Difficulty is BROKEN (way too hard... and how to fix)

[HomeChicken]

If you are a masochist, or have an advanced degree in "GloomHaven" from playing the board game, then you will enjoy this game.

If not, then it may totally suck because prepare to spend 45 minutes on a board just to run out of an ability to move into range to even fight the last monster on a board to just become "exhausted" since you run out of movement and the game just laughs in your face and says, "Tough luck, sucker! have fun doing that board again!" Which totally sucks.

It's EASY to spend **over 2 hours** on just the tutorials and then start repeatedly losing within the first two levels. (Even "friendly" difficulty is VERY UNFRIENDLY) And once you are over 2 hours, you cannot return per Steam rules. Uh ho.

The best fix? Cheat. Yes, I said that. (No disrespect to anyone who can hang with the original game, I tip my hat to you for your hardcore nature and motivation.)

You could just give yourself a few perk points or a slightly increased movement range. (*cough* check out Wemod *cough*) It makes the game MUCH more FUN and RELAXING.

The game is just too demanding in its original form, to the point of just "gimme a break" judgey where it is just punking you.

So, if you are now thinking "crap i spent over 2 hours getting my butt handed to me by this stoopid game and now i am out $35, what do i do?" Cheating is actually the best solution.

Again, no disrespect for any hardcore purists out there who play the game in its original form. Yes, you are a badass. And hardcore, no doubt.

But for people who don't have time for that BS, just cheat (even a little) and have fun.

Cheers

[Quizzical]

There are quite enough games that are tuned to ensure that everyone who plays the game will win without needing to learn how to play. There's no need to turn this game into one of them.

The difficulty is adjustable. If you want it to be easier, then you can turn it down. If you're struggling with the game even on the Friendly difficulty, then you haven't figured out how to play. The solution to that is to learn how to play. Here, I'll help:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2751554000

[Kira]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Les White:

Riiiiiight, the Campaign mode, which is the way the game was designed, became the #1 rated game on Boardgamegeek EVER, and justified making a video game out of it, is totally broken and messed up in many ways.

What kind of reality are you living in, exactly? It's obvious that there's no mirrors in it, because you have zero self reflection.

It's a hard game and it caters to a specific niche better than any prior game I know. But I wouldn't pull the million flies argument especially on a BGG rating (where you see things like Chess rated way below Ghost Stories, and so forth). I would take any rating or ranking with a pinch of salt...

[BrUwU]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kira:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Les White:

Riiiiiight, the Campaign mode, which is the way the game was designed, became the #1 rated game on Boardgamegeek EVER, and justified making a video game out of it, is totally broken and messed up in many ways.

What kind of reality are you living in, exactly? It's obvious that there's no mirrors in it, because you have zero self reflection.

It's a hard game and it caters to a specific niche better than any prior game I know. But I wouldn't pull the million flies argument especially on a BGG rating (where you see things like Chess rated way below Ghost Stories, and so forth). I would take any rating or ranking with a pinch of salt...

I agree with what you say, but i would like to ask this, what can you name which is better than GH?

[Kira]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ohm:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kira:

It's a hard game and it caters to a specific niche better than any prior game I know. But I wouldn't pull the million flies argument especially on a BGG rating (where you see things like Chess rated way below Ghost Stories, and so forth). I would take any rating or ranking with a pinch of salt...

I agree with what you say, but i would like to ask this, what can you name which is better than GH?

Depending on how you define "good" you will find the answer. This is exactly the point I was trying to make.

GH is great if you're looking for a game in this specific niche. That is, you don't mind the complexity, you don't mind the time required to play (or setup, or even just learn) it, you want something that is a puzzle/tactical co-op game and it looking like some sort of old school D&D board game ticks an RPG nostalgia box for you. Brilliant, yes, but completely horrible as a casual game. Or as a game you actually want to be able to play in less than a day and don't need a custom sized table for. Or a game that has no element of randomness. Or a competitive game. Or a game that caters to some form of social interaction. Or, you know, just something you can pick up and bring to a friend's house, without needing a minivan to do so... Digital helps a lot with some of the bulkiness but it's still very very complex and it still takes a veeery long time to finish even just one scenario. That said I will never play GH tabletop ever, I could *maybe* do Jaws because of how much faster the setup time is in that game, but all in all, the complexity of the game is such that it's just generally unplayable for me outside of Digital.

