I know this is late feedback but I think you did a phenomenal job giving your opinions on this game and why you personally recommend to back it. Subscribing and wish you the best at growing your channel! PS. Especially love that you were talking at a good speed. So many times I feel content creators talk way too fast or don't get to the point fast enough. Great flow overall 💕
I love the risk assessment you do of the creator/publisher. Saves me so much time and it is something I forget to pay attention to when I’m hyped on a game.
A friend of mine and myself were burned in the past by campaigns that fell through and it was one of the main reasons why I started the channel and make the videos the way I do. It's one of the main areas we all overlook when we back games on Kickstarter yet it's arguably one of the most important things we should be looking at, so anything I can do to help is a win :)
@@shouldyoubackit Yeah - I was burned by Inside the Box and their Alba campaign. Had I done even a little research I would have seen that they had 3 undelivered kickstarters and I would have stayed away. I appreciate your content and channel
Just remember I’m just a random Irish guy on the internet, it’s important to also do our own research and ask ourselves the question of whether a game makes sense for us and our group. Not all of our circumstances are the same 🙂 But also…glad you are liking the content ☺️
Completely agree with your assessment of value. The core box seems fantastic value but that value is not matched in the expansions. I'm gutted because I wanted the new terrain, Mantle and behemoth, but the price is inexplicable - less than half the content for more than half the cost 👎 I would have liked a stretch goal whereby if they knew they had raised x amount, they could reduce the price by $10 or $20 or something.
I had initially backed at the level which includes the expansions when the KS launched. After reviewing the pledge levels and considering the content, I'd come to the same conclusion as you that the base game pledge was also the level with the best value proposition. It isn't clear what value the expansions actually bring and I worry that they might actually imbalance the gameplay by making it easier. They bring additional survival options without any defined additional difficulty scaling. They also seem more like mini expansions to me that should simply be part of the base game and were cut and repackaged to keep the core pledge amount lower. If I do decide later that I want one of them, I anticipate they will sell for much lower than $55 US each. It seems that whomever priced the next tier got greedy and overstated their value.
I think if the expansions were way lower in price it’d be much more compelling but from what I’ve seen and from what I’ve read from the community in the comments that would be my conclusion too but it seems they’re adding to it with stretch goals but really they should be enough from the get-go
@@shouldyoubackit Agreed. If the 2nd tier was ~$159, it would be more compelling. Or they could have simply had the base tier at $139 and included the expansions (saving money on boxing, shipping, art, packaging, etc. and passing a percentage on to the consumer). They likely wanted to target that sweet spot of $99 though. Thanks for your analysis. I really appreciate these videos.
That is a very real issue, for my group is usually is 2-4 and we really struggle when we've got games that are for player counts higher than that. I think games that are able to have higher player count expansions (basically having an expansion that adds an extra few players) is great at combating this problem.
Interesting. I'd not spotted this one on the horizon, and I can see plenty of appeal. In terms of the risk rating, that feels fair if thinking of Amber as a 'proceed with caution'. I watched a playthrough video, and might watch another just to see a different perspective. Overall the concept is something I like a lot, with a theme that fits legacy well and should feel like you're achieving something meaningful as you go. If they indeed deliver memorable 'moments in history', then it's going to really deliver on that promise. Also a positive, is the crafting concept. It feels like it borrows from 7th continent, but simplifies it. Likewise making cards more interesting with the elements blended into the art is a nice little innovation. In a quirky way, I also like the idea of the 'tetris' puzzle of fitting all a player's resources into the 'bag'. Clever! Concerns so far: - Character stats that feel very 1970s D&D, and that feels especially naff when combined with the 'roll against the stat for success / failure / middle ground'. Layer on some rolls that are either guaranteed success / fail because of these stats, and I could see me disliking this approach very quickly - The number of times cards have to be redrawn because they don't apply to the situation would also quickly grate. - The foraging mechanism whilst neat, might be a tricky one to explain to players - A general aversion to legacy, such that I'd feel the recharge pack was an essential add-on, even if I'd never replay the game. - I do like something more tactile than cardboard to draw from a bag, so would feel compelled to take the add-on to upgrade to resin token (the other upgraded resources feel more like a nice to have, but one I could easily decline) - Shipping, plus VAT on top of both, does start to bump the price up - I have 4 'campaign' games (The Grizzled, 7th Continent, ISS Vanguard, Etherfields) and the reality is that I find it the hardest game form to get to the table. - I'm not convinced by the need for the plastic holders for the hex tiles. Nice to have, but essential? So I'm leaning against it, though there is a chance the end product will feel like the game 7th continent could have been, and generates a much better engagement where players feel like they influence the resultant story in a more meaningful way. EDIT: On an emotional level, discovering there was an early bird offer, is definitely a turn-off for someone discovering it later in the campaign. I get why they do it, but discovering it at this point, gives the vibe that you're being offered a lesser deal, and that can be the element that tips someone from 'going to back' to 'not backing' (not that I was too close to backing).
