Constructive Malifaux Feedback

[Calmdown]

Hi Everyone

I'd like to attempt to write a single, coherent, and concise thread that contains feedback on suggestions on the current Malifaux rules and game balance. I know that in the past I've been accused of being too inflammatory, so I'll try to keep this one to the point and I'd request that anyone reading does too.

The issues with Malifaux, to me, break down into 4 categories:

1) Luck Factor

The Red Joker and Black Joker, as they stand, inject a lot of randomness into a game that already has a very large random factor. With some small rules changes this luck factor could be minimised so that skill and strategy can be the dominant factor in games.

2) Game Balance

The problem with Malifaux's game balance is not that it does not exist, but rather than it only exists within very specific tiers. As a very fuzzy way of thinking, you could argue that Rezzers and Neverborn are balanced against eachother because Rezzers can take Kirai and Neverborn can take Collodi, but the full spectrum of models available to us are not balanced against eachother. In an ideal situation every faction and master has access to various viable strategies depending on opponent, strategy, terrain, etc; as it stands now, this selection is limited because of the wildly varying power level between models (ie, "imbalance")

In addition to wanting more models to be viable, the viability of said models also goes a long way to redressing the balance of many models that have broken or somewhat broken interactions (notably Collodi, Hamelin, Somer, and Pandora). Although these broken interactions should be fixed, when the general power level of models is on a par and when any given player has a multitude of options at their command, they are more likely to be able to compete with said broken strategies.

Currently the focus is on releasing new models and getting new content out to us; this is great, however by fixing existing models, of which there are many (both models that are nigh-unusable and models that are distinctly average that could be fixed to give us more options) Malifaux could get a whole new lease of life without needing new sculpts.

3) Strategies and Schemes

Malifaux's other problems are compounded by the interactions of the models with the victory conditions. As fuzzy examples, you will have a difficult time beating Hamelin in any strategy involving model count, or a difficult time beating Collodi in Destroy the Evidence. Strategies really need to be reworked with the realities of certain factions in mind, as well as generally focusing less on model count (which inherently favours certain crews) and more on interactive objectives or other battlefield factors.

In addition, there is a very large variance in master/faction schemes. They vary from the nigh-impossible (Dreamer) to the 'free 2 vp' (Leveticus, Kidnap). Some factions are almost completely restricted to common schemes (Guild, Rezzers) whilst others have a wealth of great schemes to choose from (Arcanists). An overhaul of these would give players some totally new objectives to focus on and really open the game up for every faction.

4) Rules Changes

There are a some minor rules changes that need to be made, outside of changes to actual models. However, in general I feel that the Malifaux ruleset is very solid and the problems arise from models and in some cases their interactions with the rules, rather than the rules themselves. Wyrd have done a good job of fixing some of the more outlandish issues (such as Bury) and hopefully they'll continue on down this track, so I don't feel it's as high priority to discuss.

Summary

Overall, I feel that a combination of the following:

-Reducing luck factor

-Balancing out power level by reworking existing models

-Overhauling strategies and schemes

-Minor rules changes

Would go a very long way to bringing Malifaux to an even better place than it is already.

A Spreadsheet!

I've collected all of the rules changes, ability and model updates (Book 1 and 2 only so far) that I feel are necessary into a single spreadsheet, available here:

Click Here to see the Malifaux Collated Change Suggestion Spreadsheet

Headlines include:

Buffing Book 1 Masters caches and Wk/Df stats

Buffing lots of of minions across the board, notably those with low stats or missing AP modifiers, to bring more minions into a usable state

Toning down some Masters and Henchmen, mostly from Book 2

Altering select abilities to be more worthwhile and/or less gamebreaking

Not talking about Hamelin or related models because it's too big a change for the scope of this document

I've not yet gotten into looking at Strategies and Schemes as I think there is a lot of balance and testing work to be done to make them right, which is out of scope here, and also suggesting too many changes at once is bad.

I've also avoided Book 3 for now, as Avatars are dependant on their base master a lot and I've suggested a lot of base master changes, and Book 3 minions are a bit fresh for changes when Book 1 and 2 have so much still to talk about.

