Nightbelly Boa in Quest Mode (Patch 1.0.3.5)

[Saint Ajora]

I know that the most recent patch solved the problem of the Villain Black Magga appearing in Quest Mode, but I noticed that the Henchmen Nightbelly Boa still appears in this same mode, what I find more problematic, since the whole point of the game is to defeat some Henchmen to close locations to make it easier to corner the Villain. In the time that Black Magga was available in Quest Mode, I could still manage to close all locations by defeating the Henchmen, thus completing the quest, but the Nightbelly Boa makes it impossible to close a location unless you explore all the cards or defeat the Villain (in case the Villain is there to be found), so I have to forfeit the game when it appears.

 

So my question to the developers is: is this intended? If not, do you plan to correct this?

[Hannibal_PJV]

Nightbelly works just like intended... Is it fun, or is it good villain In the quest mode is completely different question, but nightbelly works just like it should work.

[_Harwin_]

Nightbelly works just like intended... Is it fun, or is it good villain In the quest mode is completely different question, but nightbelly works just like it should work.

I think he's asking: "Is it intended that Nightbelly Boa show up in Quest mode"?, not "Does nightbelly Boa work as intended"?

[Archangelrey]

Nightbelly works just like intended... Is it fun, or is it good villain In the quest mode is completely different question, but nightbelly works just like it should work.

 

It worse with you have one those wildcard that take a blessing for every fail or the when it group with the Nec Giant that is unbeatable on the first attempt.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Archangelrey

[RedPred]

Perhaps the Boa works well as it should. But if the henchman doesn't close the location, the player goes from an average of 5 explorations for location before closing to 10 (!!) explorations guaranteed for each location with Boa.

 

It's quite obvious that players forfeit the game! It's not anymore a statistical problem, but a math one. There aren't enough turns to close all locations, because it's not possible a full exploration of every location by contract so characters must remain in position trying to win through temporary closing. Also and more important, your characters couldn't cover all the locations to corner the villain if they don't explore completely 2 locations and move to other ones!

 

For example:

6-party, 8 locations (80 total explorations), 5 turns for character and 5,5 average explorations to find an henchman and close a location. Normal administration. Not easy but not impossible.

Now try to close 2 locations with full exploration AND

find the Villain in the last two locations (if you find him before and successfully temp close all the populated locations, he will escapes for sure there) AND

close temporarily up to 5 locations all together AND

win the fight with the Villain (one try only, too expensive the alternative)...

with 5 turns for character...

 

In the Story mode you collect allies (9 to win in 6-party), so no matter if you can close locations or not, also if blessings go to 0 you could win!

Also there the villain reduces the dimension of location decks at every turn to make players get the bottom faster.

 

Clearly Boa is an additional heavy penalty for every single location where it appears now in Quest, not simply a casual henchman as others.

Edited August 1, 2016 by RedPred

[Hannibal_PJV]

Yes it reguires heavy scouting. Closing by killing villain several times.

[mccrispy]

Much less irritating than "lose a blessing from the deck for every Henchman" - and getting multiple goblin raids and the like!

[Ripe]

Well, you could consider it a "training" for one of the more annoying interesting Skulls & Shackles scenarios (hopefully Obsidian will do that eventually)... Bizzare Love Triangle. In that scenario you have 3 villains, no henchman (you add regular monster instead) and victory condition is to defeat a villain when all three are in the same location (naturally, if all three are not in the same location villain is undefeated and opening a closed location if there's nowhere to run!).

 

So to answer OP's question: yes, this is most likely what developers intended.

[RedPred]

Well, you could consider it a "training" for one of the more annoying interesting Skulls & Shackles scenarios (hopefully Obsidian will do that eventually)... Bizzare Love Triangle. In that scenario you have 3 villains, no henchman (you add regular monster instead) and victory condition is to defeat a villain when all three are in the same location (naturally, if all three are not in the same location villain is undefeated and opening a closed location if there's nowhere to run!).

