Is this game too difficult?

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/bugs
User avatar
Remkar
Posts: 444
Joined: 25 March 2021, 22:10

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Remkar »

Played my 2nd game today (kept it on solo and easiest setting with recommended characters) and partway through I realized I could probably rush the win.

Won with 27 cards left in the player deck.

I'll have to try playing a hot seat game, though, because it definitely might be easier when playing solo.
User avatar
Remkar
Posts: 444
Joined: 25 March 2021, 22:10

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Remkar »

Played a 3rd game.

Upped the difficulty to standard but kept the preselected characters (and was still playing solo mode).

Beat it easily with 30 cards remaining in the player deck and lots of resources and hope remaining.

So, for those having trouble, I would definitely recommend using the preset characters, as that might give a clearer path to victory.

Curious to try random characters (because I feel like the preselected characters are in great locations and have great powers to help with the base objectives quickly).
Also curious to try playing hot seat. Rereading the rules and how they differ from solo, I can't tell which might be harder. Hot seat/multiplayer gives you access to way more cards without having to discard (or get forced to play cards sub optimally to avoid discarding) and makes it easier to do the prepare action. But at the cost of the shared pool of cards giving you more turn-by-turn flexibility in solo mode (and obviously making it harder to get 5 ring tokens to Frodo/Sam).
Stefan Telemark
Posts: 4
Joined: 12 September 2021, 19:51

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Stefan Telemark »

This is not for me. And I play a lot of heavy games

This has very limited angency, lucky, slow and just booring, Cards are just - not usable ; in another region, not the correct character etc and there is the enemy deck - chaos and lack of mitigation and then the dice roll - come on ; just to make you spend the valuable resources you have scraped by....

Prefer Iberia any day of the week if it is a Pandemic game we play and If I want to play LotR then https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/115 ... nd-edition is the game to play

Why don't have more difficult levels I wonder to make it more accesible - My rating from 1 to 10 is a 2 or possible a 3 is you like to play 2+ hour long game and fail every time - this will be short lived hyperbolia
Last edited by Stefan Telemark on 07 June 2025, 20:04, edited 1 time in total.
JuniHart
Posts: 11
Joined: 06 June 2025, 08:35

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by JuniHart »

I lost again today, so I feel I should share some of my feelings. If you are used to the long game, don't. This game is heavily favoured to the rush.

There is limited resources for special moves, as much fun as it is to zip through the Misty Mountains, you tend to run out of counters. Why even bother with Preparing if you can just burn through your cards?

Consider each objective requires 25% - 50% of the maximum number of counters available through the whole game at slow speed. And 50% - 100% of counters at fast speed. :lol:

Then those counters are split across five player pools? :lol:

Ie. There might be a maximum of 13 Gold Ring Counters in any game. Now you must trade between players for Frodo and Sam to be carrying 5 of those to complete the last objective.

You have been keeping track of how many ring cards have been used or lost along the way? :geek:
User avatar
Dan Gogh
Posts: 1
Joined: 05 December 2020, 05:40

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Dan Gogh »

I’ve played this a few times now, solo and with a second player. I think I won twice, so maybe a 30-40% success rate, mostly on intro difficulty. I’d like to provide some feedback for the designers, as I really wanted to like this game, and I really enjoy some mechanics, but overall it feels very luck based with lots of time waiting with nothing particular obvious to do.

The problem is there are too many card types, and you need specific types to complete objectives, but you only draw two cards per turn. This results in some games where you just don’t draw what you need and there’s nothing you can do. It’s also really slow to travel and pass cards, as the map is large and shortcuts are yet another thing that require cards (or tokens). I agree with some other posters that the research station mechanic in pandemic helps with mobility a lot, and makes the game much more strategic and enjoyable. (As a comparison, I can win pandemic probably 70-ish% of the time on the hardest difficulty, although I have a lot more experience with it). Pandemic almost never feels like a slog or waiting game the way this game does. Perhaps if you could travel between havens, that would help (although maybe not thematic).

Another thought is if you could acquire resources without luck of the draw, it would empower the player to overcome bad luck more. For instance maybe if you could spend an action at havens or other locations to get tokens. Or if each card could be used as two or more types. There are lots of options, but just waiting to draw the cards you need feels tedious.

Anyway, I agree with the sentiment of this thread, but I’d say it’s too random as opposed to too hard. It feels like more of a luck issue than a skill issue (I’m not an expert but it seems impossible to make progress when you don’t draw the right cards). Also the randomness of characters can sometimes be a factor since some are much better than others.

That said I’ll add some positives about the game in case the designers read this. I really like the marching armies. It feels really thematic and ominous. It also adds a lot of strategy to see where you need to go to defend. I like the multiple and diverse objectives, as opposed to pandemic where the objective is always the same (which isn’t bad either, but variety is always nice). The game feels very thematic too.

Hopefully the designers can revise this a little because I’d really like to enjoy this game. It feels so close to being great, but honestly it’s just not that fun as it is, which is a shame given how much thought and work obviously went into it. But I feel it just needs some minor tweaks to overcome the randomness pitfall and could set that point actually be a favorite game!
JuniHart
Posts: 11
Joined: 06 June 2025, 08:35

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by JuniHart »

When I get the physical version of this game in September, we will probably come up with a set of house rules to make it easier and more fun. :mrgreen: Double resources, while keeping everything else relatively constant with something like this:

***Casual Difficulty***

Step 8 of Setup:

1-4 Players, shuffle and Select twice as many Event cards. Put half of these cards aside for the new midgame rule. Mix the other half with the Player Cards as per normal.
5 Players, Mix the normal number of Event cards into the Player deck, but place all the unused Event cards aside for the new midgame rule.

