El Grande didn't just overtake BattleLore. BattleLore dropped!

There's a little spat going on over at the DoW boards where now Richard Borg had come on and basically stated the the Hill Rumble/Forest Frenzy/River Rage Lore Cards are not broken. This is the second time after DoW had already said it. Well, the fans aren't too happy about it.

http://www.daysofwonder.com/index.php?t=msg&th=11258&start=0...

Are people dropping their ratings because of this?

If you consider ratings to be applied to game-out-of-the-box, then I think it deserves it. 10 kills for 7 lore is a pretty obvious bug in the game, and makes the game entirely unfun when it triggers. I'm secretly going to keep playing the game my way, but out-of-the-box BattleLore does kinda suck.

Update: DoW has since weighed in with their view of a "house rule" for this, though they stick to their position that such is not necessary.

User comments seem to suggest that users who have lowered their ratings have mainly done so out of frustration with the randomness of the card draw or a general feeling of samey-ness with the scenarios.

I've been watching its rating closely every day for the past three weeks (actually to see if would rise on news of the recent CtA release). The issues of about cards and scenarios has been talked about since the game released in late 2006, so that should have already been figured into the score.

This was a sudden drop.

Is it me or does arguing over this seem a bit like arguing with a schoolkid about whether he should play a game of "Pig" or a game of "Horse" with that basketball he's holding? I mean that coming from both sides, designer and gamer.

It seems kind of absurd as a designer to start to argue with gamers about a rule. If I were a designer, what would I stand to gain from such an argument? Don't like it, play your way. I'm not going to come be the rule police in your house.

As a player, is Borg gonna come bop you over the head if you change his card rules...? So you don't like the rules... I have a couple of rules in games I play that I change if my friends/family allow.

If a game was broken enough to deserve a lesser rating, why wouldn't it have gotten that lesser rating before now? And furthermore, what does a lesser rating actually mean? Are people gonna boycott BattleLore just because of a couple of possibly broken but in-house-fixable rules? I guess the real question here is: who cares?

Truly, is there statistical evidence that a rise and/or drop in BGG ratings = greater or lesser sales?

my $.02
MJ

Eh? I read that thread. There are 4 or 5 whiners who are pissed because the cards mentioned got dropped on them when they weren't ready for it. How does that make it broken? I'm a fan and I don't consider it the slightest bit broken.

After about 40 plays of BL it's my observation that the effectiveness of the cards is based on whether a level 3 cleric is used, whether the specific cards are in the mix, whether the level 3 cleric player is fortunate enough to draw the cards, whether he has the 7 lore to drop one, whether the opponent has "lore drain" "cancel lore" "foiled" "false orders" or any of the 1 lore cards that reduce the die rolled by -1 on a target.

Not to mention, if you KNOW the card is in the deck and you don't have it but you observe the opponent (with the level 3 cleric) amassing lore, then how stupid is it to leave your units in harm's way?

The entire premise that BL is broken because a few carping owners are poor players is bogus.

As for BL dropping one position on BGG, I hardly think that a few grumpy people did that. perhaps it's like many other games, very popular and highly rated initially because the people most likely to enjoy it are the early buyers and early raters. After time many games drop down when bought and played by the wider gaming audience.

I'm a little bewildered myself at all the stink many users have been creating. You see a lot of calls for "official" rulings over at the DoW site and for things a lot less controversial than the HR/FF/RR issue. To me BL is not perfect, but it seems there are enough small moving parts for players to tweak what they like and move on. The scenario stuff flap is even worse. I mean for Chrissake, DoW developed a scenario editor for their users. Don't like the scenarios, create your own! Yet people still bitch.

I'm still at a ten for the base set and I'll definately play any time. But , I have to say that I've thought about lowering the rating after the expansion line up.

CtA, made two serious rules ommissions, IMO. 1) Start player for placing units was not described. 2) Creature placement in a fixed position with no blue creatures. They've since discussed them on the battlelore forum at DOW. But, the answer seems tacked on ... roll 6 dice and the most green helmets go first? I just think the base set did a better job.

