Game: Heroes of Might & Magic IV Collectible Card & Tile Game,The

Thread: You should Consider Photo Copying the map Bigger and mounting it.

ddare8 — 2008-09-19T16:39:56+00:00

I see that many people have problem with the maps being so small hard to play with. I would consider investing in some Photo Color copies and making the maps bigger also mounting it on foam boards for a sturdier feeling. I know its a little bit of an investment. For the sake of a good game play it may be worth it.

Thread: Re: Hand and Adventure deck

xombe — 2007-08-31T20:00:00+00:00

I read the rules and that's the first thing I wondered..The only thing I could imagine is that it might help reduce "analysis paralysis" to have your 'good' cards pre-determined for the adventure deck and keep your 'junky' cards for your hand/money...

but I'd love to hear the answer from the developers.

EDIT: After playing through the rules, it seems to be simply a mechanic to keep your money tight while keeping your play options wide.

(you can play cards from your money hand or adventure hand, but you can only pay for them from your money hand.)

At the end of each turn you 'cycle' cards ; you draw new "money hand" card and cycle one "money hand" card to your "adventure hand". You could still get a money card into your adv hand through the cycling - it would just take a turn - so I don't know why they didn't just say "play cards only from adv hand/pay from money only from money hand".

Thread: Re: How many starterpacks do I need?

shawn_low — 2007-03-18T06:47:16+00:00

or you could get luck and pick up a box of boosters for US$8. : )

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

Thanos — 2006-07-08T06:37:24+00:00

ScottE wrote:
Don't get me wrong I think the game does look cool but I think the CCG format is a flawed format. Even a good game designer is stuck having to make bad cards just so the rare ones are more valuable. It's the economics of the collectible format. If all the rares are easy to get then players don't need to spend hundreds of dollars buying more boosters.....

I wonder if a non collectible CCG-like game is more successful in the long run. Dungeoneer has been out a long time and has an expansion about every 6 months (a new one coming in November). It seems alot of traditional CCG's die before the first planned expansion. I think the fan base is starting to realize the money sink they are and starting to move away from buying into that format.

I feel that I must respond to this. I know that for me, designing a CCG did NOT mean designing bad (or even poor) cards to make rare ones more valuable. If you ask most Conan players, some of the best cards are, in fact, common. Rarities are NOT there to make people chase after rares because they're worth more, but for many games they are simply more focused.

I realize that there are games out there that don't "get" this, where rarity is a direct reflection on a card's power level... but to cast all CCGs in this light is more than a disservice.

A lot of CCG's die before the first expansion? While I know that some have died this way, but to say that a lot of them is also skewing the facts. Most games get at LEAST one expansion before they go toes up... and I don't think that's due to the games being CCG's, but rather market share... when your target audience has a limited budget, if they're not willing to give up their game(s) of choice for your new game, it's bound to die out. THAT's what the end result seems to be... that, or the company losing faith in a product before it's had a chance to prove itself.

When it comes to the fan base moving on... Wizards of the Coast and Upper Deck had some of their best years ever... so I'm not sure that's true.

I've seen a lot of NON-CCG card games come and go as well, and I'm still not sure that one is superior to the other in either market share or longevity.

I think it comes down to taste... but not all CCG's are created equal.
Most players can at least agree on that

Cheers,
Jason

Thread: Availability and expansion?

Greybear — 2006-04-23T12:08:57+00:00

Walmart does not list the CCG as available. Amazingly, the DGA website lists an expansion. Even more shocking is reference to a forthcoming HEROES of MIGHT AND MAGIC V CCG. What are these guys smoking?

Plus, the website is horrible. Links don't work. A few have an animated "under construction" graphic. Web Design 101 indicates that as an example of an amateur web design.

It has the appearance of a dying CCG with illusions of grandeur. I would like to see them succeed, but they should clean up their website, eliminate references to another game, and focus on wider distribution. And be ready to compile a boxed set with remaining stock as a backup alternative. Release them in sets of four, for example. I'm afraid the CCG nature of the game is not going to succeed.

Thread: Re: Can you get map tiles outside of the Starter Set?

bob_the_goon — 2006-04-19T11:45:37+00:00

Starter sets are the only way to get them. There are 4 basic starter assortments as far as which map pieces are in them. The cards in each one are random except that they will always be cards for two paricular factions, and you get a mix of character packs and support packs for each one, but they are rendom within a given faction.

