Everyone, these are board games we're talking about. They are meant to be a hobby, not life. Don't take it so seriously. Drink some wine and be merry.

Happy new year!

For some Arkham IS a lifestyle. You obviously have never seen how some fans have converted rooms in their home or even complete homes over to a 20's theme to play the game in. Or the live action version that ran recently at a school. Arkham culture is a community of people who, through the works of Lovecraft or discovering the game through other means, have come together to explore a unique world created by a master of Weird Fiction and wanted to share it with others. The same way that he told other writers to create stories using his ideas players of Arkham now continue that wish through imaginative means using Arkham Horror to create new stories. The stories we tell between sessions is what makes Arkham enduring and why people continue to create new content for the game everyday. In the past two years the amount of material released has topped the expansions released commercially. If FFG had a clue they would partner with the fan creators (like they did recently with a Talisman fan) and start releasing the fan expansions.

Eldritch is 'just a game'.

Big difference.

Ha ha ha this is most funny think what I hear on this forum!!!!!

AH is god and EH just a game. My friend be carefull maybe you play to much and read to much Lovecraft.

suicidepuppet,

Funny you mention the decor...last year, I actually built a table as I couldn't find one which could accommodate the entire AH game with all of the expansions and our card holders for under several hundred dollars. Over time, I'm framing a few pictures and putting together some shelves to hold the Neighborhood Displays and other pieces.

Cheers,

Joe

For now I would settle for one of the custom storage units I've seen on BGG. That would help out a lot. But then I would just start adding to it and well...it'd be looking a lot like 1926

Also for the record, Elder Sign is objectively better than both of them

I have it on my tablet and am somewhat on the fence about it.

But I do relish when I win!

1) "Waaaaaaaauuuugh, how am I supposed to know what kind of test I'm gonna get during the Encounter Phase??! It's so random, waaaaaaaugh, no fair!"

How many times have you played the game before you came to that conclusion? Once? Twice maybe? Do you even see how the game was designed? For Combat Encounters, you need a character that has high Strength. For acquiring items in the reserve, you need someone who has high Influence. To shut down portals, you better have someone who has either high Lore, Will, or Observation (adequate Strength is not bad too).

Let's stop there, buttercup.

First, you know as well as I do that Combat Encounters are the one type of encounter which is completely transparent in the game. You also know that the Acquire Assets action isn't an encounter; it's an action. You will never do it during the Encounter Phase.

So you're off to a bad start: Constructing blatantly disingenuous strawmen doesn't convince me that you're actually saying anything worth hearing.

But let's proceed to your first meaningful statement: "To shut down portals, you better have someone who has either high Lore, Will, or Observation (adequate Strength is not bad too)."

This, obviously, is absurd. What you're saying is that you need to be good at 4 out of 5 stats in order to reliably succeed at an Other Worlds encounter. Fortunately, your "deep analysis" of the game is completely wrong. Simply reading the rulebook reveals that the actual skills the designers claim you need for Other Worlds encounters are Lore and Will.

In either case, however, we discover that the information is inadequate: There are only 4 characters out of the 13 included in the game who are actually good at both of those skills. Which means that even if you DO recognize which skills you need, it will still usually come down to pure luck whether you'll draw the card that matches the skill you have.

An actual deep analysis of the game, it should be noted, will reveal that if you analyze all the possible encounter card results that lead to a successful gate closure, there are a total of 39 possible checks. The checks break down to:

LORE : 16

WILL : 10

INFLUENCE : 6

OBSERVATION : 4

STRENGTH : 3

Most cards, of course, require multiple checks for success. So it might also be useful to look at the breakdown of how many success chains each type of check is part of. There are 28 chains in total, which means the percentage chance for each skill being required in a given chain are:

LORE : 57%

WILL : 38%

INFLUENCE : 21%

OBSERVATION : 14%

STRENGTH : 11%

So we can immediately note that you were completely wrong in your list: Influence is actually twice as valuable compared to Strength.

Another useful piece of information would actually be the situations which require only a single successful check in order to close the gate. The breakdown for this sort of thing is:

LORE : 7

WILL : 3

INFLUENCE : 1

OBSERVATION : 1

STRENGTH : 1

Lore obviously has a huge advantage here.

