I remember playing the prototype awhile ago, it had some card balancing issues and a few cards I recommended be removed that I personally did not enjoy. That being said, the tactics and deck building nature of the game were fun, tons of content and it's an arena brawler. I'm pretty curious to see what changes were made for the final production copy and if the balancing was really this bad. I just really remember enjoying this game.
That's kind of my point@@PadsandPawns To see something get a complete panning in a review reassures me that Dice Tower is not in Asmodee's pocket like a lot of other board game You Tubers. That's not to say Dice Tower is not biased sometimes. It's pretty obvious when they're being sponsored to offer positive opinions. It's comforting to me when a 1 or 2 out of 10 review comes up; it means that there is at least some objectivity going on. Feel bad for the peeps responsible for this game, Tom didn't hold back!
I really like the idea of the daggers in the miniatures instead of health tokens. Thinking Aeons end would be benefit from that (AE is my favorite deck builder).
Wow. I really disagree with Tom on this one. I don't think it's a perfect game by any means, but I've really enjoyed it the several times I've played it.
that gigantic box alone is enough to turn me off - why do some publishers think that we all live in warehouses and we have delivery trucks that we can drive to our game groups.
Combat is not just: I hit you -> can't block -> damage. While it's not the main focus of essentially a deck building game there is still more to it like chain lightning spells that can travel between targets, you riding on a unicorn trampling over a target, setting a forest on fire and burning everyone, summon a kraken that just drags everyone into the water, call an avalanche that buries people bellow it, push people into a lava pit.... I could go on and on which brings us to terrain. The statement that terrain doesn't do anything in the game is just wrong. There is a lot of interaction between certain attacks/ attack types and terrain (water/ lightning+kraken, Snow/Movement +avalanche,Forrest/fire...). Taking extra damage while in towns is to discourage turtling. He also failed to mention how important the terrain is with spells. Being in water is dangerous against lightning spells, forest damages EVERYONE in forests. The shop in the middle encourages everyone to head toward the middle; where you can sell your cards helping to streamline your deck and makes purchasing the higher cost cards easier. As far as asymmetrical powers being unbalanced…his favorite game, Cosmic Encounter, is the most nefarious for this.
This is my all time favorite game second only to Marvel Legendary, which got me started in board gaming. If you gave away or sold this game before playing, you really missed out! There is a lot to the game, but it is so different every time we play! I have found it plays great with a variety of number of players, and it's fun every time. Tom's got this one wrong. Better luck next time, Tom.
Bun in this case I think Tom is completely wrong. I’ve played 7 times int the past 2 weeks with my family and my game group and so far all but 1person has had a blast. And even the one that didn’t like it really only complained about coming back as water spirits after being eliminated.
Wow, this is one of the rare times I strongly disagree with Tom. I have had a blast playing Ignite and so has everyone in my family and everyone else that I’ve played with.
I play-tested this at DTW in 2019 and I had the same complaints and feedback that Tom outlines here. It doesn't look like Ginger Snap made any changes from playtest to retail.
I like this game its quick and fun. I see Tom didnt mention you cant do combat the first 4 rounds I think so the first few rounds you are building your deck. Also in the middle of the board there is the bazzar which you can trash cards to get better cards which forces people to run to the middle. Yes you can buy a card with honor but if you sell(trash) a card you get the cost of the card which also thins your deck. Also its fun to push and pull people in the lava and you can throw bombs as well. It was more fun than i expected.
Tom started off saying “I hate this game!” Which is rare for him to be so outspoken about a game. Last time he said that, he dropped a game from the room of his house. I gasped at 14:14 when Tom said, “I don’t know why I would want to play a clusterF….ight”
@@jackiejlw5493 - At the end of the video, Tom should smash the game with a gavel….but not as a seal of approval. Just to smash it into oblivion. Okay, I feel a little bad about making a joke about this game when I have not played it. For all I know it might be a lovely game.
So, I backed this. Ironically I saw a demo of this 2 years in a row in Dice Tower West where the designer was recieving positive feedback (I guess Tom didnt got to that booth). The game is a basic deckbuilder, it is not a full skirmish tactical game, the combat part is the extra topping on the deckbuilding part. It has some production issues, yes, but the game is fun, it offers interesting choices with enough deck customization to make it different every time.
I also demoed this game and I must agree with Tom. It was not fun and things were very unbalanced when my friend and I played. I guess that stuff never got fixed even though we said something about it during the demo.
I would agree with Heath. I spent a good amount of time with Darren chatting about mechanics. I respect the fact that developers have vision but I know my crew and I were not the only ones providing some critical feedback.
My friend backed the kickstarter and we did a 3 player game. Admittedly, I had low expectations, but we had a great time. The deck building part reminded of Dominion (which I love), and the brawling part on top was fun and funny. Having 3 characters to move around and so many cards in the market kept me engaged!
I have a lot of issues with ignite... but I feel like I played a totally different game here. We dealt with a lot of different and interesting combos in our games here. Granted, the recommended starting deck is really plain. But... man, there are many nuances that give place to strategic plays in this game. The fact that you can't play spells for honor but Tom still thinks they are superior to arrows makes me think they didn't really get the rules while playing this... and I don't balame them, that's one of the issues I have with this game.
I believe this game shines in finding the weird combo on the random set of cards you get for the game and trying to achieve it. Save for the "tutorial" game we never had a strategy or combo that was more powerful than others. Also, the panda is really great on high player count since you get to upscale your deck quick and rush to your neighbors. There are no walls in between you and other players when playing on the big map.
Whelp was debating late pledging this and ended up not. I can see some people would enjoy this but Toms negatives def are things I think I would agree with
Cards looked so good, tiles not so much. In the end I passed the game due to higher late pledge price and went for Ascension Tactics instead. Hopefully that is the right call and Dice Tower reviews it as well.
i'm with Tom on this one. I was super hyped for this game, deckbuilding and tactical skirmish merged was an instant all-in backer for me. When it finally arrived I had to do surgery on almost every single miniature to get the rings to fit, but also get them to sit on the table correctly. The daggers were a known problem and i know they busted their a$$ trying to get them to work reliably, unfortunately it didn't work. I have at least 3 figures where the daggers simply don't work and after our first couple of games everybody just throws the daggers on the table near the mini because nobody wants to deal with the fiddliness of getting them in right, holding them there (they either fall out or get seized inside). The board really is incredibly dull and generic. The notch and slot config should have been scrapped in place of simple square tiles. Even better would be one large board with optional overlays. The gameplay.... well, I tapped into every gamer I knew that was coming out post covid and we went through 5 or 6 games, including the co-op vs dragon thing.... EVERY single person that played it disliked it. Some hated it, other were just super confused that all this production went into something that was so bland and unfun. Yes, there is some terrain interaction, but none of it is so significant that you can't easily plan around it. You see somebody buy a lightning spell and you simply avoid water, etc. The open market mechanic broadcasts your strategy way too clearly. Which allows players to counter you before you even get a chance to pull off anything interesting. And that seemed to be the crux of the issue for all the players at our table: nothing interesting happens. It doesn't ever feel like all this effort I put in gives me any kind of emotional pay-off. There aren't any moments where you fist pump in victory. It's more like "no block? ok, done. I take your trophy, who is next?" The co-op game... ugh, what a disappointment! We gathered all these people and did this huge setup with board and market and dragon and figuring out how the swarms of water elementals work... and for several rounds we focused on taking out all these elementals, but then somebody realized that killing the dragon was only 5 damage, and he just ran up and ended the game. Everybody sat there with their eyes blinking, saying "that's it? That's all there is?" I feel bad for these guys. I really REALLY wanted to like this game. I know they tried really hard. I'm glad there are people out there loving it, but I am not one of them.
I’ve been enjoying this game for 8 months and I’m glad I never saw this review until now. Tom totally missed the point if the game. It’s a great strategy game to play at high player counts. The mechanics are simple, the combat is much more varied, and you can get an 8-player strategy game finished in 2 hours with the teach. It’s chaotic and super fun. I like Tom’s reviews and usually align with his opinions, but he’s way off on this one.
Oh gosh, I backed it because I really enjoy the DC deckbuilders, Clank!, and Unmatched, and Star Wars: Destiny. Seemed like an awesome combo of a bunch of cool mechanics I enjoy. Havent gotten to play yet, so crossing my fingers I disagree with Tom on this one considering how much I dropped...