Thanks for reading and I hope this is taken as constructive!

Edit: I've added a suggestions section to the bottom of the sheet for tracking good suggestions or alternative revisions.

Edited June 28, 2012 by Calmdown

[Dumb Luck]

Mainly going to focus on Gremlin changes because ... well. Gremlins.

Ahem. I think on the whole, I like it. Changing Dumb Luck is dandy. Sooey is still really good. As for the stuff I'm not a fan on:

1 - No SS Cache increase for Somer? Or any of the other Outcasts masters for that matter? There seems to be a drive in this document to buff up Resser caches but the Outcasts are still stuck on a base zero.

2 - Bayou Gremlin changes. I think reducing them to three wounds AND giving them insignificant is too much. One or the other would be fine, when you consider you could just pop a wound for Reckless and become significant anyway. Main reason why the wound drop gets my goat is covered in ...

3 - Slop Haulers. Kinda jumping over a few units here but it ties in with the wound reduction of the basic Gremlins. Making Feed Piggies once per game is nuts. Sure, it makes you consider more carefully when to use Reckless and Dumb Luck but with the Bayou Gremlins being made Insignificant, it means the crew has to slowly self destruct on itself to get anything accomplished. Maybe making it heal fewer Gremlins or giving Slop Haulers a rare restriction, but not one use only.

4 - Piglets. Both of those spells will never be cast now. So with that and the changes made to Bayou Gremlins, the only stuff that'll be completeing objectives in the crew will be the uniques or quickly expiring Bayou Gremlins.

5 - Ophelia not being able to use Dumb and Lucky on herself. Hmm. On the fence about this. She shifts from being heavy hitter to a Collodi style buff master. Her and a horde of cheap models.

And thats all the stuff I'm concerned about. Happy to playtest anything in there though!

[LupusFerreus]

I was instantly stuck on the first point raised here. Surely the Black and Red Jokers are all about chance, the main focus of this game? I like how flipping one of those cards at a game changing moment, it's definitely added some humour into my games that otherwise might have been too competitive.

[Calmdown]

Mainly going to focus on Gremlin changes because ... well. Gremlins.

Ahem. I think on the whole, I like it. Changing Dumb Luck is dandy. Sooey is still really good. As for the stuff I'm not a fan on:

1 - No SS Cache increase for Somer? Or any of the other Outcasts masters for that matter? There seems to be a drive in this document to buff up Resser caches but the Outcasts are still stuck on a base zero.

I think it was a design decision with Outcasts, for flavour, so it shouldnt be changed. Viks get an extra model and so are viable at 0 cache. Leve has a fantastic ability set and unkillableness to compensate for his lack of SS. Somer has an insane amount of cards to make up for his lack of SS. I think they all balance out the lack of SS with their other abilities.

2 - Bayou Gremlin changes. I think reducing them to three wounds AND giving them insignificant is too much. One or the other would be fine, when you consider you could just pop a wound for Reckless and become significant anyway. Main reason why the wound drop gets my goat is covered in ...

Bayou Gremlins are an aberration. A 2ss, fast, significant model, with multiple utility abilities and stats that would not be out of place on a 4 SS model. Sure they have some minor downsides, but as a general rule in game theory, a frontloaded model is better than a balanced one. I think Gremlins need a more rounded set of models, and hopefully they'll get that in future releases (less Lennies, more good models), but from a fair standpoint the abilities of a Bayou Gremlin are simply insane.

My suggestions for Gremlins are trying to stick within my scope of 'minor changes only' and not total reworks, but in this case, I think a complete rework is needed. The problem with that is you then have to rework Ophelia, and all of the other gremlin models, because they're a synergy list. In lieu of that, I think that my suggested changes are fair. Alternatively, it would not be unfair to completely remove Reckless from them and leave them as significant. An unlimited selection, significant 2ss model really shouldn't have access to 3ap. In fact it shouldn't have access to either of those things!