Based on this, obviously, you'd want to identify a character with high Lore and high Will to attempt these encounters. Assuming you did that, what would be the odds that you still drew a card which required a skill check that wasn't Lore or Will? Turns out there are 13 such cards.

Which equates to a 52% chance that you'd draw a card requiring a different skill.

That's a coin-flip.

So much for the argument that this game isn't massively dominated by random chance.

That's a coin-flip.

So much for the argument that this game isn't massively dominated by random chance.

So are you saying the game is mostly random? That said is there a challenge or just playing for fun and wining is more based on if you draw the right card?

Thank you Justin. Julia had explained the math to them in her review of the product but that didn't sink in and now it being a 'luck fest' is considered an 'opinion'. Yeah, right.

You should post this at BGG as well. They could use a little reality with their coffee.

I don't see why games should be thus dissected. Shouldn't it be more fun to discover all those things yourself than have them spoiled and put on a spreadsheet?

Here's a thought: erase all the flavor text on Encounter cards in both AH and EH, and just roll dice for 2-4 hours straight.

Of course, everything can be stripped down to probabilty, and simple mechanics.

In AH you test a random attribute, lose a random amount of resource X and gain a random amount of resource Y.

That's not as interesting as the stories behind the system.

I don't see why games should be thus dissected. Shouldn't it be more fun to discover all those things yourself than have them spoiled and put on a spreadsheet?

Here's a thought: erase all the flavor text on Encounter cards in both AH and EH, and just roll dice for 2-4 hours straight.

Of course, everything can be stripped down to probabilty, and simple mechanics.

In AH you test a random attribute, lose a random amount of resource X and gain a random amunt of resource Y.

That's not as interesting as the stories behind the system.

Most of the 'heavies' who post here and at BGG are content creators and game designers. It's in our nature to look inside the machine. It's how fan creators learn to create new content and how other designers spend their break time

This enmity thing is stupid.It;s just the battle of the nerds, sorry.

Many people like classic Simpsons, the other half love the new Simpsons.(I love the new seasons, for the record (: )

I bring this as an example since the golden era has become the intellectual property of Comic Book Guy types worldwide(i.e. angry nerds)

Eldritch Horror is praised becuase it's a cleaned up, streamlined AH.

Eldritch Horror is being hated by the other group because they're opposed to the cult of the new. A sequel to their beloved favorite makes AH feel old and dated in comparison.

What basically EH did is offer an alternative to all those players who have grown tired of AH with all its expansions.

It also gave people who wanted to buy AH, but were intimidated by the mountains of chrome and rules something more accessible.

The same thing happened with Relic and Talisman. Relic simply replaced Talisman for us, since it's the more efficient, cleaner and quicker game.

This enmity thing is stupid.It;s just the battle of the nerds, sorry.

Many people like classic Simpsons, the other half love the new Simpsons.(I love the new seasons, for the record (: )

I bring this as an example since the golden era has become the intellectual property of Comic Book Guy types worldwide(i.e. angry nerds)

Eldritch Horror is praised becuase it's a cleaned up, streamlined AH.

Eldritch Horror is being hated by the other group because they're opposed to the cult of the new. A sequel to their beloved favorite makes AH feel old and dated in comparison.

What basically EH did is offer an alternative to all those players who have grown tired of AH with all its expansions.

It also gave people who wanted to buy AH, but were intimidated by the mountains of chrome and rules something more accessible.

Wrong again. If this had been a new game it would make a difference. It's not. And go look in any forum for ES or MoM or CoC:LCG and you won't find anyone posting 'suck it up' posts.

This is half of Arkham shoved in a box and retitled. This Cult of The Proper Number of Expansions is the thing I don't get and never will. There's not an Arkham fan who wouldn't pick up a new expansion. That's an Arkham fan. Arkham fans are not tired of the game, the number of expansions or how many more they might release. Just the opposite. We make MORE material. More than FFG at this point I believe.

