Jump to content
KingCrow

Ways to inter-mix factions

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking lately that there are quite a few models that have (or should have) certain characteristics that match those of Masters and Henchman in different factions.  If there is ever a 2.5 or 3rd edition, I think it'd be interesting to see some sort of rule added that allowed Masters (or Henchman led games) to hire models with their defining Characteristic from any faction with zero additional costs.  Or maybe +1 Soulstone and Mercs saw an increase to +2 Soulstones.  I personally favor the first idea of hiring at no additional cost.

This would let Colette hire Showgirls, Parker hire Bandits, etc.  To have this idea really make an impact, Wyrd would need to add Characteristics to many models. 

There would definitely have to be a limit to the number hired though.  I doubt we could make entire crews with a Master from another faction with this idea but just in case, need those limits. 

So, what are people's thoughts? What are some characteristics people would like to see added to models for certain masters? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s already a mechanic for this - Infiltration. Hire up to 4 models with keyword X.

They just need to use the mechanic more.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, -Loki- said:

There’s already a mechanic for this - Infiltration. Hire up to 4 models with keyword X.

They just need to use the mechanic more.

Ope! I had totally forgot that ability existed. Lol. Although isn't it mostly on the Masters that are dual faction? I personally would like to see it expanded for most, if not all, Masters.

I think it's a hugely untapped potential for the game.  The crew combinations would glbe staggering and amazing! Not to mention the extra models that Wyrd would probably be able to sell because of this ability. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, KingCrow said:

There would definitely have to be a limit to the number hired though.  I doubt we could make entire crews with a Master from another faction with this idea but just in case, need those limits. 

McMourning, Marcus, and Hoffman (M&SU woo!) would be very nearly there already...and I suppose Leveticus if you either count Horseman or pretend that undead and construct are keywords instead of characteristics. I definitely like it more as a base card idea for the small limited keyword infiltrations but an upgrade slot (WITH additional action/ability so it isn’t a wasted slot after hiring—I’m still going to terracotta swap it out if possible, but, say, Surprisingly Loyal for Lucius actually HAS a use during the game) for the broader categories.

Share this post


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

Ope! I had totally forgot that ability existed. Lol. Although isn't it mostly on the Masters that are dual faction? I personally would like to see it expanded for most, if not all, Masters.

I think it's a hugely untapped potential for the game.  The crew combinations would glbe staggering and amazing! Not to mention the extra models that Wyrd would probably be able to sell because of this ability. LOL

It was used on Pandoras new Limited upgrade, Woe is Me. Lets her summon Woe out of faction. Right now that's just Field Reporters, but they're pretty great with her using that upgrade, easily spreading conditions to summon off. Also Seamus new upgrade Aka Sebastian Baker got an expanded Infiltration called My Lovelies that lets him hire 4 non-Totem, Living showgirls and makes them Undead.

Honestly, if something makes it to an M3E I hope Mercenary availability is toned down a lot, dual faction goes the way of the Dodo and Infiltration is used to get out of faction models. But that's mostly because I really like in-theme lists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @-Loki- , mainly because I'm tired of seeing models take a hit because some out of faction master is too strong with them. Sure I'd be sad that some of my models might not work anymore, but rather that than feeling salty because a model got a nerf even though it was fine when in-faction.

Also I feel that the model bloat is getting out of hand and toning down the available comboes is a way to counter that.

Share this post


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

I agree with @-Loki- , mainly because I'm tired of seeing models take a hit because some out of faction master is too strong with them. Sure I'd be sad that some of my models might not work anymore, but rather that than feeling salty because a model got a nerf even though it was fine when in-faction.

Also I feel that the model bloat is getting out of hand and toning down the available comboes is a way to counter that.

Wouldn't tjis be exactly as likely with infiltration rules? Several of those erratas were due to infiltrstion rules on certain masters? After this period of agressive errata (which I was thrilled to see at first) I'm sort of leaning back towards how it used to be with very minimal fixes unless something was rat engine with Viks lvl broken.

