Baskakov_Dmitriy

Figuratively. However, if possible, I would personally charge the enemy Snow Storm with my own one and get the Ice Golem in BtB contact with the enemy, so the next turn we have a Smash to land on the enemy. The Ice Golem is a very weak model if you shoot it from afar with something that ignores Armour +2, but not if it is already beating you with a build-in Slow or a 9/10/12 MI attack. Of course, if possible, I would not declare a Charge Action as the Golem, and would place it via Snow Storm instead. The Silent One is a model that can withstand a lot of weak hits, but cannot survive one strong strike of 6, which is not hard to land at all if your attacking stat is 6. The Acolytes aren't very touch either. Seems to be a nice idea. I can just make or buy Ht 2 fences then. Interesting advice! I am going to just try to find out a rule that would allow me to give a point value to each piece of terrain we use. Then we can tell that each table should have at least a given total point value, or even measure distribution among the different parts of the table. Interesting. I would probably just prohibit climbing anything bigger than Ht 3.

Henchmen around my area (just like many people in this thread) don't consider it punishable just to take a lot of time to take your actions. It is only considered slow playing if you suddenly start to take ten times more time to think, or need 10 minutes to find a model in your case for summoning, etc. However, even if you are just a nooby, it shouldn't mean that you have the right to delay a tournament game, and chess clock is there to show you that.

Actually, I would probably cut the rule about the flips out and just consider the game to be finished when Turn 5 ends -- for many reasons. But even in that case -- play faster. Learn to have spare time. Learn quick decision making. Prepare better. Again -- one of the possibilities is just to use TO judgement to determine the outcomes, considering that the faster player has scored everything that is theoretically possible to score. And again, learn to play faster and such things wouldn't happen to you because even if your opponent runs out of time, you don't.

The point is that if you, for example, took 4 times more time for your activations than your enemy, it could have resulted in your opponent not having enough time to score. Even if you didn't score too, it is frustrating to finish the game 2-1 at the end of Turn 2 just because we run out of time. Someone who delays a game for any reason has to be punished just because the even schedule limits us. We have to either play friendly games with unlimited time or admit that the time is limited and adjust to the limits.

I flip for the extra turn, even though I see your point in not doing it.

The effect of the clock is players acting quickly. Quick enough for the clock not to matter for them, not impacting their results, like players in chess learn to play with chess clock and have problems when transitioning from uncontrolled games, but play well when getting used to time control. There will be a protocol of when to switch. A switch will also announce your decision as a final one. This "bomb" is the TO coming and telling you to end the round. But it doesn't work if your opponent takes an eternity to summon a model (choose the right one, do the flips, look for the model in the case, look for the card...), and then complains that you took an extra 30 seconds thinking about your next activation. That's exactly what I want. Slow players have to play faster or lose the tournament. The first step will be to make an exact dueling protocol when to run the time. The most problematic moment is the time between the Turns (shuffling the deck etc.). I suppose that there should be a given amount of time for both players to do it and both clocks have to be stopped. If you take longer than required to shuffle the deck, your clock starts to run. Again -- learn to play quicker and you won't face such a situation at all. And, by the way, I consider the score differential an extremely bad tie-breaker; at least an a lot worse than Buchholtz system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buchholz_system). In my area (Moscow) it is a big issue, though. Indeed. How would you work out if your opponent is just a noob, not someone who intentionally delays the game, but this still means that you can't score because you are out of time? That's fair. If you pick a crew that is harder to manage, that's your responsibility to manage it in time. If you play chess and your next turn would be checkmate, but you run out of time, you would still lose. One way that I have suggested is to make a Henchman rule out the situation, or at least make you keep your current VP. But the intent is that you just shouldn't normally be running out of time. You should be able to complete your part of the turn quickly enough. Again, to all of you -- if you play quickly enough, you will have no problems under the chess clock. If your opponents also play quickly enough, you won't suffer either. But if someone is very slow, they are punished. That's how it should work, and the only thing to find out is the value of the punishment.

