Drowsheep

Sorry; easy maybe isn’t the right word; but accomplishable regularly. And accomplishable as in 10” is a good distance apart—you can eyeball that if you’ve got a decent eye. i thought it was 3” from the model each, which makes it a bit tighter for where you place the markers. You can ninja vanish with the Torakage or you can new horizons with the wokou raiders late in the turn. My initial issue was I thought you needed markers on the very edge of the minimum required distance between markers; which is always tricky if you don’t have a lot of scheme dropping gimmicks.

Okay—I totally misread runic bunding; it’s actually pretty easy to accomplish. So, other than corrupted leylines, I think Misaki can be efficient with any strat or scheme at present.

Seems like TT didn’t get ruined by the nerf; and a lot of it is justifiable. I really wanted Minako to lose versatile and take less of a hit; her summoning is a bit tougher now. But it be like that sometimes. I haven’t played Yasunori that much; but I will say that he got hit a bit too hard... XD

With the release of all of the schemes and strays, how are we feeling? i think a lot of schemes work well with Misaki’s crew. I think that the hardest scheme of the new ones is runic binding. Research mission is easy with shadow markers (if there’s a strat marker, otherwise maybe hire in kamaitachi or an obsidian statue?). Catch and release seems like a tricky scheme in general—but I think misaki’s numerous movement shenanigans can keep a model safe. Martyrs also seems like an easy one for her crew as there’s quite a few glass cannons. Let them bleed also is easy for the crew. Sabotage, leave your mark, and spread them out are all reasonably accomplishable for her crew. corrupted leylines seems rough, as there are a lot of place effects across the board, so that may be rough. But our other three seem easy peasy. At least, that’s my gloss over of the new schemes. I obviously haven’t played any; but that’s what I’ve got.

I stand corrected; I missed that adjustment from the initial reveal XD

However; currently, Killjoy becomes an unkillable monster due to not being able to be buried XD

Most abilities that affect markers do not affect strat markers; strat markers are for the most part immune to shenanigans.

Yeah; if there was one model I’d be fine losing versatile for sure, it would be her.

The more bonkers part is them running models that are from another keyword. The versatile (while strong) aren’t usually what’s zany. XD

To be honest with you; I prefer asymmetrical gaming. But, and I’m not trying to start a fight with anyone, these forums become hotbeds for complaining about what each faction is lacking or what other factions have that’s currently shiny. So while I personally love games where the crews are doing fundamentally different things to accomplish their objectives, the overwhelming sense I get every time I get on here is that nobody else agrees with that viewpoint—or they agree only so long as their faction is the one on top currently.

Sure; that’s an option. Though, at present DMH is reserved for models that are story wise removed from the narrative. TT is also a weird faction—as has been mentioned—because it was brought into being a bit differently from most of the other factions. And how do we determine which models get the chopping block and which don’t?

I mean; I once agreed—however a lot of 3e seems to have been making each faction a bit more homogenous. There are definitely still differences; but ultimately each faction is actually pretty similar. I have long argued that TT’s main strength is the versatility of the faction—and yet that’s what people are complaining about, so... *le shrug* I mean; I tried to offer several solutions. I’m personally advocating for leveling the playing field by adding more models; because diversifying the game will always be the healthier option than by imposing constraints (whether that’s nerfing models, adding keywords, whatever). The issue is, ultimately, people are going to play what is considered the best—so unless you’re prevented from hiring outside of keyword, or whatever puritanical hiring rules are made, people will pay the extra or hire the versatile that they want to play. You make the versatiles worse; but then why have them? What the point of running a model that’s subpar? So, if on the competitive level, people are complaining about one faction having good versatiles, then why not just add more models to other factions so that there’s less of a reason to complain? I also am always hesitant to say that one crew/style is consistently *better*. All through the days of 2e when the majority of TT was labeled as weak or unplayable, I was regularly doing well by playing against the meta (I know not ALL of TT, but a good chunk of it was getting a lot of hate across the board). So I understand where people are coming from—but I also don’t think that these crews are unbeatable.

