Ugh. Completely forgot about the live stream. I like what I see but it's difficult to give much of an opinion before I spend time with the game.

My only complaint so far is a minor one but I have to admit it really bothers me. I hate the art they picked for Avengers Assemble. Looks more like they are taking a group picture than gathering to face a dangerous foe. I'd rather have Captain America front and center leading an attack with other Avengers at his side.

Like I said, minor complaint but I really dislike their choice of art.

5 minutes ago, Derrault said:

There’s a qualitative difference between needing two cores to play a game with 4 players and needing only one.

A few Generic/class duplicates isn’t even close to being a negative on that scale.

It isn’t, until the math says it is. If 3 cards per 60 card pack are reprints, then that’s 5% of the pack. That cost for a $15 pack is $0.75. After about 50 packs are released that’s the price of your second core and a stack of 150 wasted cards. That’s at just 3 reprints per pack. And, LotR is beyond 50 packs. Arkham is over halfway there. If the game is a success it’s going to be a waste all the players have. You can argue if it’s a big deal/dealbreaker/worth talking about or whatever. But it’s a factual waste of cards and cost to the consumer that provides no positive value.

16 minutes ago, Turtlefan2082 said:

When I first got my friends into Arkham, I built all the decks. We are about to start a new campaign (#3), my friends will build their decks using my collection. I have a friend who owns the core game and Dunwich expansion, and he still insist on using my collection to build from because it is bigger. I can guarantee that the same thing will happen with this game. I will invest, and everyone will build from my collection. Get over yourself. Not all players should be heavily invested

Get over himself? C’mon. Supposing LCG players want to deckbuild isn’t a radical thought. I’m in the same boat as you with Arkham and LotR, so I get the group mindset that the coop LCGers may have, but even then my friends contribute a pack here and there if they want to use a card that I’ve run out of.

15 minutes ago, gokubb said:

It isn’t, until the math says it is. If 3 cards per 60 card pack are reprints, then that’s 5% of the pack. That cost for a $15 pack is $0.75. After about 50 packs are released that’s the price of your second core and a stack of 150 wasted cards. That’s at just 3 reprints per pack. And, LotR is beyond 50 packs. Arkham is over halfway there. If the game is a success it’s going to be a waste all the players have. You can argue if it’s a big deal/dealbreaker/worth talking about or whatever. But it’s a factual waste of cards and cost to the consumer that provides no positive value.

Get over himself? C’mon. Supposing LCG players want to deckbuild isn’t a radical thought. I’m in the same boat as you with Arkham and LotR, so I get the group mindset that the coop LCGers may have, but even then my friends contribute a pack here and there if they want to use a card that I’ve run out of.

Do they have anything close to 50 hero packs for the LOTR LCG?

1 hour ago, Turtlefan2082 said:

When I first got my friends into Arkham, I built all the decks. We are about to start a new campaign (#3), my friends will build their decks using my collection. I have a friend who owns the core game and Dunwich expansion, and he still insist on using my collection to build from because it is bigger. I can guarantee that the same thing will happen with this game. I will invest, and everyone will build from my collection. Get over yourself. Not all players should be heavily invested

So you're saying that you are going to build the decks for your friends? I'm sorry, did you say build the decks?

I'm not saying all players should be heavily invested. Literally all I'm saying is that FFG's customers shouldn't have to buy the same product dozens of times over again. But if you want to resort to personal attacks, go for it.

59 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Do they have anything close to 50 hero packs for the LOTR LCG?

There will be 48 when the game wraps up it's final cycle. Plus 8 saga expansions and 7 deluxe expansions (which no doubt will have reprints in champions as well.). Sagas and deluxes averaged about 2 heroes per. So 78 heroes then, so ~234 reprints roughly, minimum, if it lasts as long as LoTR did (not that I expect it to in this new age of FFG but still).

2 hours ago, gokubb said:

But it’s a factual waste of cards and cost to the consumer that provides no positive value.

Duplicated cards provide some positive values. You can argue that the costs (and the waste) outweigh the benefits but you can’t speak of facts if you ignore half of them. It becomes an opinion.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

There’s a qualitative difference between needing two cores to play a game with 4 players and needing only one.

A few Generic/class duplicates isn’t even close to being a negative on that scale.

Yet I can play aGoT and LotR with four players right of the box without problems, since there are special rules that allow that. Arkham is the only multiplayer LCG that required a second core to play 4 players (or the Dunwich box). MC could have perfectly gone the LotR route and allow for smaller decks as an intro experience, while giving the missing cards for fullsets as the «reprints» in new packs. No need for second core, reprints are useful for everybody and you can play 4 players with one core.

However, they decided that they wanted us to pay more for the same product like we always did. They just reshuffled the stuff to make it more marketable.

1 hour ago, Supertoe said:

So you're saying that you are going to build the decks for your friends? I'm sorry, did you say build the decks?

Only for new players

6 hours ago, xchan said:

It has already been said, but reprinting cards does nothing to make decks "viable". That's their excuse to sell us the same product again.

I don't get why people were so vocal against FFG to "force" players to get multiple cores if they wanted full playsets of every card (and by doing so, getting a bunch of extras) but are ok with getting reprints. They are selling us that controversial 2nd core set extras piece by piece now, and we don't have a choice, as they are mixing new product with old one. I could skip the infamous 2nd core before without missing any content, but now I'll be forced to get a 6th crappy Strenght card if I want to get the new hero deck. This is defenetely 100 times more annoying. Now I can't be "happy" about the full-playsets-in-one-core deal, as they are trying to trick me with selling me the same stuff again.

Resource cards are not that great, let alone mandatory. Don't overhype them for no reason.

I would rather a (very small) number of reprints in each pack of 60 than have to buy a second or third core set. It isn’t even close how much I prefer it to be honest.

The last LCG I bought into was Legend of the 5 rings - I bought 3 cores to have a full play set and mained Crane. I had a few goes with some of the other clans and obviously splashed a few different support clans, but I would say I didn’t get much use out of at least 50% of each of those boxes. The game has kind of dried up in my area, so I only bought the first cycle, but again each of those 60 card packs probably had less than 15 cards (being generous) that I actually used.

With the Cap Pack, I’ll be using a much higher percentage of the cards - I’ll play with the starter deck (without having to deconstruct another deck), and I’ll deck build some. I’ll play with it solo and with my group. I’ll be getting much better value from 55 (say) new cards here than I was getting from 60 new cards there.

7 hours ago, xchan said:

It has already been said, but reprinting cards does nothing to make decks "viable"

Just because it has already been said doesn’t mean it’s the truth. I am personally happy that FFG sell us optimized and enjoyable precon decks, even at the cost of some duplicated cards.

6 hours ago, xchan said:

Yet I can play aGoT and LotR with four players right of the box without problems, since there are special rules that allow that. Arkham is the only multiplayer LCG that required a second core to play 4 players (or the Dunwich box). MC could have perfectly gone the LotR route and allow for smaller decks as an intro experience, while giving the missing cards for fullsets as the «reprints» in new packs. No need for second core, reprints are useful for everybody and you can play 4 players with one core.

However, they decided that they wanted us to pay more for the same product like we always did. They just reshuffled the stuff to make it more marketable.

Eww half a deck is no bueno.

And the obvious value of a full playable deck in any given expansion is that you can buy and play with a group of strangers and not have to borrow someone else’s cards (and then wander off with them)

I like the fully playable hero packs, great idea by FFG!

8 hours ago, Supertoe said:

There will be 48 when the game wraps up it's final cycle. Plus 8 saga expansions and 7 deluxe expansions (which no doubt will have reprints in champions as well.). Sagas and deluxes averaged about 2 heroes per. So 78 heroes then, so ~234 reprints roughly, minimum, if it lasts as long as LoTR did (not that I expect it to in this new age of FFG but still).

There are currently 107 hero characters for LOTR

Did anybody else notice that the text on Zemo's card states he is Captain America's nemesis, whereas no nemesis in the core set has any such specified text?

I wonder whether FFG decided as an afterthought beyond the core set design to add this text to prevent folk from switching between different available nemesis in the collection.

Would it really matter if a player decided to try a different nemesis other than the intended one for a particular hero?

7 hours ago, player4273900 said:

Just because it has already been said doesn’t mean it’s the truth. I am personally happy that FFG sell us optimized and enjoyable precon decks, even at the cost of some duplicated cards.