Agreed. That's why it seems fair to: 1) Still punish the one running out of time 2) Give the other player free VP. This will teach the slow player not to be slow

OK. So what if I have "Punish the weak" and need to kill your minions, but you have run out of time? Which time would you use to flip? The point is that you should play quickly, and chess clock punishes you for playing slowly. Again, ideally you should play fast enough for the clock not to affect any of you at all. I see several ways to solve the problem. If Player 1 runs out of time, Player 2 wins 10-0. As I have suggested before -- if Player 1 has scored N points and run out of time, Player 2 wins 10-N. If Player 1 runs out of time, Player 1 keeps their current score, and Player 2 reveals all their schemes. Player 2 gains points for the strategy and for all the schemes they have if it is theoretically possible to score for those schemes. The exact conditions are to be defined by the TO. If Player 1 runs out of time, Player 2 can use the remainder of their time to continue the play. Player 1 doesn't flip or declare anything and is consider to have flipped Black Joker each time they would flip. If player 1 runs out of time, they can no longer score this Round. The game continues normally otherwise, and the clock is still switched normally, albeit Player 1 no longer spends time (as they have no time) and scores for nothing. If the Round time runs out because of that, Player 2 scores for every Scheme and Strategy if it would be theoretically possible to score for that. I would personally choose 1 or 2. 4 would be OK, but 3 and 5 don't seem to punish the player who has run out of time strongly enough.

It probably was. But even if we do use it, we should ask the author. I will send the PM now, probably there will be no problems involved.

It is so until you run out of time for the first time. And then for the second time. Then you start to learn to play quickly. How would my opponent flip cards, cheat fate, declare defensive triggers, ability and aura use? What if I have a Scheme that requires me to kill enemy models? What if I have "Take one for the team", so enemy cannot kill that model anymore just because of no longer being capable to activate? Your idea is kind of the opposite of how it is used in chess. If your time runs out in chess, you lose no matter the other conditions, even if you have a winning position, even if you would checkmate next turn. The idea is to make players act fast enough for the clock not to matter at all. If you play as designed, this new "winning condition" wouldn't affect you. If you don't, it affects you. By the way, I have found an interesting thing: Seems to be a good start in order to make rules of switching the clock.

Well, I didn't try using it to track encounters, I use black d6 dice placed near the physical models to track wounds and coloured d6 dice to track conditions. Schemes are marked on paper. It happens so if you aren't familiar with your Crew or if it is very small (4 models). If you use fingerprint-based or swipe unlock method on your smartphone and don't need to enter password each time, it takes around half a second to reach the app. From my experience, in a Crew of 8 models it takes less time to find the model in the app than on the table, you also save time passing cards to each other. If you are familiar with the crew and just need to look up a stat, or trigger wording, it is actually a whole lot easier to use the app, especially if your model has 3 or even more upgrades attached.

Much Sister-charge, such fun, much wow. Win my Turn 2. As of what I have seen around me, it is. One experience Henchman has told me that an average tournament game lasts around just 3 Turns, and that it's risky to plan to score late in the game.

http://pullmymodel.wikia.com Here it is. You can start now... Here. https://pullmyfinger.wikispaces.com/space/content?orderBy=type&orderDir=asc&o=600 We have around 900 pages to move if we want it all. Rather cool, yep? Any suggestions?

Pretty much. I actually think about using no vantage points at all as they devalue other terrain and drain time for determining LoS in an alternative way. I am thinking about developing an algorithm that would assign a point value to each piece of terrain, based on the area it can cover on the board. The amount of terrain will be determined based on this total point value. So, we would use a given "general" amount of terrain, and get a rough estimation of the terrain types distribution. Terrain that is actually used in the gaming club that I attend can be broken in those groups: Forests of different Ht Soft cover fences, usually Ht 1 Hard cover fences, also usually Ht 1 Buildings (could be called climbable and non-climbable) Pieces of Severe terrain, which could also be called Hazardous The fence types are the most common, which means that a great advantage is given to a crew that has a lot of LoS-based attacks that ignore Cover. The overall amount of terrain was actually generally pretty low (typically 25% of the board or sometimes even less) in the games that I have played, but that is my rough estimation. If an algorithm appears to formalize the terrain distribution, we can balance the usual encounters better or even predictably make "special" encounters, such as "this will be played on a field of severe terrain, so prepare something that bypasses it". This was due to poor deployment and poor decisions made (failure to surround me and charge as fast as possible). True! But it would be an even worse decision, as this would make my friend's whole Crew a perfect target of my shooting, especially of my Silent One with her blasts.

