Competitive viability and longevity of Warhammer Underworlds

[Mr. White]

One of the issues we face is that with my son and I playing, we're building from the same card pool. So, if he has a certain ploy card in his deck, I don't/can't have it in mine. This is where maybe some card only purchases would be nice. We're not likely to buy two copies of each warband just so we both have access to the same cards. I guess it's just a constraint we'll have to learn to live under.

I just hope that when (big if) I ever go to a formal tourney I can still be competitive so long as a I have a solid strategy and good play.

[Attackmack]

32 minutes ago, Mr. White said:

One of the issues we face is that with my son and I playing, we're building from the same card pool. So, if he has a certain ploy card in his deck, I don't/can't have it in mine. This is where maybe some card only purchases would be nice. We're not likely to buy two copies of each warband just so we both have access to the same cards. I guess it's just a constraint we'll have to learn to live under.

I just hope that when (big if) I ever go to a formal tourney I can still be competitive so long as a I have a solid strategy and good play.

If youre going to a tournament surely you can build one deck for that event using all the available cards!

And if your building two decks that means you and your son are going to a Shadespire tournament together and in my book that means youve already won  

So dont sweat it and just enjoy it!

[Kugane]

Perhaps setting up a secondary market for single cards would be viable in the future once the meta cools down a bit and more decks become available for purchase. I assume that could benefit lots of people, plus earn some money for resellers. 1$ per card + shipping for example.

I think GW will release lots of sets to add variety to the game regardless. Really looking forward to Skaven xD.

[CodFather]

After another 15 games under my belt since my initial post, the biggest issue I'm having is the games emphasis on luck, particularly the dice.  I want to again preface this with stating that I do really enjoy this game, and really want it to succeed. 

Now I know this is a dice game, and that there should be elements of luck. Absolutely, I have no issue with that. My issue is with the high level of variance the dice mechanics of this game presents.  The best base dice pool in this game is 3 hammers (a few ploy cards modify this, I know), which have an 87. 5% chance if rolling one success. That's for the most part, the best odds, and it only gets worse from there:

2 hammers : 75%

3 swords : 70%

2 swords: 56%

 

This in itself isn' nnecessarily a problem, but when combined with the fact a game only has 12 actions, and the big swings that even a single successful attack can attribute to the outcome of the game, it just makes the game feel very luck dependant. Not to mention the cards that have a model live through a killing blow on a 50% chance, or steal a glory on a 50% chance, etc.

 

Having a large variance or a large luck factor isn't a bad thing in a game. In fact the variance in this game is often kinda fun and exciting. Which is great, particulary if the game is meant to be a fun, casual, "beer and pretzels" game which most of other gw products are. However this game is billed as a highly competitive game. And to me, if a game is supposed to have high levels of competition, there should be much more emphasis on player skill, instead to luck.   Killax talks of the game having 70-30 skill-luck split, that's a ton of reliance on luck, and the might even be a conservative estimate, the skill-luck split might be closer to 60-40.

What do you guys think? 

 

I don't mean for this to be all doom and gloom, the game is fun, fast and much easier to find opponents than my regular game of guildall.   So far gw seems to be supporting this game well with tournament support and planned expansions. It's also possible that with more expansions you'll be able to better tailor your warband to be focused to the play style you wish to pursue and that might add more skill into the game (albeit strategic skill, not tactical) 

[Kugane]

57 minutes ago, CodFather said:

After another 15 games under my belt since my initial post, the biggest issue I'm having is the games emphasis on luck, particularly the dice.  I want to again preface this with stating that I do really enjoy this game, and really want it to succeed. 

Now I know this is a dice game, and that there should be elements of luck. Absolutely, I have no issue with that. My issue is with the high level of variance the dice mechanics of this game presents.  The best base dice pool in this game is 3 hammers (a few ploy cards modify this, I know), which have an 87. 5% chance if rolling one success. That's for the most part, the best odds, and it only gets worse from there:

2 hammers : 75%

3 swords : 70%

2 swords: 56%

 

This in itself isn' nnecessarily a problem, but when combined with the fact a game only has 12 actions, and the big swings that even a single successful attack can attribute to the outcome of the game, it just makes the game feel very luck dependant. Not to mention the cards that have a model live through a killing blow on a 50% chance, or steal a glory on a 50% chance, etc.