The problem is a lot of Arkham fans are dropping out of the conversation because of topics like these. And honestly it's time I let this whole mess collapse upon itself and get back to the whole point of my game collection...fun...

enjoy the 'buttercup sucking'...I guess...

I used to be an Arkham fan. But after buying Miskatonic,(the completionist in me), I took a critical sanity hit after witnessing the sheer number of cards that the game now had , and the major dilution issues that ensued from incorporating them.

The problem is: I want to play with: Relationship cards, Personal stories, Reckoning cards, Epic Battle cards, etc., but it's impossible to play with everything, and the huge volume of content made things hard to separate and contain.

Even before,small-box expansions would simply disappear whole into the towering stacks of everything, and the game just became flavorless for us, and too **** long to set up.

There just comes a time when you realize that having too much is bad.

Of course, I'm just sharing my personal experience with the game.

May I contribute my 2 cents as someone that has yet to play? Okay you say 'wait you haven't play I'm not going to even read further'; okay but too bad I wasn't going to review either game.

For me I like H.P. Lovecraft and wanted a board game in the Cthulhu genre. I looked at Arkham before I ever heard of Eldritch. The reviews were generally good but also there was the game length and complication mentioned in nearly every review. I wanted something simple that I could teach people that weren't big into gaming. Then there's the completion in me. I've read several times (even here) that Arkham fans buy every expansion and are more than willing to buy whatever comes next. I couldn't justify $350.00 on a game? Well not really and yes I realize I don't have to buy everything at once.

So... simpler, cheaper, faster I'm going to try Eldritch. Will I like it? I don't know. Is it far too random? Some people think so, I hope not. Is it better? There are plenty of fans to go around for both games. i personally hope that FFG doesn't come out with many expansions for Eldritch.

P.S. If you game me a penny for my thoughts and I put in my 2 cents; who gets the change?

i personally hope that FFG doesn't come out with many expansions

HA ha ha ha ha ha ha

This enmity thing is stupid.It;s just the battle of the nerds, sorry.

Many people like classic Simpsons, the other half love the new Simpsons.(I love the new seasons, for the record (: )

I bring this as an example since the golden era has become the intellectual property of Comic Book Guy types worldwide(i.e. angry nerds)

Eldritch Horror is praised becuase it's a cleaned up, streamlined AH.

Eldritch Horror is being hated by the other group because they're opposed to the cult of the new. A sequel to their beloved favorite makes AH feel old and dated in comparison.

What basically EH did is offer an alternative to all those players who have grown tired of AH with all its expansions.

It also gave people who wanted to buy AH, but were intimidated by the mountains of chrome and rules something more accessible.

The same thing happened with Relic and Talisman. Relic simply replaced Talisman for us, since it's the more efficient, cleaner and quicker game.

agree 100%

I used to be an Arkham fan. But after buying Miskatonic,(the completionist in me), I took a critical sanity hit after witnessing the sheer number of cards that the game now had , and the major dilution issues that ensued from incorporating them.

The problem is: I want to play with: Relationship cards, Personal stories, Reckoning cards, Epic Battle cards, etc., but it's impossible to play with everything, and the huge volume of content made things hard to separate and contain.

Even before,small-box expansions would simply disappear whole into the towering stacks of everything, and the game just became flavorless for us, and too **** long to set up.

There just comes a time when you realize that having too much is bad.

Of course, I'm just sharing my personal experience with the game.

Yes sure. AH is amazing game but as a pioner the way of game was a bit hard. Now we hafe a new version improve by many ways and this is fact!!! Rules ans mechanic is mucg more bettee less fidly. So we have new game which is with time bring Lovecraft theme for new level. AH is good but just time of AH is done. FFG understand that and try to do they best. Im happy they do everything right in my oinion.

Nothing last forever and one day EH will meet the same fade as AH

Eldritch Horror is praised becuase it's a cleaned up, streamlined AH.

Eldritch Horror is being hated by the other group because they're opposed to the cult of the new. A sequel to their beloved favorite makes AH feel old and dated in comparison.

Zealot, I appreciated your post and your thoughts / concerns about the two games.