I really enjoyed it myself and am glad I backed it... and this isn't because I backed it. I've received some real turds from kickstarter before. This was not even close to one of them.
Yep, have to agree on the two previous statements. While it might have its flaws it is an incredibly fun game. No one I have played it with so far disliked it. That review was undeserved (but obviously tastes differ...)
It's definitely not perfect, and some of his gripes are accurate (namely setup time), but the game itself is an absolute blast. I've never disagreed with Tom so strongly.
Tom likes it more than me. My two least favorite game elements: multi-player free-for-all pile-on, and multiple deck sorting for setup & breakdown. 16 decks you say? 14 too many.
I agree. Played it once and was the tigers. Huge advantage but I also went for the bow and arrows and never was able to draw them together. Thematically it makes no sense. Found the minatures were cool but would be ok never playing it again. Wildlands and Unmatched are far more interesting skirmish games.
its only a huge advantage if your opponent does nothing and buys nothing to counter how you're building or taking advantage of your race. Every race Has a HUGE advantage if left unchecked.
I actually like it but not enough for the space the boxes take up on the shelf. I agree with a lot of what tom said but the gameplay is fun if you use the correct deck setups. Its not really meant to be randomized even though they have those randomizer cards. We also play without faction traits and dont use the daggers since they suck.
If I have to curate and create decks and cards for a game to make it fun I'm immediately out. Either the game is fun and good or it's not. If I have to do extra things to make it work that is the same as "it doesn't work"
@@bruceulrich1231 You just have to use these guide as to which decks you pull from the box. Your not curating like a lcg. The recommended setups ensure cards like hunting nets and meteors are in the same game so you can make combos.
I love Dominion, but I do not pull out purely random combinations of cards, as you could end up with lame, lackluster selections that will not effectively combo. Selecting decks to optimize the game is simply best practice. I don't have the game, but would love to try it after some of this back and forth to make up my own mind. I wonder what this would have looked like as a four square review ... Thanks @thereal for speaking up for the other side.
Love this review :), especially the summary at the end "I try to think anything I like ... I hate the board, I hate the cards, it takes forever to set up, the gameplay is boring, it is bad at all player counts".
You are not alone Tom. I played this a couple of times and it was an insanely unbalanced and incredibly unfun garbage fire. I also agreed the components are pure trash.
Eight years of watching Tom’s videos and I have never agreed with him less. I really enjoy the game. Some of the rules he hates; while maybe not the most thematic has purpose. For instance taking extra damage while in towns is to discourage turtling. He also failed to mention how important the terrain is with spells. Being in water is dangerous against lightning spells, forest damages EVERYONE in forests. The shop in the middle encourages everyone to head toward the middle; where you can sell your cards helping to streamline your deck and makes purchasing the higher cost cards easier. As far as asymmetrical powers being unbalanced…his favorite game, Cosmic Encounter, is the most nefarious for this. I agree the game isn’t perfect, but I do enjoy the game and not worthy of such vitriol. This is not to say I'm against Tom; but it seems like everyone believes what Tom says is absolute truth. I'm in agreement with Tom 80% of the time, but on this game I'm 100% in disagreement. I
Agreed. I've played some of the other games he tore apart and 100% agreed with him. Megaman the board game for example was one of the worst games I've ever played and he torched that in his review. I think he missed the mark here badly... and some of the reasoning he gives doesn't make sense so I wonder if he learned it wrong? Thinking the panda ability is bad for example baffles me... trashing cards in any deck builder is amazing and this one also gets you an 8 costed card which jumpstarts your buying power as it's a high honor card that you will see a lot with your thinner deck.
@@brettmacdonald9344 agreed, i tried explaining that to someone else and i was told it was a bad power. I agree with you completely. And for defending the game and saying i like and countering Toms points, i got asked if i was the designer, lol. Because apparently if you disagree with tom, you must be a shill (my interpretation).
You and me bro.. The game is not perfect, but it hits the spot for a game worth playing, if not owning.. I personally think the review is too harsh...😊
I was about to say he was being too harsh, but I tuned in and payed close attention. Those were my concerns with the game and I'm glad I didn't back it. The board was my biggest issue, it looks outdated. Funny Review though! No offense to the creator, but it was a pricy game too.
The creator - Darren - is a nice guy and was very gracious with his time when playtesting this game at DTW 2019. But the lack of changes made from that stage in the process to the KS launch are disappointing. The prototype board design and art are the same.
Man... I thought some of your points were valid but just wildly out of proportion... seriously, does it hurt to write a secret location on a piece of paper or would you want another component to track a single card? Or what, just remove the card (that you admitted you liked) and make the game more dull? And complaining you didn't get the cards you wanted (bows and arrows) in a deckbuilding game... really? Lightning bolt is also single use (per turn) and expensive but bows can shoot multiple arrows per turn (and are cheaper). I agree the tigers are pretty much one of the strongest in the game and the pandas are probably one of the weakest, but had you compared all the others, it'd be not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. The board being tiles isn't a huge deal either. If you don't like board variety, that's fine, but a lot of people do. I do think the boards could've been simple squares instead of somewhat interlocking shapes that they are, but it doesn't seem worth having an aneurism over. It's fine you didn't like it, not everyone will like every game. But I guess "angry" buys more YT views in the end.
Yeah he's done negative ones plenty before. The megaman board game review comes to mind (although that game is one of the worst I've ever played. I actually really liked Ignite)
This seems like Tom was having a bad day. Having watched so many reviews of his I'm flabbergasted that some of the comments he made when stating why he doesn't like something - are almost verbatim the same comments used in reviews where he's praising a game. This feels like a rant my restaurant server friends go on after the end of a rough shift, and not so much a review! PS. I don't know anyone who doesn't enjoy this game, which is rare. To all the people saying "thanks Tom you saved me from this" - I'd say this exceptional review alone may or may not be the one to solely base your decision on. As always - get a second opinion!
To be clear, I was having a great day. I simply didn't enjoy the game at all. And how come no one ever insist that people get a second opinion when the review is positive? :)
Looks not only unfinished but also untested or testers were family/friends. There are so many red flags (if we forget the production quality) that it would take while to comb through all of them. Damn. First I heard about this I was kind of intrigued. Well, maybe version 2.0 will make it better? (I seriously hate the generic art style and that basic setup....so boring, I'm already done at that point). Feeling for Tom since I think these games are like missed opportunities for great games.
Just played the game and had a meh time and was curious what Tom thought about it. It did seem to me that all pieces should just have 1 movement for free each turn. Otherwise the game is just really slow. Cards like the ice wall and asteroid encourage even slower play because you make a wall and hide. The arrow mechanic truly seemed bad. You have to draw both the arrow and bow in the same hand just to deal 1 damage, and the bow is crazy expensive.
The idea of a tactical skirmish deck building game sounds like a lot of fun but damn... The map tiles really look like crap and it sounds like this game needed another couple rounds of playtesting.
Too bad the game isn't good, I like the animal factions and the art style. This game looks like it can easily fall into the Deck building trappings of having "do nothing" turns
Tigers riding tigers, bizarre! I agree that is weird. When I first saw the tiger, panda, and lizard man I was attracted to it. But I’m not much into the fantasy games. Im not into orcs and elves. I prefer Ryan laukats world of arzium. There’s lots lizardmen in his games. The artwork is way better too. Yeah I would prefer player elimination to what ignite does. The only way I would buy this game is if it was being sold for 10$. Man the concept was interesting deck building controlling movement and attacking. But it definitely seems like a lucky game. Definitely not strategic. There’s lots of other great deck building games. Clank, dale of merchants and dominion.
Wow I did not expect this. From what I kept hearing, its supposed to be real good. Then again, I cant really debate the items Tom doesnt find fun. This was one I was most regretting not backing but this sort of makes me feel better about it. The one thing id debate is that the whole last hit gets the kill thing might be ok strategically in preventing people from just flat out running in and bashing each other nonstop till one dies and slows down the combat just enough and adds a layer of strategy. The arrow vs spells is puzzling if it is indeed as he says.
The main difference between the bow/arrow and spells is that spells have no honor value so if you draw the spell and can’t or don’t want to play it, it’s not going to help you buy any new cards. The arrows and bow of you don’t use for their effect can still be used to buy other cards. Not to say I agree completely with the design choice, but there is a trade-off that someone who doesn’t know anything about the game wouldn’t have gleaned from the video.
