While I liked the Vengeful Five gameplay on the table. I wished there aren't anymore such villains setup in the future. I agree that this is a breath of fresh air with the new setup, but I don't think it's worth it replacing the normal villain 'slot' that we could had got.
Firstly, playing 5v5 (or 4v4) requires a great deal more of book-keeping and number crunching. We all knew that Sentinels biggest weakness is the excessive fiddlyness and number tracking required that could turn some players off, so why add to this problem?
The other part is that each V5 has their own 20 card decks, while this provides good depth and gameplay. I can't look away from the potential that developing them takes away time/effort from developing 'normal' solo villains. Personally rather than having a 5-man villains group with 20 cards each, I much prefer getting 4 'normal'(25 cards) solo villains. That way you can play 4 completely different games, contrast that with 4 games with V5, won't be much of a different game.
On the other hand I loved the implementation of The Sentinels and IMO this is how villain groups should be implemented in future expansion, not like The Ennead (too random) or V5, but with 4 or 5 villain character cards on setup and follows normal turn order. V5 is fine for the sake of uniqueness/gimmick right now but please don't repeat their format again :)
Granted I've only played Vengeance once, but I love the villain synergy of the V5. Sure, there's more things to think about, but if each player's running a villain it isn't that much work and becomes even less as they get incapped. The lack of variety in the V5 only applies in 5 hero games - there are five different 4 hero combinations and I think six 3 hero combinations.
Also I'm pretty sure that everything's already mapped out in terms of what's coming up in the remaining expansions. Whatever's going to happen - heroes, villains, mechanics, whatever, will happen. None of that's likely to change, so if there's another V5 style villain set in the future I advise you just don't buy it. There's plenty of other villains to fight anyway...
I agree with the OP. I too like the v5, and would like to see some expansion on the concept of a team of villains. I also hope it isnt the only format going forward. The biggest problem I have with fighting the V5 is time. The game takes twice as long since each player basically takes two turns. And sometimes one of the members of the group is new, or cant really multitask so having them try to handle a villain and their own hero bogs them down and makes it not fun for them. Granted those arent situations where I would choose the V5, but if more and more are released only like that then it could cut out some options in the future.
TL:DR: Im greedy and want both kinds of villains for future releases!
We might expansions with a combination of stand alone villains like we're used to, and team villains that could be slotted into the vengeful five. The main problem with that is that the team villains would require Vengeance in order to be playable.
OTOH, if there's another expansion with the five mini-villain scheme, I hope it's designed so that those villain decks are combinable with the five from Vengeance.
The lack of variety in the V5 only applies in 5 hero games - there are five different 4 hero combinations and I think six 3 hero combinations. Also I'm pretty sure that everything's already mapped out in terms of what's coming up in the remaining expansions. Whatever's going to happen - heroes, villains, mechanics, whatever, will happen. None of that's likely to change, so if there's another V5 style villain set in the future I advise you just don't buy it. There's plenty of other villains to fight anyway...
[/quote]
Yes there are 5 different combination on 4v4 and 6 combination on a 3v3. But how much variety is that compared to all-different 4 solo villain for each game? One 4-player game with Proletariat and the other game with Ermine while the other 3 villains remain the same doesn't hold a candle to the variety of completely different solo villain. I sure know which I prefered.
Also I realized that >G had mapped out the team roster and what's coming in the future, but that's the thing it's mapped out not set-in-stone gameplay mechanic. There's still time to change from villain group ala V5 to ala The Sentinels, or even better flesh them up further so they can be tuned up to be a solo villain. As far as I know playtesting for WotC hasn't even started yet so there's still plenty of time to nail down those design elements.
Don't worry. I asked Adam at the Gathering of Heroes if there would be more Vengeance Style Villains and he said these were the only ones. That's not saying things may not change (id expect if anything it be exchangable mini expansion decks) but at the moment, doesn't seem like there are plans for it.
I would also say, if you want less randomness on the Ennead, play them on advanced ;)
The last game I played against the Enead would've turned out the same on advanced. We were a team of five and all nine actually came out without having to be on advanced. That was a brutal game.
4P: BB - FT - Pro - Erm BB - FT - Pro - Fric BB - FT - Erm - Fric BB - Pro - Erm - Fric FT - Pro - Erm - Fric
3P: BB - FT - Pro BB - FT - Erm BB - FT - Fric BB - Pro - Erm BB - Pro - Fric BB - Erm - Fric FT - Pro - Erm FT - Pro - Fric FT - Erm - Fric Pro - Erm - Fric
Still, I agree that one game of Vengeance doesn't seem like it would be that different from another, at least when compared to the differences in playing against the different solo Villains.
You really should play them a few times before forming such an opinion. The reality is this is very far from the case. A few games could have told you that.
You're probably right, but we got destroyed so badly in the first game (F5 vs V5 in Freedom Tower) that I have yet to convince anyone to try again. And solo Vengeance is a logistical nightmare even with a double set of counters.
I agree with this. I like having the option for something different, the same way the Ennead are something different, but I don't want all villains to be like the V5 going forward. Luckily, that doesn't look like it'll be the case.
Having said that, I still wouldn't mind promo decks being made available for V5-style villains to add into the mix when choosing a V5 match-up, as long as getting those didn't mean I was giving up something else.
I don't want only Vengeance style villains, but I'd love more of them.
I agree with Foote, the game even changes a lot by what heroes are in the game, suddenly that nemesis goes from least important target to "Oh Crap, Knyfe is in the game, we need to kill that thing."
My group did a five player game, the five new heroes vs. the V5. We managed to take down a few of them, but it was pretty rough. The game was long, and the heros got beaten to a paste.
I tried a solitair game later, using Legacy, Visionary, Tempest, KNYFE, and Omnitron-X. I won, but it was close; Tempest and Omnitron-X were incapicitated by the end (and a good thing - incap Tempest saved the team from nuking itself with toxic damage once Baron Blade and Fright Train dropped).
I'm aware that by swapping different villain in V5 we can get a lot pf permutation and perhaps more variance than I thought too... But really comparing that to the diversity of traditional single villains? No way for that level of variance to even be close.
The biggest detractor for me is the development oppurtunity cost, considering that each V5 has a 20-card deck, it's close to the effort of developing a traditional 25-card single villain deck. And now instead of developing 4 diverse villains, the oppurtunity slot is taken by the V5 group. Again I'm happy that >G has done it this one time and it does feel fresh and different. I just hope that there aren't anymore similar thing in the future.
Btw, on the thinking for something different and with less development cost, perhaps they can introduce a 'duo' villain? Two villains on the board with their own 20-card deck and taking 2 villains turn back-to-back. Sounds like a blast to me :D
If you think their permutations of order are the only thing that gives them variance, then it is obvious you have not played more than 1 game against them either.
Informed opinions people. They are not to be feared. The lack of them in this thread is troubling.
Edit: Feeling nice, so I'll give provide you with an example, free of the hassel of playing them for yourself. In a standard Villain with a standard deck, how much of that deck would you say you go through during the average game? Just from my own experiences and knowledge of the mechanics, you are most likely going to go through most of the villain deck on average, maybe around 75% (obviously some villains you will go through the deck multiple times like Akash or Matriarch or Chairman). You see them play most of the same cards every game, with some of the rarer ones making less frequent appearences (like Voss's starships).
What percent of each V5 deck do you think you blow through during the average game? Hint: Its much lower due to the nature of the turn order and damage output. For each game, each V5 deck will have more variance because you see far less of their deck per game. This combined with their different permutations of order, and you get magnitudes more varience per game than with a traditional solo villain. But if you played a few games with them, you would have figured out all of this yourself