I plan on scanning my map tiles and blowing them up to print on cardstock because the hexes are too tiny as things stand. If you're interested, I could send you scans. I have to check and see if I have them all, since I bought two starters, and then an online retailer accidentally shipped me 4 deluxe ones instead of the 4 boosters I ordered I very well might.

If you don't want scans, I obviously have some doubles. . .

Thread: Can you get map tiles outside of the Starter Set?

HazMatt — 2006-04-18T18:49:31+00:00

Hi -

I just got a starter set and some boosters via mail order. As is well documented, the starter set comes with 7 map tiles. I read that there are quite a few more map tiles available. Are they available in boosters? Or can you only get more tiles through additional starter sets? And if I have to get more starter sets, will I get the same cards as the one I have?

thanks,
-HazMatt

Thread: Re: How many starterpacks do I need?

KrudgeWelder — 2006-02-22T23:10:58+00:00

One starter pack comes with enough for two players. Two of the armies are featured inside and you get a decent deck for each. They aren't the GREATEST decks but they are doable. I also got a box of starters and after opening them all I found that I had a decent deck for all six races; adding in the starter deck races and those races now really work well with great decks.

I would recommend that you start off with one starter box, play and see if you like it and then if you want to go further, save up and get a full box. Otherwise, the game is distributed so randomly there is a chance that you get only a smattering in one area or really beefed up in another.

I hope that helps.

Thread: How many starterpacks do I need?

capecastle — 2006-02-21T08:07:18+00:00

Do each player need a cardgame or is one starterpack enough for 3-4 players?

Thread: Hand and Adventure deck

Sky Knight X — 2006-02-16T22:44:55+00:00

Why does this game require you to split your hand into both a ‘hand’ and an ‘adventure deck’? The only difference is that the cards in your ‘hand’ can be used as money, where the cards in the adventure deck cannot.

It seems that it would work better by just combining your adventure deck with your hand and playing all cards from one place. It would reduce unnecessary fiddly-ness, streamline play a bit, and add more strategy in hand management.

I have only played a couple of times now, and have not finished a game, so I readily admit that I could be overlooking something. It just seems like an interesting design choice and I would like to know the reason behind it.

Thanks!

Thread: Some questions about balance

CortlandR — 2006-02-11T17:03:36+00:00

So, after reading the rules too many times to count, I finally felt like I understood everything so tried to play last night with my brother and ran into a few huge frustrations so we're hoping someone can help.

1. Our game was Chaos vs Nature. My brother, Chaos, built the spell hero to level 4 and had some great spells. When fighting against nature though, nature had two white tigers with a faster phase than anything in the chaos army (almost all chaos is slow) and attacked as a stack with 5 (3 Att + Lv 2) against the chaos hero with defense of 10 and won. The frustration was that all the time building up Chaos's hero abilities made absolutely no difference because he couldn't cast any spells due to his slower phase. My brother was so frustrated that his hero's defense and speed didn't improve at all because he was a spell caster and lost to a minuscule army.

Question: Are we missing something? It took ages to build up the hero and then to have him lose to two tigers doesn't seem right.

2. Similar question to above, it seems that whatever faction has the fastest armies will win every time against spell casters as long as they have decent attacks (nature for example). Other than never fighting until artifacts are received to change the odds (basically making a spell caster faster or more defensive), is there an alternative to this imbalance?

3. Lastly, the game seems to take ages before there's anything to do. You can walk around with your heroes as much as you want, but unless you have cards to define, there's nothing to do. Is this true? After awhile we just stopped moving and kept cycling in and out to try to get cards that would allow us to define creatures or locations, which seemed stupid. Has anyone found a better way or again, are we doing something wrong?

4. Similar to #3 above, again regarding Chaos apparent weakness, what's the benefit of stealth and scouting? In a card game, not knowing a hero is in the stack (stealth) seems of no value at all. With scouting, what's the benefit of being able to reveal more locations when the limitation is the cards you have to define, not getting to them?

5. Lastly, each pack has "wandering army" creatures that cannot be purchased in a town. In most cases, there are usually only one or two of these at a higher level. Is it possible to add these to your army and if so, how? I know you can define a creature dwelling, but if there's only one card, you can't take the one that is used to define it so what are these used for other than "flipping for guards" and money?

We very much want to make this game work as it has all the right makings (I'm a fan of all the PC games and have lost ½ my life happily playing them over the years); however, I can't figure out how to rectify the card game's imbalances.

Please can someone help? Are we missing something? Thanks in advance! Please correct me and make this game work!