3 - Slop Haulers. Kinda jumping over a few units here but it ties in with the wound reduction of the basic Gremlins. Making Feed Piggies once per game is nuts. Sure, it makes you consider more carefully when to use Reckless and Dumb Luck but with the Bayou Gremlins being made Insignificant, it means the crew has to slowly self destruct on itself to get anything accomplished. Maybe making it heal fewer Gremlins or giving Slop Haulers a rare restriction, but not one use only.

Again, the model has a serious design issue. Its stats, particularly its defensive ones, are high for a 4 point model; and then on top of that, it has an insane amount of utility and combat abilities, and it's significant. Look at the healing abilities scattered throughout the game; most of them heal one target, most of them require a cast, and most of them require a suit (usually a ram). Healing 4 models with no cast required is completely insane. In addition, it plays more into the 'bad game' of having all of your Gremlins sit behind a building doing sac/summon tricks. That type of play is not fun for anyone, it's not 'playing the game', and we want to promote actually fighting and chasing the objectives rather than finding unusual ways to trick the rules. I think Slop Hauler needs this change (and as with Bayou Gremlins, could honestly do with a total rework as it's far too cheap and has too many abilities) and you need some other Gremlins that give you more 'playing the game properly' options.

4 - Piglets. Both of those spells will never be cast now. So with that and the changes made to Bayou Gremlins, the only stuff that'll be completeing objectives in the crew will be the uniques or quickly expiring Bayou Gremlins.

If you Reckless around you SHOULD expire quickly. The problem with Reckless is that your whole list has 3ap. For their costs, that is absolutely insane! Right now, Reckless is an 'auto use me' ability and Gremlin players (rightly so) treat it as such. Using it should be a decision. In its current state it might as well just be fast.

Another issue with Gremlins, and you can see it on the pigs, is that for some reason all of their spells are very easy to cast. Most utility spells in most lists have high CC requirements. Gremlin ones are generally very low - 8s and 10s. Sure they still have suit requirements floating around, but they even have that less than other lists.

yes you will have few models to complete objectives - and this is why you model selection needs to be bulked out by Wyrd, or they need to rework some of your models totally (Piglets and Bayou Gremlins) to make them more fair, significant models.

5 - Ophelia not being able to use Dumb and Lucky on herself. Hmm. On the fence about this. She shifts from being heavy hitter to a Collodi style buff master. Her and a horde of cheap models.

Ophelia is pretty amazing. She has basically everything you could possibly want. I really think that my change to Dumb Luck and Calculated Luck may not go far enough (particularly on Bayou Gremlins, they still have 4 minimum Dg on a 2pt model with it). The problem with Ophelia is that again, she's poorly designed. Gremlins have trigger requirements on some very strong abilities, one limiting factor of which is the suit. Giving her the ability to remove this from a large portion of the list is what makes her pretty insane. Right now she's an uber buff master AND an uber combat master. These changes keep her as both but bring it down a notch.

For the record, I think that overall, Gremlin design was done in the classic 'all or nothing' style. And, I think that's really bad for the game. You basically win or lose based on 'dumb luck', which is not fun for you or your opponent. Some games every Gremlin will miss and all of your Pigapulted dudes will die on impact; some games your guys will oneshot all of the opponent's 8 point models. It's not great for anyone. Gremlins need the biggest overhaul of all, to stop them playing the 'hope' game and give them the tools to actually play properly and interact with the opponent on a meaningful level. As I say though, in lieu of that redesign since that's out of scope for me right now, the 'bad' interactions are what I'd like to remove.

[JayBarlekamp]

I just want to make a few comments.

first on the Joker Luck mitigation, I think the jokers are fine as-is. Everyone knows a straight flip against you can ruin your day because your opponent could have a red joker in hand. And, everyone learns that you can try to get a :-fate if your model is going to die anyway to try and pull a black joker. I really don't see the problem. The jokers (as stated by Wyrd) are meant to be game changing, I don't think there will be a change here at all. I really don't think these things happen as much as some would let on, they are just more memorable.