I don't mind dual faction masters, it's very fun to have extremely different playstyles opened up, especially if they are like McMourning and have one unique upgrade depending on faction that really alters their playstyle. McMourning is dual and has never caused nerfs, Nellie is solo guild with an infiltrstion rule and has very likely caused nerfs in other factions. Lucius is another favourite of mine who I thinks has a strong theme for both his factions. I only wish he had also gotten upgrades that altered his base style depending on faction.

Marcus and Levi have so broad infiltration rules that they have likely caused weird design choices like alligators and certain pigs not being beasts while certain pigs and most swampfiends are pigs. I find it super confusing what is deemed sentient/beast.

What I really like is McCabe. His entire box has both faction tags so you can pick him up with abother guild master or another TT master and atill use his box. No one in their right mind would recommend Lucius to broaden a nvb players model pool or McMourning as a second guild master.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ludvig I guess what I'm wanting is a more limited infiltration that only lets you bring over a few specific models. As it is now I feel a lot of the flavour I factions is being washed out. There are very few true factionwide weaknesses left at this point. Also I think the amount of combos you have to playtest is negatively affecting balance on some of the never models. Plus some factions are suffering from this, tt are getting a hit because they have so many dual masters that can bring in so many models. Gremlins and outcast got a few undeserved hits due to the merc rule and so on.

I'm not saying it's all doom and gloom, I'll still argue that the game is quite well balanced and the power curve from weakest to strongest master is quite tight. But I think the factions themes are suffering and getting a little washed out.

Also, after the fluff in book 5, I have a feeling that both dual masters and mercs are gonna be a lot scarcer, outcast are going to form their own faction town and misaki got most of her dual masters to swear allegiance to her.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can somewhat agree about the lost flavour but at the same time that flavour wasn't always very appreciated. In m1e all gremlins had shitty wp, as a consequence they pretty much auto-lost in some matchups. I think the reason more and more flavour is lost is that players keep requesting models to plug the factions weaknesses.

Playing both with and against Marcus on numerous occasions I've never felt that his hiring really break anything. Maaters with too strong abilities make horrible combos. If anything Marcus alphaing a master is thr npe, not him hiring a list full of pigs or swamp fiends. Nellie is about equally disgusting without mercs because of what she does in the form of ap efficience, activation efficiency and debt to the guild.

I've tried to play flavourful with guard models only and it sucks balls because that themed lacks so many functions. Running into a full incorp list or a high defence list or an armoured list when you only have crappy attack stats, no ability to ignore anything and not a single ca action isn't super fun.

In wave 1 of m2e guild had great flavour, high damage and no model that could even remotely do interact schemes because they were slow, had no extra general ap or fancy interact stuff. As a consequence they were almost unplayable in certain pools. If themes go back to being tight I think models will need to be reworked to actually offer most functions in each theme. Then we would have thematic crews but with similar abilities.

There's a reason Merris was all over gremlins in earlier years because hoarding a pile of markers would easily give you full scheme vp. If she was available to only half the gremlin masters the others would also be crying for a 6ss model to automatically score 3 vp each game because otherwise games would be really onesided.

As forerrata: Matching masters through balance of terror might be equally viable as trying to tone down everything. The earlier strong masters that have been nerfed could have been left alone because they certainly would have been matched by wave 4 masters and recent Nico. Instead errata's could have focused on lifting the bottom of the pack until they felt playable. The recent sweeping errata shook things up but didn't feel appropriately thought through as evident by people giving up on gremlins entirely because they feel there is no point to playing them anymore. If Nellie hiring mercs was the problem that could have been targeted instead or they could have left her like that and boosted a couple of struggling masters.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kinda torn on this. IF M3e is nearby, and with it factions splitting up, then I'm all for widespread limited infiltration to make sure commonly used in-theme models can be used by most masters. If not, I don't think the game need wider hiring pools. In fact I think generally huge hiring pools are the main challenge for keeping the game going at the moment. I think the main rule should be more restrictive model pools, a small handful of universal mercs (could easily be fewer; main role should be to fill gaps), limited infiltration (could very well be in dual-faction masters), and masters like Leveticus and Nellie should be the exeption to the rule. One thing I quite enjoy with Leveticus right now (post nerf) is that his combo potential is where most of his power lies. Everyone getting wider pools would steal his thunder. Similarly I'm fine with Nellie getting easier access to Mercs and Marcus to beasts. Worse if everyone get it...

