Hatchethead

Oh, I may have been playing this wrong: is your pool only for in-game, as in, you can't spend them on pieces?.

Your master's cache (the number on the stat card instead of a cost, in McM's case 6) is what he brings to the table for use during the game. This cache CANNOT be used to hire models, it is instead added to any excess stones you may have immediately following the hiring phase. As Ozz stated, you only need to save 2 additional stones to give Doug the max pool of 8 (added to his cache of 6). Saving any more than 2 is a waste, as the extra stones are considered lost.

The "cache" is what he brings to the table. The "pool" is the total number of stones you can use during the course of the game starting in turn 1, excess stones + cache.

The only potential snag I see with announcing a master versus announcing a faction is the Outcasts. Wasn't the pick a faction mechanic meant to benefit the Outcast player?

It's a theory. The Outcast crews have almost nothing in common with each other (theme, play style, shared minions). If attempting to predict a master for any other faction is rock/paper/scissors, trying to predict an Outcast pick is like ... something else. Was that by design? Is that part of their balance mechanic? I honestly don't know. If it is, I believe it's a mechanic that should be reevaluated, as it does more harm than good.

---------- Post added at 03:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 PM ----------

Also: My apologies to Shadai. In retrospect, I may have overreacted and inferred a personal attack where none existed. It was not my intention to dress down a new member of the forums. His opinion is quite valid.

What Fetid said. Rogue Necromancy for sure. With slicing up your own minions and casting Wracked w/ Pain through the Chihuahua, then sac'ing it for 2 parts ... it's really not hard to get up to 8 BPs relatively quick.

McM's game winner is Scalpel Slinging. It's a (0) action attack with a 6" range, which then pushes him into base contact. THEN you get a BP! The fact that it's a push into base contact means t ignore terrain penalties. You can use it while engaged in melee (horray push!), to either escape or simply move on to a different target. You can also use it on your own faster minions (like Canines) to drag yourself up field and gain a BP in the process. It's pure gold, really. Everyone in my gaming store hates it.

Sling yourself into combat, discard the shiny new BP, gain fast, unleash three of Doug's devastating melee attacks (or hit 'em with a Transplant first).

But for that one game... that one, perfect game, even David can beat Goliath.

I'm discussing this matter from a big picture perspective, what's best for the game on a grand scale. You're concerned with the microcosm of a single game, the first game, the only game in which a new player with a secret stash of models has any kind of advantage over a player with a vast selection of models.

The new player with only a single crew and a handful of minions has the advantage exactly ONCE, and only if he doesn't let slip which master he intends to field. If you're playing at a con or some event where you're up against players you've never seen before, I can understand how this could be a fantastic thing. But in the average local gaming community, the environment I game in 99% of the time, wherein you tend to play the same people over and over? There is no benefit. In fact, in my environment, if I'm having to announce which of my five leaders I intend to field, that's actually benefiting the player with only one or two masters to choose from.

Did you just imply that I'm selfish? Excuse me? I'm sorry, I don't know you and you clearly don't know me. I love Malifaux and I want nothing more than to see it succeed. I'm a Henchman. My job is to promote the game and attract new players, which I do on a regular basis. I've been growing my local community since 2010. I'm not a power gamer, I don't cheese and I want nothing more than to see my opponent have fun. I'm not even very competitive, on a relative scale.

You've obviously had a bad experience with a meta/power gamer. Fine. My condolences. But don't allow your bias and butt hurt color your judgement. Don't jump to conclusions, and next think twice before you presume to judge my motivations without knowing the first thing about me.

Most people agree with this that I've spoken too, it was actually floated quite a while ago by myself and a few others I believe. The major benefit is that it means you arent rock/paper/scissors'ing so much; building to match your opponent's faction might work in theory, but in practice crews vary so wildly by master that you're really just guessing what they could bring. You can build your crew effectively knowing the master.

My thoughts exactly. It's certainly not a new idea. I personally have created several threads on this topic in the past, but all were booed off stage before they really got started. I've heard it mentioned by others in the past, as well, but this is the first time I've seen any real support for the idea.

Master reveal I like in principal, but I would have to play it. I am a little concerned that being able to build specific counter crews might be a bit powerful in already bad match up results on master pick. Meh.

Indeed, that's the concern. Bad match-ups do exist, and maybe they'd get worse, but we'd also see some of the "bent" masters fall in line just a bit, which is a positive for the majority.

That latter scenario wouldn't happen any more than it already happens, since you should both choose your master (by hiding their card in your hand) and reveal at the same time.

