I think most people didn't know. It's just interesting that they've been free for 8 years and none of us noticed.
I think most people didn't know. It's just interesting that they've been free for 8 years and none of us noticed.
Come on, come on, come on! I'm anxious to hear how your first game of CoN went. What do you think of the game?Originally Posted by Vesper
The PBF game between wahoo and me is coming down to the wire! We're on Game Round 5 and I just concluded Karkoth's turn. Here are a couple battle reports I wrote up during that turn:
(D=Dragon, M=Monster, WZ=Wizard, F=Fighter, FS=Footsoldier)
Battle of Baron of Brandil
Round 1
Land battle: Karkoth (2 D, 2 M, 3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 3 F, 5 FS) vs. Vailin (1 M, 1 WZ, 7 FS)
Karkoth First Strike with...
3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage: Mysterio previously rolled 3d10c[6] = 1 hit, and hit was made with Robe of the Archmage for a total of 2 hits! 2 Vailin FS destroyed!
Vailin First Strike with...
1 WZ: Mysterio previously rolled 1d10c[6] = 1 hit. 1 D absorbs hit.
Karkoth (1 D, 1 D wounded, 2 M, 3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 3 F, 5 FS) vs. Vailin (1 M, 1 WZ, 5 FS)
Karkoth attacks with...
2 D: Mysterio previously rolled 2d20c[6] = 2 hits! 2 Vailin FS destroyed!
2 M: Mysterio previously rolled 2d12c[6] = 2 hits! 2 Vailin FS destroyed!
3 F: Mysterio previously rolled 3d10c[6] = 1 hit! 1 Vailin FS destroyed!
5 FS: Mysterio previously rolled 5d6c[6] = 1 hit! Vailin plays Treasure card #105 (Staff of the Mage) earning +2 VPs (19 total)! 1 Vailin WZ destroyed! The WZ's Staff of the Mage attempts to avenge his death with 1d20c[6] = 0 hits!
...while Vailin defends with...
1 M: Mysterio previously rolled 1d12c[6] = 0 hits!
5 FS: Mysterio previously rolled 5d6c[6] = 1 hit. Second D absorbs hit.
Round 2
Karkoth (1 D wounded, 1 D wounded, 2 M, 3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 3 F, 5 FS) vs. Vailin (1 M)
Karkoth First Strike with...
3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage: 3d10c[6] = 2 hits! 1 Vailin M destroyed!
Karkoth claims Baron of Brandil from Vailin with 2 D, 2 M, 3 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 3 F, 5 FS remaining earning +1 VP (27 total)!
-----
(SE=Siege Engine)
Battle of Barony of Skalgard
Round 1
Land battle: Karkoth (2 D, 5 M, 2 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 1 SE, 1 FS) vs. Nerath (3 WZ, 2 F with Reflecting Shield, 5 FS)
Karkoth First Strike negated by Nerath's Reflecting Shield!
Nerath First Strike with...
3 WZ: Mysterio previously rolled 3d10c[6] = 2 hits. 2 D each absorb one hit.
Karkoth (2 D wounded, 5 M, 2 WZ with Robe of the Archmage, 1 SE, 1 FS) vs. Nerath (3 WZ, 2 F with Reflecting Shield, 5 FS)
Karkoth attacks with...
2 D: Mysterio previously rolled 2d20c[6] = 2 hits! 2 Nerath FS destroyed!
5 M: Mysterio previously rolled 5d12c[6] = 3 hits! 3 Nerath FS destroyed!
2 WZ with Robe of the Archmage: Mysterio previously rolled 2d10c[6] = 1 hit! Nerath F destroyed!
1 SE: Mysterio previously rolled 2d8c[6] = 1 hit! Nerath F destroyed!
1 FS: Mysterio previously rolled 1d6c[6] = 0 hits.
...while Nerath defends with...
2 F: Mysterio previously rolled 2d10c[6] = 2 hits. Karkoth FS and SE destroyed!
4 FS: Mysterio previously rolled 4d6c[6] = 2 hits (ouch!). 2 Karkoth M destroyed!
1 FS: Mysterio previously rolled 1d6c[6] = 0 hits.
Round 2
Karkoth (2 D wounded, 3 M, 2 WZ with Robe of the Archmage) vs. Nerath (3 WZ)
Nerath plays Event card #75 (Retreat):
3 Nerath WZ flee the battlefield back to Iron Wolf Hold!RETREAT
Play at the end of the battle round in which you are the defender.
Transfer any number of Nerath pieces from the attacked space to any adjacent friendly land spaces.
(If there are no adjacent friendly spaces, this card has no effect.)
When the odds are against you, don't play the game!
Karkoth claims Barony of Skalgard from Nerath with 2 D, 3 M, 2 WZ with Robe of the Archmage remaining earning +1 VP (28 total)!
