Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion

[flameslayer93]

Originally Posted by dok

I do understand the frustration you're noting here. I will say that it runs both ways - we've scrambled to design around SoV stuff in C3V on a few occasions, as well. There have been cases where there have been small changes made to figures on both ends to accommodate the other.

Thanks for clearing that up. At least I know this "cohesion" thing screws with everything across the board.

[robbdaman]

Just because someone designs a unit doesn't mean that its a great idea or really works for the game. Always keep in mind that any submissions are viewed as whether they fit the 5 criteria in the first post of this thread. Yes they are up to judges discretion but that's just how it is.

[Super Bogue]

Originally Posted by flameslayer93

It's good to know we can't attempt to use Marro units now...

Seriously, getting dumped because the unit sucks is fine, getting dumped because we don't know what's going on behind the scenes isn't. I'm beginning to think the SoV is getting to be a little more...useless? Impractical? The more the C3V does behind the curtains, the less we can try.

Flameslayer, it is a good card, but working with the backlog that we have right now I can't give a to just a good card. It has to be great! I have put up hundreds of what I believe are good cards on this site but only submitted four for SoV review.

Let me be a bit more systematic in my review of the Marro Elite:
Balance = Pass now, but an upcoming C3V unit with cause this to fail later.
Playability = Pass, the powers are understandable and the paint changes should make Marro Elite standout from the Marro Warriors.
Creativity = Fail, the Marro are a complete faction and the Marro Elite do not add anything drastically new just something better.
Theme = Fail, disciplined Marro?
Accessibility = Pass, figures from the first Master set are abundant and cheap.

Again, it is a good card. Don't let a get you down. Keep the creative juices flowing. I am going to do my best to bring our backlog down. You guys do your best to come up great cards for us to review.

[flameslayer93]

Originally Posted by Super Bogue

Flameslayer, it is a good card, but working with the backlog that we have right now I can't give a to just a good card. It has to be great! I have put up hundreds of what I believe are good cards on this site but only submitted four for SoV review.

Let me be a bit more systematic in my review of the Marro Elite:
Balance = Pass now, but an upcoming C3V unit with cause this to fail later.
Playability = Pass, the powers are understandable and the paint changes should make Marro Elite standout from the Marro Warriors.
Creativity = Fail, the Marro are a complete faction and the Marro Elite do not add anything drastically new just something better.
Theme = Fail, disciplined Marro?
Accessibility = Pass, figures from the first Master set are abundant and cheap.

I understand your points, and I understand the card's gotta be great. It's just frustrating to try making something balanced into a game-world that you haven't even seen yet.

Eh, this is Flameslayer logging off of your guys' FanScape world and back into my own. Cheers!

[qt.bangerang]

I vote NO to review Laertan Oresun based on what has already been said by my fellow judges.

I vote NO to review Threforian Raptors based on card issues mentioned earlier.

I vote NO to review Marro Elite because I agree with Super Bogue, with the back log we currently have we need great cards.

To all the creators, please don't stop trying to submit cards. Keep making customs just because we don't pass it for review doesn't mean it is not a good custom...we simply are looking for the best customs that fit in, and add to the official canon.

[Dad_Scaper]

I've said no to qt. bangerang way more often than I've said yes, FWIW.

[Typhon2222]

Less talking, more testing!

[Scytale]

My votes probably don't matter at this point, but I'll toss in my as well.


to Laertan Oresun

When it comes to flagbearers, my standards are high. Flagbearers are iconic figures that represent a Heroscape general in look and theme. I realize most would be happy with something that sort-of matches, but I just don't want to see something added to canon that can't stand alongside the other flagbearers (yes, I know that's impossible). Even giving fair leeway, an armored human knight just doesn't fit Aquilla. Also, and I know it's just me, I don't think an Aquilla dice power is the right way to go since those dice simply do not exist.