That kind of defeats the purpose of being versatile if you’re still paying a tax; at that point just run models from other keywords. Yeah; I mentioned potentially comparing the various versatile models and seeing what roles they fill; obviously a mindless zombie isn’t comparable to a samurai (for instance), but they aren’t supposed to be. That being said, both Ressers and TT should have both an inexpensive meatshield and a high cost beater to pull from. Generally nerfing stuff doesn’t work; either it’s nerfed in a way that makes it unplayable, or it’s nerfed in a way that doesn’t make it less over-effective. I totally agree; I think choices across keywords is the larger issue. However, people have been complaining about competitive lists running versatile options with little to none of the keyword models. i personally like running keyword crews; and I do well doing it—but people are complaining, so I thought I’d start a discussion. i think in an ideal world every faction (and every keyword) would have a comparable amount of both keyword and versatile models. and yeah—thats exactly the issue; TT was released with a less cohesive unity between models—there are far more generic TT than any other faction. As such, how do we rectify that surplus of versatile models that one faction has. I think it’s worth going over the various keyword and trying to find those that need additional help—but I also think the potential for a more level playing field can be achieved by adding to the meta.

Hey all! I’ve been going through the forums, and a recurring issue people are griping about is the number of versatile models in TT—I personally don’t play a lot of versatile models and still do well; but there’s no doubt that TT has a lot of good versatile options! I went through the factions and tallied up the number of versatile figures in each; obviously ignoring the riders, emmissaries, effigies, and band members. Below is my list. Arcanist: h: 1, e: 0, m: 5. Rider, band, emm/eff Bayou: h: 1 e: 4, m: 3, rider, band, emm/eff Guild: h: 1 e: 3 m:1, rider, band, emm/eff Neverborn: h: 2 e: 4 m: 2. Rider, band, emm/eff Outcast: h: 1 e: 4 m:1. Rider, band, emm/eff Resser: h: 2 e: 1 m: 3. Rider, band, emm/eff TT: h: 2 e: 3 m: 5. “Rider”*, band, emm/eff *TT doesn’t have an actual rider, it we love our Yasunori, alright.... So all factions have 1-2 vers henchman enforcers: range from 0 to 4 Minions: range from 1-5 TT is definitely on the high end here. Arcanists are high in minions, but low in the other two. Bayou, other than only having 1 hench, have higher end for both of the others. Guild have high enforcers, it are low in the other two. Neverborn are high end hench and enforcer, but lowish in minions. Outcasts are low in all but enforcers Ressers are good in everything other than enforcers So how to balance it out? We have three options really; 1) This is my preferred choice—but is obviously something beyond any of our powers; release new models for each faction to get them closer to the upper tiers (minions in particular, enforcers meh, and why not get everyone a 2nd henchman? Minions are the most important in my mind since they are the most versatile models (usually the cheapest and most job specific of models). We can tally up further what types of models each faction has, and what specific roles those versatile models fill—and then figure out what each faction needs. I’m not saying that every faction needs to have five minion options; but 3-5 should be standard, maybe even 4-5. If a faction has 4 enforcers, they can probably get by with only 3 minion choices in their versatile pool. Similarly, having 2 henchmen means they probably don’t need as many enforcers as some of the other factions. 2) I’m not as much a fan of this, but it still could be fun. Make some of the versatile options across the factions lose versatile in place of a keyword. We can even target masters that have smaller keywords to round out their playable pool. I’m not a fan of this for several reasons: the thematic feel is lost a little bit here by just shoehorning models into a keyword; the narrowing of a playing field as opposed to the broadening of one is always less inviting. I would rather have three new enemy models each game to face than lose three of my own. 3) I like this option more than the second one, but less than the first. Open some of the specific keyword models to get versatile too. An example might be guild guards (obviously any master in the guild should be able to call on the guards to support them). However, this becomes difficult territory as a lot of models rely heavily on their keyword abilities or other models of a keyword. So they would become less efficient (and probably never taken) as a versatile model. Now. As for Henchmen, I’m kind of okay with it being uneven, only because it’s all 1-2; and each master has at least one henchman. I’d love to get a second versatile henchman for each faction, but I can’t confirm that it’s necessary. Enforcers now are also a tricky area; where once they fit a role in between minions and henchmen on the power level, a lot of peon models got made enforcers, and a lot of enforcers got made minions in the transition from 2e to 3e. In other words, what it means to be an enforcer is a little bit more nebulous. I’d love to level the playing field in this category too; but it’s the most difficult as these models are the most varied and unique across the factions. As I kind of mentioned earlier; we don’t the exact same number of versatile models of each category, but enforcers are a good balance spot to counteract having few minions/henchmen compared to the other factions. So; how do people feel? Is this actually an issue for people, or are we just complaining about something cause that’s what humans do? I know in my local meta there isn’t a no issue with any faction being bonker broken compared to any other. There are definitely better keywords than others, and definitely better models compared to others. But is the number of versatiles itself part of the issue that people are feeling? Obviously, on the competitive level—having more options is always going to be better than not. Anyway. That’s what I got.

