DCFF Feedback & Poll of the Week

[Thorsten the Traveller]

The DCFF tourney is over, I for one consider it a success, with regards to enthusiasm, playtesting, and hearing your feedback (ok, winning it isn't bad either

We like to involve the community in DCFF as much as possible. So, if you got any experiences to share, ideas to contribute, feedback to give, or things on your DC wish-list: this is the thread!

To spice things up, we'll endeavour to come up with a small poll every now and then to test preferences in the community. Poll nr. 1, as avatars are important for the meccg experience: Elf-lord names.

Poll1: 11 votes
Do you like the alternate names for the ELf-lords?
Yes, gives more character to them (73%)
Yes, but not the ones you've chosen (list ideas) (0%)
Nope, plain Elrond seems fine enough to me (27%)

Poll2: 5 votes
Do you like the Mordor in Ruins rules?
Yes, they change metagame and effectively avoids Mordor squat decks, which are a bore (20%)
Yes, but not all of it (list which not) (0%)
Nope, they are an unnecessary change and complication of the game (80%)

Poll3: 10 votes
What would you like for Prisoner from Ost-in-Edhil?
+2 to ring testing seems fine to me (10%)
rolling 2x for a ring test is the better choice (60%)
only help test Dwarven/Spirit rings is better (20%)
Prisoner from what/who/where? (10%)

[Jose-san]

My thoughts about some cards...

Captain of the House: I had to read it several times. I'd replace the text "or its adjacent regions that has no

• automatic attack" with "or its adjacent regions without a
  • automatic attack".
    
    Shifting Paths: I like this card, but I'm concerned that it is another reason not to use non ranger characters.
    
    (I will go on later on this)

[Beornd]

Hi Folks!

I want to give my impressions about DC-Tourni.

I played a simple Under-deep Thrain-Deck with Deep Mountain Fortress because i´m not really in touch with all the DC. I had also a few deck-faults because of so less time to create them but i think it was a DC-Deck.

Thats one of my first point of criticism i met two decks which were only modified basic decks with no DC idea and only full field with a minimum DC cards. So not really worth for a test.

My deck worked two times nice but i had problems to get an ally. It´s not possible to get an logical ally by an under-deep dwarf company. Too the faction problem but i think it´s ok to get one at the dwarfholds but it´s predictable.

Second point of criticism: I played vs. a minion dunk deck, sure a good deck idea, but without no problems to get all the necessary cards and finally a haven dunk. Ok my opponent lost because he made a big mistake but normally the deck is not really blockable and a 9+ roll without scroll for a minion dunk
I heart there were an similar Galadriel Dunk Deck with dunking at a haven (Lorien) with also squatting there and one or two non dangerous moves.

The best deck idea i saw was an Elrond Deck with strong elves. Perhaps to much power because there are no really strong DC hazards possible but good played.

So I remember to Eric and Nico they created the DC because they were boring to play vs. squatting-fw, mordor- and overpowered balrog decks. Hmmm – i think this problems were not solved.

Congratulation to Eric – i did n´t see his deck – but i think he knows what´s to do.

Concluding for a real DC-Tourni with only FB and DF there are to less cards and in my opinion the combination Basic Cards <- - > DC would only work for the basic cards.

I can give only informations about the single cards i saw. They were adjusted and not overpowered.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

thanks for the input Bernd!

Yes Prisoner from Ost-in-Edhil might be too good for minion One Ring. One cannot start him and probably needs We Have Come to Kill to play him, but perhaps you're right it's still too easy to get him. We already changed Celedhring's +2 CC bonus when carrying the One Ring, making at least the final CC for RW dunks a bit harder, we will give thought to Prisoner as well.

Still it's a 27% on a single test, or with Gwaith-i-Mirdain a 45% but then it has to happen at a site in Hollin, which makes one vulnerable for the return trip to Dol Guldur (and it's 5 regions). Corruption is often a good tactic vs. One Ring decks, and of course the regulars: speed, Rolled Down etc. The end CC must be made during end-of-turn, if we make it at the end of the turn, Covetous Thoughts might wreck the whole deal.

One thing I agree on is that DC games tend to take longer, so that's an advantage to One Ring strategy. The Galadriel deck you mention has used this, because I played it myself at Lure this year, and faced it this tourney (and won, even though it took 2 full cycles ), and it is not overly competetive, but of course if you go on long enough almost any One Ring deck will win. Starting an avatar is also a benefit. But, if more One Ring decks appear, more people will defend against them.

you are of course also right that dcff is only a part of the dc cards, and thus it cannot fully change metagame. But that was not the plan perse, we'd like to think that playing a mixed dc/normal game is possible, balanced, and fun. Of course in tournaments only the most useful cards will see play.

and about allies in the Under-deeps, well there is a possibility: Kheleglin at Iron-deeps , it's even very profitable, as he's a stage ally and you can play another greater item there...

[Luitprand]

I didn't play the DCFF tourney, but some thoughts to one card:

Shifting Path:
I played last lure a dragon deck with Lomar in the Northern Waste. It's was unplayable deck with shifting path in this tourney. I moved through lots of wildernis, of course its' norther waste. In one games i get 4x shifting path that 4 turns without MP.

I only know one card against shifting path, thats the Compass, a minor item. Pity that some avatars can't use this item.

For me, it was my last dragon-deck in northern waste. it's better if you build a sqatterdeck.

