Jump to content
surly

Most fun Masters - for both players

Recommended Posts

Everybody knows who the non fun (npe) masters are ... getting locked by Brewy, out activated by Collodi or Hamelin or getting steamrolled by Levi or Viks ... just to name a few.

I'd be interested what you think are probably the most fun masters to play and play against.

As an opponent you might still lose the game, but it was a fun game anyway, where you can walk away with a smile.

 

I'm absolutely aware of that this has to do a lot with the attitute of both players, especially since "fun" isn't the same for everyone.

However I think you get the idea what I mean and what I'm looking for here ;)

 

Cheers!
 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The objectively correct listing of Masters rated into tiers based on fun is as follows:

Tier 1 fun: Von Schill, Mah Tucket, Molly, Kaeris, Lucius, Yan Lo, Guild McMourning, McCabe, Mei Feng, Zoraida, Kaeris, Lady Justice.

Tier 2 fun: Ironsides, Lilith, Misaki, Nicodem, Seamus, Shen Long, Marcus, Somer, Ulix, Wong, Resser McMourning

Tier 3 fun: Sonnia, Perdita, Hoffman, Levi, Brewmaster, Dreamer, Ramos, Rasputina, Pandora, Collodi, Ophelia, Colette, Kirai, Lynch, Edit: Jack Daw (Thanks, tmod!)

Tier 4 "fun": Hamelin, Viks.

Of course all of these depend on lists a lot. Colette without Howard or December Acolytes is likely tier 2, for example.

I like games that aren't decided (one way or the other) on turn two. I also like for both players to be able to sorta kinda try and do their own thing so super disruptive Masters are less fun. An extremely lop-sided playstyle is also annoying. Note that there are some really powerful Masters on tier 1 and 2 but there is a light inverse dependence on power level that can be observed.

Hamelin is very boring and annoying in several ways and Viks are just utterly stupid to play with or against. In fact, Viks, could for Tier 5 on their own.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think any that let you feel like you have options to combat them even if they eventually overpower you.

 

I imagine marcus with a crew full of glass hammers is not too bad to play against.

Lilith provides a tactical challenge and she has a range of playstyles to work around.

Mccabe isn't too bad even with lots of hounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Math Mathonwy said:

The objectively correct listing of Masters rated into tiers based on fun is as follows:

Tier 1 fun: Von Schill, Mah Tucket, Molly, Kaeris, Lucius, Yan Lo, Guild McMourning, McCabe, Mei Feng, Zoraida, Kaeris, Lady Justice.

Tier 2 fun: Ironsides, Lilith, Misaki, Nicodem, Seamus, Shen Long, Marcus, Somer, Ulix, Wong, Resser McMourning

Tier 3 fun: Sonnia, Perdita, Hoffman, Levi, Brewmaster, Dreamer, Ramos, Rasputina, Pandora, Collodi, Ophelia, Colette, Kirai, Lynch

Tier 4 "fun": Hamelin, Viks.

Of course all of these depend on lists a lot. Colette without Howard or December Acolytes is likely tier 2, for example.

Mentioned Kaeris twice! Have you come up against me at a tournament? ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bertmac said:

Mentioned Kaeris twice! Have you come up against me at a tournament? ;-)

Haha, that's what I get for writing them as they occur to me and not grouped in any way. But Kaeris usually leads to fun games even when she outperforms the opponent.

I'm kinda surprised if I didn't forget anyone...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Math Mathonwy said:

The objectively correct listing of Masters rated into tiers based on fun is as follows:

Tier 1 fun: Von Schill, Mah Tucket, Molly, Kaeris, Lucius, Yan Lo, Guild McMourning, McCabe, Mei Feng, Zoraida, Kaeris, Lady Justice.

Tier 2 fun: Ironsides, Lilith, Misaki, Nicodem, Seamus, Shen Long, Marcus, Somer, Ulix, Wong, Resser McMourning

Tier 3 fun: Sonnia, Perdita, Hoffman, Levi, Brewmaster, Dreamer, Ramos, Rasputina, Pandora, Collodi, Ophelia, Colette, Kirai, Lynch

Tier 4 "fun": Hamelin, Viks.

Generally agree with that except Molly maybe as her summoning and Belle related theme (lure baby, lure) can be a bit depressing for opponent.

BTW where is Tara? ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, daniello_s said:

Generally agree with that except Molly maybe as her summoning and Belle related theme (lure baby, lure) can be a bit depressing for opponent.

Aye, I was sorta on the fence about her but then decided to put her into tier 1 due to how her defenses and Summoning mechanic force her to live on the knife's edge a bit which often leads to fun compared to most Summoners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Math Mathonwy said:

Haha, that's what I get for writing them as they occur to me and not grouped in any way. But Kaeris usually leads to fun games even when she outperforms the opponent.

I'm kinda surprised if I didn't forget anyone...

Forgot Jack Daw, didn't you? Still pretty darned impressive to only miss one by randomly listing them; I regularly miss more when counting mastere I own...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well seems like your ranking is almost the same listed recently in the "Rate masters into tiers"-thread ... just reversed.

