Jump to content

Kbonn

Members
  • Content count

    171
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kbonn

  • Rank
    Minion

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  1. Schemes & Stones (Blog) Wave 5 Yan Lo

    You are not reading the rule book rules correctly. End of turn points are all scored at the same time. No upgrade is required for this.
  2. Why is Hamlin so good?

    This entire plan relies on the hamelin player not being very good at malifaux or possibly just new to hamelin. The hamelin player will have numerous options to negate this from working and ensure it won't work, for the cost of like 1 card.
  3. A Final Plea for GG2018

    Noted. I do think having the "always" scheme tied to the suit flipped for strat is a more elegant solution to my "modified pools" idea. I will say though, attaching one more note (IE, the 5th scheme) to the strat flip doesn't "complicate" the game setup when compared to the "always" scheme being always. It just changes the location of the information.
  4. A Final Plea for GG2018

    Awesome, looking forward to trying this out later this week!
  5. A Final Plea for GG2018

    @Aaron Would you consider instead of having alternate tables, having a scheme availible on the first double ( rather than reflipping it)? This would decrease odds of an overloaded pool, add a little more variety, plus the new (doubles) scheme would have a 36.2% of showing up, which less than 5% more than any of the other schemes, so it would roughly be a 15th scheme that would be equal to the 13 non always schemes.
  6. A Final Plea for GG2018

    Is there a particular reason for this? We are ultimately talking about adding 1 page to the GG2018 document. True. Assassinate, Murder protege and Vendetta are only about one model, which are often the hardest to kill models in your opponents crew, or is a bit riskier(vendetta). Make them suffer is the only one about just wiping out models. So, Assassinate -> Neutralize, Murder protege -> Quick Murder, Make them suffer -> Hunting Party. Mark for death replaces Vendetta, which is perhaps less skewy, but more AP intensive, where specific actions must be taken prior to killing that also involve being right near the model. Making it hard to simply charge (or shoot) a model you were not previously engaged with. So similar to OG schemes, but in general a little harder, and more killing is required in general to score the same amount of VP. So eliminate being doubles, combined with Frame for murder being a suit(which should not be understated!!!!) effectively made the list more equal to 3.5. Now Dig graves and Mark for death are generally harder to do than Hunting party(in that they require more AP), despite the counter play of one peon in the corner. 2017 perhaps had the Lowest emphasis for killing of any of the GG documents, despite having 5 schemes that are focused on killing. This is something that is hard to tell beforehand with which schemes people will take. My experience with GG2017 was that I took claim jump very often, never took Accusation, rarely took Dig graves, Took Frame often, took Leave mark sometimes. I almost never took mark for death, and almost never had mark for death taken against me (unless I was playing asami). Hunting party was common, quick murder was so-so. Eliminate was rarely seen by me, though this might just be because I play Shen Long a lot. Travis has already posted about the odds of getting at least 2 killing schemes now that the suited schemes are out, so I won't add to it here. But Killing is generally good in the game, it makes your models safer, and removes AP from your opponent. Making that killing also be directly scorable should be limited in some way. Keep in mind that all schemes that have only been numbers before are now twice as likely to end up in the pool as in previous iterations. Compared to GG2017, Eliminate was (16/52) odds of showing up, or 31.3% and is now 31.6%. So roughly the same. Make them suffer was 15.5% and is now 31.6%, so twice as likely. Dig Graves was 50.5% and is now 31.6%, so less likely, showing up roughly 20% less. but still in almost 1/3 games. Take one for the team was 50.5% and is now 31.6%, so less likely, going from 1 in 2 games, to less than 1 in 3. This scheme really helped temper the indiscriminate killing by masters and henchmen. ALSO, this is now a lot more interesting as a scheme individually, but also means If you blitz your opponent you can now deny them scoring 3 if you kill their frame target early. Vendetta replaces a scheme that was 15.5% and is now 31.6%, so twice as likely. To summarize, One killing scheme stayed roughly the same(Eliminate), Two killing schemes (make them suffer, vendetta) got twice as likely. One killing scheme(dig graves) got 20% less likely. One scheme that penalizes killing(Frame) got 20% less likely, AND is less good at decentivizing alpha strikes.
  7. A Final Plea for GG2018