Again, I'm not saying Gloomhaven board game is a bad game, I think it's quite a unique and brilliant game, it's just that I find it being rated #1 on BGG to be more of a quirk / anomaly than anything even remotely relevant for any discussion about anything other than how random ratings and rankings seem to be.

[MrPyro]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kira:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ohm:

I agree with what you say, but i would like to ask this, what can you name which is better than GH?

Depending on how you define "good" you will find the answer. This is exactly the point I was trying to make.

GH is great if you're looking for a game in this specific niche. That is, you don't mind the complexity, you don't mind the time required to play (or setup, or even just learn) it, you want something that is a puzzle/tactical co-op game and it looking like some sort of old school D&D board game ticks an RPG nostalgia box for you. Brilliant, yes, but completely horrible as a casual game. Or as a game you actually want to be able to play in less than a day and don't need a custom sized table for. Or a game that has no element of randomness. Or a competitive game. Or a game that caters to some form of social interaction. Or, you know, just something you can pick up and bring to a friend's house, without needing a minivan to do so... Digital helps a lot with some of the bulkiness but it's still very very complex and it still takes a veeery long time to finish even just one scenario. That said I will never play GH tabletop ever, I could *maybe* do Jaws because of how much faster the setup time is in that game, but all in all, the complexity of the game is such that it's just generally unplayable for me outside of Digital.

Again, I'm not saying Gloomhaven board game is a bad game, I think it's quite a unique and brilliant game, it's just that I find it being rated #1 on BGG to be more of a quirk / anomaly than anything even remotely relevant for any discussion about anything other than how random ratings and rankings seem to be.

All that Gloomhaven being no1 on BGG means is that it is incredibly popular among the type of boardgamers who are likely to rate games on BGG; which does tend towards the crunchy end of the board gaming market.

[Les White]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από MrPyro:

All that Gloomhaven being no1 on BGG means is that it is incredibly popular among the type of boardgamers who are likely to rate games on BGG; which does tend towards the crunchy end of the board gaming market.

...Which implies that it is not broken beyond repair. Because if anyone likes to break games, it's people who really like hardcore strategy games.

And that community, more often than not, makes artificial rules for themselves to make the game EVEN HARDER. Like, not using invisibility cloak. Like, nerfing stamina potions.

The game is not broken because you suck at it. It just means you suck at it. It's okay to suck at a game. You can either keep playing it and get better, or you can stop playing it because it's not for you. But to claim that a game who launched a sequel that was the #1 grossing kickstarter ever is broken beyond repair is absolute nonsense.

[BrUwU]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kira:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ohm:

I agree with what you say, but i would like to ask this, what can you name which is better than GH?

Depending on how you define "good" you will find the answer. This is exactly the point I was trying to make.

GH is great if you're looking for a game in this specific niche. That is, you don't mind the complexity, you don't mind the time required to play (or setup, or even just learn) it, you want something that is a puzzle/tactical co-op game and it looking like some sort of old school D&D board game ticks an RPG nostalgia box for you. Brilliant, yes, but completely horrible as a casual game. Or as a game you actually want to be able to play in less than a day and don't need a custom sized table for. Or a game that has no element of randomness. Or a competitive game. Or a game that caters to some form of social interaction. Or, you know, just something you can pick up and bring to a friend's house, without needing a minivan to do so... Digital helps a lot with some of the bulkiness but it's still very very complex and it still takes a veeery long time to finish even just one scenario. That said I will never play GH tabletop ever, I could *maybe* do Jaws because of how much faster the setup time is in that game, but all in all, the complexity of the game is such that it's just generally unplayable for me outside of Digital.

Again, I'm not saying Gloomhaven board game is a bad game, I think it's quite a unique and brilliant game, it's just that I find it being rated #1 on BGG to be more of a quirk / anomaly than anything even remotely relevant for any discussion about anything other than how random ratings and rankings seem to be.

Still throw me a bone here. Name some RPGs/Coop you think "different" but on par with GH.

