Well we do have to be careful, too, I suppose, to not get too cliquey, either, just because we were the first ones around these cool forums for this great game. I've seen the results of that kind of thing (one particular game's community occasionally reminds me of this - it rhymes with ZeroScrape...LOL) too and it's not pretty either.

It is hard to find the right balance in welcoming newcomers to a long-standing forum and in chastising ones who jump in and act like jerks. Part of my problems with the aforementioned game's community was partly my own fault for joining that particular website's forums with a bit of a chip on my shoulder (though for the most part, I think I was pretty reasonable there most of the time).

I've really liked everyone on these boards, honestly, for the most part - yeah, some folks took a bit getting used to and I still struggle with former (or current) M:TG players' use of slang that I don't really like being used in this game but other than that, everyone's really pretty decent. In particular, I'd like to point out the non-USA gamers as being extremely awesome (but I already knew that having spent time overseas). Most foreign (to my USA perspective) gamers are just usually so much more relaxed about the gaming rather than competitive (like we are in the USA) and they always seem to really have fun playing their games.

i know, i love how the leagues work in this game.. tournys are fun and all but this is why i droped yugioh.. i love being able to come in on wed, sit down, injoy a game, get some points and just lol it up with other fans of it. On the other hand i do WANT a competive side also.. but in time.. fun game is fun!

I am hardly the original poster. And I stated several times his approach is what caused him his issues. However, you three are obviously the same as the OP and in my opinion should all go the same route. Clique was the best term you could use as you and your couple of cronies here are obviously one. You all three reacted the same way to the OP and acted just as badly as he did, and now your buddy is replying to you and applauding you while saying I can just go F off. (which I went ahead and reported). There's no call for that, and I've done nothing but try to present that not everyone shares your line of thinking... which is apparently a shock to you all.

You'll have a rough life with all the disappointments coming your way.

I love how folks can say stuff about one person and then turn around and act exactly the same and think they're in the right. Step back, take a breath, and just stop posting. It is definitely obvious with the terms you use that you all feel that you're the owners of invasion and that everyone else is just 'new'. You're wrong, plain and simple. I'm sorry to bring to you the fact that a lot more people would like to see new capitals than you make it out to be, but there it is. Deal with it and move on.

Such a let down that you can't even be objective.

Toqtamish said:

I hardly defended the OP's original comments, I just pointed out the fact that you were just as bad, if not worse, than he was in replying. You fueled the argument way further than it needed to go. I feel bad that anyone on here has to argue, but the sad part is, with people like you guys around its inevitable. I think everyone hiding behind their little screens instead of having to look someone in the eye is why politeness and general support of others ideas has been lost. The OP included. All of you just plain rude to each other.

If I were you guys, I'd assume I was the OP as well, easier to believe that someone level headed didn't have the same opinion as yours.

Farsight said:

For me it is the exact opposite. You can ask my friends. You talk trash about something I like, you go on the "shun list". If you try to hide it with "no offense" or "I respect your opinion"....well then you better be out of my legs extended reach. I am a great person to meet and listen too and get free variants and material for games from, IF you don't try to upset me. And believe me, I can tell when you mean offense. This "screen" protects ignorant jerks from my foot. I am not the average gamer build. In fact many times I wish I was the stereotype gamer build, because then I could fit in with gamers. Sometimes I feel like I am just intimidating to be around, because people will attack me last or not betray me until I am the only one left in games of betrayal.

The point that the OP needs to learn is that you don't come into my home and trash the things I enjoy, then follow it up with ways to change the things I have no issue with. Finally, IF you are going to do it, maybe you should find out WHY I like things the way they are. MAYBE then you will see things the way I do and THEN you can offer a counter opinion and I will respect it, because now we understand each other's point of views at least.

ellindar said:

Farsight are you the OP? I ask because you joined right after he stopped posting by realizing he was doing something a designer should never do. Imagine if Arena Net showed up to Blizzcon to boast about Guild Wars 2 or trash Starcraft 2.

Yo, THEY didnt say to go F yourself, i did. Your putting my negative vibe on them.. FOCUS woman.. its me.. NOW why did i just say that? am i being an ******* on purpose? NO i want to show you guys something.

HERE we go people psychology 101.

step 1) OP was a *** and raged.

step 2) other people raged back.

step 3) op was banned, you showed up RIGHT after championing him (check your first post b4 you counter this. you were all about his freadom of speach, and your right to a point)

step 4) wytefang showed up a bit late to the party, still mad after reading the OP, this carried over to you who now was fighting with sir wytefang.

step 5) i got mad over the fighting, ME siding with wytefang took his side, this isnt a shocker.

step 6) people started to cool off and put water under the bridge, i retorted with a negative comment to you, and that started it up again

step 7) (we still keeping track kids?) You took it out on everyone.

ending product: ONE ****** UP THREAD.