 

Having a large variance or a large luck factor isn't a bad thing in a game. In fact the variance in this game is often kinda fun and exciting. Which is great, particulary if the game is meant to be a fun, casual, "beer and pretzels" game which most of other gw products are. However this game is billed as a highly competitive game. And to me, if a game is supposed to have high levels of competition, there should be much more emphasis on player skill, instead to luck.   Killax talks of the game having 70-30 skill-luck split, that's a ton of reliance on luck, and the might even be a conservative estimate, the skill-luck split might be closer to 60-40.

What do you guys think? 

 

I don't mean for this to be all doom and gloom, the game is fun, fast and much easier to find opponents than my regular game of guildall.   So far gw seems to be supporting this game well with tournament support and planned expansions. It's also possible that with more expansions you'll be able to better tailor your warband to be focused to the play style you wish to pursue and that might add more skill into the game (albeit strategic skill, not tactical) 

I think in the long run this can be fixed by adding tech cards that increase probabilities. Right now it is kind of hard to commit to a strategy, because it is likely to fail. I think the luck factor may be good for the game state for now though, because it even unexperienced players can win some games, even without playing super tactical or having a super constructed deck. I wish other games had that flexibility haha.

[Wallack]

I use opaque sleeves so at home I have a copy of the neutral cards from the expansions printed in normal paper and I just slide them in the sleeve with a card that I'm not going to use so I have copies at home to make two decks with the same available cards.

However I don't think this is pay to win. Is true that there are some cards that are good for some decks, some that are good for all the decks but how many are those? I mean, with the starter set only you can make a really competitive deck. And even if an expansion comes with a really good card remember that is 1 card in 20 (or 12 if objective) you need to draw it and you need to play it. The impact of a good (or OP) card is much lower in this game than in a different game.

If we were talking about a card that lets replace one of your fighters with one that had, for example, 1 more wound and deal 1 more damage, that would be totally OP and pay to win because you are getting a big advantage since the start but in my book this game is not pay to win is pay to play with all the possibilities.

Also, you can sell the models from any expansion for like 15 euro so you can basically have all the options for the cheap.

It would be better if GW sold the cards directly? Of course but they are selling expansions really cheap and they aren't going against themselves.

I honestly think we cannot complain here if you look at the other games/companies.

[Goblin-King]

Actually, with that few cards I'd say 1/20 or even worse 1/12 cards is a big impact.
But of course this all depends on what each of us considers a big impact :-)

[Killax]

11 hours ago, CodFather said:

After another 15 games under my belt since my initial post, the biggest issue I'm having is the games emphasis on luck, particularly the dice.  I want to again preface this with stating that I do really enjoy this game, and really want it to succeed. 

Now I know this is a dice game, and that there should be elements of luck. Absolutely, I have no issue with that. My issue is with the high level of variance the dice mechanics of this game presents.  The best base dice pool in this game is 3 hammers (a few ploy cards modify this, I know), which have an 87. 5% chance if rolling one success. That's for the most part, the best odds, and it only gets worse from there:

2 hammers : 75%

3 swords : 70%

2 swords: 56%

 

This in itself isn' nnecessarily a problem, but when combined with the fact a game only has 12 actions, and the big swings that even a single successful attack can attribute to the outcome of the game, it just makes the game feel very luck dependant. Not to mention the cards that have a model live through a killing blow on a 50% chance, or steal a glory on a 50% chance, etc.

 

Having a large variance or a large luck factor isn't a bad thing in a game. In fact the variance in this game is often kinda fun and exciting. Which is great, particulary if the game is meant to be a fun, casual, "beer and pretzels" game which most of other gw products are. However this game is billed as a highly competitive game. And to me, if a game is supposed to have high levels of competition, there should be much more emphasis on player skill, instead to luck.   Killax talks of the game having 70-30 skill-luck split, that's a ton of reliance on luck, and the might even be a conservative estimate, the skill-luck split might be closer to 60-40.

What do you guys think? 

