Whut

Bug: The general Effigy upgrade doesn't auto-add the Emissary to Reference Cards

Chaki adds all reliquaries to reference cards. This isn't necessary since you'll only be able to split soul reliquaries for ancestors which you take in your list anyway.

The text box for notes at the bottom just scrolls horizontally and it's impossible to write multiple lines of text. Makes it poor for reading your notes (might just be my phone? Android 7)

An "advanced crew options" feature to create a "core" section and add a list of common optional choices for different scheme pools would be nice. Kind of like a main-side deck mechanic for card games, as I think this is effectively how people build lists to begin with. This would be cleaner than having to create and name mutliple crews, clogging up your list of crews.

In the rules section, link to the most recent FAQ and Errata just like the full rules. Also a quick reference for "things SS could be used for" would be great.

This would be some work to implement, and not necessary, but having a "stats" page would be cool. It would take your crew and break down which cards/suits can be used for which triggers. It could for example help players see "I have too many abilities that require 7+s" or "I have too many key abilities that require masks"

The app is phenomenal and thanks so much for making it

15 minutes ago, Biletsky said:

Now on Vassal 3.4.3

Module 3e v1j

Tried 6 maps:

• New Map, End of Line, Misty Hills don't lag
• Desolate Wasteland, High Ground, Prison Break lag to the point of unplayability (every action delayed anywhere from 2-20 seconds)

Edit: Also, I reloaded High Ground and then (painfully through the lag) deleted a bunch of terrain until very little remained. The lag was MUCH less and the deck windows displayed properly after deleting around 70% of the map objects this way

The deck windows show up like this (only on maps which lag, on maps which don't lag they display correctly)

Wondering if there's a specific terrain piece which causes the lag, or if it's the amount of terrain which causes it. I tested this, and suffice to say it's definitely not the amount of terrain. I had little to no lag on Misty Hills after spamming copies

4 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I don't know anything about it, but have you tried a full uninstall and reinstall?

That's always my go-to solution to try early on.

Yep, already did

Now on Vassal 3.4.3

Module 3e v1j

Tried 6 maps:

• New Map, End of Line, Misty Hills don't lag
• Desolate Wasteland, High Ground, Prison Break lag to the point of unplayability (every action delayed anywhere from 2-20 seconds)

Edit: Also, I reloaded High Ground and then (painfully through the lag) deleted a bunch of terrain until very little remained. The lag was MUCH less and the deck windows displayed properly after deleting around 70% of the map objects this way

The deck windows show up like this (only on maps which lag, on maps which don't lag they display correctly)

Now on Vassal 3.4.6

Module 3e v1j

Still suffering lag on Desolate Wasteland, didn't test others

My last idea is to get Vassal 3.4.3, since that's the version specified by the module, but I highly doubt that'll change anything

Just noticed that when I downloaded the latest module yesterday, it must have not overwritten the old one properly. Trying to reinstall now.

New developments:

When picking the map, "New Map", "Bidonville", and "End of Line" don't lag (well, a little bit here and there, but that's just normal vassal)

"Desolate Wasteland", "Floodlands" lag like crazy (2-5 seconds delay on every action including scrolling the map or clicking buttons at the top)

Haven't tried every map, but at least I confirmed it's something unique to some maps.

Although, Desolate Wasteland worked with only a little lag yesterday for about 10 minutes. Now it's unplayable, even on a fresh new game

Also, already tried reinstalling Vassal

21 minutes ago, ShinChan said:

Which version (of both) are you using? Could be some Java issue. Does it always happens with Vassal and stops as soon as you close it?

Yes. Even when it's running, I can still surf the internet without problems, it's only Vassal that lags hard.

I downloaded the newest version of both yesterday, I believe.

Module version 3e v1g, Vassal 3.4.6 (a good damage track!)

Edit: Just noticed that when I downloaded the latest module yesterday, it must have not overwritten the old one properly. Trying to reinstall now.

I used to play on vassal on this same laptop just 3-4 months ago, but now when I start a game the Java SDK uses 65%+ of my CPU and every action I make lags for 5 whole seconds. Could this be because of the newest version of vassal or the module?

