Yore Huckleberry

People may have seen this around other places, but there will be a tournament in Des Moines on March 2nd with GG4 and Ashes content allowed if you have it. Cheers!

https://www.longshanks.org/event/13576/

tagging @Trample for this -- I'm hoping to go!

tagging @Trample for this in case he hasn't seen it yet!

1 hour ago, esqulax said:

Ahh I see. 

It was just my thought that it would need to be a concrete rule that "models are banned till they have been trough an errata". If something gets added to the list because it is problematic, then we might as well just make a banlist instead. 

I think this is correct. Adding a curated ban list from one player (or even a group) is just a subjective enterprise by its nature (if efficient card draw engines are the issue why isn't Transmortis or Guard being banned, eg). Local metas play with all kinds of "gentlefolks' agreements" or TO rulings, but the moved goal posts on this are pretty souring, particularly as a Guild player.

I'll just flag here that I'm skeptical about trying to add a curated ban list to the rule of "has this been through an errata cycle already?" I can't picture using the format with the armchair quarterbacking of "Wyrd should have addressed X." I still like the original notion and might try running it or suggesting it for a local event, though.

Someone referenced this thread in a discord yesterday, so I'm copy/pasting the FAQ's official answer, in case people wind up looking at this again in a search.

On 10/1/2022 at 9:25 AM, Trample said:

Thanks for posting. I certainly wouldn't have found it elsewhere. Might try to make it this time. 

@Trample -- If you missed it in the packet, the tourney is using Longshanks.org (which is turning out to be a really good staple platform), so you'll need a free account on there. If you want to add any of the Omaha locals as friends on that, the TO has a setting that can automatically stop friend pairings in round one.

Cheers!

Want some extra fun with your Thralls? Bring Alison Dade and a Guild Mage, and every time they get hit you can trigger "Drawn to Pain," then discard a card for "I knew you were gonna do that!" to immediately heal the Thrall.

Hi friends!

If you missed it on Facebook, there will ALSO be a Des Moines tourney on November 5th, again at Mayhem Collectibles (7500 University Ave, Clive, Iowa)

Here's the Packet!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LqINYIAWf72RWv7qi1nL0MBIAxWNcUrcKDmfP6xOcI0/edit?fbclid=IwAR1yMRF-W8QfQk6W8v2uhnPkZEa6rOqjf_Wwm7U4cHXN47ch59uziCOrxxg

I didn't see a separate post for it, and I know it's been communicated about on Discord and Facebook, but the link to the FB event and the Tourney Packet are below, in case anyone missed it in other places. Wanted to be sure that it's visible for USFT eligibility, too, whatever their requirements wind up being this coming year.

https://www.facebook.com/events/776526997128004/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Adh_gW92o3ZkN4j8YaaafcG0dqtxVZ0UfEzaAaJs114/edit?fbclid=IwAR0d93Dt2rNtA4-YB6KSdgip2Em1auSVMYMIualyLdqMfN_b4TolP24k78Q

Cheers!

2 hours ago, solkan said:

Take the Hit and Intimidating Authority are good abilities to quote because they are two examples of abilities which cause an effect that is resolved at different times.

Take the Hit's effect resolves in/after Step C (Declare Target) because its condition is "After an enemy model targets" and there aren't any other timing rules governing its effect which say to resolve it later.

Intimidating Authority's effect is resolved during Step D because that's an effect that modifies a duel.  The model with Intimidating Authority waits until Step D to decide whether to discard the card.

 

 

I've always played Intimidating Authority as an Ability that you may use in step C, but whose effect is applied at step D. The difference is subtle, but it means, eg, that an Intimidating Authority model must determine whether to discard a card BEFORE an attacking model chooses whether to reduce the Focused condition to add a positive modifier. This application of the Ability's timing also means that Intimidating Authority models don't know whether the attacker will choose to reduce Focused, etc.

Flexible Morality has the same timing issue. There are a handful of others like Beer Goggles that aren't wholly clear, because they're Activated Abilities that are Activated in step C, but whose effect is in step D.

I imagine a lot of people intuitively play it Solkan's way, which doesn't affect anything else in a majority of cases. It's mostly when Take the Hit changes the target that you need to determine whether any of the effects should be generated in Step C, whether they carry over to new targets (Intimidating Authority, eg, places an effect on the Attacker, rather than being a matter of the Target being any particular thing, so it can theoretically carry over). Honestly, it's worth asking your local TO how they want you to play it.

6 minutes ago, Adran said:

I don't think this suggestion really deals with the issue that Maniacal_cackle is trying to solve, and does also have a chance to hit someone using an entirely erratad crew already. 

