I made some suggestions back in the fall to help with the game and quickly got shot down. The big one I suggested was that first player only got activate one figure during the first round.

But I am finding people that I teach the game to become rather bored. Many people find it hard to find a reason to capture victory zones and therefore take the sitting back and waiting for the other player to attack method - very boring.

Why not have the victory points for control of zones cumulative? If so, you could increase the needed value to win if you want a longer game. After all figures have been activated, then you add victory points for zones held. This seems to help a little on both players trying to move forward more quickly. This also helps the Rangers on the bikes get some quick victory points early. This would also speed up tournament play

What do you guys think? I have only played a couple of games this way and it was a lot more fun.

Just my $.02 on a game that might be not supported soon.

Berning22

PS - i have not been on the forums in a very long time - therefore I am sorry if someone has already posted this suggestion.

I have never tried any rules variants suggested on this board, but myself and the other four players in the local MC League are having fun.

I think the rules mods you suggest would make for a much faster game but if that is you desire, why not just play to a smaller victory points total?

Brian,

Thank you very much for your response.

I am not really looking for a quicker game, but a better game that more people are excited about playing. I was one that saw MC back at Gen Con 07 and anxiously awaited its arrival. Unfortunately, it had a lot of stikes against it before it arrived at the stores. Now I am just trying to get more people excited.

Brian - I wonder if I could ask you one more question. Do you and your friends get excited about the game before you play? Or is it more of a casual game? What I am trying to get at is most board games are fun to play, casual, usually pretty slow and repetitive. Most card games (Magic, etc.) and miniature games (Star Wars, etc.) are quicker paced and more competitive. I find the few players that did get into MC only bought some boosters and play to have a little fun, but they do not have the motivation to be more competitive and find better ways to play.

So if acquiring victory zones became more of a need to get quickly and hold, it might increase the pace and competiivness of the game - not necessarily decreasing the overall time the game takes to win.

Lets face it - the game is really struggling, at least it is my LGS. So do we try to fix it, abandon it, play once a year??? Or wait until someone puts it up on Vassal. Which might be a good idea for FFGs to look into if they want to try to keep this game from dying.

Berning22

I like you idea of victory points. My group may try that for a change. My group is having fun with this game. We are using heroscape terrain to add 3D and I thinking of making the victory zones variable so instead of having only the static red zones on the map each player puts his oppositions victory positions onto the map and then set a round limit to capture so many of the zones. This gives the game a faster feel. You could even make scenerios like the 40k game. i think it is just a matter of being inventive to get the creative juices going. Some people in my group are already talking about customs and I am working on wargear I am going to post for consumption/critical analysis in the coming week.

Liss

3 victory points per 1/1/1 is quite a simple and very intuitiv mechanic. i like it. and yes, me and every player in my group is still excitet about every session we play. it´s not to complicatet (like flames of war) and it is also not as simple as heroclix, halo oder star wars miniatures. just perfect for me. i also like the scale, the command cards and the tokens.

I am glad to hear that there are some people out that are really enjoying the game. It is a real shame that it is missing something that more people are not playing the game. It has some great features. I also like using the Heroscape terrain, it gives it a better feel.

Any other suggestions??? I know the game is all but dead, but I have all of these figures and would love to play and teach more people.

Thanks for responding!!!

Berning22

Berning22 said:

Berning games are only dead if you don't play them. Seriously man, San Jose still has Mage Knight 1.0 tournaments.

I've been doing demos for various systems for ten years; what are your efforts thus far? And how are you identifying your audience. Whom are you approaching to come play in the first place?

Fill us in a bit more, and perhaps we can help.