My computer can run XCOM2 with little to no lag, and I'm ~relatively~ sure that game should be taking a lot more computing power than Vassal.

Anyone know what could be going on?

A Dissertation, By Biletsky

Prior to FAQ

The text of the My Loyal Servant trigger breaks any notion of an intuitive definition for "another"

Quote

My Loyal Servant: Another model (other than this model) within 3" of the target Heals 1/2/3.

If every "another" trigger/action had a parenthesis clarification, it would make sense as a primary rule, clarifying exactly which models can or cannot be chosen. But it's not on every one, which implies there exists a "base case" for what "another" means, and that "(ottm)" alters this base case to mean something different.

1. Does "another" = "non-target"?
   • Does "another (ottm)" seek to change the meaning to "not this model"?
     • Then why use "another," just use "a model ottm"
   • Does "another (ottm)" seek to change the meaning to "non-target AND not this model"?
     • Then why the parenthesis? Parenthesis are for clarification/reminders, not primary rules like specifying who cannot be targeted. You would never see "target an (enemy) model." Use "another model ottm."
2. Does "another" = "not this model?"
   • If so, why would you even need the additional text? You wouldn't, implying that the base case must be #1

Post FAQ

As per FAQ, this "(other than this model)" additional text literally does nothing. It only serves to confuse through inconsistency.
 

Quote

 

1. Nekima – Can Nekima Push and take a y Action as a result of a friendly Nephilim model being killed within range of her Enraged By Insolence Action?

a) No. “Another” always refers to “not the model from which this text is written” except in those instances where the model in which “Another” is written would not always be a legal subject of the sentence, such as “Another Scrap Marker”, or “Another enemy model”. In such cases, “Another” will never refer to the previous legal subject.

To Clarify:

• Base Case: "Another" always refers to "not the model from which this text is written"
• Exception:
  • If the model in which "Another" is written would not always be a legal subject of the sentence
    • Ex: “Another Scrap Marker” (this model cannot be "another scrap marker" because it is a model)
    • Ex: "Another Enemy Model" (this model cannot be "another enemy model" because it cannot be an enemy to itself)

Note that the exception is "always be a legal subject of the sentence," NOT "always be a legal choice as per game rules." In the two cases above, the relevant questions are: Can this model always be a scrap marker? Can this model always be an enemy model? If the answer is no, then "another" means non-target. If the answer is yes, then "another" means "not the model from which this text is written"

Now let's apply this ruling to the Ricochet trigger.

Quote

Ricochet: Choose another model within 3" of the target. That model...

To evaluate the meaning of "another" in this sentence, we need to determine "If the model in which "Another" is written would not always be a legal subject of the sentence." Therefore we ask ourselves the relevant question, like above:

Can this model always be a model? - Yes

Therefore, Ricochet's "another" refers to "not the model from which this text is written," and you can Ricochet onto the target.

Addressing Devil's Advocate:

The only argument I see from the opposite side is claiming that the "subject of the sentence" is "model within 3" of the target" and thus the relevant question is instead:

Can this model always be a model within 3" of the target? - No, therefore "another" refers to "other than the target"

Now, it's been a long time since I've taken high school english, but I believe this doesn't hold up, as "model" is the subject of the sentence, and "within 3" of the target" is... uhhh... any english majors out there? It's some kind of phrase. Prepositional phrase? Point being, it's definitely not the "subject of the sentence" as per academic english sentence structure.

FAQ Quick Solution

Assuming Wyrd does not want Ricochet to be able to choose the target.

The FAQ should have just eratta'd Enraged By Insolence to specify "a friendly Nephilim other than this model" and specified "another" to continue to mean non-target. They should also specify if "another (ottm)" is "non-target AND not this model" or just "not this model."

Option 2 would be to keep everything as is, but change "Ricochet" to state "enemy model" - this does have some different implications for Gremlins than the above option, since some models are forced to declare ricochet but will never ricochet onto friendly models.