As far as I can see the wyrd ban format,  and others that try and emulate it isn't a practical way to remove over powered masters, since it doesn't kick in before masters are selected. You need something that comes into affect before crew selection, and to consider the consequences on players,  as it one thing signing an event where you know X is banned at the whole event,  and another when you may be able to use it or not.

The way they are going for is one of only 2 ways I can think of that achieves the aim, and the other way involves a lot more work for someone as it is making up a ban list before the event, and if you got 50 players to make up what they think should be erratad and therefore banned in this format you would probably end up with over 40 different lists.

Time is a clear guide, and sort of universal. Its not got favourites  ( even if it does affect so crews/factions/Keywords more than others). You might have to fudge things a little,  as Madness does probably contain somewhere between 1 and 4 starter boxes, which you might want to treat like the non masters in Burns. In fact it might be easier to state that you are banning masters in those books, as I don't think witness without Damien is as much a problem.  But perhaps it's better to wait until we actually know what's in madness before trying to come up with a rule thats consistent . 

( and hope Damien isn't erratad  in the 2023 errata and that some titles are...)

Bans DOES solve a particular problem, which is that there are unique challenges of balancing multiple masters and hidden combinations that appear from out of keyword in emergent post-release play. It's a great format that has specific and limited impacts. If crews, keywords, or whole factions depend on particular ook selections not being banned, that's a design issue that hopefully gets illuminated. But meanwhile it stops shenanigans like hiring Kirai "oh and hey Ikiryo is coming too" or commanding construct masters like Hoffman 2.

You're also on point that Cackle's after a different problem.

One last thought as the BalanceFaux notion grows on me:

It's aspirational. It takes it as a given that the release schedule represents an emergent game that deserves refinement, and -- even while that refinement will always be incomplete -- it sets aside particular conditions by which we expect things to have been improved. As a community interaction, that's a "positive crisis" presented to Wyrd: we trust them to keep an eye on game balance and will organize part of our gaming around that expectation -- which is a standard they've lived up to very well in the past.

3 hours ago, Cats Laughing said:

 I wonder if a better solution would be to allow a single model ban (after master selection) as a potential fix.  This would allow solo master players to still play their master but would allow their opponents a chance to deny potentially broken combos.  This single model would be instead of Wyrd's existing keyword ban (as an alternative target option), so you could ban a single model in the declared keyword or an OOK keyword.

 

The question of how to balance (outside of Wyrd's own activity) an asymmetrical game is going to involve trade-offs for any given approach. I'd suggest that the right language here is that the formats are all just "different solutions," and each of them is going to have a set of impacts, predictable and unpredictable.

I do think categorical bans have some basic virtues:

- they're simple to understand

- although they fall asymmetrically, they fall by symmetrical principles that are transparent

- the system can only be "gamed" by analyzing it, which is the gaming allowed by asymmetrical skirmishing generally

As a Guild player, I'm decently curious whether BalanceFaux creates conditions for testing whether Guild's scoring issues pre-Burns were resolved via: masters, enforcers/Guild Mage, or GG changes, though I imagine I'll remain most attracted to Bans (1) Malifaux tourneys, howling about Damian and Nexkids along the way, where, eg, we got the below gem today from Nova champion Longtin in a high-tables round 3 stomping of *checks notes* known weak master Yan Lo 2 🤷‍♂️:

57 minutes ago, Kharnage said:

 So if you're, say, a Nekima stan, but want to play into things that have been through an errata cycle, BalanceFaux is the most appealing solution, IMO.

Metallurgically speaking.

2 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Yeah, I think rather than saying all of Wyrds balance cycle should be dedicated to players like me, some experimentation in formats makes sense.

For me personally, my last four tournaments have been dominated by either Nexkids or Damian.

And while I REALLY enjoyed my tinkering to beat Nexus (and Damian), it gets tedious to just pick other overpowered titles to play against them.

The most fun tournament games I've had recently were mostly with original titles and masters like Molly 2 (and Lucius 2, but he's secretly super strong).

It'd be really nice to have some formats where original titles can keep up with the top stuff of the format.

Wyrd players in GENERAL are pretty good about not "yucking someone else's yum," but I can't guarantee you won't get the occasional "-flip" react for inviting people to opt in and try something different. Good luck, sir!

8 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

A lot of people have called for banning specific masters, but the issue is the calls for that are so subjective. This proposal is much 'cleaner'.

 

My favorite recent one was Rage Quit Wire declaring that Zipp's original version is OP and needs major nerfs.