I agree on the power level of minions, however by the looks of your sheet you have a vendetta against certain groups. Not saying you do, it just looks that way. Especially when you buff Fransisco's duellist but leave Francios' alone. And, I believe you didn't give a single buff to any Gremlin model, only cuddles. Not even the warpig.

I also agree on some of the strategies and schemes, they need some more that aren't so reliant on movement. and the Master specific ones vary from way too easy (Levi) to f'in impossible (Som'er). Hamelin's and Zoraida's are actually quite nicely balanced and probably on the level they should all be.

I may give some more input on a case by case basis after I have a chance to digest the list thoroughly

[Csonti]

Nice writeup that needs a very deep study before someone can make any resonable comment.

The only thing I could point out right now is your first problem which I don't think exist at all in the game. Luck should be part of a wargame to keep tension high in most cases and give an unpredictibility factor. I also think the Malifaux has a system that relies the least on luck compared to any other game I encountered.

As for the Jokers: I do love the Joker's interaction with the game. I hate when I KNOW that I will succeed because BJ has a known place (Hand or Discard Pile) and in the upcoming duel I have +2 stat difference and a 13 in my Hand. I also think that the RJ damage on flips is a good compensation for people who hunt down undead with HtW. I consider that a lucky head shot of some sort in between the sea of Weak damages all over the place.

You would like to implement changes to tone down luck factor so that skill and strategy can be the dominant factor in games. Meanwhile in your signature there is the stats of your games (McMourning - 17/1/0 | Nicodem - 5/1/2). According to you the first Master is at best a mid tier one while Nico is at the bottom of the pack. I think these stats in themselves confute the need to change the magnitude of luck in the game.

Anyway great and thorough article from you. Looking forward to read the ensouing conversation. Thx for your effort!

[Dumb Luck]

A well structured rebuttle indeed!

So basically under this comp pack (which I understand is entirely optional and no one is forcing me to play it), I would effectively playing with sub par models and waiting until their selection was fleshed out?

[Ausplosions]

Sigh.... here we go...

[Oscilioth]

I agree with LupusFerreus, I don't think the Joker's should be changed, it would severely lessen the tone and theme of the game. I'm sure that if you play a mass amount of competitive games than you are going to have a handful of stories of when a Joker has ruined a well timed manoeuvre, but in my experience it's not really a serious game breaking issue.

Reading through the spreadsheet, it does look like some of the fixes might bring the game a bit more in line, but it seems at the expense of theme. A fairly large number of models, especially the Unique minion to each of the original Master's, received some kind of Expert, movement got streamlined in a bit as well.

Seemed to me like a lot of the model's would lose their individuality in going towards this kind of streamlining.

I'm not to worried about any balance issues in the game at the moment, and would prefer to keep the theme intact.

If anything I think I'd be most willing to see some very minor tweaks, and most probably only the area of Soulstone Cache and Soulstone Costs, and even then, on a select few, i.e Seamus and Bishop respectively.

Interesting read, but I'm against any major changes.

[Pierowmaniac]

Spreadsheet was certainly worth a look and some good ideas included, though imho because a lot of the crews work with Synergy, if you applied all the changes then the imbalance would likely swing the other way.

I suppose in a way you could consider the spreadsheet as more like a menu, where you just need to make the right selections to avoid getting an upset stomach.

As for the Jokers, maybe your suggestion is slightly too big a cuddle.

My own idea would be:

Red Joker - Damage is Severe+Weak or just Severe if it was on a flip.

Black Joker - no change, (unlike the red joker players tend to control the black joker by keeping it in hand anyway)

Edited June 28, 2012 by Pierowmaniac

[DeusInnomen]

The Jokers are perfectly fine as they are, because this game is just as much about skill as it is luck. The skill comes from knowing when to cheat from your hand or spend a soulstone.

As for the rest, I can certainly agree we need more strategies and schemes. I tried to start up a conversation to drum up some ideas on the subject but the thread fizzled after one or two suggestions (one of which being mine). Having more strategies and schemes would go a long way in injecting some extra flexibility and entertainment to the already-fun-as-heck game.

