HOW TO WIN ARKHAM HORROR: THE CARD GAME | Understanding Value

[@richardpowell1772]

You can’t beat Arkham Horror the Card Game, you can only hope to contain it.

[@TwistedTentacleInn]

The most important concept you guys discuss (and isn't discussed very often anywhere else) is that the value of a card, a resource or an action can change depending on the situation. A lot of times its easy to get tunnel vision and overvalue a card or an action where the resource in that moment is actually more valuable. Great video, guys! - The Innkeeper

[@PlayingBoardGames]

Thanks so much. :)

[@filipwoloszyn1547]

Isn't your Health/Sanity also a resource? You can choose to take damage from an encounter card (instead of adding Doom or losing actions) and you can sometimes take AoO on purpose to do something useful instead of trying to evade with -2 on a skill check, which is basically converting Health/Sanity resource into an Action resource.

[@Zybran93]

Especially if you look at characters like Agnes etc. it becomes obvious that it's a resource.

[@MrAndrepcrs]

Great content guys. This is very helpful. Just a small correction on the relative values of cards, actions and ressources. From emergency cache (1card+1action=3resources) and swift reflexes (1card+2resources=1action) the correct conversions are actually: 1 resource = 0,4 action 1 card = 0,2 action

[@davidko9289]

Great analysis as always. Two other things to consider: 1) opportunity cost; free things aren't free because they could've been something else. Maybe it's a different card you put in your level 0 deck, or an XP upgrade, or even a card play. First turn Leo de Luca is amazing, but in most cases you'll have 0 resources and maybe you're better off playing another asset and playing Leo turn 2 or 3. 2) a single higher chance test vs multiple lower chance tests; depending on the bag, is it better to commit multiple skill cards to a single test to put it +3 or over multiple tests at +1?

[@blinxy511]

These are both good points, and probably something I'll look at fitting into a different video, maybe talking about play patterns and board evaluation.

[@Python22966]

Great and interesting video. Thank you for providing us with even more contents on this amazing Arkham Horror LCG !

[@cristaniancatembung1160]

Awesome and educational content, you guys!!!

[@PlayingBoardGames]

Thanks so much!

[@stanislavcecotka7628]

Equation on preposterous sketches is really wrong. Left side 1 card = 0.5 action, right side 3 cards = 3 actions. If you try to correct it it spirals infinitely, because you measured values based on this equivalency. Therefor the whole math is off. Just had to point it out. Still you are great guys

[@seileen1234]

One fundamental lession i learned playing MTG is: Player life is a resource and if you win with 1 life remaining or 20 it doesen't matter as long you don't lose.

[@neckutter]

Tony Morgan is my favorite cuz he routinely has 4 actions, has tons of money and with some seeker card splash, the encounter deck doesn’t hurt too bad. Plus he’s Boba Fett

[@davidja1336]

Great content. I’d love to see some thoughts building on this of most undervalued or overvalued cards. Personally, I think the cantrip skills and fine clothes are undervalued, especially for blind play, and I think some card draw can be overvalued such as preposterous sketches, which should strictly do less for most seekers than investigating with perception. The hope of unknown future cards isn’t discounted enough. I’m also shocked people still play prepared for the worst when there’s Tetsuo - 2 more cost for 4 soak, trade off on tempo but surely that’s ok for most scenarios? Anyway, love to hear your thoughts on this strategy side of the game.

[@blinxy511]

Something to consider with regards to Tetsuo vs PPftW is that aside from what you listed, Tetsuo takes up an ally slot which can be valuable. He also needs to die to find stuff, which isn't ideal if you need a weapon and have to wait for a monster to kill him, then take an attack to play the weapon. PPftW also gets pulled by Stick to the Plan, so you always have it. Tetsuo does definitely have his place though, especially if you or your teammates have valuable items, not just weapons, like the Golden Stopwatch.

[@davidja1336]

Yes I think because I rarely play Roland, I don’t really ever put ppfw on the Plan - Mark has such good draw, Tetsuo is Tommy’s second signature, Nathaniel needs the soak and can call in favors with his bro, Leo prefers allies. But both work!

