Seamus theory

[Stonedog-7]

I think the 8 came from 2 attacks both at triple negative, each attack has 4 cards being flipped for damage, 2 attacks, 8 potential chances for the joker to come up for damage...

Personally the biggest issues i've found with Seamus' survivability is that with Df4 and HtW2 people tend to play for triggers to get big weak damage instead from Flay, Brutal or Critical Strike... and unlike McMourning he doesn't heal that reliably by much, activate him too early in the turn and people will nickle and dime him pretty quickly while playing the odds for a Red Joker to finish him at the same time

[Fetid Strumpet]

For me overall its not hate on Seamus, it is disappointment. The Red Joker discussion got brought up because certain folks have argued that Seamus' shining trait is how survivable he is.

The issue of his being unable to effectively heal once he is locked in combat, added to the fact that H2W2 actually makes him, perversely, Less survivable than a model who doesn't have that trait, is my counter argument to his survivability.

[Lucidicide]

I think this has been civilised...Just trying to figure where the hate is, is it with Seamus and H2W or is it with RJ?????

Honestly? The combination.

I am trying to suggest that the real issue for people is the RJ, and not HtW2. For example, there have been some suggestions of changing how HtW works. I love the way it works, and would be opposed to it. I feel the only real reason to do this is how the RJ works. And since the BJ doesn't get the hate, I can only conclude that it is specifically the RJ's extra flipping power (well, I can conclude other things, but I choose to conclude this).

[Calmdown]

I think this has been civilised...Just trying to figure where the hate is, is it with Seamus and H2W or is it with RJ?????

For me, it's with the RJ. It swings games far too much.

The problem is, I don't feel that they will ever change the RJ, because they feel it is part of the "cool" factor of Malifaux and a lot of Malifaux players who feel that cool factor is more important than balance agree (and I'm not saying they're wrong; they play their way, I play mine). That is why I focus a bit more on HtW. I also focus on HtW a bit more because when you're discussing a model's effectiveness, you should always take into account its weaknesses, and a lot of people don't realise the weak side of HtW2.

More people would probably agree with me if they ever lost the final game of the masters because their opponent flipped an RJ on damage prevention, though. Something which I am not bitter about (much...) but do think serves as a good example of how a huge element of random luck is not something that provides a positive play experience.

[Malandres]

Ahhhhh well I am not a huge fan of him (except fluff wise) and I don't think he is too survivable...I have always regarded him as a toughened glass hammer

[Calmdown]

And since the BJ doesn't get the hate, I can only conclude that it is specifically the RJ's extra flipping power (well, I can conclude other things, but I choose to conclude this).

I agree. I also dislike the large element of random luck BJ brings too, because auto-failing a critical action can be just as bad as the RJ. I'd actually remove both Jokers from the game and replace abilities like December's Pawn with something else if I had my way

The difference in the BJ is, all that happens is you fail, the same degree of failure that happens when you lose a flip. You dont fail and explode. Whilst with an RJ, you not only succeed, but you SUPER SUCCEED, which simply does too much.

(also, lol BJ :giggle: )

[Lucidicide]

For me, it's with the RJ. It swings games far too much.

The problem is, I don't feel that they will ever change the RJ, because they feel it is part of the "cool" factor of Malifaux and a lot of Malifaux players who feel that cool factor is more important than balance agree (and I'm not saying they're wrong; they play their way, I play mine). That is why I focus a bit more on HtW. I also focus on HtW a bit more because when you're discussing a model's effectiveness, you should always take into account its weaknesses, and a lot of people don't realise the weak side of HtW2.

More people would probably agree with me if they ever lost the final game of the masters because their opponent flipped an RJ on damage prevention, though. Something which I am not bitter about (much...) but do think serves as a good example of how a huge element of random luck is not something that provides a positive play experience.

See, there's the thing. It's just as bad to flip the BJ to do wounds when you only need to do one. I feel that the BJ and RJ are integral parts of the game and there is no inherent problem with having those outliers.

I think they work best as a suit-less zero that overrides all and a any-suit fourteen that overrides all but its nemesis. The other functions are less appealing, but not terrible. It's really that you can end up with a huge discrepancy, as zero is not all that different from 1, but all can be hugely different than 3.

Damage prevention, for example = 0, 1 ,2 ,3, all.

If you've done eight damage, Black Joker through 13 is not that concerning as it only stops up to 3, letting 5 through. I feel maybe the game could be better served by the RJ being like damage (i.e. severe + another flip) letting you prevent 3 to 6, depending.