yeah; I totally agree—I just usually end up either wanting this SS for another model or for my cache. XD

So, I’ve accidentally played a lot of McCabe and have become quite good with him. From my friends who have played against me, I don’t play McCabe “like other people”? So bear in mind, my comments are probably an outlier. First off, I love McCabe, for his mobility. I’m usually using his ride with me to make sure that Luna is somewhat nearby as often as possible. i try to use Luna to dig up scrap so I can summon an upgrade card—though I’m usually more interested in getting multiple draws off of it. McCabe’s gun gets used a lot more in 3e than I used it in 2e for some reason—probably because I’m not using Black Flash? All in all, I find that I don’t summon that many upgrades that often, and the summoning of them is more for the fast or for a specific objective I need one of the abilities for. McCabe does scheme running and fire support for me. Luna doesn’t do much other than dig up scrap for McCabe and other models nearby. I personally love Sidir; he has done so much heavy lifting for me. He’s got a great gun, I love using his parry (and decent melee) to make him an obstacle to a strat or scheme that needs protecting. I just love having him. Desper hasn’t done as much for me as maybe he should have. I need to play him more, but I always feel underwhelmed with his performance. Hucksters are lovely; I try to do the sales pitch as frequently as possible, and use they’re movement shenanigans to accomplish schemes and strats. as for Ruffians; I love them! Like, I get that they don’t do much. But chain-ganging and pair down the board makes for a somewhat reliable scheme runner that has a weird eclectic set of abilities. I don’t know if there’s a world where I would take 3, I love having pair that can play off of each other. They also work well without the support of the rest of the crew, which is ideal for where they usually end up. of note, I rarely play with versatiles; sometimes I’ll run a samurai or a wanyudo, though 80% of the time I’m running full wastrels. Samurai are really good, but I also love wanyudo’s nobility and ability to just become a target and cause trouble while the rest of the my crew handles the actual objectives. Give it McCabe’s support and Sidir also causing trouble, you’ve got a trifecta of fun that keep the pressure up while my more squishy models do the real leg work. thats my super rough and very tumble feelings about the Wastrel gang.

I currently love Misaki in 3e. She is an all-around great master who is decent in most strategies and schemes, yet isn’t broken or unfairly balanced. she does have a lot of models in her keyword, which is the most *unfair* aspect of her. I rarely run versatile models or upgrades on her, as I think for the most part, she and her crew are just very solid. I haven’t taken snipers or archers that much, so I need to explore their potential more fully. But torakage, crime bosses and her henchmen are all great models!

Lol—you’re right. For some reason I thought that had already been mentioned and ruled out XD There are a lot of abilities that specify enemy only, this would be an easy change.

I suppose so; but it’s a single stone and some damage on another model probably. So I still don’t think it’s *broken*. and if that’s the issue, just demote her to enforcer. Then she can’t use SS.