Absolutely. I believe leaders should be revealed simultaneously. I've often wondered about flipping for the right to decide who reveals first, much like deployment ... but giving a player the ability to choose their master based on the other player's master choice feels like a game-breaking advantage.

And while initially when I heard this I thought "That's a pretty good idea..."

Now I'm like... eh...

At what point to you hamstring and frustrate the new player?

A new player showing up with a starter box is going to enjoy a level playing field for exactly one game ... or not even that, assuming the opponent finds out which box it is. Afterward, the guy with four masters and a suitcase full of minions is going to know exactly which master he's facing and will hire appropriately. Meanwhile, assuming the new player also owns a few clam shells worth of additional minions, how is he to know what to bring? Considering the massive selection of models his opponent has on hand, he's stuck guessing which master he'll be playing against, with no way to know how best to tailor his crew to survive. He can build for the strategy, of course, but that's only half of the equation. He's playing Fixed Master versus Open Faction, and that's a losing proposition.

The way I see it, this change helps the new player as much as it does the vet. Yes, it gives the suitcase player an opportunity to customize his list even more, but it also eliminates a large number of potential models from the suitcase (not to mention all potential leaders save one), giving the new player a sense of direction and a hope in hell while hiring his crew.

I'm considering trying this for our next tournament. Few of our local players have expressed the sort of balance concerns we see here though, so I'm not sure it's really necessary for us.

The way I see it, it's as much about encouraging the use of niche models as it is about balance. Seeing a super situational model hired only because the master v master match-up makes it a viable choice would be rewarding in an of itself, and beneficial for all involved. I may be operating under a false pretense, but I tend to see a wider selection of niche models on the table in fixed master scenarios, certainly moreso than standard faction v faction, wherein players tend to fall back on a more generic hiring process.

If you do try to implement this in a future tourney, I'd be very interested to hear the results.

Oh thank goodness. All this nonsense with endless Creepy Fog and Nurses juicing Bete only to have her bury and etc. etc. etc. I hope things change for the better.

I feel a player should be able to choose their master after flipping the strat (as it is now). I often wonder how the game would change were leaders then revealed prior to hiring, however. EDIT: Which is to say, separate the hiring of the master from the hiring of the crew, creating two separate phases.

Just goes to show - announced fixed-master vs. open faction is a totally different game. Hamelin wouldn't be so powerful if opponents knew what they were up against in the crew selection phase.

While I'm not a huge fan of Fixed Master, I can't help but feel Malifaux would be better off were players forced to reveal their leader selection prior to the Hiring Crews phase. Models that play well in super specific match-ups would see more table time, masters like Hamelin and Dreamer would be easier to combat with tailored lists. I realize it wouldn't be all roses and sunshine - "Oh, you're playing Seamus ...? See if I hire even a single living model!" or "Lady Justice? Kirai. Every. Single. Time." - but I honestly believe the pros would outweigh the cons.

... but I'm OT again.

What compounds the problem is the use of VPs to determine ranking. If I go to a tournament, and the brackets end up with weak players on one side, with myself there, and the other side is all the masters; I will in all likelihood end up with a far higher ranked score, despite not playing anywhere near as hard.

Out of the three options found in Gaining Ground, which do you prefer? Obviously not VP. So I assume you'd rather see a TP Primary structure? Or DIFF? A little off topic, I realize, but I'm curious as a Henchman about to run his first tourney. I'll admit, my first instinct was to use a VP Primary format, but after discussing it with other Henchmen and experienced tournament players, I've opted for a TP "Domination" format.

I've always contended that movement shenanigans separate the good for the bad and the great from the good. If you look at the masters widely considered to be bent, the point of contention is often (not always, but quite often) traced back to extreme maneuverability. The reverse is also true. Masters often lumped into "the bottom tier" usually suffer from limited mobility. With so many of Malifaux's strategies and schemes reliant on speed and placement, it's not a shocking revelation, really.

Who's bandwagoning? The majority of models in Malifaux have niche utility. Some are very situational. Almost all have uses, it's simply a matter of recognizing what that use is. When someone details a scenario that justifies the hiring of a model that's often overlooked, it's good for everybody involved. Why wouldn't we support that?

EDIT: Not to go OT, but this also highlights why I support revealing Leaders BEFORE hiring crews. Knowing which Master/Henchman you are about to face really opens up the hiring process, forcing you to consider models you'd otherwise ignore.

Belated Battle Reports...

As promised gentlemen, some brief Nicodem battle reports from the recent Northampton tournament where I took second place.

Thanks! Great read. Very educational. I reckon we'll be hearing about the 4-4 draw soon?

