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.

I picked up a copy today, though I'm not entirely sure why - I've already got 3 squads of scouts back from Space Crusade and have more than enough genestealers already (i.e., one or more).

I guess I got it for the game itself, but after a read-through I can see some house rules coming...

Probably give the scouts 10 command points. The points can be used to a) increase the chance to hit or assault value by one (before you roll), or b) to discard a tile from the game and draw again (can't be used more than once a turn) or c) for the scout player to place a drawn tile instead of the genestealer player (can't be used for initial placement).

Played a handful of games today ... man, is this game so unbalanced (though viciously fun if you switch sides each game). Drop pod spawned on one of the six starting squares - the poor scouts still died!

Too bad genestealers aren't this good in real 40K, and thankfully scouts aren't as bad (shooters) in 40K.

Really, if you want to adjust the difficulty, add a unit or two. Maybe an extra scout or a space marine (kills on a 5+ and/or adds +1 to defense rolls to his tile).

There was an interview with the designer of the original game who said his goal was to have the scouts consistantly die within sight of their goal.

yeah,
If the scouts find the pod the 'nid player will just put 3 Genestealers on that tile.
Like I said earlier A full team of scouts shooting will on average kill only 2 genestealers!

So the scouts not only have to find the drop pod tile without serious losses they then have to have above average luck to clear the tile, with a movement action spare...

Show me someone who says they beat the game and I'll show you a liar!
LOL

Panic...

How could they place Genestealers on the tile? I thought the Genestealers could only spawn on tiles where there's a path leading off the visible map.

Yeah

zeromaeus wrote:
How could they place Genestealers on the tile? I thought the Genestealers could only spawn on tiles where there's a path leading off the visible map.

It would make sense as thy can't be placed on dead ends.

But the rule is.

Page Four - Place Genestealer wrote:Put a genestealer on a tile at the end of the path, on the drop ship tile, or on a tile with a infestation.

So GW went out of their way to make the game un winnable.
If the scouts had any hope, it was that blind luck got 1 or 2 to the drop tile! And they win!

Panic...

Are you guys spawning Genestealers everytime you reveal a path? I don't think that's how it's supposed to work. It also sounds like you're spawning x3 Genestealers for every x1 spawn action. I was under the impression it was x1 Genestealer for x1 spawn action.

You really only need to kill 1 Stealer at range. With 2 Stealers on a tile, the Sergeant with Sqd has a good chance of winning.

I don't have the rules in front of me, but when the droppod is revealed, aren't you supposed to automatically place 3 genestealers on it? If not, we've been playing wrong...

What vicious is the pushback from losing an assault. If the genestealers have you surrounded, the loss of an assault doesn't see you lose just one guy, but everyone in the space.

In the six games we played, one stealer died to gunfire (and that's with the whole squad taking nothing but shoot actions to unload into their midsts). All assaults we ended up with either the stealers outright won, or it was a draw and the scouts had no space to fall back to, which meant they were wiped out.

I tried finding the bit in the rules about placing 'Stealers on the drop pod and I don't recall actually seeing anything about it except that when the pod is revealed, the board doesn't change any more. I don't recall seeing any other rules about the pod. I think some of you guys are actually making yhe game more difficult.

I'm pretty sure the rules as written also say to always put the drop pod as the last tile (bottom of the stack)...though to add a bit more randomness and possibly give the scouts a better chance of reaching it, you could just randomly shuffle it in. Or, like the old Warhammer Quest did with the room cards, shuffle half of them with the end room, and then shuffle the other half of the tiles and place them on top...so your drop pod would be anywhere from 50% in the stack all the way to the last card randomly.

Placing 1 stealer does indeed cost x1 action. I just usually deploy 3 at a time, then move to assault phase. It really depends on how many groups are already on the board, and how many are within assault range.

Other ways to possibly give the scouts a better shake could be: Give each scout 3 actions each turn (only 2 of which can be used to move) and/or limit the number of stealers that can deploy on the dropship each turn.

Another thing I was thinking about was maybe coming up with rules for scouts that are armed with different weapon loadouts...this may overly complicate the game, but having rules for sniper rifles (maybe always kill on a 2+ or 3+ but cause a -1 penalty in CC), and missile launchers (same to-hit chances as normal but kill all stealers on a single tile with a successful hit). Maybe Bolters get 2 dice and Heavy Bolters get 3?

Anyone else thought about this?