Coincidence? :D

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience, the most fun masters to face, are the ones, that will kill you old school (by way of murdering you with either tools or fists).

Masters who dictate your activations or deny you a lot are quite frustrating at times. (Jack Daw, Hamelin, Brewmaster and Pandora f.x)

An overly cautious opponent can be boring to face as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find Molly very annoying to face, for me she'd be tier 3. The fact that she punishes you so hard for keeping so close together makes her almost as aggravating as Sonnia.

In general, I don't think there are 'general' fun tiers - these will be very different from player to player and meta to meta. Somebody using Hamelin without the rat engine and with very little Blight? I'm not sure, his opponents will mind that much. Others, like for me Molly, annoy the heck out of me ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, surly said:

Well seems like your ranking is almost the same listed recently in the "Rate masters into tiers"-thread ... just reversed.

Coincidence? :D

I actually commented on that in my post.

But on further review, there's a lot of Master who are "wrong" by one tier but not all that many who are wrong by two tiers. Hamelin, McCabe, Molly, Ulix, Somer, Wong, Marcus, Brewmaster, Shen Long, and Lilith are about the ones who are misplaced by two tiers if that were an inverse of power tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me Jack is a fun master to play with, since he has so much interaction with his crew there's always something to do, whereas someone like Levi, who's basically a one note master, is a bit dull. On the other hand I can see why either of those masters could be somewhat irritating to play against.

I can agree that often a "fun" master to play against is one who does his/her own thing, while allowing your master and crew to do their own thing as well. In that respect I'd slightly disagree on the Viks. While they can be brutal to play against, they are pretty cool to play with. Probably a bit like Perdita, who is also pretty cool, but sometimes frustrating to play against.

I'd put Tara with Von Schill as a master who's fun, and unlikely to ruin an opponent's day playing against her.

Misaki is a bit like the Viks, cool, but brutal too. Probably not the nicest master to play against.

Hamelin can be a bit dull played as a rat summoner, but played as an Obey master could be quite interesting.

That's my assessment of the Outcast masters.

Tara, Von Schill

Jack, Hamelin

Leveticus, Viktorias, Misaki

I might be a bit biased though. Von Schill is the guy I wheel out when I just want a straightforward game without too many tricks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Freman said:

I'd put Tara with Von Schill as a master who's fun, and unlikely to ruin an opponent's day playing against her.

So much depends on not only the master, but also the crew. A Tara beast-bomb is gonna irritate a lot of people and getting Killjoy shoved in your face gets old pretty fast, too. Whereas other lists with Tara might just be fine.

Not sure you can even do that tier thing without somehow taking lists into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mutter said:

So much depends on not only the master, but also the crew. A Tara beast-bomb is gonna irritate a lot of people and getting Killjoy shoved in your face gets old pretty fast, too. Whereas other lists with Tara might just be fine.

Not sure you can even do that tier thing without somehow taking lists into consideration.

That's true too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This all has got me thinking a bit...

When teaching Malifaux I tend to mention pretty much what to expect from a model (what is a high stat, how much punishment can can most 4ss models take before dying, etc), but most actual models break these expectations to some degree. Masters are "worst" of all, the adage going "all masters are broken, but are balanced by being (about) equally broken". For me this uniqueness is a large part of what makes the game enjoyable, but can be frustrating for beginners.

Would it be an idea for a future book/edition to release a set of "learning master boxes" where all models are supposed to be as straight forward (ie not tricksy/bending "rules") as possible and at the same time as representative for their faction as possible? I'm thinking as few special rules to keep track of as possible, and masters chosen to be as enjoyable to play against as possible.

It would be hard to balance, with basically just stats to work with, and would probably be less interesting for existing players, but I'm wondering if it would be useful to get the game to grow further...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Freman said:

I'd put Tara with Von Schill as a master who's fun, and unlikely to ruin an opponent's day playing against her.

Tara was very difficult to place since I love playing both with and against her as long as the crew isn't centered around a "bomb".

All in all I dislike Super expensive glass cannons like Howard Langston, Killjoy, and Nekima as they have a tendency to warp the game to be about them. If they die without much impact, it will be a gigantic setback but OTOH if they succeed and kill half the enemy crew, then that results in a boring game as well. It's not always like that but I find them more disruptive than other expensive and well-regarded models like Izamu or Mech Rider simply because of how swingy they tend to be.

2 hours ago, tmod said:

Would it be an idea for a future book/edition to release a set of "learning master boxes" where all models are supposed to be as straight forward (ie not tricksy/bending "rules") as possible and at the same time as representative for their faction as possible? I'm thinking as few special rules to keep track of as possible, and masters chosen to be as enjoyable to play against as possible.

