Well, someday I have to try playing 4 handed, this will be really chaotic and fun.

Felt compelled to report that after trying 2-handed solo for a little while I'm a total convert. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I was going to give it a try...

I've been playing progression style 1-handed solo all through Shadows of Mirkwood, Khazad Dum and Over hill and under hill. I found a few of the KD scenarios discouragingly tough/not fun enough.

Having read through this thread it really inspired me to give 2-handed a real try. I'm so happy I did. It really is so much more fun. So thanks for everyone on here who shared their experiences. In hindsight it makes so much more sense to use more cards - I feel I'm getting the most out of my time/money.

I'm continuing my progression two-handed from here on in, starting with Heirs of Numenor. For anybody interested: https://ringsdb.com/fellowship/view/7598/ats1perilinpelargir2-handedsoloprogression 👍

I'm glad you enjoy 2-handed!

Out of curiosity, are you playing with real cards, OCTGN, or something else?

45 minutes ago, tripecac said:

I'm glad you enjoy 2-handed!

Out of curiosity, are you playing with real cards, OCTGN, or something else?

Real cards.

One of the many reasons I love lotr lcg is that I'm not looking at a screen (which is what I seem to spend most of my time doing! 😉 )

On 9/29/2019 at 4:40 PM, mttrchrds said:

Felt compelled to report that after trying 2-handed solo for a little while I'm a total convert. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I was going to give it a try...

I've been playing progression style 1-handed solo all through Shadows of Mirkwood, Khazad Dum and Over hill and under hill. I found a few of the KD scenarios discouragingly tough/not fun enough.

I'm still playing one handed, and I'm enjoying it. I can see that you are always having to give up a sphere when it comes to playing one handed though, you always have to be deciding what to leave out.

I've played all the Dwarrowdelf Cycle scenarios, and Shadow and Flame was the only scenario that I thought was annoyingly difficult. I had a pretty good dwarf deck going, then when you get to Shadow and Flame (the last scenario in the cycle) it doesn't work anymore, and you have to switch to something else.

2 hours ago, Vince79 said:

I'm still playing one handed, and I'm enjoying it. I can see that you are always having to give up a sphere when it comes to playing one handed though, you always have to be deciding what to leave out.

I've played all the Dwarrowdelf Cycle scenarios, and Shadow and Flame was the only scenario that I thought was annoyingly difficult. I had a pretty good dwarf deck going, then when you get to Shadow and Flame (the last scenario in the cycle) it doesn't work anymore, and you have to switch to something else.

I'm at a similar point in the game as you Vince, moving through progression (I just started Heirs of Numenor). You should give 2-handed a try, I'm really glad I did. Games take a bit longer but they are a lot more enjoyable. Getting some synergy going between the two decks is brilliant.

Ranged and sentinel are like new toys - very powerful. One of the best things about it is not deckbuilding for a deck that can do everything, each deck can specialise (e.g. one for combat, one for questing). This means you get to use a lot more cards.

I have been preferring 1-Handed Solo, but I mainly use it as an opportunity to test the brute functionality of a deck, like how reliable is it's early-turn resource economy?, do the expected synergies work as expected?, are there any cards I just never use?, and similar evaluative metrics.

I primarily play the game 2-Player Co-Op, but I just find 2-Handed solo to be just a bit too much tedium. But I see solo (1-handed) play as on opportunity to test decks for future 2-Handed play. I certainly don't expect a 1-Handed Solo deck to do terribly well, but if it can't beat Passage Through Mirkwood it probably needs some serious work. If it can hang in the Journey Down the River for at least half of the Anduin, it's probably got some chops and the games, while "losses," will still reveal a lot about the deck's resource economy, early turn draws, and strengths/weaknesses.

So I see 1-Handed solo as a test run and tuning opportunity for deck-building. If the deck can beat quests solo, it is all the more exciting. But I don't begrudge or unduly doubt any lone 1-Handed deck that falls to a Hill Troll, Ufthak, Marsh Adder trio or can't handle a pile of back-to-back locations with one or more Brown Lands down the queue or is immediately overwhelmed by a quad chain-surge encounter deck moment. Those situations might be survivable in 2-Handed with the right decks, of course, but they're pretty much end of the road for a solo deck.