Yup, this is an awesome game, which suffer from a (partly irrational) bad hype. It can't compete with contenders as Wow minis and Monsterpocalypse, though I think it is a better game on the long run. Monpoc is really fun and all, but the game got old a little bit to quickly for me despite a lot of character. Wow minis is fun too, but I find it much too gamey (ok, you killed my mage... Now he'll respawn in good shape two ticks from now...), so it has no character at all (though it makes for a perfect CMG). MC has a much better balance, since there's a real "dark future" feel to it, and the replay value is awesome. The freedom you have when creating a team allows for a lot of game configurations... The VZ are a lot of fun and makes each game different. Rules could be refined on some points (a clearer rulebook would come a long way...), but I'm ok with them. The problem with cumulative VP, is that quick faction (like Capitol) would have an even bigger advantage in this setting. The game would get closer to "the first who gets the VZ wins" (since staying in a VZ would allow you to add up VP, while benefiting from the zone bonus). If you have fun with this rule, then go on, but I think it's not a perfect solution.

Thanks again for responding.

I think a game is dead when it goes on clearance after being on the shelves for only 6 months. Lets try to stay in reality - Mage Knight maybe played in small regions of the world, but it is clearly dead. I also declare a game "dead" when it is no longer supported by the game manufacturer - Wiz Kids is dead!. Is there any news of new figures, factions or maps for MC? (Blutsteigen - Sorry you really lost me when you actually implied that Mage Knight is not dead).

I agree that Capitol would have an early edge in the game gaining VP, but they can not last long out in the open. Maybe they have a better shot against the other factions.

I also agree this is a good game, but it is not an amazing game. Otherwise more people would be playing it - even though FFG screwed up the launch.

I find that when I posted suggestions for people to try, everyone gets super defensive like I am raining on their parade.

I am just trying to make the game more enjoyable.

i first saw MC at Gen Con 07 and was hooked. I have play tested numerous games for over 15 years and played games for 35+. I am a former game store owner. I created multiple Heroscape boards of the MC maps to make it more visual. I proxied all of the figures late last spring and played dozens and dozens of games before launch. I officially demoed the game after launch at least 20-30 times to about 25 different people. I tried a league.

I went to Gen Con 08 and was thoroughly disappointed! I ended up spending my time an money on Monpoc. FYI - I do not like WOW minis! I love MonPoc but takes too long.

MC is just missing something. People like the game, but they do not love it. They love the unique way to build sqauds, but actually playing lacks something.

I hope those of you that read my suggestions try them out and then tell me why they did not make it more enjoyable. I have still not had anyone give me a reason why limiting the first player to one activation on the first turn does not balance out the game and make the victory zone that provides initiative (forgot name) more useful for both players.

Just my two cents,

I'm playing Mutant Chronicles CMG since may 2008 because, as a game demonstrator in France, I have access to all the minis of the first set. After played a lot of games in skirmishe mode (for demos), some games in 6/6/6 mode (in order to have fast games) and lot of games in Tournament mode since september (in order to see what this mode can do), today I can say the Tournament mode is above all the other modes.

With 10/10/10 armies, it's possible to make real fun strategies and tactics during battle and exploiting the victory zones better than in smaller modes. I'm playing very often Algeroth (and Bauhaus lately) and I've constated that Algeroth is very powerful in small format (mainly because this faction has powerful individuals) but balanced with other armies in Tournament mode. My sparing partner wishes only play in Tournament mode with Capitol or Brotherhood armies. So yes,the game is fun with army building, but yes too the game is fun to play.

In 10/10/10 mode, the First player rule is not a big advantage as it is in smaller format. Simply, the opponent must take account to this fact when he activates his last units at the end of the round.

So, I disagree, Mutant Chronicles CMG is fun to play.

I think many of us are having very fun with this game. The "no reply" FFG politic make sense the "dead game" theory, but the releases continue (very slowly, yes) and there's some community of iron-willed fans, so I have to say I'm having very fun with this game (and I can't play more often lately, but thinking about new strategies and army designs makes me have fun aniway)

Thanks for responding.

I am very glad there are some people still having fun with the game!!!

I also agree the first player activating two figures becomes less of a factor as the army builds get larger, but no one has made a valid argument as to why changing the rules does not make it more balanced.

As for the fact that FFG is still releasing figures and therefore is not dead is not entirely correct. The figures that are still being released were all part of the first set. There were significant issues with the paint jobs (I know because I have some of them) and therefore had to get them re-painted. But there has not been any mention of new figures or new maps - to my knowledge.