The kill steal is a common issue with quite a few games. While it probably wouldn't work well in a game like Ignite with multiple low HP characters, I think Adrenaline manages this the best where you get points for the amount of damage dealt. On top of that, each time you're killed the points you're worth decreases, so it keeps the group from ganging up on a single player.
@@fifrein So, you could get 1 card (more deck efficient) that always works in the area that's most important for winning. Or, you can buy multiple cards that require synergy to be useful, but as a consolation prize you can at least bog down your deck with more cards if you don't get the synergy? Sounds like a bad design choice. The bow should just come with some bog-standard arrows so that it's always usable. Make it different from the spells by allowing players to buy special arrows that do more than standard arrows. That way when the combo comes up, you can do something with it. Otherwise, at least the bow is useful.
@@VaultBoy13 Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with the design choice, and alternative options were present, but I don't think that it was as cut-&-dry as the video made it seem. I think the other thing to consider is, there are more than 3x the decks available in the base game (and double that with the expansions) than what is needed to play the game. This means that your game group could play with only melee weapons and spells. Or could not have spells and so the bow&arrows are a high investment but the only way to deal damage from range. (My game group has done both of these and enjoys both; we only ever use spells with bows/arrows in the same game when the spells are melee range [such as Ice Wall])
I actually kickstarted this and it showed up the other day and I saw how the cards were arranged and moved to my maybe sell pile, watched some gameplay as people played/reviewed it and moved it to my definitely sell pile. Very few times will i sell a game before playing (this might be the first) but I backed this when I wasn't picky and didn't dig deep into research and from watching it I know I made a mistake. Oh well.
@@thereal4579 well I also don't really have time to paint minis right now and have sold some unpainted games because of that so it's all adding up to sell lol but maybe I'll try. But I'm usually pretty good about knowing if I'll like it from gameplay and I don't think I will
@@cartergreen2309 the tactical nature of trying to counter your opponents plan and come up with your own in real time buy the deck building aspect is awesome, some real highlight moments can happen in the game and 2 players is great cause you get to combine the powers of 2 different races and try to capitalize on that power and the board lay out is smaller so it forces interaction rather quickly. obviously it is your choice, but if you're looking for a fast, light weight, skirmish game that is infinite replay ability and simple rules, this game is not only a blast, but a keeper in my opinion. / toms was wrong about almost all the rules he complained about. and other than some production issues, was wrong about everything else. He didn't have fun, that's no debatable, but your experience, like mine, could be absolutely opposite of his.
@@thereal4579 I mean I don't think anyone's opinion about a game is wrong but I'd say that's why I'm not keen on keeping it, I already own unmatched and don't need another one
@@cartergreen2309 it is wrong if it is based on factually incorrect information such as his many rules explanation gaffs. I have never played those games so i cant tell you have the stand up to them, but i agree with you.
Ive gotten a chance to play this 4x now, and have to say that Tom is way off on this one. I really enjoy the skirmish aspect as well as the dominion style deck building. Minis are cool, and great game play stories come out of this if you are patient with it.
Damn this artwork really looks such a generic mixture of fantasy related stuff and is pretty much straight up ugly. Really sounds like a dumb, boring game.
ALSO did you even read the rule book!!!!!??????? Two players get to control 2 races (having a minimum of 6 figures on the board per player and racial powers stacking (if it doesn't specify race in the power description.) ) I am convinced TOM either was taught this game incorrectly or has to rush through so many reviews, that time wasn't taken to ACTUALLY learn the rules as intended. With SOOOOOO many errors in the rules that he has issues with with such vitriol, future reviews will now be looked at with more scrutiny. PS being "In Town" and taking extra damage, prevents turtling and makes perfect thematic sense, because if your guard is shopping for supplies, you wont notice an ambush. (you cant look at it from a pure literal tile space adjacency) This was a bad video in my opinion.
Also, "turtling" involves keeping yourself in a secure position with high defense and no focus on offense. Does being in town provide any benefit to defense? If not then just being in town wouldn't be turtling, so this rule wouldn't be necessary.
@@keel1701 the advantage to staying town means you can purchase a new card to your deck per each unit in a town space, and it has the most distance between players. Utilizing the mass amount of space the town section has to buy more cards (including defensive cards that allow blocking, parrying, or line of sight advantages till you get your engine online). so yes i would say staying intown on the surface you take more damage if attacked, but allows you to ramp into you deck strategy much faster. so it is a form of turtling. so to prevent the turtling for too long you take more damage, forcing plays closer together, forcing combat more often.
@@keel1701 no sir, I own the game, and love it and want to give an alternative opinion since Tom's carries so much weight. I did the same thing on Street fighter's Miniature game. You can check for yourself.
Wow… so… I love the review in that it was fun and funny to watch, but I disagree with about 90% of his comments. The one thing I agree with is the component bit: the base circles are… not great, and the dagger snapping is way too fiddly. That said, I disagree with everything else. Re:races- this is actually connected to the terrain types. There are IDk like 6 terrain types, and they all do different things. The races have advantages and disadvantages based on the terrains and cards available in the market. In the example given of tigers vs pandas, one of the recommended market deck setups is a heavy “reduce movement of others” setup. Some of the terrain types also reduce movement. In such a scenario, playing pandas and getting a start on movement freezing is a huge advantage. The point being that race choice is one of the tactical choices based on the scenario setup - for another example one of the races can use pure spell cards as currency, but in a setup without much spells, that’s not a good choice. It all depends. I agree that the board “hexes” are weird and I would have been happier with square tiles, but whatever. It’s important that they are all different and combine the different terrains, because again, terrain management as part of your strategy in the game. I appreciate he didn’t enjoy it, and that’s for sure fine, but for me it is like tied for #1 favorite game at the moment.
What a disappointing review, I can agree the game board graphic is ugly. But the card artwork is pretty good. It’s a small first time company. I think Tom went into this one with the wrong expectations on this one. This game isn’t meant to be taken too serious. It’s not recommended for 2 player (it can be played at 2) but truly the more players the better. This is a light skirmish game centered around deck building for a large group, plays fast, good beer and pretzel game. It’s a real good one, this is an unfortunate review coming at it from the wrong perspective.
for me it was the same issue he had with street fighters miniature game, yes both games have their production issues, but both are HIGHLY engaging, TACTICAL light skirmish games, that are easy to teach, easy to play, and loads of fun.
Wow. I rarely comment on videos but I have to jump in here. Much of what Tom is ranting about is either just wrong (i.e. Pandas can put a 8 card in their discard to start AND trash a starting card…pretty big head start; early game speed means very little and everyone is buying turn 1, water minions are fast, not slow, and they swarm etc. etc.) or an oversimplification that could be applied to most board games if you want to tear them down (i.e. how he describes combat). My group LOVES the water minions. And, I’m sorry, if you can’t adjust your strategy to compensate for only the final hit taking the trophy then you’re not a very intelligent gamer. This rule creates an incentive for combat, thoughtful combat, instead of just putting in two hits because you can. It creates some very interesting game states and player motivations that wouldn’t exist if you got a point for every hit. Criticizing two damage in the village is completely insincere…any gamer can tell you this rule was implemented to make buying cards a risk, and it fits perfect in this game even if you dislike the flavor text in the rulebook. I really wish Tom would revisit this review because this game sat on my shelf for months because I respect his opinion. I don’t care if Tom didn’t like this game but it appears, to me, he set out to purposefully tear this one down by creating fictitious problems he could scream about. “Luck of the cards you draw” and “takes forever to set up” applies to almost every deckbuilder so you can’t honestly list those as detractors. You can’t write down your your meteor strike? Really? Takes my about 5 seconds to type it into my phone. And you bought 1 Bow knowing you have to have the bow to use arrows? You knew that was a stupid strategy but you spin it like it’s a flaw in game design (I won my first game with Elves, Bows, and Water minions). “Just buy the lightning spell instead of the bow.” Again, Tom knows in a deckbuilder the lightning spell may not be available so if you want a ranged attack you might need the bow. “The cost of the cards are REALLY expensive.” Cost ranges from about 3 to 11, a nice spread just like every other deckbuilder. And if you don’t like the expensive cards just don’t put them in your market. Half of this review is Tom’s opinion, which he is entitled to, but the other half ranges from nitpicking to intellectual dishonesty. In my opinion, if you like deckbuilders and you like skirmish games you will think this game is a blast.