I'm reading this and know sounds like trying to pick a fight. I assure you i'm not. Really out of all board games i played is Carcassone, Runebound, Arkham Horror and GH.

[GuffBall]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Les White:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από MrPyro:

All that Gloomhaven being no1 on BGG means is that it is incredibly popular among the type of boardgamers who are likely to rate games on BGG; which does tend towards the crunchy end of the board gaming market.

...Which implies that it is not broken beyond repair. Because if anyone likes to break games, it's people who really like hardcore strategy games.

And that community, more often than not, makes artificial rules for themselves to make the game EVEN HARDER. Like, not using invisibility cloak. Like, nerfing stamina potions.

The game is not broken because you suck at it. It just means you suck at it. It's okay to suck at a game. You can either keep playing it and get better, or you can stop playing it because it's not for you. But to claim that a game who launched a sequel that was the #1 grossing kickstarter ever is broken beyond repair is absolute nonsense.

I tend to agree, the term broken gets used a lot when what's actually meant is I don't like the game. GH is obviously not to everyone's taste but it did achieve what the designers set out for it.

[HomeChicken]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kira:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ohm:

I agree with what you say, but i would like to ask this, what can you name which is better than GH?

Depending on how you define "good" you will find the answer. This is exactly the point I was trying to make.

GH is great if you're looking for a game in this specific niche. That is, you don't mind the complexity, you don't mind the time required to play (or setup, or even just learn) it, you want something that is a puzzle/tactical co-op game and it looking like some sort of old school D&D board game ticks an RPG nostalgia box for you. Brilliant, yes, but completely horrible as a casual game. Or as a game you actually want to be able to play in less than a day and don't need a custom sized table for. Or a game that has no element of randomness. Or a competitive game. Or a game that caters to some form of social interaction. Or, you know, just something you can pick up and bring to a friend's house, without needing a minivan to do so... Digital helps a lot with some of the bulkiness but it's still very very complex and it still takes a veeery long time to finish even just one scenario. That said I will never play GH tabletop ever, I could *maybe* do Jaws because of how much faster the setup time is in that game, but all in all, the complexity of the game is such that it's just generally unplayable for me outside of Digital.

Again, I'm not saying Gloomhaven board game is a bad game, I think it's quite a unique and brilliant game, it's just that I find it being rated #1 on BGG to be more of a quirk / anomaly than anything even remotely relevant for any discussion about anything other than how random ratings and rankings seem to be.

Totally -- GH board game was clearly a labor of love and did a good number of things correctly. Balance, not so much.

For example, there is one scenario in campaign where you would need to put all four characters on different spots on opposite corners of the board, and kill a bunch of baddies, to open a secret door to kill two more even tougher baddies. Just managing to walk there would likely burn your whole deck, and that's ignoring fighting all the baddies (and we are talking like probably 10 of them before the final 2.

So, "Guildmaster" obviously tried to make the game smoother and more balanced. It should have had something that said "click here to start"

And "Campaign" mode should have said "exactly like the board game. do not click here if you are new to this." The plot developments in Campaign are cool, and I enjoy seeing what people have created.

So, in terms of fun and creativity the board game does really great. Otherwise, it is just crazy unbalanced. Being forced to repeat levels is lame when seeing what people have created is part of the fun. Unlocking movement makes campaign playable, but without it it is just insanely painful just trying to move across the boards into different rooms while dealing with baddies.

On one hand, the story elements with campaign are sort of cool. However, would have been better if the game tried harder to keep people away from it.

And the #1 rating I don't read much into. Only means it is popular, not a masterpiece. Like if you like it, cool. But many other games are more well balanced and not as annoying in their mechanics. If I lose, i want to be defeated, not just run out of cards trying to walk down a hallway.

A well designed game should be "easy to pick up and impossible to completely master." Merciless crushing new players in campaign mode starting on board 2 after spending more than 2 hours learning how to play (see no-return comment above) would, from a game design perspective, get filed under "epic fail." Again, if you like it, totally cool. But this was probably *not* on the designers to-do list...

[Les White]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από HomeChicken:

For example, there is one scenario in campaign where you would need to put all four characters on different spots on opposite corners of the board, and kill a bunch of baddies, to open a secret door to kill two more even tougher baddies. Just managing to walk there would likely burn your whole deck, and that's ignoring fighting all the baddies (and we are talking like probably 10 of them before the final 2.

