richsabre said:

Yeah, I never even made that connection. I always thought that bit of flavor text in TRG was really odd, but now it seems like a pretty deft narrative choice.

Hello FFG!

Here's my feedback. This is the only card game I have played, I only expected to buy the core set but I have now bought all the packs and am fully addicted to it. I would very much like to buy a new adventure pack each month and would be disappointed to wait several months for a deluxe pack. Saga expansions for the Lotr novels would be great, but I love the side quests too. I bought the game because it's Lotr, but love the single player/co-op aspect. I can't always play with other people and most of my competitive board games gather dust.

My favourite part of Lotr is the characters, and I would love to see more focus on specific heroes. Legolas' bow allowing him to attack twice, Gimli's axe allowing him to defend twice, for example. I also don't mind several versions of the same characters and am eager to see a tactics Aragorn one day. The card I am looking forward to the most is Andúril.

I would love the next cycle to focus on men, either Gondor or Dúnedain, with some powerful synergies and weapons. The most recent player cards have been brilliant but I feel the game has become easier. I would love to see the difficulty level shoot up in future quests. My favourite quest was foundations of stone. Getting split up in co-op was a great experience. Future quest dynamics that show this level of innovation would be fantastic. I am looking forward to a combat heavy 'battlefield' kind of quest, with swarms of enemies to cut through. Now it is getting easier to quest I would like longer quests with more quest cards. The long dark is an example of a quest that can be won very easily but putting all effort into questing.

And finally, very random, but I would love to see Event cards called 'I do not counsel prudence!' and 'You do not know your peril!' but, I'm sure they are coming.

Ben

To me there are two pillars that hold up fantasy literature: Tolkein and Howard. I've read a lot of bad and some good fantasy since discovering those two some thirty plus years ago, but none better. Good current writers are G.G. Kay, Tad Williams & sometimes Sean Russell. Oh yes, Orson Sott Card also tells a decent yarn now and again, but they, along with Moorcock, Leiber, Pratt and others are simply building on the foundations laid down by Tolkein and Howard. Yes, I've missed some good writers, but I have intentionally omitted many more.

booored said:

Well, not really. He said it was HIS thread as it was him beginning it. Thereby the author of this thread. You, on the other hand made it a personal thing. You made it a personal attack on him and thereby made this thread about him and you. And the fact that you came with that statement after you got your wished reaction says a lot about YOU. Learn the proper way of how to act in a forum and then come back when you can behave. Played card games for more than 20 years?? Strange, out from how you behave in this forum here I'd have guessed you were in your early teens. That at least would have been some kind of excuse I guess…

Else, agree with everything you said Rich. so no reason to write it a second time sad to see that we can't have these nice threads in peace without a cave troll popping up every other time. Since I see this as your thread in fact, might I ask you to do the honor and cast a Forest Snare into play?

mr.thomasschmidt said:

i was going to say something similar…if you've been playing games that long, you should have learned sportsmanship somewhere along the way, being polite, working well with others, losing gracefully, etc.

i'll never understand the need to be rude in online forums and hiding behind anonymity.

You know, I have been reading this forum for a long time and while I do not post much in this area I frequently lurk about here, and I think you lot are way to hard on booored. The only troll in this particular thread is mr.thomasschmidt and to a lesser extent richsabre.

Lets look at what happened in this thread. richsabre makes a post about the state of the game and then booored makes an on topic and constructive reply raising three points that in my opinion are spot on and needed to be said in such topic. Then richsabre makes an unprovoked personal attack on booored, calling him a troll followed by a demand for him to explain his position in further detail on something completely off topic. booored dose this, and while I think booored is a bit miss guided here he expresses his position clearly as well as doing exactly what richsabre asked him to do and the thread has a chance to turn into a very interesting subject about good and evil and modern vs classical fantasy fiction. But no. Instead there are three posts of personal attacks on booored. The most venomous form mr.thomasschmidt.