 

I don't mean for this to be all doom and gloom, the game is fun, fast and much easier to find opponents than my regular game of guildall.   So far gw seems to be supporting this game well with tournament support and planned expansions. It's also possible that with more expansions you'll be able to better tailor your warband to be focused to the play style you wish to pursue and that might add more skill into the game (albeit strategic skill, not tactical) 

When we look into the game there are couple of things that you seem to see but dismiss in the percentage calculation. Just to name a few pointers and not to disrespect your opinions at all:
1. There arn't "a few" Ploys who alter the dice, there are a metric ton of them. Some just do it more directly as others. Most of the Upgrades also alter attacks (Daemonic Weapon, Shardglass Sword, Shardglass Darts etc.) or dice outcome (Helpful Whispers, Great Stength, Soultrap, Great Fortitude etc.). The indirect alterations force you to roll better or more specific to stay in the game, this is true, but there are also many effects that allow you to cause automatical damage on regular successes, you just have to use this to your advantage. Shardfall and model placement for example allows you to stop a Drive back from occuring which leads to automatical damage. This effect is even better at range 2+ weapons because it's much easier to circumvent a Drive back from occuring.
2. There arn't 12 Actions. There are 12 Activations. When we look at the many Ploys and Upgrades again we see several (the best) of them allowing you to preform another Action (Kunnin' but Brutal and many many more) or cause effects who have the same outcome as Actions (Sidestep, Distraction, Confusion, automatical damage etc.). Pushing and Moving is largely the same, it forces your opponent to ever so likely more have to charge. However even a Charge isn't one Action if you think about it  
3. The aspect of luck decreases the more games you've played. With roughly 50 games under my belt now I can assure you being aware of tactical options for your opponent without seeing his cards is the dealbreaker for this game. It means that you know the Objective pool your opponent possible has, it means you want to Move a guy on your opponents territory in the third round in order to possibly stop Denial and Containment from being scored at all. These are tactical choices and prevent losses. No dice involved.
4. Lastly, the card pool brought isn't very random. With this I mean that discarding an opening hand for Power or Objective cards means you will see the rest if you want to, no Activation or Action phase Objective scoring required. Because of the automatic hand refill it means aspects of luck are only marganally around. We arn't working with 60 cards or even close to that which is only "used up half". You see what you want to see, this is a choice for all Power cards and Objective cards. The Third phase can be played with no cards in either deck left. There are scenario's, especially when you are ahead, where you want to enforce this because it's a card-security.

For me there is only luck involved in the following:
- See who picks the board first.
- See who deploys first.
- See who starts each round first. 
Any attack dice can be filtered to an extremely high succes rate but doing so requires good play (tactics).  It's true that not all damage accumulates to an automatic death but I can't say I have lost games on dice, it just means I have either made a mistake in my Activation, Power card played or Objective card kept.

Play more and I hope you too see the tactical depth you described above is largely incorrect. Again I say this with all respect to you.

[Biboune]

Hi,

I think that a potential trouble for this game in his competitive viability, in the near future, is the problem with the cards 1/ balance 2/ wording.

For exemple: time trap, i have read the topic on this forum dealing about it, and i think that such a discussion about the meaning of its text is a bad point. More over, i think that the conclusion is wrong: the card means that a fighter can make an action: point (then skip etc...). Doesn't matter if they charged or done anything else.

I think that the card is so powerfull that people think the wording is bad, and they think that the wording is bad because other cards have been badly written.

The only other "card game" i have played is Magic, and i don't remember trying to figure out what a card meant.  Magic has about the editions that you can play depending of the tournament, for exemple; but only 2 extensions of shadespire are out and we may already have trouble with overpowered cards?

 

We have to wait the whole set of bands and cards to be released before stating. I just wonder if Gw thought about deck+band combo/style or just about 400 cards, good one, bad ones without thinking about how they fit together and with the bands.

 

(I hope my english is getting better, in other cas; sorry if it makes your eyes bleed)

[Wallack]

46 minutes ago, Biboune said:

Hi,

I think that a potential trouble for this game in his competitive viability, in the near future, is the problem with the cards 1/ balance 2/ wording.

For exemple: time trap, i have read the topic on this forum dealing about it, and i think that such a discussion about the meaning of its text is a bad point. More over, i think that the conclusion is wrong: the card means that a fighter can make an action: point (then skip etc...). Doesn't matter if they charged or done anything else.

I think that the card is so powerfull that people think the wording is bad, and they think that the wording is bad because other cards have been badly written.

The only other "card game" i have played is Magic, and i don't remember trying to figure out what a card meant.  Magic has about the editions that you can play depending of the tournament, for exemple; but only 2 extensions of shadespire are out and we may already have trouble with overpowered cards?

