geek
Recently Viewed
Hot Games
Dominion
Agricola
Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition
Titan
Pirate King
Battlestar Galactica
Le Havre
Race for the Galaxy
Pandemic
Settlers of Catan, The
Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942
Space Alert
Ghost Stories
Puerto Rico
Red November
Municipium
Arkham Horror
Power Grid
Twilight Struggle
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Carcassonne
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
Formula D
Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game
Chicago Express
Stone Age
War of the Ring
Risk
A Touch of Evil, The Supernatural Game
Wasabi!
Tigris & Euphrates
World of WarCraft Miniatures Game
Apples to Apples
Galaxy Trucker
Ticket to Ride
Descent: Journeys in the Dark
Kingsburg
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
StarCraft: The Board Game
Monsterpocalypse
BattleLore
Bakugan Battle Brawlers
Scrabble
Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery
Snow Tails
Caylus
After the Flood
Munchkin Quest
Playing Gods: The Board Game of Divine Domination
Carcassonne - The Catapult
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Scotty Pruitt
flag
Avatar
05060708
My adversary arrived at 8:13 PM. The knock on the door sent the canine into the usual barking frenzy. An opened door and a swift kick towards the furball (don't worry, I didn't make contact... this time) allowed my opponent to enter the house in peace. The usual greetings were exchanged as we made our way to the table. As usual I forgot to offer my guest anything to eat or drink. What is it about males forgetting such niceties while females could do as much in their sleep? We sat down at the table, between us a game called Battlelore.

Him: What scenario?

Me: A new one.

Him: From the website?

Me: Negative. Call to Arms.

Him: Ah, the expansion. That allows us to create our own armies, yes?

Me: You would think so, but no. Ya see, it's an army deployment expansion, not an army building expansion.

Him: I see.

Four minutes of rule explanations followed. We randomized the side selection then chose our deployment decks. A shuffle and 4 drawn cards found us deploying units to the board. We chose our specialist cards and commenced with the bloodshed. 53 minutes later...

Him: Good game. I owned you. ::said in jest::

Me: Yeah. Good game. And yes, you did. ::frowns:: I still enjoyed it though. What did you think of Call to Arms?

Him: After looking through the different deployment decks... they are pretty much all the same.

Me: Yeah. I noticed that also.

Him: You don't have much control over unit selection.

Me: True

Him: Or placement.

Me: Also true.

Him: The specialist cards are a nice touch. I like em.

Me: Agreed. The deployment cards are missing something though.

Him: Yeah. Didn't they say this army deployment thing was going to be revolutionary and knock our socks off?

Me: Yeah. Something like that.

Him: It didn't knock my socks off.

Me: Me needer.

Him: I would rather build my own army.

Me: Agreed.

Him: With it being so random, why not just play a regular scenario?

Me: Well, I can see how the scenario bit could get stale. This can allow you to avoid that.

Him: Yeah. I guess. Seems like this should have been included in the base game. It's only a deck of cards and some terrain.

Me: ::nods::

Him: What are these tokens for with the helmets on them?

Me: Feudal levy tokens.

Him: ::raises left eyebrow::

Me: It's so they can say they did something in case you don't have enough troops when you're deploying your units.

Him: We didn't need em.

Me: True. I've read you almost ever will.

Him: ::nods:: Well, good game. I'm out.

Me: Yeah. Enjoyed it. We're playing Age of Steam Sunday. In?

Him: Yeah, I'll be here. Layterd.

Me: Seeya.

And that was our first Call to Arms experience.


Overview

Call to Arms, the first expansion to Days of Wonder's Battlelore, allows players to forgo the preconfigured scenario and deploy units using a deck of deployment cards. The deployment cards show varying configurations and compositions of units.



Call to Arms also adds a small amount of customization to each army with Specialist cards. Specialist cards are chosen before the game begins and give the selector advantages.



The Call to Arms rules can be found here: www.battlelore.com.


The Good

- An official way to play Battlelore outside of the preconfigured scenarios. note: When I say "scenarios" I'm referring to the army composition.
- The Specialist cards add additional pre-game planning (strategy) to the mix. Certain Specialist cards will be more powerful based on the strength of the various members within your war council. For instance, there is a card called King's Allies that allows you to increase a unit's size based on the level of your War Council's warrior (see image above).
- A new weapon: longbows. A range of 4 while hitting on helmets and bonus strikes, oh my!

The Bad

- The deployment system is a disappointment. A quote from the rulebook: "Battlelore's army selection system uses a novel, card-driven deployment mechanism, centered around the use of Deployment decks, Specialist cards and Feudal Levy tokens." Is it novel? Yes. But something isn't good just because it is novel. During the buildup of Call to Arms, the message being conveyed was one of wonder and amazement. -- You'll love the new deployment system! It doesn't use your typical point system. It truly is innovative! -- I don't necessarily want a point system to create my own armies, but I would like more control over the deployment process. I realize that they never claimed it was an army creation system, but, in my opinion (and it's worth soooo much), that is what the game needed. For some reason, the game feels more personal when you can place your special touch on an army. It feels like it is yours. The "deployment" system offered by Call to Arms just feels like another scenario'd game of Battlelore: play the hand your dealt.
- A deck of cards and some terrain for $20?
- It could have been included in the base game.
- No terrain generation system. - I was hoping to completely forgo the need of a scenario book.
- Feudal Levy Tokens sound cool, don't they? After I read through the rulebook, I had to go back and read the FLT section again. I was trying to figure out how they could be used. After a second read, I realized it was just a means to make up for a lack of figures. Blah.

The Verdict - 7

While I appreciate the official release for playing Battlelore without scenarios, I do not like the dryness and additional luck provided by Call to Arms. The specialist cards are Call to Arm's saving grace. Without them I would have rated it much lower. Knowing what I know now about Call to Arms would I pay $20 for it again? A reluctant yes. Not because of it's content, but because it is a Battlelore expansion that sets the foundation for a system we will see for a long time to come. Will I continue to use Call to Arms? Again, yes. In the end, you're still playing a great game of Battlelore.


Jay Borden
flag
Avatar
050607
I just received Call to Arms last week, but haven’t had a chance to play it yet.

I think the army decks look similar too, but don’t think they could be balanced if they weren’t. There are only so many figures and different troop types in the base set considering both sides will need to be made from that same common pool of figures. If one card had a ton of archers or mounted units alone, then it would drain the figure pool of a good chunk of those figures. The decks would then need to be further restricted where the opponents couldn't choose the same deck type (assuming there would be a range heavy or mounted heavy deck for both sides).

There appears to be enough subtle differences that you could gain a slight edge from your placements and choice of reserves, but they are close enough that no one should really have a disadvantage from drawing any card, and no card will break the game when drawn.

The specialist cards look like they are going to add quite a bit. That looks like the meat of this expansion. I really need to finish painting the rest of my base set figures now. I can’t wait to get this on the table.
Miguel de la Casa
flag
Avatar
0407
Re: Battlelore: Call to Arms - The Good. The Bad. The Verdic
Very nice review. Thanks!

I agree on your view of the value of the different stuff added by this expansion.

Quote:
I realize that they never claimed it was an army creation system, but, in my opinion (and it's worth soooo much), that is what the game needed.


They did. When they said it's used INSTEAD of the point based systems. It IS an army construction system because you start with nothing and you end up with your army on the board, right? It's just a novel system in which you don't have much choice on what army you build.


PlanetSmasher (wow! what a nick!), I also agree on this:

Quote:
The specialist cards look like they are going to add quite a bit. That looks like the meat of this expansion.


However, I disagree regarding balance. It'd be "easy" to design different deployment decks which could offer as much balance as any official scenario (not perfectly balanced anyway), or any M'44 scenario (known for their lack of balance) for that matter. In fact, DoW has hinted at the addition of more varied deployment decks in the future. They just decided not to include any of them now, for some difficult-to-understand-for-those-not-in-house reason. Why no non-Lore deck, for example? Balance isn't the reason, that's for sure.
Jay Borden
flag
Avatar
050607
There’s what, 8 or 9 archers in the base set? If they put all of those units in 1 deck, they would either have to spread them out so only one archer is on most of the cards. If they didn’t spread them out, then you would really need to draw that card with 3 or 4 archers on it, otherwise your deck selection is pointless since it would come down to drawing the right card in that deck. This would also take all the archers from your opponent who may also want a strong range type of army, or even a balanced army that had just 1 or 2 archers.

Does anyone think the first scenario is the model of how you would like the drafted armies to end up every game? One side with a ton of archers and the other with the mounted units? I skip that scenario even when introducing the game now. It’s not a bad scenario, but definitely not how I personally would want my typical game balanced. I’m not just referring to one side having better odds of winning here; I’m also talking about avoiding a min/max type of system. I like that Battlelore is a tactical game. I like the idea that the set up will keep the game more about the battle then the customization of the army.

If looking at the expansion as an army construction system, I think it’s fair to include the specialist cards as part of that system instead of just looking at the army decks. If they hinted on having other army decks in the future, then this is just the framework for how the future armies will be drafted while not forcing players to buy multiple copies of the base game (I think a wise move considering the retail price tag). We can expect that as more figures and different troop types become available, the variety in the army decks will also likely start to show a bit more without the specialist cards.

I don’t want to distract from the review again, I was just trying to add my initial thoughts after looking over the cards a bit.
John W
flag
Avatar
I'm beginning to wonder if I got suckered by Tom Vasel's (potentially-shill) review.

I'm going to look much closer at his words and question his motivation much more than I had to years ago.
That's a shame. :shake:
Scotty Pruitt
flag
Avatar
05060708
I don't think purchasing Call to Arms is a mistake. IMO (again, it's worth so much), a lover of Battlelore should purchase this expansion since Days of Wonder will be building on the system it introduces for years to come.


reapersaurus wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder if I got suckered by Tom Vasel's (potentially-shill) review.

I'm going to look much closer at his words and question his motivation much more than I had to years ago.
That's a shame. :shake:
Miguel de la Casa
flag
Avatar
0407
Re: Battlelore: Call to Arms - The Good. The Bad. The Verdic
Quote:
this expansion since Days of Wonder will be building on the system it introduces for years to come.


Agreed. And some of the first stones of the building are awesome. Some others are just crappy, though.
Jhoira of the Ghitu
flag
Avatar
Completely disagree here - sorry. :(
Joshua A. Hockaday
flag
Avatar
Re: Battlelore: Call to Arms - The Good. The Bad. The Verdic
what exactly don't you agree with? The whole review, or a specific comment? You think it is fantastic, or you think was not worth the money, or, or, or? I am actually curious about your opinion. :)
Anton Tolman
flag
Re: Battlelore: Call to Arms - The Good. The Bad. The Verdic
Hmmm. I am a nube in BL -- we've played about three games and I have greatly enjoyed it although I lost two! :gulp:

I've read through the CtA expansion and looked at the components -- no complaints there. It just seems to me that many of the reviews were looking at something that could not be provided -- almost a Warhammer like customization in a lighter card based game. Doesn't make sense to me.

This is especially true because BL is at its core a tactical game, not a strategic game. It is all about making those choices on the battlefield -- which zone to fight in this turn? When to retreat? etc. The CtA expansion maintains the tactical feel of BL while adding increased variety and options to how the game is played. I agree that the Specialist cards add some strategic elements and in setup the new cards also add some strategic elements -- which card should I use for my reserve? Since the cards are revealed from the right to the left sides, there are also chances to heavily consider how one uses the forces at his/her disposal to impact on the battlefield. These changes add to the strategic element present in the War Council and make the game more interesting.

I do agree with everyone about the feudal levy tokens. I don't get them, maybe because I haven't actually used CtA yet, but I plan to!

Last edited on 2007-09-11 20:53:08 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Daniel Corban
flag
Avatar
060708
Re: Battlelore: Call to Arms - The Good. The Bad. The Verdic
I usually think it is lame when people justify crappy product by saying "just wait and see what will come in the future!" However, I think it may apply in this case. Yes, this add-on definitely appears that it could have easily been included with the base set. It is, after all, basically just a ruleset and the minimum components you need to implement that ruleset, kind of like the epic add-on. Future expansions could be designed with Call To Arms in mind. For example, army expansions may come with deployment cards. Maybe they do already? I wouldn't know.