    I've suggested having slightly different tables to flip on for each strat. I think that can help solve the problem if just changing the table isn't desired.
  8. I do think having 1 strat that actually penalized a high model count would be a great thing for the game.
  9. "Only" 13 schemes

    Just a word, considering how schemes and strats pair together is secondary to having 13 good schemes. I don't necessary agree that 13 isn't enough. However, it is worth having a conversation regarding synergy between schemes and strats, just because other options are availible doesn't solve the potential issue. If you disagree that it is an issue, does our proposed solution actually cause any harm?
  10. I am glad we agree on the first point. I think we have a slight disagreement on the latter. Activation control is -always- relevant. There are several ways to achieve it. 1) Spam cheap minion/peons. This takes many different forms. Previously versions included spamming stuffed piglets, or the older "ratjoy" lists. 2) Being able to summon several models a turn. This can work with Kirai, Somer, TT Mei with toshiro, etc.. Theoretically should be factored into the cost of the models that summon. 3) random other "smaller" effects. For example, Nellie's passing activation by discarding a card. Certain conditions that choose the order of activations for your opponent, Dopple and Trixy cheating init, previous versions where chain activations were not limited to 1. Pandora paralyze and brewmaster bubble, effectively making you waste activations with important models. Just strait up out flipping for initiative. Now, for some reason only pandora and brewmaster initially concerned Wyrd for "negative play experiences". Eventually they made some changes to isolated cases, like spamming rats in any/all outcast lists. I can't think of a more negative play experience than having to activate all my models while some rats hump in the corner behind some blocking terrain. Simple put, if you are dramatically out activated, you have to commit everything before your opponent chooses to respond, keeping in mind that at any time, they can decide you've made a large enough error to commit something else. But the onus is generally always on you. The worst cases of this are when lists take advantage of more than one of these categories (or all three) like Somer does. He spams cheap models, he summons(needing only one card), and all of the models can be healed by 1AP(which happens to need the same suit somer does for the summons). This is also compounded by the fact that all of his models have an extra AP to spend on their activations, that he can draw a ton of cards during the turn, AND that his gun is actually pretty dangerous. I would wager, that most players don't mind when their opponent has one of either 1 or 2. Or has 2 minor effects from category 3. However, there are a handful of lists/masters that can take elements from all of these categories and combine them for an insane combination. Skill is always required, however... Gremlins were winning every tournament. I effectively shamed Alex Schmid into not running Somer all the time, and weird, he hasn't completely dominated every event he attends (though still obviously does well). As to Ressers, imagine if kirai could heal all of her summons to full with 1AP, imagine if all resser summons could go reckless. Imagine if it only cost them 1 control card. Imagine a world where the totem and cheap other models did the summoning instead of the master and they could still take Ashes and Dust and other expensive beaters that were swift or nimble. Yes, not ever master can do it well. But those that do, break the game and create an extremely negative play experience for those on the other end. I openly conceded that there are better solutions possible. So far I have seen None that fix the issue. Come up with a better solution if you dislike those being presented. "Nothing" will not satisfy many of us who correctly weigh the issue. Sure, Ours is the example that BEST mitigates activation control, considering the previous version of it was the one that promoted it the most. I fail to see how "summons don't count" somehow now makes it an alpha strike strat. How are you removing my 10 stone model? I've probably made sure you won't be able to easily, and you still have to activate it first. Unless you screw up and push it too close(or whatever similar ability). Your theory here seems to rely on your opponent sucking at the game. Feel free to keep rolling with that. I'll discuss actual game plans with people who assume their opponent has one. I can still do that, unless your entire crew is immune to disengaging strikes. I can still use a numbers advange to control your movement and flood the correct zone with my models that actually count. Lol, "won't affect scoring", weird, I was under the impression my summoned models can still use their AP. AP they can use to kill your models, AP they can use to pin your models in place. Ofc you are also still assuming I gave you a 10+stone model, and then also didn't kill yours back. How convenient for your theory. You are also missing that when i have control, I can activate first AND last. This little section from you convinces me you don't actually understand the issue correctly. Yes... if spamming/activation control gets worse... alpha striking would automatically get better. Striking the correct balance between the two is important.