Complete Solution

The Full Rules for Malifaux needs a paragraph on "Another" which explains the following:

• Another model within 3" => A model other than this model
• A non-target model within 3" => A model other than the target
• Another non-target model within 3" => A model other than the target AND other than this model
• A non-target marker within 3" => To replace the case where "another" is referring to something other than a model legally

And then errata a bunch of cards. Unlikely to happen, perhaps if we get a M3.5E (majority of the rules staying the same but some crews getting reworked)

1 hour ago, Plaag said:

another means not target)) and seamus can easy jump to ice pillar, remove it and take a shot, bad plan; also seamus shoots only with focuses and concealment just makes him better; swg is garbage, they dont cost 8 ss; and it helps-if u are listening to me)

For the record, if you do this, Kandara staggers Seamus and then the whole crew kills him. Bad plan.

2 minutes ago, Plaag said:

svg are still useless

"Useless" he says.

48 minutes ago, Plaag said:

wind gamin brings mobility, but 2" push is not good mobility)) and we still have many questions to wyrds wordings))

There is a big difference between out-of-activation mobility and in-activation mobility.

There is also a big difference between 1 Wind Gamin placing a model 4" at the cost of his AP and giving EVERY Elemental within 6" getting free pushes for zero AP cost for the whole game.

There's a reason why on Turn 1 a fast Dead Rider is scarier and safer than a non-fast Dead Rider who is pushed forward 6" by another model. Or a Dead Rider who first charges an enemy model and then has to wait for someone else to pull him back. You, as a Colette player, should know this. Focus-shoot or Focus-charge, especially with one of the two models with Flurry in the crew, is much better than Placing out of combat, then letting your opponent go and possibly getting engaged again.

As you read the following list, keep in mind that every time you Concentrate instead of Walk, you...

• Draw a card
• Activate your Demise
• Deal 1 Damage to an enemy within 2" (least likely to occur)
• Get Focus +1, obviously

Now the non-exhaustive list:

• 2" is enough to exit combat without the disengage action, being unable to fail, allowing you to to Focus-Interact or Focus-Shoot or Focus-Charge someone else
• 2" is enough to push into melee range when engaged by a 2" melee model, instead of having to walk.
• 2" can be enough to push around a corner, allowing you to Focus-Charge instead of Walk-Charge
• 2" can be enough to get into shooting range or charge range, allowing you to Focus-Shoot or Focus-Charge instead of Walk
• 2" can be enough to push outside enemy Auras
• Often times, you don't need to move a full Walk, because you're already within 2" of the objective, or 2" will get you within 1 Walk of the objective, or you don't want to overextend Turn 1. Focus instead.
• You can 2" push before applying the 1 damage from Sandeep's Mantra, reaching new targets
• You can 2" push before applying Demise from Banasuva's Mantra, dropping a Pyre Marker on top of more enemy models or on the opponent's table half for Research Mission
• You can 2" push before applying Demise from Banasuva's Mantra, hitting new targets with 1 Damage and Poison, and putting new models into Catalyst range
• You can 2" push before applying Demise from Banasuva's Mantra, reaching a new target with Wind Gamin's place effect

44 minutes ago, ShinChan said:

He will always be a legal subject, maybe not within range, but the trigger targets models and a SVG is always a model.

I see this distinction, and I like it. BUT I don't want to get into a 20 minute semantic debate every time it comes up with an opponent who is unfamiliar. Wyrd needs to clarify.

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I think the idea is that the original model (the one shooting the gun) is not always a legal target for the action, so 'another' isn't excluding the original model firing the gun. If it isn't excluding the shooter, then it must be excluding the original target.

Or so the argument would go.

EDIT: To clarify, the original shooter is not always a legal target because it is not always within 3".

Essentially this. The FAQ is currently a poor solution to the problem. This would never happen in practice, but imagine Wyrd designed a model with a Df trigger "Immediately Push 5" away from the attacking model." Suddenly every "another" trigger in the game would break because there exists a theoretical scenario where "another" can no longer legally mean the model with the trigger.

I'm willing to admit that IF Ricochet doesn't allow you to hit the same model twice, then SVG are average at best. I'd still be hesitant to call them bad, they're a choice to add mobility to your crew in the same way you might take a sub-par model for condition removal, or marker removal, or healing.