I found myself in close combat far more often than I could shoot. I think allowing the Scouts to hit on a lower roll significantly improves their chances. Reducing 'Stealers to two actions also puts thing much more in the Marines' favor.

I do really like the idea of putting the dropship tile in randomly over having it as the last tile. It fits better with the random shifting terrain idea much better snd potentially also improves the Marines' chances.

Coming from the perspective of a miniatures gamer who's quickly shifting more towards board games, my take on Lost Patrol's new edition.

yeah,
Excellent review, you smashed it!
This is exactly my thoughts on this but with better words!

Panic...

Also see from WD 124



And from the Suffer Not The Alien store event

Nice, thanks for posting. Also to all who offered balancing ideas earlier, we will give them a try.

Thanks, panic.

re: other difficulty levels, that's idiotic, an insufficient answer, and yet more backpedaling from poor design choices like AOS's points.

re: multiplayer, another stupid and insufficient patch. Granular success in dying is a lame solution that doesn't answer the actual problem of imbalance. Also, how the hell do you actually implement Genestealer divided control? "Hey, I'll be the mob of genestealers next to the isolated scout, you be the lone genestealer over there. Okay, I'll take two actions, you take one." For that matter, how do you determine who's controlling the marines? I get a sergeant, you get a regular guy, let's mob up to fight GS's, I'll roll the die since I've got the best odds"?

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Thanks, panic.

re: other difficulty levels, that's idiotic, an insufficient answer, and yet more backpedaling from poor design choices like AOS's points.

re: multiplayer, another stupid and insufficient patch. Granular success in dying is a lame solution that doesn't answer the actual problem of imbalance. Also, how the hell do you actually implement Genestealer divided control? "Hey, I'll be the mob of genestealers next to the isolated scout, you be the lone genestealer over there. Okay, I'll take two actions, you take one." For that matter, how do you determine who's controlling the marines? I get a sergeant, you get a regular guy, let's mob up to fight GS's, I'll roll the die since I've got the best odds"?

Well nobody is forcing you to buy it are they? Don't like it, don't buy it. Lose the chip from your shoulder mate, life's too short to take things so seriously.

"No one is forcing you to buy it" is a lame response to "this product is shoddy," especially when this is in a thread where people get info about it and are presumably deciding whether or not to buy it, or voicing their opinions after having done so. You're right that no one generally forces anyone to buy entertainment items, but, for those who want to make an informed decision about buying them, I had a response.

GW's proposed solution to people complaining about difficulty isn't a solution, which I'm saying so people don't buy the game thinking it is one. I already proposed an actual one, which is just use the gaming materials with their older and basically reasonable version.

If you think my response doesn't have merit, maybe you can tell me why, or just don't bother reading it, I'm not forcing you to

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Thanks, panic.

re: other difficulty levels, that's idiotic, an insufficient answer, and yet more backpedaling from poor design choices like AOS's points.

re: multiplayer, another stupid and insufficient patch. Granular success in dying is a lame solution that doesn't answer the actual problem of imbalance. Also, how the hell do you actually implement Genestealer divided control? "Hey, I'll be the mob of genestealers next to the isolated scout, you be the lone genestealer over there. Okay, I'll take two actions, you take one." For that matter, how do you determine who's controlling the marines? I get a sergeant, you get a regular guy, let's mob up to fight GS's, I'll roll the die since I've got the best odds"?

Yes heaven forbid a company tries and fix something that a lot of people don't like. And look how fast they did it? I guess maybe GW needs to go back to the old ways. I was right. Someone, somewhere will always say something bad about GW no matter what they do. Instead of looking at the positive it's the negative that is brought up. Heaven forbid you never make a mistake and try to get redemption.

Davor wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Thanks, panic.

re: other difficulty levels, that's idiotic, an insufficient answer, and yet more backpedaling from poor design choices like AOS's points.

re: multiplayer, another stupid and insufficient patch. Granular success in dying is a lame solution that doesn't answer the actual problem of imbalance. Also, how the hell do you actually implement Genestealer divided control? "Hey, I'll be the mob of genestealers next to the isolated scout, you be the lone genestealer over there. Okay, I'll take two actions, you take one." For that matter, how do you determine who's controlling the marines? I get a sergeant, you get a regular guy, let's mob up to fight GS's, I'll roll the die since I've got the best odds"?

Yes heaven forbid a company tries and fix something that a lot of people don't like. And look how fast they did it? I guess maybe GW needs to go back to the old ways. I was right. Someone, somewhere will always say something bad about GW no matter what they do. Instead of looking at the positive it's the negative that is brought up. Heaven forbid you never make a mistake and try to get redemption.