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dual faction is attractive from a certain point of view, but expanding the model pool further (in terms of availability to masters) brings even more balance headaches, because you can get combinations that were potentially never intended.

I'm wondering if instead there may be some value in multiple cards for the same model.  One card for Faction A, and one for Faction B.  So the model is the same (which coincidentally may increase sales of a model by enlarging the potential uses, and at the same time may save players money, because they may be able to use the model in more ways/games), but it is essentially two different units.

I think dual faction should be funneled through Characteristics instead.  I think it's more harmonious from a thematic point of view, and probably easier to handle balance if you can narrow the range of possibilities during design.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

 

I'm wondering if instead there may be some value in multiple cards for the same model.  One card for Faction A, and one for Faction B.  So the model is the same (which coincidentally may increase sales of a model by enlarging the potential uses, and at the same time may save players money, because they may be able to use the model in more ways/games), but it is essentially two different units.

Whilst it might sell more of that sculpt, it leads to fewer sales overall (as you sell them to people who would already buy A and people who would already buy B, and a few who would have bought A and B) and added confusion on the table when you can't tell what is hired just by looking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Adran said:

Whilst it might sell more of that sculpt, it leads to fewer sales overall (as you sell them to people who would already buy A and people who would already buy B, and a few who would have bought A and B) and added confusion on the table when you can't tell what is hired just by looking. 

It doesn't necessarily lead to fewer sales overall, unless you believe all dual faction options lead to reduced sales, because two different stat cards on the same model for two different factions would have the exact same impact as one model being available to two factions.  In either case, the "alternate" faction has access to an additional model from another faction. 

And even then, you'd have to show that the double card model were crowding out other sales (as a substitution good, in economic terms) rather than simply being another model picked up.  In fact, I think if you look at miniature wargaming over all, historically, "alliance mechanics" seem popular to gaming companies in part because they allow players to dabble in other factions, potentially increasing sales by exposing already committed customers to new segments of the product line.

It could potentially add to confusion since it would increase the overall unit count in the game, and it would also associate two stat lines with the same model.  However, it wouldn't prevent you from telling what was hired "just by looking" since the faction of the controlling master would clearly define which version it was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play all 7 factions, so assuming both stats are interesting and the sculpt is interesting, I would probably have bought the 2 different models. So you have lost my second buy. That doesn't apply to dual faction. I agree dual faction on a model will increase it's sales as a general rule, and lead to more sales as people use it as a gateway. The cost of only doing one sprue rather than 2 might be enough savings to make up for the reduction in sales. But the development of 2 different rules will have the same cost on that front regardless of the models. 

And in combination of all the cross faction hiring and some of the crazy things that shifting loyalty campaign brings, it's hard to say you'll not try and have the two different rules on the table at the same time let alone available with the same master.

So one might be a resser model, another an arcanist model, but each could be hired into guild just under different masters, so I think it could easily confuse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Adran said:

I play all 7 factions, so assuming both stats are interesting and the sculpt is interesting, I would probably have bought the 2 different models. So you have lost my second buy. That doesn't apply to dual faction.

It certainly applies to dual faction. 

I buy Yin, the Penangalan.  Sometimes I use him as Resser, sometime as TT, but it's still one model. 

Now, suppose I buy "double card" Yin (for which we are assuming the simple dual faction version doesn't exist), with one card version Resser, the other TT.  And yet, still, one model.

Where's the lost sale?