Yeah the particular bit about basically "why do I have to write down the coordinates for the meteor" makes absolutely no sense when there's the context of "the meteor hits on your next turn", so you have to guess where players might be and writing it down is confirmation for them that you aren't changing the location when you reveal where it hits when it destroys everything it hits (except terrain).
This made me so happy, i backed for $1 but let it go when the solo game was a second payed expansion that you could not get with just the base game. I am so happy i missed this mess!
"It plays 2-7 players, something like that. IDK why I would want to play a big cluster game where you are all running around hitting each other. It feels like it is best with 2 players, I guess! But again, I've got 3 characters and you've got 3." ~Some Tool that didn't read the instructions before reviewing the game. Played the game many times, 2 player to 8 player, loved every game. It's not for everyone, it has a lot going on and involves a lot of strategy, but I have two game groups that both love it every time we pull it out. Please check out other reviews from someone that actually reads the instructions first.
There is a whole bunch of 10s, that where by people who created an account just to rate the game. Even some of the new 10s, ignite is the only game in their collection somehow.
Definitely DISAGREE with Tom. This is one of my favorite games. There are over 100 cards and 11 races (with the expansion) that if there are certain ones you don’t like, just don’t use them! I don’t understand his issue with the board. There actually is a reason for all the different terrain - Lava is instant kill, forests you can’t be ranged attacked, water conducts electricity, snow you move slower, acid discard cards. Luck of drawing cards? Isn’t that any deck builder? The pandas actually had a really successful game with us getting the expensive bow right off the rip that way when everyone else is trying to save for the bow, he could just buy cheap arrows and rain terror. If anyone was considering this I would definitely still give it a look
Agree! There are so many people that take Tom's word as gospel, and call a game trash they have never played. It's a sheeple mentally that really hurts publishes reputation and the potential for people to experience such a great game
The Panda problem in his description stood out for me aswell. The advantage of getting two 2 honor cards or one really powerful 8 honor card AND getting to ditch one or two of the cheap cards before the game even start gives you a economic advantage that you can easily carry in mid to end game. Or getting a lightning bolt and pushing pressure on your neighbors to leave the city or give you early VPs. Just think of the scared ratfolk. It might not be everyones playstyle, but after the first game with my group, pretty much everyone really wanted to try them.
I didnt back this game so have no dog in the fight, but I think Tom's ending sentiment that most people seem to really like this game - even in this vid's comments, there is positivity - demonstrates the issue between solo reviews and 4Squares. The 4Square "anyone who says it is excellent, makes the game a seal of excellence" format fundamentally undermines all solo reviews. While it may the case that others at dice tower hq dont like this game, given the bgg reviews it seems quite possible that Tom is the outlier here, as he essentially accepts himself. Out of all DT contributors, /no one likes this game/? really? even Tom Jones has fans. In the end, this gives a feeling that this game didnt get a fair shake. Merchant's Cove is a great example of a game Tom did not like, but which still got a seal of excellence because it was treated to a 4Squares, not a Tom solo review. I think it should be clarified to publishers to which treatment their game will receive before reviews are made, or some kind of transparency given.
Are you suggesting this was sent to The Dice Tower for the express purpose of a review? Thats an interesting claim. It only has 126 ratings on BGG, I'd hold off on suggesting thats an accurate sample size. Of all TDT players, Tom is the biggest fan of deck builders and skirmish games. Who else do you think might have given this a better review?
@@keel1701 I mean if he is the main deck builder how does he not understand how powerful the panda ability is that trashes two starter cards and gets you an 8 costed card which also jump starts you economy as it's worth more honor when buying other cards? It's fine he doesn't like the game but it genuinely seems like he didn't play it right if he thinks the panda ability is weak. It's one of the strongest. There are some other oddities too (like his comparison of lightning and bows). I'm very surprised by this review not because he didn't like it but because of the reasons given and the manner in which they were given. It seems like he missed the mark here.
@@brettmacdonald9344 he knows how important trashing is, he talks about it any time he talks about a deckbuilder. The comments here have made it clear everyone has access to trashing though, so... maybe its not so special?
@@keel1701 That's why this is so confusing to me. His critique doesn't make sense and makes me think he was doing this wrong. Yes everyone has access to trashing but not necessarily easily and freely. In many games the main source of it is the bazaar at the center of the board and you will only do a few over the entire game... If people are playing this game right, then the Bazaar is a contested zone. People will predict you going there and punish you for it... so getting the two free trashes early is very strong... and that's disregarding the purchasing power you get on top of it from the 8 costed card.
Lol. Tom probably didn't play the game, he makes a lot of mistakes. Those who own the game (including me) have a lot of fun with it. And I'm not just saying that because I own the game, I've been disappointed with many games before (resold right away) but this one will keep my group of friends entertained for a while! Bad video in my opinion, it doesn't allow people to make a correct opinion about the game.
I knew from the comments this was going to be negative and then there was some telling use of past tense in the intro. "A game I WAS very interested in" and "it SOUNDED cool"
To me, it is weird that Tom complains about card and balance issues of this game but loved Clank! Which was so lopsided in its balance there is basically one card you need to buy and 12 cards that are even worth their cost. The asymmetry clearly favors one faction in that game too.
Tom's angry review always makes me amused.
Right? It's how I know a game is really and truly not worth wasting time on it.
I only watch angry reviews
I would pay for a Tom Hates This channel
Someone should make a playlist of angry Tom reviews 😂
But fr, he gets more frustrated when he *wants* a game to be good and it’s not.
This game clearly ignites Tom
And the award goes to Tom Vasel for the best use of “Balderdash” in 2021!
Dice Tower Judgement: I hate it.... made me lol
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
I remember playing the prototype awhile ago, it had some card balancing issues and a few cards I recommended be removed that I personally did not enjoy. That being said, the tactics and deck building nature of the game were fun, tons of content and it's an arena brawler. I'm pretty curious to see what changes were made for the final production copy and if the balancing was really this bad. I just really remember enjoying this game.
Never seen Tom so angry! Loved this video. Really appreciate that Dice Tower are able to offer honest opinions.
I’d wager their opinions are equally honest when they do positive reviews…
Check out his Door Dash game review 😂
I think he was angry because he was really expecting to enjoy it.
This review is far from honest, it's just Tom being a dick for no reason.
That's kind of my point@@PadsandPawns To see something get a complete panning in a review reassures me that Dice Tower is not in Asmodee's pocket like a lot of other board game You Tubers. That's not to say Dice Tower is not biased sometimes. It's pretty obvious when they're being sponsored to offer positive opinions. It's comforting to me when a 1 or 2 out of 10 review comes up; it means that there is at least some objectivity going on. Feel bad for the peeps responsible for this game, Tom didn't hold back!
Cluster F....ight! Woah lol, that made me look up from my work. This game sure ignited something!
I really like the idea of the daggers in the miniatures instead of health tokens. Thinking Aeons end would be benefit from that (AE is my favorite deck builder).
Man you'd think going off Tom's reaction, this was a Hasbro game
Wow. I really disagree with Tom on this one. I don't think it's a perfect game by any means, but I've really enjoyed it the several times I've played it.
that gigantic box alone is enough to turn me off - why do some publishers think that we all live in warehouses and we have delivery trucks that we can drive to our game groups.
Combat is not just: I hit you -> can't block -> damage. While it's not the main focus of essentially a deck building game there is still more to it like chain lightning spells that can travel between targets, you riding on a unicorn trampling over a target, setting a forest on fire and burning everyone, summon a kraken that just drags everyone into the water, call an avalanche that buries people bellow it, push people into a lava pit.... I could go on and on
which brings us to terrain. The statement that terrain doesn't do anything in the game is just wrong. There is a lot of interaction between certain attacks/ attack types and terrain (water/ lightning+kraken, Snow/Movement +avalanche,Forrest/fire...). Taking extra damage while in towns is to discourage turtling. He also failed to mention how important the terrain is with spells. Being in water is dangerous against lightning spells, forest damages EVERYONE in forests. The shop in the middle encourages everyone to head toward the middle; where you can sell your cards helping to streamline your deck and makes purchasing the higher cost cards easier. As far as asymmetrical powers being unbalanced…his favorite game, Cosmic Encounter, is the most nefarious for this.
