I have heard a lot of people say that the game is too easy and needed “Heroic” mode to be challenging. I would agree that sometimes it is too easy, but having played the game primarily as 2-player I didn’t feel there was a need for a Heroic mode. Ultron Expert was a particular bane for us and it felt we had 30 or 40 fails before we actually beat him. I watched videos of folks claiming it was an easy game only to find critical play mistakes in nearly every video I watched.

There are a lot of strong players are the forum here so I hypothesized that the disconnect had to do with multi-player vs solo play. Mathing it out in my head it seemed that when the game is easy (Rhino/Risky Business), the game will be four-times as easy in multi-player. However, when the game is hard (Ultron expert) it will be four-times as hard in multi-player.

Is my gut perception correct? Am I just a bad player? They say, “the proof is in the pudding”. So I decided to create a challenge to see if my gut could be backed up by observable data (at least from my own perspective). So here is the challenge I created…

First to keep things streamlined between games I decided to build a deck for each hero and test it a little in solo to make sure it played decently. I decided I would have no more than 4 decks with a single aspect, and no less than 2 decks with each aspect (once we got Dr. Strange). Black Widow, Dr. Strange, and Hulk would be added to the random rotation on arrival provided I could win at least once each against Rhino and Klaw expert. The following are the aspect pairings I went with…

• Ms. Marvel/Justice
• Spider-Man/Justice
• Black Panther/Justice
• Black Widow/Justice
• Capt. America/Leadership
• Iron Man/Leadership
• Capt. Marvel/Protection
• Dr. Strange/Protection
• Thor/Aggression
• She-Hulk/Aggression
• Hulk/Aggression

Once the decks were decided, my son and I would progress through each Villain (except Wrecking Crew) for each module with a random multi-player pairing (9 matches for each villain). If the game was misplayed, we would toss it out and play again.

In Corollary, for the Solo side I would play each Villain-Module twice so that my solo inexperience could catch up (ie. 18 matches per villain). The way this would work is that I would chose a random hero and play Bomb Scare. Then win or lose I would choose a new random hero and play Bomb Scare again. I would then play MoE with the same hero. Then I would get a new random hero and play MoE again, followed by Under Attack with the same hero. Repeating the process through Power Drain.

I have now completed all the solo plays, plus all the multiplayer plays through Ultron Expert and a few Risky Business plays. We will continue to collect data through the end of Mutagen Formula (which wil probably be delayed once we get Red Skull). Here are the results (all expert plays)…

• Rhino Solo (15 Wins – 3 Losses) vs Rhino Multi-player (8 Wins – 1 Losses)
• Klaw Solo (13 Wins – 5 Losses) vs Klaw Multi-Player (5 Wins – 4 Losses)
• Ultron Solo (12 Wins – 6 Losses) vs Ultron Multi-Player (0 Wins – 9 Losses)
• Risky Business Solo (15 Wins – 3 Losses) vs Risky Business Multi-Player (3 Wins so far no losses yet)
• Mutagen Formula Solo (2 Wins – 16 Losses)

So to some degree it seems to have confirmed my hypothesis. However, Mutagen definitely Feels like it is going to be easier Multi-Player. If you have a hero that doesn’t flip in solo, you can just lose on turn one. The pairing of heroes makes that much less likely in multi-player.

Here were the module records…

• Bomb Scare Solo (6-4) vs Multi-Player (3-1)
• Masters of Evil Solo (7-3) vs Multi-Player (2-2)
• Under Attack Solo (6-4) vs Multi-Player (2-2)
• Legion of Hydra Solo (5-5) vs Multi-Player (2-1)
• M.O.D.O.K. Solo (4-6) vs Multi-Player (2-1)
• Goblin Gimmicks Solo (8-2) vs Multi-Player (1-2)
• A Mess of Things Solo (9-1) vs Multi-Player (1-2)
• Running Interference Solo (6-4) vs Multi-Player (2-1)
• Power Drain Solo (6-4) vs Multi-Player (1-2)

So before claiming the game is too easy, I recommend giving Ultron Multi-Player Expert a try or better yet run the whole challenge for yourself and report back with your results.

I've never fully understood the "too easy" complaints either. Granted, it is certainly "easier" solo based on the character and deck being used (Captain America protection and Doctor Strange aggression have been dominant for me) but I really appreciate the scalability. The game doesn't just get more difficult with more players, it becomes more difficult in different ways. Take Rhino - as the easiest example. One frustrating element with Rhino solo is how little threat you have to work with. Even though he doesn't scheme that high, I've had turns end with only 1 threat at the start because he schemed with a boost, a minion schemed, and then the encounter card is "the villain schemes." On the flip side, 2+ players essentially renders the threat moot but this is offset by how you can only stun an enemy once. I might protect myself from his attack with a stun but that leaves the next vulnerable to a possibly devastating charge and there's little they can do to stop its impact due to turn order - short of a tough card or sacrificing an ally.

