Jump to content

RisingPhoenix

Vote Enabled
  • Posts

    367
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RisingPhoenix

  • Birthday 03/04/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

RisingPhoenix's Achievements

Rising Star

Rising Star (9/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post
  • Collaborator

Recent Badges

92

Reputation

  1. Well if there's anything I've learned about the internet, it's that for anything no matter how unintuitive, backwards, and flat out stupid something is, there will be some valiant defender ready to explain how it's all counterplay and you just don't understand the genius that created it. Since you haven't actually given a meaningful response to anyything I said (one line was literally just repeating two words with quotation marks around them) I can't see any fruitful conversation happening here. Bye.
  2. Plenty of people play doubles. If you hosted your series using the default rules rather than variant rules, you'd have plenty of people playing doubles. What you've done is ban people from playing doubles in your tournament then go "well everyone seems to be playing singles from what I've seen..." I know confirmation bias is the human condition, but please tell me you recognize the major logical fallacy in what you just did there.
  3. Versus Final Sacrifice, which is a pretty damn good ability. I'm also not convinced the heal aura is awful with Leveticus 1 - I've had similar with Hodgepodge and thanks to Marlena that crew gets a lot out of 1 point heals. I could see some world you tossed cheat from the top on Rusty Alyce for turn 1/2, got some mileage out of healing, then ran off and scheme ran - again if scoring is allowed to happen before end of round and 4SS scheme runners subsequently get a real role in Malifaux. Clearly there's other things wrong with 4SS models and neither is seeing play and that's the much more important thing to fix. But if they do this I think it's a reasonable hire for Leveticus crews. Then again, I keep thinking the Effigy is reasonable then remembing 4 SS scheme runners do nothing in M3E.
  4. Because they get their jank all over everyone else's stuff. Witness this thread.
  5. I'm pretty sure the fact you can place inside the 8" bubble pretty freely is not at all intuitive to anyone reading the ability for the first time or new players. Most players would think it would stop things like Lynch's demise ability, when in fact it rarely affects them. You can call this counterplay I suppose, but it feels exactly like unintiutive glitches in the game rules, same as with Bandidos and Drop It bugs. I'm reminded of the year long period where you could ricochet a bullet back onto the original target thanks to change in another - glitch due to unitituitive wording, or clever use of ability?
  6. Are these timed, or are they playing it out every time since it's still online? Also can the UK please get the stick out of their ass with regards to second masters?
  7. The real question is why do the Bandidos have 8 instead of 'Whenever a model drops a scheme marker within 8"' Like they already need to draw line of sight to make a gun attack, why do they also need to draw line of sight to the marker? All it does is fuck up the ability . There's a lot of glitches in the game regarding that occur because the developer uses that when they mean 8". Like Gravity Well, Gravity Well and dismounting McCabes feels wrong (model with Gravity Well kill McCabe? No problem. Just do the replace and place him down inside the Gravity Well!). Overall I really think it should not be used as often as it is.
  8. It's a 4 stone significant model with Df 5, 5 wounds. Mv 5, and hard to kill. That alone means if they ever do get around to allowing both points of schemes to be scored during the game (instead of at the end) it'll have a role as a cheap scheme runner. It also has a crappy self-heal, which is awful, but a lot of scheme runners have Wp 4 making it a really obnoxious tar pit (as if it hits with the attack they get distracted and it goes above the HtK threshold). If it can score a scheme and then tar pit a 6 stone model it did its job. Or score a scheme and Final Sacrifice. It's almost shocking how it's basically strictly better than Desperate Mercenaries at doing that (I guess it can't shoot for 1/2/4... gee). Malifaux as a whole has a problem where 4 stone models just kinda suck as a concept, but if that ever gets fixed (which granted feels unlikely) it's a pretty solid scheme runner. I admit the idea of it ever putting a fate token on a horseman seems implausible, but as far as 4 stone shit goes it's pretty decent.
  9. Mate, there are many things wrong with what you wrote that I won't dive into (because many of those were not reasonable and were never tested), but you realize that was Wyrd's server to test changes, right? I desperately hope you didn't join Wyrd's server to test changes in order to, um, tell Wyrd they're changing things too often and that annoys you. That'd just be 0/10 userful feedback, pure trolling. As for reality, we're not chasing perfect balance here. Perfect balance is a myth. We'd like a world where there's more models taken and more crews that are viable because Wyrd was willing to perform buffs on models that are "eh" and "below the curve". That doesn't demand 25 changes to chase a mythical thing that doesn't it exist, it demands a small number in order to make more crews viable and the meta more interesting. Don't bump anything to Defense 7, don't break the game, just minor, reasonable changes to make more models viable.
