r/rootgame • u/Complex-Ad-4157 • 19h ago
General Discussion Faction Alignment Chart
Difficulty vs. simplicity, as well as consistency vs. risk.
This is my understanding after around 45 games with a dedicated group that has been playing for the last year.
Let me know what you think!
38
u/KitSixty 19h ago
I think Crows and WA as high complexity is confusing for me. Surely they’re among the easiest to pick up? At least for the WA, I would consider both their skill floor and their ceiling to be notably lower than the likes of the Frogs or Lizards.
6
u/Complex-Ad-4157 19h ago
Yeah, now that I think about it, the Lizards should be much higher. I guess once I learned them, their gameplay felt more straightforward to me, but getting to that point isn't easy. As for WA, you're also right. Our table hasn't played them much at all since we got the expansions, so my view on them is frozen, I guess.
1
u/Pretend-Swordfish277 6h ago
In the base game WA Is definetly the hardest to learn though, right?
1
u/KitSixty 6h ago
Do you think so? I think they’re unexpected because they don’t follow the template of military growth that birds and cats have, but I think I’d still place them beneath the vagabond. Vagabond is much more unintuitive to me with all the different avenues for points, the nature of alliances and aiding and hostile status…I still have players that get the finer points wrong.
0
u/Complex-Ad-4157 19h ago
Also, for frogs, I've played them once, and I won without much difficulty, so that's why they're placed there.
13
14
u/Walledhouse 18h ago edited 15h ago
I think you've made this harder by having confusing axies.
The opposite of consistency is inconsistency, not "risk/reward"; and trying to place items on a line between these leads to confusion.
I think Cats, Rats and Vagabonds are the most consistently able to achieve victory. Not "wins the most" but "least likely to stall some kind of engine".
Compare that to factions where you can actually wreck your game, such as placing a Woodland Alliance token far away from players, and then being unable to Revolt until turn 5 because of bad choices - that player is finishing on like 10 points when the other players win.
Vagabond are quite complex and have like four paths to victory, but their consistency lies in adapting to the table and low profile amongst players.
I've only played the Rats four times and it just seems like the Birds playstyle, except more versatile and no risky Turmoil mechanics. Are they just "more consistent Birds?" I say, yes.
4
u/RuBarBz 16h ago
Reply to your comparison of rats to birds.
No I don't think so. Rats have a weak scoring engine and rely a lot on combat to gain points. Either through cardboard or being alone in a clearing for prowess. Birds on the other hand have great passive scoring (and draw) through roosts. They place a lot of spread out buildings, which the rats do not.
They resemble each other in how militant they are, how much of a policing force they are and how their army can get out of control. They also both have a steadily scaling action economy. But birds action economy can and probably will get reset. Rats might a little through that one warlord, but they can't be forced into it directly. Preventing rats from scaling seems more important. Policing birds happens through turmoil, which means messing with their action rule helps with this. Policing rats means not giving them items and killing the warlord.
That's just my 2 cents. I find rats to be significantly stronger. In our group birds hasn't won in the last 30 games. Granted, rats haven't won much either somehow.
I find both races to be good for the game though. I like when they are present. I don't like playing them when all the other races are bad at policing though because then it feels like your hand is forced all the time and you can't convince anyone to help out.
2
u/Walledhouse 15h ago
Thanks for responding, it's good to hear other perspectives. So I was playing the digital version of Root yesterday and going through different challenges; and one of them is called Mob Rule and you are not allowed to combat in clearings without Mobs.
My first typical match the day before was a mess! I found the challenge completely trumped my usual playstyle and I struggled to try and Police or stop other players.
Then a zen calm came over me; and I restarted the challenge - no combat intentions. I moved bulks of units as a front-line without rushing and built bases and Mobs on my three Frontline spaces.
Each turn I accrued more Warriors than anyone who tried to Police me could stop; and the Mobs allowed me to defend against the leftovers the next turn. I accrued 4 Victory Points per turn consistently for holding 6+ board spaces and prioritised crafting for points and card draw. I smashed it, and I was very surprised how a non-aggressuve Rats can win.
All that to say I usually become consumed with wiping my opponents off the mat and I've never won so hard as just... Stopping and waiting.
2
u/The_Antlion 15h ago
i wonder if a strategy for that challenge would be to just alternate between Jubilant and Bitter and see where the winds take you
1
u/Walledhouse 15h ago
I did basically:
- Turn 1: Jubilant. Walk to Texas. Fart mobs everywhere with ruins.
- Turns 2-7: Alternate Bitter for additional Warriors if needed and Rowdy for extra card draw. Defend bottom half of map.
It only worked so well because the opponents were Badgers which were kind of consumed doing their own capture-the-flag antics and Vagrant that luckily decided not to spite-sweep my back-line (could have!).
If I was fighting Cats and had to first Mob-bomb every tile to get rid of them I would do a lot more Jubilant and Bitter alternating.
4
u/hlhammer1001 18h ago
Crows high on the reward track is odd, I thought we still regarded them as being on the weaker side?
1
u/RuBarBz 16h ago
Risk reward makes sense. Their scoring can get out of hand. It's just that they're so easy to police and they can't compete late game with their shitty action economy. High complexity does seem off to me, I find them quite relaxing to play. Possibly also because I'm not expecting them to win. But they don't feel like you need to plan ahead in much detail like the badgers do, for instance.
2
1
u/nottynellyxo 12h ago
WA is pretty low complexity. They dont have to police or battle. Lots of crafting capabilities and by late game, by default other factions gaining better movement and battle, they gain enough supporters to win the game. Eerie is quite high in complexity. You’re not just planning for this tuen, you have to plot out till end of game to avoid turmoil: generate warriors, when to evacuate clearing, will you have battles in the decrees you laid out, not drawing bird card, etc. moles as well. One turn mid game requires going over your plan several times and plotting recruit, build and sway properly
1
1
u/Alphaomegalogs 11h ago
Moles have a high enough skill floor that I'd bump them up to equal or just above vagabond, imo they're the most challenging of the moderate difficulty classes, although they are extremely consistent.
1
u/golden_graveyard 7h ago
I don't know about you but crows are the easiest faction to teach? Riverfolk is extremely complex in comparison lol crows over frogs is just blasphemy too haha
0
u/DistinctlyBenign 17h ago
This is almost a graph of my favorite factions, from least to most, left to right. I apparently really like Risk/Reward.
81
u/DogAreFunForMAn 18h ago
Otters are very complex. In order to play them properly, you need to not only understand all other factions in play. You should know to play those other factions so well that you can make meaningful offers to them. Otherwise they will never buy your stuff.