I think the general feeling, though, is that it would be best as a "4" in the damage prevention or just not existing at all.

Regardless, I like the trump cards.

[Malandres]

For me, it's with the RJ. It swings games far too much.

The problem is, I don't feel that they will ever change the RJ, because they feel it is part of the "cool" factor of Malifaux and a lot of Malifaux players who feel that cool factor is more important than balance agree (and I'm not saying they're wrong; they play their way, I play mine). That is why I focus a bit more on HtW. I also focus on HtW a bit more because when you're discussing a model's effectiveness, you should always take into account its weaknesses, and a lot of people don't realise the weak side of HtW2.

More people would probably agree with me if they ever lost the final game of the masters because their opponent flipped an RJ on damage prevention, though. Something which I am not bitter about (much...) but do think serves as a good example of how a huge element of random luck is not something that provides a positive play experience.

I agree it swings the game too much, yes it is a fun twist -sometimes- but I much rather a game where I can say my opponent beat me with a good bit of skill and out played me...I can learn a lesson that way...but I can't learn a lesson from flipping a RJ....

[Lucidicide]

I agree. I also dislike the large element of random luck BJ brings too, because auto-failing a critical action can be just as bad as the RJ. I'd actually remove both Jokers from the game and replace abilities like December's Pawn with something else if I had my way

The difference in the BJ is, all that happens is you fail, the same degree of failure that happens when you lose a flip. You dont fail and explode. Whilst with an RJ, you not only succeed, but you SUPER SUCCEED, which simply does too much.

(also, lol BJ :giggle: )

Right! So like I said above (but after this post of yours), the problem is that the RJ is able to do more proportionally. If it was an actual mechanical opposite to the BJ, I think there'd be less issue with it.

[Calmdown]

See, there's the thing. It's just as bad to flip the BJ to do wounds when you only need to do one. I feel that the BJ and RJ are integral parts of the game and there is no inherent problem with having those outliers.

I think they work best as a suit-less zero that overrides all and a any-suit fourteen that overrides all but its nemesis. The other functions are less appealing, but not terrible. It's really that you can end up with a huge discrepancy, as zero is not all that different from 1, but all can be hugely different than 3.

Damage prevention, for example = 0, 1 ,2 ,3, all.

If you've done eight damage, Black Joker through 13 is not that concerning as it only stops up to 3, letting 5 through. I feel maybe the game could be better served by the RJ being like damage (i.e. severe + another flip) letting you prevent 3 to 6, depending.

I think the general feeling, though, is that it would be best as a "4" in the damage prevention or just not existing at all.

Regardless, I like the trump cards.

I agree. The functionality I dislike is the "other" functionality. If BJ was a suitless 0 and RJ was a suited 14 (that counted as a 13 in all weak/moderate/severe flips, such as damage, healing and damage prevention etc), and they followed normal cheating rules (ie - flipping a black joker is not an uncheatable failure, flipping a red joker does not ignore negative twists) they would be fine.

It really is the double damage flip, total wound prevention, etc that causes the issues.

[Jewomie]

for me, it isn't the cool factor... i like the red joker because it's such a game changer... and yes, i have been on both sides of that change, and i feel your pain. (non tourney though, so it's a lesser extent)

I personally like the red joker because in any fight, there are lucky blows, and you really can't get that same bit of off the wall random luck without the joker.

I will agree though, that it is very possible to run the numbers in your head and choose your moves just right to better your chances of flipping it, and that does put a damper on the game. but take it out completely and you lose that one lucky flip that replaces skill with fate.

plus, if you take it out, you'd have to take out the black joker... and it's kind of hilarious when a Chompy fails to trigger all done because of the black joker and you swarm him effectivly defeating the dreamer.

[Calmdown]

and it's kind of hilarious when a Chompy fails to trigger all done because of the black joker and you swarm him effectivly defeating the dreamer.

Thats hilarious because Dreamer is so lame though, not because it's a good mechanic. Equally a Dreamer player should not have an x% chance of automatically losing the game through no fault of his own. No matter how lame he is. Because the same phenemenon translates downward through the ranks to lower level masters, and it just ruins games.