 

We have to wait the whole set of bands and cards to be released before stating. I just wonder if Gw thought about deck+band combo/style or just about 400 cards, good one, bad ones without thinking about how they fit together and with the bands.

 

(I hope my english is getting better, in other cas; sorry if it makes your eyes bleed)

Time trap is a good card. Is not OP as it doesn't give you an extra turn it just swap the turns. It doesn't skip your opponent's turn just swap them so the advantage of this card is the initiative you get as you get the two actions in a row BEFORE your opponent but he will get those as well. However if you use it to finish an enemy you get a really nice advantage.

However if you think the conclusion is wrong (objectively speaking there are few things to discuss about the card as is not as bad written as people think) go to the post and please talk about it, I created the post exactly for that reason, to discuss it.

[Killax]

I also only think it speaks to the longevity that Games Workshop bothered to create a Facebook page for Warhammer Underworlds too that gives you awnsers to your questions directly. The moment they cannot be awnsered due to being design questions they are bound to show up in the first following FAQ. The fact that the first FAQ is allready out also shows that Games Workshop does care about it.
There are indeed a handful of cards who's intend can be a bit unclear. Other than that though I do feel common sence and legal play usually is enforced to the maximum with this game. So I see no reason why Time Trap would suddenly break that rule while other Ploys, Upgrades and Objectives still work with the same limitations as the book states despite not being on the card.

Time Trap, the way it's worded is in many cases not any different from the score immediatly Objective rule that is attached to a freshly drawn Objective. The score immediatly in that case cannot be scored immediatly despite the card still stating as such and this is because the Rulesbook clarifies it as such. 
- In the case of Time Trap, just because you recieve an additional Action does not mean you can therefor ignore all limitations put on Actions (any). The make additional Attack Action cards also do not allow you to attack friendly fighters or out of range despite not stating it.

Rules come first, what page 23 clarifies is that you can ignore limitations in certain cases if it specifically states as such. Then it gives an example that is there to clarify that an Activation and Action are not the same, in addition the book limits Move actions and covers that proces over four times. There is nothing on Time Trap that allows you to make Actions that you otherwise couldn't do. Not being able to Activate is also not the same as not being able to preform an Action. A model who charged for example can still make Attack actions. 

[Biboune]

I don't agree with you and that is not the matter.

If a card say  "attack with a fighter" as fulled by blood, we can attack with a fighter  who chargered as it s said in p23. I think that "lead by exemple" orruk card specify that you charge with another model, if they did not moved of charged (i would need to check)... Nothing like that in time trap: you charged and you can charge angain.

The card say "choose a fighter, they can take an action" and not "you have another activation".

I said "it is not he matter" because that card is not the point: the fact that we agree shows that there is a problem/issue.

[Sleboda]

6 hours ago, Killax said:

. The aspect of luck decreases the more games you've played. With roughly 50 games under my belt now I can assure you being aware of tactical options for your opponent without seeing his cards is the dealbreaker for this game. It means that you know the Objective pool your opponent possible has, it means you want to Move a guy on your opponents territory in the third round in order to possibly stop Denial and Containment from being scored at all. These are tactical choices and prevent losses. No dice involved.

 This is the biggest one. Experience, and thus knowledge, will let you offset luck in a huge way.  Understanding the potential objective cards and your opposition's likely use of them will significantly influence the outcome of the game.

[Kugane]

8 hours ago, Killax said:

