25 minutes ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

Clearly you didn't understand something at least one or two steps back.

I can’t roll my eyes hard enough at your hubris.

The core supports 4 players using each of the aspects. If you want excess duplicate copies, that’s not included, nor would it be rational for that to be the case in any game ever created in the history of gaming.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

I can’t roll my eyes hard enough at your hubris.

The core supports 4 players using each of the aspects. If you want excess duplicate copies, that’s not included, nor would it be rational for that to be the case in any game ever created in the history of gaming.

You're missing the whole point of this entire thread. Go back and read everything from the beginning.

6 minutes ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

You're missing the whole point of this entire thread. Go back and read everything from the beginning.

The point is that you’re asking for something ridiculous.

Can I just say, if you have 4 players instead of two, shouldn't you be buying 2 of everything anyways? Seeing as there's twice as much money involved? ❓

18 minutes ago, Derrault said:

The point is that you’re asking for something ridiculous.

I'm not asking for anything. Again you're missing the point. Stop being combative and go read the entire thread.

8 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

Can I just say, if you have 4 players instead of two, shouldn't you be buying 2 of everything anyways? Seeing as there's twice as much money involved? ❓

I think that is part of the business model for this game as well as other games like it. And that's one of the pros about Android: Netrunner and Star Wars: The Card Game , because buying more than one complete card pool isn't strictly necessary.

On 10/4/2019 at 5:08 PM, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

Are any of the other LCG's, especially the co-ops, also 4-player games? If so, and you've played one or more of those games with 4 players from a single card pool, chime in!

For competitive ones, Warhammer: Invasion and Game of Thrones are 4-player, and both of the other co-ops are. Having played all four at some point, here are my thoughts:

Game of Thrones: This is very, very easy. There are 8 houses, and you can have a max of two houses in each deck, and realistically the neutrals aren't that necessary, and anyway you have a ton of them cuz the game requires three cores. Also has a sweet melee format. Too bad I never got a chance to buy this myself.

Warhammer Invasion: This probably works fine as well. We only really ever play draft mode in Invasion, which is incredible with four players, but since the cardpool is split in half between Order and Destruction, it's only two people sharing pools.

Lord of the Rings: This one is admittedly trickier. There is limitations to it. There are some cards that are staples. And the way deckbuilding works, you almost always blend spheres, and there's only four of them. Not great with one pool.

Arkham: Not bad actually. There are *some* limitations, but not a ton. That said 4-player Arkham itself is a bit of a snoozefest regardless of how many cardpools you have.

4 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

For competitive ones, Warhammer: Invasion and Game of Thrones are 4-player, and both of the other co-ops are. Having played all four at some point, here are my thoughts:

Game of Thrones: This is very, very easy. There are 8 houses, and you can have a max of two houses in each deck, and realistically the neutrals aren't that necessary, and anyway you have a ton of them cuz the game requires three cores. Also has a sweet melee format. Too bad I never got a chance to buy this myself.

Warhammer Invasion: This probably works fine as well. We only really ever play draft mode in Invasion, which is incredible with four players, but since the cardpool is split in half between Order and Destruction, it's only two people sharing pools.

Lord of the Rings: This one is admittedly trickier. There is limitations to it. There are some cards that are staples. And the way deckbuilding works, you almost always blend spheres, and there's only four of them. Not great with one pool.

Arkham: Not bad actually. There are *some* limitations, but not a ton. That said 4-player Arkham itself is a bit of a snoozefest regardless of how many cardpools you have.

Thanks for your input. How do you suspect that Marvel Champions will measure up in this regard?

3 hours ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

I'm not asking for anything. Again you're missing the point. Stop being combative and go read the entire thread.

Of course, your motives could be nothing but pure. What other reason could you have for making a false assumption and then telling me that I didn’t read your post? Cough.

On October 4, 2019 at 4:51 PM, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

What if we all want to play the same aspect? Perhaps build four very aggressive, similar decks. Because that can be a thing.

Then you're going to need multiple copies of the core set. Or you'll need to wait until enough hero packs come out with different aspects, and/or double up on buying those.

On October 4, 2019 at 5:06 PM, Deadwolf said:

Not only would your team be extremely one dimensional (an all aggression team would be eaten alive be threat)

But different heroes prefer different aspects, so you'd be shoehorning an aspect onto a hero who is more efficient with something else.

