Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

KK
Kevin Klemme
March 09, 2020
35146 2
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
January 27, 2020
20825 0
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
August 12, 2019
7405 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 19, 2023
3967 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 14, 2023
3498 0
Hot

Mycelia Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 12, 2023
2075 0
O
oliverkinne
December 07, 2023
2583 0

River Wild Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 05, 2023
2255 0
O
oliverkinne
November 30, 2023
2496 0
J
Jackwraith
November 29, 2023
3016 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
November 28, 2023
1973 0
S
Spitfireixa
October 24, 2023
3692 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
October 17, 2023
2625 0
O
oliverkinne
October 10, 2023
2461 0
O
oliverkinne
October 09, 2023
2289 0
O
oliverkinne
October 06, 2023
2506 0

Outback Crossing Review

Board Game Reviews
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)

Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.

× Talk about collectible card here.

Thunderstone Advance

More
10 Jan 2012 22:12 #112458 by QPCloudy
Ok, so, I am very PRO Thunderstone as it is now. Today AEG put up a new post detailing the basic TS: A cards. Son, I am disappoint, for serious.

www.alderac.com/thunderstone/2012/01/10/get-down-to-basics/

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Jan 2012 22:29 #112462 by san il defanso
Well, the cards look tons better to my eye. I think that the old graphic design was a little too dark (in palette, not attitude). Also, adding icons to the cards is a good move. Now people will be able to tell the VP from the strength. Good move in my book.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Jan 2012 23:02 #112464 by Last Alchemist
I am also very pro Thunderstone, and I like the card changes. The cards themselves seem like they will make the game more dynamic out of the gate. I like the layout as well. I think the icons are clean and crisp and will shorten the time it takes new players to get up to speed with all of the iconography of the game, which I know was a HUGE hurdle for some new players.

Dan

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Jan 2012 23:11 #112465 by Michael Barnes
The new graphic design is WAY WAY WAY better. It looks contemporary, not like mid-1990s game art and typography. It's lighter too, as San noted, which is good. It just looks better.

I like changing the Miltia to something more functional, that's good.

But taking out Iron Rations? WTF?! That was such a great callback to classic D&D...

It's going to take a very long time for QPCloudy's opinions to hold any weight here at this Web site anyway, but I think disappointment is premature. This could turn out to be a good revision that makes a good game better overall.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Jan 2012 23:26 #112467 by Space Ghost
I like the cards....except, I think the bag of gold in the center looks sloppy and is hard to parse. Overall good changes.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 00:04 #112470 by QPCloudy
Replied by QPCloudy on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
I guess the biggest problem with these preview cards that I saw was the changing or Militia to Regular. Regular just sounds so. . . generic. After thinking about it, ok, the icons do make things clearer. Explaining to my friends strength and weight was confusing for them, although I never could figure out why. This means this, accept it.

I dunno, they just don't feel as Thunderstoney as the originals. Who knows, maybe seeing more village cards and more monster cards will help.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 00:44 - 11 Jan 2012 00:44 #112472 by Grudunza
Replied by Grudunza on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
I think I agree with QPCloudy about the look of them. I haven't been a huge Thunderstone fan... it's alright, and I'll probably be more eager to try out the new version, but I'm not that crazy about it. But the look of these cards seems dull to me. Very generic in a way. I thought the original version had more character. Anyway, here's a comparison...



Last edit: 11 Jan 2012 00:44 by Grudunza.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 00:48 #112473 by Last Alchemist

Space Ghost wrote: I like the cards....except, I think the bag of gold in the center looks sloppy and is hard to parse. Overall good changes.


I thought so as well, until I clicked on the picture and saw the larger example of the card. AEG usually has good printing for their cards so I imagine this will be extremely easy to parse once you have the actual cards in hand.

Dan

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 02:05 #112478 by QPCloudy
Replied by QPCloudy on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance

Grudunza wrote: I think I agree with QPCloudy about the look of them. I haven't been a huge Thunderstone fan... it's alright, and I'll probably be more eager to try out the new version, but I'm not that crazy about it. But the look of these cards seems dull to me. Very generic in a way. I thought the original version had more character. Anyway, here's a comparison...



Now that I see them side by side, I absolutely like the original look much more. Ok, update the icons, i.e. Iron Rations for weight and bag of gold for gold, but I am really going to miss the original look.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 03:14 #112482 by Egg Shen
Replied by Egg Shen on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
The layout on the cards appear to be an improvement and the icons are a welcome change. I don't think the art is quite as good. Then again its tough to say when all we get to see is 3 cards of very generic units. The cards in general now look like something you would see from FFG. I dunno, it just reminds me of their layout for some reason.

I've got my eye on this new version of Thunderstone. I hope they can really make it shine...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 10:53 #112495 by Hex Sinister
Seems like there's less area for the artwork. Not thrilled about that. I like how the original text windows have some transparency that lets you see even more of the image. The new one looks really cropped and cramped.

I still don't know why they want to print Physical Attack +1 on the card instead of using iconography. There's only two attack types, at least in Un-Advance.

Whatever, I'm ready to discover what's so Advance about it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 14:33 #112507 by Shellhead
Replied by Shellhead on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance

Hex Sinister wrote: Whatever, I'm ready to discover what's so Advance about it.


You will need to get an advance on your next paycheck to find out... I'm betting that Alderac tries to turn this into a CCG cashcow.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 14:59 #112511 by Msample
Replied by Msample on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
CCG ? Doubt it. Pseudo LCG via frequent expansions like the original ? Fer sure.

I prefer the older art. Bit more of a throwback feel to the art you'd see in the early D&D books and modules. The Advance art is a little too slick and modern.
The following user(s) said Thank You: QPCloudy

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 Jan 2012 16:00 #112517 by QPCloudy
Replied by QPCloudy on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
Just saw a quick mock up someone did combining the two styles on bgg.

boardgamegeek.com/image/1201647/boromir_...kermit?size=original

I do like the combo!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Jan 2012 02:47 #112590 by tin0men
Replied by tin0men on topic Re: Thunderstone Advance
I'm a pretty solid TS fan. I like the iconographic changes. But the "cleanup" removes some of the character. Almost reminds me of some of FFG's art - not that that's 'bad', but I liked the sort of grungy approach they took in the past.

I've liked TS enough to preorder all the expansions, going all the way back to when Wrath of the Elements first became available.

I'll tell what though, after the debacle that was TS:Heart of Doom...

--AEG chose to ship it to retailers completely lacking a full deck of cards.
And compounded the error by shipping the missing decks solely to retailers, and telling customers to go lookup the retailer for the missing components; no online or customer-support request availability--

... the above has me sitting on my wallet on the prospect of Advance (and for the upcoming NF:Coldest War).

In my case, my 'missing deck' was packed lose into a big box of packing peanuts, along with several games. Needless to say, I didn't spot it, or become aware anything was missing for quite awhile after receipt.

Fortunately, when I contacted them, Coolstuff stepped up and shipped me the missing cards without question. But the fact that AEG would leave customers swinging on known-missing components, in an entire print run, makes me question. Not to mention this time they aren't going to get the benefit of the doubt. I want to _know_ that what I'm going to receive is complete.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.339 seconds