honestly if I hadn't already backed so many campaign games that are hopefully fulfilling this year, I would 100% back Stonesaga. The art is *chefs kiss*
My hesitancy with this game is the company's previous game, SoA. I remember reviewers that I align with in taste criticizing that it was not very good. Most BGG ratings point otherwise. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Have you played Stars? And if so how does it compare?
OK I think this was exactly the channel I was looking for for years. 🥰 PS: As a non-native English speaker, may I ask you where does your "accent" come from (which part of the UK)? ☺
If you’re interested in actually playing you should never ever back any first edition crowdfunding projects. The second edition will be better. Akarios 1st had many issues, and companies should fulfill projects one at a time. Good luck having fun with stone saga!
There is wisdom in what you’re saying but I don’t think any game I’ve backed on Kickstarter has ever received a second edition. I know Akarios is getting a 1.5 errata/ rule book but that was the extent of it from what I saw
I know this is late feedback but I think you did a phenomenal job giving your opinions on this game and why you personally recommend to back it. Subscribing and wish you the best at growing your channel!
PS. Especially love that you were talking at a good speed. So many times I feel content creators talk way too fast or don't get to the point fast enough. Great flow overall 💕
I love the risk assessment you do of the creator/publisher. Saves me so much time and it is something I forget to pay attention to when I’m hyped on a game.
A friend of mine and myself were burned in the past by campaigns that fell through and it was one of the main reasons why I started the channel and make the videos the way I do. It's one of the main areas we all overlook when we back games on Kickstarter yet it's arguably one of the most important things we should be looking at, so anything I can do to help is a win :)
@@shouldyoubackit Yeah - I was burned by Inside the Box and their Alba campaign. Had I done even a little research I would have seen that they had 3 undelivered kickstarters and I would have stayed away. I appreciate your content and channel
Funny that's the exact campaign my friend was burned on and I had actually introduced him to the campaign as I thought it looked cool :(
Man, nowadays I am relying on your new videos to make my decisions 😁 so thank you!
Just remember I’m just a random Irish guy on the internet, it’s important to also do our own research and ask ourselves the question of whether a game makes sense for us and our group. Not all of our circumstances are the same 🙂
But also…glad you are liking the content ☺️
Completely agree with your assessment of value. The core box seems fantastic value but that value is not matched in the expansions. I'm gutted because I wanted the new terrain, Mantle and behemoth, but the price is inexplicable - less than half the content for more than half the cost 👎 I would have liked a stretch goal whereby if they knew they had raised x amount, they could reduce the price by $10 or $20 or something.
I had initially backed at the level which includes the expansions when the KS launched. After reviewing the pledge levels and considering the content, I'd come to the same conclusion as you that the base game pledge was also the level with the best value proposition.
It isn't clear what value the expansions actually bring and I worry that they might actually imbalance the gameplay by making it easier. They bring additional survival options without any defined additional difficulty scaling.
They also seem more like mini expansions to me that should simply be part of the base game and were cut and repackaged to keep the core pledge amount lower. If I do decide later that I want one of them, I anticipate they will sell for much lower than $55 US each. It seems that whomever priced the next tier got greedy and overstated their value.