[OldManMyke]

Are the jokers really fine? Doesn't the presence of the Red encouage negative flips on damage rolls as you have more chance of pulling out the red joker and doing massive damage to a model that you shouldn't have been hurting at all. Same with healing flips. Spending a lot of activations to a get a master down to a couple of wounds and then having them healing flip a Red and mitagate ALL the effort that you have put into wounding that model is not an easy pill to swallow. And its not like you can use your skill to mitigate it, unless that you are advocating cheating a defence flip DOWN so that the negatives from hard to wound are cancelled out. Which surely defeats the point of giving models hard to wound (especially hard to wound 2)

I'm not sure I would go as far as Calmdown in changing the effects but I do think that a change to bring them (specifically red) closer to the rest of the cards isn't a bad thing.

[bashamer]

As a point of reference; this game requires terrain for balance.

for example: Collodi

Collodi is significantly better w/o terrain as everything can walk in nice straight lines; adding more terrain makes his mobility an issue and his pulses much smaller. plus he can bring his own clouds and those don't get into the way. And surrounding someone w/ dolls doesn't work when they are next to a building.

An example of a model that gets better with Terrain; Teddy.

Teddy has a problem that he can get exploded when where are 2-3 guys on him; this negates his regeneration etc. no longer an issue as your opponent really can't get more than 2 guys on him.

Flight on heavy terrain tables is AMAZING, needing a suited card to get it is totally reasonable.

The reason this matters:

from what I've seen half; probably over half; of the games are played with significantly less terrain than it is designed for.

So balance is hard to discuss when we don't all play the same game, from your changes my estimate is you don't pay with a lot of terrain. So even tough we all call it the same, we are not comparing apples to apples, as there are oranges, pears and even a monkey thrown in there.

Edited June 28, 2012 by bashamer

[OldManMyke]

So how many pieces do you play with, typically we use 3-4 per 18" square of the board

[Pierowmaniac]

Are the jokers really fine? Doesn't the presence of the Red encouage negative flips on damage rolls as you have more chance of pulling out the red joker and doing massive damage to a model that you shouldn't have been hurting at all. Same with healing flips. Spending a lot of activations to a get a master down to a couple of wounds and then having them healing flip a Red and mitagate ALL the effort that you have put into wounding that model is not an easy pill to swallow. And its not like you can use your skill to mitigate it, unless that you are advocating cheating a defence flip DOWN so that the negatives from hard to wound are cancelled out. Which surely defeats the point of giving models hard to wound (especially hard to wound 2)

I'm not sure I would go as far as Calmdown in changing the effects but I do think that a change to bring them (specifically red) closer to the rest of the cards isn't a bad thing.

Totaly agree about the issue with HTW2 etc.

Healing and Damage prevention with a Red joker though I'm not so inclined to agree. Mainly because these are generally the product of using a Soulstone and if they happen to by chance use a particularly powerful Soulstone for healing then that makes sense in a Fluff way.

I think healing and damage prevention are OK as they are.

[DeusInnomen]

Are the jokers really fine? Doesn't the presence of the Red encouage negative flips on damage rolls as you have more chance of pulling out the red joker and doing massive damage to a model that you shouldn't have been hurting at all. Same with healing flips. Spending a lot of activations to a get a master down to a couple of wounds and then having them healing flip a Red and mitagate ALL the effort that you have put into wounding that model is not an easy pill to swallow. And its not like you can use your skill to mitigate it, unless that you are advocating cheating a defence flip DOWN so that the negatives from hard to wound are cancelled out. Which surely defeats the point of giving models hard to wound (especially hard to wound 2)

I'm not sure I would go as far as Calmdown in changing the effects but I do think that a change to bring them (specifically red) closer to the rest of the cards isn't a bad thing.

I don't argue that it sucks to have the Red or Black Joker get flipped and have it undo a lot of hard work by you or your opponent, but I personally consider this balanced by the fact that both players have the jokers thus it is neither an advantage nor disadvantage to either side. (This is partly colored by certain Masters who get a reaction to one of those cards being played though, such as Rasputina's "December's Pawn" feature that lets her drawn two cards when she plays or flips the Black Joker.)

