booored said:

I have to agree on that. Actually what I think it comes down to is that the biggest mistake FFG ever made with this game was to include that tiny section about tournament rules. If they hadn't we wouldn't have had this discussion at all

Compared to CoC, aGoT and W:I I find this as a co-op game not really suitet for competition. One could always make all games regardless of the intentions and rules into competition, but I just don't buy it for this game. AND even if there has been/is much talk about tournaments from FFG I hornestly doubt we will ever see anything but fan made tournaments. We'll see at the upvcoming game con but I doubt it. I think it would be best to just let the idea of a LOTR LCG tournament have a peacefull death now take the fire and run with it

booored said:

I agree with you and stand by my statement at the same time The whole difference between our opinions is summarized in you statement:
'The point of a game is to be entertaining.'
So far no one created a game that is entertaining for everyone and I even think that it will never be done. So as a designer/publisher you have to ask yourself who (what kind of players) do you want to entertain with your product? I think that FFG decided to go for dedicated/hardcore solo players (more casual in case of 2 or more). That is why they included challenging quests in base game.

Is it a business mistake on their part not to go far casual players? I don't know but my gut felling tells that no: they could gain sales on the base set but might loose sales on APs (I think casual gamers would not buy them and some hardcore players would be turned of by easy time they had with the core)

As for tournaments:
I would love to be wrong but I think it will never happen - agree with mr.thomasschmidt

I think they'll launch tournament when there'll be plenty of space for deckbuilding.

There is some space for it now, yes, but there is also many unfinished stuff that needs to be taken care of before. For example - Secrecy needs more card, Rohan and Gondor theme is not uncovered, Hobbits'd enjouy some additional cards'n'heroes for them, elves too, I bet.

Yes sound like we can forget about tournaments for this game. But then what the point of scores system? Only for the quest Log?

Sounds like they have idea to make tournaments system but after they release the game they change they minds. Maybe we will see it in the future…..just maybe. But for now is buried for sure.

Glaurung said:

Exactly. The victory points could be used to just measure your own progress, like beating ones own high score.

mr.thomasschmidt said:

Victory points have a gameplay function. It is really a exile zone for the encounter deck, and while there are only a few cards that utilise it so far we have already seen , wel la few cards. So while yes the tournament scene will nvr happen, and the score and quest log is a total farce, the victory pile itself, as a game mechanic is a good thing.. as it just gives the designers one more thing to play about with when designing card effects.

I use the scoring system merely as a means to measure success between friends and/or myself (solo play) and also to show off how you managed to fair in an insanely difficult quest. Half the time it's a slaughter house, but we'll see if the Dwarrowdelf cycle that I just ordered improves my odds. Thus far I've beaten Passage through Mirkwood several times, Hunt for Gollum, Hills of Mull Duil (?), and barely defeated once with friends Down the Anduin.

Trololo, try using a purple/green combination, and maybe throw blue in if you can fit it, as Dunhere is very handy on picking off the snipers.

I use the two green snares, 3 gandalfs, 2 sneak attacks, and 2 steward of Gondor cards, at least. Anything with heal is a bonus. Use the hero Berevor for sure, as you want good card draw to feed the attachment that buffs your questing via discard. I also use Gloin and heal him typically with Glorfindel (but if you are splashing blue, I might try another tactic).

On a side note, also a Dunhere (blue), Thalin (red) combo is very nice in killing lots of the enemies in the staging area. Then use also Quick Strike with Dunhere, untap him with Unnatural Swiftness attachment and do a normal attack with him later is also a good red/blue tactic.

Just using the core, that's the best advice I can give you. As advertized as a Living Card Game, I believe they made the 2 scenarios so hard so that you would purchase upcoming adventure decks and expansions. It wouldn't be a living card game if even just the Anduin was more easily beatable, as people would probably just settle for the core box and treat it as any other board game. This one was meant to be collected. Still, with solo play, I haven't yet beat Anduin but that could be I don't have the time, as I work 12 hours a day usually, 7 days a week. Good luck.