I think if the expansions were way lower in price it’d be much more compelling but from what I’ve seen and from what I’ve read from the community in the comments that would be my conclusion too but it seems they’re adding to it with stretch goals but really they should be enough from the get-go
@@shouldyoubackit Agreed. If the 2nd tier was ~$159, it would be more compelling. Or they could have simply had the base tier at $139 and included the expansions (saving money on boxing, shipping, art, packaging, etc. and passing a percentage on to the consumer). They likely wanted to target that sweet spot of $99 though. Thanks for your analysis. I really appreciate these videos.
This 💯
All these cool games tend to be 4 players max. My group of friends sadly is often 6-7 total players so we miss out on a lot of these games
That is a very real issue, for my group is usually is 2-4 and we really struggle when we've got games that are for player counts higher than that. I think games that are able to have higher player count expansions (basically having an expansion that adds an extra few players) is great at combating this problem.
Interesting. I'd not spotted this one on the horizon, and I can see plenty of appeal.
In terms of the risk rating, that feels fair if thinking of Amber as a 'proceed with caution'.
I watched a playthrough video, and might watch another just to see a different perspective.
Overall the concept is something I like a lot, with a theme that fits legacy well and should feel like you're achieving something meaningful as you go. If they indeed deliver memorable 'moments in history', then it's going to really deliver on that promise.
Also a positive, is the crafting concept. It feels like it borrows from 7th continent, but simplifies it. Likewise making cards more interesting with the elements blended into the art is a nice little innovation. In a quirky way, I also like the idea of the 'tetris' puzzle of fitting all a player's resources into the 'bag'. Clever!
Concerns so far:
- Character stats that feel very 1970s D&D, and that feels especially naff when combined with the 'roll against the stat for success / failure / middle ground'. Layer on some rolls that are either guaranteed success / fail because of these stats, and I could see me disliking this approach very quickly
- The number of times cards have to be redrawn because they don't apply to the situation would also quickly grate.
- The foraging mechanism whilst neat, might be a tricky one to explain to players
- A general aversion to legacy, such that I'd feel the recharge pack was an essential add-on, even if I'd never replay the game.
- I do like something more tactile than cardboard to draw from a bag, so would feel compelled to take the add-on to upgrade to resin token (the other upgraded resources feel more like a nice to have, but one I could easily decline)
- Shipping, plus VAT on top of both, does start to bump the price up
- I have 4 'campaign' games (The Grizzled, 7th Continent, ISS Vanguard, Etherfields) and the reality is that I find it the hardest game form to get to the table.
- I'm not convinced by the need for the plastic holders for the hex tiles. Nice to have, but essential?
So I'm leaning against it, though there is a chance the end product will feel like the game 7th continent could have been, and generates a much better engagement where players feel like they influence the resultant story in a more meaningful way.
EDIT: On an emotional level, discovering there was an early bird offer, is definitely a turn-off for someone discovering it later in the campaign. I get why they do it, but discovering it at this point, gives the vibe that you're being offered a lesser deal, and that can be the element that tips someone from 'going to back' to 'not backing' (not that I was too close to backing).
honestly if I hadn't already backed so many campaign games that are hopefully fulfilling this year, I would 100% back Stonesaga. The art is *chefs kiss*
It really is!! 😩
My hesitancy with this game is the company's previous game, SoA. I remember reviewers that I align with in taste criticizing that it was not very good. Most BGG ratings point otherwise. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Have you played Stars? And if so how does it compare?
OK I think this was exactly the channel I was looking for for years. 🥰
PS: As a non-native English speaker, may I ask you where does your "accent" come from (which part of the UK)? ☺
I’m from Northern Ireland 🙂
Haha that was probably the only part I wasn't thinking of and everything is clear now! Thx! (But not thanks for making me back the project though...)
I'm worried when we align...
Haha does that mean we've both got great judgement....or awful judgement....?
@@shouldyoubackit Good judgement in games.
Bad judgement in how to spend money.
Youhou ! Nice video ! Was helpfull thank you !
Glad it helped!
If you’re interested in actually playing you should never ever back any first edition crowdfunding projects.
The second edition will be better. Akarios 1st had many issues, and companies should fulfill projects one at a time.
Good luck having fun with stone saga!
There is wisdom in what you’re saying but I don’t think any game I’ve backed on Kickstarter has ever received a second edition. I know Akarios is getting a 1.5 errata/ rule book but that was the extent of it from what I saw
I'm happy with most of mine.