Yea, I have to disagree with most of what you said. 4-6 turns gets you out of early game and into mid game, many games can make it 12 or 15 turns. Each color does have specific things and strengths they do that the other colors can't, yellow has a lot of remove damage to draw, purple has quite a few play a card to bounce a card to your hand, blue has a lot of ramp, red has the only board wipe, green has a lot of make your opponents discard, silver has resist and the best spot removal... so picking your two colors to build with absolutely makes a huge difference and surprisingly enough, so far no two colors dominate, when I go to a card shop and play every color is in decks people bring. So for balance, the game is amazing, in casual play you can build a working deck out of most of the mechanics, and for competitive play in Lorcana the meta is VERY varied, it feels like every week there is a new type of deck some one figures out that looks really good, the top 10 decks in a big tourney might only have a few decks that look similar vs other games where there are only 1 or 2 viable decks that everyone plays. Starter decks in any card game are pretty low power.. you have one or two cards for each mechanic to show you how it works and to maybe get lucky with and pull something cool off. But any deck you put a little thought into is going to beat a starter. I think the foundation so far is very solid and I know I am enjoying the game quite a bit.
I think for a very surface level look this is ok, but I feel value on starter decks here are in fact way too high. Firstly, the colors do have impact to their "identities" Sapphire - focused on ink generation (ramp) Ruby - rush/aggressive challenging/control Steel - alot of removal actions/songs, resist keywords Emerald - discard / wittling down opponent (combo) Amber - low cost, flood characters / singers (people who can sing songs for cheaper) Amethyst - card draw, combo, evasives While not 100% only these things will be found in those colors, I would say each color has an identity that makes up 70-75% of its card pool, that when pairing colors, will pretty much determine the play patterns/goals of said color combinations. Starter decks, are very hit/miss I will admit. They are more focused around the specific keyword or theme that was released in the set, without putting alot of "rare" cards into the mix. Alot of starters can be improved by just removing the filler and adding more copies of engine cards. This will make it alot more consistent. Lorcana challenge in Atlanta is happening this weekend. 2000 players attended. I would recommend watching a bit of gameplay and how the players play their lines with more optimally focused strategies. I have found that this game in particular, do to its freedom on turn structure/action order, and the resource management of knowing what card to sacrifice based on matchup, that giving 2 players the exact decklist, will result in variety of results due to pilot difference. Lorcana feels more like a game of chess than a standard tcg, as it currently stands. And I welcome it.
Also pixelborn, a fan made platform openly supported by ravensburger, has a very active player base. You can get access to every card, and play digitally. Alot of players use this to stress test their deck makeups, and tweak. They have a $5K+ tournament every 2 weeks, that generate great data when meta is concerned due to the bigger sample size and variety of decklists that play. I would recommend, playing some pixelborn, grab a cohesive optimized deck off dreamborn or inkdecks and play. You'll find the lines are alot more enjoyable and less clunky than the starter decks have currently.
I really appreciate you enlightening me about the card types. I was stumped haha. You clearly have passion and a lot of game knowledge and I 100% respect it. I’ll take into consideration what you said about replacing filler cards. Ive played all the other tcgs and notably a lot of hearthstone so i’m used to playing those already structured decks with every card serving a real purpose. Thanks a ton for your input and your comment(s)!
Worst take I've seen on Lorcana. Pretty much all the comments sum it up. You need to take a deep dive on the card game and actually learn it. Into the inklands meta was very diverse. Steelsong, Emerald/amethyst discard, red/blue pawpsicle and more were all viable. Ursula's return meta is still developing but it is looking like its gonna be a fun meta again. Highly recommend taking a second look.
Yeah, i totally disagree with you. Take in consideration the game is fairly new, and devs don't want to make the mistake MTG, Yugi and Pokemon did (eveybody know what mistakes we are talking about)+
I did take into consideration that the game is fairly new, and in no way am I saying the game isn’t fun. I just hope the game is taken in the right direction. These are just my first thoughts after playing and are subject to change. Thanks for watching and I appreciate your comment :)
This is a pretty terrible review of the game. It's obvious that the reviewer it's another one of those folks that wants this to be Magic and is upset that it isn't. And for someone that has played Magic, I can't believe they had the gall to say that some of the cards aren't playable. MtG has thousands upon thousands of cards that are not playable. Every single release is padded with cards that will never make it into a competitive deck.