6 hours ago, Adran said:

Surely there is a flaw to the concept, in that it appears to assume that things are known to be flawed after a fixed period of time, when in reality it is more likely after a number of plays.  By people not playing new models in a competitivesetting, they are going to take longer before any problems with them show up, so longer before wyrd would need to look at them as something that needs errata. 

I don't think having a minor alternative will stop all other competitive play. Bonanza Brawl didn't kill Malifaux by letting people have the madcap experience now and then, and BalanceFaux won't replace the core rules.

BalanceFaux's not really my cup of tea (I play Guild and title masters really unlocked our faction, friends), but I'm willing to muddle through with Perdita 1 if it means not dealing with Damian in a given setting.

1 hour ago, Adran said:

I'm obviously not explaining myself well as people aren't answering the points I thought I was raising, but instead are answering different points I didn't think I was making. So I'm leaving this conversation there. I don't know the right answer,  but I don't think the FAQ has the answer.  If you think it does, then that's fine.  Apologies for anyone who has been confused by this side discussion. 

 

I think all the Wong FAQ does is remind us to look at the core rules for effects. If a Restore the Natural Order pulse comes from some other location and the pulse hits the model that generated the effect with an action, then that model is affected by the pulse. 🤷‍♂️

Another example is that a Kaltgeist can affect itself with Icy Winds if it draws the additional instance of a 2 range from an ice pillar (or a second Kaltgeist) within 2" pulse range of itself, and be affected by that pulse and take a move.

On 8/28/2022 at 7:12 PM, admiralvorkraft said:

I'll say, wardens are a lot of fun with original Flavor Lucius. Your opponent is unlikely to bring a lot of armor tech and you can really get the most out of their ranged slow.

Or Nellie 2 for double slow, though people sometimes panic into Nellie and assume they'll see a Peacekeeper, so you might run into anti-armor.

@Kharnageninja'd me, ha

I think this is decently clear that when you re-center a shockwave, the newly-centered marker/model is now the reference point for what is ignored via the core rulebook.

Restore the Natural Order is a different kind of pulse, but it is still having its "object creating the pulse" centered in a new location, and as such, it seems pretty clear that the object it's being centered on is the one that's ignored, rather than the "model creating the pulse" being ignored. (much as I'd love to chip away at Damian's toolset)

the Dashel 2 trick is basically:

activate DCU:
use/stone-for a 7Mask+ to summon a doggo off the dispatcher
Shoot doggo and take trigger to remove Dispatcher (draw card, focus executioner)
Shoot doggo and take trigger to remove Dispatcher (draw card, focus executioner)
Pick up the corpse to get the stone back (or just gain one)

2 focus, 2 draw, possible stone for a 7 (masks).

If you want extra jank, you can add Sonnia 2 and gain a soulstone when the doggo dies with burning +2 on it.

In Dashel 1, you probably just want the Steward, who can take slow off your summons, heal your models, and give a focus with a 6M anyway.

I've won a few tournaments with Guild in the Schemes and Stones meta, and one of them (pre-Burns) my masters were: Nellie, Lady J, and Dashel. The Nellie game was Nellie into Nekima in an assassinate pool, and Nellie straight up denied assassinate by blunting a Nephilim alpha, between squeal, stunned, and distracted, then healing up via many interact actions. The Nellie game was also Break the Line, which she's inherently strong into. Basically everything on her card is powerful; it's a matter of figuring out what your plan with her is.

Second tourney win was Hoff 2, Hoff 2, Basse 1 (post-burns, obviously). First game was a lot of Hoff 2 scheming via Death Beds and Research Mission on Turf War; second game was Hoff holding an attrition edge for Standard BtL; 3rd game was Basse 1 sucker-punching a Nexus crew with a ton of blasts midway through round 1, then sending a rough rider and Bernadette to go pick up symbols.

And that's without even touching Perdita or Sonnia. Guild has a ton of play options right now.

The clock topic has been hashed out a ton. I think we're at the stage where people need to try it or see it. Hopefully a lot of these upcoming MWS games will be recorded, so people can watch the matches and get a sense of how it actually works in practice.

As for meatspace gaming, I don't have trouble finishing 5 rounds in 2:15 unless things get particularly crunchy or an opponent isn't playing quickly. Vassal games feel downright leisurely to me at 3 hour time control.

12 hours ago, LordZombie said:

There is only about 3 weeks until the big fauxmaha finale. With the playtest of the new book going on, I don't see GG3 anytime soon. With that said, here is the player packet for the event! 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mi3pgRh3ZryqjnqIGEWgT8EuGF5XjZla4FIoigOYTws/edit?usp=sharing

Thanks @LordZombie!

Do you have a packet for the Henchman Hardcore event on Friday at the Bugeater, too?