You know, I would tell you the way I have chosen. I don't mess with the printed cards, I have just downloaded the official app (Bad Things Happen), paid 10$ for the cards to be there, and I am damn glad. The cards are always there, you can't forget them unless you forget your smartphone. The cards there are always automatically updated and are always up to date. The cards in the app are easier to reach if you have a lot of models in play. You can let your opponent scan the QR code of your crew so they can read it while you are explaining what your models can do, and they can read about your crew later to reflex about the game. Every Upgrade's effects are automatically added to each model when you build a crew with Upgrades. You don't have to carry a large box of cards or a large book with you to routinely read cards and experiment with building crews, you can do such experiments when in public transport, or waiting for something or someone, etc. More things are automatically accounted, so you have less stuff to mess up with. Not to say that the app doesn't have any problems -- it does. But the benefits outrun the downsides by far, so go get the app. And good luck on your journey.

The basic rules are: Unless stated otherwise, normal Malifaux rules and Gaining Grounds 2018 are used, as well as common sense. The players in each round are divided in two Teams, 3 players in each. Each player declares their own faction and hires their own crew under normal rules, but rarity (Rare N models) has to be followed for the whole side, not just for each crew. The Crew Size is determined by the TO. Masters are all considered to be Rare 1 for the purposes of hiring crews (there cannot be two equal masters on the same side). One player in each Team is a Captain. The Captain decides everything for the Team if the Team can't make up a choice. Each player has their own Fate Deck, control hand and Soulstone cache. Each player controls their models themself, doing all the flips, cheating Fate, etc. Players in one Team are allowed to reveal their control hand to their allies, but every discussion is to be made openly and in the language that the other Team can fully understand. For the purposes of Schemes, Strategy, Abilities, Actions and Triggers, all the models in your Team (including the models in the friendly crews) are considered friendly models or models in your crew, all the models in the enemy Team are considered enemy models or models in the opposing crew. The Captain has to appoint a player to flip Initiative and Deployment order each time those flips are done. The Captain decides which side deploys and activated first. The Teams take turns activating their models, choosing a player to activate a model each time. For example, Player 1 in Team Blue activates, then it's Player 2 in Team Red turn to activate, then Player 1 in Team Blue can activate a different model, or Player 2 in Team Blue can activate. Effects that cause Chain Activation (like Accomplice or Companion) can be used to Chain Activate a model of another player in the same Team. The Captain chooses which Crew Leader is accounted as the Leader for the purposes of Schemes and Strategy at the beginning of the game. When a player would do an action as required by the Scheme or Strategy (like placing Symbols of Authority), a Team Leader (the Captain) does it instead. I have tried it today, the game size was Henchman Hardcore with only 2 players per side, and it was much fun, even though my ally and me have made some mistakes that made us lose. The last one was the following. My friend has used Obey on my Howard Langston to finish the enemy Leader: the enemy Snow Storm only had 2 Wounds, no Soulstones, and Langston would likely die soon (it actually happened soon). The Obey has led to a successful strike with one negative flip, and I have asked my friend to Cheat Fate for it to be a clear flip in case of a Black Joker being there. He said: "If a Black Joker comes, it's our Fate!". And the Black Joker came as the second card, the one he would have missed if he had cheated. Indeed, "Cheat your Fate or lose your Soul". However, even with only 20 SS/player+Leader and just 2 players per side, it was kind of a mess, even though the fun kind of a mess. Perhaps it was due to us being new to the thing, one player on the other side kind of new to Malifaux at all, and not being prepared for that (we used out regular HH crews), but still. I presume that it would be an even bigger mess with 35 SS per Crew, and cannot even imagine what would happen with three 50 SS Crew. So, which amount of SS seems reasonable for this N vs. N format?