The "advantage" I'm highlighting with potentially making different versions of the same model for multiple factions is the ability to balance that model vis-a-vis the options within the particular factions to which it is made available.  One potential headache with expanding availability of models over multiple factions is the potential of handling balance of abilities, given the vast number of potential permutations.  It's what makes me hesitant of increasing the availability of multi-faction options without some kind of planning constraints that help with balance (for instance, Characteristics to a certain extend side-step this, because when you set a model's Characteristics, you're narrowing the field of potential combinations).

And sure, if you want to imagine a possible convoluted scenario like you described just to attempt to confuse yourself, you certainly can.  But you can equally ensure the model operates under strict enough hiring conditions to preclude them.  Like most things, it's a matter of execution.

At any rate, my preferred method of cross faciton availability is to base it such opportunities Characteristics, because I think it's potentially more thematic that way, and also by restricting the hiring pool to a known condition, I think it will help with balance.

My comment on the possibility of offering different cards for the same model regards the prospect of a universe where more unrestrained dual faction exist. 

Not that dual faction models are necessarily overpowered in any way.  But rather, I tend to think the potential for balance issues increases when you expand the number of possible crew combinations.

 

Share this post


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

It could potentially add to confusion since it would increase the overall unit count in the game, and it would also associate two stat lines with the same model.  However, it wouldn't prevent you from telling what was hired "just by looking" since the faction of the controlling master would clearly define which version it was. 

I really wouldn't Malifaux to have models whose cards vary based on who hires them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a focus of play, I really don't want to see a model and have to remember which of its stat lines it is using based on which Faction my opponent it is playing. Especially if I'm on game 3 or so of the day and have played against multiple Factions.

WWHSD beat me to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

I really wouldn't Malifaux to have models whose cards vary based on who hires them. 

I'm not sure I would either.  As I indicated in my original comment, I think these kind of cross faction options should be funneled through the Characteristics.

I am concerned about proliferating otherwise unrestrained dual (or even multi) faction models, because I think they hold the potential for balance issues.  So if I had to choose between a universe where there were many more cross faction options otherwise unrestrained (by Characteristic requirements, for instance) or a universe where models had different versions tailored to multiple factions, I'd choose the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WWHSD said:

I really wouldn't Malifaux to have models whose cards vary based on who hires them. 

Do the two forms of McMourning bother you?

As far as mixing factions, I’m somewhat sad that totem rules mean Colette can never hire Wong’s Lovely Assistant.

”My, you’re...green.”

[Somehow the Lovely Assistant, despite her bayou origins, has developed a honking NYC accent.]

”And you’re ginger, sister, but you don’t catch me making a big deal outta it.”

  • Haha 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as it's clear to someone before the purchase of a model which stats are for which faction (for example in a wave book separated by faction sections) I have no issue with a model having a different stat block / card in one faction then in another.

To me this could highlight the tactics used by a model in one faction compared to another for a multitude of reasons (McMourning, for example) or even a model at  different stages of it's own tale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Gnomezilla said:

Do the two forms of McMourning bother you?

There's only a single McMourning. He can be hired in two factions and has different upgrades available to him in each faction but the base McMourning card is the same no matter which faction you hire him into. That's no different than any other model with upgrade slots that can be hired in more than one faction. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of different cards per different faction, but perhaps have a different upgrade card, per faction, for the model. like mcmourning has. For example, Bad JuJu could have a gremlin upgrade, for when zoraida wants to take him there, which does something different. (Neverborn lets him not die, gremlin lets him jump to swampfiends who die).

Also, I think some models should have the "unhireable - this model cannot be hired out of faction" ability, instead of restricting things from the master point of view ( IE: Leveticus w/ Gremlins, especially when only 2 models were an issue, IIRC)

However, I wouldn't want them to get rid of Dual faction masters, Though I have a faction preference for Zoraida and Tara, I like playing in their other factions ( IE: Sammy can't be with Zoraida in Neverborn )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wafew said:

However, I wouldn't want them to get rid of Dual faction masters, Though I have a faction preference for Zoraida and Tara, I like playing in their other factions ( IE: Sammy can't be with Zoraida in Neverborn )

I don't think dual faction masters are as much of a problem, from a balance oversight point of view, because I think Wyrd probably invests a good deal more effort on masters than other models (but then again, there's still Sandeep...). 

