EDIT- due to this thread being about the current situation of the game, the poll only really works with those who have most of the packs, however if you wish to vote and dont have most of the packs, then please say where you are up to in the game, and then i can add a * next to your vote so it can be differentiated from the other votes (its a shame but unaviodable i think)

EDIT 2- i realise that such a thread cannot possible give even an idea of the player base's idea on difficulty due to the amount of variables such as how you play, the amount of cards you have, the time you can commit, experience etc...however what is interesting is that most players still comment on where they think the game is difficulty wise at the moment on other threads so most players must have some sort of idea on what they personally think, so i think it is still worth doing due to this fact. please add comments alongside your vote so we can actually see why you choose your option

sorry for the long edits but its worth pointing out i realise this poll is seriously flawed before others do it for me

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There has been much talk recently about difficulty, more specifically that the game's quests are too easy. I find this strange. Rewind only a little, say 6 months, and this was not so, in fact i seem to remember it being the opposite, the forum had many discussions regarding the high level difficulty of quests such as Ithillien....however games change, players change, even the way we play changes...hence this thread.

I wish to get a least a handful of responses, if for nothing else but my own curiosity (and yes, before anyone says it, i am well aware of the maths of statistics, and know this proves nothing....) but i would like to see what the forum thinks, so that next time i am discussing (arguing..) on this subject, at least i and others have a fair idea of what at least the regulars of this forum think (you can see my ideas in the next post)

so, here are your choices: (say if you have one that isn't here)

THIS GAME, AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS IS......

A: Far too easy- the majority of quests can be won without posing even a little challenge, to the point that it is boring

B: Getting to easy -due to the power cards that we currently have, they are getting higher compared to the difficulty of the quests

C: Mid range- This game is right where it should be. The are plenty of easy quests for theme decks but enough that still kick where it hurts once in a while

D: Getting too hard- the increase in enemy and location stats, mixed with bad treacheries is starting to outweigh the player cards available

E: Far too hard- quests are completely unbalanced in favour of the enemy

F: Depends on the player number- solo is more to the difficult end of the balance, multilplayer is more to the easy end

G: Depends on the player number- multiplayer is more to the difficult end of the balance, solo is more to the easy end

H-Too hard to say- it varies too much with each cycle and also on how you approach the game (for example its hard if you run theme decks, or easy if you only use the most powerful decks you can)

Rich

A-

B-4

C-18

D-5

E-1

F-

G-1

H-4

So my opinion, is C. This game has gone from too hard (mirkwood solo) and too easy (mirkwood mulit) in the first 6-12 months of the game, to just about right for me, even solo and multiplayer. I can win very often with my power decks, but in general, most theme decks, or lesser powered decks, win less, but still a respectable amount

it is interesting that there are now quite a few players who say the game is too easy. I am not new to strategy games, i have to say, with all honesty, that i excel at strategic thinking, it is 'my thing' if you like (i am talking more military strategy games here)...so perhaps the reason i win less is that this game has less of a 'forward thinking' aspect of it than warfare strategy games, indeed it is obvious that there is too much luck involved here for this LCG to be considered 'strategy' based, though of course there is some involved

or perhaps i just am too interested in the theme and lore of the game, the art of the game, the actual cards themselves, to focus on the actually quest...in fact i look forward to the art most of all.

or perhaps i am just not that great at this game, which is fine...i enjoy it at least as much as the next person here....and as i said before, that is what counts. so in short this game is right where it should be for me, and i hope it continues with the same balance

rich

I play this game 100% of the time 2-player co-op with a buddy, and we are making our way through 1-2 quests per month. While we're not caught up, from what we've fought I'd rate this a "C".

I have 2 concerns/suggestions:

1. I play Spirit/Leadership and my buddy plays Lore/Tactics. Any time we hit something difficulty 6+, I fall back on 25-ish "mandatory" Spirit cards due to their sheer power and have very little deck flexibility. I would love to see some sort of banned list, not in the traditional sense, but as follows:

- Once you reach Heir of Numenor, you may no longer use: Mathom, Unexpected Courage, "Cancel Treachery" (I suck with names), "Cancel Shadow effect", Northern Tracker ... Don't take this literally, just tossed some powerful cards on the list for examples.

- Once you reach The Dark Riders, add more cards to the list. Can even cycle out older Heroes, which would lead to new creative decks and less stagnant repetition. This also would enable the FFG quest creation team to have more options, as they don't have to account for as many broken combos, which also leads to my 2nd suggestion!