Yes. Not with PullMyFinger, but it would take around 30 seconds. Because of no announcements I will presume that no work is being done towards that.

My idea is to switch to wikia. I doubt if we need stuff from the earlier editions, but 2e stuff could even be moved manually, by hand. Any volunteers?

10-N, where N is the amount of VP your opponent has already scored. So if you are losing 3-6 and your opponent starts slowplaying because of seeing that you are going to score now (like if you have Undercover Entourage and are going to approach their deployment zone, and some other scheme is up to be revealed). Under normal rules, you would call a TO, and things would depend on TO's judgement. With chess clocks, however, all that your opponent would be able to achieve is running out of time, and you would win 10-6. If your opponent is so slow that you have barely done it out of turn 2, and they have just scored 2 points, yes, you would win 10-2 and give a lot of Diff, but if the game would continue against such an inexperienced dude, you are actually likely to win 10-2 anyway. The point is, however, for the clock not to matter, to make players act faster so they actually finish the game without either player running out of time. And what if that happens routinely? I have found a few people around this forum who say the opposite, that it works and can even be a common practice. Why do you say that it never does work? Do you mean that in your opinion it just causes more problems than it solves? It will make both players speed up due to not willing to lose 10-N just because you ran out of time.

Steps 1 and 2 don't exist normally -- they are to check if the action is legal at all, and they say whose time is consumed for that. Step 3 from my sequence is actually step 1 and part of step 2 from the opposed duel sequence in the rulebook. It doesn't really matter if you flip at the same time or not, it is important that nothing can change after you flip, and your opponent will have to flip anyway. And it is also important that it's not possible to delay a game by taking 5 minutes to flip a card. I understand that if you don't have problems to solve, this thing seems to be an unneeded overhead rather than a right tool to use. But if your average game lasts 3 turns, or even 2 turns, I bet that chess clock could help more than it would hinder the play.

In this case we need to make the clock easily reachable for both players like it is in chess so they can click it quickly, and formalize the duel sequence so you know for sure when to click the clock. The general idea is that whenever you have to react, it's your time being spent. For example, the opposed duel sequence could look like this. Each step involves a clock switch. Your turn, your clock runs. You choose a model to activate and declare an action and its target. You ask your opponent if he agrees that it's possible or if there are defensive abilities to be announced, and switch the clock. If your opponent considers the action legal, they have to announce Df or Wp and cover. They don't have to announce things like Hard to Kill or incorporeal -- if you want to read your opponent's cards, you have to spend your own time for that. So, if your opponent switches the clock back, it means that they agree and allow you to proceed. They cannot argue that the action wasn't possible after they switch now. You decide if you proceed with the action as announced. If you don't, you return to step 1. If you do, you declare Soulstone use and flip a card for your attack, there is no way back after you flip. Your opponent flips for defense and determines the duel winner. If they have lost the duel, they decide if they cheat fate. If they have won, they just switch the clock back. You decide if you cheat fate and switch the clock. If your opponent won the original duel, they can cheat fate now. You declare one trigger. Your opponent declares one trigger. You determine success and flip for the damage if applicable. Your opponent decides to use a Soulstone for prevention and flips and they do. That's a lot of switches, but comparable to such amount in quick chess. If we make the clock clickable really fast, things should go OK. The only real problematic moment is if players argue if something is possible or not. I don't know whose time should it be. We can probably stop both clocks and then make the player who was wrong get a penalty. For example, Player 1 wants to charge, Player 2 says that the charge is not possible, Player 1 doesn't agree. They pause the chess clock and probably start another timer, and call the judge. If the judge says that Player 1 was wrong, Player 1 has the amount of time spend on the argument cut from their overall time left, and their activation continues, if it was Player 2, then the charge action happens normally and Player 2 loses that time from their clock. So arguing will only be effective if you are absolutely sure that you are right and won't work as a mean of slow play. When things go smooth, let them go smooth. But when they don't, chess clock should help.

