Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
I find it surprising that there is even going to be a solo mode.

Jake Thorton is one of the design leads, who was absolutely disinterested in doing any sort of solo rules when he was working on Dungeon Saga, a game that many were clamoring to have solo/ co-op rules from the very beginning.

Since this game is full co-op, adding solo mode should not be that hard.

In fact the game will contain: 2-4 player co-op, solo mode (play 1-4 virtues alone), solo mode (play 1 Super virtue Providence) and 1 VS 1-4 players (Darkness vs. Virtues mode)

Really seams like I'm beating a dead horse at this point but I'm fascinated by this project since I can't remember the last time one had such a consistent bleed of people but still had the total going up every day.

The continuous loss of backers shows that there's a good number of people that don't think there's much value in this KSer, either because of the gameplay or what's provided in the core pledge. Eventually something will give, amount of backers leaving will stop being more then new ones or the current backers won't have more money to give for the flashy add ons.

Pacific Rim did similar (but didn't start bleeding backers quite so fast) http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1428582690/pacific-rim-extinction/#chart-daily

 Monkeysloth wrote:
Really seams like I'm beating a dead horse at this point but I'm fascinated by this project since I can't remember the last time one had such a consistent bleed of people but still had the total going up every day.

The continuous loss of backers shows that there's a good number of people that don't think there's much value in this KSer, either because of the gameplay or what's provided in the core pledge. Eventually something will give, amount of backers leaving will stop being more then new ones or the current backers won't have more money to give for the flashy add ons.

I'm fascinated for the same reasons!

I guess if they have 5-6 big $50 add-ons up their sleeves they will be fine since they can release one every couple of days to keep the funding climbing. It sure seems like they plan to just stay the course and keep bleeding backers. I guess from their standpoint fewer backers with a higher average pledge may make the logistics easier. I think they are down something like 250-300 backers net since the beginning of the campaign, but in another 2-3 days they will unlock the next stretch goal... For more cards!

You are saying that SG for more cards is bad?

The game system runs on those cards. So more cards SG makes sense if you actually plan to play the game.

(By "you" I mean anybody who is backing the game, not you personally)

Also, MG has lowered the SG gaps to 10K in response to the slowed pace of the KS. So 10K for more cards is not bad.

When we (and by "we" I mean the backers of the game and MG, not anybody here on Dakka) reach the Ogre SG, that Adventure has been done and ready.
The SGs are grouped together as whole adventure (the current adventure being L'Ogre) that runs over many SGs. That is why there are figure SGs, card SGs and map SGs intermixed. When the batch of SGs is done a whole new playable adventure is added to the core, not just some random figures or maps.

Next SG after L'Ogre might be the 1 VS many game mode (i.e. Darkness player who plays against the Virtue players). It has been hinted coming for some time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, according to Kicktraq the KS has lost 228 net backers (it has lost more, but incoming backers cover some of that loss).

The backers that had jumped out is about 4% of the backers. No big deal.

The 24 hour EB was kind of anomaly (more than 6000 backers jumping in) that netter far more backers in the first 24H than the previous games. Now that the backers have had the time to actually read the KS page, some of them are jumping off again for various reasons (they don't like the game type and thought this would be something else, they can't get to buy just the figures, there is no Spanish or German language packs and so on...)

Meanwhile, the second African add on (against the vampires) seems to have been very popular among the staying backers. The monday when the add on was released saw greatest number of backers leaving (net total -87) but that day still ended up on the positive money amount because of the add on.

In fact, despite the 4% backers jumping off, every day has stayed on the positive money amount coming in (some days not much, but still). Since the KS is now on the midway slump phase, I expect the money to trickle in at the standard low amount.
We will see only during the last 48 hours if the total will soar above 1 million or not (and if there will come a second wave of pledgers dropping from the game or is the exodus already over).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here is the second african add on. REH loved the snakes?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Some social stretch goals were added. If they are passed, 4 art prints (A3 size) will be added to the core box:



Also, if all 4 art prints are added, a figure of Leo will be added to the core box also (as a town crier)

 Monkeysloth wrote:
Really seams like I'm beating a dead horse at this point but I'm fascinated by this project since I can't remember the last time one had such a consistent bleed of people but still had the total going up every day.

The continuous loss of backers shows that there's a good number of people that don't think there's much value in this KSer, either because of the gameplay or what's provided in the core pledge. Eventually something will give, amount of backers leaving will stop being more then new ones or the current backers won't have more money to give for the flashy add ons.

Interesting observation - and it looks as if that day is...today!

Yep. So far negative backers and funding, this was the day the rulebook was released so that's not good. I still be surprised if it doesn't break a million.

I'm hoping this will spur them to include some miniatures only add-ons so I can throw some more money at them. I think Jake (quirkworthy) said they might be able to do miniature only add-ons if they were whole trays worth, meaning the same packing tray as the regular add-ons.