I think Wrecking Crew gets a bad rap for the same reason. Sure, it can be easy solo even with expert mode, but with 2+ people can be brutal, especially with how many encounter cards can trigger chains that are absolutely ridiculous.

It's fun to see some data to explore this dynamic.

So, what were the causes of loss in the games you lost, threat out or defeat of the heroes?

Solo has a much tighter tolerances for both types (lower threshold on main schemes, less total hero health and fewer total allies/resources to stave off villain actions/cards).

In other words, the benefits of more players generally outweighs the additional difficulties.

The game is really as difficult as you want. Or at least that's my impression.

It is the advantage that the game is designed in a modular way, in your game you can put all the modules you want or eliminate some if you cannot overcome the game.

The first thing I did when I got the Green Goblin scenario pack was to add the Scorpion, Electro and Vulture modules from the beginning to Rino's deck in expert mode. I played Spiderman (remove the obligation card from the deck since the Vulture was already in play and it didn't make sense) and had a blast.

It was like being inside a Spiderman comic that I have read so many times. I turned the scenario from "Welcome, let's learn to play" into "Sinister Six steal a shipment of Vibranium." The difficulty skyrocketed (I only won a game of 4) but it was a lot of fun and very thematic.

If this scenario seems easy to you, you can always add more modules with a "null" theme that does not spoil the theme, such as "bomb warning" or "civilians in danger". Even other modules like "tombstone" or "masters of evil" (although it breaks the theme a bit).

If you play this "scenario" with a hero other than Spiderman, you will also have to face your nemesis (another additional module).

I can't wait to play the Absorbing Man scenario from Rise of Red Skull adding the Titania (Hulka nemesis) module, who is his wife for something.

You can play the 3 villains of the core one after another as if it were a single story without regenerating the life of your hero from one scenario to another, accumulating the damage.

There is nothing to prevent you from playing a scenario with all the modules (secondary plans) in play at the same time. Have you tried adding the two modules "legions of hydra" and "the seat of judgment" to a scenario? It's anything but easy, take the hero of your choice.

With the Red Skull campaign, we have new generic obligation cards that we can add to any hero's deck, making it more difficult. You can add 2 or 3 if it still seems easy to you.

The more heroes we have more nemesis modules to add and the more scenarios, the more secondary plans we will have to play with the combinations.

I think modular design is a great success because the game grows with each new pack. You can always combine it with the first ones and replay them, in this way the first heroes, villains and scenarios are refreshed and are not outdated or overwhelmed by the new content.

You can approach Marvel Champions as a board game or a competative ccg. Running games across a wide range of heroes, making sure to have a representative spread is more of a board game approach because people tend to play everything in the box with that genre. If you were going to take a more competitive ccg player mentality then you only need to measure a much more narrow group of decks. As a former competetive card gamer I remember buying boxes of cards and immediately culling half or more that would never be played.

I am not saying either methodology is better, but for myself, I am less interested in balance based on all decks, but more of a hybrid of above. For example, take the best 10 decks. If they have a 90% win rate I would say the game is too easy because those will be the decks played by competetive players so the other do not matter.

23 hours ago, Derrault said:

So, what were the causes of loss in the games you lost, threat out or defeat of the heroes?

In most games it did not matter. Flipping to Alter-Ego would be a threat loss and staying in Hero would be a death loss based on the same flop of cards.

I think you need to play Ultron Expert in multiplayer to appreciate how it doesnt scale like you imagine. Build your 8 to 11 decks and pull two random heroes over each of 3 games and tell me if you are lucky enough to win 2.

I have mentioned before in multiplayer your first hero may be best for the scenario, but your second hero is already a downgrade from that.

Multi-player also complicates things because in single player you may be equipped to deal with threat on turn X staying in Alter-ego avoiding stage progression, but your pairing may also have to flop to alter-ego and take it on the chin because he was more prepared for turn X+1.

Or you get a situation where you can handle threat and your partner can handle an attack, but now you have two chances to get an extra scheme that sets you over instead of just 1.

You really need to try it to understand how difficult it is to contain stage I or stage II of Ultron.

3 hours ago, aeixea said:

The game is really as difficult as you want. Or at least that's my impression.

