yea i admin, him calling everyone who coutnered him a fan boy pissed me off.

My MAJOR problem with the 12ish races thing is this. IF this game ever gets big.. MAJOR competive, HAVING 6 races up everyone messed up the meta. To the point where its just clench and pray. Balance is where a game is at, if a game is not balance you piss off your fan bace. Sure warhammer is a world and all that good stuff, but lets say this.. big toury is comeing up, the other 6 get there pack.. no rules saying they cant use it. your race isnt in it. You sir just lost your shot at getting anywhere into tops vs that line up.

Also FROM A $ pov, they WILL NOT give you the option to skip a pack. They loose 15$ every other month. So for a busness POV it wont happen.

Another thought that crossed my mind, was boards with moded stats, 2 in kingdom and 2 in quest. or 2 in kingdom 1 in quest, with a +1 or 2 to hp in a zone.

More races = more support needed, that = more time and money on both ends, theres and ours. Making a race neutral means they are alot easer to splash and build combos that are alot faster and a bit more fun imo.

edit: "IF it isn't broken, don't fix it."

To a point I can understand each side. Maybe in YEARS to come we might get more cities. For right now its just good to get the kinks worked out and the player base big. I am loving this Living Card Game thing. =)

Manchine said:

I second that!

ellindar said:

wow ...so anyone that supports only the 6 races for whatever reason is automatically labeled a 'fanboy' and their opinion is invalid eh?

I would like to have seen other armies as full races as well. I really wanted Vampire counts as one. But at the same time, if they can't do it without armies starting to be to similar, I'd rather them do it as they did.

The reason I wish that Skaven, etc would have gotten their own boards is that I think that neutral cards themselves are somewhat unbalanced. I discussed this with several people at Worlds but I'll explain a bit here as well. I think that cards like Errant Wolf, Grey Seer Thanquol, etc are about a 1/2 resource under cost for their power level. Neutral cards in general are just too cheap.

The loyalty cost of a standard faction card is what keeps the faction's power level in check. It makes sense that Dwarves can play their Mining Tunnels for 2 while everyone else pays 3. If Empire wants to benefit from Dwarven tech (so to speak) it should cost them a bit more, and vice versa.

Neutral cards do not have a loyalty cost, beyond the fact that they don't contribute the loyalty of your main faction. In general, a neutral card that costs 2 is better than a faction card that costs 2. This is out of balance in my opinion and I think that as more and more Neutral cards are released we will see them become a problem. This has happened in other ccgs and I'm told it's even happened in the CoC LCG (though I don't play that game so I can't be certain).

I think that the game could be balanced correctly with any number of factions (not that it's EVER really been balanced to this point), it's just easier to declare certain armies Dogs of War and make them neutral. Given that Order can play any of the Order faction's cards and Destruction can play all of the Destruction faction's cards, the only thing that a capital board really does is provide a loyalty icon to ease the cost of that faction's cards. Having Skaven not be neutral would only mean that they would keep their same cost when played on the Skaven board and would be a bit more expensive when played on a different one. What's the issue?

If the issue then becomes the fear that each faction will not be given enough support per battlepack, well, that's dumb. Every High Elf and Empire card is Dwarf support. Every Orc and Chaos card is Dark Elf support. This game is based on deck building that is really pitting Order versus Destruction. It's a 2 faction game, regardless of the number of loyalty icons they print.

ellindar said:

Okay, so obviously we have a troll here, but I'll still bite a bit, I guess. Newsflash: This topic was discussed about 9 months ago when Skaven came out, where were you? So we don't really need to "wait" for anything. Most people here agreed it was a difficult idea to implement for a variety of reasons (doesn't mean you can't wish for one but it ain't happening and crying or whining about it isn't going to make you look better than you're already coming across, nor will it change that fact). Instead of griping to those of us here who don't really care what you think, shoot your complaints to FFG.

Nuff said.

Stalkingwolf said:

That's why it was pretty obvious that he's just some clueless troll who wandered in. Best not to feed him.

Toqtamish said:

He has? Well good riddance, I say. They need to just this thread anyway, it's a pointless debate since they're not about to change this issue at this point.

im now an offical Wytefang fandboy

+1 sir.. +1

I think that if they did all the WFB race's then alot of the flavour of these race's would be lost due to the fact that it's a card game. As a skaven fan I'd love a capital board but more over I'd love a WFB card game that work's.

