Other than waiting for the Companion set and official multiplayer rules, is there other pressing agenda that you'd be happy if FFG addressed it?

I saw a thread or two asking for more factions from Warhammer lore added as official races complete with their capital boards.
Personally, the urgent issue is theme development of the 4 (soon to be 6) official races that we have already. Particularly Chaos: I do not want them to be a one trick kneelin' (I mean corrupting) pony. Since it's looking like Chaos has an emergent Khorne (kill), Slaanesh (dominate), Nurgle (spread corruption & deal damage), and Tzeentch (spells & mutation) themes (go Ruinous Powers!), I would much prefer if these were expanded in the near future.

In terms of products:

My main hope for the future is simply that this game takes off, the battle packs are every bit as awesome as the core game (and that the Dark Elves and/or Skaven are competitive )

In terms of specific mechanics:

One thing I hope to see in the future are cards with two or more factions' loyalty symbols to represent units that could be used by two specific factions, or represent leaders that led a mixed army, like the Flayerkin (they could cost: X [Chaos][skaven][skaven], sort of like multicolored cards in Magic the Gathering) or an Empire/High Elf Teclis from Storm of Chaos (I think Teclis allied with the Empire, although I might be wrong. Pretty sure it was one of those poncy elves though)

I'm hoping also for continued exploration of existing themes. That would be my number two wish. My number one is for a FAQ with a flow chart.

I'm with Dormouse.

Initially I'd like to see FFG put out an FAQ. I'd like to see some better descriptions of the flow of the game. The rulebook is a little vague on some points. Secondly - I would like to see published multi-player rules. This mainly because that is what my group typically plays - so we have not played very often up to this point.

Multiplayer rules are essential for me. I'm likely to get the interest of a friend or two. We don't have a local store to organise tournaments out of (, the local stockist has n play space, currently no suitable gaming club in the area). This means I will be playing casually. with frends Playing casually means that we will want a rules set where a group can sit down and play together.

I'm very pleased to see Skaven included early on and would like to see the eight factions offered by the end of the first cycle before we move on to new factions. I'm keen to see new factions but I want to have robust factions with diffeent playstyles avialble in each.

FInally, more banner cards and core cards. I am considering purchasing a second core box and not just for the splashy "rare" singletons I know I am going to need more contested villages for several decks. Alliances seem to require a few banners (at first look). I think nuetral and banner cards are required in larger quatnity and not just by buying the core several times. This doesn't have to happen soon but I think if trends show what I suspect (and accept I may be wrong) that certain neutral cards will appear in many deckarchtypes and possibly even staples it would be nice to have these without having to keep track of which deck they are in and move them about. Not to mention having trouble in lending a new player an extra deck to try out as the cards are needed in both.

As I said I am tempted to by a second set as I like the idea of having several decks made but I feel it is an artificial barrier in the long run and I feel it would be better if certain cards become mainstays that repacks make it more accessible for players to have several decks on the go.

I would like to see team multiplayer rules...

I am not that interested in multiplayer rules. They can be fun sometimes, but normal yyou will have 2 players.

Normally you may have two players, but a lot of people have regular gaming nights and groups and MP games are often preferred at my old groups than a series of partner swapping head to heads.

More development on the four core is a must but then I'm happy to sit back and wait for whatever FFG wants to throw our way. Obviously as an undead player in WFB I'd like to see the Vampire Counts, possibly with an option to take imperial militia units.

Well, we already have an entire cycle of Battle Packs that will be further enriching the Core Set races as well as adding some new stuff to the environment.

I'm not sure if they have any intention of adding new races beyond the Elves Companion set as fully playable factions. They may instead be straight Order/Destruction cards intewnded to supplement the other races. That would be a little disappointing, but I think in the end it may be the better choice as far as equal development of cards for the Battle Packs go. I certainly have no insider knowledge though, I'm just guessing (and hoping that I'm wrong).

I think, if the game lasts long enough we'll see more playable races. *fingers crossed*

We played a multi-player game last night. We took a que from the Vampire card game and did it this way: Each person was attacking the person on his right and defending against the one on his left. So we had Empire attacking Orcs who were attacking Dwarves who were attacking Chaos who were attacking Empire. The first person to his target's capital wins. It worked way better than anyone of us expected, but my g/f ended up with a game winning troll vomit and assault on the dwarf capital.

Ruvion said:

This would be especially nice if, eventually, we were able to create decks completely themed to one particular Chaos power.

It would also be interesting if the themes inherent to each race went beyond just a bunch of cards that do similar things. Like extending a theme to favor having a larger or smaller number of cards in a deck of a particular race of alliance. For example a Skaven themed deck packed with many small units to represent the chittering horde (Having in way excess of 60 cards).

Having cards that support such themes may help to promote diversity in the meta-game. I wouldn't want to see a generic formula for deck construction emerge. Where decks with more or less than a fixed number of cards are at an automatic disadvantage, regardless of the intended strategy of their race or theme.

Hopefully with the ability to control card draw such artificial restraints as generic optimum deck size won't become a dominant feature. While helping to support the idea that certain themes favor having more card in a deck. Or even favoring deck themes involving very few units or support cards.

Good gaming all!

One thing that has been discussed among my local players is the inclusion of the missing factions/races. One of the guys plays Tomb Kings in WFB and wasn't interested until they were a faction in the LCG. Thankfully, after trying the game out he liked it enough to play anyway. But here is how I am pondering that it may happen:

Bretonnia will get added to Empire.

Wood elves will get added to High Elves.

Ogres will get added to Orcs.

Lizardmen would be an Order faction.

Tomb Kings & Vampire Counts combined (I know they hate each other in WFB) as Destructions undead faction.

That way everyone is covered. Thoughts?