You seem to assume FFG is adding reprints to make decks more optimized. I don't. Half the decks they suggest in other LCG are pretty bland, far from being optimized.

They might be enjoyable, but they would still be enjoyable without reprints.

Caleb seems to suggest in the stream that he would add reprint because it fits with the character and/or deck design. Rather than create a unique but redundant card for that purpose he'd just include the old card in there. So yeah he wasn't saying he needed to do that to optimize the deck. Just that he wanted that option to create decks that he thought were fun and/or functional. I guess something like Avengers Mansion in an Avenger character's deck that also required a bit more draw to be functional is an example or some copies of Indomitable in a deck designed to defend alot and wants more readying effects. In both scenarios that wouldn't be so bad since repeats of those cards assuming a collection of 1x of each product would still have some value if you are constructing multiple decks from one collection.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

Eww half a deck is no bueno.

And the obvious value of a full playable deck in any given expansion is that you can buy and play with a group of strangers and not have to borrow someone else’s cards (and then wander off with them)

Half deck is as good or better is all you are planning to buy is a single core and play multiplayer with friends.

And I'm not arguing that hero decks are not a good products. I argue that reprints are not needed in them.

They already upped the price of the core set so they could include a full playset of every card in it. Then, they decided that the higher price was just not enough so they are also reselling us some of those cards to make even more proffit out of us.

I find that pretty annoying since I was planning on playing this solo. I didn't felt the need to buy second cores of LotR or Arkham for solo play. MC is far more expensive to me. Not only because the core is priced higher, but because I will get useless cards every now and then with new product.

I don't buy the excuse that people is making for them. Those cards won't make decks more effective or playable out of the box. Most of the decks I played doesn't run resource cards because I prefer to play mostly low cost cards (and I don't see myself changing that anytime soon), and once the cardpool grows bigger, they will become even more useless. Those are not "staple" cards let alone mandatory.

To me, they are just lazy, and want to exploit us more by reselling us the same stuff.

3 hours ago, Janaka said:

Did anybody else notice that the text on Zemo's card states he is Captain America's nemesis, whereas no nemesis in the core set has any such specified text?

I wonder whether FFG decided as an afterthought beyond the core set design to add this text to prevent folk from switching between different available nemesis in the collection.

Would it really matter if a player decided to try a different nemesis other than the intended one for a particular hero?

That is odd. Particularly since all nemesis sets have an encounter set name printed in the bottom left. It might be the inclusion of additional reminder text, which is going to be part of the templating going forward.

Re: reprints in Hero Packs - I don't personally see it as a problem. If the trade off is, hero packs contain a playable out of the box deck at the 'cost' of a few reprints. That's fine by me. Much easier for new players to get into the game, and makes it much easier to me to act as an ambassador for the game - and even makes it easier to get the game to the table in general, since you're not building decks for all your friends, potentially.

As Caleb explained in the video, when they're building a pre-con deck, they're bound to come across situations when the deck 'wants' a staple effects.

FFG has to either:

1) Design a card that is needlessly different (providing more staples effects that draw away from aspect cards and make deckbuilding more samey)

2) Design a card that is similar but underpowered (players don't want strictly worse cards - these will be seen as even less valuable than reprints)

3) Design a card that is better (power creep)

4) Simply reprint some cards

I think that last one is the best solution.

If you're the kind of person who says "Right, it's a 60 card pack for $15, so I'm paying 25 cents per card. Wait, what, this pack contains 3 reprints!? I've been swindled!" then sure, it might be a problem for you.

Mostly I look as the packs as a new injection of cards and options, for a reasonable monthly fee. Some packs will contain a hero I'm not interested in - so it's more like a 45 card pack - but in the grand scheme of things who cares? (Plus you're telling me if you buy a pack for the aspect cards, having no interest in the included hero, you're NEVER going to try them at least once?)

In the competitive LCGs, each 60-card pack had full playsets of 19-22 different new cards. In the Captain America hero pack of approximately 60 cards (I think it's 59) there are full playsets of 30-34 different new cards. Even with reprints, that's a better deal in terms of new content. I've not played any of the other co-operative LCGs, can someone who has tell me how many new cards per 60-card pack there are?

39 minutes ago, xchan said:

Half deck is as good or better is all you are planning to buy is a single core and play multiplayer with friends.

