Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

Sign in to follow this  
Goblin-King

Wish list for season 2 - design and rules

Recommended Posts

With season 1 having come to it's conclusion with the release of the last two warbands, it's time to sit back and ponder the future.
We all have our favorite AoS races and units we'd each like to see become warbands in Warhammer Underworlds. This is not what this topic is about.
Rather, if you should send GW a letter with suggestions for improvements for the next wave, what would you ask of them?

My suggestions in no particular order:

  • Make the backside of activation tokens and glory point tokens notably different. Yes, they are different, but they are both dark grey.
  • Change the rule so the winner of the very first throw is the one to place a board. It changes nothing, but it's illogical that the winner gets to NOT do something first.
  • Release sleeves in bulk.
  • Make the front design of power cards and objective cards notably different. The slight change in hue is not enough. Different artwork for the border and bright gold for objectives.
  • Make it easier to get duplicates of cards without buying the entire warband several times. I really don't need three sets of orc models...
  • Make any new dice sets have defense dice in team colors. Bright red for attack and dark red for defense. How hard is that?
  • Please keep the Shadespire rules and general power level. I don't want some unique gimmick that makes all my old stuff unplayable.  
Edited by Goblin-King
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The player who wins the first rollof should choose who places the first boared. It gives some warbands the tactical advantage they desperately need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Qraith said:

The player who wins the first rollof should choose who places the first boared. It gives some warbands the tactical advantage they desperately need.

It still comes down to a 50/50 chance of getting your way though, so dice deciding who goes first or who decides is pretty much the same.
But rolling for who gets to decide would be more in line with all the other rolls where the winner gets to chose who places a fighter first or who gets first turn.

I could go for either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Variety of figures/themes is top of my wish list.  It seems we're getting a 3rd Stormcast warband which already feels like they've overdone them since the Farstriders were just released.  I wouldn't mind a 2nd warband for most factions but really hope we see more new things.  Also more female sculpts would be good, especially if they're not in chain mail bikinis.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know some friends that aren't already into Shadespire because there's no warband matching their old whfb armies... So I guess I'd really like to see lizardmen, elven and/or kharadron warbands.

I would also like to see more organised play kits, and that they kepts every Shadespire warband compatible with season 2, even if generic cards are not allowed.

Edited by Chetote
Typo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Daveman said:

Also more female sculpts would be good, especially if they're not in chain mail bikinis.

This! And ESPECIALLY if they are in chain mail bikinis.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worry they will add a magic round at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I hope they give it a good six months before releasing the new warhammer underworlds. I'm enjoying the game so much right now and I only have 4 warbands!

But in terms of future wishlisting, I would love to see: 

A Gryph-Hound and Castellant

Tzaangors (even though painting them is such a dingus)

Nurglings and a nurgle sorceror 

Beastmen 

Wanderers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a friendly heads up...
Nothing wrong with wishing for particular warbands, but there's already a thread dedicated to that:

This thread was intended for suggestions to improve the core of the gameplay and it's components.
Which design or rule changes would you guys wish for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/04/2018 at 8:44 AM, Qraith said:

The player who wins the first rollof should choose who places the first boared. It gives some warbands the tactical advantage they desperately need.

This I really like, gives you a benefit to winning and then a choice, do you want the three objectives or to position the boards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/04/2018 at 9:27 AM, Goblin-King said:
  • Change the rule so the winner of the very first throw is the one to place a board. It changes nothing, but it's illogical that the winner gets to NOT do something first.

Hello!

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, or the rules are badly translated, but placing the board first is a disadvantage, and should go to the loser of the first throw don't you think? the winner of the throw forces the loser to act if i get it right

If we're doing it right we do it as follows :

loser of roll chooses a board, places it, and the winner then places another board on any of the 4 sides.

to mitigate previous disadvantage, loser of roll has 3 objectives to place and winner is left with two.

Winner has terrain placement advantage, loser has objective placement.