 

So to answer OP's question: yes, this is most likely what developers intended.

 

I don't think at all. The problem is just come only in Quest mode, a feature with random generation added in the digital game for long term players, because Boa is classified as henchman and still comes out from the pool as other normal henchmen. That case doesn't exist at all in the real RuneLords physical game, so the physical game developer never intended it.

 

The other situation you describe doesn't exit in RuneLords from what I can see. The only similar scenario is 4.4-Under Jorgenfist, with 2 villain but still with henchmen and closing condition for defeating them. So it 's reasonable to suppose that decks in RuneLords don't let you win with full explorations in any circumstances.

Also, Hannibal explained how to win that specific Quest scenario: with heavy scout. So or you have a lot of those scout cards in your decks or you statistically fail. That s the reason why this thread exists imo.

[Hannibal_PJV]

Yes, this is a very valid thread. The quest mode would propably be more fun without nightbelly. I have very scout heavy teams, bacause of reasons. So I can beat the nightbelly heavy scenario, but not every player is. They try different buildupps and for those teams nightbellys can cause big trouples of completing scenario succefully. Not sure of this though. Some other scenarios require heavy fighting and other some another skill to beat those odds.

The dev has much more freedom in quest mode than story mode, so it is not impossible to see changes in quest mode card distribution. I still hope more custom banes and boons to quest mode, just because leveling up From 20-30 takes so long time, that is good to see variation. That is why I personally like nigbelly boas in quest mode, because They give variation to hensman pool and I don't have to everytime fight agains some other hensmans again and again... But fun factor is Also something that has to be considered. So there is dilemma at this moment. The suitable bane pool is guite shallow at this moment. I have very high hopes to quest mode in the long run! But in the meanwhile the story mode is the thing that is the maincource, so quest mode upgrades, like custom banes and boons have to wait for a while.

[Ripe]

 

Well, you could consider it a "training" for one of the more annoying interesting Skulls & Shackles scenarios (hopefully Obsidian will do that eventually)... Bizzare Love Triangle. In that scenario you have 3 villains, no henchman (you add regular monster instead) and victory condition is to defeat a villain when all three are in the same location (naturally, if all three are not in the same location villain is undefeated and opening a closed location if there's nowhere to run!).

 

So to answer OP's question: yes, this is most likely what developers intended.

 

I don't think at all. The problem is just come only in Quest mode, a feature with random generation added in the digital game for long term players, because Boa is classified as henchman and still comes out from the pool as other normal henchmen. That case doesn't exist at all in the real RuneLords physical game, so the physical game developer never intended it.

 

The other situation you describe doesn't exit in RuneLords from what I can see. The only similar scenario is 4.4-Under Jorgenfist, with 2 villain but still with henchmen and closing condition for defeating them. So it 's reasonable to suppose that decks in RuneLords don't let you win with full explorations in any circumstances.

Also, Hannibal explained how to win that specific Quest scenario: with heavy scout. So or you have a lot of those scout cards in your decks or you statistically fail. That s the reason why this thread exists imo.

 

Yes, situation like that doesn't exist in Runelords but it does exist in Wrath of the Righteous... scenario 0.2 The Elven Entanglement include a henchman that doesn't allow immediate closing of a location. So in both adventures released following Runelords developers gave us scenarios where in order to close a location we need to go through every card.

 

Considering decks in those adventures follow same rules as decks in Runelords and provide even less scouting (no Augury or Scrying spells in either Skulls or Wrath!) the only reason why we didn't get similar scenario in Runelords is because it was their first attempt and they were still learning what they can and cannot do.

 

But now, with three full adventures released (and fourth being released in few months) there is no reason to assume that having Boa appear in Quest mode is not something developers wanted or intended. Does that make the game harder? Sure. Does it make scenario "unwinnable"? Possibly, but then again, "winning" Runelords story mode is borderline impossible if you try to run it with just Ezren...