Dwarves and Goblin specialist packs, these two sets seem to lack... no cavalry for the Dwarves, no new creatures, no new cav for the Gobos but instead a band and pikemen (that will probably get little more than bonus strike against cav).

I know there will be more coming down the pipe so I'm not too worried. Slingmen goblins has me interested in the gobos. I'm getting CtA's and the specialists cards and army creation rock. So, I'll keep Battlelore and Epic at a ten for now.

it's an alright game, but I really don't understand the drooling about how great it is. Is it because it's pretty? Otherwise it's just a flash in the pan that C&C:A did better if you ask me.

The real reason for the drop: the new hype machine is starting to fade, and it will settle into a semi-high ranking after people get over it.

I don't think Richard was arguing with a player over how to play a game, I think he was just trying to dispute the charge that the Lore cards were broken.

His fix is ridiculous though.

?

Did I miss a thread Ryan? The one I read just had the designer suggesting that perhaps if you have an opponent who favors a level 3 cleric then you might consider rethinking your war council and tactics to counter the possibility that one or more of the terrain spells could be used against you.

I didn't see where he suggested any fixes to BL at all.

Like other posters explained, if your opponent favours a level 3 cleric, you're statistically better off doing the same.

I used "Prayer" and dropped the hill one on my opponent 2nd turn hitting almost his entire army... I then explained to him how he was a poor player and should quit bitching.

Obviously an isolated incident and holds no bearing. Much like the "I've played 40 games of Battlelore and it hasn't been an issue" argument. Unless someone was trying to exploit the terrain cards in every one of those games it doesn't matter how many you played.

Nevertheless I am not sure they are broken, however they do suck. What other cards so dominate game play that you have to consider their existence for every move you make? In my opinion they make the game less fun and that's all that matters.

The game really isn't that great.

Dice + Cards = pseudo strategy.

Market Hype + Pretty Miniatures = Flash in the Pan.

I gave it a 5 because of 'inexplicable troop paralysis'. [some call it the 'chaoticness of battle' or whatever].

Sing along with me:

Left, left, left, right, left
Sargeant Pepper's turning blue,
No 'center cards' so he can't move.
Left, left, left, right, left...

I have to admit that BattleLore has not managed to win me over half as much as Memoir '44 has... I'll happily play a game of M'44 with ANY expansion (or vanilla) any time, any where, but for some reason, I'm just not that "into" BattleLore...

And whereas I was pre-ordering the Memoir expansions, I haven't even LOOKED at the Call To Arms Battlelore set yet... I've even found myself walking past it on the shelves at my FLGS!!!

What the heck?!?!

Apparently there are several styles of play that Richard touches upon to counteract this.

Remember, too, "Live by Hills Rumble/Forest Frenzy. Die by the same." If you draw the card, even if you don't have a Cleric, you cans still pay the three Lore penalty so YOU can use it. This makes players think twice about taking the Cleric into the Army.

Each Lore deck has a card or two (Lore Drain, Dispell, and Foiled, for example) that put the kabosh on nuke cards. Save these cards for real emergencies.

Another: Don't create terrain-heavy scenarios. In all the C&C games, a little terrain goes a long way. A lot of fan scenarios seem to want pack in all the terrain they can. This creates a map that favors the defense and makes for slow play, so Hills Rumble/Forest Frenzy are the handy tools to break it up.

All along, BattleLore has been described as a open-ended game system. (What I sometimes describe as a "kit" game.) Making up your own scenarios and experimenting with the system is supposed to be part of the fun. You don't have to play with Lore at all, if you don't want to. Or tweak the cards to suit your group's style of play. I've been through the scneario book and played each battle several times and, from my experience, it hasn't been an issue. I wish I could play so often that I _know_ the cards are broken.

It's never been put forward as a "tournament" or highly competitve game, like Warhammer. Even Call to Arms uses a deck system rather than a point system to deploy armies for impromptu battles. If CtA were a point system, believe me, someone would have broken it already and folks would be crying about that.

or maybe people just really like it? but how could that be?!?!! because you think it is pretty mediocre, so all those other people that like it are taken in by hype and flashiness? that's a pretty pathetic attitude to take and frankly i would feel insulted if i was the type of person who felt that someone elses opinion on a game was that crucial to my well being.