  11. True, though I think you will still see them sometimes, and it might just result in seeing more taxidermists to summon them, even so, this problem is now much better. None of the things you listed makes them not a problem. It is just only a problem with hamelin, who is easily one of the top two outcast masters. In any pool where activation control will be decisive, you'll see him. I don't see how the length of time they are on the table is seen as making it less of a problem. The pop out, activate, then shortly later vanish. This makes them harder to prevent and reach, all the while the hamelin player is cycling through many activations while you activate your whole crew. When you are done, Ashes, Hamelin etc.. will all activate and do the things they want to do. At least it costs nellie cards to pass activations. While the stuffed issue has been lessened for gremlins, I think you are underestimating how popular asura and generating zombies in general will be. And again, even if they only come in, activate, and then are used that is still part of activation control! This doesn't make the problem less bad, it makes it worse. Clockwork traps are already not taken, precisely because they don't activate. As to summoning them, that is optional, do it if you know the schemes your opponent taken or if the pool doesn't punish it. Tail em was already minion only. Minions are important. There are already a lot of bad models in the game. I do wish Wyrd would fix a lot of wave 1-2 models that could use an update, but that isn't how you sell new stuff is it? Yeah, odd that people would take issue with the models that are abusive and not the ones that are not. I think the reverse is also true, only a few models would be hurt by certain changes that don't deserve it. Not sufficiently in my opinion, and several others. You are free to disagree, but this is the playtest forum, this is where feedback and opinions are supposed to go. I disagree. Please explain how "OURS" discourages activation control. The change to not count summons makes the pool not auto-summoner. However, there is still a massive benefit to me if i get several activations after you are done. Like for example. I get to see which quarters you moved into, before i decide which one to contest (either by killing one of your models, moving mine, pushing yours... etc). If summons counted this scenario would be completely won by activation control lists and not just favor them, as it does now. Ply clearly favors more activations, as you've conceded this already I won't get into it. Please explain how "Public Execution" minimizes activation control( specifically in this case, peon spam)? I like the touch to only losing it at end of activation, rather than end of turn. But a good hamelin list will flood you with peon activations then pick off a model or two. Please explain how "Symbols of Authority" minimizes activation control. Please explain how "Supply Wagons" minimizes activation control. If you think simply by having peons not count for the strat that somehow "minimizes" the impact of activation control, You are sadly mistaken. There is always an inherent benefit to getting to see your opponents plan before you reveal yours, though you can always interrupt it if needed. I see small steps taken, to help make them not completely dominated by activation heavy lists, but not enough. Not really. To properly discourage activation control lists we would need something like "last stand" except one that actually works. Some of us even discuss a turn cap on activations, as good players can snowball an activation lead into a noncompetitive game. If you want to respond, lets discuss the strategies first. Then we can do schemes. I can fully concede that they both don't need to punish activation heavy lists, but something does. I can also concede that I don't have the best solution. I will not concede that the problem is trivial or "handled" by the current draft that is out though.
  12. Sure, but being able to spam activations is very powerful, what is the real argument for also having them be "protected" from certain schemes? The peon lists that are taken are the ones that work. I'm not concerned with terrible lists being terrible. "Being an activation" is by far their highest value, so I don't get your complaint about that not being enough. Is it? Somer is clearly a problem as many of us have complained about on forums, facebook, podcasts, twitter.... What is the point here? "Don't fix certain problems because others exist"
  13. "Only" 13 schemes

    The question isn't "how often do they come up" but "do they come up in a certain combination with the strat to make an unbalanced pool"
  14. "Only" 13 schemes

    So I've been hearing a lot of comments about how there is "only 13" schemes. Personally, I think have 13 equal schemes and one always is great for the game, as we saw in GG2017, a bad suited scheme had an unbalanced effect on scheme pools. However, What if each strat used a different 13 scheme pool? If each strat has 10 from the current base pool, removing 3 that relate to the strat the most, and rotate in some old ones that we all know work well. Thoughts?
  15. 9/22 Yan Lo (TT) v Asami (TT)

    As your opponent in this game I will add one caveat. We had planned this game earlier in the day friday before the change to Guarded treasure was posted. So I didn't realize the change had happened when i built my list. I didn't make a list to attempt it, so i can't comment on it.
×