Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Talk about collectible card and miniature games here.

TOPIC: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs

Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 16:43 #146952

Recently I was looking for a collectible cardgame to get to collect and play with my son. At the time, I was asking about Pokemon. Today some are looking for more info on Netrunner in that thread. Others want to compare Netrunner with Star Wars LCG in the 'What boardgames?' thread.

Maybe we can consolidate all of these.

So, what are thoughts on the current LCGs? If you've played several how would you rank them? While ranking them in order, list which expansions you feel are essential as well as how many core sets are required to really play the game.
  • Mr. White
  • Mr. White's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • D12
  • Posts: 5255
  • Thank you received: 2296
Life & Death & An American Chainsaw
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 17:55 #146973

MAGIC: THE GATHERING

Nah, all I've played of the LCGs is Netrunner, so I can't rank them worth shit, I've just read all their rules. All I know is that Netrunner and Pokemon are way worse than Magic. I've also got shitloads of opinions on how to introduce, set up, play, and maintain Magic and its collecting aspects with your kid without it turning into any more of a money sink than everything else mentioned. Also, a HUGELY appealing thing about CCG/LCGs to a kid is that you have your own collection of cards that is different from your dad's or anyone else's collection, it's yours, it's special; that is completely missing from LCGs and that is sad.

Edit: I forget from the Pokemon thread, how old is your kid? Six? That is a little too young for Magic, and DEFINITELY too young for the significantly more complex Netrunner or ANY of the other LCGs. In terms of rules, Pokemon is the simplest of the ones mentioned so far, then Magic, and all the LCGs have more complicated rules than Magic. The CCGs I'd consider for a six-year-old would be Pokemon or Harry Potter, but I'd likelier just wait another couple years till they turn 8 and teach them Magic. In any case, CCGs are of course dangerous territory to be treading on with a kid, but as I said I have very clear ideas as to how I'd work that, with Magic at least, and probably Harry Potter or Pokemon too.
  • dragonstout
  • dragonstout's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D8
  • Posts: 1637
  • Thank you received: 491
Last Edit: 11 Mar 2013 19:36 by dragonstout.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:13 #146981

Netrunner is the best. 1 core set needed, the first two expansions are almost necessary for ensuring that every faction can use a good variety of options. The third expansion is good, but a bit of a meta-heavy game changer.

Call of Cthulhu is not so good. Three cores are probably needed. Same with Game of Thrones, which just seems to be drowning under it's own weight at this point. Avoid these, they aren't as good as Netrunner.

Lord of the Rings is one of the best co-ops on the market. One core is fine, but you really a big pile to make this game really good for both deckbuilding and the variety of quests.
  • SaMoKo
  • SaMoKo's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D8
  • Posts: 1605
  • Thank you received: 569
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:25 #146984

I've got the WOTC Netrunner and LOTR LCG if you want to check those out tomorrow night. FFG kept the rules verbatim from WOTC, the only thing different are the cards and the factions. I haven't cracked open LOTR yet, but we could do a learning game.
  • metalface13
  • metalface13's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D10
  • Posts: 4765
  • Thank you received: 675
"Chance favors the prepared mind" – Louis Pasteur
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:27 #146986

Call of Cthulhu was great but it's kind of been beaten at it's own game since then. Netrunner and Star Wars is the real competition these days. Netrunner probably wins but I think that's because they had so much to choose from, Star Wars has to be built from scratch and it's a really interesting game, given time I expect it to be every bit as good as Netrunner and in some ways I think it's already there. Netrunner is more immediately thematic but the deck building is more complicated, Star Wars is really accessible on the deck building front and grows on you the more you play it. There are some really difficult choices to make in that game. The theme is so easy to get into and the cards are gorgeous. I think they are both great choices and really it comes down to theme preference. I'm into Star Wars but my neighbor is into Netrunner so I play both a reasonable amount. They're both great.

I have no comment on the LOTR one because I don't care for co-op games that much.

If you do want to do CoC let me know, I have a wack of cards I don't need anymore, pay shipping and they're yours.
  • JonJacob
  • JonJacob's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D10
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thank you received: 1731
Boardgames suck.
Last Edit: 11 Mar 2013 18:30 by JonJacob.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:30 #146987

I've only played LotR and Netrunner, they're totally different beasts, but both are excellent with the caveat that LotR basically requires the first expansion cycle to be fully realised. Netrunner is a LITTLE weak out of the box, but very playable with I think 7 different decks out of just 1 core.
  • Bull Nakano
  • Bull Nakano's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D8
  • Posts: 1253
  • Thank you received: 403
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:53 #146991

I bought the CoC LCG starters and asylum packs. Then they rebooted it making my cards incompatible. I'll never buy into another of FFGs LCG's again. Basically paid to be a beta tester for the format.
  • Mad Dog
  • Mad Dog's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Road Warrior
  • Posts: 3644
  • Thank you received: 1372
Last Edit: 11 Mar 2013 18:56 by Mad Dog.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 18:56 #146993

I'm not sure if I'd do the first expansion cycle for LotR. Probably Carrock, the Dead Marshes, and Return to Mirkwood would do. Kazad-Dum, and a bunch of the Kazad-Dum packs offer far more (assuming you pick up at least Return to Mirkwood). The second cycle offered far more variety than the first in both quests and deckbuilding.

I really didn't find Netrunner to be too bad out of the box, considering it's an LCG. There were quite a bit of room for building up some interesting decks and putting in some head-game surprises based on meta strategy. Even Jinteki was ok if you got into the habit of switching around corps to keep your opponent off balance. It was just too easy to counter if you played it regularly.