When we look into the game there are couple of things that you seem to see but dismiss in the percentage calculation. Just to name a few pointers and not to disrespect your opinions at all:
1. There arn't "a few" Ploys who alter the dice, there are a metric ton of them. Some just do it more directly as others. Most of the Upgrades also alter attacks (Daemonic Weapon, Shardglass Sword, Shardglass Darts etc.) or dice outcome (Helpful Whispers, Great Stength, Soultrap, Great Fortitude etc.). The indirect alterations force you to roll better or more specific to stay in the game, this is true, but there are also many effects that allow you to cause automatical damage on regular successes, you just have to use this to your advantage. Shardfall and model placement for example allows you to stop a Drive back from occuring which leads to automatical damage. This effect is even better at range 2+ weapons because it's much easier to circumvent a Drive back from occuring.
2. There arn't 12 Actions. There are 12 Activations. When we look at the many Ploys and Upgrades again we see several (the best) of them allowing you to preform another Action (Kunnin' but Brutal and many many more) or cause effects who have the same outcome as Actions (Sidestep, Distraction, Confusion, automatical damage etc.). Pushing and Moving is largely the same, it forces your opponent to ever so likely more have to charge. However even a Charge isn't one Action if you think about it  
3. The aspect of luck decreases the more games you've played. With roughly 50 games under my belt now I can assure you being aware of tactical options for your opponent without seeing his cards is the dealbreaker for this game. It means that you know the Objective pool your opponent possible has, it means you want to Move a guy on your opponents territory in the third round in order to possibly stop Denial and Containment from being scored at all. These are tactical choices and prevent losses. No dice involved.
4. Lastly, the card pool brought isn't very random. With this I mean that discarding an opening hand for Power or Objective cards means you will see the rest if you want to, no Activation or Action phase Objective scoring required. Because of the automatic hand refill it means aspects of luck are only marganally around. We arn't working with 60 cards or even close to that which is only "used up half". You see what you want to see, this is a choice for all Power cards and Objective cards. The Third phase can be played with no cards in either deck left. There are scenario's, especially when you are ahead, where you want to enforce this because it's a card-security.

For me there is only luck involved in the following:
- See who picks the board first.
- See who deploys first.
- See who starts each round first. 
Any attack dice can be filtered to an extremely high succes rate but doing so requires good play (tactics).  It's true that not all damage accumulates to an automatic death but I can't say I have lost games on dice, it just means I have either made a mistake in my Activation, Power card played or Objective card kept.

Play more and I hope you too see the tactical depth you described above is largely incorrect. Again I say this with all respect to you.

We should vote you as the Shadespire Emperor on this forum! The stuff you have posted up until now is great!

[Killax]

1 hour ago, Kugane said:

We should vote you as the Shadespire Emperor on this forum! The stuff you have posted up until now is great!

Way too much credit, its just that I really like Shadespire and am blessed with a group of friends who share the same enthusiasm for Wargames. While Shadespire is different most of the group is very familiar with Skirmish games too and my friend who isnt too lucky with dice rolls in other games is the same who owned the local store after his first four games. I personally dont think this is a coincidence, by comparison many skirmish games and wargames are more luck based. Tactics are involved to some degree but more in the build aspects. For WU you can pick your Ploys, Objectives and Upgrades in conjunction to each other, but due to relative small deck sizes a large part falls on seeing Objectives as the main goal and use Activations to archieve them. They are not always combat or objective token based but much more board control and thinking steps ahead for your opponent.

 

[Kugane]

5 minutes ago, Killax said:

Way too much credit, its just that I really like Shadespire and am blessed with a group of friends who share the same enthusiasm for Wargames. While Shadespire is different most of the group is very familiar with Skirmish games too and my friend who isnt too lucky with dice rolls in other games is the same who owned the local store after his first four games. I personally dont think this is a coincidence, by comparison many skirmish games and wargames are more luck based. Tactics are involved to some degree but more in the build aspects. For WU you can pick your Ploys, Objectives and Upgrades in conjunction to each other, but due to relative small deck sizes a large part falls on seeing Objectives as the main goal and use Activations to archieve them. They are not always combat or objective token based but much more board control and thinking steps ahead for your opponent.

 

That sounds great!   I'm hoping I can find a semi competitive group to play with over here as well. I've been trying to find a group to play AOS with for 2 years now and only found 1 person. Perhaps it'll be easier to people on the Shadespire fence! It takes up far less space and painting time then other games after all, and I really love how accesible it is in terms of getting your deck together. With 80 euro you pretty much got everything there is to have.

[Killax]

2 minutes ago, Kugane said:

That sounds great!   I'm hoping I can find a semi competitive group to play with over here as well. I've been trying to find a group to play AOS with for 2 years now and only found 1 person. Perhaps it'll be easier to people on the Shadespire fence! It takes up far less space and painting time then other games after all, and I really love how accesible it is in terms of getting your deck together. With 80 euro you pretty much got everything there is to have.

I think so too! If you have a GW around I think your bound to find interested players.

The biggest advantage of WU is the size and time it thakes up, its just excellent. In addition due to competative and great card design the game also really makes it clear that everybody should play as they want to.