An all aggression team would indeed not be able to do much about threat, but might be the fastest at just blitzing the villain and taking them down before they're able to advance too much.

On October 4, 2019 at 5:08 PM, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

Are any of the other LCG's, especially the co-ops, also 4-player games? If so, and you've played one or more of those games with 4 players from a single card pool, chime in!

I've played Arkham Horror with 2 copies of the core set and 1 of each expansion at every player count from 1-4, but mostly with 3 players. We didn't have any real issues about overlapping cards we wanted for our decks, but we did all play different classes. Multiple players playing the same class would definitely make it harder build decks out of one pool.

Not really too sure what the OP is getting at here.

The core set does exactly what it says on the box. A game for 1-4 players with cards to play up to four heroes at a time using the four aspects of the game.

If I understand correctly, your wanting to play the game with up to four heroes from a single aspect? Well that gets fixed with time as hero packs are produced. It gets fixed without the need to buy anything more than a single core box.

Players need only ever buy the core game. Any further purchase is free choice; even for self-confessed completists.

10 hours ago, Derrault said:

Of course, your motives could be nothing but pure. What other reason could you have for making a false assumption and then telling me that I didn’t read your post? Cough.

For the last time, stop with your combative responses, or I will report you. No more warnings.

12 hours ago, Janaka said:

Not really too sure what the OP is getting at here.

The core set does exactly what it says on the box. A game for 1-4 players with cards to play up to four heroes at a time using the four aspects of the game.

If I understand correctly, your wanting to play the game with up to four heroes from a single aspect? Well that gets fixed with time as hero packs are produced. It gets fixed without the need to buy anything more than a single core box.

Players need only ever buy the core game. Any further purchase is free choice; even for self-confessed completists.

That’s exactly the point I made, and they tried to perform some kind of gaslighting/online domination move.

edit: It’s laughable and reportable.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

That’s exactly the point I made, and they tried to perform some kind of gaslighting/online domination move.

That's on me for not clarifying that passive aggressiveness and Last Word Syndrome also count as combativeness.

I think OP answered his own question already. You have 3 options here:

1.)Don't buy, dont play.

2.)Buy multiple copies of the core plus all hero packs.

3.)Buy one of everything. This gives you a full playset of every aspect. Have each player choose a different aspect and then deck building is wide open to them.

22 hours ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

Thanks for your input. How do you suspect that Marvel Champions will measure up in this regard?

I suspect it will perform just as well as game of thrones in that regard, if not better. You can have one person play each of the aspects, and probably you'll have four playsets of every neutral, given the giant stack of reprints that you'll have a couple of years into the game. I would argue that so long as each person picked a different aspect, there'd not be a single other restriction, given how many neutrals we'll have. Only thing is any new neutrals that are introduced might not have the same stack of reprints, those might have to be shared.

58 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

I suspect it will perform just as well as game of thrones in that regard, if not better. You can have one person play each of the aspects, and probably you'll have four playsets of every neutral, given the giant stack of reprints that you'll have a couple of years into the game. I would argue that so long as each person picked a different aspect, there'd not be a single other restriction, given how many neutrals we'll have. Only thing is any new neutrals that are introduced might not have the same stack of reprints, those might have to be shared.

It wouldn’t be terribly surprising if every round of 4 heroes (1 per aspect) brings copies of the same neutrals.

Then you effectively get a 4 player set for each aspect rotation.

The neutrals currently are either:

1. Deck Restricted (double resources, allies) - you have enough for everyone

2. Play Restricted (Avengers Mansion,Helicarrier) - you probably dont want 3 of these in your deck but 2 is probably ideal.

3. Unrestricted but Situational (Emergency, Haymaker) - Both Emergency and Haymaker are rather weak compared to a comparable signature or aspect card but they still okay in certain decks (Emergency is decent with Iron Man/Capt Marvel due to the energy resource). In 2p it will likely be rare that you have fewer copies than you want but could happen in 4p (tho highly unlikely all 4 will want the same card - unless FFG really screws up and prints an OP neutral)

So, I think 1 core and 1 of each expansions supports 2 players well. But it is a bit more restrictive for 4 players when it comes to neutrals. That said, I think a single core would be fine for 4 casual players.