[Stonedog-7]

I think part of the disparity between the Black and Red Jokers is that when a Black Joker ruins your damage you've likely only pushed to get a flat or single positive flip, it's rare to try and push for multiple positive except as a way to counter negatives... Red joker trumping several negatives feel far stronger... maybe the Red should only pull that extra damage on a cheatable damage flip otherwise only causing flat severe damage

[Brettqpublic]

Another downside to H2W is lots of Resser models have the ability. I feel this further heightens the RJ problem because against a lot of Resser crews I will more than likely cycle through my entire deck in a turn. Furthermore, I will only be flipping 1 or 2 cards for attack but I'll be flipping 2-4 for damage.

[Lucidicide]

I agree. The functionality I dislike is the "other" functionality. If BJ was a suitless 0 and RJ was a suited 14 (that counted as a 13 in all weak/moderate/severe flips, such as damage, healing and damage prevention etc), and they followed normal cheating rules (ie - flipping a black joker is not an uncheatable failure, flipping a red joker does not ignore negative twists) they would be fine.

It really is the double damage flip, total wound prevention, etc that causes the issues.

First, we are rocking this posting at the same time thing.

Second, I think you'd get too much flack suggestion that the RJ function like a 13 in all but being a 14. I think it's easier to control its swing. You always know what the BJ is going to do - nothing. I can prepare for the possibility of hitting a model for zero damage. It's very hard to prepare for a model getting hit for potentially double severe. As was mentioned, there was always the possibility of missing, therefore no damage was already accounted for.

If the RJ is a problem, you'd have more luck just making it auto severe+weak so you can still know exactly what is possible.

The other thing about RJ v BJ in terms of coming up is that you are far more likely to have negative flips than positives, and therefore the BJ is less likely to "steal" high cards when it comes out (as you were likely to be using a low value anyway). The RJ, by dint of negatives being more common, is more likely to cause the big swing.

I think that's fine in and of itself. It's more fun to have something happen than nothing. But right now it's too hard to account for the epic scale of the RJ, and the BJ is totally accountable for. That's the rub, I feel.

[Hatchethead]

For me, it's simply unintuitive that the red joker grants an additional flip during a negative twist damage flip, especially when said twist is related to Hard to Wound. I'm all for the RJ trumping the negative mod in general and granting a severe, it mirrors the effects of the black joker and I dig the symmetry, but the +flip is silly outside a no mod/positive twist scenario. That's the only change I'd support, tbh.

I realize the RJ+flip is supposed to represent the perfect hit, finding the weak spot, the chink in the armor, the soft underbelly. I dig the mechanic, but I don't think the additional flip should occur during a damage flip. Just my opinion.

As a guy who plays only Resurrectionists, my favorite Master being Doug McMourning, I probably see the red joker during a :-fate:-fate far more than the average player. That said, I always feel slightly dirty when sick damage is dropped by an RJ+flip during any negative twist damage flip, regardless of who's on the receiving end.

Edited February 17, 2012 by Hatchethead

[Malandres]

Hmmm I think this needs to be in a different thread as this is called "seamus theory" not "the RJ sucks"

[Hatchethead]

Hmmm I think this needs to be in a different thread as this is called "seamus theory" not "the RJ sucks"

Yeah, this is less about Seamus and more about H2W and the mechanics of the RJ in general. Major derailment. Partially my bad.

*dives through plate glass window and is gone*

[Calmdown]

Well, a good start to fixing it without changing things too much would be:

Red Joker

Remove rule about being choosable regardless of negative twists.

Value: 14, any suit

Damage: Severe+Weak

Damage Prevention/Healing: Prevent/Heal 4 damage

Black Joker

Can be cheated as per usual cheating rules.

Value: 0, no suit

Damage: 0

Damage Prevention/Healing: 0

The major issues are the automatic failure of flipping a BJ, the automatic success of flipping an RJ regardless of negative twists, and the overly explosive nature of the RJ.

[msgfree]

If you hit Seamus twice with triple negative twists, you draw 8 cards of your 45 card deck. You have 8 chances in 45 to draw the Red Joker, so I was saying that theres is an almost 18% chance that in those two attacks you'll be hit by a Red Joker, AND that is if it's one of the first things that happen in the turn. In reality its likely to be later when your deck is much smaller, and the chance of pulling RJ in a damage flip is much higher.

With all due respect, your probabilities are grossly simplified.

You are making a lot of assumptions that don't seem to be realistic.

First the probability would be slightly higher than your 17.7%, because the probability is not (8/45) . The probability would be (4/45+4/41) = about 18.6%, but that is assuming that both attacks are the very first duals that are taken in a round AND you don't have the RJ in your control hand AND the RJ wasn't an initiative flip.

