I know there's RNG in any card game but endgame cards in Ark Nova have to be by far the weakest point of the game.
I've had a series of losses decided simply by the fact that I am offered a choice between two endgames that will score at most 2 points and the opponent has one endgame with an easy 4 like Favorite Zoo.
One game in particular made me want to quit for a while because of how unfair it was: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=502941940
To sum it up, once again I was offered a choice between Climbing Park and Aquatic Park. My opponent played an Elephant at some point which gave him another endgame. Fast forward to the deciding turns, I am about to end with my Rhino project into grabbing the last worker. My opponent commits a big blunder and decides to build instead of breaking even though he has an Eagle and not enough money to play it (and he had all the intel to know I could finish). I play my Species Diversity and trigger the endgame, sitting at a confortable 30 point lead. I could not believe my eyes when I saw Favorite Zoo (4) into Research Zoo (4 also thanks to a Science Museum from their last Hollywood tile) to equal my score exactly and win on tie breaks. Especially insane since those were literally the only two endgame cards that gave him 4 points, any other combination would have lost them the game because of their blunder.
I believe Ark Nova would be a much better game without them altogether. I know they have been slightly balanced in Marine Worlds but this doesn't change the underlying issue with them: while they give enough points to decide some games, they don't give enough to base your strategy around them. This means that for optimal play - at least in my opinion but I would love better players to chime in on this - you basically ignore them completely until the very last turns where they can decide some minor decisions to maximize your score (do I finish building my park for the extra 2 points on Architectural instead of playing one more animal? etc). Most of the times they don't matter because the score difference is large enough, but when they do, it always feels unfair.
What do you all think, do you like them or would you happily trash them too (and rework Elephants obviously)?
EDIT: ah nice I just lost another one because of endgame RNG (that makes it 3 in a row now), choice between Conservation Zoo for 2 points and Naturalist Zoo for 0 points, opponent has Architectural for 4 points and I lose because of this
I've had a series of losses decided simply by the fact that I am offered a choice between two endgames that will score at most 2 points and the opponent has one endgame with an easy 4 like Favorite Zoo.
One game in particular made me want to quit for a while because of how unfair it was: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=502941940
To sum it up, once again I was offered a choice between Climbing Park and Aquatic Park. My opponent played an Elephant at some point which gave him another endgame. Fast forward to the deciding turns, I am about to end with my Rhino project into grabbing the last worker. My opponent commits a big blunder and decides to build instead of breaking even though he has an Eagle and not enough money to play it (and he had all the intel to know I could finish). I play my Species Diversity and trigger the endgame, sitting at a confortable 30 point lead. I could not believe my eyes when I saw Favorite Zoo (4) into Research Zoo (4 also thanks to a Science Museum from their last Hollywood tile) to equal my score exactly and win on tie breaks. Especially insane since those were literally the only two endgame cards that gave him 4 points, any other combination would have lost them the game because of their blunder.
I believe Ark Nova would be a much better game without them altogether. I know they have been slightly balanced in Marine Worlds but this doesn't change the underlying issue with them: while they give enough points to decide some games, they don't give enough to base your strategy around them. This means that for optimal play - at least in my opinion but I would love better players to chime in on this - you basically ignore them completely until the very last turns where they can decide some minor decisions to maximize your score (do I finish building my park for the extra 2 points on Architectural instead of playing one more animal? etc). Most of the times they don't matter because the score difference is large enough, but when they do, it always feels unfair.
What do you all think, do you like them or would you happily trash them too (and rework Elephants obviously)?
EDIT: ah nice I just lost another one because of endgame RNG (that makes it 3 in a row now), choice between Conservation Zoo for 2 points and Naturalist Zoo for 0 points, opponent has Architectural for 4 points and I lose because of this