But if a Solo deck fails early, it's just another opportunity to reshuffle and play the first few rounds of the next game, and the early rounds are probably the most important for gauging how well a deck's card-pull reliability and economy efficiency really works.

18 hours ago, mttrchrds said:

I'm at a similar point in the game as you Vince, moving through progression (I just started Heirs of Numenor). You should give 2-handed a try, I'm really glad I did. Games take a bit longer but they are a lot more enjoyable. Getting some synergy going between the two decks is brilliant.

My next move is into Over Hill and Under Hill, which is chronologically after the Dwarrowdelf Cycle. I know nothing about the Saga Expansions really, but someone here said solo players get to use four heroes. If that's true, that should supply the ability to use all four spheres and get more synergy into the game.

My main concern with playing one handed is that I keep hearing how the scenarios just keep getting harder and harder as the game goes on, so missing one of the spheres may become too big of a liability at some point. I've also considered trying to go all the way through one handed, and then going back and trying them all two handed, if I'm still alive by that point.

I like playing one handed because it feels like I'm playing solitaire. Playing two handed sounds too much like I'm pretending there's someone else there to play with. That's a little unfair I'm sure, but that's the way it strikes me for now.

3 hours ago, Vince79 said:

My next move is into Over Hill and Under Hill, which is chronologically after the Dwarrowdelf Cycle. I know nothing about the Saga Expansions really, but someone here said solo players get to use four heroes. If that's true, that should supply the ability to use all four spheres and get more synergy into the game.

Bilbo Baggins is his own "Baggins" sphere in the Hobbit saga (i.e., your other heroes will still represent at most three of the standard spheres if playing one-handed solo), and there are very few Baggins cards in the saga boxes. Of course, nothing stops you from including Songs and other cards in the deck that might allow you to make use of cards from all 4 spheres.

1 hour ago, TwiceBorn said:

Bilbo Baggins is his own "Baggins" sphere in the Hobbit saga (i.e., your other heroes will still represent at most three of the standard spheres if playing one-handed solo), and there are very few Baggins cards in the saga boxes. Of course, nothing stops you from including Songs and other cards in the deck that might allow you to make use of cards from all 4 spheres.

Ok, I see. Songs are all right, and I've been using them to fill the void. But you can't really depend on them being there when you need them. I guess that's true for all of the cards though.

For most/all of the Hobbit quests you probably don't want to be using the Baggins resources to pay for cards, since they have quest specific uses which can be critical.

I like playing one handed because it feels like I'm playing solitaire. Playing two handed sounds too much like I'm pretending there's someone else there to play with. That's a little unfair I'm sure, but that's the way it strikes me for now.

To me, playing LotR LCG 2-handed feels more like controlling multiple characters in a computer RPG (Dragon Age, Baldur's Gate, etc.) - It still feels like a solo experience, just with more characters to control.

If you play Journeys in Middle Earth, you will be forced to control at least 2 characters, so maybe that would help you get used to multi-character control?

12 hours ago, tripecac said:

If you play Journeys in Middle Earth, you will be forced to control at least 2 characters, so maybe that would help you get used to multi-character control?

I do play Journeys in Middle Earth, good game, I recommend it. You're right, playing that game is a bit like playing for two people, because you take turns with each character. As you note though, with the computer app, it feels a bit more like a computer/video game.

I guess the bottom line is that I haven't felt like I've needed to make the switch to two handed yet. Maybe that will change in the future. I understand I'm missing out on some synergy, but that aside I've enjoyed playing one handed.

I might just have this opinion because I have a large card pool and therefore likely a bit of an easier time, but to be honest when I play one hand solo I oftentimes have an easier time since I am usually able to make a very tight deck, and manage the smaller trickle of encounter cards than if there was another deck at the table.

That being said certain decks, usually tactics heavy ones, can be pretty hopeless solo.

For me the main reasons I usually try and get 1 to 2 people together to play is because A. I remember the effects at play in complicated board states better with other people at the table since things are being said out loud etc. and B. Because some quests are just so much cooler with multiple people and essentially lose what makes them unique when you play solo like the long dark and similar affairs.

Starting with Khazad-Dum, I started playing using a three sphere deck (I play one handed solo), because of someone's suggestion here. Also use songs to bring in the fourth sphere. Before this, I considered this to be most likely completely impractical. Now I look back at some of my two sphere decks and I wonder how I ever got by with them.