Im having an insane time over here coping with the DOR, I am using BGotW+IH...the all monsters move cards are a nightmare, its R'lyeh on earth, believe me, try it...
Criticism of the IH board
jgt7771 said:
mageith said:
Just curious. How do you place monsters from monster surges? The rules allow the first player to choose if some are to go to the Outskirts. I always place randomly. Maybe I should quit that.
...that sounds wrong. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but noone has the ability to choose anything about the Outskirts (normally). It either happens, or it doesn't.
A monster is to be drawn for every gate or every player (whichever is greater). I'm sure you got that. First Player chooses a Gate, then draws a monster for it, starting with the Mythos Card gate drawn. Any monster drawn for an Arkham Gate is checked against the limit...blah blah blah...Outskirts. I'm sure you know that too. Any monster drawn for a non-Arkham-board Gate is placed. I can't think of how there can be an Innsmouth Gate and a monster not be drawn for it.
2 open Innsmouth Gates, 1 open Arkham Gate (also the one drawn on Mythos), 4 Investigators, one below Monster Limit: 1 monster to Arkham, 1 to each Innsmouth, 1 monster has to go back to the starting surge gate in Arkham but can't, so goes to Outskirts.
I guess I wasn't clear. Monster surge of 4 monsters. (4 players) 5 monsters on the board. 4 gates on board. Two monsters to the board and two to the outskirts. First monster goes to gate that is on the Mythos card. 2nd monster (I place) randomly on remaining gates (not counting the first gate). The rules, however, as you state.
So if I were choosing the gate for the second monster (without knowing the monster) I would NOT choose the Innsmouth gate because of the DOR. The way I do it there's a 1/3rd chance the monster will go to Innsmouth. I know these rules. I was just wondering why my DOR is more active the flamethrowers and that might be the reason. Because of my houserule. Sorry for the confusion.
Dam said:
Dilution might be part of the problem, not all of it.
Monster surges are another thing. Even if D. Reef, EOoD and Marsh Refinery are already open, they'll get 1 monster each at "best" and only the D. Reef one has the real likelyhood of actually going to the vortex (assuming it's not a Blue/Green/Yellow, which happens often).
There is something fishy 
going on if you can have 8 monsters in IH and not having to worry about them going to the vortex off Joe Sargent's for several turns (mainly because of the criss-crossing arrows that allow back and forthness). I know I'd never dare leave 8 monsters in DH or the Horror would guaranteed wake up (unless they all suddenly appeared toward the end). Taking out the Horror vs filling the Fed Raid track, don't know which is harder.
I appears the flamethrower and I both use all the items from all the expansions, so too many Elder signs is not a problem. In fact, if I don't get at least one elder sign, we're usually in trouble.
I thnk the key to the Danger of DOR is Devil Reef. Once it opens, it takes a few turns to get there. Then a few turns to seal. And then a few turns to get back. When its all done, about a half a player has spend his time dealing with the devil. It also has one of your beloved gate bursts and that has happened too.
I think all other other monsters in Innsmouth are really just diversionary. I can only remember one actually going into a vortex. But if you don't have the Devil Reef and the other island gate open (which you won't if you are playing with a full deck), the DOR won't give you trouble. It doesn't always give me trouble, it just usually does.
Probably the main problem with Innsmouth is that the more investigators you have, the easier it gets. It doesn't scale very well in that manner. On the other hand, most of the Old Ones are deadly in hand to hand combat, so you'd better get it right and seal them away.
mattherobot said:
jgt, in your second scenario you say that the last monster should go on the Innsmouth gate after one each has been placed on the Arkham and Innsmouth gates, and one monster has gone to the outskirts. When the rules say that no gates should receive more monsters than the surging gate, does "receive monsters" mean monsters attributed to that gate (whether or not they go there or to the outskirts) or monsters remaining there? The other scenario I could see there is that the second monster going to Innsmouth would go in the outskirts too. Not sure though, these kinds of scenarios don't up very often.
I can't ever find the quote again, but the idea is supposed to be one monster per Gate. That changed when they added the "or number of players if greater" clause. Say a surge happened in Dunwich (which is when this weird rule happened at the time). 5 Players, 1 Gate in Dunwich, 1 Gate in Arkham, but the Monster Limit has been reached. Someone could say, "All monsters to the Arkham Gate!" And suddenly the Outskirts fill up, and instead of being flooded with monsters, the Terror Track goes up once. OOOOOOO...big fat hairy deal.