  10. I, um, press X to doubt. The changes were in total +1 Df/-1 Wp, change Challenging to Caught in the Ring, and changer Regenerating to Broodfighter. Unless they tried completely reworking Barbaros' entire function and then abandoned that rework (which is a different problem) there just isn't enough flex on the changes to actually have had ten iterations of them. Now the odd one out in there is Broodfighter. It's a brand new Keyword ability, templated to create a lot of mobility for a keyword with black blood and lots of regeneration. With the addition of the Keyword RETURNED then that would lead one to believe that Broodfighter is part of Lilith's Neverborn keyword. As a Keyword ability that will appear on multiple models and help define her crew's playstyle, do I absolutely believe it changed ten times in playtesting? Hell yes. With a crew keyword, even minor changes does massive things (see the Von Schtook disaster). Is that the same thing as Barbaros changing ten times in playtesting? I kinda don't think so. It's pretty dishonest way to frame things. But hey, since we have this beta test pool where Wyrd can make changes and have them tested, why don't they make some minor changes to a whole bunch of models in the beta pool? Then they can be tested out over time and they get feedback. If we can't have changes in the real world without testing, they can at least do fast iterations in the kiddie sandbox right? Then when they roll out the once-a-year balance patch they can make a whole ton of changes, right? If Wyrd would just talk and say "hey yeah we're going to toss a bunch of changes onto the beta sandbox with a plan to incorporate them unless we run into issues" that would satisfy me that something is happening behind the scenes. Well if we keep tweaking 1-2 models at a time, we'll get around to Rabble Rousers and Phillip and the Nanny around what, 2025-2027? I mean they're hardly Gaki levels of terrible, they're just not... good. So if we continue at this rate of buffs, that's the situation for the next 5 years or so (at least). Or if we did some small buffs they'd be more worth taking, maybe there'd be more reason to take some in-keyword models for Molly. Would that be more fun for Molly players? Hopefully, yes. Would that make more fun to play against Molly? I admit I'd have to learn to play around Phillip and the Nanny since I don't think I've seen him on the board more than once or twice, but that honestly sounds like fun to me. I kind of get a thrill when I see a rarely-taken model, especially if it does interesting things.
  11. @Maniacal_cackleWell this might be the biggest jump of... all time ever. There's a pretty big gap between "doing multiple power-level errata a year and being open to buffing models in small ways to improve diversity and available options" and "abandoning the physical playspace". Like an enormous, huge gap. And it's not a slippery slope or anything of the sort from one to the other. Hell, over the past ten years board games and physical games in general have seen a resurgance. Now COVID has doubtless put a damper on that, but I believ tehy'll continue to gain popularity. They won't replace video games, just as video games have not replaced them. But they also both can learn from each other. Malifaux isn't a video game, and shouldn't become one. But it shouldn't learn nothing from them either. Ignoring them is just as crazy as becoming one. Having more models and more masters be viable picks is a good thing. And small tweaks to models to make them more viable is one of the best ways to get there. Are you actually willing to state outright that you have an issue with having diverse options available, and would prefer less masters being viable over more and having trap models that are not worth taking? P.S. with small numerical adjustments you can use the same cards as before with the help of a sharpie, if physical cards are really so important (which no one is really convinced they are)
  12. So people check scoring in the app at the start of a game because they might have forgotten the exact scoring rules, were unlikely to have memorized the schemes and strats in the first place, and if they haven't played in a while things might have changed. It seems we can equally expect that people to check the models in the app at the start of a game because they might have forgotten the exact card text, were unlikely to have memorized all the stats and abilities in the first place, and if they haven't played in a while things might have changed. These look the same because they are the same. That's how people operate in reality. People check the app. Or if they just want to play a casual game where they don't care, they don't care if they're playing with the latest rules or latest stuff, they play their game with their friends and don't worry about it. And they get all sorts of rules wrong, terrible terrible rules to get wrong that completely imbalance the game. And they just go and mess them up! And its casual and they have fun with their friends and they don't care. A small number of people on the forums