Just so everyone does not misinterpret my motivations - I want the game to survive, I have ever since Gen Con 07. The fact is it is not surviving, so what can we do to help it survive? My thought was try to make it more balanced and more fun! We also need someone making new maps! Any Photoshop experts out there. Also, we need to put it up on Vassal so we can connect the players that love the game over the internet - Any Java experts out there.

Berning22

For me, and this is just my personnal opinion, the game surviving question is only decided by Fantasy Flight Games and its capability to properly support the game. If the game has not been sold well, and this is an euphemism, it's only due to all delays and the breaking of the first set during several months with all the risks involved. Today, we don't even know if the first set will be completly released. So the game balancing of each rule is a secondary question from my point of view.

Mutant Chronicles CMG is a game who need to have its first set complete in order to have a player community (at start). So, if there is no other first set figures released in the next months, the game will be dead regardless the game rules balancing or any changes brought.

If customers don't want to invest in this game today, it's not due to its game rules but the Fantasy Flight Games unability to properly release it. Don't make a mistake on the diagnostic. The Mutant Chronicles CMG is a game with a fun potential (very fun for a MC universe fan), but today I think that is the releasing politic from FFG who take the full responsability for screwing up the license, not the game rules balance.

I don't think balance issues (if there are any) is contributing to its growth or lack thereof.

everyone i've played the game with has enjoyed it.

everyone i've played the game with has been a minatures player of at least one other system

so its problem is more that it is a niche game in a limited market.

i have a big collection of W40K minis. when i want to play for fun i play mutant chronicles. when i want to play in a tournament i play W40K (which still has some balance issues of its own).

RE rules changes: if you want to change the rules in the hopes of getting more people into the game go ahead (i don't think FFG would mind), but i don't think FFG or the community at large neds to change the rules, the people who would be into it (us) are enjoying it with the rules as they are now. I don't think people in my game of thrones card group that don't play minatures would play this no matter which rules i gave them.

Coral Beach - I could not agree with you more about the fact that FFG screwed up with this game and it is up to them to determine if it dies or not. Unfortunately, we do no have direct control over FFG. My point is can we do to make it a "better" game if FFG continues to support the game? More fun, exciting, balanced? I have all of the figures plus extras.

I have tried to push this game all last summer even before the release, and many people like the game but do not love the game. Many people thought it was a little "boring". Some related it to Star Wars minis before they initiated Gambit. There was not enough motivation to come out of cover. Games need more than one way to win. At this point, most of our games ended with total destruction of the other squad. In my opinion, if the victory zones were cumulative it would give different squads different strategies to win.

I know many of you do not like change. But if you have not tried it (victory zones were cumulative) - give it a try and let me know what you think. You might be very surprised how it changes the game.

Thanks,

Berning22

Lars - you kind of made my point for me. If you want to play a miniature game for fun you play MC! Why is it not a tournament level game? It is missing something.

Why are so many people affraid of looking at changes to game that is obviously dying that we like to play?

Just try it one time and see if it is not more exciting? See if does not add more strategy? I really think you will find more strategy than just trying to beat the hell out of each.

Just my $.02.

Berning22

Berning22 said:

I was a bit vague with that response Berning, my apologies. I certainly understand that when figures are no longer made for a game, and rules support begins to vanish, then a game is officially kaput and harder to get people interested. My point was more intended to emphasize the fact that if we label it such before we even know the status, we may turn potential players (forum browsers) off before they decide to give it a go. conversely, even when games are no longer produced, you can always get someone to try something if you pitch it well.

I think if house rules work for you then go for it. Enthusiasm, however, is key until we know what the future holds.

Enjoy, and thanks for the discussion.

Berning22 said:

1) my comment was that people are like electricity they take the path of least resistence. I can tick off about 5 WH40K tournies that i've been told about since the begining of the year. TO get an MC tourney i'd have to build up a much bigger player base (and i don;t think the rules are preventing me from doing that).

2) because the changes you suggest are not needed on a widescale basis. If you want to change the rules go ahead. I don't need to. I actually like these rules better then WH40K's. Now if i could change something that would change buyers persepective about this game i would. If i could change the fact that people label it a dead game without even trying to buy it i would. If i could chnage the fact that supports of the game think it is fundamentally flawed i would...