Edit: The best part of the first two packs for Netrunner was the extra agendas. Building up a corp was a little flat without them.
  • SaMoKo
  • SaMoKo's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D8
  • Posts: 1605
  • Thank you received: 569
Last Edit: 11 Mar 2013 18:58 by SaMoKo.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 21:25 #147024

And those agendas ARE important. I'm still waiting on the What Lies Ahead reprint. :(
  • Woodall
  • Woodall's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D4
  • Posts: 53
  • Thank you received: 12
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 21:29 #147025

I cannot add anything of value about the current LCGs (I've only played Netrunner once online).

However as a former player that was big into Decipher's Star Wars: CCG; I'm very interested in hearing how the new LCG compares to the old game if anyone who has played both can speak on that. I watched the intro video that Team Covenant did and the game seems alright, but for some reason it just didn't excite me as much as the prospect of playing Netrunner or even bustin' out the old SW:CCG. I know people didn't like the location aspect of Decipher's CCG, as at times it was difficult to move characters around or a space deck would be up against something that was ground heavy, and understand why the new game moves away from that. However the old card game was so great at telling stories, perhaps due to being less abstracted so for me that was always a strength not a weakness.

A final question mark I have revolves around the block deckbuilding. As someone who really enjoys deckbuilding and tweaking cards, the simplified take does not appeal as much to me as what I'm hearing from others - but it seems I'm in the minority on that one.

Also I may just be getting my fill of SW from playing X-Wing... so there is that.
  • Da Bid Dabid
  • Da Bid Dabid's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • D6
  • Posts: 589
  • Thank you received: 515
Last Edit: 11 Mar 2013 21:31 by Da Bid Dabid.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 21:36 #147030

My experience isn't very extensive, but here's my thoughts. Keep in mind that I'm not much of a deckbuilder.

- Game of Thrones LCG: Only a partial two-player game with the core set, and I didn't enjoy myself very much. I found it to be VERY mechanical, and I can only imagine that deckbuilding would be rewarding at an intense level, but maybe not a casual one.

- Lord of the Rings LCG: I played about 10-12 solo games with one core set. I liked parts of it a lot, especially the scenario design. But again, it's very mechanical, and I thought that the combat was particularly irritating. As a cooperative game I didn't think it was very good, at least with the core set. It felt like it too often could be called about a third of the way through, when one critical bad draw could send the whole game south almost instantly. Essentially, it was swingy, but only in the bad direction. Barnes wrote it up better though, since he has more experience. It just seems like something that you need to invest in bigtime to make it rewarding.

- Star Wars LCG: This is very easily my favorite of the LCGs, for reasons that I will soon express in an actual article. The deckbuilding is much more accessible than in other games, and the actual gameplay tweaks a couple of things that have always irritated me about the genre. It's reasonably thematic too. I like the illustrations a lot, and I like how both sides are trying to accomplish something kind of different.

- Magic: The Gathering: I've only done the Danger room variant, which is not nearly the same thing that other people have experience with. But the structure of Magic is easily the lightest of any of the games I've mentioned here. I think it relies more on having an active group, since it's not a "one guy owns everything" deal, and that group would have to be one who wants the same experience you do, be that competitive or casual.
Subscribe to my game blog, The Rumpus Room.
sanildefanso.wordpress.com
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 11 Mar 2013 21:37 #147031

I still think Warhammer Invasion is great for what it is---a very straightforward slugfest of a game that does not overstay its welcome.
  • Gary Sax
  • Gary Sax's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D20
  • Posts: 7703
  • Thank you received: 2433
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Msample, lj1983

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 12 Mar 2013 12:04 #147125

Gary Sax, are they still making Warhammer: Invasion? Can you do multiplayer? Are all of the WFB races represented now? I played it once a few years ago and thought it fun.

Metalface, bring the cardgames.
  • Mr. White
  • Mr. White's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • D12
  • Posts: 5255
  • Thank you received: 2296
Life & Death & An American Chainsaw
Last Edit: 12 Mar 2013 12:04 by Mr. White.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 31 Jul 2017 11:21 #251868



We were talking about these a little bit this weekend...so I'm curious what's the current status.

Star Wars - Has this Destiny dice/card combo thing replaced this?
Netrunner - Hasn't the format changed? Do I recall a campaign or something? Cards cycling out? A new base game?
Game of Thrones - Is this multiplayer?
Legend of the Five Rings - Do we have any idea how close the skews to the original game?
LotR - RIP?
  • Mr. White
  • Mr. White's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • D12
  • Posts: 5255
  • Thank you received: 2296
Life & Death & An American Chainsaw
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Let's Talk FFGs LCGs 31 Jul 2017 13:01 #251876

Mr. White wrote:
Netrunner - Hasn't the format changed? Do I recall a campaign or something? Cards cycling out? A new base game?

The standard format is unchanged. There is only 1 other officially-supported alternative, the fairly new Cache Refresh format. Both competitive play and Cache Refresh must adhere to the deckbuilding limitations of the NAPD Most Wanted List, which assigns additional influence to certain high-powered cards in an attempt to nerf them somewhat, or limit their prevalence.

The last big box (Terminal Directive) was a self-contained campaign that contained a mix of campaign-only cards and 57 cards that are legal for standard and competitive play in the regular format.

Rotation is scheduled to hit when the first pack of the next cycle becomes available. Neither a name nor a date is presently known for this cycle, and only 1 datapack remains of the current Red Sand cycle. The first 2 cycles (Genesis and Spin) rotate out at that point. Big boxes will never rotate out.

A new base game has only ever been wild-eyed speculation and rumor, I don't think there is any hard evidence that this will ever be a thing.
  • JoelCFC25
  • JoelCFC25's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • D6
  • Posts: 678
  • Thank you received: 120
Last Edit: 31 Jul 2017 13:01 by JoelCFC25.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Moderators: Jackwraith, Mad Dog, wadenels
Time to create page: 0.334 seconds