Thread: Re: Attacking Artifact Locations?

thefoehammer — 2006-01-26T22:06:55+00:00

The rules do not cover this, but once you capture an artifact location you flip the counter to show that it is already captured. It cannot be captured again.

Thread: Re: Rulebook error

Kalidor — 2006-01-11T14:19:01+00:00

Yeah, I had noticed that the first read-through as well. I guess it went to printers early, before they corrected it. Good for newbies to know, however, good to clarify!
Have fun!

Thread: Attacking Artifact Locations?

timbur — 2006-01-09T02:37:09+00:00

I am just reading through the rules before trying to play for the first time.

From my initial reading, it seems possible for another player to attack an artifact location you have already looted. Is that intended? I suspect it is not, since it makes little sense to place the artifact under your hero if that is possible. If this is not possible, then it would be nice to have different markers for locations vs artifacts.

Thread: Rulebook error

nyhotep — 2006-01-07T10:32:51+00:00

My copy of the rulebook (and maybe yours, too) has the town and location counter pictures reversed. The downloaded rules have the correct illustrations.

Thread: HOMMIV Session

agashamirv — 2005-11-28T22:57:42+00:00

We picked up this game at Gencon this year. We wanted to get it at Origins after the demo, but they didn't have any for sale yet.

It finally got to hit the table Monday night. Al and I each have a starter and about 3 boosters worth.

As an asside, I love the 'everything is common' card rarity scheme of this game, really dampens the pain of the collectablitiy cost.

Anyway, I put together a chaos deck, and Al had a Death deck. I started with a mage (some day I'll learn the hero's names, but that's going to take a lot more play), 2 Pirates, 1 Orc, 1 Troll, 1 Evil Eye, 1 Nightmare, and the Assylum that lets you buy Hydras.

Al started wih a Might hero, 1 Vampire, 3 Ghosts, and 2 Skeletons, I think.

We both puttered around, trying to get to our locations. I couldn't draw a location to save my life, but I was drawing a ton of spells, skills and artifacts.

I started fighting everything I could on the board, and kept leveling up. Al on the ohter side of the board was drawing locations and spells. At this point he realised he needed to start with the Magic hero, or take most of the spells out of his deck.

When we finally came to blows, I was level 5 with 3 spells (I LOVE spark) and Al was only level 2. I made quick work of his hero for the game.

We learned a lot about deck building in this one. Al determined he needed fewer spells and more creatures. I decided I needed more Towns. I only put one in the deck, thinking I didn't want 2 Assylums because why would I want to be able to create the creatures I could already create (both my assylums are identical)? Part way through the game, I realised why. I couldn't define any towns, so Al could buy his creatures anywhere on the board practically, while I had to go back for mine.

We liked the game enough to both double our collection size, so hopefully we'll be able to build more decks. I can only build Nature and Chaos now. Al can build Nature and Death.

Enjoy

Thread: Re: nice game concept

ScottE — 2005-10-31T23:41:08+00:00

I find it interesting that distributors won't pick it up unless its collectible?

So games like "Duel of Ages" or "Dungeoneer" aren't successful? They both seem to have done well. Dungeoneer has been out of years and has another expansion coming in November. Duel of Ages has 7 expansions and now is working on new stuff.

I think the trick is these days to make your expansions also playable. So for this game you release a nice set similiar to the starter but no randomness. You can combine 2 sets to play 4 players. Then each "expansion" also can be played stand-alone. Or combined. Best of both worlds!

Heck, you got 700+ cards! That's pretty insane. If you went with a non-collectible format you could of released those 700 cards over time in expansions.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

Rikolus — 2005-10-31T21:57:07+00:00

The Boat situation IS ridiculous... I got a starter set I would definately not have "chosen". It's loaded with water. But NO Boats! I have islands that look interesting, but from what I can tell, no way to get to them! Kinda puts the kabash on those other comments that the game plays fine right outta the box.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

ScottE — 2005-10-28T21:09:21+00:00

Don't get me wrong I think the game does look cool but I think the CCG format is a flawed format. Even a good game designer is stuck having to make bad cards just so the rare ones are more valuable. It's the economics of the collectible format. If all the rares are easy to get then players don't need to spend hundreds of dollars buying more boosters.

Now checking some of the info I see this game has no rarity which is a bold and surprising move. But the way they made that work is they put 700 cards in the set!! So if you are a collector you may have an equal chance of getting any card but because of the sheer volume it will still take many, many boosters to complete.

As for constructing decks, check out what Arcane Games did with Tower Siege. The basic set includes 2 identical decks. And each expansion includes 15 cards that aren't random. So if you don't like collecting just buy a basic set and each fixed expansion and you have everything. If you like deck constructing you can buy as many of each expansion deck or base deck you want and build whatever you want. I applaud Arcane Games for taking an innovative step away from the collecting grind but leaving the building part intact. Another example is Dungeoneer. Each expansion is fixed and playable as a stand-alone game. But if you like deck building you can mix and match cards to your heart's desire. Another brilliant move.

I wonder if a non collectible CCG-like game is more successful in the long run. Dungeoneer has been out a long time and has an expansion about every 6 months (a new one coming in November). It seems alot of traditional CCG's die before the first planned expansion. I think the fan base is starting to realize the money sink they are and starting to move away from buying into that format.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

thefoehammer — 2005-10-28T14:41:30+00:00

ScottE wrote:
I've given up on the collectible system. It promotes poor game design and requires designers to make way too many "junk" cards so that the rares are more valuable. I think its a terrible crutch our industry has gotten into.

Maybe if this game tanks they'll re-release it in a stand alone format.

I'm not sure I understand why a game being collectible promotes poor game design. It certainly has some complications that make play testing more important. But all things being equal a good game designer can create a good collectible game. Just like a bad game designer can create a bad board game.

The concept of rarities and junk cards certainly exist in any collectible format, but I think the game design of HOMM negates that somewhat. You'd have to check it out to know what I mean for sure. Its mentioned in some of the earlier posts here too.

Obviously, I'd like to see it be successful, since I am playing it now. Once I played the demo, I couldn't wait for some other possible format, which I doubt is forthcoming.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

ScottE — 2005-10-26T10:23:53+00:00

Well I was pretty interested in this game until I found out it was "collectible".

I wish they designed it like Duel of Ages with a basic set and expansions that added to it. I've given up on the collectible system. It promotes poor game design and requires designers to make way too many "junk" cards so that the rares are more valuable. I think its a terrible crutch our industry has gotten into.

Maybe if this game tanks they'll re-release it in a stand alone format.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

kingbobb — 2005-10-16T14:25:35+00:00

My wife and I looked at this last night, but not knowing enough about it, look was all we did.

Marketing wise, there's a 2 player starter set, claiming to have enough cards to last as a complete game by itself. There were also boosters, both the random booster type, and also what looked like preconstructed decks. The advert blurb on the preconstructeds says something like "these cards are designed to play well together."

So, sure, you could buy yourself a bunch of random boosters, and assmeble decks ahead of time. Or you could buy the preconstructeds, adding them to the starter game.

For a game that involves a collectible aspect, it really seems like it goes out of the way to also cater to those that don't want to buy the whole set in order to have a full balanced game.

Not having played it, I can't say whether it works so far as the balanced thing works.

Thread: Re: In stock anywhere yet?

J-Tech — 2005-10-12T00:31:22+00:00

Heya Jonathan, still waiting in Vancouver BC. I'm hoping we see some product sometime soon, my friends and I are starting to get antsy. I know you guys are doing your best, so we shall patiently wait for our FLGS to call...

J-Tech

Thread: Re: In stock anywhere yet?

startune — 2005-10-11T13:30:14+00:00

Mass market is coming. Just we have two routes in the works, one possibly soon, and one definately in January.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

startune — 2005-10-11T13:27:08+00:00

I have found it interesting reading the objections to the collectible format. They are all the same objections and solutions that I used to be permitted to design our 4 Battlecards games and our Escape Velocity Nova game as non-collectible (expandable) games. But when all was said and done, the distributors made it real easy for us to make the decision to switch. They simply didn't carry Escape Velocity because "they didn't want to maintain stock levels of different kinds of expansion packs". Battlecards still sells relatively well, but no where near as well as Heroes is already selling.

Again, I agree that reading the back of a pack and knowing what is in it is better for the player, but the truth is that the game would not have been picked up by distributors without the random packaging. That was made very clear to us by almost all of our distributors. So, I circumvented the system. It is random, so it gets distribution, but it plays well no matter what packs you end up with...I do wish there were more boats however, something we will see to in future prints.

Thread: Re: In stock anywhere yet?

Roliander — 2005-10-11T04:15:46+00:00

I just checked the Walmart, Target, ToysRUs, and Bestbuy sites and came up with nothing for this game. Not even an "available soon" hit. Is this game only going to niche game stores because there are none to speak of within a hundred miles of where I live which means online ordering only. If this is the case it will mean I will pass since I refuse to be the "supplier" of decks whenever I want to play. Hope availability of this game is going to be a bit more broad. If it is does anyone know anything?

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

Roliander — 2005-10-10T03:51:33+00:00

thefoehammer wrote:
I was not making an inference of what kind of players they were, sorry if it sounded that way. You stated you were planning on pre-building decks for them and were concerned that they would not enjoy it. My friends are seasoned CCG, TMG, board game and RPG players too. Right now half have bought in and half have not. The half that have not, still want to get together and play with either pre-constructed stuff, or doing some onsite tweaking the way I suggested. So the idea was to pass along a suggestion, not counter the thought that playing pre-constructed can be boring for the players who don't have their own stuff.

Obviously, a collectible game is more enjoyable for the collector due to the sense of ownership. The game is planned to be at Mass Market stores in blister packs, though I have not see it at any yet. The store discussed was Wal-Mart, but the distribution company is one that deals with many chain stores I think.

So hopefully if your friends like the game they can pick it up there soon as well.

This makes me feel much better. I am also sorry if my reply came off sounding defensive. If there is going to be an easy way for people to get cards then I will probably leap in first and introduce it to my group and hope enough of them like it enough to construct their own decks. Thanks.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

jtfc — 2005-10-09T21:12:04+00:00

I don't think your suggestions are realistic. Can you point to any example of this actually working well? I also think it's bad for the game if you are willing to make the game unbalanced (i.e., make one side more powerful) just because otherwise it isn't selling well enough.

Well, pretty much by definition the side that isn't selling is the weak side. I would be surprised if most companies don't try to 'equal up' based on what's winning in tournaments.

For my examples, all I can think of is Magic: The Gathering. When it first came out, blue sucked. Nobody wanted to play blue. When Unlimited came out, Blue was actually more powerful than the other colors thanks to 'time stop' and other cards. Then they built a set based almost entirely on artifacts, and after that began doing themed expansions. I haven't played it lately, but for a while you could almost predict what kinds of cards were going to be the most powerful: if nobody was playing X, then X was going to get a boost in the next set.

As far as sales, they sell themed decks right now, unless I'm wrong (like I said, I haven't played it lately). So they must have some process for when some themes sell better than others. This isn't new territory.

I just can't imagine how, for example, a sealed tournament would work in this. If one guy has four of the same type and the other guy has four different types, it'll be a slaughter. In most CCGs, you can use every card in every game, just by adjusting land/mana/whatever is the virtually free thing that the guy who runs the game can carry around by the boxful. This game you almost have to build your deck around a single type, so being forced to buy five decks that you don't want for every one you do...just doesn't seem right.

Well, hopefully it'll become popular, and then trading will solve it. Although what made Magic really take off was sealed deck tournaments (it got fresh blood in, since it was cheap and easy to play and everybody had a chance to win) and I don't see an equivalent here.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

DaviddesJ — 2005-10-06T20:58:15+00:00

jtfc wrote:
There's two ways to handle the 'inferior' packs besides CCG style:

1. Unbalanced production. If everybody wants chaos, on the second run make more chaos.

2. Balancing expansions. If Life boosters aren't selling, then on the 2nd edition make some good Life cards, and then the original Life cards will sell.

I don't think your suggestions are realistic. Can you point to any example of this actually working well? I also think it's bad for the game if you are willing to make the game unbalanced (i.e., make one side more powerful) just because otherwise it isn't selling well enough. And any system that has several months of lag while inventory sits unsold on shelves is going to be very unpopular with retailers.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

jtfc — 2005-10-06T20:46:21+00:00

thefoehammer wrote:
DaviddesJ wrote:
jtfc wrote:
Each booster is based on one "type", right? Order, Chaos, Life, and so forth. So why hide that information when you sell the booster?

One problem with labeling the boosters in this way is that, if some factions turn out to be more popular than others, retailers can end up with a bunch of unsold product.

In a collectible game you can make wider variety and not hurt the game company or the store.

It really is still a CCG. Its intended to have random pulls. Its intended to promote trading. Its just not intended to be a game of "he who can afford the most rare cards wins".

You can also kill the game in a hurry. It's true that you find leftover French tanks etc., but that's in part because people bought so many of the 'popular' tanks. If some packages are clearly superior but you have to choose at random, it kills both sealed games and makes people quit rather than buy 10+ packs hoping to get a good one.

