sigmazero13 said:
Actually, in his OP his question was "is this the best way to solve the problem", and thus discussion of why the "problem" doesn't need to be solved is perfectly viable. IE, he's asking "does this fix it", and thus if people don't find it broken, it is otherwise hard to answer.
arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics... thanks for reminding me
Carcass said:
sigmazero13 said:
Actually, in his OP his question was "is this the best way to solve the problem", and thus discussion of why the "problem" doesn't need to be solved is perfectly viable. IE, he's asking "does this fix it", and thus if people don't find it broken, it is otherwise hard to answer.
arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics... thanks for reminding me
Enlighten me... what do you mean by that exactly? I have a cousin with mental disabilities, and am not sure exactly what you are trying to imply with that statement (which I'm guessing is meant at a jab at those with problems).
The point is, he asked "does this fix it" and people say "fix what? What exactly is it that's wrong that needs to be fixed". When what he's asking is "does anyone else like my idea". And some did, but most apparently don't on this thread, thinking it causes the game to be imbalanced.
All the cool kids are talking about hex unit variants in that awesome new post. This thread is way whack and so last week.
LOL @ Carcass ya thats what i was asking but i enjoy discussing anything about boardgames since i run a boardgame/internet/warhammer/Magic/Music store and i value all opinions even if i do not agree but ya i don't spend to much effort rebutting someone that seems bent on being right . I believe RuneWars has some flaws as does other games and all i wanted to do here was discuss how we can improve the game "did not use fix he he he " and not have a discussion on games being broken i had a huge post about that months ago and we talked it to death. But i do enjoy the discussion and take no offense to anyone believing differently then I but i do not argue to be Right i argue to get to a sollution to solve an issue , problem .
Anyhooo Thanks again for your time i will try your option Carcass and see how it runs i also bought my 3rd RunWars game so we can try running it as more of a Risk Style multi attacks with 8 extra map pieces and 3x the units i might need 4x but will see
get back to you on that
Thanks
Ripley... said:
Well without offending you if you have played Descent enough then you should know what im saying about producing a game with many bugs aka not playteted enough in wich i feel i have talked about to death in other forums . How do you think Arata's are created developers read our
I'm not offended at all. I understand there are people out there who feel differently than I do and I try to allow for other people's opinions when making my posts. At the end of the day everything I say is just my opinion, after all. =)
For the record, I do know what you mean about games with lots of bugs and I also have felt in the past that maybe FFG didn't do as much playtesting as they should have. Runewars is not a game that I feel that way about. In fact, Runewars is a game I hold up as a shining example of FFG's efforts to correct their earlier games' flaws in this regard. I'm not denying that FFG has had its issues - nobody is perfect after all - I'm just saying Runewars in particular is not a game I would call broken.
Ripley... said:
thoughts and suggestions about bugs or other effects that might alter the games intent in the situation with RuneWars i found 2 problems the game is way to dragonrune oriented and the armies mean didlyskwat meaning you can just create a defensive position just outside your starting zone and use your heroes to win the game making the armies useless might as well be Runebound. Second the routing of large Neutral units these units are too easily killed or pushed away buy routing. So i was just putting it out there that mabe 2 routs are needed to rout a large i say again Neutral unit.
Concerning the idea that RW is too "dragon rune oriented" all I can say is of course it is. Dragon runes are, in fact, the goal of the game. Collecting them is how you win. I should hope the game is oriented around its victory conditions, that's a sign of good design.
Regarding the idea that heroes dominate and that this might as well be Runebound, I have to disagree with you there. Personally I've found the heroes and armies are well balanced in relation to one another. The armies take up more time - as they should - and the heroes do their thing on the side. Neither of them "dominates" our games. Furthermore, considering the (rather large) number of people I've seen who have expressed exactly the opposite opinion - that the heroes don't add anything of value to the game, I would conclude that there's some wiggle room here for how your group chooses to play the game. Maybe the people at your table are spending too much time thinking about their heroes.
Lastly, concerning neutral units, I don't have any problem with a dragon being taken down by a handful of archers or other triangle units. Each triangle unit represents a whole group of soldiers, after all. It's not a lone warrior standing against the dragon, it's like 20-50 guys. I have no trouble with that many people overpowering a dragon. Even if you choose to picture the dragon unit as a small group of dragons, there are still a lot of dudes there. I also don't see any reason why a dragon would be less likely to rout than a human (or whatever.) Dragons are intelligent and fear for their lives as much as anyone else would. If they perceive that these few HUNDRED soliders, represented by 2 or 3 plastic units on the board, might take them out, they fly the heck away. Making special rules to keep dragons around longer because "dragons ain't afraid of no ****" is the more ridiculous idea to me. It implies the dragon(s) are overconfident and routinely charge into situations where the odds are plainly against them. Quite the opposite of what an intelligent and non-suicidal creature would do.
As I said previously, you can play the game however you want. Make whatever house rules help you sleep at night. This doesn't mean the game is broken without them and it doesn't mean FFG dropped the ball during testing, it just means the game doesn't do what you thought it would.
You might be right we played again and i changed the base starting value for runes at 2 fake and 1 dragon rune and it seemed to fix everything there was more time for armies and harder to get the dragon rune victory . Coolbeans guys thanks alot for your time on the thread