Yep, thanks for correcting me, forgot that he is not an Enforcer for a sec. That's true -- but there are such crews in 50 SS as well, for example, Hamelin or Nicodem. Not sure, but worth asking my friend who knows Hamelin really, really well. I doubt that it will go that well without Hamelin and in 20 SS, though, because the rat engine will go out of fuel pretty soon. Well, I'm also sure someone will abuse it if it gets possible, because having lots of activations is a very big advantage in Malifaux. However, you also need some beater models to do the job, as HH is actually about hitting stuff, and you don't have much place. Seems likely. Henchman Hardcore game result is usually decided in just a few rounds, I am not sure if it would allow you enough time for your summoning engine to spin up. For example, Toshiro needs corpse markers or scrap markers, which means that someone has to die: most options to spawn those markers seem a bit too expensive for HH. But if you get it to spin and haven't lost the game yet, damn yes, lots of Komainu or Ashigaru will probably win a game for you. Well, summoning is indeed very, very powerful. So here goes the counter -- chess clock. Could you please tell me what causes problems regarding the chess clock? My point was that if you do 25 activations per turn and your opponentt does 8 activations, it means that you need around 3 times more time for that to happen. You get an advantage, but you have to either do things faster than your opponent (e.g. flip cards faster), or you will get out of time. We also resolve a very problematic situation that happens at normal tournaments where only the round time is limited. When you play against a summoning crew, if you play slowly, thinking for a long time about your every move, you are less likely to forget something, and you also don't give your opponent more time to go further with the summoning and get an advantage. If you do play quickly, though, mistakes are more likely, and your opponent gets more tournament time to rotate the combos. Summoner builds also frequently only score points late in the game, so there is a chance that they won't get points if you run out of time. I know that slow play is considered cheating, but it's hard to prove, and henchmen that I know won't consider carefully choosing your actions to be slow play. With chess clock, though, that's not a problem at all. You both have, say, 1 hour of time, and if you thing for too long or have too many models to activate, that becomes a huge hindrance.

That thing I can understand. Kind of, seems worth testing, but you are likely right. 7 SS cache or other high amount could become a requirement, any needed suits could become guaranteed, and most good hits against the Henchmen will be prevented. Again, worth testing. Why exactly would it be terrible? I believe that you likely do have some experience to cite for this, but I would like to understand things myself. There are no summoning masters (because no masters at all), so no 25 activations at your first turn (hey, ratty dude) or 3 centaurs per turn (hey, some-other-dude). Models that can summon in HH have strong limits. For example, Toshiro needs Corpse Markers or Scrap Markers, an upgrade (1 SS and your only upgrade slot!). Mechanical Rider needs 8 the second turn and an 8 the third turn, a HH game shouldn't normally go further without one side already almost winning the game -- and taking the Rider means that I don't take Howard Langston, who can give away a lot more damage than the Rider and two 4SS models summoned. BTW, there are hard counters like Taelor. I also thought about countering summoners with simple chess clock. If the game should last no more than 30 minutes and you give 15 minutes per side, a summoner would need to flip a lot faster or simply lose by time.

How much exactly is OK? Could you please perhaps link me to photos of proper amount of terrain? It's also important how many roofs are present. If there are any, they can potentially invalidate every single piece of cover.

LoS blocking terrain: 1. There was a forest on the right flank. My friend could actually, with some very accurate measurements, land a (3) Smash on one of my models by Turn 2, probably even my Henchman, but that would depend on the activation order and things that I would do. 2. There was a Ht 4 blocking wagon in the middle (the opponent's side), there were other things, but they didn't matter much because only a small portion of the battlefield was actually used. My friend had also forgot about the elevation rules that allowed me to shoot above the forest -- the point of elevation was to draw LoS differently. The blocking wagon didn't matter much either because my friend has made a mistake, but the stairs to the wagon were also considered hard cover, so the Silent One was well defended. My vantage point wasn't LoS blocking (so an enemy Henchman could stand in more than 12 inches from it, then move in and shoot me through cover, then push my model because it had Frozen Heart -- would be 3 points of damage and I would also lose a strategic position). Other things didn't have an impact on the game. ______________ Anyway. How much terrain do you usually use/recommend?