Mic issues? Doesn't sound as clear as usual (like it's located far from him).
Brilliant. Any other review Tom asking if tigers can ride tigers would have been a highlight!!
This is my all time favorite game second only to Marvel Legendary, which got me started in board gaming. If you gave away or sold this game before playing, you really missed out! There is a lot to the game, but it is so different every time we play! I have found it plays great with a variety of number of players, and it's fun every time. Tom's got this one wrong. Better luck next time, Tom.
It seems like Tom is holding back his true feelings about the game. Hard to tell what he really thinks!
This is the BEST review I've seen in forever!
Always feels good when you find out you made the right call on an expensive game.
Yup. Felt bad for missing Ankh, but worth it to miss games like this by the dozen...
agreed, especially because I love Deck Building Games and this on paper sound like it would be fun for me.
Bun in this case I think Tom is completely wrong. I’ve played 7 times int the past 2 weeks with my family and my game group and so far all but 1person has had a blast. And even the one that didn’t like it really only complained about coming back as water spirits after being eliminated.
@@WickedChickenz I agree with you, Kit. I've really enjoyed this game.
Wow, this is one of the rare times I strongly disagree with Tom. I have had a blast playing Ignite and so has everyone in my family and everyone else that I’ve played with.
I play-tested this at DTW in 2019 and I had the same complaints and feedback that Tom outlines here. It doesn't look like Ginger Snap made any changes from playtest to retail.
@@daniellynch2300 it’s definitely not a masterclass in game design by any means but I embrace the chaos.
I like this game its quick and fun.
I see Tom didnt mention you cant do combat the first 4 rounds I think so the first few rounds you are building your deck.
Also in the middle of the board there is the bazzar which you can trash cards to get better cards which forces people to run to the middle.
Yes you can buy a card with honor but if you sell(trash) a card you get the cost of the card which also thins your deck.
Also its fun to push and pull people in the lava and you can throw bombs as well.
It was more fun than i expected.
fantastic points that were missed by "The Tom Vassel"
Tom started off saying “I hate this game!” Which is rare for him to be so outspoken about a game. Last time he said that, he dropped a game from the room of his house.
I gasped at 14:14 when Tom said, “I don’t know why I would want to play a clusterF….ight”
Oooo anyone remember what game got the roof drop?? I'd love to see this!
@@Xammblu_Games - Vasco da Gama
@@CB-yh3db Thanks! Going now to find that video now :)
That needs to be an official Dice Tower judgment. “Get this game outta my face, and outta my house!” ⬇️
@@jackiejlw5493 - At the end of the video, Tom should smash the game with a gavel….but not as a seal of approval. Just to smash it into oblivion. Okay, I feel a little bad about making a joke about this game when I have not played it. For all I know it might be a lovely game.
So, I backed this. Ironically I saw a demo of this 2 years in a row in Dice Tower West where the designer was recieving positive feedback (I guess Tom didnt got to that booth). The game is a basic deckbuilder, it is not a full skirmish tactical game, the combat part is the extra topping on the deckbuilding part. It has some production issues, yes, but the game is fun, it offers interesting choices with enough deck customization to make it different every time.
I also demoed this game and I must agree with Tom. It was not fun and things were very unbalanced when my friend and I played. I guess that stuff never got fixed even though we said something about it during the demo.
I would agree with Heath. I spent a good amount of time with Darren chatting about mechanics. I respect the fact that developers have vision but I know my crew and I were not the only ones providing some critical feedback.
I laughed watching this. Never seen Tom so worked up. Thanks for the review Tom
Thanks Tom. You just saved me a bunch of money and potential heartache. Very amusing review!
Ahh! So this is the KS game Tom played a few weeks back he said was terrible "six ways from Sunday"
My friend backed the kickstarter and we did a 3 player game. Admittedly, I had low expectations, but we had a great time. The deck building part reminded of Dominion (which I love), and the brawling part on top was fun and funny. Having 3 characters to move around and so many cards in the market kept me engaged!
Every deck builder reminds everyone of Dominion lol
@@12345678abracadabra Not really 😅
I have a lot of issues with ignite... but I feel like I played a totally different game here. We dealt with a lot of different and interesting combos in our games here. Granted, the recommended starting deck is really plain. But... man, there are many nuances that give place to strategic plays in this game. The fact that you can't play spells for honor but Tom still thinks they are superior to arrows makes me think they didn't really get the rules while playing this... and I don't balame them, that's one of the issues I have with this game.
I believe this game shines in finding the weird combo on the random set of cards you get for the game and trying to achieve it. Save for the "tutorial" game we never had a strategy or combo that was more powerful than others. Also, the panda is really great on high player count since you get to upscale your deck quick and rush to your neighbors. There are no walls in between you and other players when playing on the big map.
Hilarious review, I actually had this game in my cart for a late pledge at one point and I ended up cancelling - sounds like I dodged a bullet!
you didn't, game is a lot of fun, you're missing out.
And I actually did late pledge this at the last minute.
Holy cow, did he just review Phase 10?
This review doesn't resolve the 'can tigers ride tigers' issue.
yes they can mechanically wise, thematically they just run on all 4's instead of being b-pedal which makes them faster.
The answer is yes, and people should totally make this a priority.
Whelp was debating late pledging this and ended up not. I can see some people would enjoy this but Toms negatives def are things I think I would agree with
I think he really likes it down deep! I'm sold!
Cards looked so good, tiles not so much. In the end I passed the game due to higher late pledge price and went for Ascension Tactics instead. Hopefully that is the right call and Dice Tower reviews it as well.
i'm with Tom on this one. I was super hyped for this game, deckbuilding and tactical skirmish merged was an instant all-in backer for me.
When it finally arrived I had to do surgery on almost every single miniature to get the rings to fit, but also get them to sit on the table correctly.
The daggers were a known problem and i know they busted their a$$ trying to get them to work reliably, unfortunately it didn't work. I have at least 3 figures where the daggers simply don't work and after our first couple of games everybody just throws the daggers on the table near the mini because nobody wants to deal with the fiddliness of getting them in right, holding them there (they either fall out or get seized inside).
The board really is incredibly dull and generic. The notch and slot config should have been scrapped in place of simple square tiles. Even better would be one large board with optional overlays.
The gameplay.... well, I tapped into every gamer I knew that was coming out post covid and we went through 5 or 6 games, including the co-op vs dragon thing.... EVERY single person that played it disliked it. Some hated it, other were just super confused that all this production went into something that was so bland and unfun.
Yes, there is some terrain interaction, but none of it is so significant that you can't easily plan around it. You see somebody buy a lightning spell and you simply avoid water, etc. The open market mechanic broadcasts your strategy way too clearly. Which allows players to counter you before you even get a chance to pull off anything interesting. And that seemed to be the crux of the issue for all the players at our table: nothing interesting happens. It doesn't ever feel like all this effort I put in gives me any kind of emotional pay-off. There aren't any moments where you fist pump in victory. It's more like "no block? ok, done. I take your trophy, who is next?"
The co-op game... ugh, what a disappointment! We gathered all these people and did this huge setup with board and market and dragon and figuring out how the swarms of water elementals work... and for several rounds we focused on taking out all these elementals, but then somebody realized that killing the dragon was only 5 damage, and he just ran up and ended the game. Everybody sat there with their eyes blinking, saying "that's it? That's all there is?"
I feel bad for these guys. I really REALLY wanted to like this game. I know they tried really hard. I'm glad there are people out there loving it, but I am not one of them.
I’ve been enjoying this game for 8 months and I’m glad I never saw this review until now. Tom totally missed the point if the game. It’s a great strategy game to play at high player counts. The mechanics are simple, the combat is much more varied, and you can get an 8-player strategy game finished in 2 hours with the teach. It’s chaotic and super fun. I like Tom’s reviews and usually align with his opinions, but he’s way off on this one.
Great review, Tom
Oh gosh, I backed it because I really enjoy the DC deckbuilders, Clank!, and Unmatched, and Star Wars: Destiny. Seemed like an awesome combo of a bunch of cool mechanics I enjoy. Havent gotten to play yet, so crossing my fingers I disagree with Tom on this one considering how much I dropped...
you will, he's incredibly wrong
I really enjoyed it myself and am glad I backed it... and this isn't because I backed it. I've received some real turds from kickstarter before. This was not even close to one of them.