Either way' date=' I eagerly await Malifaux v.2. I love the current game, but I think it's time to stop the flood of new models, that make it very difficult to properly balance the game, and rebalance all the existing factions. I don't think the game needs any huge adjustments, but it does need some effort to make the rules more streamlined, easier to play and easier to balance in the future.[/quote']

100x this.

Professor Pink, why you gots to poop all over the Resser parade?

Registration has been posted; you can find the sign-up sheet on the Armoury event board, just across from the front desk.

Also, the tourney info package is done. Hard copies are available in store or you can find it online.

Cheers!

Our first ever Malifaux tournament at the new location!

30ss SCRAP

ENTRY FEE: $5

All proceeds to fund prize support.

Rounds: 3

Round Time Limit: 100 Minutes (including setup)

Scoring Format: Domination TP/DIFF/VP

Pairings Format: Tournament Points (TP) Primary

Deployment Type: Standard

Encounter Location/Special Features: Preset

Strategy Selection: Fixed Shared

Scheme Usage: Unique

Encounter Size: 30ss

Leader Selection: Fixed

Hiring: Single Faction, Open Crew

See tournament information package for additional details.

12 spots available.

8D

(All) Noobify Self

:-p

Recently, I was asked about burning multiple stones to prevent damage from a single source. While I'm fairly certain it's one stone per source, I'm not 100% confident ...

D'oh! Nevermind. The question was answered here: http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?29184-cheating-and-healing-prevention-flips&highlight=wound+prevention

On 2012.02-22, this thread won the internets.

#1. I've never considered nor heard an alternate pronunciation, to be honest.

Now ... Sonnia Criid, on the other hand ...

Even if it were something as simple as:

If a target is within 1" of an intervening base of equal or higher Ht, LoS is blocked unless a model is both higher in Ht than the intervening base and within range to the target equal to the model's Ht in inches.

Say you have a Ht 1 target behind a Ht 1 base. I have a Ht 2 model wanting to shoot it. If your Ht 1 model is within 1" of the Ht 1 blocking base (and therefore in cover, assumed to be hunkered down), my model would have to be no further than 2" from your model in order to draw LoS, despite being tall enough to see over the intervening terrain. Naturally, if I can draw LoS, so can you.

It's still simplistic and streamlined, but it does solve some of the issues. That said, it introduces issues. Gremlins hiding behind Ht 1 walls would no longer be able to see over them unless their targets were close enough to draw reciprocal LoS, for instance. They trade potential offense for pure defense. I guess that's somewhat realistic ... but is it fun?

McMourning for sure. Versus Ramos and/or Colette, his body parts mechanic will still function whereas corpse counters might be sparse. I'd otherwise recommend Nico and maybe Rafkin if you have him (for counter generation), as Seamus' terror bomb will be of dubious use against so many constructs (though Avatar Seamus might be fun) ...

EDIT: I derped the vote. I totally voted for Seamus, meant to vote McM. Herp.

I don't see how this is even a thing.

And yet ... it's a thing.

I've had "The Balance Talk" numerous time in the past and I reckon I'll be having it again as the game continues to gain in popularity. As new skirmish games arrive on the market, the more choices people have, the more discerning they tend to be before making that initial purchase.

Most of these players are veteran war gamers who care deeply about the competitive aspect of any game they play; they couldn't give a wit whether the fluff is nice, the mechanics are unique or the models are cool, they just want a fair fight. They either "hear from a guy" or they visit the forum, witness the hyperbole, then come to me to cut through the BS. They know perfectly well that all gaming forums are filled with negativity and they want a clear picture from someone who plays. I do my best to set them straight.

In fact, it's less about what they read on the forum and more about how the forum tends to muddy the hivemind of the local player base. "Man, I really want to play Seamus but I've heard he's garbage, so ...", as spoken by a player who has never visited the forum.

Beyond that: Malifaux, at least in my experience, tends to attract non-gamer types, the un-hardcore. Whereas 40k requires a considerable commitment in terms of time and financial investment, not so much with Malifaux. These people are less "in-the-know" and are more likely to be swayed by an atmosphere of negativity. The funny thing is, they usually don't care so much about balance, they just want to play; but being told their favorite master is "useless" because of XYZ is enough to put the kibosh on their enthusiasm.

It would add complication to do this, but I'm actually a large fan of the Shadow rule. It could make sense that a Ht X model within the shadow of a HtX blocking terrain piece cannot be seen except by something within 1" of the blocking piece and Ht > X.

Like I said, a bit complicated, but also provides some protection when you're in close. Also, it piggybacks on the shadow rule already, so not much new to add.

I would love to see something like this, to be honest. Yes, it would add complexity to the targeting mechanic, but I'd still support it.