Maniacal_cackle

4 minutes ago, Jinn said:

She still has a lot of rough matchups in balancefaux IMO, especially Outcasts and Rezzers.

Would love to hear more about that!

In ressers, the main thing I can think of that is a nightmare would be Archie since he gets so many free heals, but at the same time ruthless Raspy can nearly single activation Archie with good setup.

Mad dog gets the blow it to hell trigger... But mass marker removal is just something to work around I feel like.

Or am I missing things?

3 minutes ago, LinenMusician said:

Hmm, interesting. I usually play her hardly into keyword with Blessed of December and Ice golem, maybe should try adding some OOK and versatile stuff! The best thing about December is that your master can make 0 walk actions and still has impact on game blasting faces off, stacking slow and staggered and making opponent to discard cards.

Yeah, when I look at her I see a crew that is generally working with 10 cards a turn... So has a lot of space to experiment with OOKs. Generally most models power up if you funnel cards into them!

3 minutes ago, LinenMusician said:

From strats perspective cursed objects are great, but sometimes she can play well on Covert Operations with acces to pushes from attacks (also Deadly Pursuit on Blessed and hoarcats with steath are nice in it). 

Yeah seems good! And on Guard the Stash you can block LOS to the markers with pillars potentially xD I had a sneaky play where I killed the enemy master near a take the hit model by just blocking LOS using pillars.

4 minutes ago, LinenMusician said:

The one thing I REALLY dont want to play her is Pandora (especially 2), Rasputina is ruthless, but swapping conditions from slow and staggered to fast and focus are nasty, and this Poltergeist removing markers is terrible!

I feel like Pandora 2 is a defining matchup if you're declaring into Neverborn, that's for sure xD

Although she's not in the Balancefaux format until next year, so I think Rasputina will find a good home in the format.

I've been trying Rasputina lately, and having pretty decent success with her.  In the most recent game I tried her on Flank Cursed Objects in the Balancefaux format.

New Rasputina Crew (Arcanists)
Size: 50 - Pool: 3
Leader:
  Rasputina
Totem(s):
  Wendigo
Hires:
  Silent One
    Magical Training
  Silent One 2
  Snow Storm
  Joss
  Envy
  Soulstone Miner

Felt really good! Rasputina seems awesome on Cursed Objects, but can see how she'd not hold up to some S tier stuff.

The ability to sit in my deployment zone nuking him all game, with snow storm and joss threatening melee devastation, was really good. Having effectively 10 cards to work with every turn was very potent, and the constant repositioning with Rasputina's bonus 1-2 times a turn was huge.

Snow storm was initially ice golem, but then I wanted SSC on it and that wasn't a viable list, whereas snow storm can already use stones which felt real good. I probably could have utilized him a bit better, but basically he did some skirmishing, killed Beebe, provided protection against a few guns, and just deterred the enemy from diving me too hard.

This is especially encouraging as you were vocally opposed to this format when I first proposed it.

Hydranixx and I also just played a game of the BalanceFaux format, and it felt like there were a lot less "answer me or instantly lose" crews going on.

3 hours ago, Bartłomiej Celary said:

There are multiple players who would like to play in a global team tournament, but do not wish to participate in this experiment. Can we put this to a vote and then decide on a ruleset?

There's no plans to do a vore at this stage, but let me know how many teams you have that feel this way and I'll pass it on to the committee.

Are they already on the discord?

Oh, maybe I didn't post this already...

I've been having great success with double crooligan, double enslaved spirit builds this season! Well, two games with Molly 2.

It's so much scoring AP. And Molly 2 herself threatens so many points.

23 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

I might be undervaluing Decay, but I haven't been very impressed with it on Mortimer, Rotten or Nico. Of course they don't have the built in heal. 

I don't think there's any model with Decay that uses it effectively at a competitive level... Domadore's are probably the best, and I guess Gwyll is modelled off of them. Annoying that Gwyll can't heal the whole keyword, though.

3 minutes ago, Shortcircuit said:

I got a few crews, Lady J, Dashel, Lucius, Mei, Raspi, Maxine, Nexus,Wong and Hamelin.

was thinking to take him down with Hamelin and the Bleeding disease since it doesn’t involveca damage flip.

Yeah bleeding disease is a really good answer to tanky models, so try that and see how it goes!

The Team Cup event will use this format, so by the end of the year we should have 6 rounds of experience with it.

Registration for the 2022 Malifaux Team Cup is open!

Form teams of three, and battle for the most prestigious title of the year - winners of the Team Cup!