I'm sure the decision to use the six factions wasn't done without thought, it might even be based on the sales of the factions for WFB, but the game is still young and it might be something they do in the future.

I've skimmed over the last three pages, I'm not going to lie, so if this point has been made at all feel free to ignore it.

Would the people who want the "neutral" factions representing with capital boards be happy if neutral capital boards were printed, possibly even distributed through League, that had an image of the faction's capital but did not provide any loyalty. You get to run your oh-so-flavourful mono-Skaven deck out a Skaven capital, but if you feel like being unflavoursome and splash something like Rock Lobber for Orcs you obviously aren't too bothered with flavour and can run your Orc capital board for the +1 loyalty symbol if you're really desperate.

That's a fantastic suggestion, actually, Lord Malinari. Bravo, sir. Bravo. I hope FFG considers it.

That is an awesome idea, well done. Would work very well.

Well, at this point I think a few things need responded to.

@Whytefang - Your comments seemed a bit over the top as well, especially saying the thread should just be closed because you claim that the company will not be doing anything with more capitals. I'm not sure where you got this information, and in fact, I will explain why I feel this is a good topic to come up every quarter or so. FFG reserved room 105 at the Westin on Friday at GenCon and in there gave some updates on the company and their current games (quite a bit on the new ones of course like city of thieves) but also answered questions in which this exact one came up at the end of the session. The answer was quick but was stated that the success of Invasion will dictate whether or not there is effort put into additional captials for the races that are currently neutral. (obviously not a word for word quote but close enough). So, with that being said, I don't think anyone has the right to even debate the fact this is a valid thread or quesiton. It also tells me that the OP actually had a valid argument that support of additional capitals is really based on what the company is willing to spend their efforts on. Basically, do they just leave well enough alone and make the quick $ while it lasts, or expand and invest hoping for it to continue. From a pure money standpoint, this is a valid question for them. From our standpoint (in my opinion), it has a lot less to do with 'support' and 'balance' as we all like to think it is. Sure there's some of that, but its purely time and effort.

I did see a lot of folks buying invasion while I was in the booth throughout the weekend which is always a good sign for the game. It also means that new people will hopefully get into the game and even venture into the forums. They are going to have questions and wants for the game just as we do, and I would hope they post them, even if it is this same topic. The more folks who want to play but may want capitals is good for the company to know. Its also possible there will be more people who don't want them, but let's not make general statements discouraging people when we don't know all the facts, or because we as an individual want things to be a certain way.

As for the idea of making capitals for neutrals that have no loyalty or loyalty point, while an interesting idea I don't feel its necessary really. I think they would be much better served by making them fully fledged capitals. Having the current information that's out there I'm not sold on the idea it would unbalance the game or make some hardship on the current races, etc. So, for me it is a waiting game and for now I'll enjoy the game in its present state and look forward to what changes come down the line to keep things interesting. My main goal is to introduce the game to as many folks as possible and instead of creating so many arguments and such on here, really try to have good discussions that keep folks coming back and keeping a interest in the game and the changes.

Did my previous post get lost in the shuffle?

Farsight said:

The thing is, the Skaven, Lizardmen and Vampire Counts, whether this was right or not, HAVE been printed as neutral. Therefore, you could give them fully fledged capitals but what good would it be to give them a loyalty marker of their own when none of their cards feature them? And as the current cards have been balanced around not having loyalty reduce their cost it would make Skaven very very broken if their capital inferred some sort of cost reduction. Whether future races should have their own capitals is a different matter, but I proposed this solution as a way to help players run their existing Skaven/Lizardmen/Undead decks with a capital of their own.

As a side note, you could even give these capitals loyalty symbols as they wouldn't actually reduce the cost of the neutral cards (however this could be counterintuitive to new players.)

Unifiedshoe said:

Unifiedshoe said:

Hi Shoe, I think you're right, I think it did get lost in the shuffle. And I quoted it as you bring up some good points:

1. I agree that neutral units could become an issue for balance, especially if that extra 'loyalty' cost isn't already in the card somehow. So far I haven't seen it as an issue, but I also see where people will instead of play a largely undead deck, will play with say all orcs and then there will only be this one or two broken undead cards in there. That is my dislike.