And I'm not arguing that hero decks are not a good products. I argue that reprints are not needed in them.

They already upped the price of the core set so they could include a full playset of every card in it. Then, they decided that the higher price was just not enough so they are also reselling us some of those cards to make even more proffit out of us.

I find that pretty annoying since I was planning on playing this solo. I didn't felt the need to buy second cores of LotR or Arkham for solo play. MC is far more expensive to me. Not only because the core is priced higher, but because I will get useless cards every now and then with new product.

I don't buy the excuse that people is making for them. Those cards won't make decks more effective or playable out of the box. Most of the decks I played doesn't run resource cards because I prefer to play mostly low cost cards (and I don't see myself changing that anytime soon), and once the cardpool grows bigger, they will become even more useless. Those are not "staple" cards let alone mandatory.

To me, they are just lazy, and want to exploit us more by reselling us the same stuff.

I take the opposite view really - compared to the last LCG I spent money on, the core set is half the price (or the 3 I bought) and I will get more use out of the cards in each hero pack (as I intend to play this game solo, which I couldn’t do with the last LCG and because you must play all of a hero’d Signature cards to use them).

I bought several dynasty packs for L5R for maybe 6 cards I actually wanted and used regularly? Comparatively, having a few cards I don’t need doesn’t feel so bad - if I play the prebuilt Captain America deck once, I think it will probably be the highest percentage of a 60 card pack I have ever used, so it looks far better value from where I’m sitting...

17 minutes ago, jonboyjon1990 said:

1) Design a card that is needlessly different (providing more staples effects that draw away from aspect cards and make deckbuilding more samey)

Having a needlessly different card helps expand deckbuilding and differentiate decks of the same aspect. I don't understand how you came to the opposite conclusion.

As I see it, number one is the better option. Sure Cap might want an Avengers Mansion in his deck, but that doesn't mean he has to have it. Will the deck be less effective without it, probably, but it will still be playable and enjoyable out of the box. I don't get why people assume otherwise.

If a deck falls apart without that card it's either because the card is overpowered (I don't want another Steward of Gondor situation) or the deck is not well thought.

I think the biggest problem are resource cards. They cornered themselves with those and now they have no option but to never create different ones to prevent an economy spike. Reprinting them in new decks is the easiest option.

That could have been prevented by making them limited through deckbuilding rules ("only three neutral resources allowed per deck") instead of through the cards effect. We could be looking forward to mix resource cards or resource cards with some extra effects similar to arkham skill cards (get something extra if you paid for X type of card). However, we are going to be stuck with Strenghts and Geneouses for a very long time. Lazy and disappointing. And their excuse is that the decks are more viable this way...

When you buy a pre constructed deck for MTG or pokemon, it comes with reprints of the basic resource cards.

I mean, it's not exactly the same, but it isn't that different either.

1 hour ago, jonboyjon1990 said:

If you're the kind of person who says "Right, it's a 60 card pack for $15, so I'm paying 25 cents per card. Wait, what, this pack contains 3 reprints!? I've been swindled!" then sure, it might be a problem for you.

My concern is not money. It's time and opportunity. I'm more disappointed that they are using slots in a hero pack that could have otherwise been allocated to an excited new card. Financially what they are talking about is pretty insignificant and really is preferable to the old system where your redundant purchases were all front loaded at the beginning when you bought several core sets. Here it's rationed out throughout the life of the game in extremely small increments and it's filling a function that's understandable. It's still better IMO. I just was kinda hoping we'd have no redundancy at all this time around since as someone who will buy all the packs and will deck build it benefits me very little.

16 minutes ago, Deadwolf said:

When you buy a pre constructed deck for MTG or pokemon, it comes with reprints of the basic resource cards.

I mean, it's not exactly the same, but it isn't that different either.

Well most people get into LCGs to get away from annoying aspects of the CCG release formats. So I'm not sure that answer is gonna satisfy LCG die hards

1 hour ago, xchan said:

To me, they are just lazy, and want to exploit us more by reselling us the same stuff.

The good news is that you have all the informations (a core set with all the cards but at a higher price and hero packs with reprints) before buying anything. If the reprints are such an issue for you, you can forget this game without losing 70 euros in the core set and the first scenario pack.