I have no insider information on this, but I don't think they intend to release any new stand alone races. AGame of Thrones has several Houses that could be added as playable factions and they have chosen to represent them similarly as you have guessed, as a small faction aligned with one of the 6 playable houses. I think however they handle the Skaven is probably going to be the way they handle the other races. I'm guessing neutral cards with some sort of restrictive designation, "Destruction Only." Not a wholly satisfying solution, but given the numbers of cards in a Battle Pack, adding a 7th playable race is going to greatly effect the card distribution unless they are willing to do "one time" or annual companion set releases but choosing not to support them in the Battle Packs.

- I'd love to have more 'fluff' quotes on the cards.

- Chaos God specific theme deck builds made possible/competitive

- That FFG avoids the pitfall of: buy hordes of 'rares' / 'singulars' to make a superdeck. Instead put the focus on making all cards as useful as possible.

- Repackaging at times of certain cards to ensure one can make multiple decks without buying entire boxes several times.

dormouse said:

I REALLY hope that this isn't the case. I want to see Skaven (and others) done as separate races with their own loyalty icons, even if they don't have a capital yet or enough cards to do a full deck. Doing them as "destruction only" neutrals really doesn't do them justice.

I'm also amazed that nobody's commented on the fact that we get our first Skaven cards the same month that GW release the upded Skaven army book. What a staggering coincidence.

I unerstand your passion about WH in general, but there's no room for other faction. Is a waste of time and card design. 6 factions are enougth to cover up all possibilities. CoC has 7 faction and believe me, lots of time there are unbalancing issues, cause it's impossible to control.

Skaven, as goblin or other stuff, need to be a "sub-them", with their own mechanicsms and strategies, though.

Creating a new stand-alone race, with 2 races coming out, is a non-sense in game design terms.

In a game like this, sometimes, choices have to be made and the right choices are those which make the game work better, not the ones that follow the narrative flow of events in the WH world.

The good thing about FFG is that they ALWAYS balance theme and gameplay, creating unique games with lots of flavour and good mechanics.

6 races are nowhere near enough to cover all possibilities. Warhammer is a much bigger licence than GoT or CoC, to do it in a way that pays any attention to the theme at all the Skaven and others (Khemri, Vampires, Lizardmen, Bretonnians and all the others I've seen requested) need to be separate races. It's hardly a nonsense, it's just a new set of loyalty icons after all. And I fail to see how introducing them properly will involve any more or less design/balance issues than releasing them as neutrals.

This kind of issue has been in the center of some AgoT players some times ago, when someone was askin' for something like "Make House Tyrell" a stand alone house or the like.

I DON'T SAY IT'S STUPID, sorry If you thought so. I'd never say something like this.

I've made a "design" analysis (and that's just MY opinion). 6 House/Races/Factions are enough to cover CARD GAMES possibilities. I say so because, even If I'm not tellin' "hey I'm a card genius", I have some good/bad experiences in card games about colours/factions unbalancing and that's the reason why I am defending this opinion with stregth.

I'll make a specific example using CoC. I'm not playing it anymore, but I follow the meta (yes, I'm a card addicted )

In CoC there are 7 factions: in the last few years, before LCG announcement, Agency was just "useless" alone, as well as Hastur. It means 2 useless factions. Now, that Agency and Hastur made a "coming back", Yog is pretty unplayable and Cthulhu is too slow (it has always been so, but know it's worst).

This happens because, more than ever in the LCG environment, it's IMPOSSIBLE to fine tune the meta with 20 cards a month per 7 faction.

Even in Magic it used to happen.

You can say "Ok, it's normal, it happens", and I agree, but more factions you have, more possibility you get to let this happen.

I respect all the Warhammer fans (I'm not cause I don't know anything of the environment yet...I just love the card game), mostly because I'm a Martin fan and I understand...But I understand even game design issues and I'm pretty sure that adding races it's not the same as adding sub-themes.

Personally I hope more full factions will pop up. Limiting it to 6 would make no sense and push away a lot of potential customers.

My main hope for the game atm is that you don't need to buy everything 2x or more to make decent decks.

Got your points guys.

Anyway, I don't see people quitting the game for a missing "skaven" race.

Believe me, I do like and know well the Martin environment, but, even if i'd really like to have, I don't know, a Night's Watch independent faction, I'd never leave the game.

And again...I'd really like Vampires, i.e., but I will not quit the game because of they're not a race.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, I'd never quit the game if they become a race ;-)

I'm not AGAINST your ideas, guys, don't misunderstand me...I'm ready to change my mind if they demonstrate the capability to create new races maintaining a good balancing...But my PERSONAL experience says that's difficult and even if i trust FFG, I have to say that some choices are arguable.

Now...

We have to balance game needings and thematic flavour to obtain a good result and I guess what they did is a pretty solid game, with great mechanics, graphics and cards...We can ask for more themes and flavours, but we have to understand and FORGIVE some "odd" choices to preserve some game "solidity".

This is not a book, or a movie or a wargame, where some variety is directly tied both with the commercial and the game necessity.

WH:I a card game. What it needs is good mechanics with good arts and the more themes it can get. IMHO.

The fact that we're here (and more players are coming, believe me) is the proof that this little "gaps" aren't a problem at all.

Maybe, after a couple of BPs we'll see something that will make us forget about it

I talk about this cause, as I said, I live the same thing with Agot and MOST of the time I have to accept some "odd" choices that are well accepted if they improve the "health" of the game.

Then, let's see what'll happen in the future.

Peace

DB

You might not leave it but I know people who won't buy until their race pops up. My brother for instance has gone by good games because his favourite faction, race or character wasn't in it. As have I at times.

ChaosChild said:

I talked with Eric at Game 09 and he siad that Skaven will be neutral, if I remember right.