I went through a phase of playing CoC regularly with some friends at my local gaming club. We discussed offering it as a league, and funding prizes on a pooled basis (we had done this in the past with other games). But the general view of the group was that the situation with availability of the early APs could be an issue (since none of us had them, it didn't create an issue between us, but either opened the competition up to being cleaned up by someone who did, or else would make us have to introduce restrictions we felt inimical to the structure of the game. And, more pertinently, that FFG's support for the game was in doubt specifically for CoC, and for the idea of LCGs in general (so it was a quick decision not to switch to WHI, which is also a game I like, sadly).

We still play occasionally on a casual basis, but few of the group are staying up to date with even the latest APs, and games are getting rarer.

We decided (some time ago) we'd review if the APs became available again. Feels like this is going to be an issue for quite a while!

A casual gamer could become competitive more easily when core sets and more AP's come out in the new format (3 copies of every card)

I believe that many casual gamers have not bought 3 copies of every AP and the core set to get to a full set of cards and are therefor less intended to attend a tournament.

The new AP format is great but without having a core set doing the same thing (3 or maybe even 2 copies like SoA) it becomes hard for the casual gamer to get competitve. I for instance did not bought 3 copies of the core set and sure not did that for every AP set.

I myself should retain the following rule for competitive play: You only play with the cards provided from one of each set, AP and big expansion (*1). Only use the AP's with the new format. I know the drawpool is still small with only 3 AP's out, but this should also provide many different decks as no specifiek deck should be superior to all other type of decks with this few cards available. Way more fun than al those "bird + 70" decks at Worlds.

(*1) This means you only can play 1 copy of every card of the core set (really should be 2 or more), 2 copies of cards from SoA and 3 copies from every new AP set.

Glad to hear things are going well in France. I can't even get my local store to carry asylum packs ("We have Arkham Horror." "But I already have that! Grr!") let alone the core set.

I would be surprised if a Swedish regional drew 10 players.

Darkman said:

I can't say that I would enjoy this idea. At least not this soon. At least not for official tournaments anyway. As a casual alternate format... seems fine. Would definately change the local metas.

On a similar topic though Chevee, Hata, and I were kicking around an idea of a block format using only the latest big expansion and the most recent complete cycle as an option for a side tournament (to replace conspiracy). May or may not happen, but sounds like it would be right up your ally.

I would like FFG to go back to the free promo prize support that they did under the CCG days. As soon as they dropped that my club's out of town attendence dropped off almost instantly. Bring that back and maybe people will start going to events and visiting other stores/clubs to play.

I'd also like to see a decent UK based yearly event rather than such things always being US or Europe centric.

Konx said:

I heard my name?

Hmm... honestly, I don't recall. I know that I did get into the discussion and analyzing at the end of the CCG days and the early chapter pack days, but it's been long enough now that I don't recall if I ever wrote articles for CoC as I've done for AGoT. I tend to bounce in and out of things, but playing a couple league games at GenCon has me interested in CoC again so I've been prowling the boards some since. *sigh* Even with shuffling the AGoT events around this year, CoC and AGoT were on the same day so I have yet to complete my dream of playing in each.

I keep seeing comments about better prize support to bring larger groups to tournaments but that's not the answer.

Like I said before, the reason CoC isn't as popular as Game of Thrones, or Warhammer:Invasion and probably would be as popular as Lord of the Rings when that comes out is because most people have no idea who HP Lovecraft or Cthuhlu, or Hastaur, or any of those guys are. You have to reinvent the game into something someone will understand and relate to..if you want players When people see you playing and ask questions, ask them if they like Horror movies, or the tv show fringe, and you say its like that. If they stay interested, you start talking about Lovecarft and his stories. I always direct people to the stories when people start playing because it adds another layer of appreciation to the game. I got a girl 100% hooked because I loaned her an old paperback of Lovecraft stories and she happened to read "The Lurking Fear" and started relating the story to decks she would built. Its that simple.(yeah, im that evil).

Look, I also play monpoc, which has great prize support, and you know what? It doesn't increase players, it increases bitterness, and ebay sales.

If someone likes this kind of freaky genre, they will like the game. I would rather have a few players who have fun playing and enjoy the game over a lot of ignorant obnoxious mercenary hacks like Magic tournaments draw.

Focus on the genre!

Ephraim said:

What's Monpoc?

The_Big_Show said:

Monsterpocalypse by Privateer Press Its basically chess, with giant building, and you control a monster and his/her minions and rampage through the city flattening buildings and trying to knock your opponent's monster out of the game. There is a Cthulhu faction too called Lords of Cthul. Its a game based on those old Godzilla/king kong movies.

