It's worth noting that the "Revised reference cards" are now optional, as in you can choose to use them to make your game easier (1 or 5 investigators) or harder (4, 7 or 8 investigators). Since there is still only one card per player number, there's no real need to make more than one check box as easier vs harder can can be inferred from then number of investigators used.

Also worth noting that FFG hasn't "officially" announced that the FAQ has been updated, so until they do so there's no guarantee that things won't change again.

Since there is still only one card per player number, there's no real need to make more than one check box as easier vs harder can can be inferred from then number of investigators used.

But it would be forward compatible if FFG decides to put an easier/harder variant for every player count

I also suppose the scripts should be a little bit easier to write if you don't need to include the logic that decides whether the revised reference card for a given player count makes the game easier or harder.

"Difficulty" refers to the Mythos composition: whether "easy" or "hard" cards have been included or removed, etc. It's independent of the new reference cards.

Fellow Investigators

Has there been an update in calculating the scores for a game? New cards,

Focus, etc, have all come into play, so wouldn't these affect the actual game

score in some way?

Had a quick look at the forums and FFG with nothing jumping out at me,

Thanks, Walts

There has been no announcement regarding changes in scoring. Personally the only changes I can think of would be

- replace references to "cursed" / "blessed" with "bane" / "boon"

- maybe add adjustments when using a given variant (e.g. starting rumor, removing specific mythos).

Dropped FFG a Q about this ...

The scoring system remains unchanged with the release of Under the Pyramids.

Thanks for playing!

~ Nikki Valens (FFG)

... so nothing new to add/subtract ... Walts

Played two games today. They're in lines 5303 and the next (player is 'Arkhan'). I must have been absent-minded entering the games (probably still reflecting upon all the bad things that happened to my Investigators in those games ;-) ) because in line 5303 I selected 'Defeat by forfeit' whereas this should be 'Defeat by Rumor'. Would you please be so kind as to change this ? Thank you and my apologies. Patrick.

I got it. In the future, you should email me the corrections:

[email protected]

so that we can keep this thread free from "corrections" clutter.

In the future, you should email me the corrections:

[email protected]

This information might be worth adding to the first post.

Okay, did not realize I hadn't included it. I have updated the OP. Thanks

I just submitted my first game result and I did not keep track of some of the details of the game. Is there a printable form that I can fill in during the game ready to submit the stats?

I don't have such a thing. You might be able to print out the submission form.

Hi there.

Looking at the statistics, there does not seem to be a lot of 1-investigator games. However, I'm convinced that for most of us, over 35, real-life guys and girls, solo games is often the only option in weeks.

Solo game in EH seems also to be extremely difficult, especially with certaineffects that punish the Main Investigator. Hence, I'm going to submit a series of one investigator games with a systematic. I'm going to go one by one and submit 3 games against each AO with each of the main box' investigators. Let's see how this goes. Yestarday I submitted the fisrt fail Akachi againsth Azatoth. I lost in the last moment...

Solo doesn't mean "1 investigator," it means "alone." I played one 1-investigator game just to see if it was more balanced than Arkham 1-investigator games... it's not, really. 1-investigator Arkham and Eldritch games aren't fun.

When I solo, I try to go in with 3 or 4. With the new rebalancing cards, I'd be curious to try 1-investigator again.

I am interested to see your one-investigator trend results.

What do you mean by "new rebalanced cards, Tibs"?

At the end of the FAQ there is a new set of player reference cards that are supposed to better balance the game:

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/8e/5b/8e5b9773-5b92-4447-bc21-3b9e3e9aef8e/eh_errata_faq_2016-01-12_web.pdf

Thanks. Shame theses new reference cards are not for me, as I'm currently playing only with the Core Set. Today I finished with Akachi 1 win vs 2 losses). Next character will be Lily.

I have a question concerning the rumors questions in the forms. If the game results in defeat by awakening the AO, hoy do you consider active rumors by the time the game ends?

Just to be sure...

I would use them anyway. I think FFG is just being secretive about the fact that the game really was never well balanced against investigator number.

Take, for example, gate and monster frequency in the old reference card set. The number of monsters that appear in a game should be roughly linear with the number of investigators. But monsters spawn from gates, so if gates are already growing linearly with investigator number, then the number of monsters spawned per gate should remain roughly constant (and vice-versa). But on the old cards, both gate number and monster number increase with investigator number, so that higher-investigator games have more monsters per capita, and that's not balanced.

True, and for the purpose of solo game with one investigator, spawning 2 clues can ease the difficulty of travelling around.

First try with Lili, victory, by the way xD

Second go for Lily was another victory. This was really challenging, as I drew Omen of Devastation as Third Mistery while the Rumour misterious lights was ongoing. I don't think I would have managed to win with only one clue spawning instead of two...

Doom track ended at 1!!

Already I like the sound of it. Keep it coming. Also, make sure you're checking the "Revised Reference Cards" option if you're using those cards. Would you like me to add that information in?

Is the game duration statistic supposed to include game setup?

No, just game play. Not setup or teardown.

The spreadsheet is great, and I find it quite an interesting set of data to read; we have been adding all of our games to it as we learn to strategize more and more.
Three small errors/problems/slight-lacks-of-info I have noticed, first two both under the Expansions/Difficulty tab:

- Option Frequency and Option Difficulty display the note of the topics above them when highlighted. (The Mythos Composition and Mythos Difficulty topics)

- The above topics don't have a Prelude and Starting Rumour or a controlled variable ( None ) listed underneath them. This would help us know how much more difficult they make the game.

- I am also slightly confused about what the numbers mean at the top of the Investigators tab, under the Team Size , are they win or loss percentages? Could that be clarified?

As an aside, I think it would also be cool to see the win percentage of certain investigators based on Old One and Team Size.

I don't want to come off as complaining, though; I think what you have done here is very quickly and immediately helpful. It has also sparked interest into preparing for an Old One we have never fought before.

(...)and view all submissions to date here .

Maybe the link in the first post should lead to the "Introduction" tab and not to "Submissions" tab?

On some computers it takes ages to open the latter, and I don't see a good reason for it to be the default tab.

I suppose for most readers the actual processed statistics will be more interesting than a list of all individual submissions.

In any case, dropping the "#gid=40" from the url does the trick.