Yep, have to agree on the two previous statements. While it might have its flaws it is an incredibly fun game. No one I have played it with so far disliked it. That review was undeserved (but obviously tastes differ...)
It's definitely not perfect, and some of his gripes are accurate (namely setup time), but the game itself is an absolute blast. I've never disagreed with Tom so strongly.
Tom likes it more than me. My two least favorite game elements: multi-player free-for-all pile-on, and multiple deck sorting for setup & breakdown. 16 decks you say? 14 too many.
Best vassel review I have ever watched!
Wow today I discovered The angry Tom show and I liked it
I agree. Played it once and was the tigers. Huge advantage but I also went for the bow and arrows and never was able to draw them together. Thematically it makes no sense. Found the minatures were cool but would be ok never playing it again. Wildlands and Unmatched are far more interesting skirmish games.
its only a huge advantage if your opponent does nothing and buys nothing to counter how you're building or taking advantage of your race. Every race Has a HUGE advantage if left unchecked.
Tiger’s riding tigers are how baby tigers are made 🙃
I actually like it but not enough for the space the boxes take up on the shelf. I agree with a lot of what tom said but the gameplay is fun if you use the correct deck setups. Its not really meant to be randomized even though they have those randomizer cards.
We also play without faction traits and dont use the daggers since they suck.
If I have to curate and create decks and cards for a game to make it fun I'm immediately out. Either the game is fun and good or it's not. If I have to do extra things to make it work that is the same as "it doesn't work"
@@bruceulrich1231 You just have to use these guide as to which decks you pull from the box. Your not curating like a lcg.
The recommended setups ensure cards like hunting nets and meteors are in the same game so you can make combos.
I love Dominion, but I do not pull out purely random combinations of cards, as you could end up with lame, lackluster selections that will not effectively combo. Selecting decks to optimize the game is simply best practice. I don't have the game, but would love to try it after some of this back and forth to make up my own mind. I wonder what this would have looked like as a four square review ...
Thanks @thereal for speaking up for the other side.
Love this review :), especially the summary at the end "I try to think anything I like ... I hate the board, I hate the cards, it takes forever to set up, the gameplay is boring, it is bad at all player counts".
You are not alone Tom. I played this a couple of times and it was an insanely unbalanced and incredibly unfun garbage fire. I also agreed the components are pure trash.
Eight years of watching Tom’s videos and I have never agreed with him less. I really enjoy the game. Some of the rules he hates; while maybe not the most thematic has purpose. For instance taking extra damage while in towns is to discourage turtling. He also failed to mention how important the terrain is with spells. Being in water is dangerous against lightning spells, forest damages EVERYONE in forests. The shop in the middle encourages everyone to head toward the middle; where you can sell your cards helping to streamline your deck and makes purchasing the higher cost cards easier. As far as asymmetrical powers being unbalanced…his favorite game, Cosmic Encounter, is the most nefarious for this.
I agree the game isn’t perfect, but I do enjoy the game and not worthy of such vitriol.
This is not to say I'm against Tom; but it seems like everyone believes what Tom says is absolute truth. I'm in agreement with Tom 80% of the time, but on this game I'm 100% in disagreement.
I
i whole heartedly agree with you.
Agreed. I've played some of the other games he tore apart and 100% agreed with him. Megaman the board game for example was one of the worst games I've ever played and he torched that in his review. I think he missed the mark here badly... and some of the reasoning he gives doesn't make sense so I wonder if he learned it wrong? Thinking the panda ability is bad for example baffles me... trashing cards in any deck builder is amazing and this one also gets you an 8 costed card which jumpstarts your buying power as it's a high honor card that you will see a lot with your thinner deck.
@@brettmacdonald9344 agreed, i tried explaining that to someone else and i was told it was a bad power. I agree with you completely. And for defending the game and saying i like and countering Toms points, i got asked if i was the designer, lol. Because apparently if you disagree with tom, you must be a shill (my interpretation).
You and me bro..
The game is not perfect, but it hits the spot for a game worth playing, if not owning..
I personally think the review is too harsh...😊
I was about to say he was being too harsh, but I tuned in and payed close attention. Those were my concerns with the game and I'm glad I didn't back it. The board was my biggest issue, it looks outdated. Funny Review though! No offense to the creator, but it was a pricy game too.
The creator - Darren - is a nice guy and was very gracious with his time when playtesting this game at DTW 2019. But the lack of changes made from that stage in the process to the KS launch are disappointing. The prototype board design and art are the same.
Man... I thought some of your points were valid but just wildly out of proportion... seriously, does it hurt to write a secret location on a piece of paper or would you want another component to track a single card? Or what, just remove the card (that you admitted you liked) and make the game more dull? And complaining you didn't get the cards you wanted (bows and arrows) in a deckbuilding game... really? Lightning bolt is also single use (per turn) and expensive but bows can shoot multiple arrows per turn (and are cheaper).
I agree the tigers are pretty much one of the strongest in the game and the pandas are probably one of the weakest, but had you compared all the others, it'd be not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.
The board being tiles isn't a huge deal either. If you don't like board variety, that's fine, but a lot of people do. I do think the boards could've been simple squares instead of somewhat interlocking shapes that they are, but it doesn't seem worth having an aneurism over.
It's fine you didn't like it, not everyone will like every game. But I guess "angry" buys more YT views in the end.
A big surprise: Tom’s first ‘I hate it’ review I’ve seen. I thought Tom only poster reviews of games he could recommend.
Not at all, he does bad reviews all the time.
Yeah he's done negative ones plenty before. The megaman board game review comes to mind (although that game is one of the worst I've ever played. I actually really liked Ignite)
I remember this being advertised by a little known designer on a Facebook group. I was wishing them the best; too bad it sucks.
Doesn't suck
This seems like Tom was having a bad day. Having watched so many reviews of his I'm flabbergasted that some of the comments he made when stating why he doesn't like something - are almost verbatim the same comments used in reviews where he's praising a game. This feels like a rant my restaurant server friends go on after the end of a rough shift, and not so much a review!
PS. I don't know anyone who doesn't enjoy this game, which is rare. To all the people saying "thanks Tom you saved me from this" - I'd say this exceptional review alone may or may not be the one to solely base your decision on. As always - get a second opinion!
To be clear, I was having a great day. I simply didn't enjoy the game at all.
And how come no one ever insist that people get a second opinion when the review is positive? :)
When Tom gives the Death Stare at the beginning...something went sideways in the game!
Looks not only unfinished but also untested or testers were family/friends. There are so many red flags (if we forget the production quality) that it would take while to comb through all of them. Damn. First I heard about this I was kind of intrigued. Well, maybe version 2.0 will make it better? (I seriously hate the generic art style and that basic setup....so boring, I'm already done at that point). Feeling for Tom since I think these games are like missed opportunities for great games.
As has been mentioned in the comments, Ginger Snap playtested this game pretty hard for a few years before the KS launch.
So, Game Night In A Can is better?
Just played the game and had a meh time and was curious what Tom thought about it. It did seem to me that all pieces should just have 1 movement for free each turn. Otherwise the game is just really slow. Cards like the ice wall and asteroid encourage even slower play because you make a wall and hide.
The arrow mechanic truly seemed bad. You have to draw both the arrow and bow in the same hand just to deal 1 damage, and the bow is crazy expensive.
Please remember to be this mad at the other 90% of Kickstarters that are unbalanced
I don't think that's exclusive to KS, that's maybe 90% of all games produced. It just so happens that KS games especially don't get playtested enough.
games not unbalanced, toms just wrong, but i agree with the sentiment of your comment,
If the lack of balance gets in the way of fun than yes.
Mic seems to fade in and out btw
Balderdash? Sounds like it's beyond balderdash.
I guess Tom doesn't get the point, because you didn't buy his definition.
I love angry Tom. Balderdash!
The idea of a tactical skirmish deck building game sounds like a lot of fun but damn... The map tiles really look like crap and it sounds like this game needed another couple rounds of playtesting.