Karkoth plays Event card #2 (Animate Dead):
Karkoth adds 3 FS to Barony of Skalgard!ANIMATE DEAD
Play after you conquer a land space by winning a battle on your turn.
Add 3 Karkoth Footsoldiers to the conquered space.
In death, Karkoth's enemies become Karkoth's army.
-----
We're having a blast playing the game, but wahoo feels the dice haven't rolled his way. At times, I've felt the same way, but that's one of the game's strengths--even one's best-laid plans can go horribly wrong if the dice betray you. Great game!
Also, on Nerath's turn prior to that Karkoth turn, wahoo sent two Dragons behind the Nerath/Karkoth front to raid a land space containing 2 Storm Elementals and 2 Footsoldiers. In the first battle round, none of the pieces hit.
In the second round, one of his Dragons hit, killing one of my Footsoldiers, while my two Storm Elementals hit, wounding both of his Dragons, leaving 2 wounded Dragons against two Storm Elementals and a Footsoldier.
At that point, wahoo said he wanted to retreat, but I told him he couldn't, since there wasn't a valid adjacent space for his Dragons to retreat to, which was part of my plan; I made sure Karkoth controlled all adjacent land and sea spaces prior to Nerath's turn. So, the battle continued.
In the third round, one of his Dragons hit, killing my remaining Footsoldier, while my two Storm Elementals and Footsoldier missed.
In the fourth round, both of his Dragons missed, while my two Storm Elementals hit, killing both of his Dragons.
Nerath attacked with 10 gold worth of pieces, while Karkoth defended with 8 gold worth of pieces. After the battle concluded, Nerath lost 10 gold worth of pieces (2 Dragons), while Karkoth lost only 2 gold worth of pieces (2 Footsoldiers). The dice make anything possible, which was the point I was trying to make last week.
IMO, in the late game, wahoo's been using his Dragons to raid, while I've been using mine to support battles and reposition after battles to create choke points. It's been a very interesting game!
Robert Florence has a look that game this week: Fortune and glory on Cardboard Children. And yes, reading the article, it sounds like something Indiana Jones said on purpose. It's got adventures, cliffhangers, nazis, fortune and glory (if you are lucky).
You can also play the game competitively or co-op (in that mode, it introduces villains and the deeds of their organisations). It sounds like excellent fun.
See this chat about the game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUeX6EtWDK0
Wendelius
Last edited by Wendelius; 10-08-2011 at 03:10 PM.
Yeah, Fortune and Glory sounds quite excellent. I'm a total sucker for pulp action. Unfortunately, the retail price is $100. I can tell that it has a lot of components (can't tell how the quality is), but they've made the game too rich for my blood.
Thematically it's interesting, but the key mechanic is push your luck with a delayed dice roll (when you fail to overcome a danger, and wait until your next turn to resolve whether or not you made the backup check), and the cooperative aspects seem light on the interaction. I found this review very useful in determining that this does not diverge enough from the FF model of light on strategy "beer and pretzels" games. In my experience, I don't much enjoy them sober or otherwise once the veil over what you are actually making decisions on is pierced. The price is also something of a deterrent.
Thanks for the interest. Hearing that the Hill brothers have been developing Fortune & Glory for 10 years, I can identify. I've been working on TToA for 5 years now. A cross-country move and my teaching job have slowed me down lately, but I'm hoping to have a new prototype ready by mid-November. I would want a publisher to handle it (maybe via Kickstarter if that made the most sense), since I don't have the time in my life to run a game company.
Here's part of a sample adventure using the latest draft of the cards:
Cards look great Jason. If you ever need some help playtesting I bet I could talk Inspectigater and his wife into a field trip with me to Woodstock.
Let's just take a convoy to WRJ.
Seriously, if you guys want to make that trip some time, we could work something out! Our regular game night down here is Thursday, but weekends are not out of the question.
Cool, our game night is generally Friday (you missed a pretty good beat down by Innsmouth the other night Omni), but I know I'd be game for a Saturday or Sunday trip to Woodstock. It would be too hard for me to get down there during the work week (and just too late for a Friday).
Sounds like Omni is in, let me talk to 'Gater and see what he says, but I'm totally game for working something out. I'll be in touch.
I'll be in my bunk.
I guess we're talking past each other, because in a strategy game I don't consider "anything is possible" to be a positive trait.
To be clear, I want you to know that the probability that he would make 8 attacks with dragons and miss 6 times is ~0.4%. As in, four-tenths of one percent.
I'm glad that your strategy of tricking him into taking a risk that he had a ~98% chance of succeeding at worked out for you.
Are you saying his 2 Dragons have a 98% chance to inflict 4 hits on my four pieces before (since you said succeeding) my 2 Storm Elementals and 2 Footsoldiers can inflict 4 hits on his 2 Dragons, remembering that I lose one piece to each hit (Footsoldier, Footsoldier, Storm Elemental, Storm Elemental in that order) and he loses one Dragon on the third hit? If so, I'd like to see your math.