There is no doubt that booored has a caustic tone, but I have never, ever, seen him attack anyone personally like the way you lot have behave in this thread and other threads he has posted in. I also think he is one of the most helpful and insightful posters on this forum. He defiantly gives strongly worded opinions, but he also gives sound advise, card evaluations and brings up interesting points about the meta game.

You lot should all take a step back and lay off him because form the point of view of this casual forum frequenter, the problem I see around here is you lot, not booored. It was you guys that degenerated this thread and some others I have noticed, by attacking booored for no reason that I could work out. It was richsabre's unprovoked comments that started the degeneration of this thread. Now booored isn't all with out blame, he has said some harsh things now and then and he did do a mild snap back at richsabre comments, but I bet for every one thing I have seen him do, I have seen others say worse and say more to him. It is a wonder he is as civil as he is considering how you lot treat him.

iGaveHimLife said:

well it is here that you are in fact wrong- im not going to comment on the fact that you think id be idiotic enough (and pathetic enough) to troll my own thread, but i am going to say that booored has indeed said some very unkind things to several people on this forum over the months, myself included…and unlike you i have checked and posted on these boards every day for over a year

i dont know where you come from, but here in england we (in general that is) are polite if talked to in a polite manner…but if talked to in the manner of booored…well what else is there to do but to act as we did?

saying we were '**** sucking' was hardly insightful, and totally uncalled for, as is 90% of the things he says….i could go on but ill let the vast majority of the forum members speak for my point

besides…you coming into my thread and talking about anything other than the intended subject is trolling anyways- so i guess youre just as bad as the rest of us right?

I also have to agree with the critiques relating to the lazy and poor design behind "flip card and die" mechanics that are in the game. It just about breaks the game, and needs to go the way of the dodo. There are much better ways to challenge players.

And also, I too am concerned that when I see certain keywords that they are geared towards what appears to be that single cycle. That is also bad game design. It is hard enough opening a pack and seeing multi-player only cards when you play solo, but I can overlook that one to some extent (I feel it still is on the sloppy side of things…more about filling packs and selling cards than good design), as one never knows when a friend might pick up and play.

But I stress, the game almost got shelved by the one-card nukes in the encounter decks. Said friends would do the same.

And it would be a shame for such a unique design with great artwork to flounder in that regard. I am still playing, but another bad decision could easily knock me out of this - and card games in general. I see a tendency towards bloated and sloppy design, that is not quite tolerated in other genres.

When it works though…it really works.

i'll also add that i honestly have noticed an improvement in the tone/tenor of the boards, specifically from booored and glaurung lately, i just didn't want to say anything earlier in risk of jinxing it.

i think they have both, by and large, been much more polite, i've found their insight more helpful lately, and when they offer criticisms in a non-caustic manner, it's all the better.

so, no, i don't want to be hard on any one person. it's just, perhaps b/c this game is "co-operative," i expect even more cooperation than i do from maybe some other types of games.

booored said:

1) I think they're doing a good job so far, but this is my first LCG, so I'm probably not an expert for this. I love all the KD Goblins which all presented a threat on their own. TRG had some cool monsters, TWitW was tentaclicious, the Nameless Things, the four Carrock trolls, etc. The opponents could be a bit harder though. Would love to see some orcs on drugs or some human opponents (can also be on drugs).

2) I have no problem with this, as I'm building decks for each scenario. I'd like to see more secarios like SaF that make excessive use of the secrecy keyword, but even so the mechanic seems to work better after new Glorfindel got released.

3) I know exactly what you mean, but I'm not sure what can be done without maing the game too easy. I liked the mechanic implemented in FoS, in which the brutal cards only came into play in the last stages of the game. I'd also like to see an official ruling that allows players to mulligan a card during the setup (or to choose one of three - like Branching Paths). However, players should get a punishment for using a mulligan.