It is the advantage that the game is designed in a modular way, in your game you can put all the modules you want or eliminate some if you cannot overcome the game.

The first thing I did when I got the Green Goblin scenario pack was to add the Scorpion, Electro and Vulture modules from the beginning to Rino's deck in expert mode. I played Spiderman (remove the obligation card from the deck since the Vulture was already in play and it didn't make sense) and had a blast.

.....There's no such thing as a Vulture modular set???

1 hour ago, Tokhuah said:

You can approach Marvel Champions as a board game or a competative ccg. Running games across a wide range of heroes, making sure to have a representative spread is more of a board game approach because people tend to play everything in the box with that genre. If you were going to take a more competitive ccg player mentality then you only need to measure a much more narrow group of decks. As a former competetive card gamer I remember buying boxes of cards and immediately culling half or more that would never be played.

I am not saying either methodology is better, but for myself, I am less interested in balance based on all decks, but more of a hybrid of above. For example, take the best 10 decks. If they have a 90% win rate I would say the game is too easy because those will be the decks played by competetive players so the other do not matter.

Is deckbuilding/deck-selection a skill or not a skill? I thinks its fair to take reasonably well built decks with with an average (random) deck selection and call that a baseline. I am fine with top 10 decks just as long as there is a fair cross-section of aspects and a fair cross section of heroes. If the game is just going to toss out 2 aspects and a quarter of the heroes than the game is a fail.

It seems here the suggestion is the game is "easy" on Justice/THW-2/solo and nigh impossible if just one of the multi-players is Aggro/Hand-4. If that is the case why do we need Heroic when we have Hulk and Thor?

One of my concerns is how is the game going to evolve in difficulty. I am fine with the game getting harder to match the growing deck-building card pool, but if the game is going to get harder to suit the solo Justice/THW-2+ only Uber-hero player than I will be off this train soon.

In other words, I am concerned at how FFG defines the difficulty baseline going forward.

PS. I have a pretty strong resume in competitive CCGs/boardgames myself.

11 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

.....There's no such thing as a Vulture modular set???

The Spider-Man nemesis set is probably what they mean.

19 minutes ago, IceHot42 said:

In most games it did not matter. Flipping to Alter-Ego would be a threat loss and staying in Hero would be a death loss based on the same flop of cards.

I think you need to play Ultron Expert in multiplayer to appreciate how it doesnt scale like you imagine. Build your 8 to 11 decks and pull two random heroes over each of 3 games and tell me if you are lucky enough to win 2.

I have mentioned before in multiplayer your first hero may be best for the scenario, but your second hero is already a downgrade from that.

Multi-player also complicates things because in single player you may be equipped to deal with threat on turn X staying in Alter-ego avoiding stage progression, but your pairing may also have to flop to alter-ego and take it on the chin because he was more prepared for turn X+1.

Or you get a situation where you can handle threat and your partner can handle an attack, but now you have two chances to get an extra scheme that sets you over instead of just 1.

You really need to try it to understand how difficult it is to contain stage I or stage II of Ultron.

I’ll give it a try, I only play solo normally; but there’s no reason couldn’t run multiple hands.

The game is easier than others they have made so for "experts" of other FFG LCG it makes sense there are some that can find the cracks and exploit them easier. However, for newer players the game is a really great introduction. It still offers a lot of challenges. So I think it is great that they offer clean solutions to up the difficulty as you start to "crack" the game, but there should never be any shame in just enjoying it as a base game especially if you are playing with younger or more inexperienced players.

That said, the game has WILD balance swings on hero and villain make-up as well as player count. Look at Spiderman as a solo he can totally stun lock a villain with so little counter since there is only one action per turn for them, while someone like Iron Man who needs a couple turns before they get to even play the game can be stuck in a lost game before they find their shirt. With multiple players I think the heroes come into a much better balance position, as do the villains (as you mentioned the difficulty swings with Goblin and Ultron based on player count). So my only play recommendation is to use a multiple player count. Either with other people, or play two handed if solo. I think you get a much better experience out of the game (regardless of your own skill level) and open up a more comic-like experience by setting up combos and having heroes step up here and there.

12 minutes ago, Derrault said:

The Spider-Man nemesis set is probably what they mean.

I’ll give it a try, I only play solo normally; but there’s no reason couldn’t run multiple hands.

Thank You, I really appreciate your perspective.

52 minutes ago, Derrault said:

The Spider-Man nemesis set is probably what they mean.

But they said that they removed a card because "The Vulture was already in play".

34 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

But they said that they removed a card because "The Vulture was already in play".

I'm going to guess it was "Shadows of the Past".