Too bad the game isn't good, I like the animal factions and the art style. This game looks like it can easily fall into the Deck building trappings of having "do nothing" turns
Game is good
Tigers riding tigers, bizarre! I agree that is weird. When I first saw the tiger, panda, and lizard man I was attracted to it. But I’m not much into the fantasy games. Im not into orcs and elves. I prefer Ryan laukats world of arzium. There’s lots lizardmen in his games. The artwork is way better too. Yeah I would prefer player elimination to what ignite does. The only way I would buy this game is if it was being sold for 10$. Man the concept was interesting deck building controlling movement and attacking. But it definitely seems like a lucky game. Definitely not strategic. There’s lots of other great deck building games. Clank, dale of merchants and dominion.
I was looking forward to this game too... ah well
You might still like it! But maybe find a game cafe that has a copy, or a friend you can borrow it from.
Wow I did not expect this. From what I kept hearing, its supposed to be real good. Then again, I cant really debate the items Tom doesnt find fun. This was one I was most regretting not backing but this sort of makes me feel better about it. The one thing id debate is that the whole last hit gets the kill thing might be ok strategically in preventing people from just flat out running in and bashing each other nonstop till one dies and slows down the combat just enough and adds a layer of strategy. The arrow vs spells is puzzling if it is indeed as he says.
The main difference between the bow/arrow and spells is that spells have no honor value so if you draw the spell and can’t or don’t want to play it, it’s not going to help you buy any new cards. The arrows and bow of you don’t use for their effect can still be used to buy other cards. Not to say I agree completely with the design choice, but there is a trade-off that someone who doesn’t know anything about the game wouldn’t have gleaned from the video.
The kill steal is a common issue with quite a few games. While it probably wouldn't work well in a game like Ignite with multiple low HP characters, I think Adrenaline manages this the best where you get points for the amount of damage dealt. On top of that, each time you're killed the points you're worth decreases, so it keeps the group from ganging up on a single player.
@@fifrein So, you could get 1 card (more deck efficient) that always works in the area that's most important for winning. Or, you can buy multiple cards that require synergy to be useful, but as a consolation prize you can at least bog down your deck with more cards if you don't get the synergy?
Sounds like a bad design choice. The bow should just come with some bog-standard arrows so that it's always usable. Make it different from the spells by allowing players to buy special arrows that do more than standard arrows. That way when the combo comes up, you can do something with it. Otherwise, at least the bow is useful.
You almost always hear good things about KS games even if they are bad or mediocre. The bias armor is pretty strong on KS games...
@@VaultBoy13 Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with the design choice, and alternative options were present, but I don't think that it was as cut-&-dry as the video made it seem. I think the other thing to consider is, there are more than 3x the decks available in the base game (and double that with the expansions) than what is needed to play the game. This means that your game group could play with only melee weapons and spells. Or could not have spells and so the bow&arrows are a high investment but the only way to deal damage from range. (My game group has done both of these and enjoys both; we only ever use spells with bows/arrows in the same game when the spells are melee range [such as Ice Wall])
Tell us what you REALLY think of this game!
I actually kickstarted this and it showed up the other day and I saw how the cards were arranged and moved to my maybe sell pile, watched some gameplay as people played/reviewed it and moved it to my definitely sell pile. Very few times will i sell a game before playing (this might be the first) but I backed this when I wasn't picky and didn't dig deep into research and from watching it I know I made a mistake. Oh well.
you should try it and make up youre own mind, its fantastic.
@@thereal4579 well I also don't really have time to paint minis right now and have sold some unpainted games because of that so it's all adding up to sell lol but maybe I'll try. But I'm usually pretty good about knowing if I'll like it from gameplay and I don't think I will
@@cartergreen2309 the tactical nature of trying to counter your opponents plan and come up with your own in real time buy the deck building aspect is awesome, some real highlight moments can happen in the game and 2 players is great cause you get to combine the powers of 2 different races and try to capitalize on that power and the board lay out is smaller so it forces interaction rather quickly.
obviously it is your choice, but if you're looking for a fast, light weight, skirmish game that is infinite replay ability and simple rules, this game is not only a blast, but a keeper in my opinion. /
toms was wrong about almost all the rules he complained about. and other than some production issues, was wrong about everything else.
He didn't have fun, that's no debatable, but your experience, like mine, could be absolutely opposite of his.
@@thereal4579 I mean I don't think anyone's opinion about a game is wrong but I'd say that's why I'm not keen on keeping it, I already own unmatched and don't need another one
@@cartergreen2309 it is wrong if it is based on factually incorrect information such as his many rules explanation gaffs. I have never played those games so i cant tell you have the stand up to them, but i agree with you.
Ive gotten a chance to play this 4x now, and have to say that Tom is way off on this one. I really enjoy the skirmish aspect as well as the dominion style deck building. Minis are cool, and great game play stories come out of this if you are patient with it.
12:37 Tom: Combat be like...
czcams.com/video/XslcgQJMZaY/video.html
This must be the inspiration behind the game!!
hahahaha, this made my day!
I think when ppl already expended that much money into a game they force themself to like it
Wow, not seen Tom gets so heated about a bad game in a long time :D
I love you Tom.
It's gonna be okay.
I'm not buying it.
I thought the cover art was a humanoid tiger attacking a chicken with feathers flying everywhere.
Damn this artwork really looks such a generic mixture of fantasy related stuff and is pretty much straight up ugly. Really sounds like a dumb, boring game.
ALSO did you even read the rule book!!!!!???????
Two players get to control 2 races (having a minimum of 6 figures on the board per player and racial powers stacking (if it doesn't specify race in the power description.) )
I am convinced TOM either was taught this game incorrectly or has to rush through so many reviews, that time wasn't taken to ACTUALLY learn the rules as intended.
With SOOOOOO many errors in the rules that he has issues with with such vitriol, future reviews will now be looked at with more scrutiny.
PS being "In Town" and taking extra damage, prevents turtling and makes perfect thematic sense, because if your guard is shopping for supplies, you wont notice an ambush. (you cant look at it from a pure literal tile space adjacency)
This was a bad video in my opinion.
Are you, perchance, the designer?
Also, "turtling" involves keeping yourself in a secure position with high defense and no focus on offense. Does being in town provide any benefit to defense? If not then just being in town wouldn't be turtling, so this rule wouldn't be necessary.
@@keel1701 the advantage to staying town means you can purchase a new card to your deck per each unit in a town space, and it has the most distance between players. Utilizing the mass amount of space the town section has to buy more cards (including defensive cards that allow blocking, parrying, or line of sight advantages till you get your engine online). so yes i would say staying intown on the surface you take more damage if attacked, but allows you to ramp into you deck strategy much faster. so it is a form of turtling. so to prevent the turtling for too long you take more damage, forcing plays closer together, forcing combat more often.
@@keel1701 no sir, I own the game, and love it and want to give an alternative opinion since Tom's carries so much weight. I did the same thing on Street fighter's Miniature game. You can check for yourself.
Wow… so… I love the review in that it was fun and funny to watch, but I disagree with about 90% of his comments. The one thing I agree with is the component bit: the base circles are… not great, and the dagger snapping is way too fiddly. That said, I disagree with everything else. Re:races- this is actually connected to the terrain types. There are IDk like 6 terrain types, and they all do different things. The races have advantages and disadvantages based on the terrains and cards available in the market. In the example given of tigers vs pandas, one of the recommended market deck setups is a heavy “reduce movement of others” setup. Some of the terrain types also reduce movement. In such a scenario, playing pandas and getting a start on movement freezing is a huge advantage. The point being that race choice is one of the tactical choices based on the scenario setup - for another example one of the races can use pure spell cards as currency, but in a setup without much spells, that’s not a good choice. It all depends.
I agree that the board “hexes” are weird and I would have been happier with square tiles, but whatever. It’s important that they are all different and combine the different terrains, because again, terrain management as part of your strategy in the game.
I appreciate he didn’t enjoy it, and that’s for sure fine, but for me it is like tied for #1 favorite game at the moment.
Thank you for this comment, I too disagree with Tom 90% and left a lengthy comment. His take on this is just lazy.
I love grumpy tom!
"A tiger riding a tiger.. Seems odd"
What a disappointing review, I can agree the game board graphic is ugly. But the card artwork is pretty good. It’s a small first time company. I think Tom went into this one with the wrong expectations on this one. This game isn’t meant to be taken too serious. It’s not recommended for 2 player (it can be played at 2) but truly the more players the better. This is a light skirmish game centered around deck building for a large group, plays fast, good beer and pretzel game. It’s a real good one, this is an unfortunate review coming at it from the wrong perspective.
for me it was the same issue he had with street fighters miniature game, yes both games have their production issues, but both are HIGHLY engaging, TACTICAL light skirmish games, that are easy to teach, easy to play, and loads of fun.
