Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

Recommended Posts

I have twice beaten the content currently available, rather easily, heavily relying on the card Switch Blade.  

In both cases:
a) I had Inside Fighting - which is rather significant
b) I had a graft that provides 1 combo at the start of each turn - which might be useful, but is not necessary.
c) I had at least one combat draw mechanic in my deck
d) Both runs came early in my playing time (my 3rd? alpha build run; my 1st experimental build run) - which means my total card pool was small and finding these cards was easy; in one run I actually had two copies of an upgraded Switch Blade.

With this combination my turn lasts forever by spamming a 0 cost, cycle 1 card that adds a copy of itself into my deck and using action points to draw when necessary.  It takes about 3 passes through a deck, maybe 4, before it becomes likely to reach a roughly infinite turn.  Upgraded, the card stacks Wound meaning even though it's a 1 damage card, it can soon add up and whittle opponents down very fast.

As a deck building aficionado it feels great: I've easily refined a highly competent, game winning combat deck by removing non-essential cards and enhancing this (2-3 card combo).

As a fan of rogue-likes it feels kind of bad: Click card, click enemy, click card, click enemy, click card, click enemy, oops didn't draw it, click card, draw 3, repeat.  Very repetitive, very monotonous, a little outright tedious.  Also, unlike a bleed build, it's much easier to complete combat without murdering anyone, which is comparatively advantageous. 

I was wondering if any one else felt similarly.  In any deck building game, I of course, want at least one strategy that involves cycling through a small deck of cards a bunch and, in doing so, having it become very powerful.  This combination feels a bit too easy and has only been diminished by increasing total available cards thereby reducing the number of opportunities to select it.

I might as well add that I enjoy the flavor of many negotiation cards, but I do doubt their total efficacy:

The best example of this is "White Lie".  Once you tell one tiny little white lie, you need to tell more and more and more of them or it's going to quite literally blow up in your face.  That's very much on the nose so kudos for that.

That said, Doubt feels very weak and while I guess it's balanced by the fact that it a) cannot be targeted by an enemy and b)unlike other inceptions does not deteriorate per turn - both of which are very strong inherent characteristics of the doubt inception - dealing the minimum 1 damage at the start of the next round (after you take damage) feels absolutely awful, especially if you had to spend your turn playing cards that would otherwise damage you in your hand.  In other words, why take the 1 action point uncommon White Lie that adds doubt over the 1 action point common card that adds doubt (I forget the name, sorry).  Unless some cards exist simply for flavor; that is, this exists because it can, not because it's viable.  At which point, should the card White Lie be a penalty like Unstable: a card that is automatically inserted into the the deck when you've done something morally grey, such as convincing Oolo that you killed the Spree in the cave after actually letting them go, or defending someone you meet on the road from a pursuer via negotiation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites