The SWA is an Adventure Gaming club serving the Capital District of Upstate New York (Albany, Schenectady, Troy, Saratoga) since 1974. We sponsor monthly Game-a-thon game days and a 3-day convention, Council of Five Nations, early October or late September every year.
Reply: Eldritch Horror:: General:: Re: Do you mix otherworld encounter cards from different expansions?
Esgaldil wrote:This is a much bigger issue for Arkham Horror. Eldritch Horror does a better job of having themes linked to today's AO and/or today's sideboard (if any) that is not diluted by the other decks.That is not true of the OW encounters. As noted above by haroth9842, OW encounters in EH are "decoupled" from the AO.
Other Location Encounters (and Mythos Cards, and pretty much all of the permanent decks) are as well - that's kind of my point. Using Other World cards from any or all Expansions doesn't greatly change the degree to which a game in which Cthulhu is the AO feels different from a game in which Syzygy is the AO. When setting up Arkham Horror, it feels more necessary to go through every deck in order to, for example, make sure that a Hastur game feels like a Hastur game.
by SchackTAGHi again guys,
I'm back with a little belated Wrestlemania present in the form of 9 new decks for the game! The wrestlers are Erick Rowan, Luke Harper, Kane, John Morrison, Shinsuke Nakamura, Sami Zayn, The Rock, and the Hardy Boyz. As several of you have asked for the cards uploaded as single images, I will upload a full collection of the images for all the decks I've made so far. Likewise, I will upload these new decks as pdf files as usual, but in a bundle along with all the previous decks. I hope you enjoy.
Erick Rowan (9 Grapple, 7 Maneuver, 5 Strike)
Luke Harper (9 Grapple, 7 Strike, 5 Maneuver)
Kane (9 Grapple, 7 Strike, 5 Maneuver)
John Morrison (9 Strike, 7 Maneuver, 5 Grapple)
Shinsuke Nakamura (9 Strike, 7 Grapple, 5 Maneuver)
Sami Zayn (9 Grapple, 7 Strike, 5 Maneuver)
The Rock (9 Grapple, 7 Maneuver, 5 Strike)
Jeff Hardy (9 Maneuver, 7 Strike, 5 Grapple)
"Broken" Matt Hardy (9 Maneuver, 7 Strike, 5 Grapple)
by minigno1) Yes, and in many different ways (removable stickers from the file can be printed on the correct type of label paper OR ordered from silverfish already made), spreadsheet is easy also to track achievements that control which scenarios you have access too, scrap paper could work too...a lot ways around this.
2)Yes, but...what one party does in the world affects the direction the world takes and thus what other parties can do (available equipment, available scenarios/story paths, etc). Even that could be worked around and tracked if you didn't like that aspect.
3)This comes down to prep work and organization. A good organization can let you setup/takedown in 30-45 minutes, depending on the scenario -- less if you are really good. Gameplay itself is about 45-60min per player...some are faster than this, some slower. My wife and I are on the AP side sometimes and it takes us about 2hrs (with 2 characters total)to do a scenario outside of setup/breakdown time.
4)I don't play either, sorry!
5)Retail is going to be an unknown...depends on if you mean FLGS or OLGS...it's going to depend on who orders it to stock it and how quickly the supplies go. I don't know when the next reprint will start if you miss it. KS is a guaranteed copy at a cheaper price in most case. I don't see any advantage on waiting for retail UNLESS it's a timing issue for you over the next 20+ plus days during the KS. I think the KS will probably be cheaper since it's $100USD and free/cheap shipping in most cases. Retail is $140 msrp, so I'm not sure how much an FLGS will discount that.
drkrash wrote:1) Can the legacy elements be tracked without using the stickers (e.g., recording info on scrap paper)?
drkrash wrote:2) Can two "groups" be playing at the same time? I'd be getting this mostly for solo play, but I know my boys will want to have a game going with me also. Can two games be going concurrently? I understand that there would be potential spoilers for me, but I can live with that.
Absolutely, it just requires a little prep work to build the character decks. So it might be irritating to do it between each and every play but its easy to do.
drkrash wrote:3) I have limited room to keep a game set up. How long is the average session before you could record stuff, clean it up, and put it away?
Maybe 90 minutes with 2p, once you get the hang of it. Probably 2-3 hours with more people.
drkrash wrote:4) I've seen some comparisons to Mage Knight. I loved the theme and components of Mage Knight, but didn't really like the gameplay. On the other hand, I love Descent. Which is this more like?
The decisions you make as a player are more like mage knight in that it's card driven, but the tactical aspect of the scenario if more like Descent... hard to say... It a bit of both really.
drkrash wrote:5) And finally, a kinda harsh question: what incentive is there to back the 2nd printing KS rather than wait for retail, aside from getting it sooner? Is the plan this time to actually have retail copies available? It seems there are no stretch goals or KS exclusives, and I assume no price break either. I'm willing to wait for a lower retail price (and the KS certainly doesn't need my support!).
Honestly, I don't think you're going to find this any cheaper at retail, and if the demand persists you'll see scarcity driving the price up at retail. The reason to back is because you want to secure a copy at all, and might not get the chance if you wait.
by wheelerrussAnd karsten hasn't even posted his yet!!
by hellboyberryThe action windows can seem like a minefield to new players but don't fear it's actually not too tricky once you're used to it.
The short answet to your question is "Yes" - in green areas of the phase reference you can take actions/play events.
And if the card states something like "Combat Action", that action can only be triggered during the combat phase.
I found it was much easier to remember when you can't take actions as that is actually a lot fewer times than when you can take them.
This quick reference chart is very useful and it was my best friend when i first started out:
Good luck, have fun and never fear asking advice, I guarantee this won't be last rule clarification you'll be looking up!
by MaltmanJAn item Board Game: Great Western Trail has been added to the geeklist Jamie's Game a Day in 2017
by bxrrrThank you, Fabrice. A lot of knowledge and experience in your comment! And I am considering Loyang as well.
Gunner Joe wrote:Glad to see that I am not the only one who was disappointed in this conceptually great, but highly inaccurate (as a simulation) offering. I guess that historical accuracy forwhat is after all, a hypothetical war isn't all that important to younger gamers, but having lived in that period I'm disappointed that history has been sacrificed (in part) to fantasy.
Here are my principal caveats:
1. Wasted counters: The Avro Arrow (that did exist - I saw it fly - but was never produced, only 6 aircraft were built) and the stupid nuclear powered bomber counters, and whatever the Russian X-fighter is supposed to be (that didn't exist.) Also the B-60. The B-36 and not the B-60 was actually the proposed platform for the "Goblin" parasite fighter and the B-60 was just the unsucessful competitor to the B-52.
2. I was shocked that the designer was too lazy to create year/event-specific scenarios. I guess that made it easier to includethe fantasy stuff I reference above. ("Operation Dropshot" , which is an Aussie creation is actually a better simulation of this era but it includes land and naval dimensions.) Allowing each player to purchase their units without regard to timeframe was a real cop out. The historical force structure information for this timeframe is readily available and I'm sure that most of us with an interest in this period could have created realistic force pools if asked.
3. As someone else here has noted, there were a (limited and unreliable)number of missiles available during this premised timeframe and here is enough recently de-classified information available that would permit game designers to calculate appropriate CEP/launch reliability factors. for this early period. These missiles would have been a part of the posited conflicts.
In lieu of detailed research, the designer has blended the mid 195os with the early 1960s, hence F-106s and Lightnings.
4. Here is what should have been included. Assuming a timeframe of 1955-1960 the units(and numbers of specific units)would vary:
Avro Canada CF-100 Canuck all weather interceptor
McDonell-Douglas F-89 Scorpion all weather interceptor
Lockheed F-94 Starfire all weather interceptor
Canadair (CF-86)and North American (F-86d) Sabrejets
(Canadian pride note here. Those who flew all variants of the magnificent American F-86 Sabrejet readily concede that the "hottest" ride was the Canadian designed and constructed Orenda 14 powered model. (Personal pride note here, my dad helped build them)
North American and Canadair F-86 Sabrejet interceptors
Hawker Hunter interceptors
Gloster Javelin interceptors
Gloster Meteor nightfighters
Vickers Valiant strategic bombers
Handley Page Victor strategic bombers
And if we really wanted to have some plausible fun let's include Mao's China (which would have made some kind of commotion and been deserving of a nuke or two) and have an off-map box and a Mig 15 unit tht can let the Free World player nuke Peking.
I think that all of our comments point to the fact that an increasing number of games are being churned out by this company that are worthy of more development and counters. I do love their modern game topics and appreciate the counter limitations that they self-impose, but all of this speaks to the need to not waste what they can produce. As illustrated above, the 6 silly "nuclear bomber" counters, the 2 Avro Arrows, the "super carriers" and the Soviet experimental fighters (which I REAALY am not sure ever existed even in concept- I think it's just a game-balancing fantasy)counters are all wasted squares that could have accommodated most of the needed actual units notedabove.
At any rate, I still like the game and perhaps we might convince the cmpany to cxome out with added rules and counters as they did with their Viet Nam game some years back.
Interestingly, China was a target as part of SIOP-63, which came later, regardless of their posture in a US Soviet conflict. I guess it was a "let's make sure" targeting idea.
Still curious if anybody has tried this solitaire--is it even doable?
by GilmoreDKJust a little heads up: We have updated all the cockpit panel files so they now include:
Caproni Ca. 3
Handley Page O/100
Handley Page O/400
+ the high flyer:
Download at www.icog.dk
by gbaileyHi Jim,
In answer to:
How does a unit become routed?
please refer to CHARTS & TABLES CARD - Formation Morale Table - ‘2 or less’ under the ‘Brigade or Group not in Emplacement’ column to rout.
Stormtrooper74 wrote:Any available in the u.s.?
I'll have them at Geekway, maybe Origins, and maybe Gen Con. I don't have any more than that, unfortunately. I should have more to sell later this year or early next year!
Reply: Anachrony:: Rules:: Re: Evacuate - After the action evacuate I can still make actions, right?!
rattkin wrote:Sure. I just tend to employ more critical view of game designs, rather than justifying rough edges someone didn't spend the time to file.
Sounds good. I'm the same way usually. I just don't find this particular instance a rough edge. On the other hand, I can't argue with your statement that this is causing a whole lot of questions, so I guess I can see your point as well.
Kyur wrote:Where's Jim ?
Let's try *this summoning spell*...
I was curious about that as well. He's stopped playing Ascension and Waterdeep with me.
I've been yanked here through some pandimensional rip in space and time!
Apologies for extended absence, everyone. My mom has been my in the hospital, my wife has been wracked with morning sickness, and aside from occasional RPGG posting, I've been offline during lots of home renovations.
After voiding the majority of my subscription backlog, I return.
Lucas, it was nothing personal regarding asynchronous games on hold--I've been bull-whipped by RL.
As of now, I'm back. Thanks, George, for the extra prodding.
Didn't take it personal, just got a little worried that you just disappeared. :-)
Though i might end up like you here in a month or two. Getting to the end of the school year, wife is getting more and more preggers, and my father has been sick. So i hear ya!
by PokeyMonkeyAn item Board Game: Cutthroat Caverns has been added to the geeklist UK Maths Trade April 2017
Decades of gaming means that you try games out before you write them off.
I love minis games, but so far this one has lots of issues.
Why is it odd to have some negative thoguhts about a game that does not meet your expectations? This site is loaded with threads all about exactly that.
Maybe someone with the game can speak up and we can have a dialog...someone who is willing to buy it and try it.
Right now, the innovation, if you can actually call it such, is rather wonky.
The minis are a disappointment compared to similarly priced wargame minis...FFG should have gone hard plastic on these.
The rules are sort of a mess, spread across cards, booklets, and dials.
Oddly, the game really needs more cards for variety.
That's not even delving into weird bits of the rules yet.