Wasn't the starer pretty close to this idea? The models in the starter are all pretty straightforward with beater Henchmen and Minions and then a Supporty Enforcer all without much in the way of weird tricks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Math Mathonwy said:

All in all I dislike Super expensive glass cannons like Howard Langston, Killjoy, and Nekima as they have a tendency to warp the game to be about them. If they die without much impact, it will be a gigantic setback but OTOH if they succeed and kill half the enemy crew, then that results in a boring game as well. It's not always like that but I find them more disruptive than other expensive and well-regarded models like Izamu or Mech Rider simply because of how swingy they tend to be.

 

Good point.

As someone who loves playing these models and also plays within agroup of people who love them just as much, I can totally agree that games tend to revolve around these models easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, surly said:

 

Good point.

As someone who loves playing these models and also plays within agroup of people who love them just as much, I can totally agree that games tend to revolve around these models easily.

And this is a perfect demonstration of how subjective this "fun" thing is. Some people see it as very climactic and fun when the biggest beaters meet in the center and decide the result of the game. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that! It's just a different view point.

I love Malifaux the best when the Strat and Schemes are on knife's edge, there isn't all that many casualties and clever maneuvering is at the forefront. And yet I'm sure that some others consider a game where neither side was tabled as a boring affair.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

Wasn't the starer pretty close to this idea? The models in the starter are all pretty straightforward with beater Henchmen and Minions and then a Supporty Enforcer all without much in the way of weird tricks.

Yes, but I'm thinking with one master for each faction for a slightly more complete experience. Sort of like a follow up to the starter set. Also, the starter set made a point out of the models NOT being typical of their faction, for this I'm thinking to use them as an intro to the factions as much as the game. "You loved the starter, this is the next step"...

I dunno, just thinking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm this is a hard one, I find my fun is more based on my enemy player then there master. For instance I played Mason Hamelin and had a blast but vs someone's Kaeres I could not wait for it to end. I feel that NPE based on masters is forgetting that half the experience is the human element.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a game yesterday with Marcus vs. Guild McMourning in Guard the Stash with corner deployment. That was one of the most enjoyable games I've played. It was close the whole way, with the winner not being obvious until the end of turn 5. It was a brutal, back-and-forth game with me burning through over half my deck on my first activation on turn 2. (Fast Sabertooth Cerberus attacking The Judge & hitting the Maul trigger 3 or 4 times. He burned through 5 soulstones trying to stay alive, too.)  It helps that I was playing an awesome player, too. Shout out to chmcho for the great game.

Edited by JoeJones
Finishing the last sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realise that this is a massively subjective thread based on how you perceive 'fun' but I am interested in this thread as a new player. I picked up Rasputina as my first box, got some Acolytes and set to my early games... four games in and I don't enjoy playing her at all!! I'm not a great player by any stretch but I am entering this to err on the side of fun. Is it wrong to want to laugh my way through games whilst dishing out damage and maybe even winning some games? Or has my brain slid too far into an Anime villain perception. Want my cake and eat it?.....

 

So for a new player the essence of fun would be different I guess, we want a master that won't punish us too much but also not make our opponents groan before the game begins!! I don't know if suggestions for this are even possible (multiple new player threads on each faction thread anyway).....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ressummon said:

I realise that this is a massively subjective thread based on how you perceive 'fun' but I am interested in this thread as a new player. I picked up Rasputina as my first box, got some Acolytes and set to my early games... four games in and I don't enjoy playing her at all!! I'm not a great player by any stretch but I am entering this to err on the side of fun. Is it wrong to want to laugh my way through games whilst dishing out damage and maybe even winning some games? Or has my brain slid too far into an Anime villain perception. Want my cake and eat it?.....

 

So for a new player the essence of fun would be different I guess, we want a master that won't punish us too much but also not make our opponents groan before the game begins!! I don't know if suggestions for this are even possible (multiple new player threads on each faction thread anyway).....

I'm not sure that is as much a master issue as it is meta and/or playstyle issue. Malifaux is a game where about 90% of your success is determined by your skill. That's why no single master or even master matchup is going to guarantee interesting and exciting game against all opponents. It takes a few games to determine the skill level and the list building style of your opponent to be able to build lists that make for really exciting games.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will say that masters power perceptions will change as you and you opponents get used to their tricks and style. So whilst Masters Like Rasputina and Viks are very very good at the kill everything game, there is a lot more to Malifaux than killing everything, and I have played games where I have lost my whole crew, my opponent has ended up with more than he started with, and I have still won the game thanks to the VPs I scored. 

Rasputina for example is relatively easy to shut down from her killing spree, and not very good normally when you need to cross the half way line to score. But I have also had her kill half my crew on the first turn when I made a mistake in deployment. So Rasputina might easily go through a play phase where you opponent starts off finding her unfun (because they lost their entire crew before they did anything) and ending where they don't have any issues, and you are finding her no fun because she can't actually do anything. 

And Myrra is completely right. Its a play style. If you don't like playing against a hyper aggressive crew, it doesn't matter which of the 20+ masters can lead the hyper aggressive crew, you won't like it. But a different opponent would use exactly the same crew in a control manner and you might really enjoy the experience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×