So they came up with the "spread them around" clause, and the Rules Lawyers went positively INSANE with it.
It's really VERY simple. One monster per open gate, doesn't matter how many boards you are playing with, spread the monsters as evenly as possible, and use logical judgment. Monster Limit ONLY applies to Arkham. Call each Gate out loud...draw and place the monster...if applicable in Arkham, relocate monster to Outskirts. Anything else is just making it all too complicated.
@ mageith
I guess I wasn't clear.
And I'm still not following.
Monster surge of 4 monsters. (4 players) 5 monsters on the board. 4 gates on board. Two monsters to the board and two to the outskirts.
How are you getting that? The Monster Limit does not apply to Innsmouth at all. If all 4 Gates are in Arkham, that totally makes sense, but if one of those Gates is in Innsmouth, you can't just call it like that. One monster per open Gate.
First monster goes to gate that is on the Mythos card. 2nd monster (I place) randomly on remaining gates (not counting the first gate). The rules, however, as you state.
And this is where I think you're wrong. Instead of going Gate-monster-Gate-monster, you're adding up all your monsters first, and placing them as you see fit (in your case, randomly).
So if I were choosing the gate for the second monster (without knowing the monster) I would NOT choose the Innsmouth gate because of the DOR.
That's not how it goes:
One monster on surge gate. One monster on Arkham Gate 2. One monster on Arkham Gate 3...then to Outskirts. One monster on Innsmouth Gate (not applicable to Monster Limit).
Seriously, if that's wrong, someone tell me now. Because I'm getting REEEEEALLY tired of not having a FAQ about the simple things that refuse to remain simple because there are too many brains to play with it.
jgt7771 said:
@ mageith
I guess I wasn't clear.
And I'm still not following.
Monster surge of 4 monsters. (4 players) 5 monsters on the board. 4 gates on board. Two monsters to the board and two to the outskirts.
How are you getting that? The Monster Limit does not apply to Innsmouth at all. If all 4 Gates are in Arkham, that totally makes sense, but if one of those Gates is in Innsmouth, you can't just call it like that. One monster per open Gate.
First monster goes to gate that is on the Mythos card. 2nd monster (I place) randomly on remaining gates (not counting the first gate). The rules, however, as you state.
And this is where I think you're wrong. Instead of going Gate-monster-Gate-monster, you're adding up all your monsters first, and placing them as you see fit (in your case, randomly).
So if I were choosing the gate for the second monster (without knowing the monster) I would NOT choose the Innsmouth gate because of the DOR.
That's not how it goes:
One monster on surge gate. One monster on Arkham Gate 2. One monster on Arkham Gate 3...then to Outskirts. One monster on Innsmouth Gate (not applicable to Monster Limit).
Seriously, if that's wrong, someone tell me now. Because I'm getting REEEEEALLY tired of not having a FAQ about the simple things that refuse to remain simple because there are too many brains to play with it.
That's 100% right as I understand it. Mageith, you seem to be referring to some sort of house rule you use regarding the placement of monsters, correct?
Oh, and JGT, my compliments to your players on choosing to surrender that victory over Rhan-Tegoth. Such a decision shows real class, in my opinion.
Solan said:
That's 100% right as I understand it. Mageith, you seem to be referring to some sort of house rule you use regarding the placement of monsters, correct?
Yes that was my point/question.
To jgt: 
I entirely mispoke. Of course, I do not get to choose not to place a monster in Innmouth. I was not only not clear, I was wrong in my description. (However I think I do play it right, just not how I described it.) If there's a monster surge and gate(s) in Innsmouth, it will get hit.
mageith said:
I thnk the key to the Danger of DOR is Devil Reef. Once it opens, it takes a few turns to get there. Then a few turns to seal. And then a few turns to get back. When its all done, about a half a player has spend his time dealing with the devil. It also has one of your beloved gate bursts and that has happened too.
I agree with this assessment. But even if it does open, unless it's the first gate of the game (has happened to me) and next Mythos causes a monster surge (either another D. Reef or Strange Sightings card; hasn't happened so far), there is still only 1 monster there. If you have someone "up top" in Arkham who can move quickly, you can get there in 1 turn (5 movement from Newspaper + $3 needed, only 3 movement if at Train Station).
mageith said:
I think all other other monsters in Innsmouth are really just diversionary.
See, for me that's an issue, they shouldn't be. They should a threat, not quite on the level of the D. Reef/Y'ha ones, but more than they currently are, which is IMO down to the movement arrows opening back and forth possibilities.
mageith said:
Probably the main problem with Innsmouth is that the more investigators you have, the easier it gets.