8.04, 8.03 and 8.02 are positions 5,6 and 7.

The largest problem for Battlelore is it's been sold out and not adding new players, while El Grande is currently adding players with the new reprinting.

Disagree. Doing the same puts your odds at 50/50. If you draw the card you win. By not having a cleric you halve the odds that the card optimal for the current scenario shows up. In the half of games it does show up your opponent only gets it half the time. If we assume that the strength of the level 3 cleric is in getting one of these nuke cards and otherwise a different war council configuration is superior, you have dropped your opponent's chances from a 50/50 blind luck draw to significantly less.

Going for a level 3 Cleric in hopes of getting a nuke card is equivalent to saying that you can't match up skill-for-skill so will throw all your chips in on getting a lucky draw. Richard's suggested counter-strategy makes you pay-in-full for that decision by tilting the Lore deck as against you as possible. One in every four games where you happen to get the right card you win. Otherwise I mop the floor with you. Despite the fact that I can't make full use of the nuke card myself. But I don't need to use it, because as long as you can't use it I will win. Sounds fine to me.

-MMM

I own BL but have not played it much (still playing CCA every time I have 1h free...), but I completely agree with DWTripp. I think that BattleCry did have a "broken" card, the "all units fire" or something like this, but this is not such a case at all. You should not stay close to a river or forest when all signs are telling you that your enemy is preparing for that.

There are some such cards in CCA that you can anticipate. "Line Command" lets you activate a whole block of foot units (no matter how big). So if your oponent is getting foot units together, taking mounted units out of the line, instead or going for apparently easier targets, you KNOW he's going to use it. Or "Double Time" allows to move a block of 4 heavy units twice and attack (and they throw 5 dice in CCA), so again, if instead of going toward you he is getting them together at 2 hexes distance, RUN!

My guess is that many people think that there is no strategy at all in these games, and then they just move after move, and when such a card falls upon them, well, they feel a bit fustrated. I know there is not A LOT of strategy in them, but just the right amount to make these games interesting enough to play and play and play... and have a look at your oponent (and think) from time to time.

Well, battlelore has probably been the most "hyper-hyped" game, and so it had lots of "9" and "10" due to hype. Probably most gamers adjusted their score to a more "honest" one, keeping the game to a high but "not-so-high" place.
Personally I just didn't buy battlelore because of the "rare" pre-sale figures and the overwhelming amount of planned expansions-blisters-etc, but I think the game is a good game anyway.

Mop the floor? Ummm... The cleric is still viable even if he doesn't happen to get a game altering nuke off... I'm just as likely to win with a lvl 3 cleric regardless of the terrain spells. They just give me the extra chance of an instant, easy victory.

This is a pretty silly topic. I mean, so a game drops? So what? The very fact that Battle Lore is at #6 out of hundreds of games shows that it's pretty successful and well-liked.

Secondly, these ratings (like all ratings) are fairly arbitrary. I'm not a fan of many of the top 10 games on BGG. I wouldn't call them bad games, just not my thing. I could even give you my reasons, but it wouldn't mean that the game's deserve to be dropped to lower numbers. It'd just mean they're not for me. The fact that we can actually sit and debate about Battle Lore's dropping (but still very high) overall rating is just absurd to me. As more games are introduced and players' tastes change, games are going to shuffle around.

I consider Battle Lore a good game. It's not one of my favorites, but I doubt any of my favorites would ever make the Geek top 10. Does that mean I'm going to change my tastes? No, that'd be downright dopey.

There's hundreds of games listed on BGG. Each of us only likes a very small percentage, I'm betting. And it's hard to imagine many people completely agreeing with the top 10. Still, like I said, being #6 on this list isn't exactly a minor accomplishment. Not that it matters. In the end, I play games because I enjoy them. Even if everyone on BGG hated a game I loved, it wouldn't change my opinion. Or vice versa.