I'm be totally in for that.

Yesterday ended up +$1555 on the positive. So still each day has been a positive amount of dollars coming in. Maybe some of the leaving backers are $1 backers? I think the leaving backers are at most $110 each, but incoming backers might be adding an add on or two to their pledges?

Anyway, negative Backer numbers, but positive money numbers so far.

Rulebook is released, so people can stop asking for that...

 Monkeysloth wrote:
I'm be totally in for that.

You should say something on the KS page! The more people that do the better chance they decide to go ahead with mini only add-ons.

The main issue I personally have with the game is the shown game play. I've watched the Beasts of War video and had to fight not to fall asleep. From the very first turn is seemed extremely boring:
- roll 3 dice
- match the symbols to your possible actions
- perform an action, reserve some dice or give the dice to some of the other players

Now, this is boring enough but as it seems many of the cards are very plain and basic actions like "move Solomon Kane 1 space" or "move one of the Trackers by one point up or down". So rolling 3 dice and matching symbols just to get Solomon moved by 1 space or move a damn tracker by 1 point is not what I personally would see as exciting game play. To make things even worse there are acts (hope I remembered the right term) where you don't even have a board and miniatures. Instead, players have to do the very exciting dice rolling (*cough*) to get some light tokens onto the some act card or move some trackers up or down. And even acts with miniatures on board could result in "move Solomon Kane from one side to the other" ...

The french guy (think his name is Benoit if I remember correctly) basically did nothing in his first turn except roll 3 dice and give some away / store some. And it seems the game is very prone to being dominated by an alpha player - as could be seen by Az basically telling all other guys what to do.

Good god, this is some of the most boring game play I've seen in a very long time. Sad thing is: the miniatures and artwork look very nice but with a lot of value being in the cards etc. I cannot back something were it seems already clear that I would never enjoy the game.

While I would probably be interested in a minis only offering I think it would be bad for the game overall

there are clearly still a significant number of backers who really don't seem to 'get' the game for whatever reason (based on the steady backer drop out), and I bet a significant number are those interested in the minis but not the game

offer a minis only level (pricing of which would be tricky as I bet the sunk cost for the minis is a lot more than for the rest of the game) would probably lead to a sudden major funding drop as people switch to the cheaper minis only level which would panic some of the remaining game backers leading to further drop outs

I think they either need to tough it out (it might work) or drop the whole campaign and come back later (with a minis only option preferably)

Grimzim wrote:
The main issue I personally have with the game is the shown game play. I've watched the Beasts of War video and had to fight not to fall asleep. From the very first turn is seemed extremely boring:
- roll 3 dice
- match the symbols to your possible actions
- perform an action, reserve some dice or give the dice to some of the other players

Now, this is boring enough but as it seems many of the cards are very plain and basic actions like "move Solomon Kane 1 space" or "move one of the Trackers by one point up or down". So rolling 3 dice and matching symbols just to get Solomon moved by 1 space or move a damn tracker by 1 point is not what I personally would see as exciting game play. To make things even worse there are acts (hope I remembered the right term) where you don't even have a board and miniatures. Instead, players have to do the very exciting dice rolling (*cough*) to get some light tokens onto the some act card or move some trackers up or down. And even acts with miniatures on board could result in "move Solomon Kane from one side to the other" ...

The french guy (think his name is Benoit if I remember correctly) basically did nothing in his first turn except roll 3 dice and give some away / store some. And it seems the game is very prone to being dominated by an alpha player - as could be seen by Az basically telling all other guys what to do.

Good god, this is some of the most boring game play I've seen in a very long time. Sad thing is: the miniatures and artwork look very nice but with a lot of value being in the cards etc. I cannot back something were it seems already clear that I would never enjoy the game.

Like most games, the game is more exciting to play than to watch others playing it.

As for the tracker, it's game over if any of the tracks drop to zero or the danger track goes to eleven. The tracker is tracking Kanes health and mind through the whole adventure (from act to act), so it is a balancing act to keep the tracks "in the green". As some of the abilities have a cost of lowering one of the tracks (or rising the danger track), you have to constantly make desicion whether you can risk using the ability.
Virtues giving the dice to each other means that they have to co-operate to win.

There is also the pressure of the darkness cards running out, so there is a timer running in each act.

So, while an outsider watching the game might get bored, the players are feeling the timer/balancing act putting pressure on them and will be thinking all the time about their moves. When your brain is active you are rarely bored...