The current consensus seems to be that you can, and I'm just rolling with it here (again, I don't play Arcanists).

It's strange to me that Wyrd, who are usually amazing at wording consistency, are leaving enough of a grey area here to even be questionable. They even almost solved this problem for themselves but then totally stumbled with the My Loyal Servant trigger - "Another model (other than this model)"

According to the FAQ and thus RaI, "Another model" should mean "other than this model," so why would this text need to remind the reader by restating "(other than this model)" unless normally "Another model" was supposed to mean "other than the target."

But if that were the intention, "Another model other than the target" would be the correct way of stating it, no parenthesis required and the base case remains "another model" = this model.

They really need to overhaul "another" officially and errata the cards but I doubt they want to because all the cards are printed and for sale.

• "Another model" = not the target
• "A model other than this model" = not this model

3 minutes ago, Plaag said:

another means not target)) and seamus can easy jump to ice pillar, remove it and take a shot, bad plan; also seamus shoots only with focuses and concealment just makes him better; swg is garbage, they dont cost 8 ss; and it helps-if u are listening to me)

1 hour ago, Plaag said:

all that u told abt banasuva doesnt work against seamus and summon fire gamin is a bad idea too-just an easy points for strategy for him, swg are bad models, 

Why doesn't it work against Seamus? He suffers from Concealment + Cover more than your average shooting model. If Banasuva has Concealment + Cover, Seamus needs 2 focused or SS'd shots to kill him. Maybe around T2-3, it becomes much harder to ensure cover against a teleporting Seamus, but T1 he has no way of ignoring it.

I admit I forgot about the SS Cache upgrade, and Captain - those are both good calls that I missed, but I don't play Arcanists.

Fire Gamin give only 1 point for strategy, and if he's killing them, he's not killing Banasuva, Kandara, Sandeep, or Metal Golem. Sandeep might give up VP Turn 2+3 (which Seamus will be able to score anyway) but he'll win the attrition war in the end. You can't pull them close to the centerline with dead rider without dropping the Pyre on your table half. They're a nuisance.

SVG are not bad models. The first time I looked at them, I thought they were garbage, but you have to understand how they work. They're not stellar, and they're certainly bad against a H2W crew with seduction (or most ressers honestly), but they're totally serviceable in most cases.

2" pushes keep your elementals mobile while drawing cards, can push out of combat, and help to manage the common 6-8" range on Elementals' gun actions. 8 Wds with H2K ensures 3 attacks minimum to take down, and every crew will have a Silent One to heal above H2K. Able to concentrate as a bonus action, push for free, and shoot twice. Ricochet trigger is (literally) broken since "another" can currently mean the target as per FAQ. Damage track is effectively min 2 even against Armor +2, straight dmg flips have a 43% chance to deal 5+ damage (compared to 25% to severe on a normal flip), positive damage flips have a 68% chance to deal 5+ damage (compared to 43% to severe on a normal positive flip) and you can attack nearby low-Df models or even friendly models to deal damage to hard-to-hit or low HP enemies. Their melee is good too, 2/4/5 with a trigger to ignore armor, and the quick shot trigger is free card draw at worst.

Df/Wp/Stat 6 with Know The Warrior is the best feature though - as long as they have a focus, they can cheat EVERY opposed flip and redraw a card. Every flip. Failing an attack? Cheat low to redraw, or high to hit and still redraw. Winning the duel? Your opponent has to cheat first, after which you can cheat low to get a replacement card, or cheat >5 to get a straight or positive flip and still redraw. Kandara is drawing tons of cards anyway, so there's absolutely no reason to be stingy. Just cheat everything except that one card you plan to summon with.

That being said, I'd appreciate if you'd actually write up more than just several run-on opinions per post. If you think something is bad, state why. If you say something doesn't work, state why. What you're doing isn't helping anybody.

17 minutes ago, Plaag said:

u have bad plan for the game))

Товарищ, объясните

I assume the issue is that Seamus can one-shot the Fire Gamin. I edited it to make it a bit more clear what I meant

On 10/12/2020 at 9:18 PM, Maniacal_cackle said:

They're pretty awesome!

