A friend of mine blogs and covers miniature gaming for a broad based geeky online publisher, and got to do some extended previewing of the ASoIaF stuff at CMON Expo, and they were assured that this would be a break from CMON's typical Kickstarter model -- there will be no stretch goals, and no early access to products. CMON seemed very cognizant of how crucial having equitable access to units, factions, and abilities is in a customizable game for which they hope to support organized play, and how toxic stretch goals or times exclusives would be to forming an organized play community around the game.

So unless you think they're just telling bald-faced lies to gaming press, that should at least be a concern/criticism taken off the table.

That said, the only thing of interest to me is the license, here. As others have said, a rank and file combat game is an odd duck thematically, and neither the handfuls of d6 combat nor the measuring tape movement grab me these days, especially when Rune Wars Minis makes such refreshing strides in both those arenas. I'm not expecting a lot of exciting thematic diversity that's not based in the leaders, so I'm not optimistic for engaging list building and build variety within factions.

The good news is, I don't have to make a call on it soon, as if I were to play, I'd wait for the Greyjoys to open come out barring some horrible playstyle incompatibility.

1 hour ago, Necronson said:

what about Uthuk Y'llan you say? Well that's a kickstarter exclusive,

Dont forget KS exclusive Ardus' and Kari's alternate card!

Kari: her ability goes to range 7 (comes with special KS exclusive range 7 ruler), and its 4 damage per surge!

Ardus: 4 white dice!

I truly hate Kickstarters as presales. All these companies do is burn all the retail outlets and then expect them to carry the game later. If your game is ready to go and produced already (i.e. you have the capital, either in cash or from I don't know a legitimate lending institution like a bank or heaven forbid an investor) just release it through normal distribution channels. It is way better for you in the long run if you don't spurn the game stores.

Don't defer all the risk to the kickstarter backers, if you have a solid product you think will succeed then put up your own **** money. Companies like Mantic and CMON are a blight (i'm sure there are others too).

Many things being said here are wrong

CMoN will do a new formatted KS for this game

There will be off table intrigue and subterfuge

A love rolling lots of dice, less swing

I also love a defense roll

CMoN is going for simple, no need paint, simplified rule (although there are things I don't like about the rules)

And there is an element of predicting due to global turn choices and which units you activate. Although I love flight path method of initiative

ASoIF is going for

You cant say that we are wrong despite you loving lots of dice, and a defense roll. Those are very subjective things.

The subterfuge and intrigue didnt play a part of the demo video so we cant comment on if its good or not.

And Ill see what happens with the kickstarter when I see it, people have said it wont have exclusives or early birds, but then why would I kickstart it?

What is the draw of a fistful of dice? I've never understood the whole I like rolling 40 dice and killing 3 dudes. Also why do you prefer an defense roll to a static armor?

19 minutes ago, jek said:

What is the draw of a fistful of dice? I've never understood the whole I like rolling 40 dice and killing 3 dudes. Also why do you prefer an defense roll to a static armor?

There's a joke in here about massive dice in hands, but I'm not gonna make it cause I don't want to get banned.

I don't know if anyone caught this in the demo but they announced that there are no ranged units sets for ASOIF and there is no siege engines. Thus you have only cavalry and infantry. It becomes a really blocky wargame with very little tactical choice other than where your blocks slam into each other. I would be more excited if it allowed for me to recreate real medieval style battles but without ranged or siege ability it seems very much like a pass at the moment until that changes. With archers and the potential siege weapons in Rune Wars due to the monsters being called siege types. I feel like it will provide more options than ASOIF.

10 minutes ago, Entos1 said:

I don't know if anyone caught this in the demo but they announced that there are no ranged units sets for ASOIF and there is no siege engines. Thus you have only cavalry and infantry. It becomes a really blocky wargame with very little tactical choice other than where your blocks slam into each other. I would be more excited if it allowed for me to recreate real medieval style battles but without ranged or siege ability it seems very much like a pass at the moment until that changes. With archers and the potential siege weapons in Rune Wars due to the monsters being called siege types. I feel like it will provide more options than ASOIF.

Well they did go over that alittle, he just didn't want to answer at that point, something in the works yadda yadda yadda. Like ranged units was some kind of company secret or something. Pfft. If they do forgo having ranged units then that would just be really really weird.

They will have ranged units.. I saw pics of them somewhere

And as far as dice, I love rolling dice, plus more dice tend to average out better. I've watch how to play runeswar video where one lucky roll swung the entire battle, not much coming back from 12 hits

3 hours ago, taylorcowbell said:

You cant say that we are wrong despite you loving lots of dice, and a defense roll. Those are very subjective things.

The subterfuge and intrigue didnt play a part of the demo video so we cant comment on if its good or not.

And Ill see what happens with the kickstarter when I see it, people have said it wont have exclusives or early birds, but then why would I kickstart it?

They said kickstarter would be formatted different - I think they will try premium figures, painted and whatnot

There is off table subterfuge - good or not is an opinion but it is there

Also....

I love rolling lots of dice, less swing

I also love a defense roll

CMoN is going for simple, no need paint, simplified rule (although there are things I don't like about the rules)

But saying its some kind of negative is wrong when there are many who like it, its not a mark against the game, when some see it as a positive...that's my point

there hope you feel better

6 hours ago, jek said:

What is the draw of a fistful of dice? I've never understood the whole I like rolling 40 dice and killing 3 dudes. Also why do you prefer an defense roll to a static armor?

mainly it creates better average results and with a defense there is another variable which can be played with. Plus its fun, we always have a good time scooping up dice and rolling them, seems to always be a conversation

10 minutes ago, ryolacap said:

better averages

As an engineer with a math minor I can tell you the average is the average no matter how many instances you roll.

23 minutes ago, flightmaster101 said:

As an engineer with a math minor I can tell you the average is the average no matter how many instances you roll.

Funny, as I assume you are making a joke.

found the pics of archers!

4 minutes ago, ryolacap said:

Funny, as I assume you are making a joke.

found the pics of archers!

You mean the variance decreases, not that the averages change. If you have to get 4+ to hit and you roll 2 dice compared to 20, you're more likely to get all hit or all miss with 2 dice than with 20. That's the benefit you're trying to talk about and it has nothing to do with averages.

So my confusion is if there are archers why were they being so *** and coy about that fact in the demo video?

5 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

You mean the variance decreases, not that the averages change. If you have to get 4+ to hit and you roll 2 dice compared to 20, you're more likely to get all hit or all miss with 2 dice than with 20. That's the benefit you're trying to talk about and it has nothing to do with averages.

of course.... I am also saying you hits will average out. I have seen 12 hits in rune wars followed by 0

1 minute ago, taylorcowbell said:

So my confusion is if there are archers why were they being so *** and coy about that fact in the demo video?

yea that was weird

22 minutes ago, ryolacap said:

average

32 minutes ago, flightmaster101 said:

Seriously. If I roll 10 dice I will get closer to an average amount of successes (mean), than if I roll 1 and multiply my successes by 10. I am saying the successes get closer to the average. or as I said better average results (better as an opinion you might like huge swings per die roll)

Ok, lets do this.

What is an "average" amount of successes? Are we talking about anyone who has ever played the game and thrown (hey game, thrown, lol) a success? If all data from all games is collected and the "average number of success" all players throughout gameplay roll 4 successes, giving a person throwing 10 dice a chance to exceed this average over a person who throws 2? The definition here is crucial because no one collects this data and every instance of hitting and missing is anecdotal. Therefore there is no way you can actually say what the "average" number of successes are.

The averages on the dice will never change. They are always N!(p^x(1-p)^(n-x))/(x!(n-x)!). No matter how many you roll or what you need to succeed, every dice roll with boil down to that formula. It is proven, it is fact. Which is why the definition of "average number of successes" in point one comes into play.

Now if you want to revise your statement to not improperly use the word average, and say "The more dice you roll the better you chance to score hits.", well then that would be a valid statement.

18 minutes ago, flightmaster101 said:

Ok, lets do this.

What is an "average" amount of successes? Are we talking about anyone who has ever played the game and thrown (hey game, thrown, lol) a success? If all data from all games is collected and the "average number of success" all players throughout gameplay roll 4 successes, giving a person throwing 10 dice a chance to exceed this average over a person who throws 2? The definition here is crucial because no one collects this data and every instance of hitting and missing is anecdotal. Therefore there is no way you can actually say what the "average" number of successes are.

The averages on the dice will never change. They are always N!(p^x(1-p)^(n-x))/(x!(n-x)!). No matter how many you roll or what you need to succeed, every dice roll with boil down to that formula. It is proven, it is fact. Which is why the definition of "average number of successes" in point one comes into play.

Now if you want to revise your statement to not improperly use the word average, and say "The more dice you roll the better you chance to score hits.", well then that would be a valid statement.

No, I never said throughout the game you can have an average per die roll because each die roll effects the next. Because of losses you cant quantify 'throughout the game'. And with one die roll there is a better chance to hit closer to the average amount of successes with 10 dice (which on a 4+ would be 5) than if you roll 1 die and multiply it by 10 (which would be either 0 or 10)..... period.

and that's not even getting into defense rolls and the fact that it is pooled dice vs pooled dice and not die vs die

6 minutes ago, ryolacap said:

average amount of successes

Ok, I'll simplify. Define this. ^

I'm not a math wizard but what I think you're saying is that rolling more dice gives you a "bell curve" distribution of results.

1 hour ago, Budgernaut said:

You mean the variance decreases, not that the averages change. If you have to get 4 to hit and you roll 2 dice compared to 20, you're more likely to get all hit or all miss with 2 dice than with 20.

You literally said it here, and I never said the average would change, I said you get better average results ie. more results that are close to the average ie results with less variance. If you would stop clutching on to your precious variance key word and simply admit that in between two sides of variance there is an ______________.