Except that scenario doesn't require you to kill any monsters, which kind of invalidates your point, and proves mine.

That scenario requires you to loot a chest. That's it. You don't have to kill a single monster. So, as I said, just because you are bad at the game doesn't mean it's a bad game.

[BrUwU]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από HomeChicken:

A well designed game should be "easy to pick up and impossible to completely master." Merciless crushing new players in campaign mode starting on board 2 after spending more than 2 hours learning how to play (see no-return comment above) would, from a game design perspective, get filed under "epic fail." Again, if you like it, totally cool. But this was probably *not* on the designers to-do list...

This is such a ♥♥♥♥ take man. The reasoning like this, turned the entire game industry into this garbage sludge produced for the most common consumer we see right now. Brain dead, and shallow so people can refund the game in 2 hours.

Tell me this, if we take your approach, should games like War in the East should be considered poorly designed? In no way you figuring it out in 2 hours, only tutorial small scenario can take 10 hours to complete. Crusaders King 2 is a smashing hit, yet i wouldn't even consider touching it, if i don't have more than 2 hours. I bet just sorting through all in game options and reading them will take more then 2 hours. And your first bunch of campaigns will ends up in absolute disaster guranteed. Is it poorly designed just because it mercilesly crush you after spending 2 hours learning it? Do i need to mention Dwarf Fortress? CDDA?

There is many games, which is NOT easy to pick up, like afformentioned games above, yet they are amaizing hits in the industry because how deep they are after you jump through initial hurdles. Not everyone wants yet another Mass Farcry Call of Creed 179 Revenge of Captain half-Price off.

[-RAISTLIN-]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από -RAISTLIN-:

cheating is for losers.

[Lynnuxx]

I'm coming from the boardgame where we play a 3 character-campaign.
I bought this game last week and started a 4-character campaign with the original boardgame rules and on normal difficulty.
One of my first thoughts were: for players new to Gloomhaven this will be very hard.
I myself had trouble to coordinate the actions of the 4 characters and in addition fought a bit with the GUI. This led to a few mistakes but to my surprise the first three scenarios I finished with a lot of gold, all chests looted and all characters leveled up with one additional perk and managed to exhaust one character in every scenario so far.
So I guess experience helps a lot.

But a scenario takes a lot of time, way more than in the boardgame. That's mainly due to the 4 characters.
Recommendation to new players (to Gloomhaven at all):
- Maybe begin in Guildmaster. This seems to be easier due to the tutorials and short basic missions. So you will have more success and less frustration at the beginning.
- If starting a campaign maybe only start with a 2 character group for easier coordination.
- If a scenario is too hard, just turn down the difficulty. This is totally ok and not cheating since you'll get less rewards. Sometimes a scenario is simply too hard for a specific group setup.
- If you've earned enough gold per scenario, you can donate 10 gold in the sanctuary to get two bless cards into your attack modifier deck. Those will help in the scenarios and donations will help to increase the prosperity of Gloomhaven. Try to balance the donations with the item purchases.
- One common mistake at the beginning in Gloomhaven is to think/expect that there's a tank class like in most RPGs. There's not. Even the tankiest character in Gloomhaven will go down quickly without support, especially in 4 character groups. So stay away from enemies, retreat and come back. Use ranged attacks and alternating low/high intiative. Btw. that's why not only cards with low initiative values are good, the ones with very high values are too.

[Hehaho15]

I have to say, having played tabletop games in the same vein as Gloomhaven, and having played some of the tutorials (which suck in how they try to teach it)... It is hard to pickup, and the exhaustion mechanic, and burning cards to short/long rest, are pretty punishing when you don't even know how long the scenario will be.

I have to say, that I don't care for the way exhaustion is implemented in practice.

I feel that if this was introduced at a table, the person demo-ing it did a bad job of teaching it.

[Greymantle]

If you are new to the game its fun if you like hitting your head on a wall. The game design is poor at best if you are new to the game. If you have to spend hours watching others and or reading up on strategies to get through the first mission they have already failed. I returned the game it was nothing but frustration at the start running out of cards over and over again.