 

am i correct?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´d love to see a revised rulebook with timing charts. including all the FAQ relevant points. please fill the rule gaps.

as fun as the game is, that point is totally unnecessary and shouldn´t be an issue in the second season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bobal said:

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, or the rules are badly translated, but placing the board first is a disadvantage, and should go to the loser of the first throw don't you think? the winner of the throw forces the loser to act if i get it right

If we're doing it right we do it as follows :

loser of roll chooses a board, places it, and the winner then places another board on any of the 4 sides.

to mitigate previous disadvantage, loser of roll has 3 objectives to place and winner is left with two.

Winner has terrain placement advantage, loser has objective placement.

Yes, loser of the first roll places the first board, then the winner gets to place his board however he wants, giving him a possible advantage.
Then the loser places 3 objectives while the winner only places 2.

The thing is, neither winning or losing is per definition an advantage. 
Having played objective SG for a long time "winning" the roll felt like losing because I couldn't get 3 objective markers.

But literally ALL new players gets confused over this backwards rule. In basically all other games it's "highest roll goes first".
Right now it's just a random generator. You could as easily just flip a coin. Saying loser goes first or winner goes first doesn't change a thing.
But winner goes first just makes more sense (to my brain at least...). Or winner decides. Both are better.

I'm even more inclined to root for "winner decides".  Your chances of getting things your way is in principle still 50/50.
But once in a while you get a matchup where both players want the same setup. Orcs vs Skellies. Orcs wants board placement and skellies want 3 objectives.
In that case the chance of getting things your way goes to 100% because both players agree. I really can't see anything negative about this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proper timing overview would certainly be appreciated. Other games I’ve played have had very detailed (without being obtuse) diagrams in the rulebook, which Shadespire lacks.

Love the game though, and wouldn’t suggest any major changes - expanding what we’ve got and tightening things up (wordings etc) should be the way forward rather than totally changing things in any way that invalidates current releases 🙂

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a more complete glossary and consistent use of terms on cards, plus formatting that applies to all rules on all cards.

Two examples are "choose" being defined as a game term after the fact by the FAQ and the one Gorefist having two rules separated by only a line break and no actual bolded text.

That should not happen.

 

Also, use a word other than "Characteristic" to define the bonus to stats given by power cards.

Edited by Sleboda
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest two things.

Firstly replace the roll offs with a D6, I have done this and it saves a huge amount of time. Just keep the one roll needed for first turn with the Shadespire Dice.

Secondly add some rules for shuffling and drawing cards. Basically you shuffle your Objective Deck and Power Deck at the start. Your opponent then cuts your decks, after that you can not shuffle your deck again for the rest of the  game, you can only draw the cards you need from the top. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rodiger said:

Firstly replace the roll offs with a D6, I have done this and it saves a huge amount of time. Just keep the one roll needed for first turn with the Shadespire Dice.

Do you play with the tiers of success for roll offs? Most crits win - If equal, most single support win - If still equal, most double support win - If STILL equal, re-roll. 
Since we started doing this, we hardly ever need to re-roll. Not any more than if we rolled a regular die.

4 hours ago, Rodiger said:

Secondly add some rules for shuffling and drawing cards. Basically you shuffle your Objective Deck and Power Deck at the start. Your opponent then cuts your decks, after that you can not shuffle your deck again for the rest of the  game, you can only draw the cards you need from the top. 

Yeeeees...?
Is this not how it's played? Or are you implying you have been up against players who randomly shuffle their cards mid-game and/or pull cards out from the middle of the deck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Goblin-King said:

Do you play with the tiers of success for roll offs? Most crits win - If equal, most single support win - If still equal, most double support win - If STILL equal, re-roll. 
Since we started doing this, we hardly ever need to re-roll. Not any more than if we rolled a regular die.

Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant at the start for setting up, and deciding who goes first, not for combat. There are a lot of times when both players don't roll any crits on 4 dice and it just takes many rolls with a lot of dice, for something that could be very simple.