Registration deadline is 4 November, with first round kicking off November 7.

The BalanceFaux format will be used for this event. Clocks will be used, as is now standard for MWS events.

Teams must be made up of 3 players. Each player in a team must register as a different faction. Each team must play three different masters in a round. E.g., if a team has a Bayou player and a Neverborn player and Neverborn declares Zoraida in Round 1, Bayou cannot declare Zoraida that round.

The player pack is attached. To register, click the link at the start of the post!

Team_Cup_2022-8.pdf

For me, this would include any methods of them coming into base contact (including dropping the marker).

19 minutes ago, Rufess said:

The card draw of Use ‘Em as Bait is very depends on you local meta ruling, but to my understanding it only draws when an enemy ends a move into the Tide marker or when a Tide marker is pushed into an enemy. So it is about 1~2 cards a turn based on the current revealed model.

Just be aware that if your meta uses this ruling, it presumably means you can end the move blocking LOS to the marker and deny the effect.

I'm curious about the requirement about ending a move in base contact, though, since it doesn't say anything about ending a move?

The double rush is a fast paced 2v2 format.

One city in my country is running regular tournaments of the format, but I haven't experienced it myself.

I believe the rules are in the Gaining Grounds documents.

5 minutes ago, Shortcircuit said:

Ok I have a buddy who plays Transmortis and I have alot of problems of dealing with his armor 1 / hard to wound units. Any tips ? Is the best option ignoring them or try to lure them away, He has so much card draw, speed and melee power that I'm desperatly trying to find a weakness.

What do you play?

In general, a lot of Transmortis models are weak to running around them. They appear fast, but at a base they're move 5 with two AP.

If you can stagger Valedictorian at range, for instance, she potentially is losing out on an entire activation.

Super stoked for when the Molly one comes out, but was also curious about this one. Cheers!

3 hours ago, ShinChan said:

The master really seems a little bit over the power curve of the game. A way better leap? HtK and Stealth?  to Defense most of the time? That's a though cookie

I think masters being pretty tough with leap is fine, especially as stealth gets turned off as soon as this master actually starts using its AP.

But is probably a lot less fine if the card draw engine ends up drawing a ton of cards. I think that's the most worrisome part of the crew for me. Card draw tends to break crews.

Also, on the note of card draw/card discard, this crew seems like it needs to pressure the opponent's hand... So wouldn't Merris be a great OOK for many matchups? She's great at pressuring hands.

In case I didn't make it clear before, my idea of 'wild success' for this format would be to have a mixture of BalanceFaux and RegularFaux.

The competitive community identifies stuff very quickly (probably annoyingly quickly for Wyrd). So we'll still be identifying broken stuff long before it gets errata-ed I suspect... But then there'll just be an alternative for when we don't feel like doing that.

Although who knows, the format may flop at the first event and never be seen again. Or it may be so popular people refuse to play anything else. No way to know until we try it.

One interesting effect is tha the format appears to be growing on people xD

There's been very few people who were keen when they first heard about it, but then over time find it more and more appealing.

But the real test will be an actual event and then to see if people enjoyed it...

Just now, Hawkoon said:

This is quite a significant part of his package. Not being able to cheat against either his attacks means that you have a very much higher chance of getting off the trigger for terrorize or getting a straight flip on his 2/4/5 attack.

The way I see it he's a very good schemerunner hunter, but can also be used as counter-tech against crews with many defensive triggers and/or heavy reliance on shielded.

Pair him with a changeling and you got scoring power too

Also note with the 'no cheat' bonus, sometimes you'll end up using like a moderate mask to get it off.

9 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

But in all seriousness, I like the format. I've had a ton of discussions locally about how the Faux release/errata schedule makes some problems when the new stuff inevitably includes power-level outliers. Especially as we were of the opinion that the latest errata really evened out the top end for the old stuff.

Yeah, for me, it was the realization that this will be a permanent state of the game if the cycles don't change. I like the new stuff... Just not if we're in a continual state of new stuff and no periods of errata-ed games. This format lets you mix and match.

9 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

So this BalanceFaux as an alternate format sounds good to me. I would personally just limit it by books but I can see the reasoning behind allowing the Enforcers and starter models from Burns. There are quite a few autopicks there but OTOH some make a real difference in competitiveness for a couple of the weaker keywords and I don't think that any cause real power level problems with the original Masters.

Yeah, the initial plan was to do it by books, but it just has so much collateral damage (like Kaltgeists for Rasputina, Curator for McCabe, White Rabbit for Som'er, etc). So this is a bit of a compromise.

Yannic is the only model I'm really concerned about, but we'll see how it goes.

In ~6-8 months when the next errata comes out, all of Malifaux Burns will rotate into the format. So will be interesting to see how it develops (if it even gets off the ground).

1 hour ago, SEV said:

So will this be the new MWS format?

The only thing currently confirmed and committed is the top 16 will NOT use this format.

But I'll definitely be using it somewhere if the MWS doesn't.

Long story short, about 4 different formats were proposed, but they all end up really messy.

Except this one.

This one is clean and crisp (with the downside of collateral damage).

But it's a bit like being a PC gamer that plays things a few years after release. You get to play the same things, it just takes a little while.

6 hours ago, doubleW said:

Not a comp player - but what if you are just allowed to ban one master (incl title) after each player chose faction... 

If you think damian is broken - ban him.... if not - leave him open to play 
Not sure if people think there are more than one "broken" master in some factions though

Noobs input here  

In addition to what Kharnage said, I think this'll still be unfair.  Any factions with a must ban master will have an advantage.

Bans are more interesting from a counterplay perspective IMO.

EDIT: another consideration is moving forward we don't know what will release every year.  It's entirely possible factions will have two busted things sometimes. This format is well future proofed as it operates on a simple principle (though has awkwardness until the first title errata xD)

5 hours ago, Doldrums said:

Would you say the kentauroi box is only necessary if you want to play the title? Sticking their charge on people sounds fun. 

What do you play the canine remains for? I haven't played with or against the good doctor yet so I don't know how much he's building dogs mid combat. 

Competitively I don't use them much at all.  Casually they're pretty fun, but not at all necessary.

7 minutes ago, muraki said:

Yep, hence a 'classic' format (could do something like 'currently everything up to explorers book + all erratas) would be relatively simple for people to understand by just having it be by book.  But if you want to do it, go forth and do it (prolly just odd tone over text but feels more 'heres a proposal what do you think' rather than 'fyi im going to run with this and see how it is!' ha.... tho i guess the official announcement gives you a date to start reps from if you want to really sell the concept for a official GG add).

I do think my biggest issue with this format (provided it doesnt sweep the nation) is that I'm sure there'll be new boogiemen to dominate the meta... which may not as bad as damian / nexkids (as if they were really egregious wyrd would of tapped em down).  Unless the format is 'different enough' that people don't try and powergame it with the strongest in their faction (which I know I see more when the format changes radically, there's a lot more 'let me try out X for a bit and see how he does!' than 'oh wait, i remember x was a monster, back to him i guess!')

FYI tho, I'd wordsmith the name a bit, as I don't like the way 'balanced' reads, as it makes me think it should be the dominant format, or that the core is a 'in testing/ in dev' ruleset.  Something like 'Classic' or 'Errata Eligible' or 'Book (X)' would help make it feel like something I could see in the official packet without confusing people.

Well, the post includes the philosophy and rules,  so when tournament packs start including the format people can reference it. That's the main idea of the post. So to some degree, it's a combination of "hey this is something people are playing now", and for some readers a "hey this is a format happening in your meta". I'll be referring some players in my meta to it.

I kinda like Classic Faux, but that doesn't really capture the essence of the format (all new releases are part of the format eventually).

The formats core principle is that anything that has been eligible for balancing errata is legal in the format (with some adjustments to address outliers like McMourning). So I think Balance Faux captures that nicely. "Errata eligible" kinda captures it, but is the wrong tense and is super clunky.

BalanceFaux has a nice ring to it, and I think it's accurate. Presumably errata has the aim of making the errata models more balanced.

1 minute ago, Adran said:

Except in his intro he did talk about competitive play.  Since he has agreed with you  I probably misunderstood the original intention.  

I think I was thinking of it as being used as a VWS event,  and potentially as a regular format ( since it was talked about how it would change in 18 months). 

As a format for trying to avoid the latest hype because you are always facing it , it may work. I'm not sure how much it is just the newest thing that is the problem people are having in facing the same things, but,  it's not my problem so I'lltrust your judgement.  Its a bit arbitrary in timing, not helped by insanitary  not fitting your timing assumptions, and cuts a lot away to remove a few problems,  but for your target audience that's probably not much of an issue. 

 

The world series isn't my only meta, but there is a lot of overlap.

It is likely the World Series will give it a go in an event sometime soon, but the top 16 will definitely not use this format.