Loved/unloved Masters

[Nical]

I think there are some less-competitive models in Malifaux, but I believe Preference can justify anything except crime. 

So I think you really want to choose "poor" model, you must prepare somethings to reduce your disadvantages.

 

Choose schemes and other models "seriously" 

Good Scheme run combo can reduce your disadvantages. In Malifaux, most important thing is always VP. 

 

"Study" your models

At least, "poor" models are not useless, they are just less-competitive. So if you want to use them, you must study them to make them more useful.   

 

Don't fear defeat

If you lose, you can see why you lose. And you can fix problems in next games except luck.  

[Math Mathonwy]

To ride on Nical's excellent post, I think that it is important to remember that there are very, very few models in Malifaux which are overcosted more than by a single SS or so. So taking one of two less optimal models is a bit like playing with one or two SS handicap which is not crippling in 50SS. Malifaux is a very skill intensive game so the skill discrepancy is very likely to play a bigger role than one or two slightly less than optimal model choices.

[Bengt]

I think it gives a little extra to make "substandard" models work.

[tomjoad]

With most models, being over or undercosted by a single stone is no big deal. That's 2% of your pool. Add to that the fact that a lot of people are wrong about which models are miscosted (I mean, if one person says silurids are bad and another says they're top line, at least one is wrong by definition), and there's probably not a lot to be gained by quibbling over them.

 

The bigger issue is with Masters that don't stack up. A master that lives all 5 turns gets to do 33% more stuff than a minion that survives a whole game, so when my Yan Lo is much less capable of effecting the game than your Nicodem (or whoever), the difference is more stark.

[Fetid Strumpet]

For myself te masters I love to play the most are those that have a presence on the table, even when they aren't activating. What I mean is the masters I enjoy playing the most are those who have a direct mechanical effect on the game, just by standing in place.

Seamus with his sinister rep aura, Molly with her aura of black blood, pandora with her misery aura, those are te masters I often just feel more comfortable using because even if I just spend all my so walking and doing nothing else, it doesn't feel like a wasted turn.

[HowNot2Wargame]

So don't understand the yan lo hate... Or Tara when she's ressers at least. I always thought it was the rest of the crew which was the problem barring dead of winter.

Wyrd wisely have built a lot of flexibiltity into the upgrade system, but I think changing strategies, schemes even, and personally even deployment can help shake meta's up.

The only thing I would say is that the only specific master I have an 'anti' list for is levy (only time I go for the guild fish and chips of 'two austringers and a Francisco please), and even then that's built so it would still help with other outcasts.

Again, I think on the assumption people end up getting enough of a faction to be flexible in list creation, then most of this goes down to small percentages of advantage compared to skill

[Nical]

I agree "overcost" is not important thing for "poor" models.

I think "poor" models are just less-competitive, and it means someone can do better and / or more effective than them. 

 

But "versatility" may be important thing for "poor" models in some situations.

If you just want one thing from your model, specified models are usually better.

But you want many thing from your model, versatile models are usually better.

[Corney]

I read these forums a lot but rarely comment. But I felt compelled to on this particular thread.

I play outcast and gremlins. Primarily outcast as I'm waiting for the new gremlins to slowly be released and I'm playing through each master and finding them all to be enjoyable and each good depending on the scenario, scheme pool and terrain set up. The way I see it is they are all different tools for different jobs.

Got Turf war with assassinate, bodyguard, vendetta and make them suffer? Take von shill and his fellow friekorps.

Got Reconnoiter with breakthrough, bodyguard, power ritual and entourage? Take misaki with her last blossoms, smoke and shadows upgrade and an obedient wretch sitting back making rats.

However I have a few opponents that dislike playing with some of their masters and have their favourites too. One of them is so predictable with his master choice as he always feels it's his strongest choice for the majority of scenario and schemes that arise.

So my point is this, it feels to me it's more down to personal preference then whether a master is actual "weak" as I feel m2e is very well balanced and I haven't come up against anything I would consider OP. Yes there will be situations where match ups are bad and one crew has the advantage over the other but with the range of models that there are it's only to be expected.