Locations also have the inherent weakness of being able to be challenged and removed right away before you can gain any value off of it. Before Inkland, a character's attack power wasn't as important as defense and lore. Now, making sure your deck have enough attack power became an important stat to have the option to remove your opponent's location. Cards that wasn't good before, became more relevant than ever. Maui's hook and Merlin Crab is a good example of location completely changing the context with the inclusion of locations. When I looked at the spoiler, Maui's hook ability to +3 strength was flavor text. If I have Maui already, what other characters would I need to use +3 strength on. Now that I have played against location, I have constantly wishing I have Maui's hook or Crab to take out the locations. Everyone needs to reevaluate cards that give plus strength.
It isn't a lack of forward thinking. It was by design. The problem is that people like you and MillGuy want that one-size-fits-all answer to play to the meta. Locations are great for the game. It forces actual challenging by your opponent. That was missing from the first two sets. You just play your Goat to the board and bounce it over and over for the win. It was ridiculous.
I hate locations I'm hoping they are not a permanent inclusion into the game; also the rule change allowing you to swap damage with your other characters is nonsense, I only play with a small group so there's no drama we simply do not use locations or the new damage rule
@@MoreThatMillGuy-wu9lfit's a misunderstanding right now. The physical packs have rules cards for the new mechanics, one of which says that a new feature there adding is moving damage from characters and locations. A lot of people interpreted this as being able to do it at anytime, but it's actually referring to cards like Bestow a Gift, or the Maleficent card that moves a damage counter from a chosen character to a chosen opponent.
I think locations have been fun and add complexity to the game. It actually requires players to make threat assessments and decisions based on board state. It sucks being on the receiving end late game, but it opens up design for new cards in future sets. Maybe we’ll see an Armageddon effect for locations in future sets. Or a splash damage effect similar to tink or GYS.
A big issue I have with locations is that the best ones are in the most obnoxious control colors. Red/purple has consistently been to strong and I think ravensburg just has a favorite color combo
This could have been easily avoided or at least slightly remedied if earlier cards just said "deal X damage" imo. You can't deal damage to a player anyhow so what distinction even needed to be made in the first two sets? It's like you said, this feels like a lack of forward-thinking on the dev's part. What color combo do you think is going to abuse locations most? Amber/Amethyst seems like a good bet but Ruby seems to have some good locations as well.
So far it's Amethyst/Ruby seem like the Colors to abuse it the most, With Steel/Ruby having the best options for dealing with them (I.e. Maui or Rise of the Titans)
Locations also have the inherent weakness of being able to be challenged and removed right away before you can gain any value off of it. Before Inkland, a character's attack power wasn't as important as defense and lore. Now, making sure your deck have enough attack power became an important stat to have the option to remove your opponent's location. Cards that wasn't good before, became more relevant than ever.
Maui's hook and Merlin Crab is a good example of location completely changing the context with the inclusion of locations. When I looked at the spoiler, Maui's hook ability to +3 strength was flavor text. If I have Maui already, what other characters would I need to use +3 strength on. Now that I have played against location, I have constantly wishing I have Maui's hook or Crab to take out the locations.
Everyone needs to reevaluate cards that give plus strength.
It isn't a lack of forward thinking. It was by design. The problem is that people like you and MillGuy want that one-size-fits-all answer to play to the meta.
Locations are great for the game. It forces actual challenging by your opponent. That was missing from the first two sets. You just play your Goat to the board and bounce it over and over for the win. It was ridiculous.
This is an interesting way to look at it, as a way to divert resources to have diversity, I'll have to think on it
I hate locations I'm hoping they are not a permanent inclusion into the game; also the rule change allowing you to swap damage with your other characters is nonsense, I only play with a small group so there's no drama we simply do not use locations or the new damage rule
Wait I'm out.of the loop on the damage thing, what is it and where can I find the change announcement?
@@MoreThatMillGuy-wu9lfit's a misunderstanding right now. The physical packs have rules cards for the new mechanics, one of which says that a new feature there adding is moving damage from characters and locations. A lot of people interpreted this as being able to do it at anytime, but it's actually referring to cards like Bestow a Gift, or the Maleficent card that moves a damage counter from a chosen character to a chosen opponent.
I think locations have been fun and add complexity to the game. It actually requires players to make threat assessments and decisions based on board state. It sucks being on the receiving end late game, but it opens up design for new cards in future sets. Maybe we’ll see an Armageddon effect for locations in future sets. Or a splash damage effect similar to tink or GYS.
A big issue I have with locations is that the best ones are in the most obnoxious control colors. Red/purple has consistently been to strong and I think ravensburg just has a favorite color combo
Mcduck Manor would like a word with you lmao
This could have been easily avoided or at least slightly remedied if earlier cards just said "deal X damage" imo. You can't deal damage to a player anyhow so what distinction even needed to be made in the first two sets?
It's like you said, this feels like a lack of forward-thinking on the dev's part. What color combo do you think is going to abuse locations most? Amber/Amethyst seems like a good bet but Ruby seems to have some good locations as well.
So far it's Amethyst/Ruby seem like the Colors to abuse it the most, With Steel/Ruby having the best options for dealing with them (I.e. Maui or Rise of the Titans)
I fkn hate locations. They only sit and in the right decks just play removal and gain free lore. Theres no where near enuf dmg to mass remove them