And finally my personal suggestion:

Create a tactics attachment/ally that gives me money when I defeat an opponent. And some kind of tactics torturer who can turn an enemys damage into progress would be nice.

leptokurt said:

grusome …but great! i think you shall get at least your first wish. we have horn of gondor that works on characters out of play, the attatchment could basically do the same for enemies

id like to see gimli's axe do this, or boromirs sword

mr.thomasschmidt said:

iGaveHimLife said:

iGaveHimLife said:

You know, I have been reading this forum for a long time and while I do not post much in this area I frequently lurk about here, and I think you lot are way to hard on booored. The only troll in this particular thread is mr.thomasschmidt and to a lesser extent richsabre.

Lets look at what happened in this thread. richsabre makes a post about the state of the game and then booored makes an on topic and constructive reply raising three points that in my opinion are spot on and needed to be said in such topic. Then richsabre makes an unprovoked personal attack on booored, calling him a troll followed by a demand for him to explain his position in further detail on something completely off topic. booored dose this, and while I think booored is a bit miss guided here he expresses his position clearly as well as doing exactly what richsabre asked him to do and the thread has a chance to turn into a very interesting subject about good and evil and modern vs classical fantasy fiction. But no. Instead there are three posts of personal attacks on booored. The most venomous form mr.thomasschmidt.

There is no doubt that booored has a caustic tone, but I have never, ever, seen him attack anyone personally like the way you lot have behave in this thread and other threads he has posted in. I also think he is one of the most helpful and insightful posters on this forum. He defiantly gives strongly worded opinions, but he also gives sound advise, card evaluations and brings up interesting points about the meta game.

You lot should all take a step back and lay off him because form the point of view of this casual forum frequenter, the problem I see around here is you lot, not booored. It was you guys that degenerated this thread and some others I have noticed, by attacking booored for no reason that I could work out. It was richsabre's unprovoked comments that started the degeneration of this thread. Now booored isn't all with out blame, he has said some harsh things now and then and he did do a mild snap back at richsabre comments, but I bet for every one thing I have seen him do, I have seen others say worse and say more to him. It is a wonder he is as civil as he is considering how you lot treat him.

First of all, I can't see how you make a constructive on topic answere when you start with referring to all previous persons who wrote in this thread as "FFG **** suckers". Or when you make a statement as vile as "that fit nicely into the Lore that only the most pathetic phyco fan would have a problem with" that is clearly an attack at rich. How's that constructive in anyway? And while rich can certainly speak for himself it snaps when I read that kind of uncalled for remarks.

Secondly, if you take and read this thread alone, then yes, we might be harsh on booored. Might. BUT this is just one of MANY that he has participated in and most of them turns out this way, mainly because he shows little to no respect whatsoever for other human beings in this forum. If you "lurk about" here as you said, and I don't mean to offend you in any way, you would know that by now. Both booored and Glaurung are frequently pissing everyone else off by how they address others and share their destructive criticism. No constructive here. Though, it seems that Glaurung has learned from this and learned to respect his fellow players.

Thirdly, I wouldn't call a person helpful when he in one thread accuses players of being idiots for the lack of understanding the game and then in an other thread rises a question that is clearly stated in the rule book!!! But you can decide that for you self. I like the way you try to make me the troll though that, according to you, it's us, the people who try to respect our fellow players and unprovoked holds a nice tone, that is the trolls. Well, in that case good sir, I take that as a compliment! *bowing deeply*

Hey dont Speak from me. I really respect Boored cose he Know What his talking about. Even if you think he speak rude anyway he speak with reason. But what you speak is water with no any point for 90%. I just dont wont to be part of your useless struggle.And please dont mention me ok?

richsabre said:

Improvement of tactics should be a priority of future deck design. I at least would like to see more resource engines for this sphere. Killing means looting after all.

Thanks for starting this thread. I share your opinion and ratings given in your first post. The only issue I don't agree with is "quest content". After FoS and SaF it should be at least 8/10. In fact I like all Dwarrowdelf adventures. Only TLD was a bit disappointing (not bad, but not quite what i expected). RtR is perhaps too easy, but there should be scenarios like this for beginners and for testing decks (and just to have some fun).

Also, I think that adding weapons/attachments to opponents like they did with Durin's Bane is something they should keep in future scenarios. And I miss nasty travel effects like in the Mirkwood cycle.

yes, looking at the rating i gave i probably agree with you, and i admit this thread was a little premature (given that i dont have S&F), but overall i agree this cycle is far more refined than mirkwood, which is suppose is to be expected

rich

leptokurt said:

I think most of the calls for improved Tactics options pertain to the sphere's function in solo games. Yes, Tactics is probably the weakest sphere in single-player games, but I think it might even be TOO strong in groups. When it doesn't have to worry about questing (paired with strong Spirit/Lore support), it just carves through enemies. Boromir + Support of the Eagles or Hama + Feint just gets silly. Enemies like The Watcher and the Carrock trolls just get swatted like flies.

That being said, it does need a boost to make it a more viable solo option. Some hero/ally that gets a willpower bonus as it kills enemies would be a nice start. Your "bounty" idea (+resources for killing) is also good.

I agree that the encounter "attachments" are a neat development. In that vein, I also enjoyed Gathering Ground from TLD (the treachery that attaches to a location). Fresh, innovative encounter mechanics are always fun.

Also, without delving into the issue of who trolled whom, I agree with booored that the "reveal and die" issue could be improved. I think many of the killer cards (Sudden Pitfall, Sleeping Sentry, the Gollum treacheries, etc.) can be mitigated with smart play, but there are still times when they just wax you out of nowhere. This is frustrating, because it feels like the encounter deck just got lucky. I think the FoS solution is a fairly good one: have the really brutal cards shuffled in towards the end of the quest, after players have a better chance to set up (and thus a better chance to overcome those powerful effects).

booored said:

I'd really like to defend you, booored, as I didn't have a problem with your first post, but c'mon, was this really neccessary?

booored said:

I'm not a big fan of attacking people personally who I think attacked other people personally, so…

As you've been playing the game for more than 20 years I assume you're at least, uh, 21. Old enough to say

"sorry, i didn't mean to offend you, but…"

…instead of, well, what you said. I'd give it a difficulty rating of 3 to copy and paste the sentence above.

starhawk77 said:

As a solo player I hate all multi players. You suck and destroy the game for me! Stop having friends!

Ok, I have to admit that Erebor Battle Master was a big improvement for tactics/dwarf decks. One of the best player cards in this cycle. Now we only need more tough enemies like Durin's Bane that will hack each spirit hero into pieces. One reason why I love TWitW and SaF is because they'e made for tactics. Boromir in action is SO much fun!

Btw, you can add "Leaping Flame" to the list of cards that destroy you immediatly. The ***** came up twice in round 1 while everyone was questing.

leptokurt said:

Yeah, every scenario seems to have that one treachery that is head and shoulders above the others. Leaping Flame is "that treachery" for S&F. You can build up a nice little strategy to tank that one Balrog hit per round, but it's harder to handle two. Then everything starts to unravel when that extra attack goes through.

S&F and TWitW are basically a giant middle finger directed towards Spirit players.

Hmmm what Leaping Flame do?

When revealed, it causes Durin's Bane to make an immediate attack against the first player.

starhawk77 said:

someone else suggested something like this earlier in the thread, i think (it may very well have been you, i don't recall as i type this) but the problem lies in that the attack phase is after the quest phase.

maybe you all are envisioning something like for every enemy killed by this hero, he gains +1 willpower?

not only does that seem too powerful (and no elegant way to keep track) i'm not sure we'll see something like that (but then again, maybe we will). at the same time, to get him up to any decent willpower (i would think this hero needs to start at 0 or 1 willpower) he has to attack for quite a few rounds, at which time you might have gotten too far behind in questing.

i'm certainly no card designer, but it seems like it might be difficult. i think cards like blade of gondolin and legolas' ability are the way to go. after all, we already *do* have tactics cards that place progress (forget needing willpower to only then have to compare it against threat in the staging area!) directly onto quests via the results of combat. sure, it's only two cards at this point but that, to me, seems to be the way to go.

besides, i don't think we really want our best fighters questing anyway, it's just not their function.