Again, this is not to say that dual factioning is bad or that I'm somehow opposed to it.  But this is a thread that presupposes the increase in the mechanic.  Given a meta where cross faction hiring is more common, I would want preferably to anchor it through Characteristic ties, which does limit the possibilities and I think would encourage/support theme, but another option would be to make multiple stat lines for different factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, LeperColony said:

It certainly applies to dual faction. 

I buy Yin, the Penangalan.  Sometimes I use him as Resser, sometime as TT, but it's still one model. 

Now, suppose I buy "double card" Yin (for which we are assuming the simple dual faction version doesn't exist), with one card version Resser, the other TT.  And yet, still, one model.

Where's the lost sale?

The "advantage" I'm highlighting with potentially making different versions of the same model for multiple factions is the ability to balance that model vis-a-vis the options within the particular factions to which it is made available.  One potential headache with expanding availability of models over multiple factions is the potential of handling balance of abilities, given the vast number of potential permutations.  It's what makes me hesitant of increasing the availability of multi-faction options without some kind of planning constraints that help with balance (for instance, Characteristics to a certain extend side-step this, because when you set a model's Characteristics, you're narrowing the field of potential combinations).

And sure, if you want to imagine a possible convoluted scenario like you described just to attempt to confuse yourself, you certainly can.  But you can equally ensure the model operates under strict enough hiring conditions to preclude them.  Like most things, it's a matter of execution.

At any rate, my preferred method of cross faciton availability is to base it such opportunities Characteristics, because I think it's potentially more thematic that way, and also by restricting the hiring pool to a known condition, I think it will help with balance.

My comment on the possibility of offering different cards for the same model regards the prospect of a universe where more unrestrained dual faction exist. 

Not that dual faction models are necessarily overpowered in any way.  But rather, I tend to think the potential for balance issues increases when you expand the number of possible crew combinations.

 

I see what you are saying, but I don't agree. I guess it's the premise that adding a second faction to a model is as hard as writing a different model that is where I differ. 

And whilst you can control out of faction hiring, I think over 3/4 of ressers and arcanists can be hired in a different faction some how at the moment. They are the worst offenders by far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Adran said:

I see what you are saying, but I don't agree. I guess it's the premise that adding a second faction to a model is as hard as writing a different model that is where I differ. 

And whilst you can control out of faction hiring, I think over 3/4 of ressers and arcanists can be hired in a different faction some how at the moment. They are the worst offenders by far. 

I think it's useful to keep the various issues in this thread somewhat distinct. 

The last few posts dealt with the contention that somehow making models with multiple cards (rather than simply dual faction) would somehow result in a loss of sales vis-a-vis dual faction, but I think now we should be able to agree that's not likely to be true.  Or, at least, if you still maintain it is, I'd like to hear how you're coming to that conclusion still.

Now, I never advanced any position regarding the relative effort involved in making two cards, as opposed to dual faction.  But I would tend to agree with you that it would involve more work to develop models with multiple cards, if for no other reason than that it is virtually no effort to make something dual faction.

However, it is easy to overstate the degree of effort involved.

For instance, some units may have different cards, but may differ in very minor ways.  One could imagine a marker support model with two cards - one Arcanist based on/generating scrap markers, the other Resser based on/generating corpse markers, but the abilities themselves are identical (excepting, of course, references to the appropriate marker).

On the other extreme, the two cards may have absolutely nothing to do with each other, having different stat lines, abilities, attacks, tactical actions, cost, etc...

Most would likely lie in the middle, where the models share similar roles and concepts, but differ in details. 

 

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

×