For example, you remove casualties from the back rank of a unit, but in the game a rank is an entire row of the 4 mini trays, not just the back row of dudes. You remove all the figures on a tray before going to the next. So when a 4 tray unit loses 4 minis, you remove one tray, leaving a really odd, lopsided unit with 2 trays in front and one in the back. This is really functionally and visually odd. I have seen it in historic games, but you generally have much, much larger units there.
Another thing...armor and shields don't really do anything. The spearman unit in heavier armor with a shield has armor 1. The Animate swordsman with scanty light armor and and a shield is also 1 armor. The mounted knight in heavy armor with a barded warhorse and shield is 2 armor. Maybe I'm expecting a more granular system, but it is a bit odd.
Granted some upgrade cards can improve this, but there are scant few available until the expansions start releasing, so who knows what all will change.
cohenhs wrote:My group has used the power/coin balancing suggestions three times and frankly it was a huge success. TM now is making to the table more often and the weaker races are getting a try. Just a note, it was easier to make the changes to each race the same each game so we don't adjust the buff based on which races are in play. I created a card for each race with the buff, and each player flips his card during income to acknowledge/remind the player about the additional income. This works well but precludes changing the buff based on which races are in the game.
I only wish the expansion races were also listed so I could buy the expansion. Without a way to include the new races in the balancing system I don't think the new races would be played.
I have done the calculations for 3-5p, Expansion scoring, Fire&Ice map 1, 1000+ rated players. The rows show a difference of 0.5 VP in average score. The columns are the faction name, its average score according to snellman, its compensation buff (0, 1coin, 1pow, ...), and after that there are other factions at the same buff level with their exact average VP. The (3.5 VP) in paranthesis are not something to be payed out, it is just there to show what the accumulated value of 1pow during 6 round will be.
darklings 137.72 0
chaosmagicians 135.93 0, mermaids 135.92 0
witches 135.39 0
nomads 134.14 1pow (3.5 VP)
swarmlings 132.66 1pow
132.00 1coin (5.5 VP)
icemaidens 131.06 1coin
fakirs 130.69 1coin
dragonlords 130.35 2pow (7.5 VP), halflings 130.32 2pow, riverwalkers_v5 130.00 2pow
cultists 129.67 2pow, giants 129.52 2pow
engineers 129.29 2pow
128.50 1coin,1pow (9 VP)
126.50 3pow (11 VP)
acolytes 126.04 3pow
yetis 125.73 3pow
alchemists 125.16 3pow
shapeshifters_v5 124.73 1coin,2pow (13 VP)
auren 124.29 1coin,2pow
123.00 2coin,1pow (14.5 VP)
121.00 1coin,3pow (16.5 VP)
dwarves 120.23 1coin,3pow
It should really be posted under F&I, but I am unwilling to start yet another thread, and I do not possess the F&I.
Many Many thanks!
by craniumgroupI don't think you're missing anything. My understanding of HQ supply is that an OOS HQ cannot supply other units and if it's a US or Joint HQ that can't cannot trace a supply line from the East map edge it loses an efficiency point.
Activation, however, can still happen as long as the 6.3 restrictions are met. So an OOS HQ can still be used in an Offensive OC or EC play.
It just makes all the logistics harder, because the units being activated have to get supply from some other HQ (or Kunming).
There is one confusing bit. 6.21.A states this:
"Supply Line: A unit is supplied if an unblocked hex path can be
traced from a supplied appropriate (6.12) *activating* HQ to the unit
and the path length does not exceed the HQ’s range."
The word "activating" in that context would imply that the supplying HQ must be the one doing the activation, but 6.3 clearly states this:
"For a unit to be activated it must have an activation
path from the HQ being used for offensive or reaction purposes, and
be in supply, possibly from Kunming or a different HQ than the one
used for the activations (see 6.2)."
The "or a different HQ than the one used for the activations" makes it clear that the activating HQ doesn't have to be the HQ that is granting supply.
I've always taken the text in 6.21.A in the context of nationality restrictions. In other words, the supplying HQ must be able to actually activate the unit in question as per 6.12 in order for the unit to be supplied from that HQ.
I hope this helps. Also, if I've got anything wrong the EotS vets will step in and smack me upside the head. =)