by chaosjenkins
Trump wrote:
DC doesn't presumably scale better . It demonstrably scales better. This is pretty simple to prove.
I say presumably because I haven't run into scale issues with the size games I've played with either DC or Marvel (up to 3 players). I am limited to my experience.
Trump wrote:
I don't see what the difference is as far as card choice. Both games are following Ascension's model so the card choice is random. Why would you consider Marvel's card choice to be better?
Several factors conspire to make the card choice generally better in Legendary.
1. There are up to 12 cards available for recruiting/fighting right there on the board at any given time depending on how full the Villain track is.
2. You replace cards on the hero track as you buy them, so new heroes become available during your turn.
3. You can fight the super villain more than once if you've chained well.
4. Players tend to begin building decks based on a team affinity or depending on their choice of a recruiting or attack-heavy strategy. This often means player x doesn't want anything to do with a card being targeted by player y. In my personal experience, DC offers more "everybody wants that" cards and the first person with enough power takes it. Period. There is some variation in Batman wanting equipment and Superman wanting super powers, etc., but in general it creates that dumbed down effect mentioned earlier. Obvious buys. First person who can takes it. Neither game comes close to the common stack inventory of something like Dominion, admittedly.
Trump wrote:
Marvel tends to be easy?! You're really going to have to define what you mean there. How is Marvel easy but DC isn't? You are all just trying to accumulate points and have the most when the game ends. With Marvel, you're only gaining points by defeating villains. With DC, you can can gain points like that but you can also gain them by simply buying the right cards for your deck. That would seem to indicate that DC is easier since there are more ways to score. Perhaps you're referring to the fact that the game can win with Marvel, but by saying the game is easy you're implying that it's a co-op game and the point is to beat the game. That's not true at all.
The emphasis added is mine. From the How to Win paragraph on page 1 of the Legendary rule book. "Players must work together to successfully attack the evil Mastermind four times. If they do, then the Mastermind is beaten once and for all, and all the players win the game for the forces of good." It then goes on to explain how the player with the most victory points is the most legendary hero of all. Right there in black and white, it reveals it's primarily a cooperative experience with the players facing off against the game. Sure, you can be as competitive for that individual award as you and your group want. You can do the same thing with Defenders of the Realm and Castle Panic. It doesn't change the fact that those games are co-ops first.
You may believe the game isn't interesting unless you play it competitively, but to decry in blanket terms that it's not co-op at all seems a little foolish given the evidence to the contrary.
Given this, I listed one of my criticisms of Marvel is that it skews a little to the easy side, as far as the challenge of the players defeating the mastermind. It does, unless you get a terribly unfavorable distribution of heroes/villain/mastermind/scheme. I never said it was easier than DC, because the goals of the games are clearly different, even if you infuse Marvel with as much competitiveness as you like.
As far as simplicity, I'd have to give the nod to DC, because anybody who has played any deckbuilder ever can pick it up and play with virtually no instruction. It's dead simple. Depending on the skills of your opponent and the card draw, I wouldn't venture call it easy, though.
