Math Mathonwy

I'm pretty convinced that losing an 8SS minion into dealing with Pere is something of a bargain, unfortunately. Plus, if you can do it in the middle of the Gremlins and get him to blow up, then it's game-set-match pretty much right there. True that. I am of the opinion that Pere's effect on the game is overtly great, no argument there. A bit to the side from your point, note that Ophelia's crew is really, really difficult to customize to any meaningful extent. You can switch around Young LaCroix and basic Gremlins and decide whether you want to take one or two slop haulers, but that's pretty much it. You might include a Taxidermist if you're feeling particularly adventureous but that doesn't seem like an optimal choice against pretty much anything. So they need to be able to handle all-comers (though there are some very nasty match-ups - Dreamer and Hamelin seem almost impossible to deal with). Could you run this step by step as I see no way for Marcus to Alpha Pere effectively unless the Pere player is dumb as bricks. As an aside, that pink on white is hell to read - holy crap!

I was sorta convinced by Sholto's defense of the Shikome. It takes quite a bit of forethought, but a well positioned Shikome with Pere as her prey seems like it could work.

Yeah, true that. Had a brain cramp - of course the Obey-user is at least Ht2. Still, at least our tables have Ht2 (and higher) terrain to hide behind all of the time. I mean, a table with LOS all the way through everywhere is a pretty rare sight (and luckily so). What I'm trying to say is that since Pere has such a huge threat range, hiding him is a lot easier than hiding Loco and in my book that makes him better. You haven't - thank you for pointing my mistake out .

Can someone explain how they get Papa Loco to move 18" during a single (companioned) activation and then blow up? Because I'm obviously missing something as people keep saying that they are the same or that Loco is better than Pere. That threat range means that on most boards I can hide to Ht1 Pere behind something which makes most counter measures a lot harder to do. Lure need LOS. Obey needs LOS. I've yet to play on a board that didn't have ht1 LOS blocking terrain somewhere convenient. It really has nothing to do with noobness - the game revolves around schemes and strategies and these usually force you to move. OK, apparently everyone else is significantly better in getting to the objectives in a super loose formation where every model is over 14" from another (no matter that there are lots and lots of synergistic abilities that are sorta short ranged) but how do you avoid getting isolated and shot up by the rest of the gremlins in a formation like that?

I would try to kill the Shikome with Ophelia, Rami and Francois first and when the coast is clear, then launch Pere. As in this game there was the Rattler with terror who could've been blocking Pere, but then I'm confident that Ophelia and Francois would've taken care of it. Companion is such a nasty ability...

I do somewhat agree. Wyrd did do some non-essential changes for v2 and they've been doing all sorts of tweaking for the releases of Rising Powers. I really liked Asmodee's approach with Helldorado where they released a new set of stat cards where they had cuddled the slightly too good dudes and boosted the slightly not good enough dudes. I honestly think that Pere's threat range is a bit too good now leading to somewhat non-satisying games as really, avoiding him when schemes and strategies basically force you to come forward (otherwise would be a pretty boring game) can be pretty impossible and dealing with him when he is so easy to hide due to the range of the slingshot is extremely non-trivial. Aye, 1SS is too little to be worried about. But in my last two games Pere could've been 9SS and he still would've been a real bargain. But behind all of this debating, let me assure you that I still do acknowledge that my experiences with Pere are really limited and if people really don't think that his threat range is over the top, I'm willing to believe it so. So thank you for the input - I really appreciate it!

Aye, but Jack Daw is quite a few SS more than Pere. But that dynamic would still be there were Oopsie a (2) action. I'm not arguing for a complete cuddle (or, God forbid, a ban) here, just a slight mitigation to keep his range a bit in check. Or does everyone really think that that the 22" threat range forming a gigantic 12" diameter circle is absolutely perfect and tampering with it in any way would wreck the model? Because if so, then fair enough, I suppose. Would you take Pere if he was 7SS? I know I certainly would. And that tells me that there is probably something amiss with his current design.

Yeah, singular solutions exist, I think everyone agrees there. Note though that Obey's range is only 12" and that one can hide Pere, so it's not an "I win" button that people often lead you to believe. And since Obey can't lead to suicide, once the Oopsie has gone off, Pere can't be obeyed to perform it against the Gremlins. But yeah, at the end of the day, Obey is nasty against him. Again, I'm not saying that counters do not exist, I'm saying that his destructive potential is a bit much making the whole game revolve around him. And, furthermore, that most of those counters are unreliable due to the huge range of the Pere slingshot. Simply making Oopsie a (2) action would solve my problems with him.

Aye, Belles and Crooked Men are pretty good against him. The problem with them is that Pere's effective range is 8" from Ooh, a Girl, then 10" from two walks and then 6" from the pulse. OK, the pulse range isn't quite the same as the other 18" since it's important to go off in a position covering a maximum amount of enemies, so we should probably add only three or four inches from it. All told, his threat range is something like 21-22+" This in turn means that hiding him behind terrain is usually pretty doable which is certainly something that I would do against Belles. And companion means that the other Lacroix can pave the way for his slingshot. All that said, I do agree that he is dealable. I just feel that currently he dominates the game too much while he's on the table and some toning down would make for a better experience while still retaining his fun flavour and worth.