There's two ways to handle the 'inferior' packs besides CCG style:

1. Unbalanced production. If everybody wants chaos, on the second run make more chaos.

2. Balancing expansions. If Life boosters aren't selling, then on the 2nd edition make some good Life cards, and then the original Life cards will sell.

Not saying that it's a horrible thing that it's a CCG. I am saying that they didn't need to do it this way in order to sell it: it's not inherent in the 'booster pack' style.

Thread: Re: Movement mistake?

jtfc — 2005-10-06T20:28:58+00:00

I sent an email to one of the writers and received a reply:

This is not a mistake. A stack with one speedy and nine slow units is speedy (assuming it doesn't have a hero).

Thread: Re: nice game concept

thefoehammer — 2005-10-05T19:39:15+00:00

Must be machine fed via some sort of computerized bin selection system. The algorithm probably programs what the choices are based on each point of a given cycle. Would be fun to see!

Thread: Re: nice game concept

Joe Casadonte — 2005-10-04T20:31:38+00:00

thefoehammer wrote:
I agree that the way the tiles are going to show up may end up being the biggest collectible frustration for some folks.

For me, it will be. OTOH, I must give kudos, and large kudos, at that, to the well-thought-out way in which the cards were packaged. Yes, I got some stray Death cards, and too many Chaos cards (for what I want, at least at the moment), but the way in which all of the cards can be used together is very well done.

I wonder how it's done, too? It can't all be done by hand? Nor can I imagine that many permutations of print layouts. I wonders, yes I wonders.....

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

thefoehammer — 2005-10-04T14:48:06+00:00

I was not making an inference of what kind of players they were, sorry if it sounded that way. You stated you were planning on pre-building decks for them and were concerned that they would not enjoy it. My friends are seasoned CCG, TMG, board game and RPG players too. Right now half have bought in and half have not. The half that have not, still want to get together and play with either pre-constructed stuff, or doing some onsite tweaking the way I suggested. So the idea was to pass along a suggestion, not counter the thought that playing pre-constructed can be boring for the players who don't have their own stuff.

Obviously, a collectible game is more enjoyable for the collector due to the sense of ownership. The game is planned to be at Mass Market stores in blister packs, though I have not see it at any yet. The store discussed was Wal-Mart, but the distribution company is one that deals with many chain stores I think.

So hopefully if your friends like the game they can pick it up there soon as well.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

thefoehammer — 2005-10-04T13:58:57+00:00

I agree that the way the tiles are going to show up may end up being the biggest collectible frustration for some folks.

The trade community is informal as far as I can see so far. We have made a couple of trading posts on the official forum. I have an extra of the forest/mountain tile set that I would be willing to trade for the underground set (I have extras of those too, but would like to see a new player get a good mix). I have trade references as TheFoeHammer on the LOTR minis site that I can send you a link to also. Maybe you have some duplicate locations or artifacts we could trade too. Let me know.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

Roliander — 2005-10-04T02:57:24+00:00

I'm not really talking about people who have never played a CCG before and are going to be confused by deck construction. I'm talking about my gaming group who have all had lots of experience with a variety of games including CCGs.

Unless you have invested your own money and time into constructing your own deck, CCGs tend not to be very fun. That is what worries me about HOMM. How is it going to be distributed? Is Target, Blockbuster, ToysRUs, or other major chain going to pick it up? Because if it is only going to be available to people in my area by ordering it online, there are not going to be very many people who are going to run out and buy cards and build decks. So it comes back to me buying enough cards to try and construct six balanced decks and hope that people will find it fun to play with decks they did not make themselves and fun for me knowing what all the decks contain.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

Joe Casadonte — 2005-10-04T01:22:21+00:00

Joe Casadonte wrote:
If I am going to overcome my intense aversion to CCGs and invest in a couple of starters and a few boosters, I will be hugely pissed off if I wind up with 2 of the same starter. I'd probably chuck the whole lot then and there.

OK, so I bought 2 starters and 6 boosters (only 5 of which came, but hopefully that will be taken care of shortly). I opened the first starter up and found the subterranean tile set. Just as I feared, the second starter also had the same tile set. So, absolute worst-case scenario, insofar as the tile sets are concerned: not only do I have a duplicate but I have a duplicate of the (to me) less-interesting subterranean tiles.

Ugh. I am so disappointed. The only thing keeping me from pitching the lot is that it looks so likable, and I am a big fan of the computer games (1-3, at least).