Dude, you need a hug
Wow. I rarely comment on videos but I have to jump in here. Much of what Tom is ranting about is either just wrong (i.e. Pandas can put a 8 card in their discard to start AND trash a starting card…pretty big head start; early game speed means very little and everyone is buying turn 1, water minions are fast, not slow, and they swarm etc. etc.) or an oversimplification that could be applied to most board games if you want to tear them down (i.e. how he describes combat). My group LOVES the water minions. And, I’m sorry, if you can’t adjust your strategy to compensate for only the final hit taking the trophy then you’re not a very intelligent gamer. This rule creates an incentive for combat, thoughtful combat, instead of just putting in two hits because you can. It creates some very interesting game states and player motivations that wouldn’t exist if you got a point for every hit. Criticizing two damage in the village is completely insincere…any gamer can tell you this rule was implemented to make buying cards a risk, and it fits perfect in this game even if you dislike the flavor text in the rulebook.
I really wish Tom would revisit this review because this game sat on my shelf for months because I respect his opinion. I don’t care if Tom didn’t like this game but it appears, to me, he set out to purposefully tear this one down by creating fictitious problems he could scream about. “Luck of the cards you draw” and “takes forever to set up” applies to almost every deckbuilder so you can’t honestly list those as detractors. You can’t write down your your meteor strike? Really? Takes my about 5 seconds to type it into my phone. And you bought 1 Bow knowing you have to have the bow to use arrows? You knew that was a stupid strategy but you spin it like it’s a flaw in game design (I won my first game with Elves, Bows, and Water minions). “Just buy the lightning spell instead of the bow.” Again, Tom knows in a deckbuilder the lightning spell may not be available so if you want a ranged attack you might need the bow. “The cost of the cards are REALLY expensive.” Cost ranges from about 3 to 11, a nice spread just like every other deckbuilder. And if you don’t like the expensive cards just don’t put them in your market. Half of this review is Tom’s opinion, which he is entitled to, but the other half ranges from nitpicking to intellectual dishonesty. In my opinion, if you like deckbuilders and you like skirmish games you will think this game is a blast.
Yeah the particular bit about basically "why do I have to write down the coordinates for the meteor" makes absolutely no sense when there's the context of "the meteor hits on your next turn", so you have to guess where players might be and writing it down is confirmation for them that you aren't changing the location when you reveal where it hits when it destroys everything it hits (except terrain).
We should make a meme song out of the tu tu tu tu hit hit hit hit hit dead 🤣
This made me so happy, i backed for $1 but let it go when the solo game was a second payed expansion that you could not get with just the base game. I am so happy i missed this mess!
Wow so the only fun thing about the game is dropping the meteor and stabbing the minis with daggers. That's sad.
Wow. I think he might not like it.
"It plays 2-7 players, something like that. IDK why I would want to play a big cluster game where you are all running around hitting each other. It feels like it is best with 2 players, I guess! But again, I've got 3 characters and you've got 3." ~Some Tool that didn't read the instructions before reviewing the game.
Played the game many times, 2 player to 8 player, loved every game. It's not for everyone, it has a lot going on and involves a lot of strategy, but I have two game groups that both love it every time we pull it out. Please check out other reviews from someone that actually reads the instructions first.
How did this game get 8.4 on BBG? Tom clearly hates the game for reasons beyond personal taste.
There is a whole bunch of 10s, that where by people who created an account just to rate the game. Even some of the new 10s, ignite is the only game in their collection somehow.
This was the funnest game at gencon so I don't agree at all. Its awesome.
hot damn ive never seen tom hate a game so much
Definitely DISAGREE with Tom. This is one of my favorite games. There are over 100 cards and 11 races (with the expansion) that if there are certain ones you don’t like, just don’t use them! I don’t understand his issue with the board. There actually is a reason for all the different terrain - Lava is instant kill, forests you can’t be ranged attacked, water conducts electricity, snow you move slower, acid discard cards. Luck of drawing cards? Isn’t that any deck builder? The pandas actually had a really successful game with us getting the expensive bow right off the rip that way when everyone else is trying to save for the bow, he could just buy cheap arrows and rain terror. If anyone was considering this I would definitely still give it a look
Agree! There are so many people that take Tom's word as gospel, and call a game trash they have never played. It's a sheeple mentally that really hurts publishes reputation and the potential for people to experience such a great game
The Panda problem in his description stood out for me aswell. The advantage of getting two 2 honor cards or one really powerful 8 honor card AND getting to ditch one or two of the cheap cards before the game even start gives you a economic advantage that you can easily carry in mid to end game. Or getting a lightning bolt and pushing pressure on your neighbors to leave the city or give you early VPs. Just think of the scared ratfolk.
It might not be everyones playstyle, but after the first game with my group, pretty much everyone really wanted to try them.
@@Desca2001 AGREED!
This is the combat got me. Lol.
love the ranting...
I didnt back this game so have no dog in the fight, but I think Tom's ending sentiment that most people seem to really like this game - even in this vid's comments, there is positivity - demonstrates the issue between solo reviews and 4Squares. The 4Square "anyone who says it is excellent, makes the game a seal of excellence" format fundamentally undermines all solo reviews. While it may the case that others at dice tower hq dont like this game, given the bgg reviews it seems quite possible that Tom is the outlier here, as he essentially accepts himself. Out of all DT contributors, /no one likes this game/? really? even Tom Jones has fans. In the end, this gives a feeling that this game didnt get a fair shake. Merchant's Cove is a great example of a game Tom did not like, but which still got a seal of excellence because it was treated to a 4Squares, not a Tom solo review. I think it should be clarified to publishers to which treatment their game will receive before reviews are made, or some kind of transparency given.
great point
Are you suggesting this was sent to The Dice Tower for the express purpose of a review? Thats an interesting claim.
It only has 126 ratings on BGG, I'd hold off on suggesting thats an accurate sample size.
Of all TDT players, Tom is the biggest fan of deck builders and skirmish games. Who else do you think might have given this a better review?
@@keel1701 I mean if he is the main deck builder how does he not understand how powerful the panda ability is that trashes two starter cards and gets you an 8 costed card which also jump starts you economy as it's worth more honor when buying other cards? It's fine he doesn't like the game but it genuinely seems like he didn't play it right if he thinks the panda ability is weak. It's one of the strongest. There are some other oddities too (like his comparison of lightning and bows). I'm very surprised by this review not because he didn't like it but because of the reasons given and the manner in which they were given. It seems like he missed the mark here.
@@brettmacdonald9344 he knows how important trashing is, he talks about it any time he talks about a deckbuilder.
The comments here have made it clear everyone has access to trashing though, so... maybe its not so special?
@@keel1701 That's why this is so confusing to me. His critique doesn't make sense and makes me think he was doing this wrong. Yes everyone has access to trashing but not necessarily easily and freely. In many games the main source of it is the bazaar at the center of the board and you will only do a few over the entire game... If people are playing this game right, then the Bazaar is a contested zone. People will predict you going there and punish you for it... so getting the two free trashes early is very strong... and that's disregarding the purchasing power you get on top of it from the 8 costed card.
Need a 'seal of stay the F away'
oh oh... received few weeks ago... still didn't played but no good
@@thereal4579 eh?
Lol. Tom probably didn't play the game, he makes a lot of mistakes. Those who own the game (including me) have a lot of fun with it. And I'm not just saying that because I own the game, I've been disappointed with many games before (resold right away) but this one will keep my group of friends entertained for a while! Bad video in my opinion, it doesn't allow people to make a correct opinion about the game.
🤣🤣🤣 impossible to be more clear 🤣
I knew from the comments this was going to be negative and then there was some telling use of past tense in the intro. "A game I WAS very interested in" and "it SOUNDED cool"
To me, it is weird that Tom complains about card and balance issues of this game but loved Clank! Which was so lopsided in its balance there is basically one card you need to buy and 12 cards that are even worth their cost. The asymmetry clearly favors one faction in that game too.
Clank! Has factions? Huh?
I understand that you can't recommend it, but does it get a Seal of Excellence?!?
Love deck building hare minis
Huge passsss
Funny angry Tom like always