You're certainly right when saying that EH streamlines some of the problems AH had, and I agree with you that some people that were unhappy with AH now will have a good game that will offer them a chance to enjoy the Mythos in a way more similar to their test, as it's true that people who dedicated their lives to AH will simply keep on playing AH.

Let me stress a point here about the nature of these topics, though. For me it's not "what's best (in life)? AH or EH?", and neither it's the point of many of the other posters. The point is we are talking about the luck-dependancy of EH (as a stand-alone game, no comparison here). Many have said "you should learn how to play" or "can't talk about luck dependancy" and stuff, and actually, this is no objective comment (no fact, sa you'd say): every game has numbers behind it, and a sound math is the skeleton for a sound game. Indeed, a fan-boy can simply enjoy the encounters and play, but many of us (that have something to do with "the other side of the coin" and are playtesters, game designers, reviewers and so on) before saying "this game is pretty well balanced" want to do some math to actually give an active contribution (a playtester should not only say "this game's cool" but spot out the weaknesses; a designer should know how to avoid a catastrophe with people breaking his game; a reviewer should know what he's talking about in order not to lose credibility) and this is what Justin had done while publishing the numbers (and I did a long time ago before my very first review; actually, I'm still working on a better model, considering the odds for every character to survive certain encounters) and proving (mathematically) that OW encounters are actually luck dependant (I would like to track down all encounters in the whole deck, but this can prove a long way to go).

Please remember: this doesn't mean the game is good. And it doesn't mean the game is bad. It's only an objective fact (math is a fact, not an opinion) that maybe people before buying the game would know. There are games absolutely non-luck dependant (A Game of Thrones comes to mind, if we want to stay with FFG), games where luck has a minor impact (usually games where you roll many and many dice - there are statistics theorems showing that the more dice you roll, the easier is for the result pool to align with the expected values (and again, it's a fact, not an opinion) - or strategy allows you to overcome bad luck in some way) and there are games where luck is an important (yet maybe not decisive) factor, and many people are not ok with all these categories, so I (as a customer) always appreciate these analysis. End of the story.

And, as said, this has nothing to do with EH-fan boys vs AH-fan boys.

I used to be an Arkham fan. But after buying Miskatonic,(the completionist in me), I took a critical sanity hit after witnessing the sheer number of cards that the game now had , and the major dilution issues that ensued from incorporating them.

The problem is: I want to play with: Relationship cards, Personal stories, Reckoning cards, Epic Battle cards, etc., but it's impossible to play with everything, and the huge volume of content made things hard to separate and contain.

Even before,small-box expansions would simply disappear whole into the towering stacks of everything, and the game just became flavorless for us, and too **** long to set up.

There just comes a time when you realize that having too much is bad.

Of course, I'm just sharing my personal experience with the game.

Actually, MH kinda solves the dilution problems the game had (encounters relating stuff from different expansions, undiluted mechanics to trigger new Acts into play, double gate Mythos card to avoid periods of non-ctivity on expansion boards and so on), but I understand that a "complete Arkham Horror experience" could not be everyone's cup of tea.

One good solution could be removing some components and just playing with 1 or 2 board exp (the second one being always KH, otherwise you go with speed Arkham, and games are not so good, imo).

And certainly EH is a good solution if you want a more compact game streamlining some of the issues

That's a fair point Ken. Arkham is demanding (time & money) and if you want an HPL game then probably it's not the first logic choice. Investing a load of money in a game you don't know how your buddies will like, well, it's risky.

Still, I'd not pick up Eldritch either. For two different reasons:

a) the core game is really low on cards (seriously, you cycle encounter decks at least once per game) so that probably you'll need an expansion to fix it. This means something like 100 bucks invested, which even if not much, is still quite a load of money. Plus, you said you're a completionist, and probably this game will receive several expansions (so that maybe Arkham will be cheaper in the end)

b) I'd not see this game as something "simple to teach people not that into gaming": the game is difficult, and brutal. I'm afraid casual gamer wouldn't enjoy it that much.