Ephraim said:

Ah, yes. My friends and I did give Monsterpocalypse a go for the first two expansions. Nice idea but we found it overly complex and with too many grey areas. We wanted something more in line with the clix level of complexity and ease.

Anyhoo... a problem I've found with drawing new players into any LCG or CCG is that people look at Magic and see all such games as money sinks. Were as once upon a time random boosters were pocket change affordable, you now need to mortgage your house for them and any card game is seen in the same light in my experience. Now while having promo's won't affect them, it might well help get players travelling to tournaments and games outside their area, and that can only help the game.

There is merit in trying to grow the game from within the stores you play at and I strongly encourage that. Afterall, one way to potentially grow the tournament scene is to gain more players. Therefore, I appreciate the ideas many of you have shared and this respect and I agree that it can be hard to sell a game when the population isn't as familar with Lovecraft's works as it is the other LCGs.

However, that's not really the point of this thread.

As I mentioned above, according to FFG all LCGs, including CoC are selling well. So the issue in this thread shouldn't be how to recruit new players or grow the player base (that can be another thread discussion). The issue I'm trying to discuss is "how to convince existing players to play in tournaments and outside their local shops."

I've proposed that something needs to change in order to grow competitive play and that FFG should be in charge. Again, if tournaments keep failing (not getting members to play) as they have been, then something should be done to try and change that.

As a matter of curiousity, how many of you are planning on attending the next large CoC tournament "Arkham Nights"? If you aren't planning on going why not and what would it take to get you there?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

In short, I'm not planning on going because CoC is a secondary game to me and so my next gaming trip will be the Days of Ice and Fire event for AGoT. Sadly, the best way to get me to travel and play more CoC is to make sure I have more vacation days at work and to not conflict with AGoT Worlds at GenCon.

I would guess that a significant contingent of people buying CoC are the types who would rather travel to an ancient ruin, unusual exhibit, or wild areas full of archane lore than a gaming event. If those people are supporting the product and playing it more like a customizable board game with friends at home or at a local shop and the game is healthy then perhaps that market needs to be the focus rather than on competative play.

I am not attending an Arkham Nights event because as far as I am aware there isn't one in the U.K.

I only know 2 other people who play ( I made them play ) and no one plays at my "local" game store either, which is still a 3 hour round trip for me.

I am not complaining, I still get pleasure from collecting the cards and a few casual games with friends but wuold love to go to a big event in this country.

PaulBittner84 said:

Reprint old asylum packs and core sets in new 3x collation so that people who do play are more willing to be competitive.

Find more of these apparently mythical "existing players" who hide out in gnome trees and unicorn havens. Once found, they can then play local competitive events and then progress to the larger events. Lots of 'ifs" there.

To me, asking how to get existing players to play in more competitive events is a lot like putting the cart before the horse. Got to create those existing players first before getting those very same players to play competitively.

Only a small precentage of gamers are really competitive anyways. From my experience with M:tG competitively , out of every 8 people I knew who played, only 1 attended competitive events. Considering how much more popular M:tG is, I would say that the numbers for the CoC LCG is a lot worse.

-

As for Arkham Nights, Katja and I are attending. The reasons we are going is simple. We like CoC LCG and Arkham Horror and we live within 15 minute drive of the FFG Event Center.

If it wasnt for close proximity I doubt we would travel to it. I have yet to see an event held there that made me think to myself "I would have traveled a thousand miles to go to this event".

Arkham Nights however...this one seems different somehow. The costume contest, the Lovecraftian themed days full of events, a bit more competition. New Lovecraft game announced. Richard Launius present for seminars. etc. This one I still wouldn't travel a thousand miles just to participate, but if any of them would this and the ASoIaF event would be the ones to do it.

They seem to be getting better at the events they run and the content included in them. Lots of growing pains but I am confident that they are getting there.

At long last FFG finally came east to NYC for regionals. It took call of cthulhu ten long years to do so. They did so on the backs of Brooklyn Mike and the Compleat Strategist NYC, both whom I infinitely thank. And they still haven't visited New England. Fourteen Million of us, no visit. Apparently, FFG believes it can compete in Europe, Indiana, and Minnesota and dole out kits to worthy applicants. Research us FFG. Find suitable locations. Waiting for heroes like Brooklyn Mike to salvage the entire eastern seaboard brought you nine competitors in ten years. Get those League Kits out of the store room. Pay someone to build a region up. Likely that person is not living within thirty miles of Roseville, Minnesota. Or continue to leap from your flagship twice a year.

Tokhuah said:

I have to somewhat agree to this - I spent months trying to convince other CCG players to play this game to no avail - people would run the usual reason of not being able to afford a second game etc etc (i'm sure we've all heard the reasons).

One day I took it down to the local board games night and immediately picked up three players. Maybe this is who FFG are planning to aim their product at? I don't know many board game players who are at all interested in 'competetive' play - most see the LCG as just a Customizable board/card game to have some fun with (heck, we're playing it as a Highlander game as well at the moment). The game has clearly sold more copies to our local Board Games group than the local CCG group.

PaulBittner84 said:

The issue I'm trying to discuss is "how to convince existing players to play in tournaments and outside their local shops."

I've proposed that something needs to change in order to grow competitive play and that FFG should be in charge. Again, if tournaments keep failing (not getting members to play) as they have been, then something should be done to try and change that.

I truly sympathise with your goals: i'm also your typical 'spike', have played m:tg competatively, and nowadays play v:tes (vampire the eternal struggle) as compatetively as possible.

For me personally however, the problem with CoC and competition is not so much a problem FFG-support, or the nature of the average CoC-player (though i am sure the 'board-game'-approach of the LCG has an impact), but for me it's mostly a matter of the game itself. Let me explain:

I started CoC by buying multiple copies of the core-set, and getting the first 2 ap's (also in multiples, they were still there in abundance those days). I started playing with my girlfriend, and introduced the game to a few friends. The problem I had when playing for the first time, is that, clearly, some cards are just very good, and some cards not so, and worse: for any long time ccg players picking the good from the junk was easy. I you wanted the good deck you took the agency / hastur deck with the dogs, the cheap spot removal and cheap characters. No need and no point in taking any card costing more than 3 really.
Playing with a good deck just ment there really was only one deck possible: the deck with the (give or take) 15 best / cheapest / most efficient cards. Wanting a fun game implied tossing the dogs aside, and not playing agency when the other person wanted to play cthulhu / yog / shub etc.
At that time i blamed the lack of numbers mostly: with such a limited pile of options, it's quite impossible to get a 'mature' and balanced metagame.

The outcome of the World championships therefore was not a big surprise: the top 4 decks were largely the same: dogs with agency / hastur.

However, now well into the 3rd cycle of AP's, the problem seems persistent.
A good, competative deck has: dogs, birds and cavern, has an average cost of 1-2, combines cheap characters with spot removal.
The top 4 from last championship again play (give or take a few cards) exactly the same decks, and those decks weren't even surprising. From the moment of opening of the AP's, any experienced coc-lcg player could see that the birds were hot, while the gug were not.

For me this is the main reason why i'm not interested in organising a local tournament, or travelling to stahleck, even though i'm as Spiked as Spikes come. I see no point in going to a 10-person tourney where i know that 7 of those players play the same deck as i will, and 3 persons will have crap (because they decided NOT to bring the 1 and only competetive deck).

At this point, i feel this isn't so much a problem of CoC not having matured enough to really have something that can be called a metagame.
Maybe it's because CoC just isn't a very good game for competative play overall ? As an experienced noob (i'm neither a mathematician or a gamedeveloper) i'd say a good (ccg)-game that can support a competitive scene needs to have some sort of rock-paper-scissors dynamic to it. M:tg has it (aggro, control, combo), vtes has it (rush combat, stealthbleed, politics/bloat), which keeps the scene alive and the meta-game moving: choosing rock means losing to paper, but beating scissor, adding some scissor to your rock means standing a chance against paper, but diluting your game against pure rock etc etc).
CoC-LCG doesn't seem to have this kind of dynamic built in the mechanics. There's cheap, not so powerfull minions, and there's expensive, more powerfll minions. However, due to the nature of the game, the 3 stories on the board etc, having multiple small minions is both, easier, faster, and stronger than going for 'cool' expensive minions. Ergo: the faster, cheaper deck will simply always win. Counter strategies like mass-removal, will always put the counter player in the defense, and will do not much more than delay the inevitable. The smaller creatures win, no doubt. THere's only rock and paper. So why the hell play rock, other then 'it rocks'?

My feelings for the future are these then:
To keep things interesting, FFG will bring out smaller and more powerfull creatures to entice people to start playing, say, shub, or syndicate, and FFG will bring uit larger creatures that 'combo' better with other larger creatures (mi-go for instance). This is all well and good for your average COC player that approaches the game with a laid-back attitude. That player will happily create a mi-go deck, while his friend plays the cool yog discard deck, leaving the 'good' cards in the box for funness-sake.
For the competitve player, this is horrible. Nothing kills a ccg like powercreeping (aka: not adding more varience, but adding stronger, more efficient cards, thereby 'wallpapering' older cards). I haven't played the old CoC (blackborderd), but from what i can tell form these forums, the exact same thing happened: in the end there were only 3 good decks, 1 of which was the real contender, and the game ended when there came an annoying powercombo that took al the fun form the game.

I like CoC. It's fun, but mostly it's fun because even I, the spike-player, agree with my friend not to play certain cards or certain decks because there simply isn't any deck good enough to trump it. That really sucks, and is, imho, the hallmark of a badly designed cardgame.
If you ask me: "Why isn't CoC competative-scene not bigger than it is, and how do we get it bigger?", my answer would be: "Because the mechanics aren't subtle and smooth enough to allow for a good rock-paper-scissor-dynamic. I'm not quite sure if this problem could be fixed card-wise, (fe. by adding more massremoval, spells that add victory tokens to storys, so a non-character based strategie becomes viable or something.*) , but that is definately what keeps me from travelling and going all out with this game ...

* I like that ffg made good cheap characters like the shub-ghouls with devastating drawbacks (being killed by 'day'-cards etc,) but still the'yre also printing stuff like the birds ... which are simply good, without any drawback at all. Would they have printed the cavern without the dreamlands keyword for example, the card would be nicer: it would need dreamlands support to be usable. Now however, the best way to combat such a card is to add dreamlands cards yourself, in order to 'out-dreamland' the cavern-player... humm lets see, which dreamlands card is both cheap and usable in itself.... drumroll... Caverns ! So everybody is almost 'forced' to play caverns...

I don't agree completely with Investigator's post.

It is true that if you have some experience in card games it is easy to recognize what is the best deck; and it is true that last year there was little room (= too few cards) to play something different and at the same power level (but even here it is not entirely true: at Stahleck, I played against a couple of shub-parallel universe deck, and that deck was at a good power level...and I think that the same deck now as some good cards to test).

But this year the situation is different, in my opinion. There is space for a bit of deckbuilding: we have the core set + 2 complete Ap cycles + SoA + the new cycle.

Just to say: the removals you have in the hastur/agency are the shotgun blast (if the skill is not too high) and small price to pay (quite symmetric, you have to lose a character for 2 turns). Then you have victoria (but it works only for non-terror, non-willpower characters) and you the rats (even here, skill matters).

Put into play a shub-ghoul (cost 2, skill 4, terror) and you have only the small price to kill him. If it has toughness+1, it is already not enough.

Regarding the 70 step: it cost 1. Meaning that a DoA for 1 can destroy it. Or a burrowing beneath (cost 2). Or a torch the joint (cost 2).

What I'm trying to say is that there are possibilities to deal with the deck, but maybe these possibilities are not so obvious, so you need to extensively test to find out the good and not so good cards and combination.

There are, of course, a couple of things that are still missing in the game:

- pure-control cards: we need some "mass" removal to play control. Back in the CCG-era there was Nodens. I'm not asking for it, but for example a cost 3 event that can destroy a couple of characters without limitations (for Cthulhu, for example, NOT neutral FOR SURE) would be nice. Or a "wound all characters with skill 2 or lower" event. Something that can help in dealing with the rush decks (but, again, NOT a neutral event...there are too many good cards that are neutral...develop the factions, please!!!).

- some "combo" tricks: the combo aspect, in this game (given the mechanics, I guess) it is a bit dangerous, because while trying to put in the game a combo-deck there is the risk that you make cards that are strong even for the rush deck. (making these kind of decks even faster = BAD thing). But there is for sure room for some tricks that could help in lead the deck to the victory.

- we need extremely GOOD high-cost characters. The point is the following: when you decide to play a high-cost characters you have to put a lot of "resources" in it: first you have to attach a lot of cards to a single domain (meaning that you are not doing "card advantage"). Then you need to use that domain. Finally, you have the character in play: but at the moment there are not so many good characters that are worth this investement (Y'golonac, maybe the new hastur, for sure not the gugs at the moment).

For example, I was trying to build a "things in the ground" deck: to make this deck work you must have a high number of characters and good characters, because if you and your opponent are both putting into play a couple of dogs (for example), there is no gain for you. Problem: good high-cost characters are not out there (in my opinion).

So, trying to summarize:

- true, there is a obviously-best-deck out there

- false, it is not possible to compete with that deck playing other factions.

my 2 cents

Konx.