I've ran standard 4 for 75+ games soon I think. I could easily see bumping up to 5 and still not get 2 monsters per gate or even 6 for people who use KH as well, but 4 feels just about right, most of the time games go down to the wire, critical Mythos card or two have to be survived at the very end.
Dam said:
Okay, at least it's not a totally worthless piece for a board like the KH one (IMO of course). Vortices = DOR token, which can wake up the GOO. Martial Law is fun to deal with. But there is something the DH board does better and that's actually funnel monsters into the vortices. In DH, each moving monster will hit a vortex in 3 moves max. In IH, I've seen several "love triangles" with monsters bouncing from Church Green to Factory District, only to get a reversed movement symbol and bounce back. Sometimes they even visit Innsmouth Shore and then head back. DH has arrows going one way basically, eventually, regardless of the symbol drawn, monster will hit a vortex. In IH, it requires a Fast monster to make me worry about it, if it appears at Marsh Refinery or EOoD. Devil's Reef and Y'ha are of course, "hi, goodbye" locatons, but even those can be unsuccessful, as was the case in my first IH game, D. Reef opened and spawned a Deep One Hybrid (fitting, huh), who then saw Ashcan Pete over on River Docks and decided to go get itself killed against Pete, instead of hitting the vortex. I think double-arrows would've been better, funneling everything towards Joe Sargent's regardless of the symbol color drawn.
For me, the Church Green's White arrow should be with the Black, Innmouth Shore's Black should be with the white, everything would move smoothly toward Joe Sargent's, problem solved (as far as monsters being reluctant to head toward the vortex).
Or am I being too harsh?
It is the gate bounces that really make my DOR track rise in most games, usually toward the end, just when it looks like we're going to win 
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
Dam said:
Thing is, out of 12 games, the DOR track has filled once (and that was due to Plans in Motion Rumor) and only once have I filled up the Feds Raid track, when there were 4 DOR token on the other track. I've had as many as 9 monsters in IH (though in that case 50+% were Green/Yellow). Last game there were 8 normal monsters in IH, a pair of Elder Things just kept going back and forth between the 3 streets I mentioned, Zombie and Deep One Hybrid weren't even close to reaching the vortex from Marsh Refinery (which optimally is 4 moves away, but I think realistically at least 6 moves needed, from what I've seen). Most of the time, any monsters from EOoD move once, then the critical move sees them hit White "and they were never heard from again" sorta thing hits.
One game I had the feds raid twice and STILL lost to a DOR track bloom. I think it was my first or second game.
Granted that hasn't happened again quite like that, but I have had a second game where I was onbliged to call int he feds twice.
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
Tibs said:
The "main" part of Innsmouth can possibly allow monsters to do the "back and forth" thing. However, this is made up for in a couple ways:
- The "at sea" vortexes are a mere one space away, so monsters exiting there can move immediately into a vortex; in DH only fast monsters can do this.
- The penalty for maxing the track in DH is that the woken Dunwich Horror helps to awaken the AO. The penalty for maxing the DOR track is that the AO immediately awakens without any further support. Jumps immediately to endgame without one more shot for the investigators to prevent it.
- While investigators can intercept all "dancing" monsters by arriving at Joe's Bus Service, when martial law is declared this can become dangerous.
- Resetting the DOR track in Innsmouth is more dangerous and in a way more costly, and there is no further reward (like when killing the Dunwich Horror).
- There are 32% more cards that open gates in Innsmouth than there are at Dunwich. And fewer unstable locations in Innsmouth means that proportionally more of these opening gates will produce monster surges--a critical danger in Innsmouth!
With so many more dangers in Innsmouth than Dunwich, I appreciate that the investigators even have such a break as to have "waltzing" monsters.
Way to go Mr Tibbs ! If I hadn't agreed with you before reading that, you'd have won me over by the end. 
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
jgt7771 said:
I didn't want to just come out and say it...but the three above me did...so there it is. Dam, the only reason I brought it up is because, around here, you have clout. We grognards all know who you are. But some of the newer players might not. And when you make blanket statements about an expansion and its problems WITHOUT full disclosure on how you play the game, you invite misunderstanding.
I gave up on defending Kingsport because so many people agreed with you; I'm not gonna let you walk all over Innsmouth when you're not even giving it a chance to beat you up.