2 hours ago, Goblin-King said:

Yeeeees...?
Is this not how it's played? Or are you implying you have been up against players who randomly shuffle their cards mid-game and/or pull cards out from the middle of the deck?

I have only played friendly games and it has not been an issue because of who a play with, it is just there was nothing in the rules about this ( that I could see) and for a game that is so much about card play, it should have some guide lines about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Rodiger said:

Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant at the start for setting up, and deciding who goes first, not for combat. There are a lot of times when both players don't roll any crits on 4 dice and it just takes many rolls with a lot of dice, for something that could be very simple.

I wasn't talking about combat either. Roll-offs are when both players roll 4 dice to decide who goes first or gets to decide something.
1st version of the rules just makes you re-roll if you have the same amount of crits. The updated rulebook pdf makes you look at most single support and then double support in case of a tie. Only if you tie in both crit, single and double do you re-roll.

As for card rules, I guess it can't harm to make the rules idiot-proof in case someone insists to be super weird. But honestly I kinda think it's a non-issue.  I would die from shock if I saw someone draw cards from the middle of the deck! xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Goblin-King said:

I wasn't talking about combat either. Roll-offs are when both players roll 4 dice to decide who goes first or gets to decide something.
1st version of the rules just makes you re-roll if you have the same amount of crits. The updated rulebook pdf makes you look at most single support and then double support in case of a tie. Only if you tie in both crit, single and double do you re-roll.

I wasn't aware there was an updated rulebook pdf, I will have to read that.  With regard to the cards, it is pretty easy to fix a deck even while shuffling them, a cut and not touching them again just eliminates that, as there is nothing in the rulebook anything is a house rule at the moment. As I said it is not an issue for me, but it is something that should be in a rulebook. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the next set, I hope they keep the same dice in the core set. The core black/white dice are so much nicer then any of the warband specific dice and I really want another set of them, but dont want to buy a duplicate core just for it :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2018 at 11:45 AM, Sim said:

I worry they will add a magic round at some point.

I doubt they'll add a magic round. More likely they'll add "spells" in the power deck tied to certain fighters. The more powerful ones perhaps being ploys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2018 at 10:35 AM, Goblin-King said:

Yes, loser of the first roll places the first board, then the winner gets to place his board however he wants, giving him a possible advantage.
Then the loser places 3 objectives while the winner only places 2.

The thing is, neither winning or losing is per definition an advantage. 
Having played objective SG for a long time "winning" the roll felt like losing because I couldn't get 3 objective markers.

But literally ALL new players gets confused over this backwards rule. In basically all other games it's "highest roll goes first".
Right now it's just a random generator. You could as easily just flip a coin. Saying loser goes first or winner goes first doesn't change a thing.
But winner goes first just makes more sense (to my brain at least...). Or winner decides. Both are better.

I'm even more inclined to root for "winner decides".  Your chances of getting things your way is in principle still 50/50.
But once in a while you get a matchup where both players want the same setup. Orcs vs Skellies. Orcs wants board placement and skellies want 3 objectives.
In that case the chance of getting things your way goes to 100% because both players agree. I really can't see anything negative about this!

 

Completely agree about the first roll-off!

It bothered me when the game first was released as much as it still does that the first roll-off is fixed but all the other roll-off's are "winner decides".

For simplicity and consistency, it should be "winner decided" in all roll-offs, even if the end result is still the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thought I've had several times... When playing best of 3 the idea is that you can bounce back from an unlucky roll or draws or whatever.
However several warbands run strategies that are really dependent on winning or losing the first roll. Needing 3 objectives, needing a specific board setup etc... 

1st game -  Roll off for who decides the setup order.

2nd game - The player who didn't get to decide the first game decides this one.

3rd game - Roll off for who decides the setup order.
 

That way you are guaranteed to at least have one game setup the way you want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×