2. Less RNG based bombs. I can appreciate a good "Difficulty-8" but to lose a game based on what turn the Balrog gets his Sword is a bit silly.

Other than that, keep up the great work! Love this game and love that there is a fun co-op game on the market.

Great poll I'm definitely a C. Though I don't play many multiplayer games with more than two. (Don't know if there should be some letters for those playing multiplayer rarely to never, thoughk)

Is a bit wrong way to ask Rich.

Cose there is different players with different approach to the game.

If you just wonna quick make a deck without really thinking and win every quest is one approach. You finish your work day and just play a fun game before he sleep is one story.

If you wonna real challenge use your brain and thinking a lot is another story.

there is other question : you are casual player or a deep strategist and tactic?

that why we always dont get to the point. We all want different things from the game...... And as i say before you cannot please every one. There is a limit. But since all serous players already leave this forum the answer is clean.

Looks for example on the CBOTR guys. they a so rookie as a players was from begin. Now they much, much better. Before they like babes like every thing but now they also start to complain about the game and rules? Why? Since they play a lot an they learn and start to see some flaws and some problems they didn see before. So for now question is like this:

Are you reach the certain level to understand the game is unbalanced, desingners is lazy and you didn have a challenge anymore. Why i say this? Cose im pretty sure this game can be much better cose i see HON! That was amazing job!

And make NM as quick as possible or you start to lose players but is already happen......

@Shtanky and MrThomasschmidt - thanks for voting

@glaurung- i completely understand your point, it does indeed depend, and yet you contradict yourself in your reply...you say 'this depends on how you approach the game' yet you complain all the time about it being too easy....do you not think it is your way you approach the game?

i shall put you down as H- Too difficult to say and have modified it to say 'depends on how you approach the game'

i put a C for example, because that is taken across the entire scope of how i play...part of the time i play to win, but most of the time its lighhearted roleplaying into middle earth...so its a C

i do think there is an important difference here...even though we decide how we play, even FFG realise (early on in Nate French's time) that we all play differently, almost in a natural without thinking about it sense, hence the player types...bilbo, pippin boromir...so i think it is important that the designers take these into account when making a game and its difficulty.

now i have no idea if FFG design like this, but i think that it should (and is) at least be taken into account..it is afterall how they will achieve that golden 'balance' and keep the players happy, becuase, even though you say all the serious players have left (which is incorrect...i am here, and so are many others from the start) there are different types of seriousness....again back to the player types

a game's difficulty should not just be based on 'can this game be beaten with a full power deck, if so the give it an X rating for X times it can be beaten' but should be more 'what type of deck does this required to win? a theme deck, or a full power deck?'

i realise that there are too many variables to model this poll, but remember i am not trying to make this into something it is not- it is merely for my own curiosity, so for others...try to take a look at the full scope of how you play when voting

rich

For solo would say B

For 2 player C

3-4 player D

So, i guess that is G, but that all depends on H.

This is a complicated question you posed!

thanks for voting tracker, it is indeed not easy to make a choice, but for simplicities sake i tried to keep the options limited...as i say if you can think of others that will be better suited to your opinion i shall add them, but for now i shall put you down as G

rich

For me the game in general is C.

For real solo players, i believe it is going D.

personally: B, but H will always be true for the community as a whole because some players prefer the more thematic decks to just combining all of the most powerful cards. One of the real challenges for the designers is balancing the various expectations of players - giving power-players the player cards and challenging scenarios that they want, while providing thematic players with a more stylistic, fun, experience.

thanks for voting both

this is actually the hardest poll to run, due to all the problems, such as the way you approach the game, and esepcially how many packs you have (and what part of the game you are up to)...so this is probably one for those with all the packs, which is unfortunate, becuase it cuts a out a key part of the player base- those who are new to the game (which is of course needed to keep the game alive)

i have reflected on this in the first post as an edit

I'm going to say C. I play almost exclusively solo (one handed) so my judgement is based on that perspective. I like to build a lot of different decks and never use 1 deck for any long length of time so that probably influences my opinion where with thematic decks i see a real struggle to get through where with the power decks it seems smoother and easier. There are still a fair amount of really hard quests that i think balance the difficulty.

i certainly do not envy the job of the designers as i can imagine its quite difficult to satisfy all the individual playstyles

thanks for voting- and your signature has reminded me of another variable- amount of core sets you own

rich

I'm gonna say somewhere in between C and D. I would just say straight out D, but that's not exactly how I feel. I think that the games "more than average" difficulty is a good thing, and I wouldn't consider it "Getting too hard". So... Between C and D I guess. However you'd like to interpret that response.

Before I answer, or try to, I just want to address one specific point. For me there is no formula where hard equals good, bad equals easy, or vice versa. I dislike quest designs where one card can end the game. I dislike designs where certain set up means nigh impossible and other means fairly easy. I have always found Osgiliath to be a very good design because one card can be pleasant at a certain moment and terrible at other times. It is also a quest where you can run into difficulties even though you've been doing quite well throughout the game. Of course, even that quest is quite dated now, but for the time being it had been almost ideal (though it scaled much in favour of solo play).

The quests now tend to do the same, much harder with more players (almost the exact opposite to the early quests).

Overall, I don't believe there is a single deck that beats every quest almost every time, I've seen the Outlands, I've seen the Dwarves, I've played them, I've probably played couple thousand games by now. At the same time, I do understand some of you want a constant challenge. And I really think different levels, within the adventure pack, is the way to go. It can please almost everybody. And it should have been considered from the start - but it is easy to be clever now.

So, I probably cannot answer with a single letter, I've written way too many of them already. But it is a very timely thread to do.

I'd probably lean towards several options, but if I'm pushed to answer, I'd say: C

I think the first and third quest of this current cycle are far too easy, with Druadan being difficult multiplayer (it's a pretty swingy quest - most times I've played it it's been brutal two player - but I've played one game where I completely lucked out with the encounter draws and it was a cakewalk win).

I agree with so many others that this must be a game that is hard to design for, versus a head-to-head format, on top of the different expectations: some wanting a more RPG feel from a card game, some wanting a real challenge every time, etc etc.

I suspect the remaining three quests will ramp up the difficulty, much like RPGs get harder when you level up - but who knows? I still love the game but get disappointed when I didn't have to try to win. I don't need Into Ithilien hard all that time - but Cair Andros, Battle of 5 Armies, and others are challenging enough - and thematic enough - to keep me satisfied!

All in all, there is more I love about the game than dislike - so I hope it has a healthy, long future ahead!

I'd say game went from D to C. I think two things have changed since the ending of Dwarrodelf cycle:

• The better card pool. Mostly, the apperance of the all-mighty Outlands along with the raised quality of the cards in Tactics pool.
• The change in difficulty from "more players, less difficulty" to "more players, higher difficulty".

This should apply to good, experienced players with complete card pool.

thank you all for writing, its great to see people's opinions, which is of course the real reason why i run these threads...im not interested in the outcome per se...just the comments on the way there.

rich

FFG should give us more treats for doing their market research for them.

Anyway, I vote D, but not because it's getting too difficult, in fact I think it's getting a little easier but it's still somewhat difficult to me. Also, I own everything x1 except emyn muil, druadan forest and amon din, and play almost exclusively solo.

Given that I have not played the Against the Shadow cycle, I would vote C as well. I play two-player and solo. There are definitely those breathe and beat quests, but those are actually a good relief from the harder quests. My personal preference is cool game mechanics over difficulty because there are ways to boost difficulty. In the rules, they describe expert mode where you link quests together while keeping all damage and some other things. I also think that in hopes of the game's longevity, quest difficulty cannot be tailored to the expert user. New entrants to the game would likely be turned off if they had to play catch up on all of the packs just to enjoy the recent (and readily available) Adventure Packs. I agree that the expert players' experience also plays an important part to the longevity of the game and the Nightmare variants of the quests should be more readily accessible.

I think you can reduce the majority of Glaurung's posts to:

"Game too easy. Player cards too powerful. Need nightmare packs now!"

I think you can reduce the majority of Glaurung's posts to:

"Game too easy. Player cards too powerful. Need nightmare packs now!"

yes you got 10 out 10.

I think you can reduce the majority of Glaurung's posts to:

"Game too easy. Player cards too powerful. Need nightmare packs now!"

yes you got 10 out 10.

I thought you would like that.

I enjoy Glaurung's posts. He reminds me a lot of Tommy Wiseau's character in The Room. He's getting a little too repetitive now though It was better in the old days.

thanks for voting

rich