Next up will be Seamus vs. Sandeep on this pool:

Public enemies on Flank Deployment

• Take Prisoner (randomly selected)
• Hidden Martyrs (randomly selected)
• Sabotage
• Research Mission
• Spread Them Out

Board TBC (open to suggestions for a Vassal board that will be balanced for both crews). EDIT: Maybe "Welcome to the Jungle" with some blocking terrain but not dominated by it?

Also open to suggestions against Sandeep - never played against him before!

Sandeep's Crew:

A good way to remember how Sandeep works is this: Mantra and Pseudo-obeys are for Elementals, everything else is Academics

• Keep in mind Banasuva and Kandara are BOTH Academics and Elementals
• Every Academic has a Mantra. 6" range and only applies to the model with the Mantra and Elementals. NOT all Academics
  • Sandeep's lets you deal 1 damage within 2"
  • Banasuva's lets you resolve your Demise
  • Kandara's lets you draw a card
  • SVG's lets you push 2"
  • Ox Mage's lets you heal 2
  • Kudra is a bad model
• Sandeep and Banasuva each have a pseudo-obey for only Elementals. Banasuva's is his Bonus action
• Sandeep gives Shouting Orders(Academic) within 6". NOT Elementals
• Sandeep also can draw LoS and range from Academics (NOT Elementals) within 6"

Key Summons

Note that if he wants to summon wind, he can't summon two gamin

Fire can be replaced by Ice, but the Fire Gamin is easily the better of the 2.

Metal can be summoned instead of Poison, but Poison is better in practically every way except mobility if there are enough scrap markers for Ride The Rails and Magnetism.

Ice or Metal may come out to drop markers for Research Mission

• 8 - Poison Gamin
• 9 - Wind Gamin
• 11 - Two Fire Gamin
• 12 - Poison Gamin + Fire Gamin
• 13 - Two Poison Gamin

Tips and Observations:

He will 99.99% be taking Research Mission, Sandeep is the best crew in the game for that scheme, and there's very little you can do about it.

Sabotage or Spread Them Out likely as second scheme, although Hidden Martyrs on Banasuva is possible too. Kill Banasuva anyway. If you see SS Miners or Wind Gamin in the starting crew, the former 2 are more likely.

99% Expect a Metal Golem in the crew, it's a no-brainer choice with Sandeep and drops scrap every turn for Research Mission. It can also be pseudo-obeyed to Off The Rails multiple times in a Turn.

99% Expect a Silent One or even 2 for healing. They will try to be in cover and only give up 1 Public Enemies point, but they have to die if you're ever going to pressure Sandeep or Kandara properly

Always pay attention to how many SS Sandeep has. No SS = no prevention for Kandara, and no suits for Sandeep. Pressure Sandeep and Kandara for this reason.

Banasuva is target #1. He is incredibly crucial to "the machine" Sandeep runs and making it 10x easier to score Research Mission, but is an enforcer with Df 5, 7 Wds, and can be one-shot by Seamus with a severe. If Banasuva lives, you likely lose through attrition alone.

If he's smart, his first activation of Turn 1 will be Banasuva walk, concentrate + drop an Ice Pillar, bonus action to command Metal Golem to Vent Steam. Good luck.

Kandara is target#2 (unless you think you can kill Sandeep), as she is what gives Sandeep an absurd amount of card draw. However, with Serene Countenance + Concealment, or by just using stones for defense, you might not be able to take her down with a Seamus shot or Lure her. Don't overcommit if you can accomplish more by targeting the other models in his crew.

The crew has an absurd amount of AoE damage. Blasts from Banasuva and fire gamin, pulses from Poison Gamin.

Not sure if he'll do this, but it's my typical game plan: Summon 2 Fire Gamin T1. They summon in with Df/Wp 4 and 4 Wds, but when they activate (within 6" of Kandara and Banasuva) they concentrate to draw a card and drop a Pyre Marker, gaining 1 burning, then bonus action to remove the pyre marker for 2 burning. This effectively gives them 7 HP, meaning Sandeep summoned 14 HP worth of models T1 which can later become a Fire Golem. Note they can only ever reduce damage by 2 for a single action, so 6 damage will always kill them. *

*In order for this to work, he'll have to summon them behind cover, and either activate after Seamus, or command them immediately to concetrate and drop a pyre marker for 1 burning so they can't get killed by a weak hand cannon shot.