I think if you did that you would have to discard down to your maximum hand size right away (so it's potentially worth it your hand has mostly been spent and you want to redraw up, but otherwise it's not AS useful--still good, but you'd have to discard). Also, unless you Black Joker it, you're still damaging your own model--on a Depleted that's fine, but I don't think I'd awant to throw damage onto my own Yasunori. Plus, even with a lot of cards, there's potential you flip all mod/sev, and that would be a shame. Combine all that with the fact that the suit isn't built in, I'd say that it's not *broken*--is it good? for sure.

I feel like I'd rather save the stone to prevent damage after it's been flipped--but I suppose someone could do the math on when it's better to get a negative or not (by math, I mean at what level of damage is it worth it; at 2/3/4 it seems unlikely to waste a stone, but at 2/4/5(6?) is it worth it? I have no idea).

Awesome; that’s pretty much how I ruled it! I just wanted to get another brain on the situation to make sure we didn’t play it wrong! Thanks!

As a TT player (who again doesn’t play much of Shenlong right now), I get that Shenlong is powerful. His chi is hardly the issue though. i know that his drunken style is a little wonky—and as such when I’ve played, I haven’t used it that frequently. But I do think that the thing that needs to be addressed with him is that ability (either removing it or giving it some limited version of it). From the games I’ve played with models that use chi (a few more than just my Shenlong games), I wouldn’t say the ability is broken in anyway. It’s a solid ability that compares to a lot of the other abilities that other factions have. There are definitely better abilities for keywords—there are also worse ones. i think the ultimate issue with nerfing stuff if that once it’s nerfed it’s usually worse than whatever is currently in the meta; I’d rather look at masters across multiple factions that no one is playing and see what we can do to help those ones out and bring them into the meta.

Hey all! i have a question that came up today during a game. A model soulstoned and reduced a damage from an attack to 0–however there is a built in blast. we collectively ruled that the blast still happens since its built in. however, the rules state that when a model takes 0 damage, it is as if they suffered no damage. so, I am wondering if a blast shows up if all the damage has been reduced! thanks!

That’s what I’m saying; I don’t ever run versatiles with Misaki, Asami, or Youko (again—I haven’t played that much Shenlong in 3e—though I wouldn’t run versatiles with him either?). The models in their thematic crew are sufficient. I’lol grant you that TT has more versatile models than other factions; but I would just give some of them keywords so they are t versatile. If that’s really the issue you have; is that people are bringing good versatile models. my counter point is that most other factions have a selection of models from support to beaters that are versatile. Or, just increase the number of versatile models in each faction. the issue is that TT is newer and was originally based off of Masters who were all multi-faction, so many of their early models for TT were pushed out to balance the number of options in 2e and were designed to be generic so they can go with any master, no? Other (More) established factions have masters that have been been around for a while, so more models that were released over time were part of one of the other masters already there. I have never had a problem with Youko; I love playing her, and she’s my favorite model to activate almost every turn. if I can get her behind cover, or in some concealing terrain, I just leave her there and dish out the control. The issue I had all through 2e—and it seems to be the same in 3e, is that people complain about some models being underwhelming while I’m living the dream playing good games with them, while other models are just labeled OP and the default—when they’re not. I’m not saying that nothing needs to be tweaked and fixed. But in my meta I’d say we have a diverse group of players, and we all win some and lose some; Minako—for example—has won me some games—other times, she got beaten or shot to death without making a great impact. The few games I’ve played with Shenlong and Lynch in 3e have left me feeling underwhelmed, though I still had fun. Yet those are the masters people keep saying are OP. TT is the faction about playing to the schemes; and I think they do a great job of it. That is the faction gimmick, and I don’t think too much honestly needs to get changed. i think the issue is that people like to follow the trends of what’s *meta* and then get caught up in that. I haven’t played anything in TT that I would are is “broken”. If we want to talk I about broken, let me redirect you to the Neverborn forums :P