Hopefully FFG will show restraint with neutrals in the xpacs.

I plan to play this with a group of 4 and I 100% think we will only need a single copy of each thing:

- we will have to agree which heroes to play anyway

- I expect even with 2 cores we would agree to use different aspects each

- there are only 11 neutral cards in the core set. At least 5 of them off the top of my head are max 1 copy per deck. Several of the others are max one copy in play per player. You would therefore be buying a second core for multiple copies of only a handful of cards, none of which I consider to be so strong everyone would want to bring 3 of them.

- in a competitive game, I’d probably want the option to play 3 of everything, but in a co-op min-maxing every deck just doesn’t appeal to me in the same way. If First Aid is important to my friend who is playing protection for example, I’m happy to let him use an an extra copy instead of me - he may end up taking a bigger hit from me instead.

As the card pool grows, I suspect that the unrestricted neutrals will be left in the dust except in niche situations due to being overall weaker than aspect cards.

It is Avengers Mansion & Helicarrier, which are powerful staple cards, that you may have fewer copies and you want at 4p, as it seems 2 of each is ideal. Tho I also dont think it will be a huge difference if you only have 1 and definitely doesn't make a 2nd core a must buy.

For supporting 4 players, a 2nd core gives additional options (allows 2 simultaneous aspects) and opens up more availability for the neutrals but it is definitely not essential.

There's another option here which--I don't think--anyone has discussed yet: you can buy extra copies of the first few products. Then, if you end up having more than you really need or you choose to move on from Marvel Champions for whatever reason, you should be able to unload stuff relatively easy toward the beginning of the game's lifespan.

There is one thing about the Aspects that we don't know enough about yet: what will come in the expansion Hero packs. Each of those Heroes is playable out of the box and will include an Aspect. The Captain America pack will be based on the Leadership Aspect. Once you have that, it will be possible to play two Leadership heroes on your team without a second core. Assuming each of the first four Hero packs has a different Aspect, you should have doubles of each Aspect in less than a year.

However, we don't know enough about the card distribution to know if there will be cards in those packs that everyone will want - if there's a card in the Captain America pack that every Leadership hero will want, then you are basically back to the same place again.

The core leadership deck is all about allies.

We dont know a lot about the leadership deck from the Capt. America but if it is a more support focused leadership deck then it is possible. Both decks would want Power of Leadership, tho there is a good chance that is a reprint card. Who gets what ally would be the biggest point of competition, because an Avengers Assemble deck would also want allies.

15 hours ago, Deadwolf said:

The core leadership deck is all about allies.

We dont know a lot about the leadership deck from the Capt. America but if it is a more support focused leadership deck then it is possible. Both decks would want Power of Leadership, tho there is a good chance that is a reprint card. Who gets what ally would be the biggest point of competition, because an Avengers Assemble deck would also want allies.

You can only run 3 (4 upgraded) so it would make sense to space out the allies

It seems the information in this thread is not very precise and is lacking in a lot of details.

So first of all decks are between 40-50 cards with advantages and disadvantages to both extremes.

There are 5 different Heroes to choose from

Each Hero comes with its own set of deck-required 15 Signature Cards

There are 4 Aspects to choose from. Each player can only choose 1 per deck. Each Aspect has 19 cards some are 3x, some are unique and can be only 1x per deck, while others are max 2 per deck.

There are also 11 Neutral cards ( x4 players = 44 ).

If you have done the math that is 45 cards (per player available for deck construction). Not even enough to build a full 50 card deck unless another player goes down to a minimum 40 card deck.

As far as deck constructing goes (in a 4-player pool) there are significant limitations from a single Core Set. Counting primary options you have 20 (5*4) + 12 (4*3) + 6 (3*2) +2 (2*1) = 40 (4-player) build options. That may seem like a lot but it also seems amazingly stale as the 3rd deck builder only gets 1 of 6 choices and the 4th deck builder gets only 2 choices.

From that point since you are potentially only trading a few cards or cutting up to 5 cards there is, in actuality, very little deck crafting until SEVERAL expansions come out.

Now that suits me personally just fine for now (as I approximate a play group of 3 players), but I think I would get 2 core sets so that I dont feel handcuffed as the 3rd deck builder.