[@markusschmidt9260]

Great video, but regarding the XP generating cards, while I agree, Delve Too Deep is a great card, and certainly better than "Let God sort them out...", I would say, the really bonkers one is Arcane Research. 2 mental traumas is a real small price to pay for any mystic, except maybe Agnes, for whom it is 2 less damage on an enemy. They don't get that much horror from cards like Rotten Remains and horror from Shrivelling level 5 can be healed fast with cards like Fearless level 2 or Deny Existence level 5. Compared to Sharon's Obol it is 4 more XP in any campaign. It stars giving you 2 XP after the first scenario, while the Obol costs you 2 XP in the beginning and starts making a profit after scenario 3. And earlier XP helps you in more scenarios, so it is effectively worth more. On top of that, the price (risk) is much lower than with the Obol. Of course, Delve Too Deep has another great advantage: it gives XP to everybody, so your team mates will get more powerful and archive more as well. But it is a card, you have to draw, and you can't commit to a test, if you can't afford to play it. Still worth a deck slot in the beginning of a campaign, and probably better than any other non-signature XP card, except Arcane Research.

[@blinxy511]

You aren't wrong, Arcane Research is very strong and probably the best XP related card right now, but for this video we wanted to highlight how much a given resource is worth, and the cards that you actually need to play are a little easier to evaluate. It's much easier to relate the cost of drawing an encounter card and paying money/card for the effect than it is to evaluate how much taking a mental trauma is worth, especially since it has a variable cost relating to the investigator's starting sanity.

[@PlayingBoardGames]

I agree completely, and beyond Travis' response, I discuss this card a bunch in our list video that comes out this Thursday. It's super strong. Too strong.

[@markusschmidt9260]

@@PlayingBoardGames Agreed, it probably should be on the taboo list. Looking forward to your next list video. Regarding the actual cost of mental trauma: I even used the card a couple of times in standalone games (!) with Diana Stanley. The twist is, with 2 Arcane Research plus St. Hubert's Key in play, she can play Desperate skills right off the bat. So even for the only comparably "low sanity" mystic (with 7), the cost can actually be a benefit. I really liked playing her that way. It was fun and always performed really well. I wonder, why this is not a staple build others came up with long before me. I put a (campaign) deck on ArkhamDB, in case you are interested: arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/26867/desperate-diana-gets-well-prepared-1.0

[@ragnaros3157]

One thing to consider with "Let God sort them out..." is also, that only the investigator that played it get benefit from it. That makes a HUGE difference in multiplayer.

[@Negowa2]

I didnt quite follow how Ursula and In the Know work together. Are you saying you get your free investigate through her character ability and then you use In the Know for this free investigate? I thought the free investigate would just be a vanilla investigate, ie you cant use a card's investigate action.

[@PlayingBoardGames]

Yes, the Investigate action after Ursula moves can be any card that has the bolded Investigate action on it. It's the same with Finn Edwards and his free Evade each turn, which can be used on a card like Stealth as opposed to a basic evade action.

[@Negowa2]

Oh great to know! Thanks

[@PlayingBoardGames]

I guess you could say you're.... In The Know.

[@Brekekekiwi]

@@PlayingBoardGames Are you sure about this? If it says you can take a free investigate action, it would let you play a card with a bolded Investigate (paying all costs except the action)? That is a huge revelation for me!

[@ragnaros3157]

Maybe you should include the chance of drawing a weakness into your "card" value. (/!\ Arguable maths here: In a starting deck, you have roughly 2 weaknesses on 33-5 cards after mullligan (depending on the investigators those can highly change) so basically 7% chance of drawing a weakness. The weakness isn't only a dead draw (0 value) but usually cost you action(s) to resolve (2 for Chronophobia, hypocondria etc.). With those odds and taking the value you give to card draw, I would withdraw 0.17 value on it (2.5 actions x 7%). It can be lower, because every weaknesses don't have the same impact, but the 0.5 action lost is for sure.) Card draw is what makes a deck running IMHO, it is not risk-free, on the contrary of taking a resource. And obviously the best way to draw is to search. I especially despise spending the last action on drawing, it can be devastating sometimes (a Silver Twilight acolyte for an example).

[@jimofthenorth8090]

Quick point, Get Over Here doesn't allow you to move, it moves the enemy to you.

[@rogerbennett]

I like the concepts but I can't follow your action economy valuations. You approximated that a card is worth 0.5 action, but also demonstrably drawing one card is literally one action. I don't get how the maths add up. E.G on my turn I draw a card (emerg cache) and play it. Thats cost two actions, and gained me three resources. so that has a 3/2 value. The two-pip version, where the draw is free is a 4/2 or 3/1 value, which is a much better proposition. I don't get where your 0.5 and 0.25 number are coming from.

[@mudgee92]

That's because spending a basic action to just draw a card or just gain a resource are lower value then the benchmark or standards they set

[@81hewp]

PBG value.

[@dapineaple]

Someone tried to explain click economy to me once, and I told him that just didn't seem fun.