As for the alpha player syndrome, that is the fault of the play group to allow that behaviour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
While I would probably be interested in a minis only offering I think it would be bad for the game overall

there are clearly still a significant number of backers who really don't seem to 'get' the game for whatever reason (based on the steady backer drop out), and I bet a significant number are those interested in the minis but not the game

offer a minis only level (pricing of which would be tricky as I bet the sunk cost for the minis is a lot more than for the rest of the game) would probably lead to a sudden major funding drop as people switch to the cheaper minis only level which would panic some of the remaining game backers leading to further drop outs

I think they either need to tough it out (it might work) or drop the whole campaign and come back later (with a minis only option preferably)

Maybe the minis only pledge level or add-on might be best to put in the PM then?

MG is doing the KS to fund a game, not a bunch of minis. It is not like GW where the rules are an afterthought to sell the minis.

 Col Hammer wrote:

Like most games, the game is more exciting to play than to watch others playing it.

As for the tracker, it's game over if any of the tracks drop to zero or the danger track goes to eleven. The tracker is tracking Kanes health and mind through the whole adventure (from act to act), so it is a balancing act to keep the tracks "in the green". As some of the abilities have a cost of lowering one of the tracks (or rising the danger track), you have to constantly make desicion whether you can risk using the ability.
Virtues giving the dice to each other means that they have to co-operate to win.

There is also the pressure of the darkness cards running out, so there is a timer running in each act.

So, while an outsider watching the game might get bored, the players are feeling the timer/balancing act putting pressure on them and will be thinking all the time about their moves. When your brain is active you are rarely bored...

As for the alpha player syndrome, that is the fault of the play group to allow that behaviour.

While I agree that playing a game is of course much more exciting than watching a game played I do not agree in this particular case: I've watched countless game play videos but personally did never feel so bored.
I also fully understand how the tracker works and that abilities may influence it but again, for me having some trackers to manipulate up or down does not make an exciting game.
The cooperation aspect of giving dice to other is very weak. It would be no issue if the game play options each players has would still be exciting but as said, I felt the actions are rather bland.
And finally the alpha player syndrome: I have to disagree again: while the players are responsible a game can enforce it or make it very hard for an alpha player to dominate. Almost all information in Solomon Kane is open information meaning that all players can see it. This strongly enforces the alpha player syndrome in my opinion.

All that said: It's my personal opinion of what I've seen on the game. Other may like the shown game play and that's fine with me and at the moment that are almost 6000 people who may still be fine with the shown game.

About the gameplay being boring or exciting, that is totally subjective, so I won't return to that topic anymore.
Some like it, some don't. Both are right in their point of view.

I still disagree that alpha players are games fault. Every co-operative game has danger of falling prey to an alpha player. How are the rules to combat against a "character defect" so to speak?

It is up to the game group to rein in the alpha player if it ruins the gaming experience. I don't see how games rules could stop the alpha player if the objective of the game is co-operation...?

I'm gonna play this game mostly solo and I'm not an alpha player type, so perhaps I won't ruin this game for me?

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
While I would probably be interested in a minis only offering I think it would be bad for the game overall

there are clearly still a significant number of backers who really don't seem to 'get' the game for whatever reason (based on the steady backer drop out), and I bet a significant number are those interested in the minis but not the game

offer a minis only level (pricing of which would be tricky as I bet the sunk cost for the minis is a lot more than for the rest of the game) would probably lead to a sudden major funding drop as people switch to the cheaper minis only level which would panic some of the remaining game backers leading to further drop outs

I think they either need to tough it out (it might work) or drop the whole campaign and come back later (with a minis only option preferably)

No, I'm not advocating for a minis only pledge, but only for minis only add-ons, precisely for the reasons you outlined. What if you could get the core game (cards and all), plus both big add-ons for $170? I think that set up would be appealing to many people not interested in the gameplay. You would get something like 100 KS exclusive (and generally very cool and unique) minis, including seven huge ones for $170. I'd go for that in a heart beat, and it would increase my pledge level. As is, the big add-ons, let alone the core box are really hard to justify because you are paying for 2000+ cards plus a ton of boards. Based on the numbers, they aren't getting very high uptake on their big addons. Miniature only add-ons can only help the total.

I think it's definitely best they stay the course at this point, they have a very realistic chance of being able to even things out here. Last night there was even a positive rush that ended up giving them a net positive on money for the day, and halved the number of backers they had lost before around dinner time here in EST lands. Unfortunately I don't know that it's possible to regain the momentum that a campaign starts with, so it's a real shame that they squandered it with complacent planning. I sort of feel like they expected to pick up where they left off with Joan of Arc: they have a game up, people throw money at them, and everybody is happy. They forgot a new campaign has to re-earn the backers' trust and enthusiasm.

frankelee wrote:
I think it's definitely best they stay the course at this point, they have a very realistic chance of being able to even things out here. Last night there was even a positive rush that ended up giving them a net positive on money for the day, and halved the number of backers they had lost before around dinner time here in EST lands. Unfortunately I don't know that it's possible to regain the momentum that a campaign starts with, so it's a real shame that they squandered it with complacent planning. I sort of feel like they expected to pick up where they left off with Joan of Arc: they have a game up, people throw money at them, and everybody is happy. They forgot a new campaign has to re-earn the backers' trust and enthusiasm.