15 hours ago, Tonbo Karasu said:

I'm going to guess it was "Shadows of the Past".

I have not explained myself well, excuse me. I add the Spiderman Nemesis set as a secondary plan. Because of this, Vulture is in Rino's deck from the beginning of the game, so there is no point in Shadows of the past card.

I remove Sadows of the past card only when play with Spiderman.

2 hours ago, aeixea said:

I have not explained myself well, excuse me. I add the Spiderman Nemesis set as a secondary plan. Because of this, Vulture is in Rino's deck from the beginning of the game, so there is no point in Shadows of the past card.

I remove Sadows of the past card only when play with Spiderman.

Well, it’d still present a possible 2-pip boost card, so that’s one reason to keep it in.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

Well, it’d still present a possible 2-pip boost card, so that’s one reason to keep it in.

with surge.

26 minutes ago, IceHot42 said:

with surge.

Yes, although that only goes to the next card, so it’s functionally the same as not including the card for that purpose.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

Well, it’d still present a possible 2-pip boost card, so that’s one reason to keep it in.

Right.... i don't think about it... thnx!

49 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Yes, although that only goes to the next card, so it’s functionally the same as not including the card for that purpose.

Exactly,adding the extra 2-boost doesnt dilute the encounter deck.

2 hours ago, IceHot42 said:

Exactly,adding the extra 2-boost doesnt dilute the encounter deck.

Which would increase the average boost of the deck. Overall, the average is a little bit over 1. Rhino's about 15-20% below that curve.

On 9/9/2020 at 1:43 PM, IceHot42 said:

Thank You, I really appreciate your perspective.

So, I did it against Ultron expert (default module of Under Attack) running the default decks for Hulk and Captain America. I figured Rogers is a good partner because he’s got strong THW potential, leaving Hulk free to focus on smashing faces. This proved to be accurate.

That being said, I don’t think it’d work as well to match up several Aggro heroes (Ie heroes with low innate THW and few/weaker signature THW cards). Bad partners probably would be: Spider-Man, Thor, She-Hulk; Good partners probably would be: Captain America, Captain Marvel, Black Panther, Black Widow, maybe Iron Man

I’m a touch ambivalent re: Ms. Marvel, Doctor Strange; although Hulk probably could do a pretty good Protection racket with Ms. Marvel aggression.

8 hours ago, Derrault said:

I’m a touch ambivalent re: Ms. Marvel, Doctor Strange; although Hulk probably could do a pretty good Protection racket with Ms. Marvel aggression.

Ms Marvel, particularly if flipping every turn, using the personas liberally, can, even built as aggression, thwart as well as any other deck I have seen. Sometimes you have to leave a bit of threat on a scheme which I am not a fan of, but I routinely have turns where she takes off 10-15 threat and still has time to do 6-10 points of damage in the same turn. I did a run through of all the scenarios with a team of Ms Marvel and Dr Strange and there were times I was tossing multiple threat dealing cards because there was nothing to use them on...and as you know, some of the scenarios can spit out 2-3 side schemes a turn easily...you may be overlooking her a bit. She is, to me, on a par with the top rank of heroes for strength.

11 hours ago, Derrault said:

So, I did it against Ultron expert (default module of Under Attack) running the default decks for Hulk and Captain America. I figured Rogers is a good partner because he’s got strong THW potential, leaving Hulk free to focus on smashing faces. This proved to be accurate.

Ill have to try this pairing (our only win-to-date was Spidey-Justice/Iron-Man-Leadership). Ill have to try it two-handed solo, my son is done with Ultron.

A few questions if you dont mind/remember:

• Was this a 1-0 or did you make multiple runs?
• Was there a lot of stun locking that synced up well with the alternating first player?
• Did you get immovable object fairly early?
• What were your mulligan conditions (ie. what cards were your desired openers)?
• Did you run into any attachments (Upgrade Drones or the Under Attack exhaust in Hero mode to remove upgrades)?
• In Stage IIb were you adding extra Drones or Taking the extra threat?

9 hours ago, IceHot42 said:

Ill have to try this pairing (our only win-to-date was Spidey-Justice/Iron-Man-Leadership). Ill have to try it two-handed solo, my son is done with Ultron.

A few questions if you dont mind/remember:

• Was this a 1-0 or did you make multiple runs?
• Was there a lot of stun locking that synced up well with the alternating first player?
• Did you get immovable object fairly early?
• What were your mulligan conditions (ie. what cards were your desired openers)?
• Did you run into any attachments (Upgrade Drones or the Under Attack exhaust in Hero mode to remove upgrades)?
• In Stage IIb were you adding extra Drones or Taking the extra threat?