The probability of his 2 Dragons both rolling hits is 56.25%. Doing so would kill both of my Footsoldiers.
The probability of my 2 Storm Elementals both rolling hits is 14.06%. Doing so would wound both Dragons.
The probability of my 2 Footsoldiers both rolling hits is 2.78%. Doing so would kill both Dragons.
If all units hit, I would win the battle with 2 surviving Storm Elementals. But let's assume my Storm Elementals and Footsoldiers are inept and only ever have a chance of hitting once in a round, yet the Dragons excel (56.25%). Again...
Round 1
The probability of his 2 Dragons both rolling hits is 56.25%. Doing so would kill both of my Footsoldiers.
The probability of one of my 2 Storm Elementals rolling a hit is 60.94%. Doing so would wound one Dragon.
The probability of one of my 2 Footsoldiers rolling a hit is 30.56%. Doing so would wound the other Dragon.
Round 2
The probability of his 2 Dragons both rolling hits is 56.25%. Doing so would kill both of my Storm Elementals.
The probability of one of my 2 Storm Elementals rolling a hit is 60.94%. Doing so would kill one Dragon.
He'd win with one wounded Dragon remaining.
Now, let's assume both sides are equally inept:
Round 1
The probability of one of his 2 Dragons rolling a hit is 93.75%. Doing so would kill one of my Footsoldiers.
The probability of one of my 2 Storm Elementals rolling a hit is 60.94%. Doing so would wound one Dragon.
The probability of one of my 2 Footsoldiers rolling a hit is 30.56%. Doing so would wound the other Dragon.
Round 2
The probability of one of his 2 Dragons rolling a hit is 93.75%. Doing so would kill my other Footsoldier.
The probability of one of my 2 Storm Elementals rolling a hit is 60.94%. Doing so would kill one Dragon.
The probability of my remaining Footsoldier rolling a hit is 16.67%. Doing so would kill the other Dragon.
But let's assume the sole Footsoldier misses and the other Dragon survives for Round 3.
Round 3
The probability of his remaining Dragon rolling a hit is 75%. Doing so would kill one of my Storm Elementals.
The probability of one of my 2 Storm Elementals rolling a hit is 60.94%. Doing so would kill the remaining Dragon.
But let's assume both Storm Elementals miss and the Dragon survives for Round 4.
Round 4
The probability of his remaining Dragon rolling a hit is 75%. Doing so would kill my remaining Storm Elemental.
The probability of my remaining Storm Elemental rolling a hit is 37.5%. Doing so would kill the remaining Dragon.
Having said all that, I hope you can see why I'm curious to see where you came up with the 2% chance of my forces defeating his Dragons. Are you still crunching the numbers?
Yea, that's a really close battle. If you're going to go dragon raiding, you've got to pick better shots or have somewhere to run once your dragons absorb their freebies.
98% is the chance that he would have landed at least 3 hits out of 8 attacks over 4 rounds, at a bare minimum killing a storm elemental and most likely winning outright.
Having said that, in your first example the odds that he'd get 2 hits from his dragons are on par with the odds you'd get a hit with one storm elemental. You're then treating the 30% chance of a second hit from a footsoldier as a given so that your Round 2 logic results in him losing a dragon. Your "ideal situation" round 2 only works out anywhere as close to as well as you're making it out maybe 3 out of 10 goes, the rest of the time your footsoldiers are dead and it's 1 wounded dragon and 1 healthy dragon vs 2 storm elementals (Hint: Dragons highly favored to win). It's remarkably disingenuous to use a 3 in 10 best-case scenario on your side as THE best-case scenario for your opponent, and then use that as the baseline for the rest of your calculations.
The most probable path would be that in the first 2 rounds he attacks 4 times and kills 3 of your pieces, and in exchange you'd land 2 hits back on him between your storm elementals and footsoldiers. The expected result would be 2 wounded dragons versus a storm elemental on round 3, which favors him strongly to win (93.75% he wins, 37.5% that you inflict a parting blow to at least kill a dragon).
This comes out to it being probable that he'd win without losing a dragon, with you having about a 40% chance of killing one of his dragons but him still winning.
It's really not a close battle. It's only close if you consider a 40% shot of trading 2 footsoldiers and 2 storm elementals for a single dragon to be a worthy enterprise.
As anecdotal evidence goes though, your use of a scenario where your opponent effectively rolled a 1 on a 4-sided die 6 times out of 8 rolls (0.42%!) to make your point is rich.