2. If you can balance the game with neutral cards, there's certainly no reason you can't balance it them as capitals instead. That's sort of been a point I feel all along for those in favor.

So yes, I'm in agreement with you obviously, and I hope that at some point it all works out! I still really love the game the way it plays right now too, but I always am interested in some new additions!

LordMalinari said:

Yes I agree with your points. It will definitely make it harder to introduce them as their own race with a capital board. My only guesses would be to introduce vampire counts, skaven, etc. as all new cards, leaving the neutrals as just that, neutral. That way you don't take anything away from players either, people who like using the neutral still can, including the new races.

Farsight said:

Got the info from the devs months ago and they were pretty firm about it then. I also worked at FFG so I know a bit more info than the average joe at any given moment. They may pay some lip-service to the whining about this but believe me, that's all it is - it's extremely unlikely that they'll ever create Capital boards going forward because the new races are already ensconced as Neutral cards with no Loyalty icons, thus no need for Capital boards - it's also a financial issue as FFG saves much more $$ with large packaged printing/publishing deals at the printer. They're not going to print out some expensive capital boards for no other good reason than some whiny kid wants one. I do like Malinari's idea, it could satisfy the grumblers at least and I wouldn't complain if we did get some kind of capital boards but complaining about something that isn't going to change isn't really doing anyone any good. Nor is coming in here, guns blazing, with a snotty attitude as a total noob poster (like the OP). Hence the reason he got booted, I'd assume.

Farsight said:

I am basing my remarks on factual info - having been around the game since launch, I've heard maybe 10% of the gamers playing the game (from a wide variety of forums and at many different events) ask about having Capital boards for extra races, the rest have seemed fairly content with how it's currently set-up. Admittedly, it's somewhat anecdotal number-crunching but considering that I have my ear to the ground (about this game) in many online sites, I think it's a safe assessment. Furthermore, I have zero interest in this topic one way or the other - whatever they end up doing will be fine with me, so I have NO horse in this race (so to speak). It is a fact, however, that Skaven, Vampire Counts, and Lizardmen are already printed as Neutrals without loyalty so it's pretty clear they won't be getting or needing Capital Boards going forward.

And finally, if you're going to use my actual screen name, please be considerate enough to spell it right. Thanks. It's Wytefang - no "h." I don't mean that in a mean-spirited fashion, I just find it a bit disrespectful, especially when the proper spelling is right there in front of you.

Wytefang said:

Wow... excuse me if I don't take much of what you say seriously due to your tone. You've been really derogatory since you started posting in here and to be honest, to call every one of us in here a 'whiney kid' because we want to see capitals for all the races is about as ignorant as you can get. I lump you in with the OP as far as delivery of what you're saying. And sorry if a typo is disrespectful to you, but 'you're not all that' if you know what I mean. A typo is a typo and I tihnk someone has got a need to try to throw weight around. You say you have dev info from months ago when they were firm that about being agasint this... go ahead and post that information (when, where, etc)

And as for 'factual info' - I've been around the game since launch, and since pretty much everyone I've talked to has asked about capitals for new races doesn't mean that represents all the 'facts'. Sorry, but again, its just not all about you. And as far as other online sites, including this one right here in this very thread, you'll find 50% of the folks saying they'd enjoy having them. Not to mention that I tend to lean towards the feeling that the company isn't going to straight out lie in an hour meeting that folks gave up their precious convention time for to sit down and interact with a company that they choose to support. Somehow I'm betting FFG doesn't see that as lip service, nor the 45ish year old man who asked the question as being a 'whiney kid'.

And unless you can bring the level of your conversation up to something more civilized, I will from this point on choose to agree to disagree with you and let you go on your way. Again, new people coming into the game would probably like to know they can ask questions and voice their opinions without folks like you thinking you own the direction the game should go in.

Okay, so I'm starting to suspect that you might either be the original poster who switched names (unlikely but possible) or you've misunderstood who things were directed to and about. Nothing was derogatory towards you - it's posters like the OP who come in here as a total newcomer, and who suddenly start whining (yes, "WHINING") about one piddly aspect of the game that the majority of posters here seem pretty okay with, that I'm referring to. Please understand that nearly all my bile is directed to posters like the OP.