Dain Ironfoot said:

Lore's function is to heal and to draw cards, but still it has some good fighters. Ok, I also don't want too much questing power for tactics, but either they have to create stronger enemies so that it pays off to have a 0 WP tactics ally, or they have to offer other ways to make progess with a tactics deck. Legolas is a very creative card in that way, and I'm sure there are other ways to increase tactics's power without making it too badass.

One example of what I consider to be a good enemy is the Orc Drummer. He's not too strong, but can be a pain in the ass because of his card effect when he's in the staging area and because of the shadow effects when he is engaged. A tactics deck should have no problem to eliminate him, but a spirit deck has to gather some forces to overcome the 3 DEF.

Dain Ironfoot said:

I think I suggested a hero/ally who gets +1 willpower each time it destroys an enemy (or I may have done so on another board), but I doubt I'm the first to make that recommendation. It would actually be pretty easy to keep track of--just attach the destroyed enemies facedown (similar to Eagles of the Misty Mountains). Limiting it to once per round would be fine, since my proposal would offer the added bonus of permanently removing those enemies from future reshuffles. It's just one idea, though, and I'm sure there are more creative solutions. Alternately, an ally could probably go without that restriction, since allies are considerably more difficult to ready.

At any rate, I do think Tactics needs to have SOME questing ability in solo games. It doesn't need to be great at generating progress, but it should have a way to combat the threat in the staging area. Without some modicum of willpower, Tactics players find their threat jumping up every quest phase. I agree that cards like Legolas and Blade of Gondolin fit the Tactics "flavor," but they don't really alleviate the problem of skyrocketing threat. On the other hand, Hail of Stones and Hands Upon the Bow work fairly well as "pseudo-willpower." The ability to pick off enemies in the staging area might be the way to go, but I still think Tactics needs a small dose of raw questing power.

Well, it's been a while since I posted, but I might as well chip in !

The game has gotten better, no doubts there. There is an apparent power creep both for the encounter deck and the player cards, but it hasn't been steep enough to eclipse some of the more powerful core power cards. However, I will share Booored's preoccupation with insta-death cards. Cards like Sleeping Sentry are just killers and IMO, there should be ways to make the game tough without making it hang on one precise moment in the game. Redhorn Gate is a good exemple : if you play for the first time, you might get a bit aggravated by the transition from stage 2 to stage 3 of the quest deck, especially if you flipped Snowstorm. As soon as Cardhradras come up as the active location, Heroes and Allies drop like flies. So you have to gear up your deck and playstyle to prepare for that exact moment, that time when all your efforts might go crashing down. Granted, I felt a lot of pride when I finally beat Redhorn Gate, but still, it can be frustrating and not all players have my patience.

Synergies are now way more interesting, and combos are starting to evolve out of the card pool, which is awesome. In the beginning, each card more or less standed on its own except for a few cases. Now, a lot of variation, combos and synergies are possible. My only gripe would be that some keywords are still left in the dust (Noble, for instance), while others (Dwarf comes to mind) are getting waaaay too much attention. They are slowly making Noldor and sylvan better, but they should work on it more, as well as Hobbit.

Finally, as Starhawk77 pointed out, the wording hasn't really gotten clearer, and since they are trying to find new imaginative mechanics for each quest (which is good), it often generates question the rules have trouble answering. The new FAQ is a good thing, but it was overdue. A new, clearer rulebook would be a good thing in a new printing of the core sets.

Otherwise, this game is still awesome, and I am really eager for the next deluxe expansion !!!