In that example Im very happy with the massive ammount of Universal cards as it keeps decks very unpredictable. One player loves their Forceful Denials and Robberies while the other banks on fighter survival.

Also check Facebook groups or even consider a second Core set so you can have some 4 player play at home. 

Cheers,

[Kugane]

1 minute ago, Killax said:

I think so too! If you have a GW around I think your bound to find interested players.

The biggest advantage of WU is the size and time it thakes up, its just excellent. In addition due to competative and great card design the game also really makes it clear that everybody should play as they want to.

In that example Im very happy with the massive ammount of Universal cards as it keeps decks very unpredictable. One player loves their Forceful Denials and Robberies while the other banks on fighter survival.

Also check Facebook groups or even consider a second Core set so you can have some 4 player play at home. 

Cheers,

Thank you! I certainly will. I found a group about 80km away from here, so thats probably an option to go to!  As for now, I'll play at home with my gf until I find more people to play with.

[Tailessine]

Just to add, i think a little bit of luck is good in a game; otherwise it can turn too much like a euro-boardgame which potentially can be 'solved' meaning a new player would never have any possibility of a win. At least in Shadespire the moderate amount of luck means the winner is not certain, and your plans need to keep changing and adapting. There is definitely more skill than in the main 40k/AOS games, where the rules often turn meaningful decisions into a dice roll.

[Goblin-King]

Luck vs Skill - American vs Euro...

It's a hard thing to balance. I agree with Tailessine that a certain amount of luck is good - or at least acceptable.
Though after a round of setting up ploys and upgrades and charging that ONE fighter with your four fighters - and all you see are missed hits and crit saves... it's a little hard to fully appreciate the randomness. Lesson learned? Always assume the dice are gonna ****** you over? Every attack is a gamble and don't do it unless you get some secondary benefit like positioning, blocking or intimidation? 

But while situations like that are extremely frustrating, I observe my "new to the game" opponents have a good time seeing a series of moves (that would basically have won me the game) fail to randomness.

I quess the big question is: In such a short game where every action counts - is the randomness of dice sustainable for tournaments?

[Killax]

What is more random as dice though is players not following their own Objective hand as the set of moves for that phase. For whatever reason many player urge to reach combat. Its even on the forums and reviews. Hold Objective cards are randomly cut, people don't gravitate to Shardfall from the getgo etc.

To me the mayority of Warband fighters is not random.

You know the potential move outcome and I often settle for a push as a required result. As before let your Objective hand lead you. In addition treating Objectives and Power cards as seperate hands is the easiest way to mess up and get a random loss because the moveset applied by the player was too random. After deployment, judge your potential. Combat doesnt make up the win, its there to secure your Objectives.

WU is also very different from AoS or Wargames in general because Glory wins you the game and most Glory is actually not obtained by only killing but playing to your cards.

In addition I have to admit, understanding the playstyle of a Warband can be hard to understand and there even is a room for alteration for each Warband style though occupying that room isnt always smart. E.g. Reavers for me work best Aggressively Objective based. Sepulchral Guard Defensively Objective based. Champions Defensively Melee based and Boyz Aggressively Melee based. What this implies is that you work towards a deckplan and stick to it. Go aggressively melee if you have ploys and Objectives who support that. Don't play like that if you don't.

[Wallack]

In a turn game there is always a luck aspect. Can be as low as the 50% of the who goes first or as high as only rolling dice for everything.

I would say this game is 70% skill 30% luck 100% power of will or whatever the song said.

You can win a game playing bad only with luck, but you won't win a tournament.

[Rintrah56]

12 hours ago, Killax said:

What is more random as dice though is players not following their own Objective hand as the set of moves for that phase.

 

This is an interesting one, a bit like how playing poker against people who have no idea what they’re doing can be very tricky as it makes it difficult to plan/predict/forecast - they just don’t do what you’d expect them to logically do!

 

[muggins]

Not a lot to add to the topic that hasn't been said, other than while Shadespire has not taken off in my area (I can drive an hour to play), AdeptiCon is full at 124 players, which is amazing. 

The key to how well this game does is how well gw keeps hyping it. Radio silence like they do for 40k/AoS won't work. 

[CodFather]

It does bode well that they've dropped monthly errata's and FAQs since its release.