So, is there a reliable online trading community for this thing yet? I tell ya, I get screwed on the trade and the whole thing is going.....

Thread: Re: nice game concept

DaviddesJ — 2005-10-03T20:06:51+00:00

thefoehammer wrote:
It really is still a CCG. Its intended to have random pulls. Its intended to promote trading.

Yeah, I came to this conclusion too, so I decided not to buy the game. At first I was hoping it would be more of a non-collectible game, which just happens to be packaged in individual packs, and it would be possible to play from a single pool of cards, ignore trading, etc. But it doesn't seem that's realistic.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

thefoehammer — 2005-10-03T18:36:42+00:00

DaviddesJ wrote:
jtfc wrote:
Each booster is based on one "type", right? Order, Chaos, Life, and so forth. So why hide that information when you sell the booster?

One problem with labeling the boosters in this way is that, if some factions turn out to be more popular than others, retailers can end up with a bunch of unsold product.

That's right, just walk through any toy store and look at the leftover action figures in the discount bins that never sell. They are always the fringe characters that no one wants. Or to connect it to wargaming, back in my GHQ days you could look at all the leftover French and British tanks. Everyone wanted German, Russian or US. It was great that they were able to make those products because a few of us wanted them, but stores got left with a ton of those types. In a collectible game you can make wider variety and not hurt the game company or the store.

It really is still a CCG. Its intended to have random pulls. Its intended to promote trading. Its just not intended to be a game of "he who can afford the most rare cards wins".

Thread: Re: Movement mistake?

thefoehammer — 2005-10-03T18:26:52+00:00

Also there is a secondary skill called Stealth that lets you hide your hero and thus speed up the stack if someone lower moves faster, and there are artifacts that speed up your hero like Equestrian gloves. So for simplicity and gameplay the top card controls the speed of the stack.

Thread: Re: Movement mistake?

Kalidor — 2005-10-02T15:59:29+00:00

I think it is just a game mechanic to facilitate movement. It may not make any sense at all, but for gameplay it works a little better, I think.
Besides, moving only 1-2 spaces per turn every turn due to terrain effects would get a tad boring, quickly...
This is a way to circumvent that...you lose the strength of a hero, but gain better movement.
Maybe?

Thread: Re: nice game concept

DaviddesJ — 2005-10-01T19:23:36+00:00

jtfc wrote:
Each booster is based on one "type", right? Order, Chaos, Life, and so forth. So why hide that information when you sell the booster?

One problem with labeling the boosters in this way is that, if some factions turn out to be more popular than others, retailers can end up with a bunch of unsold product.

Thread: Movement mistake?

jtfc — 2005-10-01T18:52:33+00:00

"If there is a Hero in an Army Stack, the Hero must be on the top. If not, place the Unit Card with the highest Movement score on top of the stack".

So if I have an army of 10 wolves (and no hero), it moves 4 hexes per turn, and if I have an army of 9 wolves and a sprite it moves 6 hexes per turn? That doesn't sound right.

Didn't you mean lowest movement score?

Thread: Re: nice game concept

jtfc — 2005-10-01T18:33:41+00:00

Here's what I don't get.

Each booster is based on one "type", right? Order, Chaos, Life, and so forth.

So why hide that information when you sell the booster? If it's not truly a CCG with rarity and suchlike, why not, say, put a level 1 monster on the outside? That way if you wanted to help your druid by getting a Preserve (nature) deck, you wouldn't have to buy 10 decks hoping to get one or trading a bunch of stuff.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

Joe Casadonte — 2005-09-30T13:39:23+00:00

thefoehammer wrote:
Hope you buy a starter and a few boosters and give it a try. Its very addicting game play.

I took the plunge, so I guess I'll find out next week.....

Thread: Re: nice game concept

thefoehammer — 2005-09-29T14:14:39+00:00

The saving grace on the Starter is that you can use duplicate map sets just as easily as different ones, and some combos of the same map tile makes an interesting configuration the way they can interlock differently. But personally that might have been nice to see.

I have copied my post from the heroes forum regarding what a hero pack is seeded with. It matches what you say.

- 2 spells or an artifact and location depending on your hero's class
- 1 hero
- 6 Level 1s, split 3 and 3 of the two the town can build.
- 2 Level 2s the town can build
- 1 Level 3 the town can build
- 1 Level 4 the town can build
- 1 Location to build your Level 4
- 1 town
- 3 Primary skill cards (Magic if M-U, Others if Warrior)
- 2 Secondary skill cards based on Primary

Extra Packs (1 in 4 of the Booster Boxes and 1 in 3 of the Starters) vary in content a little bit but seem to have.

