My gaming group has just finished the official scenario run, and now we're playing Call to Arms game, starting with the first Edwardian Wars scenario, if I'm not mistaken. We all had the some trouble when choosing from CtA deployment sets, and ended up picking them randomly.

I tried to make simple research on sets from one side (penant), and they turn out to have exactly the same amount of unit types. I assume the same for standard side. So the difference is composition. Then I laid out all cards from a camp and still I can't figure the 'style' of the deployment cards sets.

Anyone can help me on this?

Also I'm a little confused about the correct back card. So should they be the same with the deployment card or be different? A friend bought a CtA recently, and his specialist cards back is the same as the deployment cards back. While mine was different.

(nevertheless we found the expansion is an excellent addition to the game. It gives the feeling of building an army without being complex or time consuming with unnecessary number crunching)

Thank you.

There really is very little difference between the sets.

Also, the card backs for the specialists really don't matter. When later specialist sets were released, Days of Wonder issued replacement cards for CtA with backs to match the new ones. Now the FFG is running the show, I don't know if replacements are available. Howver, since you are able to choose your specialist cards face up, the differing backs won't affect gameplay. However, some people play a house rule where they randomly draw specialist. In this case, the card backs do matter.

Man, a thread like this makes me wish that all the posts from the DoW forums were still available.

Aha! They are still available The good folks at DoW, while no longer having the scenario editor, et al, up, did decide to let the forums remain. Very nice. However, my rudimentary searching couldn't find the thread whose existence I may be imagining anyway

Now searching my own archives to see if I can find the spreadsheet that I created to tally all the notable characteristics of the six decks I could think of (which, also may be imaginary )...

Aha a second time! My age-adled mind does get some things right. Or in this case, half-right. The spreadsheet I remembered went into more detail about the unit distribution among the decks, but the one I found deals pretty much with positioning.

Aside from the main differences between the pennants (Goblins) and standards (Dwarves) decks, there are several subtle differences that do, in fact, impact the game - whether players are aware of these differences or not is another matter (whether being aware of these differences will ultimately impact the direction the game takes [due to the element of chance in the card draw] is yet another matter ).

Without going in to too much detail in this post (off to work soon), some decks have more units positioned forward, towards the fourth row from the baseline, while others have more units towards the baseline. Some decks (Pennants C and Standards B) have a greater disparity in the distribution of the relative combined strength of the units per card - or better said: have more cards that rock and more cards that suck, rather than mostly moderate cards.

Another item of note is that the goblin cards have more units, typically 5 (always 5?) per card, while all the dwarf and human cards have four units per card. I know this is seen more as a liability by some, but used correctly it can be a powerful advantage.

Alright, a couple of comments tangible in nature among those abstractions: Taking Standards B and Pennants C can lead to some very potent armies - though the risk of having quite an impotent force is higher as well. The reward outweighs the risk slightly, however, due to the reserve card mechanic mitigating the effect of one of the poor cards which one may draw. Also, taking pennant decks will greatly increase the chances one has of going first. With the specialist cards available, it is possible to create a very advantageous opening position that can be exploited to great affect by having the initial play.

Alright, cutting myself off here lol

Thanks for digging in Toddrew! Those are among the guidelines that I need. The difference is subtle indeed. I've found that initial deployment has a good amount of impact on the game. We're going to have some more CtA games this weekend.

You're welcome

I'll try to get around to restoring the spreadsheet with the unit distribution data that was on it before I evidently forgot to hit save or somesuch, but I did want to make another general statement about CtA: While selecting decks and placement of the resulting deployment cards will have an impact on a player's gameplan, wise use of specialists and war council levels in relation to the forces one ends up with is where the player really has control in the CtA set up process.

I think that those who find CtA disappointing miss or underestimate this point. As a result I believe they feel that the "no difference between the decks" and the related, seemingly "complete randomness" of the deployment card selection (both points with which I do not agree) lead to the conclusion that a player is at the mercy of chance rather than having any strategic control over the process.

From deck selection through special selection, the control one has over CtA mechanics is not complete and I think this is perfect for the game. Just as responding and planning around the command and lore hands that one is dealt during the battle is central to the game, building around the forces one are dealt through the deployment cards with the war council construction and specialist card selection is central to the CtA game within the larger game.

I tried to classify cards based on their composition, but it was again useless. Such as 'Infantry with archer support' or 'Cavalry with infantry support' or 'Infantry'. All I get is useless numbers, and I can't figure the synergy between cards in a deck. Hmmm....

(we haven't played with the specialist cards yet, and I think some of them are quite potent--King's Army, Infiltration--and I don't own any other expansions)

Depending upon how one does the numbers, most likely those numbers will be of little use. For example, if taking averages across an entire deck those will be mostly meaningless, as the decks between themselves are balanced in almost all ways (average number of units per card, number of particular units per deck, number of unit type per deck), with the only difference of those sorts being between all of the standards decks compared to all of the pennants decks (Standards decks have 4 units per card, Pennants decks have ~4.5 units per card; Standards decks obviously have Dwarf units, Pennants have Goblins).

There is another difference between the Standards decks and the Pennants decks that seems subtle, but when it manifests itself in the deployment card draw can have a large affect on the game. There are the same number of human archers in each deck: Four. However, in the Standards decks those are distributed among 4 cards (1 each) while in the Pennants deck they are distributed across 3 cards (2 on one, 1 on the other two). Like most game mechanics in BL, this is a risk/reward situation. If one is hoping to gain an edge in archers and exploit the Bow Upgrade specialist card to its fullest extent, take two decks from the Pennants selections. The most human archers one can field with the Standards decks is 5 (drawing four cards containing one human archer each, then using Illusionary Troops for a fifth). With the Pennants cards the maximum number is 7 (drawing both of the cards that contain 2 archers each, plus two of the cards that contain 1 each, then using Illusionary Troops). While the opportunity for drawing more human archers exists within the Pennants selections, the risk of drawing cards that contain no human archers is higher.

There is a related dynamic with the blue and red mounted units, but the difference lies between the Pennants C and Standards B decks when compared to the other decks. Within PC and SB has the same 5 mounted units (3 blue, 2 red) distributed among four cards, as in the other four decks. However, in PC and SB the deployment card containing the two of the blue/red mounted units has one blue and one red, whereas the other decks have two blue units (in the Pennants decks there are also 2 green goblin mounted units - in A they are spread amongst two cards, one on which it is the only mounted unit, the other paired with a red unit; in B they are both placed on the same card along with a red banner cavalry unit; on C they are also on the same card, alongside a blue mounted unit).

Again, though, reiterating that while being aware of these subtleties can be used to impact ones decision making, making the most of what one is ultimately dealt in relation to the board and opponent's set-up through the war council and specialist cards is where the control lies.