Yeah, I think I really don’t like playing two handed. Half because it’s more fiddly (have to manage more triggers, more synergy across hero decks, and more cascade effects that beat box off each other, all without losing track of where you are. It’s mentally draining, but without a huge upside (I mean, yes, you can play duos...and that can be fun, but it also takes so much bloody effort).

1) First try with Cap.

I tried doing Spider-Man/Justice (core set basic), but he simply stalls out. Spider-Man is very resilient, but he just can’t do his own share of removal for the drones, nor is Justice necessarily able to handle thwarting for two without good THW capacity from the hero (something that Spider-Man is easily the worst hero so far for; his Ally doesn’t THW, and his only innate thwarting is mildly better Chase them down...ugh). I’m also not a fan of how Web Up deprives Spider-Man of his hero ability, which is pretty crucial.

Comparatively, Cap was just perfect as a counterpart, able to keep his own drones down (thanks Retaliate!) and also focus on THW so that Hulk can just smack the villain around.

2) I did do a lot of stunning, although that was mostly Hulk so that Cap could channel his resources into allies, and board building until they could both go off together. Once their boards were firmly established (and Cap had both serums and a Martial Prowess from Hulk), it was a pretty smooth sail to victory. Biggest hiccup was an unbelievably badly timed Concussive Blast wiped out 6 allies (4 for Cap and 2 for Hulk).

3) Immovable Object came out somewhere around the halfway (time wise) mark. It didn’t happen in the first shuffle, because Ultron claimed it as a drone. (Incidentally, that’s probably the most obnoxious part of Ultron, that you can be forced to cycle multiple times just to ‘see’ a particular card)

4) I almost never Mulligan. Interestingly, this time I did for Hulk, but only because I drew his Limitless Strength, and Strength in the opening hand, and the other cards were Sub Orbital and To the Rescue!; so totally useless vs Ultron, whereas that would have been perfect vs Klaw.

5) Yes to all the attachments, and it provided an interesting (aggravating?) timing puzzle, because often I’d want to maximize efficiency by doing something...except because the other hero was first player, I couldn’t flip and deal with it immediately, or combo and ready up. So, as usual, they were annoying, but pretty much crucial to get rid of them ASAP.

6) 2B drone or threat depended on hero form and health generally (I had to stop several times and ask myself how much damage Ultron could’ve do if I picked up something like Gang Up; or can I afford to let him scheme for 5?) Cap had retaliate from the get go, and once Immovable Object and Hawkeye hit the field, I could freely choose drones or threat with very little fear. (I tended to favor threat as long as I knew I had the thwart in hand to overcome it).

12 hours ago, Derrault said:

Yeah, I think I really don’t like playing two handed. Half because it’s more fiddly (have to manage more triggers, more synergy across hero decks, and more cascade effects that beat box off each other, all without losing track of where you are. It’s mentally draining, but without a huge upside (I mean, yes, you can play duos...and that can be fun, but it also takes so much bloody effort).

It is still appreciated.

I gave it a try myself last night. I do see how this combo could work (although I wasnt using pre-cons). It felt like it was working, but I think the combination of me being less experienced and possibly more unlucky got in my way.

I had a good opening hand for Hulk (marginal for Cappy) favoring Immovable Object. Third turn I was able to get Hawkeye out, but Ultron flipped Advanced and 2-boost which moved to Stage IIb fairly quickly. Hawkeye held serve and I was onto Squirrel Girl right behind. I had a decent board built: 2x Super Serums, Av Tower, Nick, Doreen, and Hawkeye ready to chump, plus a Brawn and Tigra. There was a decent amount of threat on stage IIb, but I was ready to move through that as long as I stayed in hero mode one more turn. Hulk soaked up his attack (the retaliate put Ultron in a range that was likely going to finish Ultron II next turn) and I blocked with Nick for Cappy. I still had blockers with a 4-Health Hulk, if I ran into Gang up or Assault. But instead Hulk flipped Caught off Guard (which I was) and that was the end of Hulk, which was followed by an Assault which was boosted by a Concussion blast into a Doreen block. With Cappy now at 2-health left that was more or less it.

Ill give it a go again soon. My son was up for trying Hawkeye and Jessica against Crossbones, so we will likely work through that again.

If I keep failing I will likely spin off a play-by-play thread and we can figure out where my choice need improvement. But as of right now my feeling is that you are just a bad barometer.

*checking my notes this was actually the first run we did against Ultron/Bomb Scare, hopefully I can get the matchup to a respectable 1-2 or 1-3.