Fire Gamin punch way above their weight class, but can't sustain their damage, since it comes from burning. Their gun is 1B/2B/3B plus a burning for damaged models, so if hitting the target and 1 additional model, they're effectively dealing 4 total damage at the end of the turn, or 6 after next turn. Remember that preventing the damage also prevents the burning, for what it's worth. Every turn they can stack up to 4 more effective HP for themselves (plus heal for 1) and keep drawing cards as long as the correct Mantra are in range. Their melee damage is pretty bad against H2W models but they do gain 1 burning with each hit, further building Health.

Poison Gamin pull work too. 2/3/4 attack with a built in poison, concentrating near Banasuva pulses 1 damage + 1 poison, Catalyst like McM, 5 HP Arm+1. They'll be looking to tie you up and slowly whittle you down.

Wind Gamin are the Schemers. 6 HP Arm+1, Mv 6, Flight, built in leap.

SVG are extremely hard to take down, but only if they carry a Focus for Know The Warrior to use DF6 + cheating to draw unlimited cards. Seduction these guys. Also, H2W makes their damage pretty poor.

Ox Mage is an optional choice in Sandeep, is the only healing in the keyword, and unlikely to be taken against Seamus

Consider Valedictorian to AoE remove corpse and scrap markers to prevent Research Mission, but honestly you're delaying the inevitable since there will be pyres, ice pillar(s), schemes, and scrap on your half of the table if Sandeep dedicates to it no matter what.

Tabletop will never be precise to 3 sigfigs or whatever. You're right that's physically impossible.

But at the end of the day, the rules explicitly encourage this kind of perfect-distance placement through rule of intent, and the game is specifically designed with models being able to intentionally block LoS in this way.

No one will stop you from shooting yourself in the foot if it simply doesn't feel right to you, but one day you'll be on the last activation of a turn, staring down the barrel of a 4x focused Sniper with a 13 of rams in hand, 23 inches from your most important Ht2 30mm already-activated model with 7 health remaining and suddenly you'll question your principles

2 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Check this or that choices. You can't choose to gain stunned if you have it already, so you must select the other option.

Works in reverse as well (if they don't have three cards, must gain stunned).

Right, didn't know that.

In that case, this is SO far beyond anything RaI that I wouldn't even try to argue it. I'd say when choosing models, you have to choose separate models

32 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I could see it going either way. Perhaps best to discuss with your opponent before the game!

I'd lean towards disallowing it though. Otherwise it is guaranteed discard two cards at a minimum which seems nuts for no resist.

Well, no, it's just guaranteeing the Stun. If you need to "Discard or Gain Stunned" 3 times, you can just gain stunned 3 times and not discard.
Unless there's some rule I'm unaware of where you can only choose to gain conditions you don't have?

8 minutes ago, Jesy Blue said:

You know Stunned doesn't stack, right?

I don't want stunned to stack, I want to say "discard 3 cards or I stun you"

On 10/12/2020 at 4:42 PM, Maniacal_cackle said:

Agree with the above, and for a more detailed breakdown I see it as:

• Pay cost of gaining a flicker token.
  • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 1, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
• Before performing a duel, the model gains a flicker token for From Beyond.
  • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 2, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
• The effect generates an Interact Action,
  • But we know generated actions have to wait until all other effects are resolved.
• Generate and resolve the trigger if applicable (model heals and may end a condition).
• Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 1
• Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 2
• Action and all effects resolved.
• Resolve interact action (even if engaged).

Is that right? Seems weird, but I think that's how it orders.

So I suppose jury's still out on a final ruling for now, but I'm still inclined to think it works like this and haven't been convinced otherwise

Big Brain Brin

Master Plan: For every (Tome) this model shuffled into its Fat Deck, choose one enemy model within 6" and LoS..."

Can BBB choose the same model three times? Because $%*@ Colette in particular

My RaI guess would be no, my RaW guess is maybe