loose the bidding aspect. A hero jumping from one location to the next bothers me a bit but can be overlooked as you repeatedly get to curse their name. I am just not sure if pulling cubes (a mechanic I like the sound of) will be fun after 3 hours ...

I should read the rules again but how easy would this be to set up, play for one hour, pack up, and set it up again the next day?

Anyhow I am still on the fence but if it does ever see the table I will certainly leave my opinion here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Hinrickson
United States
Brooklyn Park
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
peakhope wrote:
However, if I already owned a copy, I would absolutely play it myself before getting rid of it.


Really? Even though one person on BGG doesn't like it?


Sorry dude, but anytime I accidently read one of your posts I get a headache. You don't debate issues to try to convince people to take your side on a topic, you debate in a fashion the trys to point out why someone is wrong (according to you).

Is your life really enjoyable at all?
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike McRoberts
United States
Lansing
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Played a third game- (Still fun) This time my 7 year old son played along as a Nazgul- came in 3rd of 4. He beat my friends wife. 27 points for me- I won only because I held on to 2 cards of power that award 2 VP each at the end of the game changing a tie at 23 points to a victory at 27.

Just showing again how this can be anybodys game. There were some cruel plays early on, but later we needed to work together to win in T9.

T6 and 7 we were losing at the last stage of Minis Tirith. 5 heroes were standing against us- we took a beating- lost most armies, lost many clix against Aragorn Gimli, Pippin and Farimir + others(after heroic call). Limited favor gained.

Played on Easy mode. FUN FUN!!! Try it out.
3 
 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.