Berning22 said:

The MC CMG group that I play with is a less competitive group than your average minis group. I have also played in organized group/tournaments for SW Minis and HeroClix, and the latter was very competitive but this was because of the rare/valuable prize support that was given out, never the game mechanics. Also both SWM and HeroClix are collectible miniature games which seem to have a more competitive fan base than the non-collectible ones (in my experience). Our group treats MC more like HeroScape since all pieces are equally available to all players. This seems to diminish the competitiveness that comes from games where "suitcase" players can show up with unbeatable forces and walk away with the prize.

I also agree strongly with the poster who mentioned that 10/10/10 is really the format this game shines in. The factions are far more balanced at this level. Unfortunately the time required for a 10/10/10 game doesn't lend itself to short 3-round tourneys. A 10/10/10 game could easily run to and hour and a half. But the army building and strategy for 10/10/10 games makes it a much better game. In my opinion 3/3/3 and even 5/5/5 formats are really just for teaching the basics to new players.

Great comments guys!

I guess after years and years of play and playtesting games that I am always looking to improve games. I know we as players do not have a whole lot of control over this game at this point, but we can try to make it more exciting and fun to play since we all have the figures. Again, I agree 10/10/10 is the best format and MC is a good game. I would just like to make it better so I can get more people to play.

I am still looking for any feedback from people that have tried my suggestion - control victory zones cumulative. I really think some of you will be plesantly surprised.

Maybe I should have titled this thread - "How can we make this game more enjoyable for non-MC fanatics". I think the MC fanatics (I am one) opened this thread and became very defensive of "their" game.

Anyone out there from Ohio? I am still waiting for some Java geek to put this game on Vassal so I can take down Coral Beach (just kidding). It really should be pretty simple to do.

Thanks again for all of the great responses.

Berning22

As my response, I'm not defensive but just answer your "having any fun" question, no problem.

The FFG Mutant Chronicles license only covers the miniatures game, so they can't give any permission to do a vassal mod of this game (this could be considered as a videogame), Paptimus were ready to make the mod but for now this thread is dead, sorry.

Concerning the fun increment with MC, I'm working in some scenarios for make easier the fights between the diferent factions without ruining the MC original flavour, when having some material I'll post here (as always)

Great - I think scenarios should also add to the game. This may have the same effect I was trying to add with my rules variant. I love the tournament point options at the Gen Con in Paris. That sounds like a lot of fun and it throws in new strategies - much needed!

Take care - Can't wait to see the scenarios.

Berning22

Hello, this is my first post, so hello everyone

I'm what you'd call an eurogamer, but looking for something diffirent. I'm digging about this game and keep finding mixed reviews. However, as I observed - these are contributed mainly by people who played some other "mutant" games before. Personally I don't really care about the size of minis, I'm simply a little bored with managing wooden cubes . I also think that there are enough miniatures available to build two cool armies - for my and my fiancee.

I guess I'd have to build them for me and her - I can't really imagine her doing that. However - she is a tough player and we both like games that demand strategy. So - strictly from a gameplay point of view - you think MC is a good choice? Do I need to expand it all the time to make it replayable? I guess I'm going to start with the starter set and two/three expansions per army.

Btw, guess I can't count on thick, solid boards to be released?

Ziomek said:

Yes ... they won´t be released anymore (i think), but you can download them from the Mutant Chronicles main website. Print them out in color and 81%-83% size and put them on some cardboard.

And of course, the game is fun with a lot of tactical potential. Some warpacks together with a starter set are a good idea. Gommorian Hammer, Nepharite Overlords and Warmaster's Legions are a "must have" for the legion. Advanced Recon and 13th Banshee Division are also very good warpacks for capitol. So you can build up the two armys from the starter set.

Got it! I'm already thinking about printing additional maps and assembling something more solid. Perhaps FFG could release the original board as well. I tried once a quick round of WoW CMG and after some time with MC I have to admit that this one seems to have much more potential.