Knowing your limited resources, I'd consider maybe the box expansion of Khazad Dum. Reason being is it has one level 3 difficulty scenario, so you'd get more money for you buck, Zigil Miners, which give you a resource buff if you can figure out how best to utilize them. The box also gives you a green hero named Bifur. Specifically for beating the Anduin a little easier, if you are using him, one other green hero (i.e. Beravor) and Dunhere, you can steal Dunhere's resource into green, meaning you can Snare the troll right off the first round and build your deck slowly up with Zigil Miners and other cards. Make sure that once you quest, you can defeat within two rounds the second stage card of Anduin. Also, be sure to utilize mulligan rule if that opening hand doesn't draw you what you need the first time.

If using purple, use Gandalf and Sneak Attack during the Combat Phase immediately after your enemies receive their facedown shadow cards. This way when Gandalf shows up, he blasts one for 4 (hopefully a kill) and is ready to block or attack for the phase.

wojo said:

I agree that that would appear to be the intent, but I think that it was a big mistake.

FFG had the perfect opportunity to create an entry-level customizable card game. The existing powerhouses in the industry - Magic and a couple of its close competitors - already have a firmly established reputation for being expensive treadmills that require a lot of money on an ongoing basis to have any chance of being competitive. FFG very intelligently countered that by designing a system where players could get in quickly with a full starter set, while controlling costs due to fixed card distribution. It was a great idea, and long overdue.

Unfortunately, they dropped the ball by not targeting players new to this type of game. Lord of the Rings would have been the perfect introduction - it is a popular theme, with accessible and straightforward gameplay, and perfectly suited for solo play. It's the one title a brand new player will be most likely to pick up off the shelf.

Instead, the brand new player opens up the box, gets hit with scenarios that are clearly designed for players with a lot more experience and a lot of expansion packs, gets frustrated, and gives up.

It's a mystery to me why FFG decided to use this title to compete for the money of very serious veteran gamers, when they already have a vast array of products to choose from - including several other titles in FFG's own library. Where does the new player get started? Certainly not here, nor in their other LCGs which have more or less followed the approach of catering to veterans.

It's been a huge misstep from a marketing perspective, and a missed opportunity to add a lot of new gamers to the scene.

Runix said:

Yes, I guess that happens often for solo players if they want to use tournament-compliant decks.

Runix said:

I don't think this is intentional by FFG. Dol Guldur is designed to be hard, that's true, but I think they wanted Journey Down the Anduin to have medium difficulty. (In a 2 player game, when you play with non-tournament decks, that quest is doable.) But at that time, they hadn't developed methods to achieve proper scaling. Take 1st quest card for example: 1 card plus Hill Trill if you're solo - pretty difficult - but 4 cards and 1 Hill Troll in a 4 player game (-> 12 heroes): doable. Scaling is even worse in Dol Guldur. But FFG is improving on scaling, in KD there is a location that requires X progress tokens, where = number of characters in play, and so on…

Runix said:

I respect that but I couldn't disagree more and I'm not a veteran neither hard core gamer. Just love the game anyway

HilariousPete said:

This is a really good point. As the decks are "supposed" to be 50 card min, people naturally want to play like that, and it is a good size for a deck building game imo.. but if you only have the core set… you should really be using the smaller deck size .. not a 50 card deck. The smaller deck you have the faster and more reliable it is to pull the card you need.

booored said:

Exactly. This is one of the reasons behind my statement earlier in this thread that the biggest mistagke about the game is the little info in the rules regarding tournament. With all respect for those who want to play for the competition of it I think this should never have been the path for this game. It would have created less problems that way No wonder new players get confused. Everyone wanna play the "right" way and the small part about the tournament rules just weight so much so most think this is how you need to play in case you want to play with others. But it's perfectly ligimit to play a less than 50 cards deck. I myself feel a little like cheating if I play the core spirit deck and beat JdtA quest not really caring about rounds. But it's a really good and fun strategy. But if you then compare to others you feel inadequate cause "everyone" else is going for the fewest amount of rounds and strict 50-cards- no-less-decks.

As said, FFG should never have mentioned anything about tournament rules, since those that are around are getting debated night and day, and if they hadn't included it hard core fans would have developed their own tournament rules. And with all respect for FFG, the fans would probably have made a better job

I suppose I agree on that point. Having a recommendation that players start with a 30- or 40-card deck would be a welcome change to the rules. Right now the "easy mode" recommendation is to skip playing out Shadow cards. I'd recommend forgetting that and just going with a smaller deck.

I win this mission half as much as I'd like to and I lose it twice as much as I should.

schmoo34 said:

Epic!!! I laughed my but off when I read that one