I think a lot of folks get really fixed on the Red Joker being flipped in a Damage Flip and forget that a :-fate:-fate flip eats up four cards, and as long as one is a Weak card the more of those being Severe cards the more it helps your opponent because they're wasted. About the only time I could someone being nervous about it is if this is a game-changing attack where you seriously need the damage to be at least a certain amount.

Sure, the Red Joker can change the game, but it does that for both of you. I'm not saying it shouldn't be changed, I'm just saying I personally haven't seen a compelling enough of an argument to change it versus other proposed changes. Some of us actually like the unforgiving power of the Jokers, it adds a factor of "sometimes Fate just goes for/against you" to the game and it makes you sigh and move on.

I feel the other issues deserve consideration first, such as the balance issue that keeps coming up with the Rezzers and (to some extent) the Neverborn. I'd rather they spend 3 to 6 to 9 months playtesting changes to the factions rather than changing what's basically a core mechanic of this game. Wyrd only has so much time to dedicate to design and testing, being a small company.

This entire discussion is very interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing where it goes.

[Dorian]

For scheme changes I will again raise my torch & pitchfork and say Seamus got screwed. Not only is the scheme near impossible but it also mandates you take his totem. No scheme should ever mandate you take a certain model. That said some schemes are obviously easier than others, I don't want any of them to be free VPs but I think the difficulty should be made more uniform.

[Gruesome]

Interesting stuff.

I have a few points.

I am 100% in agreement on the schemes and strategies needing work. We need better balances between speed and slower-harder hitting crews. But I actually think that Story encounters might be an excellent way of starting to flesh out alternate winning conditions and over time we might be able to distill some new basic strats and schemes from them for use in the overall game.

I think that a list like the proposed changes is impressive, but overwhelming. I am surprised at the breadth of coverage. I wonder though, if instead of talking about everything, it might make more sense to pick out a top 5 or so and try to make suggestions there.

I am not sure about the Jokers debate. I can understand wanting to eliminate some more randomness, but I also understand the desire for the very same randomness.

As it does not impact my crew of choice any more than my opponents, its not something I concern myself with. I am far more interested in what can be done with masters that struggle with the most strats and schemes. My personal experiences mean specifically Seamus and Nicodem. I am sure each faction can bring theirs to the table.

I look at your proposed changes to Nicodem and I like them, aside from only giving him 1 more SS. I think he should have 5, but still, the other changes are very nice and do not make him feel over-powered in the slightest.

I did not like the Seamus change at first, but the more I have thought about it, the more it has grown on me. The stated intent of the avatars was to give models options. Not necessarily to make them simply better, but different. By giving regular seamus the ability to grant himself Anathema through Face of Death, he gets a very nice buff that also moves him forward to Manifestation. BUT, since he has Anathema, turning into his avatar is no longer the 100% choice now. He is still pretty good and by burning his FAST action each turn he gets a little taste of his avatar while also granting speed to his belles and even still summoning. So, its a balance. And when you want to go to town, you manifest. It feels like much more of an option this way, rather than a requirement. I can actually imagine games now where I do NOT choose to manifest him. (Usually will, but still...)

I am a big fan of that change. Kudos.

As for the plethora of model changes, they are overwhelming to me. One thing I have been thinking about is back to schemes. I know that its the cart leading the horse, but I have been thinking about models like crooligans and asking myself what sort of a scheme setup would make them be a real go-to model and then trying to invent a scheme for them. I like the model and what they do, but the problem for me in the current state is that there are simply better models accessible to me for everything they do. With more varied schemes that really make use of the interact+push, perhaps they become "best at SOMETHING".

Anyway, thankyou for sparking the conversation. (I do not want to call it a debate)

[bashamer]

I grab 18 pieces of terrain when I set up the table, I count. my opponent calls me insane, and I show them in the rulebook whee it mentions the 18 pieces; you use 12-16.

page 65 btw.

nothing smaller than a 50mm base (trees) some walls that tend to be ~4" long, some buildings that are ~3"x4" and I throw two per 12" x 12" square.