have invented a fictitious category of overly persnickity people who really care about getting every rule correct but can't actually be bothered to do any work to make it happen as a rhetorical device. Go look at the rules and clarification section - if you can't reference that at the drop of a hat you are literally doomed to play malifaux wrong, because you will be messing up great and terrible rules you shouldn't be messing up. I'd wing it that since GG2 at least half of all "casual players" have had a summoned model interact with a strategy marker - if they've played in enough games to even play with a summoner. If they don't have a smart phone to reference during the game, they're not persnickity at all. Or they're playing a different game, one with less rules complexity, more streamlined implementation, and which doesn't have all the warts of Malifaux. So yeah, if you don't have a smartphone you're playing the game wrong. But that was always going to happen. And every player of Malifaux has bought into that enough to keep playing (if you think M3E's rules are ornary, M2E had more exceptions than rules). Buffs will make the game more diverse and make more masters viable for people who play frequently. And people who don't play frequently and don't look up things on their phone won't care.
  13. @DuBlanck The changes that casual players really notice and the changes that serious players notice aren't at all the same things. For instance, imagine if you removed this from the back of the Dead Outlaw's card: Casual players would probably be shocked. This model lost an entire ability! An entire ability! It's huge, it can obey enemy models, it's got two triggers, you can't just remove it! Anyone who plays the crew competitively would know this literally doesn't change the Dead Outlaw. At all. Meanwhile for a competitive player, Barbaros going from Df 5->6 is a hugely impactful change, while a casual player is probably not even going to notice there's a difference. It's exactly things like "total movement range" or "exact defense numbers" that casual players need to check, but changes to these are often very impactful at making models better and worse, and are easy ways to slightly improve models and increase diversity. I've explained this difference what feels like three times now, so hopefully this time around you got it. A small change is not "completely rework the card". It is change a stat or two, add a trigger, those sorts of small changes that casual players don't have memorized, and are not going to notice being different, but which can very much effect if the model is worth taking. As an aside, these sorts of small changes are also nice in that it doesn't really matter if their cards "lag behind" the true card by a few months. When they do get the update, the way the model plays won't completely change (like Benny or Bayou Smugglers, which were massive reworks), the model will essentially be a similar model to what it is now - just a bit better.
  14. Um. So does anyone who plays once a month memorize their stats cards for every one of their models? Because I play with people who play way more than once a month and they still check their cards. You just don't memorize every stat value and TN on a card unless you play with it on a near daily basis, at least for most people. I really must meet these once a month casual players who have all their cards completely memorized so well they can recite them with 100% accuracy from memory, don't own smartphones, are unsure of how the internet works, and decry everything digital yet feel compelled to play with only the most up to date rules and components no matter what. I feel like I must round up a few anthropologists and turn it into a true expedition. How do they live? What do they do for work? Are they still genetically similar to homo sapiens?
  15. Out of curiosity, how do these mythical beasts deal with the issue of Gaining Grounds? I mean they wander into the store unaware of any apps, websites, errata, faqs, or anything happen in the community, and... what then? Do you introduce them to the four new strategies and 13 new schemes that make up the objectives of the game? Because this is the fundamental rules and objectives of the game that you're playing that change on a yearly basis - and that has far more impact on play experience than a couple of model changes. I guess everyone I know has one of those newfangled digital smartphones, is aware of the existence of the internet, and at least interested enough in the game that they're broadly aware of changes. I'm not saying no one has been caught off guard by a sudden unannounced GG Update, but this level of sheer disconnect from players isn't something I regularly encounter. Maybe this is just the famed rural/urban divide in action. Although I still wonder why if Cletus is playing Billy-Bob they can't just use their GG0 cards and rules since apparently they're not following any of thte updates anyway. If you just don't give a fuck, why would you use new rules? Hell, they could play Malifaux 2E for all we know, the rules are still in the books, the game still works just fine. They don't need to follow any update they don't care for (which they won't be doing because they don't have any electronics apparently).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information