The probability can change significantly depending on a variety of factors. If you are holding the RJ, probability is 0. If the RJ is already in the discard pile, probability then becomes ((1/x)*(1/y)) where x= # of cards remaining in draw pile and y= 54-# of cards remaining in your control hand. That would be a very low probability and the probability will change drastically depending on when the attacks occur.

I think you guys are getting too hung up on an improbable event because when it does happen, it can be quite memorable. This causes the even to stick out in your mind as occurring more frequently than it does in reality. Check out the awesome book "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb if yor want to learn more about this.

[Jewomie]

Black Joker

Can be cheated as per usual cheating rules.

QUOTE]

this is the only part i disagree with. i think the idea of a failed attack from the black joker is important to the way the game plays... everything else you suggested i can actually agree with completely. i might try it on my games this weekend. (assuming my opponent is cool with it.)

[Buhallin]

Equally a Dreamer player should not have an x% chance of automatically losing the game through no fault of his own.

How do you figure that a player flinging the Dreamer deep into enemy lines with zero support is "through no fault of their own"? It is admittedly too low-risk a move for what it is with the Dreamer, but it's still a risk - for project management we'd classify it as a "Low Probability/High Impact" risk. If a player chooses to accept that risk and fails, then I'm pretty sure it's their fault.

[tattyted]

what Clamdown means is that with each attack at triple neg flip you flip a total of 4 cards so 2 attacks make eight. So far so good. And if you look at it one way then there is a good chance of getting the rj in 8 cards out of 45

However you can also look at it and say the ODDS of gettting the rj on any individual flip are not 8/45; first card flipped you have a odds of 44 to 1 of flipping rj, second card is a 43 to 1 chance, third a 42 to 1 etc. If you have flipped 7 cards and still not got the rj then the odds of getting it on the 8th flip are 37 to 1. As a resser player I would take these odds.

Point of this - we can quote maths and figures till we bleed through each and every orifice and in the end what do we achieve?

Now, can we please stop the naff maths (Mathifaux? Malimath?)and leave that to Mathhammer!

Edit- my pc froze while typing this and by the time I posted the debate had quite rightly moved on. What are the odds of that eh?

[Lucidicide]

Well, a good start to fixing it without changing things too much would be:

Red Joker

Remove rule about being choosable regardless of negative twists.

Value: 14, any suit

Damage: Severe+Weak

Damage Prevention/Healing: Prevent/Heal 4 damage

Black Joker

Can be cheated as per usual cheating rules.

Value: 0, no suit

Damage: 0

Damage Prevention/Healing: 0

The major issues are the automatic failure of flipping a BJ, the automatic success of flipping an RJ regardless of negative twists, and the overly explosive nature of the RJ.

You can't make the RJ not trump a negative but let the BJ trump a positive. Mirror it!

Besides which, the BJ is not an autofailure. Someone like Nino can flip it and still hit someone like Nico if he doesn't have a decent control hand. Maybe you were talking about damage, though.

Anyway, I think the above would be acceptable with the following changes: BJ is still not cheatable, RJ still trumps negatives, and RJ only does severe if it comes up in a negative twist. I recognize this adds a slight complexity to the mechanic, but I think Hatchethead is spot on with that suggestion.

Anyway, it is off topic for the thread, but threads evolve and no one really seems to have a problem with it...

[Calmdown]

With all due respect, your probabilities are grossly simplified.

You are making a lot of assumptions that don't seem to be realistic.

First the probability would be slightly higher than your 17.7%, because the probability is not (8/45) . The probability would be (4/45+4/41) = about 18.6%, but that is assuming that both attacks are the very first duals that are taken in a round AND you don't have the RJ in your control hand AND the RJ wasn't an initiative flip.

Sigh, I knew someone would call that. I was trying to keep the post less mathematical so no one had to read even more maths; everyone can see that this doesnt happen if you flip the RJ at another point. Note the number of vagueries in the post and the lack of too much maths. The exact numbers are not relevant because none of the situations above are likely to *specifically* exist. The point was to show that the percentages are not "once in a blue moon", they are "very often". Anyway...

I dont play Seamus much, but I have likely played him more than most people in this thread. When you play against players who know how to exploit the downside of HtW2, you will see Seamus knocked out by red jokers followed by some simple basic attack very often. More often than once every two games, in fact, in practice. That's not hyperbole speaking, its experience. Its ridiculously easy to exploit HtW2 given that on a turn you choose to focus Seamus, the great majority of the total cards you flip will be flipped for Seamus damage flips.