I think if you read the review of the blog it sounds like pretty reasoned criticism.

Is that not permitted?

I'm glad I've read it as I can't stomach crap game design, and then what sounds like a half-assed day one patch. It's saved me 30 quid.

Davor wrote:
Yes heaven forbid a company tries and fix something that a lot of people don't like. And look how fast they did it? I guess maybe GW needs to go back to the old ways. I was right. Someone, somewhere will always say something bad about GW no matter what they do. Instead of looking at the positive it's the negative that is brought up. Heaven forbid you never make a mistake and try to get redemption.

Actually, no, my complaint was their fix was terrible, not that they tried to fix something. I've stuck around with companies that put out a poor set of rules and made a concerted effort.

If I'm wrong for saying something bad about GW's embarrassingly lame effort, then I don't want to be right. Seriously, there was a time when I was just kinda' mad at GW, but I really do like their IP and their more enjoyable games, and look for more. And I'll even favorably review the ones I like. But I'll also trash the trash.

Sure, since you're asking about the positive, I like the good-natured attitude with which they rushed out a poor patch, and I like the flavor text with which they framed their multiplayer option that looks like no one playtested. I also like that they didn't bother to make new tile art, so you can play the old (and actually playable) edition with the current one. There, that's three things I genuinely (and for emphasis since internet tone can be misinterpreted, I'm being completely honest about those three things) like, surrounding a terrible new edition.



...Thanks, Pacific, for taking the time to read my criticism, and I'm glad it helped w/ the decision.

But also, do consider that some folks may actually like the extreme difficulty.

Imbalance ≠ difficulty. It's not like a perfect strategy, decision-making, extreme patience or caution, knowing probabilities, superb risk-reward assessment or even just gambling when it pays off, having experiences or great reflexes will allow you to roll more 6's.

The game takes like 20 minutes to figure out smart formations and where are good places to move, if that, and then it's a question of how long it takes for scouts to roll middling. It's not a steep learning curve (which I'm completely fine with), just not even remotely balanced. I think about the only thing that would make the game balanced as-is is if the GS player was both really foolhardy and never once learned from their mistakes.


edit- If you like a really unbalanced game, that's fine. I don't understand why that would be fun, but it's fine. But unbalanced in this case has nothing to do with difficulty (i.e. skill/effort-based) but just probability.

And for the record, this isn't about disliking difficulty- Kingdom Death (risk assessment, decision making and backup plans, in the face of many things often getting wrecked by random), Dark Souls (reflex, patience) and Malifaux (high volume of decision-making with a lot of info and bluffing) are all on my list of favorites.

 Pacific wrote:


I think if you read the review of the blog it sounds like pretty reasoned criticism.

Is that not permitted?

I'm glad I've read it as I can't stomach crap game design, and then what sounds like a half-assed day one patch. It's saved me 30 quid.

This. Thanks for the review, I was considering picking up a copy but seems a waste of time considering it was meant to be a nice easy pick up and play but requires house ruling to make it work.

I picked it up, though I already had the rules which I found online earlier in the year after reading about it from someone's review using Catachans and subsequent link to Quirkworthy. I'd been (not exactly actively) wondering about tile solutions, and so this edition provides me with both a complete game with updated rules (plus "patches" from this thread), and just as relevantly, components to go with the rules, FAQ and expansion stuff (sniper scouts) I'd already found online. So I'm good with it.

I had the sniper rules somewhere, but lost them, they're done by the author of the original version, who also did a nice write-up / retrospective on Lost Patrol and what he'd change if he got o re-do it again when he heard it was being re-released.

Okay is the game just frigging hard to win for marines or is it absolutely impossible to win? As in no matter what they do they lose? Nothing whatsoever marine player does fails even if they roll best dice rolls possible all the time?

If it's mathematically 100% impossible to win then yeah bad game design.

If it's just frigging difficult then that I can live with. Some of the most addictive games I have played have been precisely "you are almost certain to die. Wanna try again?" games.

Anybody played Telengard? That's nutty difficult. Screw that. I think that MIGHT be 100% impossible to win(assuming it even has a goal which I'm not sure. Never heard of anybody winning it...) yet can be great fun.

One key requirement then is though it's fast to play so you can play it often in quick order.

It is possible, but incredibly unlikely, for the scouts player to win.