[Shapeshifter]

I take the chance to comment on some DCFF-cards:

1) Reconstructed Towers: ...

Fallen-wizards may not use the stage version and may not play any stage card on The White Towers.

According to DC General Rules a Lord player is considered a FW player unless specified otherwise. Thematically, however, I would suggest to allow Cirdan to play stage cards at the Reconstructed Towers.

2) Bladorthin: Whatever the final card text will be it should include some words on what your is if he replaces Thranduil.

3) Legendary Hunt: ...

If Thranduil defeats a creature using The Hunt, you may invert this card to bring one The Great Hunt from your sideboard to your deck (reshuffle)

"deck" should read "play deck" imo, otherwise it could also be your discard pile.

4) The King’s Hunting: Has Clean the Greenwood to be stored to be worth full MP?

5) Thrain: the artist's name should read Ted Nasmith

[Thorsten the Traveller]

thanks for the imput guys, always a great help.

@shifting paths. Yes that card has been toned down since its early stages, but still proves to be a menace evidently. Currently we made it environment, so it can be Twilighted. For normal companies it will not matter too much, but lone avatars (like Dragons, RW's) do suffer. Of course we can make a card for them. But perhaps the whole concept should be reconsidered, side-tracking is nice because it increases possible hazard plays, but it should not dominate the game.
We could also add "(deep)wilderness", to make clear that a deep wilderness region counts as 1 wilderness, just as it does for Radagast and his carddraw.

@Reconstructed Towers. Well according to Lord rules, Lords are considered FW-players. That does not mean they're Fallen-wizards (they are for hazards), but that part is a bit ambigous here, I'll fix that. But Lords cannot use stage versions of White Towers/Isengard at all. Not sure if I've formulated that clear enough, I'll check it.
Not sure which stage you think Cirdan should play on White Towers, if all versions are , he cannot Hidden Haven it...

edit: checked it, it's made unequivocally clear you cannot use The White Towers stage version.

@Bladorthin. We got it fixed, but either way, since no GI is given it is automatically 20, just like when your avatar is not in play, I assume.

@Clean the Greenwood. Yes, no store, no MP, so also no full MP. Still considering this one, but I think it's fair. Without storing it would be too strong.

@Thrain. Well we'd be lucky if we can use this artwork at all, since it seems to be untraceable. If you can find it, please send over.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

Added new poll, thanks for voting.
We have already trimmed down the Mordor in Ruins rules, but it remains a bit of a debate

There might be options to incorporate the Mordor in Ruins rules rather in 1 or a few cards
or let the rules affect only minions.
other ideas are always welcome.

[Bandobras Took]

I prefer a good hazard card or two to the Mordor In Ruins Rules, in all honesty. The DC hazards seem to have done a good job so far against truly boring squatter decks; I don't know that Mordor needs to be singled out specifically. I do, however, like the idea of the quest to Rebuild Mordor for minions, so I'm not sure how to reconcile the two.

[Jose-san]

Yeah, I like it thematically but it's a lot of new rules, maybe too many.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

that is indeed the problem we are struggling with, the rebuild mission is cool, but from this simple rule to make all sites in Gorgoroth/Udun , basically all the other rules follow.

Also we like the playability of Creature/Helm at Darkhavens, hoping that it makes active RW decks more likely, but of course it can also be just abused by squatters. The new duplicable Creature version (see ME: The Necromancer) is another way to go, we could similarly make something for Helm of Fear, but it seems like a detour, when you have these 2 cards in the game already.

[Vastor Peredhil]

Hi all,

so as the tourney is done we incorporated your feedback, which was very valuable to us, and commit the final versions for 90% of the cards of FB & DF sets

please update core & metw, and no worries both run fixed & stable at the moment

edit:! to connect now, right click on the surface window to reconnect to server, in case you do not read logs, or are just not smart enought to figure it out !

please let us know if we still missed something, or if the new changes make no sense, or very much sense for you guys

yours Nicolai & Eric

[Thorsten the Traveller]

Though of course, we are in constant mode of devopment (yet another good reason to print dcff, so we carve things into stone )
We'll keep making minor changes, as we check up on artists for their permission to use artowrk, or find backup artwork. Any help in this search is appreciated, we might publish a list for stuff we are still looking backups for.

Meanwhile, we have abolished the Mordor in Ruins rules, experiment tested and not found good enough. Not just for the votes in this poll, which unfortunately are few (I myself abstained), but it was already on the list for some time. Mordor in Ruins will be accomodated with a card in later expansions.

This means minions must go to B-dur again for One Ring victory. To further slow down minion One Ring a bit, we changed Prisoner from Ost-in-Edhil. Instead of giving a +2 to ring tests, he now lets you roll twice. This reduces the chances to get One Ring out by an average 10%, while it still helps testing for easier rings. Let us know what you think.

[Vastor Peredhil]

core is set, so collection is stable till christmas update

so update both folders and give feedback on the changes

[Shapeshifter]

Meanwhile, we have abolished the Mordor in Ruins rules, experiment tested and not found good enough. Not just for the votes in this poll, which unfortunately are few (I myself abstained), but it was already on the list for some time. Mordor in Ruins will be accomodated with a card in later expansions.

Somehow I missed the poll about the Mordor in Ruins rule. I think, however, that it was a good choice to abolish this rule. Especially destroying the One Ring in the Under-forges where you can play the Scroll of Isildur felt a bit weird.