Booored made a specific comment on my last thread; that by manipulating Ranged characters in the way proscribed (Declare and attack; untap, join someone else's declaration on a following attack) that this would make an easy game "too easy" (to paraphrase). That being said, and given that difficulty is at least in part a result of deck building, how difficult is the game overall? Our early games have resulted in two whuppings and one skin-of-our-teeth victory. Will that dramatically lessen with better decks? Or does the game remain challenging?

As you might guess, it's important to me that the game remain challenging. Thoughts?

people have different opinions- i think this game remains a challenge throughout- though it gets 'easier' as you get more experienced and your card pool grows...it goes without saying earlier quests get easier as your card pool gets bigger, but this power creep is unavoidable in a game like this and you can easily remedy this by playing cards only at the quests time of release...i admit some previous harder quests were only won by me after i had advance player cards not available at that time (rhosgobel)

i say 'easier' as i dont think its a case as simple as that....some quests are very linear and once you work out the key to beating them, its almost an eyes shut sort of thing (carrock for example) and some quests retain their difficulty even when you know whats coming- redhorn for example

now there are other players such as glaurung for example who have always found this game too easy, but it remains a matter of experience and perspective

it also has to do with your player type-- are you boromir, pippin or bilbo?? (do you focus on winning, combos, or theme)...im a bilbo player through and through...so my 'abilities' are a bit sub-standard but hey, win rates dont matter to me, as long as i can crack each one at least once (dol guldur is the only one to evade me...but i havnt really tried much being honest)

dont worry man....you ll be still getting your arse kicked a year from now..i know i am haha

I'm ... focused on thematics/concepts that work. So... Faramir?

For example, I was considering trying out a Ranged deck and seeing what cards worked and what sphere constructions I got out of it. Is there a Red/Purple combination that'll work well with, or a Green/Red (old school Magic deck) that I can use to pull it off? I'll spend a lot of time looking at synergies among heroes and then building around them.

I am admittedly giddy with anticipation. And best of all, solitaire means I don't have to wait on my wife to build a deck she's happy with. Speaking of which; on a scale of 1-10, how strongly would the Senate recommend purchasing another copy of Box 1? I know the Threat Indicators aren't really worth it, but are having the extra core set cards worth it?

hi

i do not own another core set, but i admit if i could afford it i would

i would say usability ONE extra core set probably has a 6/10 but i guess you should ask someone who has done this- i know alot of players swear by another set

a third core set is gonna be alot lower than that

rich

Wow. The site looks great on mobile. Thank you, Dolphin. And thank you for your feedback, Rich. A 3rd set never occured to me, to be honest. One thinhlg that has thrown me is that everyone keeps saying a deck is "50." Isn't it fifty minimum? Or is that just considered optimal to be able to pull what you need when you need it?

Fifty is the "tournament minimum" deck size. You're free to play with a 200-card deck if you want, but I think most players stick at or near 50 in order to maximize the chances of drawing any one particular card. I suppose you can also play with 30- or 40- card decks if that suits your fancy. It's your game.

As for the question about additional Core Sets, I'd agree with rich. You'll get a fair amount of value out of a second copy, but a third basically amounts to a $30 Unexpected Courage. I only have one, and I've never missed the additional player cards. Unless you are one of those people who just has to have a full playset of every card, one or two Core Sets will be sufficient.

you should have started with your sig. starhawk haha

yes that last- it is the optimum- i tend to go over 55 ish but thats becuase i can never bring myself to get rid of a card i like the look of.....the artwork is my biggest enemy in this game- its too good!!

richsabre said:

I hear ya. For me, the best part about Elladan and Elrohir is the fact that they make an all-Magali deck possible (i.e. a deck containing only cards illustrated by Magali Villenueve). It may not win, but it'll be so, so pretty.

starhawk77 said:

god help me if she brings out anymore female heros---that will be my mind gone to mush, and all tactics out of the window...it continues to baffle me how anyone can be that good at drawing

BY THE WAY- i just found out from the artist's site that needful to know was elrond- didnt realise it- but yeah makes sense

@rich...me neither...I have sooo much trouble getting rid of that one card that I like. I end up with 51 or 52...and my roommate just makes monster decks with 65 cards. But since it's coop and not competitive, not having the perfect doesn't ruin your fun :-)

In fact I am a social player. I like the game better when many people are involved. Easy or hard, I just like knowing I had a part in winning. That said, the random factor means that mosts quests can still surprise. King Spiders and Ungoliant Spawn...two Hill trolls on the first turn of Anduin. Each time is a different experience. So I say : just have fun, try and get better scores each time, and use the heck out of the quest log. :-)

Interesting. I struggled and struggled with a 50 card deck against quests. Went to a 25-30 card deck and started beating them regularly. So have been sticking with that size and have been happy. BUT, that may change when I start putting Lore in my decks