Also, I'm mostly just responding at this point because apparently you've actually succeeded at confusing other people with numbers, and it bothers me. I don't actually expect to convince you of anything at this stage, as while the odds are objective, the willingness to accept risk when making tactical decisions is entirely subjective and differs greatly between people. And honestly, I'm okay with that. I just think decisions are more strategic when the players actually have some sense of the odds and knowingly choose to accept them, as opposed to just doing shit and hoping it works out in the end. And in the end, that to me is what separates a strategy wargame from a Craps tournament.
Last edited by Reldan; 10-09-2011 at 10:03 PM.
I think you forget, Reldan, that anecdotal evidence used to prove a point on the internet counts as real evidence.
Math angers the Dice Gods, and they shall smite thee for calculating odds. You must put your faith in the Dice Gods and you will prevail....*namaste*.
Chatter over on the Plaid Hat forums makes it sound like there's not much of a chance of seeing Summoner Wars iOS this month.
Boo.
I'm sure Caylus and Tigris & Euphrates are right around the corner, though.
My weekend:
The whole point of me mentioning the 2 Dragons vs. 2 Storm Elementals + 2 Footsoldiers scenario in our game wasn't to prove that the 2 SE + 2 FS have the advantage over the 2 D; I know they don't, but they certainly have a decent shot at defeating them. Or that it was some grand strategy on my part, tricking wahoo into attacking them. I simply felt that, for 2 gold less than the cost of 2 D, I was willing to defend that space with those pieces, hoping that would be enough to deter him from attacking. If it wasn't (which it wasn't), then I was okay with leaving the outcome of the battle to the roll of the dice, since I knew the battle would last at least two rounds, and I'd be able to roll a minimum of 4 d8 dies and 2 d6 dies.
Had I spent an additional 2 gold on a Fighter (d10) to defend that space, equaling the cost of 2 D, the battle would have lasted at least three rounds, and I'd have been able to roll a minimum of 3 d10 dies, 4 d8 dies, and 2 d6 dies. The only reason I chose to defend with 2 SE was because they had been recruited previously for a different purpose. Otherwise, I would have defended with (if wanting to match the cost of 2 D) 2 Wizards, 1 Fighter, and 2 Footsoldiers, since Wizards and Fighters are the only pieces that can explore dungeons for treasures, whereas Dragons can not. That's an important consideration when recruiting reinforcements.
The part of the game I enjoy the most is determining the type and number of pieces needed to attack or defend a space. Is it overkill putting that piece here, or would I be better served using him here? Can I afford to lose this space? What about the dungeons? Monsters use better dies (d12) and can rampage, but Wizards and Heroes can get me treasures. But how many Wizards and Fighters can I afford to lose in a dungeon and still effectively defend with until, or attack with on, my next turn? The game is just a lot of fun to play.
That's what I meant by close. Dragon raiding is generally best as a zero-loss situation. The example has a decent chance of losing a dragon. Combine that with the range of possible cards that can impact the battle and it's not a gamble I'd take unless it was a hex that really had to be conquered.
There's also the defensive cost. Dragon raiding, for me, is about doing damage and taking none AND having my dragons be able to use their reinforce move to get back to a spot they can help defend or back to a spot where their presence forces the other player to spend points defending rather than attacking.
I will admit though that elementals on land make a tempting target
How was Shards of the Throne?
And how many hours did it take with six players? I'm currently trying to figure out how to schedule a game of TI3 + both expansions.
It only took 2 days to get funded too. Kickstarter seems like such a boon to aspiring game designers.
Wendelius
Nice! I take it you were Nekro Virus from the position of the shot? That's a very fun race if you like warmongering.
Steal any good tech?
So I ordered Star Trek: Fleet Captains and should get it sometime this week. My wife is a Trekkie so I'm going to surprise her with it and I hope it's another solid 2-player game we can play together.
The reviews I've read so far on BGG make it sound like the 2-player is more fun than 4-player simply because there are always two sides regardless of number of players and you don't have to wait long for your turn to come again.
It's a shame that I have no desire to paint minis, because the pics I've seen of the painted models from this game actually look pretty good.
I've never played the game (Twilight Imperium, right?), but it looks intimidating, even to a veteran board gamer. Prior to playing Arkham Horror, I never thought it looked intimidating, but this one does. Is it as difficult to grok as it looks? Or is its bark worse than its bite?My weekend:
By comparison, I like Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game, but my girlfriend doesn't. I'm guessing there's no chance she'd play this game...?
Nice! Another ST:FC owner! Don't hesitate to request replacement ships and/other components from WizKids' website, as I've done so twice thus far without resistance (6 replacement ships and 1 replacement Location Tile). They'll even replace ships that were assembled incorrectly and/or sloppily (nacelles glued on crooked, gaps between components, etc.). You'll just have to send them photos if you request more than two replacement ships. Also, inventory all your cards and tiles, and remember that the Command Post Tiles are located under the ship insert, not the main insert.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote