In the future, I plan to do a more in depth article about how the expansion changes the game strategy, but for now:

Recopied from the blog: boredgamegeeks.blogspot.com

Without going into specifics, the expansion changes the base game is several important ways. First of all, the game is deeper, offering both more choices and in many cases more difficult choices, of what path to pursue and where to spend one’s resources. But perhaps even more importantly, it also improves game balance.

As someone who has played War of the Ring extensively (probably about sixty times), studied it, analyzed it, and discussed it, I eventually came to the conclusion that the game was imbalanced in favor of the Shadow side, probably to about a 60-40 ratio. This was due primarily to two factors:

1) The strength of the Shadow character deck, in terms of being able to corrupt the Fellowship.
2) The incredible ability of the Witch King, Black Captain to draw cards for the Shadow player, at almost no cost (he just had to be in a battle in which you played a combat card, which are things that you want to do anyway to try to win militarily, due to his extra action die, and 2 leadership, and the importance of combat cards in defeating the Free Peoples strongholds).

This strategy leads to the Fellowship having to pass two hurdles in order to win the game. They must both make it to Mount Doom before (or on the same turn as) the Shadow military victory, and secondly, they must do it without becoming corrupted. Achieving both in the face of a Shadow player that is simultaneously attacking well militarily AND drawing many character cards via the Witch King to hurt the Fellowship, is relatively difficult. As I estimated before, I believe that with expert play on both sides, the game would yield a Shadow win about 60% of the time, maybe even a little more.

In fact, I believe the strategy of using the Witch King to draw character cards is so fundamental to strong Shadow play, that the advice “Use the Witch King often to draw character cards” is as critical a piece of advice to knowing how to play the Shadow as “Move the Fellowship” is to the Free Peoples. Yes, it is possible to win as the Shadow without using the Witch King’s card drawing, or using it only occasionally and without focus, just as it is possible to win as the Free People without moving the Fellowship, but it’s certainly a much lower probability of success. My very first game, I was so distracted by the various battles going on all over the board, that the Fellowship never left Rivendell. I believe that the Shadow not using the Witch King is as big a mistake as this.


The expansion fixes this balance issue in several ways:

First of all, several new game elements aid the Fellowship, making it more likely that the Free Peoples will be able to bring the ring to Mount Doom without being corrupted, even in the face of heavy Shadow character card play. It’s certainly not automatic, but it seems much more fair and reasonable, and relegates the Shadow corruption victory back into the ‘backup win condition’ category, focusing attention back onto the progress of the Shadow military campaign, as it should be.

Secondly, several new game elements either increase the costs (drawbacks) of bringing out the Witch King, or give alternative choices/strategies that are much lower cost to the Shadow, because they avoid the drawbacks of the Witch King, but are still relatively effective. Thus, with more reasonable alternate strategies for the Shadow than just bringing out the Witch King and drawing cards, and a stronger drawback of bringing him into play, there is a lot more strategic depth in what to do with the Shadow, and which path to pursue. Many times, these choices will be guided by the events of the early game, and as responses to choices made by the other player.


This is not the only change that increases game depth and adds more difficult decisions. Another ‘automatic’ move, that in the base game would always happen very quickly, was the killing off of Gandalf the Grey and subsequent arrival of Gandalf the White, providing the Free Peoples with a critical extra action die. I found it kind of silly and unthematic to always be hoping to kill off Gandalf as soon as possible. Again, new expansion elements create more tradeoffs, making this strategy not always the best (or delaying the time of its occurrence). Indeed, many times Gandalf will lead the Fellowship well into the midgame (often only dying as a random casualty or to defend against a ‘3’ tile), and in several case I have had Gandalf the Grey still leading the Fellowship in Mordor, and in one game, to Mount Doom.


Finally, a bunch of random thoughts on more ways the expansion changes the game:

It increases both the offensive options of the Shadow and defensive options of the Free Peoples.

It causes every region of the board to be able to see combat (i.e. you can realistically go after the Grey Havens as the Shadow).

It helps make the possibility of a Free Peoples military victory a bit more likely.

It slightly increases the importance of separating companions from the Fellowship, and makes it a more reasonable course of action for the Free Peoples player to do so.

It gives the Free Peoples a possible means of being able to avoid a ‘turn stall’ due to Shadow character cards like Cruel Weather (which when used at the very end of a turn, can push the Fellowship back from a position where it could enter Mordor, to one where it cannot, without the possibility of moving again in response).


In conclusion, I love how the expansion doesn’t add merely ‘more stuff’ or ‘more power’ to the different sides, but rather adds more options (leading to difficult decisions and strategy choices), and more game balance. I believe that with the expansion pieces added to the base game, the game is at least very close to 50-50 balanced. So close that I cannot yet determine even after many plays, whether either side has an advantage (let alone which one).

Those who like War of the Ring should love the expansion. It has certainly exceeded my expectations, which were already very high to begin with.

You don't want to give us any examples rather than simply saying how things will change ?

Thematically, i've never really been that fussed about a reasonable if not overwhelming balance in favour of the shadow. I hope things don't end up going too far the other way. Guess we will have to wait and judge for ourselves.

So how does the expansion affect DEW North? The ability to attack anywhere would seem to help DEW, since once you have the 5VPs you have more options- Grey Havens, Shire, etc.

There was an old LOTR game where one route for the Fellowship was to head for the Grey Havens (from the shire), and then take a ship to Pelargir or other point on the Gondor coast. Interesting.

While I'm very much looking forward to this expansion and like any enticing tidbit that will give insight into what is coming, I don't really think you are telling us anything, Alex. You give us your impressions of the expansion, but no info. I don't know if you are allowed to, but how about some details?!?!?

No, we can't give details yet. If I could, you would be able to tell immediately.

>Balance Overcompensated?
Most of the balancing is merely to make the WK:BC less dominant. So, if you weren't experiencing problems before, you probably won't see much balance change.

>DEW North
As I said in the DEW north thread, the expansion hurts that strategy, both if the FP counters militarily or by Strider rush.

Oh, I want to. I cant untl the game comes out. As soon as it does, I'll give you my thoughts.



As sean mentioned, its more a problem of acertain strategy for the shadow being overwhelming (heavy use of the witch king to draw character cards). The expansion mitigates that, opening up more strategic options, because there are now several strategies in more balance, rather than one, nearly-mandatory strategy.

That comment pleases me greatly.

I agree that WK abuse constitutes the main imbalance. However I think it takes a fair few games and experienced players to get to that point. Where the shadow player doesnt abuse the WK as well as it could I dont the game is far of being balanced at all.

I was a little concerned that the input of experienced players like Alex would push things back too far the other way to the point where we had balance with experienced players but a light advantage where the shadow play was not optimal.

I don't think that this is the case. The main benefit of the expansion is that it allows so many options (on both sides) without any increase in the game length. It makes what were once easy decisions no longer so obvious and it allows more flexibility for both sides. Early moves will definitely vary from game to game and hopefully no particular opening will dominate (like it does now in the base game).

I am extremely pleased with how the expansion to the base game turned out and I hope that all experienced War of the Ring players will feel the same way.

Michael

I concur with Sean and Alexis's viewpoints. (I was also one of the playtesters.) To me, the original game was much harder to play as the Shadow. There were many more critical decisions to be made. In the strategic expansion critical decisions for the FP start right away. (Even if the best way to win is still to dunk the ring.) And so I feel like the "tension-balance" is much better.

Regarding game balance, I was one of the very few who didn't feel that the original game was unbalanced to begin with. And I don't particularly feel that overall balance was affected either, so that's good I think.

For the base game, the dominating opening moves are:

For the shadow:

Bring isengard to war and get saruman and bring sauron to war and get the witch king, ASAP. (One then the other).

Very often: Besiege Minas Tirith. (Or if doing DEW north, instead hit the north).

For the FP:

Kill gandalf on a corruption tile and get gandalf the white.


The only one of these that really seems an 'automatic' early move anymore is Saruman.

The corsairs, Ents etc that were event cards but now factions with scuplts; are those event cards replaced by new cards with new events? Or will the base game simply be played with some fewer cards?

I also am very interested in the answer to Peter's question above. Nice observation, P.Domeij!) What will happen to event cards that have been replaced by figures of their own?

Also, I realize that this next question falls more into the "Strategy" forum under the original game, but since violentzen brought it up, I'd like to add my 2 cents to the thread:

Regarding opening moves:

Is it really that common for Saruman and WK to be brought immediately into the fray (after getting to war, of course)? I have only played several games and with the same group, so I'm sure that our 'gene pool' of ideas is somewhat small compared to most others (although, to our credit, I don't think we're in a strategy 'rut', as all our games go in quite different directions). Anyway, I've seen the SP intentionally delay the WK arrival to keep the FP nations from being activated, allowing the SP to get his armies in place (especially in DEW) and not having to worry about the FP armies uniting too strongly (make the FP use his dice/seperated characters to advance/activate his nations). As far as Saruman, to tell you the truth we've had minimal play in Rohan overall. Oftentimes, the Northwest sees as much or more action. Of course, the extra dice are a BIG incentive, but since the FP starts out with so many more, we never saw it as a big reason to deploy them earlier than our own strategy's warranted.

As far as the FP, we've often kicked Aragorn out ASAP to get him crowned, and we'll save Gandalf until at least a 2 tile is drawn in a hunt.

Can't wait for the expansion, though, to see how this will all change!

Sorry for bringing up subjects in the wrong forums! Hope the BBG police don't come after me!

There are replacement event cards.

In the base game, yes it is. That is hat I spend my first 4 musters on, no matter what. The extra action dice, as soon as possible, far outweight all other considerations.

The drawback of the WK, of activating the nations, is really weak. I dont really care if I ahve activated the nations, because I would love for the FP to bring the nations to war 'the normal way' by using 2-3 muster dice to push them down the track. This is an inefficient use of muster dice for the FP.



If you were to play with people outside of your group, who had a lot of experience, who brought the WK and Saruman out early every time, they would most likely be crushing you because of this. After ~100 plays, I believe with 100% certainty that it is never correct to not use your first 4 muster dice on saruman and the witch king in the base game. The expansion does change this (though I still always want saruman early.

In the base game, the activation drawback of the witch king is essentially irrelevant. It actually does have a minor impact in the expansion. Additionally, there is another large drawback of bringing out the WK Black Captain, and there are alternate ways to get his action die, which make it an actual decision, both in terms of when to get him, and sometimes even whether to get him.



I had a few times that the northwest saw play in the base game, but its pretty rare. The expansion actually makes it more possible.



Those are both good strategies, though often its right for gandalf to die ASAP. The expansion makes waiting for a big tile for gandalf even better. I tend to wait for a 3 for him if possible. I like early aragorn, it is great except in games where the shadow is going to ignore the fellowship and just try to win militarily as fast as possible (in which case a strider rush is best).



It doesnt really matter
This is more a base game strategy discussion though, I'd go read the strategy forum for that game.

I have a reflection about the new siege weapons and how they will affect combat.
What comes to my head is this: A catapult mustered in a stronghold will immediatelly be followed by a counter-muster of a siege tower or vice versa. That feels like a rather boring siege arms-race, fed by muster dice (or event cards if that is what brings the weapons in). I hope I have got it all wrong.

That's exactly the first concern that the testers had, so don't worry about it.

Let me finally add to all of this, having finally discovered this thread, that Alex was a prominent figure in guiding the developers into the final cut for this expansion. He often prodded them into making tweaks that needed to be done, resulting in this fine expansion product. I mostly playtested without much comment, but read all the banter, which at some times got a little intense. But it was all well worth the effort. Alex helped tremendously (and Sean) in shaping this great expansion project into what it is now today. This is a great game. It is even greater, and perhaps more balanced now, with the new expansion. The most pressing issue with the WK and drawing cards to stop the Fellowship has been well addressed, thanks again to those like Alex who persisted with design solutions contained in the final product.

Steve Sanders

On the topic of the siege engines and catapaults, there actually IS a fair amount of that--FP builds a catapault, Shadow builds a siege engine to compensate. But it's not a very static or boring process--each side has to make calculations about how important the siege is, etc. before mustering their unit, and the net effect of having one of each (or two of each) at a siege is NOT zero.

Will the entire decks be replaced? I certainly hope so. Wouldn't like playing with a mix of worn and brand new cards.

Unfortunately not--just the new cards will be part of the expansion.

Thanks. I thought the designers came up with great ideas for how to fix the problems I saw. I kpet feeling like: This thing is a problem, and I know its a problem, but I dont see what a good way to fix it is. And then they would find a way to fix it.