Heh. If DAm had clout before, looks you just gave him another one, jgt
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
Tibs said:
jgt7771 said:
I gave up on defending Kingsport because so many people agreed with you; I'm not gonna let you walk all over Innsmouth when you're not even giving it a chance to beat you up.
I'm still fighting on the front lines for Kingsport. Come aid the noble cause, brutherr!
I'll always defend Kingsport. It does have its theme, rules, and balance issues, and it's better when you house-rule the rifts only to open in Kingsport and never in other boards, but if someone had to choose between Kingsport or Black Goat or Dark Pharaoh, I'd always persuade them towards Kingsport. If they were looking for a "first" expansion, I would favor Kingsport over Innsmouth even.
I like Kingsport too. Innsmouth is definately my favourite, although it does help that all the groundwork in small cards etc had been laid down by then allowing concentration on other stuff. Dunwich might be a little bettre than Kingsport (and definately has better investigators) but I don't see the hugh gulf that many do.
Definately get KH or DH before IH if it is your fist expansion.
Oh, and take any of the big boxes over the small boxes (although I likes 'em all to varying degrees).
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
ps, curiously enough whilst I've very much enjoyed IH on its own and think I'll stick with it that way for the most part; and think DH is best on its own for theme; KH itself I think works better for me alongside Dunwich, whereas Dunwich can get diluted. I haven't tried KH with IH yet, but it looks like Kingsport will become more dangerous, although Innsmouth may get slower. I.e. KIngsport is the best "third board" IMO
jgt7771 said:
mattherobot said:
jgt, in your second scenario you say that the last monster should go on the Innsmouth gate after one each has been placed on the Arkham and Innsmouth gates, and one monster has gone to the outskirts. When the rules say that no gates should receive more monsters than the surging gate, does "receive monsters" mean monsters attributed to that gate (whether or not they go there or to the outskirts) or monsters remaining there? The other scenario I could see there is that the second monster going to Innsmouth would go in the outskirts too. Not sure though, these kinds of scenarios don't up very often.
I can't ever find the quote again, but the idea is supposed to be one monster per Gate. That changed when they added the "or number of players if greater" clause. Say a surge happened in Dunwich (which is when this weird rule happened at the time). 5 Players, 1 Gate in Dunwich, 1 Gate in Arkham, but the Monster Limit has been reached. Someone could say, "All monsters to the Arkham Gate!" And suddenly the Outskirts fill up, and instead of being flooded with monsters, the Terror Track goes up once. OOOOOOO...big fat hairy deal.
So they came up with the "spread them around" clause, and the Rules Lawyers went positively INSANE with it.
It's really VERY simple. One monster per open gate, doesn't matter how many boards you are playing with, spread the monsters as evenly as possible, and use logical judgment. Monster Limit ONLY applies to Arkham. Call each Gate out loud...draw and place the monster...if applicable in Arkham, relocate monster to Outskirts. Anything else is just making it all too complicated.
That is how I do it, and I start with the surging gate and go round in some regular order, basically clockwise.
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
Yikes, sorry about all the consecutive posts made as I read my way through this thread (which seems to have mushroomed overnight).
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
Mariana the Ex-Nun Cultist said:
It is the gate bounces that really make my DOR track rise in most games, usually toward the end, just when it looks like we're going to win
- Mariana the ex-nun cultist
I seem to not get bounces on seals that often, even though I seal often and early. Most of the time it's a gate burst that hits. Monster surges aren't that common either (I think 1 today in 13 Mythos cards). Getting a new gate + doom token is the most common occurance in the Mythos phase though. Today saw Cold Spring Glen, Marsh Refinery, Science Building and Historical Society all pop open, which are all very low on the activity scale. Getting an Elder Sign on Darrell during setup and then a Parchement for Roland Banks helped keep the doom track in check, otherwise would've been hideously close and with Chaugnar Faugn the GOO, final combat would've been nasty.
bumping this for a bit
Okay, I think I achieved a personal best today against Cthugha, 17 Mythos cards, 0 monster surges . Did have to empty the DOR track when it was at 4. 3 of the tokens were from bounces, just 1 from a monster going to the vortex, despite first 2 gates opening in IH (D. Reef and Marsh Refinery) AND adding 2 monsters to the Innsmouth Shore and Church Green streets. So 5 monsters (D. Reef monster moved to the vortex during pre-game) in IH, only 1 stationary, 0 hit vortices. Child of the Goat was best placed at Innsmouth Shore, but decided to take the scenic route, through Factory District to Church Green . Stupid things just won't take the shortest path 
.