Step 9 of Setup:

Divide the remaining Player cards into only two stacks, Shuffle and add one Skys Darken Card to each stack and proceed as normal. Put 2 more Skys Darken cards with the Event cards you have already put aside for the new midgame rule. Put the rest of the Unused cards back in the game box as normal.

Playing the game:

*Actions Fellowship and Prepare now free and no longer consume a Do action.

*Draw 4 player cards instead of 2.

*Hand limit is now 9.

*The first time the player deck runs out of cards, execute the new midgame rule below.

Midgame:

*Remove all Event and Skys Darken cards from the players discarded deck.

*Add half the Event and Skys Darken Cards kept aside for this rule to each half of the discarded player territory cards.

*Thouroughly shuffle each half of the midgame player deck separately and use them to replensh the players pickup deck.

*The Second time the players deck is exhausted, the hope loss rule applies as nornal.
User avatar
Remkar
Posts: 444
Joined: 25 March 2021, 22:10

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Remkar »

Stefan Telemark wrote: 06 June 2025, 17:28 This is not for me. And I play a lot of heavy games

This has very limited angency, lucky, slow and just booring, Cards are just - not usable ; in another region, not the correct character etc and there is the enemy deck - chaos and lack of mitigation and then the dice roll - come on ; just to make you spend the valuable resources you have scraped by....

Prefer Iberia any day of the week if it is a Pandemic game we play and If I want to play LotR then https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/115 ... nd-edition is the game to play

Why don't have more difficult levels I wonder to make it more accesible - My rating from 1 to 10 is a 2 or possible a 3 is you like to play 2+ hour long game and fail every time - this will be short lived hyperbolia
I just watched the early part of your most recent game out of curiosity.

You make quite a few mistakes and questionable plays just in your first 8 turns.

You also appear to not understand some of the rules (how Eowin's special ability works against the Nazgul and the timing of using valor to remove enemy troops in battle for example).

You also let your hand size get above 7 WAY too often and are forced to discard a lot of cards for no good reason.

From my plays so far, I feel like this game is at or close to 100% winnable on easy. And very close to 100% winnable on standard difficulty with recommended characters. My guess is that it is probably drops to the mid (maybe low) 90%s for standard with random characters if you are playing very efficiently.
JuniHart
Posts: 11
Joined: 06 June 2025, 08:35

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by JuniHart »

Remkar wrote: 09 June 2025, 20:10
Stefan Telemark wrote: 06 June 2025, 17:28 This is not for me. And I play a lot of heavy games

This has very limited angency, lucky, slow and just booring, Cards are just - not usable ; in another region, not the correct character etc and there is the enemy deck - chaos and lack of mitigation and then the dice roll - come on ; just to make you spend the valuable resources you have scraped by....

Prefer Iberia any day of the week if it is a Pandemic game we play and If I want to play LotR then https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/115 ... nd-edition is the game to play

Why don't have more difficult levels I wonder to make it more accesible - My rating from 1 to 10 is a 2 or possible a 3 is you like to play 2+ hour long game and fail every time - this will be short lived hyperbolia
I just watched the early part of your most recent game out of curiosity.

You make quite a few mistakes and questionable plays just in your first 8 turns.

You also appear to not understand some of the rules (how Eowin's special ability works against the Nazgul and the timing of using valor to remove enemy troops in battle for example).

You also let your hand size get above 7 WAY too often and are forced to discard a lot of cards for no good reason.

From my plays so far, I feel like this game is at or close to 100% winnable on easy. And very close to 100% winnable on standard difficulty with recommended characters. My guess is that it is probably drops to the mid (maybe low) 90%s for standard with random characters if you are playing very efficiently.
I want to disagree with both extreme views. The average player wants to play a game on the easiest difficulty level and have a reasonable chance of winning. It is not about the individual player skill or hyperbole, but suggesting changes to either rules or hints, so it follows game theory better.

This game is strongly influenced by both luck and strategy. It is not correct to say that 100% can be won with the right strategy. There are combinations of black cards than can wipe 4 to 6 hope out in one turn if you have run out of the right kind of counters.

If the game is improved before release, which I am sure is the reason it has been put on BGA before physical release, then rather than being hyperbole, the end product could be better than predicted. I am siding with those who have tried the game and reported that it is too difficult for the average player to manage resources across huge geographic distance barriers.

Yes Arwen helps, but I still lost my last game when I got double searched just before the last objective. Partly because I played the Eagles card on Frodo and Sam, partly because I had used so many friendship cards against early random searches, and partly because I got random searched immediately after playing the Eagles card.
User avatar
Siegel
Posts: 2
Joined: 13 August 2024, 07:59

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Siegel »

I have only played once so far (solo), though that is partly because it felt quite a slog. As a fan of both Pandemic and Lord of the Rings games, I think my biggest problem was that I kept feeling my characters had little useful to do while waiting for the right cards to turn up. Some of this may be inexperience in the game so I would be keen to know if that is common.

In Pandemic, there is always something useful to do and when things go badly, more things need doing than you can get to. Here, I felt my options narrow. I needed to save symbols for the objectives, but then couldn't use them to take interesting actions. It seems that if I buy this to play with friends in person, I'll need to give them something of a strategy outline along with the rules teach.
User avatar
Calmon70
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 August 2020, 20:58

Re: Is this game too difficult?

Post by Calmon70 »

Game is pretty easy when played solo by good players (didn't lose a single one after initial 2-3 games I abandoned while learning the mechanics) and nearly impossible to play multiplayer turnbased. Frodo player especially should know how to play the game otherwise is instant loss. Also other roles should do what they are good in their roles like boromir go conquering shadow fortresses, free recruiter should well... free recruit, free symbols collectors should do this, etc.
Post Reply

Return to “The Fate of the Fellowship”