But if I had to pick up an introductory coop game, I'd opt first for Elder Sign (with the expansion, vital to have some bigger challenge) and see. If they like the setting. If they like the coop idea. If they start considering who's to go where to attempt what. And then I'll consider moving to something else (EH, AH, MoM, depending on the personal taste of the people involved)

Just some ideas. You know your group better for sure!

For me I like H.P. Lovecraft and wanted a board game in the Cthulhu genre. I looked at Arkham before I ever heard of Eldritch. The reviews were generally good but also there was the game length and complication mentioned in nearly every review. I wanted something simple that I could teach people that weren't big into gaming. Then there's the completion in me. I've read several times (even here) that Arkham fans buy every expansion and are more than willing to buy whatever comes next. I couldn't justify $350.00 on a game? Well not really and yes I realize I don't have to buy everything at once.

Nothing last forever and one day EH will meet the same fade as AH

That's probably absolutely true

[...]

Still, I'd not pick up Eldritch either. For two different reasons:

[...]

Just some ideas. You know your group better for sure!

Ouch... well that boat has sailed. I ended up with it rather unexpectedly. Short story but not relevant here.

As for complication it does seem like a bit much so I can only imagine AH. I've play war/miniature games and even MtG so I'm used to rules but I just had a hard time getting the flow.

I hope it is not a dust collector and unfortunately I'm not running out for Elder Sign. Saving up for some other stuff.

I see. Then, if you are a former MtG player, you'll probably enjoy more EH: they gave a great attention to keywords while wording on Arkham is pretty sloppy. So, MtG players would be more "at home" with the precision of EH. I hope you like the game, and it's a big success for your friends

Thanks I'll give it a try. And IMHO I felt that the precision required for MtG hurt the game in my circle more than helped. Too much bickering over the definition of "is" rather than the flow of the game. I know like all games there is a fan base and I too am fond of concise wording but a line was crossed for us. Want to buy boxes of cards going back years (jk).

[Edited for spellin']

So are you saying the game is mostly random? That said is there a challenge or just playing for fun and wining is more based on if you draw the right card?

I don't know about "mostly random". It's not like you're playing Sorry . There's still a strategy to how you play and the goals that you choose to pursue (and how you pursue them). But the success or failure of the encounters you need to attempt in order to win is massively random in a way that Arkham Horror is not.

Personally, I'm finding that the outcome of EH appears to be a lot more random than I would prefer for a game with a playing time of 3-4+ hours. There's a lot of really nice things about the game, though, so I'm probably going to keep experimenting a little while longer to see if there's still something I'm not quite grokking. But it's looking dim. (The clue tokens are behind the same random wall as everything else, so they can't solve the random wall problem. Skill improvement initially looks appealing, but the hard time limit imposed by the limited Mythos deck seems to make it impossible to actually pursue that as a systemic strategy for mitigating the randomness of the cards.)

I don't see why games should be thus dissected. Shouldn't it be more fun to discover all those things yourself than have them spoiled and put on a spreadsheet?

I didn't actually do any of that analysis until I decided to post in this thread. At that point I'd played the game more than a half dozen times and seen all of those Other Worlds encounter cards at least 30 times each. So:

a) I wasn't really spoiled anything for myself; and

b) It was just mathematically confirming what playing the game had already made obvious

But, in general, I agree with you. Which is one of the reasons I'm quickly reaching the conclusion that EH is not a great game: It looks like the only way you can begin to even mitigate the randomness of the game is to dissect the game to determine which encounter decks require which skills (and even that only seems to get you down to a coin flip). And, for me, that's not fun.

I'd much rather play a co-op game like Arkham Horror or Knizia's Lord of the Rings or Space Alert where effective strategies can be made by simply looking at the board.

This is half of Arkham shoved in a box and retitled.

I really can't agree with that assessment. While having thematically similar mechanics (clue tokens, Ancient Ones, etc.), Eldritch Horror is a completely different game than AH in terms of how those mechanics actually work. They really are two completely different games and not simply two different flavors of the same game.

As for the AH vs. EH issues that Ken at Sunrise has mentioned, I think comparing Arkham Horror + All of Its Expansions to just the base game of Eldritch Horror is ridiculous. For one thing, EH is guaranteed to have expansions.

