Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Chamber of the Everchosen. We hope you enjoy your visit!


Here at COTEC we are all about the Warriors of Chaos in Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

Tactics to help you slaughter your opponent on the tabletop, through to galleries on how to build your next Warshrine. Its all covered... and growing!

We are a forum for gamers and hobbyist alike and again would like to welcome you to a fun, friendly, warm place and hope to see you again!


Join our legion! Takes less than a minute and gives you access to everything!


If you're already a member please log in to your account by entering the correct runes and words of power:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Fall of Kings Feedback
Topic Started: Feb 8 2007, 05:44 PM (357 Views)
Lightbringer
Member Avatar
Evil Wizards Inc.
I thought it would be nice to get some feedback on what was good an bad with the Fall of Kings. So please post in this thread if you have any oppinions, both good and bad. I have preppared a few questions but you don't need to stick to them if you find anything else to say.

And don't be afraid to come with negative critique, we need to find out what was bad if we are to make it better!


Questions:
Are mini-campaigns a nice idea or not?
What did you think of the story, and what did you think of the way it initially focused on non player characters?
What did you think of the fluff as the game developed?
What did you think of the system?
What did you think of having only two factions with no switching between them?
What did you think of the lenght of the game?
What did you think about having two updates a week? Too few or too many?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rogge_85
Member Avatar
Anti spammer
Hereīs my answwers:

1. It was very nice.
2. Story was quite good imo.
3. Sometimes it was great, sometimes not as interesting, on overall it was good though.
4. System seemed to work nice, but if one faction got behind in the first 2 updates, it seemed impossible to make any gains after that.
5. To little imo, I think it was ok with no switching, but I would like some more factions, to make the game a bit more random & tactical.
6. Lenght was perfect, not too long & not too short, kept you interested.
7. I think 2 updates a week was good.

Some other thought Iīve had, has been those of the Asrai, now donīt get me wrong, but this was supposed to be a Chaos campaign, with Chaos vs Chaos, but in the end it felt more like Elves against Chaos.
It was something I had looked forward to for a while, playing with the members of COTEC, trying to get the feeling back from LOA & such, but all of a sudden thereīs a dozen members one has never heard of before, all playing elves! New members is nice & all, but only if they stay & are active, not here to just be part of a campaign & try to change the fluff (unless invited). & where are all those Asrai members now, not seen them around for a while (except Narmo ofcourse)...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lightbringer
Member Avatar
Evil Wizards Inc.
Well then I am guessing you will really like what Acolite has planned :P
If that does not give back the LoA feeling, nothing will.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Narmo Eressea
Member Avatar
Aspirant to Anarīs favour.
Narmo goes on strike. We want information!. What do we want! I N F O R M A T I O N. Continues untill a policeman hits him

However: I hope in next campaign I can be a follower of Malal.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fingol
Member Avatar
The Chosen
All in all it was a great sytem, it allowed for us to basically do whatever we wanted within reason and the fluff was good enough to sate my selective taste ^_^ Plus it was fun to speculate on what could possibly be inside the Court.

Mini campaigns like this are always good, because even if things aren't going your way it's not as if you're wasting your time. I've read several places where people have felt pretty down when they've invested a lot of time and energy to a campaign but things seem to go down the pisser.

Quote:
 
but in the end it felt more like Elves against Chaos.


Really? IMO it felt more like Chaos vs. Pawns of Chaos. Myria had plenty of mercenaries that weren't specifically Chaotic, which fit with the fluff quite nicely. Plus with the woodies running around, more people who actually wanted to be on the King's side were able to get there instead of going for plan B. I get what you're saying, I just think having some random mercs show up was a good idea.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
snyggejygge
Member Avatar
High Zar of Khorne

Missed the end (canīt believe they got crushed that badly as soon as I left), but all in all I liked the campaign, the story was good enough, mechanics worked great, length was perfect etc etc.
I would like some more factions in the game 6 as rogge said, a bit more Chaos vs Chaos w. the COTEC guys rather than too many outsiders (not that I complain about that, more members are always good, letīs just hope they stay active)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lightbringer
Member Avatar
Evil Wizards Inc.
Well, then here are my views as GM, I thought they might interest some people.


Are mini-campaigns a nice idea or not?
Very nice, playing games with friends is never wrong!

What did you think of the story, and what did you think of the way it initially focused on non player characters?
I think the focus on Myria and other non player characters was a slight misstake. I would have liked to focus more on your actions as players, but I found that I needed to take alot more into consideration because I had NPCs as the main characters. On the other hand, the story as it was would not have worked any other way.

What did you think of the fluff as the game developed?
It was hard as hell to write. I am not cut out to write on demand like that, which unfortunatly made the later updates... well, late. Overall I am pleased with the result though, even if there is an update or two I am not very proud of.

What did you think of the system?
It worked rather well. I messed up and at the start didn't consider inactive players and such, but in the end it came together fine. I am still very pleased with the general idea of the system, I think it is fashinating that a system where both sides gets the same amount of points (I scaled your points to match) can end with one side winning by such a large margin. The Main Battle was still a bit pointless though... might have been better not to have the main battle as anything more than a score influence by the side battles.

What did you think of having only two factions with no switching between them?
As a test, fine. But I would not want to have more games with that setup.

What did you think of the lenght of the game?
What did you think about having two updates a week? Too few or too many?
I think the lenght and speed of the game got almost right. It slacked off a bit at the end so it might have done will with being something like two turns shorter. This was probably also an effect of the fact that the defenders where clearly loosing. That could have changed quickly if the attackers had made a misstake, but that far in the game both sides knew pretty well what to do so it became hard. (Not that the defenders and attackers both did not miss a good operunity or two, but that is easy for me to say since I had all the numbers).



So what have been learned? Well, there are seveal things which I know we can do better next time, and I have passed on those things to Acolite who will most likly be designing the next game. All in all, I think we can expect the next mini-campaign to be better than this one in just about every way thanks to the lessons learnt!

I am already looking forward to it. :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · News · Next Topic »
Add Reply