Isn't he a bit too good? I've now played my Lacroix twice, and both times Pere has won me the game, basically. The sling shot from Ooh, a Girl makes his threat range completely ludicrous and the six inch(!!) pulse that does that five points unless resisted is absolutely huge. Getting lucky on the casting flip or cheating a high card there is extremely powerful as you can, with a single high card, force your opponent to flip consistently lucky or cheat away his hand. Or die a lot. And after all this, he just sits there and if someone kills him, he explodes more. Or Rami can shoot him in the back making him explode if the opponent could turn him into a danger for the gremlins. First game I exploded three Silurids and something else, second game the boom took out two sets of mini lynxes (blacking out on their name right now), a Jackalope and did massive damage to Marcus with only a lucky flip saving the Rattler. I do realize that there are ways to deal with him and that spreading out helps a bit, but him being so crazy fast and the pulse being so huge makes him a bit too good for his cost, I feel. If Oopsie was a (2) action or if the pulse was "only" four inches or did only three or four damage, I would feel quite a bit better about using him. I do not wish to see all of those suggestions implemented, but one or two. There are other power minis in the force like Rami, but only Pere tends to kill triple his SS cost in a single activation. Am I alone thinking this?

I disagree and feel very fortunate to able to do so. I mean, as far as I can tell, the design philosophy behind Malifaux isn't "Rasputina easily beats Zoraida who easily beats Vickys who easily beat Rasputina" (to pick three random masters) but rather aims for balance most of the time. Doesn't mean that there are no bad match-ups (Hamelin vs Gremlins) but I don't see that as an ideal Wyrd is working towards but rather an unfortunate side-effect.

Nice!

From game strength perspective, Hamelin is currently the top dog. The other first tier Masters are Colette, Dreamer, Pandora, and Zoraida with Perdita, Kirai and someone I'm blanking on at the moment hot on the heels.

Well, you said that defeating Hamelin is very easy, which I don't think is spot on and I doubt that Omenbringer (or pretty much anyone else) thinks so, either.

So, a Lady Justice with, say, 40 wounds wouldn't be OP? As it doesn't break down the game in any meaningful way, it would just make her really, really hard to take down. A pretty strange definition, but at least it's more usable than the previous one that was considered.

Is your definition of "OP" "unbeatable"?

Huh? I have absolutely nothing against Hookers, I assure you. The only person that I would say I bear animosity towards I've ignore listed for their horrid behaviour. Do you use the same definition for "Overpowered" as Hookers? Because if you do, can you name even one model/army in the history of minis wargames that would be "Overpowered"? I mean, even the original Nicodem with 12 dogs is beatable in certain scenarios so doesn't fulfill Hookers' definition. (I can, mind you, but only one and it's pretty obscure and was fixed quickly) "Very easily"? That's a pretty bold claim, don't you think? I mean, it's obviously possible that everyone magicpockets played in the tournament that spawned this thread sucked fiercely, but I'd say that the more likely hypothesis is that it isn't quite so "very easy" as you say. Have you considered that your skills are just so high above the usual player's that you simply can't generalize from your own experiences?

That's an extremely weird definition for "overpowered" that a) is not used by anyone and seems basically impossible to meet. So why on earth would you use that definition?

Not very sure about that "alot of people". The way I see it, I'm the only one in the thread who believes that balance is achievable and my definition of balance is a situational balance, not an absolute one. Right now the top tier Masters are almost unconditionally better than the second tier ones. This I agree with.

Perhaps it's just that I have played such a huge number of minis games, I dunno, but I seem that I come to this from a different angle to most. I agree. The question "is Lady J better than Rasputina?" is something that can be answered with "sometimes, depends on the schemes and the situations and such". And you can replace Lady J and Rasputina with most of the Masters. But there's a couple, where the answer will be more clear cut. "Is LCB better than Rasputina?" "Yes." "Is Colette better than McMourning?" "Yes." Maybe not exactly always, but most of the time. And my thesis is that it wouldn't take much work in balancing to bring all the Masters into the first group. Not a popular opinion, I know. Yeah, there will probably, even then, be a Master who wins the most and a Master who wins the least. Such is the nature of the beast, but that's not a problem in my view. That there is too big a gap between the best and the worst Master, now that is, if not a problem, then at least a non-ideal situation.

What's your reasoning here? Why do you think that he should be top tier as opposed to middle tier? An honest question, mind. If Wyrd aim for balance, it would be easier to cuddle five masters than to buff fifteen of them.

You've got to be kidding me. Are you, like, twelve or something? Yeah, you go rolling on your floor as much as you like. And you somehow believe that this makes what you said better? Wow. Never thought I'd have a need to use the browser plug-in to ignore list someone on the Wyrd forums, but my patience with childish personal attacks has been getting kinda lower the older I get. Bye-bye. As for Bully, would it be a crazy idea to allow the opposing model to override it for an activation (or action) by discarding a card from hand?

Sounds like a great game! It's always fun to end the game with a Red Joker killing (well, driving away in this case) the opposing Master Huh?

Wow, way to escalate into personal attacks. Not cool man, not cool. Would someone be willing to test with immune-to-bully gremlins against Hamelin? I doubt that the balance would shift too drastically, but this is just theorying. Personally I really like the sound of that solution to the particular problem (of it being nearly impossible for Gremlins to win against a well-played Hamelin). A problem with anti-Hamelin tactics is that they all seem to rely a lot on specific crew choices (like Convict Gunslinger or Perdita in Sandwich's long and somewhat self-contradictory post with, nonetheless, probably a lot of merits), which is something of a problem. Since you don't know whether you will be facing Hamelin or Vickys or Ophelia, choosing a very specific anti-Hamelin crew will spell trouble against, say, Ophelia. Now, some disparities are natural and all right, but right now I'd say that the balance is too skewed and you need a very specific anti-Hamelin crew to have an even chance of winning (other than slaughter but no one will choose to play Hamelin in a slaughter).