If you're just comparing the base game of AH to the base game of EH:

- The difference in price is inconsequential ($5).

- Both games feature a similar amount of complexity.

- Both games feature a comparable set-up time.

- Both games feature a similar play dynamic (co-op vs. AO).

- EH has more mechanical variety between Ancient Ones (due to all the AO-specific components).

- AH has more variety overall (due to the larger number of encounter cards).

It's apples-and-oranges, frankly. If I had to choose only one or the other, however, I'd currently go with AH.

So are you saying the game is mostly random? That said is there a challenge or just playing for fun and wining is more based on if you draw the right card?

I don't know about "mostly random". It's not like you're playing Sorry . There's still a strategy to how you play and the goals that you choose to pursue (and how you pursue them). But the success or failure of the encounters you need to attempt in order to win is massively random in a way that Arkham Horror is not.

Personally, I'm finding that the outcome of EH appears to be a lot more random than I would prefer for a game with a playing time of 3-4+ hours. There's a lot of really nice things about the game, though, so I'm probably going to keep experimenting a little while longer to see if there's still something I'm not quite grokking. But it's looking dim. (The clue tokens are behind the same random wall as everything else, so they can't solve the random wall problem. Skill improvement initially looks appealing, but the hard time limit imposed by the limited Mythos deck seems to make it impossible to actually pursue that as a systemic strategy for mitigating the randomness of the cards.)

I don't see why games should be thus dissected. Shouldn't it be more fun to discover all those things yourself than have them spoiled and put on a spreadsheet?

I didn't actually do any of that analysis until I decided to post in this thread. At that point I'd played the game more than a half dozen times and seen all of those Other Worlds encounter cards at least 30 times each. So:

a) I wasn't really spoiled anything for myself; and

b) It was just mathematically confirming what playing the game had already made obvious

But, in general, I agree with you. Which is one of the reasons I'm quickly reaching the conclusion that EH is not a great game: It looks like the only way you can begin to even mitigate the randomness of the game is to dissect the game to determine which encounter decks require which skills (and even that only seems to get you down to a coin flip). And, for me, that's not fun.

I'd much rather play a co-op game like Arkham Horror or Knizia's Lord of the Rings or Space Alert where effective strategies can be made by simply looking at the board.

This is half of Arkham shoved in a box and retitled.

I really can't agree with that assessment. While having thematically similar mechanics (clue tokens, Ancient Ones, etc.), Eldritch Horror is a completely different game than AH in terms of how those mechanics actually work. They really are two completely different games and not simply two different flavors of the same game.

As for the AH vs. EH issues that Ken at Sunrise has mentioned, I think comparing Arkham Horror + All of Its Expansions to just the base game of Eldritch Horror is ridiculous. For one thing, EH is guaranteed to have expansions.

If you're just comparing the base game of AH to the base game of EH:

- The difference in price is inconsequential ($5).

- Both games feature a similar amount of complexity.

- Both games feature a comparable set-up time.

- Both games feature a similar play dynamic (co-op vs. AO).

- EH has more mechanical variety between Ancient Ones (due to all the AO-specific components).

- AH has more variety overall (due to the larger number of encounter cards).

It's apples-and-oranges, frankly. If I had to choose only one or the other, however, I'd currently go with AH.

I'm referring more to the re-cycling of the components more than a direct rules pull, but you have to admit that most of the rules and mechanics are altered or mashed together elements from Arkham. I've been using fixed stats since day one, it's nothing new.

I feel the greatest disservice is that they don't bother to make a 'new' game but just keep re-cycling AH over and over into other packages. Give us a Gaslight era game with all new everything and that's worth taking a look at. Be bold, add a little steam punk element or something. I may not like it, but it wouldn't be for the reasons I dislike Eldritch.

I didn't actually do any of that analysis until I decided to post in this thread. At that point I'd played the game more than a half dozen times and seen all of those Other Worlds encounter cards at least 30 times each. So:

Wow. How many investigators did you use? After all there are 24 other world cards. I've played 6 games so far (2 investigators each) and I've only see a couple repeats (and I know there are cards I've yet to see).