Starting with rage and keeping it going to messed up timing. New guy comes in and rages over OP, we rage back. It's a very nasty cycle of rage.

IM SORRY for telling you to go F yourself. going from a logical standpoint YOU look to be the OP, hence my out look.

LETS put the reset button here.. and be adults here ok?

END TOPIC:
You want new boards, you and the people who think they same have given VALID points.

I dont, others like me dont. We have given counter points, then our own points.

Like i said when i was very rude (sorry about that again) that its just what we THINK, it wont change whats done or how things are going to play out for now. IF FFG asks us as a comunity then you might be able to change things. NO MORE CHILDISH bull, k thx bai!

I'm to 99% happy as it is, but undead really should have it's own capital...

I'm reset. I definitely don't want to argue. I'm also definitely not the OP. I've read these boards a long time and I personally decided to join after my gencon experience as I felt I wanted to add to the debate and hopefully help cool things down. (read *not the original poster lol)

At any rate, I wish ya all good luck on your gaming, PEACE!

@Curator: I definitely understand the reasoning on why everyone reacted the way they did to the OP. Its just in my opinion, why stoop to his level? But at any rate, I think the OP was actually banned from what someone else said? I think that may be why he stopped posting.

@Himmelweiss: You've actually just deomonstrated a point lol. I think everyone is pretty happy with the game, but then you would really like *your* particular favorite (read Undead) as a capital... I think this is the consensus, everyone, especially people who've been around the Warhammer universe, has strong devotions to certain races, and of course who wouldn't want to see those have their own capital? Like most have said, I don't think this is happening over night and may never happen at all. But its definitely ok to voice the fact that you'd like to see them. Its good to know!

Cool, now we can at least be constructive. In all fairness, I do think I've seen Farsight post before in the past.

I can see that as a pretty compelling points towards having Capital boards - that it may make previous fans of the miniatures game really interested since they can support their favorite race or races. Not a bad reason, per se, to have Capital boards for every race.

it dose add some balance to the game if they do it, IE not making cards that are 2 costs with 2 power and 5 life.. yay for Fing skaven...... but adding loyalty symbols to slow stuff like that down.. but over all needed support to keep this game competive and cheap, its like shooting yourself in the foot, i dont see it happening, atleast not yet.

You would think society would learn that going up to a culture of peoples and trashing their outlook, then salting the wound by voicing how they need to change, would have gotten through peoples heads by now.



^ New guy that thinks he has it all figured out

meets....


Us /



Edit: BTW he wasn't banned. His name would have been replaced with Unknown or FFG, I know this for a fact. I think as a game designer he realized he was dumb to be challenging Eric Lang's brilliant mind.

I also highly doubt he was any kind of real game designer. But anyway, cool pics though!

Wytefang said:

I guess it was a hard decision for FFG : how many factions should be supported in the game ?

WHFB has 15 different supported armies, and several unsupported ones (as Chaos Dwarves, Kislev etc). They merged the chaos faction into one, but that would still mean 13 army.

Counting 12 BP/year that would be 18,46 card/faction per year, but this also includes neutrals. That mean every faction would be sloooowww to develop. You could compare it with MtG with rougly 30 card/color in every quarter, and still a not too fastly changing metagame.

With 6 factions we have 40 card/faction in a year, which also includes neutrals.Of course, I didn't counted big expansions. This still seems less than the rival, but at least we don't get that many coaster cards.

The other problem is with many factions : differentiate and balance. There are simply not enough card interactions to make that many completely different factions. Even with six there are some simiralities. (look how Empire spoil some HE strenghts at bouncing, or Chillwind in DE while corruption normally a chaos mechanic etc) Also, all faction (at least in theory) should be able to face any other with a chance... well we already see how hard to reach that goal even with 6 factions, and MtG often face the same problem with 5 color. If it would be possible to make only multi-faction deckst to stay competitive then it would be no point to make that many factions at all...

So they decided they keep the factions from Warhammer : Online, so we have the most iconic/strongest factions, with the most variability at their own, while others are still available. It's not impossible to make a skaven army, and undead and lizardmen will be viable too. Yes, no own capital board, but who cares ? No loyalty symbols on the units to care about it... but you could shape it up with your playstyle. For example if you play Pillages, Easy pickins and Mob up in the same deck with an orc capital it won't make it an orc deck. The same is true for Lizardmen combined with HE spells etc.

I think they made a good decision to do it this way. The game is good. Really good. And, albeit slowly we will receive the possibility to create a deck for every sinlge possible faction. So what's the matter ?

final point : Just play, and enjoy the game my friends.

Very well said, Cain_Hu. Good job for taking the time to explain all this - I wasn't much interested in having to point out all that obvious stuff. Thanks.