Yea, I have to disagree with most of what you said. 4-6 turns gets you out of early game and into mid game, many games can make it 12 or 15 turns. Each color does have specific things and strengths they do that the other colors can't, yellow has a lot of remove damage to draw, purple has quite a few play a card to bounce a card to your hand, blue has a lot of ramp, red has the only board wipe, green has a lot of make your opponents discard, silver has resist and the best spot removal... so picking your two colors to build with absolutely makes a huge difference and surprisingly enough, so far no two colors dominate, when I go to a card shop and play every color is in decks people bring. So for balance, the game is amazing, in casual play you can build a working deck out of most of the mechanics, and for competitive play in Lorcana the meta is VERY varied, it feels like every week there is a new type of deck some one figures out that looks really good, the top 10 decks in a big tourney might only have a few decks that look similar vs other games where there are only 1 or 2 viable decks that everyone plays. Starter decks in any card game are pretty low power.. you have one or two cards for each mechanic to show you how it works and to maybe get lucky with and pull something cool off. But any deck you put a little thought into is going to beat a starter. I think the foundation so far is very solid and I know I am enjoying the game quite a bit.
backing music from around 2 mins makes it so hard to listen to the video
I think for a very surface level look this is ok, but I feel value on starter decks here are in fact way too high.
Firstly, the colors do have impact to their "identities"
Sapphire - focused on ink generation (ramp)
Ruby - rush/aggressive challenging/control
Steel - alot of removal actions/songs, resist keywords
Emerald - discard / wittling down opponent (combo)
Amber - low cost, flood characters / singers (people who can sing songs for cheaper)
Amethyst - card draw, combo, evasives
While not 100% only these things will be found in those colors, I would say each color has an identity that makes up 70-75% of its card pool, that when pairing colors, will pretty much determine the play patterns/goals of said color combinations.
Starter decks, are very hit/miss I will admit. They are more focused around the specific keyword or theme that was released in the set, without putting alot of "rare" cards into the mix. Alot of starters can be improved by just removing the filler and adding more copies of engine cards. This will make it alot more consistent.
Lorcana challenge in Atlanta is happening this weekend. 2000 players attended. I would recommend watching a bit of gameplay and how the players play their lines with more optimally focused strategies. I have found that this game in particular, do to its freedom on turn structure/action order, and the resource management of knowing what card to sacrifice based on matchup, that giving 2 players the exact decklist, will result in variety of results due to pilot difference. Lorcana feels more like a game of chess than a standard tcg, as it currently stands. And I welcome it.
Also pixelborn, a fan made platform openly supported by ravensburger, has a very active player base. You can get access to every card, and play digitally. Alot of players use this to stress test their deck makeups, and tweak. They have a $5K+ tournament every 2 weeks, that generate great data when meta is concerned due to the bigger sample size and variety of decklists that play. I would recommend, playing some pixelborn, grab a cohesive optimized deck off dreamborn or inkdecks and play. You'll find the lines are alot more enjoyable and less clunky than the starter decks have currently.
I really appreciate you enlightening me about the card types. I was stumped haha. You clearly have passion and a lot of game knowledge and I 100% respect it. I’ll take into consideration what you said about replacing filler cards. Ive played all the other tcgs and notably a lot of hearthstone so i’m used to playing those already structured decks with every card serving a real purpose. Thanks a ton for your input and your comment(s)!
Worst take I've seen on Lorcana. Pretty much all the comments sum it up. You need to take a deep dive on the card game and actually learn it. Into the inklands meta was very diverse. Steelsong, Emerald/amethyst discard, red/blue pawpsicle and more were all viable. Ursula's return meta is still developing but it is looking like its gonna be a fun meta again. Highly recommend taking a second look.
My daugther and me enjoy it a lot. I used to play a lot of MTG a lot of years ago.
Thats awesome! My brother and I used to play some magic as well.
Yeah, i totally disagree with you. Take in consideration the game is fairly new, and devs don't want to make the mistake MTG, Yugi and Pokemon did (eveybody know what mistakes we are talking about)+
I did take into consideration that the game is fairly new, and in no way am I saying the game isn’t fun. I just hope the game is taken in the right direction. These are just my first thoughts after playing and are subject to change. Thanks for watching and I appreciate your comment :)
This is a pretty terrible review of the game. It's obvious that the reviewer it's another one of those folks that wants this to be Magic and is upset that it isn't.
And for someone that has played Magic, I can't believe they had the gall to say that some of the cards aren't playable.
MtG has thousands upon thousands of cards that are not playable. Every single release is padded with cards that will never make it into a competitive deck.