Also, nothing about asking for the simple courtesy of spelling someone's online nickname properly means that they "think they're all that," homeslice. It simply means what it is - that it's either extremely rude or extremely ignorant to misspell someone's online name when it's right in front of you. My remark was further prefaced by a comment meant to explain that you probably shouldn't take it the wrong way (which of course you did, sigh).

For the record, I gave you the facts such as they were - several months back a question was asked of the Devs about whether or not the Neutrals coming out (aka the Skaven at the time) were going to be getting capital boards, the answer was a clear "no". Just look it up, it should be easily found via the search engine, also some of us live close to the FFG Event center and have gotten to speak to James about stuff like this from time to time and going even further back, to Nate. (And since you've requested specifics, Eric Lang is on my Facebook friends list and we chat occasionally - sometimes the topic ends up being this great game he's created, though he's notorious tight-lipped about anything that could be a future project or spoiler.)

As far as their official company line at the seminar, it's pretty obvious that they're not going to slam down someone in that type of forum, who asks that kind of question. They'll toss out the PR standard speak "We'll keep an eye on things and maybe down the road we'll have to look at that again, depending on interest and such." It's pretty much a common thing to hear at any gaming seminar or PR release concerning an issue that isn't going to go the customer's requested way.

Nothing about any of my posts in here seems terribly detrimental towards a new player who comes in here politely with a reasonable post - it's pretty clear that the OP did NOT fit that bill. And again, just to clarify, the usage of the word "whiny" refers to people like the OP here. And for the record, I have zero investment in the game going the way that "I want." If that was the case, the usage of any esoteric Magic slang would have been banned long ago and Orc/Skaven Rush would have been a bit more mitigated from the start with Chaos seeing more of a boost in past sets.

I'll agree with you though, I guess that we'll just have to agree to disagree on some things here. You seemed to come in here and didn't want to see the forest for the trees, preferring instead to (somewhat) champion the OP who was extremely out of line in both mannerisms and attitude. If you want to enjoy civilized discussion in here, I'm all for it and we're all for it - just come in here and be respectful and cool, and it's all good. We're a fun, reasonably respectful group of gamers who love W:I. That's the way it should be and we should strive to keep the forums as civil as possible - I can definitely agree with that.

Well said Wytefang as always.

Toqtamish said:

Hey, thanks Toqtamish. Appreciate the kind words. I'll admit the original post really got me annoyed and then the follow-up posts made me even angrier so this is admittedly not my best thread as far as sheer friendliness. I just wish newer forum posters were a bit less aggressive and/or rude when first showing up here. It seems to be a trend as of late (F7Eleven, DDM - at first, now I'm fine with him, and a few others)....

It's up to all of us to just keep things in perspective and have fun. Now I'm going to play a Troll Vomit on you all, muahahahahahah!

go for it, i play bolt anyways.. who needs units...

lol

Wytefang, my first days on this forum, everything you said was proactive and helpfull, thats why i give you the +1 (a league of legends forum thing) This guy can F off imo.. and i also figured he was the same guy "omg everyone hated me b/c i opened up like a tool. so ill just change my name.." type of thing. Both have low posting numbers, no account modding (ie avatar, games) so you can venture they are either friends are the same person. Poster 2 always backs up poster 1. EHhhh anyways.. i DO care what they do.. I think adding more boards will mess over balance and push this game into being another one i toss in a box and file under "was fun while it lasted" BUT thats just it, "I THINK" imo you can get nothing done here but to voice you side an move on. Others contest it.. then let it be.. thats there side.. you wont win this pissing contest and they wont either. Thats my final 2 cents. I ALSO THINK this thread should be closed, THIS topic and others like it, should GO away.. voice your idea.. then STFU. IF they like it.. they will run with it.. GG move ON.

I had my suspicions too as poster 2 jumped all over me in strong defense of the OP with the thread he created in the LotR boards.

I do agree with Wytefang that the boards have changed some since last year when we were a smaller group just getting started in to W:I. Couldn't agree more Zephe, lifes too short and at the end of the day, its a game.