Wytefang said:

No need to thank, I just have a big mouth what I can't keep closed.

If they somehow manage to make this 6 faction at least semi-balanced I will be happy.

I'm thinking its only 6 factions because that's what there is in Warhammer: Age of Reckoning. The Order/Destruction stuff is running the exact same lines as the MMO.

Cain_hu said:

Even if people initially wanted more capital boards so that Skaven fans could nerd out a little more, the real reasons to not make them neutral have to do with game balance. Check out what I said about it on page 3. I think that this game is heading down a dangerous road if it continues to introduce factions without giving them loyalty icons. As for people actually thinking about this game as having 6 factions (Orcs, DE, HE, Dwarf, Chaos, Empire), you're just deluding yourself. It's Order vs. Destruction and everything else is just flavor.

Unifiedshoe said:

But seriously, yeah, I know what you mean. Having no loyalty on the neutrals can be problematic just because if they are very good they can show up in every deck for that side (see: Clan Moulder's Elite) and the environment can become very homogenous.

you're homogenous!

I prefer to think of myself as metrofactional.

I honestly & objectively think FFG took the lesser of two evils & has done the best thing for them & players:

Maximum BP size (# of unique, new cards) & frequency (of release) are pretty much fixed variables without increased investment. Even if they wanted to make 6 more BPs a year, each have 20 more unique cards, not only would it cost them more investment / risk (in development up front) but increase the chance of over-supply and not be close to supply & demand equilibrium. They most likely came to an ideal BP size & frequency from analyzing the market in their other LCGs & competitors' card games. As fledgling game, the number of BPs they chose & # of unique cards in each they chose was certainly not a random one. It is what it is and has little to do with anything Warhammer I highly doubt.

So of course that limited being able to equally support (in qty) ALL of the Warhammer races with the first & second cycle, while keeping interest in all players by supporting their favorite faction adequately. So choice would be: Release only cards for 6 factions up to a certain point (at least in the beginning) then focus only on 6 other ones OR Always release additional cards for the X initial races with X cards for X additional races included as they go.

Doing the first would allow the 6 latter factions to get their cards in a shorter amount of time AND could even have capital boards, but at the expense of neglecting the previous factions. Rackham did this with AT-43....only people who didn't mind were those who bought the maximums for the earlier races AND continued to buy for the new ones so as not to get bored. Sure, maybe after X cards for initial 6 factions, BPs could be more frequent or have more cards, but not definite and/or very likely. Would make the game disjointed - almost like 2 games. But again - grumblings with slow support for a certain faction. Not my definition of a "Living" card game imo.

The second allowed for 6 + 1 races. but took an entire cycle or an expansion pack for the +1. So you get that one additional race faster. But doing so, unless demand increased enough to allow for more investment (& include that +1 race going forward in BPs as much as the initial 6), ongoing support for that race would have to be very infrequent or nonexistent, comparatively. Even if they had put a capital board out for Skaven - the problem becomes that they become stagnant compared to the others - or rather someone has to. Again, doesn't sound like a "Living" game. No capital board kinda allows them to be always considered & hence living as not having to rely mainly on themselves. A board with each new race - 3 now - would only increase this and hinder the races.

So, seriously, they didn't take the chance to make every race [have] their own capital because it made little sense economically and did not agree with their business model for their intent of what is a LCG.

I've thought about how they could release capital boards now, as things are - A neutral one with no loyalty symbol would just simply never be used. As cool as it would look, no free loyalty symbol is so impractical it would just be something to look at. Having one determined race's loyalty symbol on it is only slightly better - say they chose chaos for skaven - still wouldn't use it for a skaven/DE build or Skaven/Orc build. And since Skaven are neutral - how could you make it desirable to use a Skaven board with one destruction loyalty on it? Greatly reduces being played with the other two races and makes the one chosen one have an imbalanced advantage. Having 2 or 3 at the same time is would of course be way too powerful. I think best way are to make one Skaven board, have the loyalty on it changeable to one of the 3 Destruction factions. Either via wheel or cut-out space for a Orc / Chaos / Dark Elf token, so they'd function just like the others. Doesn't take anything away from Skaven, and only adds uniqueness to their race (albeit thematically). Of course they'd cost a little for the board than the others, but I'd bet that there is enough demand to justify it

and nice pics Curator But to be honest what came to my mind first was a kid i saw at the mall few days ago throwing a temper tantrum for some candy after he'd eaten a Cinnabon.

Clamatius said:

Most amusing quote of the week. Grats. LOL

Re: "neutral capital" mechanic. Here's an idea.

You could make it count as if there were a <race> card in each zone, as far as the cards were concerned. For example, Greyseer would get +1, Deathmaster would kill things as if there were 1 more Skaven in play than normal, and Loqtza would zap for 1 more damage than normal.