Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Yggdrasil» Forums » General

Subject: Wanting to get this game... but is it "solved" ? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Sea
Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur
Wilayah Persekutuan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe "solved" is an extreme word to use, and co-ops are generally puzzles waiting to be "solved", but somehow this game strikes me more on it than the others.

My main concern is that due to how the deck is set up , you can somewhat count how many times you need to push back a certain enemy and you can ignore it afterwards. Another issue I seemingly see is how a common strategy (namely the blue/white strategy) has been "discovered" and it somewhat render certain actions obsolete, certain enemies less taunting than others (hence less prioritized in almost every game), and a certain "pattern" to play has been formed (somewhat). Now sure you can argue that one doesn't need to follow the strategy every time, or the problem is solved if you don't keep track of how many times an enemy card has turned up, but in that case I'm not playing optimally anymore.

Now I haven't play the game before, and have only done my research because I've been thinking of getting a co-op game, so I might be drastically wrong. However I'd like to hear opinions from those that have played the game before. So, anyone?




p/s : Another co-op that I "think" suffer from the problem is Atlantis Rising, which in sense of optimal play, the "champion" would be better off fighting the navy every turn, and it is almost "mandatory" to get all your atlanteans ASAP, resulting in somewhat a "pattern" of playstyle.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mathue Faulkner
United States
Austin
TX
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As far as the deck set up is concerned, it is set up that way be design. It allows for more strategic play. Having said that, when we play and add Angry God and/or Ragnarok cards, we also randomly remove other cards (and don't look at what specific cards we're adding). This prevents any card counting, and makes the game more interesting imo.
9 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luca Iennaco
Italy
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmb
You may count cards drawn, but it is only a little help because:
-) Niddhog moves foes as well;
-) you lose with too many foes beyond certain tresholds, not only when one reaches Yggdrasil.

I wouldn't say this game is "solved". It possibly has less variance than others, but there's still enough to enjoy several plays.


(...and maybe you should stop reading strategy articles before playing a game and try to explore it with your mates, during play. )
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Hackman
United States
Champaign
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I had the same concerns after I played my first game. Even though I lost I could already see that certain enemies would need to be pushed back more often than others and that certain actions were usually the way to go.

I played pretty much every day for two weeks. And it was always fun. Using different gods changed the strategy a bit. An early Ragnarok card could mix everything up. A game with lots of Jormungand cards early plays out differently than one without. I've won by focusing on the black and green islands and by focusing on blue and white.

I do think that once you get the hang of it, it's good to put the angry enemy cards in randomly. The rules say you should remove a corresponding enemy card for each angry enemy, but I prefer removing them randomly so I don't know if I have won until very near the end.

Short answer - Yes, you will quickly develop strategies that make sense from game to game, so there's definitely not that blank slate feeling you get with some other co-ops where you have no idea what random situations will arise. However, with one little tweak to the deck I'd say you get just as much replayability as you would out of the more random co-op games like Defenders of the Realm or Pandemic.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sea
Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur
Wilayah Persekutuan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mfaulk80 wrote:
....when we play and add Angry God and/or Ragnarok cards, we also randomly remove other cards (and don't look at what specific cards we're adding). This prevents any card counting, and makes the game more interesting imo.


This does seem to solve the "set deck" problem somewhat. Thanks!


Luke the Flaming wrote:
You may count cards drawn, but it is only a little help because:
-) Niddhog moves foes as well;
-) you lose with too many foes beyond certain tresholds, not only when one reaches Yggdrasil.

I wouldn't say this game is "solved". It possibly has less variance than others, but there's still enough to enjoy several plays.


(...and maybe you should stop reading strategy articles before playing a game and try to explore it with your mates, during play. )


Hahaha can't help it! I always do a lot of "research" before purchasing a game, since I'm the person buying all the games for my group I need to make sure that it stands well with them and warrant for many plays,since I don't get to buy games often..... that and because I spend too much time on BGG whistle
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
SoCal
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
genesyx wrote:
Maybe "solved" is an extreme word to use, and co-ops are generally puzzles waiting to be "solved", but somehow this game strikes me more on it than the others.

My main concern is that due to how the deck is set up , you can somewhat count how many times you need to push back a certain enemy and you can ignore it afterwards. Another issue I seemingly see is how a common strategy (namely the blue/white strategy) has been "discovered" and it somewhat render certain actions obsolete, certain enemies less taunting than others (hence less prioritized in almost every game), and a certain "pattern" to play has been formed (somewhat). Now sure you can argue that one doesn't need to follow the strategy every time, or the problem is solved if you don't keep track of how many times an enemy card has turned up, but in that case I'm not playing optimally anymore.

Now I haven't play the game before, and have only done my research because I've been thinking of getting a co-op game, so I might be drastically wrong. However I'd like to hear opinions from those that have played the game before. So, anyone?




p/s : Another co-op that I "think" suffer from the problem is Atlantis Rising, which in sense of optimal play, the "champion" would be better off fighting the navy every turn, and it is almost "mandatory" to get all your atlanteans ASAP, resulting in somewhat a "pattern" of playstyle.
To help ease some of the certainty, you could go further and prohibit examining the discard pile (in some of my groups, they really "abuse" this where when there are a handful of cards left, we pretty much know whether or not we won).

Another thing would be to also prohibit looking inside the bag, ever.

As far as the term "solved".... I've stopped playing certain competitive games b/c playing against human players STILL didn't offer enough variety and excitement.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew MacLeod
Canada
London
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
And when, exactly, are we playing Churchill again?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
genesyx wrote:
Maybe "solved" is an extreme word to use, and co-ops are generally puzzles waiting to be "solved", but somehow this game strikes me more on it than the others.

My main concern is that due to how the deck is set up , you can somewhat count how many times you need to push back a certain enemy and you can ignore it afterwards. Another issue I seemingly see is how a common strategy (namely the blue/white strategy) has been "discovered" and it somewhat render certain actions obsolete, certain enemies less taunting than others (hence less prioritized in almost every game), and a certain "pattern" to play has been formed (somewhat). Now sure you can argue that one doesn't need to follow the strategy every time, or the problem is solved if you don't keep track of how many times an enemy card has turned up, but in that case I'm not playing optimally anymore.

Now I haven't play the game before, and have only done my research because I've been thinking of getting a co-op game, so I might be drastically wrong. However I'd like to hear opinions from those that have played the game before. So, anyone?




p/s : Another co-op that I "think" suffer from the problem is Atlantis Rising, which in sense of optimal play, the "champion" would be better off fighting the navy every turn, and it is almost "mandatory" to get all your atlanteans ASAP, resulting in somewhat a "pattern" of playstyle.


In all seriousness, I'm getting close to 100 plays of Yggdrasil [!!!!!], and I can say that it is "solved" for me...but only at the lowest levels of difficulty. At the highest levels? It's still one awful nightmare for me......zombie
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fenrir Jarl
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ive played only 2 times, and at first game was really hard (we realized we focused on wrong enemies). In second game player playing thor was responsible for killing giants and collecting runes, and after unlocking all runes game was won (even there were 10 tunrs left, we knew that we cant loose).
But we played only on basic difficulty.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew MacLeod
Canada
London
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
And when, exactly, are we playing Churchill again?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jarlfenrir wrote:
Ive played only 2 times, and at first game was really hard (we realized we focused on wrong enemies). In second game player playing thor was responsible for killing giants and collecting runes, and after unlocking all runes game was won (even there were 10 tunrs left, we knew that we cant loose).
But we played only on basic difficulty.


Gotta love your name!
2 
 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.