- 9-11 Spells for that Alignment (Unless its Might)
- Basic Magic Skill card for that Alignment (Unless its Might)
- 6-8 Creatures not buildable in towns.
- 2 artifacts and/or locations
- If its a Might Extra then its got extra artifacts and Monsters

So the distribution is excellent for the way the game is played. It creates a somewhat "default" rarity in that you'll have less Level 4s than Level 1s. But you need less Level 4s to play the game and they cost more in the game turns.

Hope you buy a starter and a few boosters and give it a try. Its very addicting game play.

Thread: Re: nice game concept

Joe Casadonte — 2005-09-29T03:30:06+00:00

startune wrote:
I appreciate, and share your general disdain for the way most CCGs are marketed. This is why none of the other games we have made have been collectible. Let me put some fears to rest.

I'm very tempted to buy the game, but am also in the "turned off by collectibles" aspect. One thing that has me scratching my head: if you have disdain for the way most CCGs are marketed, why make it so that you can't tell what starter you're getting? If I am going to overcome my intense aversion to CCGs and invest in a couple of starters and a few boosters, I will be hugely pissed off if I wind up with 2 of the same starter. I'd probably chuck the whole lot then and there.

startune wrote:
There are no rares and no uncommons.

I am very glad to hear that. Does that mean, though, that every card is distributed completely evenly? Or maybe all classes of cards are distributed evenly, e.g. all level 1 units are 3 times more likely than level 2 units, and all towns are evenly distributed amongst themselves, but are less common than level 1 units?

startune wrote:
In short. Play the game, then judge it. But know that it was designed as the answer to CCGs by a guy that hates the way CCGs are marketed.

Well, that would be the right thing to do. If I can just convince myself to try it....

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

thefoehammer — 2005-09-26T18:09:51+00:00

The game demos well with pre-constructed decks since a newbie player would be more frustrated with deck-building concepts and the like without knowing the ultimate benefit of certain cards. But even in that situation they need some schooling on the intent of some cards in the deck, such as which town you intended the deck to start with and whether certain units were intended to be built at Creature Dwellings or flipped as guards.

Still after a game or two, most players would be pretty comfortable building their own deck and probably get more enjoyment out of doing so as you suspect.

An option you could consider is to bring some pre-constructed decks but also bring a pool of extra cards for swap-outs. That way your friends can tweak it a little from the original format and make it more suited to their developing play-style.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

taraba — 2005-09-26T01:24:15+00:00

Well, I don't completely agree with mariners95. My first game was played the same way you describe. I constructed a few decks and played with some people who didn't own any cards. No one from that group has told me that they'll buy cards and some have told me that they won't. So, I'll probably keep making decks for other people to play with in the future unless someone buys some cards. But "collectible" means "Will cost a few hundred dollars" to anyone who's been into one before.

Thread: Re: Wondering about another CCG weakness

mariners95 — 2005-09-25T20:00:39+00:00

My guess is that you would only have to do it once. After that the other players will want to run out and buy their own cards and construct their own decks. So I would do it just to get a good play group going. Just buy the starters for all these players and then tell them if they like the game either let them take the cards (if you dont care about the cost of the cards) or have them pay for the cards to start their own decks with.

Or whatever you decide.

What I am getting at is, if they play THIS game, they will like and will come back to play it again and again!!

Image

Wren — 2005-08-24T12:49:34+00:00

Front of the regular edition starter deck.

Image

Wren — 2005-08-24T12:49:34+00:00

Back of the regular edition starter deck.

Image

thefoehammer — 2005-08-23T15:40:05+00:00

Counters on map and cards

Image

thefoehammer — 2005-08-23T15:40:02+00:00

A 4 tile assembled map

Image

thefoehammer — 2005-08-23T15:37:29+00:00

Two map tiles with a ruler for scale

Image

thefoehammer — 2005-08-23T15:37:29+00:00

A game in progress from Gencon 2005

Image

startune — 2005-05-10T19:55:37+00:00

Full Size Image of Tile Set #2

Image

startune — 2005-05-10T19:55:35+00:00

Tile Set #2 in one of its over 400 configurations.

Image

startune — 2005-05-10T19:55:34+00:00

Another Sample Tile from Tile Set #2

Image

startune — 2005-05-10T19:55:34+00:00

Sample Tile from Tileset #2