As a custom, it's pretty neat. Aquilla's Blessing is a really cool idea for a flagbearer power.


to Threforian Raptors

I'm giving this a thumbs down for reasons different than the other judges. Some of the problems mentioned have been fixed so I'm seeing a cleaner card, but I am not as concerned about small things like spelling that can be easily fixed in editing. (Though obvious mistakes do sour me.) As far as cost is concerned, 65 feels cheap but only two attacks per turn and only 3 defense on a two-man melee squad are significantly limiting factors. My problem with the unit is a very basic one: using a single figure as multiple members of a squad. One of the main draws of Heroscape from day 1 has been the look of the figures and terrain. I've always loved that squad members look different. Even in the era of Fanscape I do not want to see that change; that would be the point that the game goes into the realm of "make do" customs for me.

The design is strong; I would have voted yes for a common hero version.


to Marro Elite

Like I said above, aesthetics are important to me. A slight repaint on one unique squad to create another unique squad? I just don't like it. Also, I really do not think that another 4-man range squad with range 8 and 3 attack would be good for the metagame, especially at a low, easy-to-fit-in point value. These guys are brutally strong.

I do like the concept of a range unit that has reason to want to get into engagement however.

[Typhon2222]

Originally Posted by Scytale

to Threforian Raptors

I'm giving this a thumbs down for reasons different than the other judges. Some of the problems mentioned have been fixed so I'm seeing a cleaner card, but I am not as concerned about small things like spelling that can be easily fixed in editing. (Though obvious mistakes do sour me.) As far as cost is concerned, 65 feels cheap but only two attacks per turn and only 3 defense on a two-man melee squad are significantly limiting factors. My problem with the unit is a very basic one: using a single figure as multiple members of a squad. One of the main draws of Heroscape from day 1 has been the look of the figures and terrain. I've always loved that squad members look different. Even in the era of Fanscape I do not want to see that change; that would be the point that the game goes into the realm of "make do" customs for me.

The design is strong; I would have voted yes for a common hero version.

Given the other, additional difficulties which already hinder those attempting to make custom common squads (as opposed to heroes), I am saddened to read this. It adds just another barrier to common squads -- which are precisely the units which many of us are the most eager to see more of.

If a single-sculpt common squad will automatically be grounds for rejection by any judge (as now seems to be the case), it might be worth noting this in the OP, to pre-empt any future frustration.

Will also use this chance to repeat a prior request: that the OP make explicit that all previous SoV units, as well as all C3V units, should be kept in mind by designers when contemplating possible synergies for a new unit. Again, should pre-empt frustration.

[ZBeeblebrox]

Originally Posted by Typhon2222

Given the other, additional difficulties which already hinder those attempting to make custom common squads (as opposed to heroes), I am saddened to read this. It adds just another barrier to common squads -- which are precisely the units which many of us are the most eager to see more of.

If a single-sculpt common squad will automatically be grounds for rejection by any judge (as now seems to be the case), it might be worth noting this in the OP, to pre-empt any future frustration.

Will also use this chance to repeat a prior request: that the OP make explicit that all previous SoV units, as well as all C3V units, should be kept in mind by designers when contemplating possible synergies for a new unit.

Not all of us feel that way, Ty...i for one realize that Common squads may be difficult to produce...given the pre-painted market today...so I would consider and exceptional squad design if it was produced with the same sculpt. But the design would have to be awesome for me to overlook the lack of conformity of having same sculpts in a squad.

[Typhon2222]

Originally Posted by ZBeeblebrox

Not all of us feel that way, Ty...i for one realize that Common squads may be difficult to produce...given the pre-painted market today...so I would consider and exceptional squad design if it was produced with the same sculpt. But the design would have to be awesome for me to overlook the lack of conformity of having same sculpts in a squad.

Hiya ZB,

I know not all of you do. But if at least ONE of you does, then it seems to me it's still worth noting: for it guarantees that any design with that feature will still have one NTR vote even going in, and about zero chance of ever making it all the way.

[Scytale]

Originally Posted by Typhon2222

Given the other, additional difficulties which already hinder those attempting to make custom common squads (as opposed to heroes), I am saddened to read this. It adds just another barrier to common squads -- which are precisely the units which many of us are the most eager to see more of.

I hear what you're saying and empathize. I too am a common hero guy (more specifically, I'm a faction guy). But same-figure squads? That just isn't Heroscape to me.

Like ZB, I won't go so far as to say that I would reject all such designs (I was wavering on the raptors, actually), but it's a huge negative.