It is quite funny that things like "net positive on money" and " halving the number of lost backers for the day" are what we are talking about as the "good signs" for a campaign. I think that if their goal is to make money, they need to make some changes. I agree with you about squandered momentum.

 Gallahad wrote:

It is quite funny that things like "net positive on money" and " halving the number of lost backers for the day" are what we are talking about as the "good signs" for a campaign. I think that if their goal is to make money, they need to make some changes. I agree with you about squandered momentum.

Well I've been through plenty of rough patches in life, so I know how to appreciate being a few less feet deep into the hole I'm in. I think they have made some important changes, I know some people think sweeping changes to how the game works or is sold is necessary, but I'm just not convinced that it's quite that bad. There's an audience of 10-15k backers who could get this game, they can still get those people. As long as the major things turning people off are changed by the last 48 hours in terms of gameplay looking fun and being explained clearly, and lack of value in the core pledge, it'll still be fine in all likelihood. Stumbles like they had to begin with rarely turn into total disasters with a little patchwork.

 Gallahad wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
While I would probably be interested in a minis only offering I think it would be bad for the game overall

there are clearly still a significant number of backers who really don't seem to 'get' the game for whatever reason (based on the steady backer drop out), and I bet a significant number are those interested in the minis but not the game

offer a minis only level (pricing of which would be tricky as I bet the sunk cost for the minis is a lot more than for the rest of the game) would probably lead to a sudden major funding drop as people switch to the cheaper minis only level which would panic some of the remaining game backers leading to further drop outs

I think they either need to tough it out (it might work) or drop the whole campaign and come back later (with a minis only option preferably)

No, I'm not advocating for a minis only pledge, but only for minis only add-ons, precisely for the reasons you outlined. What if you could get the core game (cards and all), plus both big add-ons for $170? I think that set up would be appealing to many people not interested in the gameplay. You would get something like 100 KS exclusive (and generally very cool and unique) minis, including seven huge ones for $170. I'd go for that in a heart beat, and it would increase my pledge level. As is, the big add-ons, let alone the core box are really hard to justify because you are paying for 2000+ cards plus a ton of boards. Based on the numbers, they aren't getting very high uptake on their big addons. Miniature only add-ons can only help the total.

Ya, that wouldn't interest me. I don't want to pledge $110 just to get add-ons. And Orlando is right there's probably a good percentage that want just the minis too so it could be pretty bad even though I'd like that option.

Now they could do a $110 mini pledge that's just 2x the core game minis and that might be a good enough deal for some but most of the figures here are better for RPGs instead of miniature games and I don't really know what the interest would be in such a large volume of generics towns folk that were all monopose.

I think the game is trying to satisfy too many people and has a bit of an identity crisis. It's heavily narrative driven but they've thrown in loads of mini's many of which when you watch some of the playthroughs spend more time off the board than on it.

This is a $60-80 dollar game and they want $110 + $30-40 shipping. An easy miss for me this one.

After all the months of build-up, excitement over a witch hunter minis game based on an iconic literary character from a company that has put out two of my favorite games, I'm really disappointed to realize that this game just isn't for me. The game play kills it (for me) and the minis value isn't there for me to just pledge for them.

I really like the company, the people and the games they've put out but this one just isn't a fit for me, unfortunately. If only a stretch goal would be for skirmish play rules ...

 Myrthe wrote:
After all the months of build-up, excitement over a witch hunter minis game based on an iconic literary character from a company that has put out two of my favorite games, I'm really disappointed to realize that this game just isn't for me. The game play kills it (for me) and the minis value isn't there for me to just pledge for them.

I really like the company, the people and the games they've put out but this one just isn't a fit for me, unfortunately. If only a stretch goal would be for skirmish play rules ...

I feel the same way you do. I was so excited for what I perceived as a coperative adventure game involving one of my favorite characters.

I feel like a lot of the choices that you make for Solomon during any given turn are really boring, and of limited interest since so much depends on the card draws.

I think this style of dice swapping followed by a card draw to see what happens in the story would be a much better fit for a political intrigue type game.

I'm trying really hard to justify the base game as SK minis plus some great SK art, but I'm really having trouble. It is a $80 dollar game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Painfully expensive add-on with a stunning Devil miniature up:

The wendigos are the same size as the Ogre.

This set really doesn't do much for me. Especially since it looks like they're using some plains Indian designs instead of east coast Indians.

Also, "painfully expensive"? That got a LOL from me...

Well the vampire one is a lot more content for only $5 so...

Still, "painfully"?