Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Pretty good game.. alot of room for improvement tho. My biggest gripe with it is that defending creatures actually do damage with they defense stats, which makes no sense to me. There should be 2 rolls done. one for the attacker, then the defender using his own attack value. Creatures that dont take damage on a failed attack simply skip the defender's attack roll. Otherwise, a savable deck and more options would make this alot better.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I like it. I disagree with those that don't like the random damage rolls. I think it's the most original aspect of the game and keeps you on your toes. Play the odds and you'll win, most of the time just like every other card game. It is a good base for a game but needs more variety of cards, more combination characters and most important MULTIPLAYER!
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
any of you ever played risk with dice?
randomness plays a big role as a game mechanic in risk.
it does too here. get used to it.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
At first the randomness is rather annoying. But after playing 3 times, I got the hang of customizing the deck and playing according to the randomness. I'd like to be able to play against others across the net, can definitely go places with this.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I think the damage system should just be fixed...No random damage...Just fixed. a 2 attack monster can kill a 0 defence monster with 2 health no matter what. that kind of system.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I'm just curious... For people who really dislike this game, are you customizing your decks, because I don't think you're giving it a fair shake if you just play with the random decks.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I agree with everyone else that says there is too much luck involved. With multiplayer and less randomness, this could easily be one of the top games on Kongregate!
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I think this game is very disballanced, you need to concentrateall that random thing and i think if you make it multiplayer playable it will win weekly prize and more!
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
way too random.i mean i had 2 robot,1 death knight, 2 hydras, 1 archer 1 Cerberus, 2 ogres , 1 dragon ,and one dragon rider,i had full health he had 4 health and i lost?!?!?!?!
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
yeah, at first i liked this game though there should defiantly do something about the damage system, attack 7 with 0-7 damage is too unpredictiable
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
if you attack 10 to 2, it begins to count 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 for attacker and 0,1,2 for defender...I mean you can lose 0 to 2 and this is very bad...:::(
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
It's a good start but it has a long way to go.
Here are some suggestions:
1) More combinations, 2) Less randomness (have a minimum attack value for monsters), 3) ability to save decks, 4) multiplayer over the net, 5) and obviously, more cards.
Good luck on the next version!
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
A TERRIBLE GAME I HAD A DRAGON RIDER AND LIKE 3 OTHER MONSTERS AND I USED A SPELL TO LOWER A ARCHERS DEFENSE TO 0 AND I GOT LIKE 0 100 TIMES TERRIBLE GAME -5/5
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
good game but after i played ofr a bit it started pissing me off the attacks were more randomnized my ogre with a sword couldn't even kill an archer
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
There is something wrong with the badge. I've apparently won it, but it hasn't shown up on my profile page yet. Other then that, though, I really enjoyed playing it.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
As others have said, the game is entirely luck, and the random number generator being used seems perverse. I went an entire game winning only three fights, no matter how large my numerical advantage. Face-stomping because your 1 beats a 4 consistently is not a good system either.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I love this game. The strategy is all in customizing the deck and realizing that there is an outside chance that a weak monster will kill your strong monster and therefore, include cards that will minimize that effect. With CastleWars, there are way too many moments where I'm thinking, "Why would I even want that card?" Here, if there's a useless card in your hand, it's your own fault for picking it.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
This game is not even based on luck....80% o the time, i hit the monster and only got 1 of damage, but when i got hit, is always by 3 or 4 damage...there's something really wrong with this randomizer....
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Another comment about the game balance. I think the battle system is far too based on luck. The zeros make it too easy for a two-point character to defeat even a dragon if the right numbers come up. And make it too easy for a dragon to fail, even when it's been beefed up with extras. I think the way points are taken needs to be seriously re-thought. Luck is far too prominent. This should be a strategy-based game. It would make it a great deal more interesting.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I prefer Castle Wars, though this random thing is good - set minimum besides maximum for each monster and it will be Heroes of Might and Magic. One bug - why is Menu inactive during computer's turn? 3/5
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
this game is horrible, every one of my monsters got punished due to the poor 'luck' factor, and I got terrible cards compared to the computer, the only reason I won is becuase my opponent ran out of cards. 1/5
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
you guys when your attacking, you roll with your attck #, the other rolls with their defence #, thats y some weaker guys can kick ass
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Before I started playin I was reading the rules I like how you have them, but the luck factor is terrible for this game. I suggest add more cards and get rid of that luck factor I mean I failed with a dragon attackin a skeleton and I lost to it and it didn't even attack me...Multi player would be nice to but that luck factor kills this game 3/5