I have also played on tables where you can draw a 12" wide corridor across the table. literally, a model can be placed on the table more than 6" away from ANY terrain. also had a few tables there the central 12"x12" was empty. Or where I could not get a single point for reclaiming Malifaux; there were just not enough 12"x12" squares that had legal terrain.

in general getting to the center of the board takes ~18" from your deployment zone. when you have ~18 pieces, when you have ~10 it probably takes 12".

So these are things that are better w/ lots of terrain:

-Quality melee; as there are more choke points; there are more 1 v 1 fights.

-Speed; you have to move more, and you keep moving more; fights move they don't just pile into a giant cluster

-Terrain / LOS / cover ignoring effects

These things are worse:

-bulk melee; as you are fighting in choke points having 10 dudes that want to swing just won't happen.

-range; sure you got 12", but can you see 12" in all directions?

-Spirit, flight, float, etc; yep you can move in a straight line, but so can everyone else.

-Push; yep you can push 4", too bad there are models, walls, trees and buildings around the place so enjoy your 1.25".

Edited June 28, 2012 by bashamer

[rancor709]

Clamdown, excellent and well thoughout pts with suggestions. To improve the game potentially.

On the jokers, to me the chance of failure should always exist so the blk joker as is im fine with. The red joker can swing a game radically on often what is calculate luck. Provided its not in my hand may as well fish for it against my opponents harder to elminate helpers. I think it be interesting at a tournament level to try it as sever + weak on straight flips and as a sever that overides negative fliips but not blk joker. I have faith that wyrd as they have conducted themselves are thinking how to more fully level the playing field, but it does take time.

Personally really love the game but tweaking so that strategy plays an even larger role. Is something that helps stop negative play experiences from occuring.

Overall i think malifaux is growing and learning from its history and as games grow wouldnt shock me to see ideas from all over used to make the game deeper, even more accessible and even further the game in the process.

[Cunning]

You've got to remember, Calmdown is coming from the position of a competitive gamer and is making these recommendations to try to make the game more balanced/competitive.

Working within these guidelines the joker changes make perfect sense. They are to make to game balanced and competitive. You may prefer the extra randomness, which is totally fine, but remember the aim of his changes.

If you disagree, are you disagreeing with the suggestion that these changes will make the game more competitive or are you disagreeing with his intention that the game should be more competitive at all?

[JayBarlekamp]

disagreeing with his intention that the game should be more competitive at all?

This, there are other games for that.

[Dorian]

I like malifaux having the competitive aspect but I don't want to see it go the way of 40k, where everyone has a 3+ and the stats look the same.

[OldManMyke]

This, there are other games for that.

Really? How does making the game more suitable for competative play hurt casual play in anyway - and I am firmly in the casual play camp, as anyone who has seen me play will be able to tell you

[UberGruber]

Calmdown is coming from the position of a competitive gamer and is making these recommendations to try to make the game more balanced/competitive.

I also am competitive, in the sense that while I don't mind losing and tend to give my opponent the benefit of the doubt in the case of rules queries, I play to win.

I, however, feel that randomness actually adds not only to the flavour of the game, but also to the competitive element. Certainly one may bemoan the jokers and one's luck if a certain draw undoes ones plans. But as in most games where randomness is a factor (rather than the ultimate determinant), you tend to find that in the long the best player is also the luckiest. Odd that.

Obviously there is a sliding scale from chess like games with no in-game random factor whatsoever to ludo where only chance determines the victor. But Malifaux is right in the broad mass of games where chance is present but one of the skills needed in the game is to allow for ill-chance. Adding predictability to wargames gives the player greater control. That control is often confused with skill. Clearly you don't want a player to have no control of events but there's absolutely no reason why having quite a large number of things beyond absolute player control makes a game less competitive.

I don't by any means think Malifaux is a perfect game as it stands. But neither do I think the random element needs mitigated in order to make it more competitive. Speaking here as a competitive player of any game.

Edited June 28, 2012 by UberGruber