Discussion in 'Custom Scenarios and Boards' started by Pengw1n, Nov 20, 2013.
!!! must do more dificult maps !!!
The current Mauve Manticore Supplement #3, the one with 3 dogs and ice demons? Yeah, thats ******ed bad. Sorry, but I call a spade a spade. Which dev accepted it as a submission? It requires zero skill, other then hitting the resign and reload buttons until you get the correct card draw on the dogs.
Whoevers in charge of what to put on the public play area needs to be reprimanded.
Cowardly dogs should never be put in with frost anything......doing so in my shop would have gotten you banned from my store.(-REDACTED-) as a troll.
Constructive feedback is always welcome, don't give in to rage just because a map is causing you problems - or if you don't agree with it's quality or playability. I'm not going to delete your post, but that tone is quite a bit out of line.
I also edited out the name of your store, as that could be considered marketing.
Pengw1n, you forgot to edit the store name out of the quote in your message .
Thats cool, I find your response out of line. The proper and professional response as a representative of a gaming company should be, and I quote, "Thank you for the feedback, our dev team will look into the playability of that module".
Trying to start an argument won't get people to take your seriously. I responded to the thread due to a complaint to your post (from a community member, not the map creator) - but as I said, any feedback given will be taken into consideration. Your criticism wasn't unwarranted - but calling for reprimands et c, is certainly out of line. If you don't like the module, you don't even have to play it - it's an optional one.
Theres nothing to argue. Blue Manchu erred in publishing that module, along with the other modules that just require reloads or are exercise in frustration(more dogs and frost issue). A competent reviewer wouldnt have put it out there, optional or not. Since I backed the game, and paid for the expansion, any optional content should be playable and for that I expect YOU GUYS to review it for playability. "Hmmm...this module is good, challenging, but good" "This module is ******ed, and relies on luck of the draw to win." Do you see the difference?
Instead of defending fail, step up and admit the review process failed or was absent.
The Blue Manchu guys know what they are doing. You're calling some battles "failed", they might call them "suited for the purpose". It's more OK for optional, bonus content to be harder than the base campaign ones. You might not agree but that doesn't mean they've failed.
That said, factual criticism of the game has always been well received by them, but the forum tone and population has always been a friendly one. It's good that the moderators keep that standard up. There's no need to be so confrontational about it. I've been very critical of the same issue with some Mauve Manticore battles (Binding of Xanthicius comes to mind) and I've had no moderation issues.
Blue Manchu does not pick the easiest of submissions because that just wouldn't be fun. A good challenge can make you think outside your comfort zone and gives more satisfaction when it is finished.
+1 for "I can't beat the dragon map because I don't get enough attack (or healing) cards and holding the victory squares doesn't matter because the dragon has 4 from the start".
Losing a map because I can't attack enough is pretty bad. I'd rather have the "harder" version where the dragon only holds 1 victory square 'cause that seems more fair.
The Mauve supplement stage 2 seems pretty terrible too, but at least there's only 1 level before it.
I don't know if it'd be changed even if lots of people complain about it, since it's optional.
Guess I'll just wait for the next one, and maybe I can actually beat that one.
I replay the Mauve Manticore scenarios quite often because they are challenging and force you sometimes to retry them.
There are certain parts, where you can not do anything about it, even if you a experienced player.
Like 2/3 of Mauve Manticore #1, 1/3 of Mauve Manticore #2, 3/3 of Mauve Manticore #3 and 1/3 of Mauve Manticore #3 Supplement.
The only one which is more frustrating than challenging is the infamous 2/3 of Mauve Manticore #3 Supplement.
It would only be fair to adjust the victory points needed to win for the GM from 3 to 4. It would still be hard but it would not give you the feeling of a very unfair and bad game design.
BLASPHEMY!!! seems i must do some fiendish design to be hated by every one here
I needed 6 tries just now to beat Mauve Manticore #3 battle 3, "Bindings of Xanthicius". I had no chance in any of the five first tries. I simply did not draw enough damaging attacks and healing/Impenetrable Nimbus to kill all the demons and keep the three elves alive for enough turns. I used the tactics documented in this thread as much as the draw allowed, e.g. always rushed the demons in the corner.
As soon as the first elf dies you just gave away two turns worth of victory points and are probably hosed. When the enemies also keep putting lava and acid under your guys and move you back on them when you move away, no amount of tactical positioning will save you.
I maintain there is no way to win this battle most of the time. It is way too dependent on draws. Gary should need at least one or preferably two more VPs to win or the dragon should sit on only one VP, not four. Alternatively this should be a single battle or the first one of three, not the third one of three.
Tried MM4 out and they are pretty good. The zombie one is REALLY tough though... I'd heavily suggest increasing the VPs the zombies need from 2 to 4 (or more). If you die, yes, you'll still lose, but at 2 VP if they get some lucky move cards and get to the VP spot quickly it seems impossible.
I am positively thrilled that I got a board in. And I smiled at the text edits. (Aw, you recognized "itchy" and "tasty"?) I wasn't expecting them to select my oldest map: I hope I've managed to improve in board balancing since then.
For enemy Victory Points, the count almost doesn't matter. The balance leads to pretty absolute success and failure: if you can't reach the Victory Square before the enemy, then that means you're in the middle of a hallway full of Zombies. If they are "lucky" this way, then you likewise must be "lucky" to be in a scenario that is possible to survive. Thus, whether they're counting up to 2 or 4 or 10 points, most players are still dead.
Anyway, as the mapmaker, it should be no surprise that I found it easier than the Save the Trees map. That took me a number of retries and I'm still not sure I grasp the best strategy. Chess Conundrum was a lot deeper than I realized at first glance.
Yeah, the VP doesn't matter that much -- I have had a game that came down to it though but that was a really rare instance. It is a pretty luck based scenario, but it is still fun. I think all the MM choices were good and interesting. Definitely one of my more favorite of the series (MM1 with Die Hard is still my favorite though).
I just want to remind people that discussion of Mauve Manticore belongs in this thread, not the submission thread.
My apologies. I seem to have lost track of it when I was looking to post.
Hey, has anyone played Mauve Manticore #3 Supplement after the balance changes? I just tried it and I couldn't pass through the second map after 10 tries... I'm wondering if I just had very bad luck or if this map needs some serious rebalance. It was difficult before, but now, with the step attack nerf, it seems almost impossible. There was only one time that I could put one of my dogs in the vp, but it was killed the nex turn.
We've been talking about giving the dogs their old cards. Thanks for the feedback.
Separate names with a comma.