How many Masters...

[Tawg]

Does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

But.. actually I was going to say -- is too many?

Do you think there are too many already, or too many to expand?  I was reading the Wish-list thread, and I am surprised that people would wish for no more Masters, while at the same time wanting any other models to crop up.  I mean, granted Masters have usually rather more expansive list of abilities, I don't think they are the only ones who throw the game into a different light when employed.  Henchmen, enforcers and even some minions can really shake things up for the way a faction plays/interacts in the game.  Anna Lovelace is a fairly good example for something that can warp an aspect of the game fairly hard.  And even while being a relatively simple minion, the Jorogumo certainly offer a bit of a new threat to Last Blossom game-play.  In the end, models are going to represent new possibilities that may tip balance regardless of if they are full tilt (like a master) or not (Enforcers/Minions).

It just seems odd to me to suppose that not expanding on the masters, which are the center-pieces mechanics wise and inspiration wise, would be a strictly good thing.  I mean, obviously a certain finesse is required, and releasing masters in a fashion becoming of their station and impact on the game is well and good.  But never seems like a stretch to me.

It would be interesting to see the game pace itself in a rotation style like so many TCGs, with new rule-books ushering in a change in format, to allow controlled fluctuation in the possible composition of crews.  Although the effort needed to create new mechanical identities to do this on a regular basis, and do so with enough masters at once would be.. quite surmountable.  Although it may be preferable to the typical fashion of Table-top miniature games where eventually they simply do an edition reset with new-rules-compatible updates to replace ones we already know.  Granted the production cycles and efforts required to print and sell mini's is certainly going to be different than anything M:tG would have to deal with, so of course, it's a super unrealistic business model to try and force the game into.  Although perhaps on a 2-3 year cycle it could work.  Although making a "Legal" standard to play by, that rotates out models as per needed would make design choices not limited by potential interactions that need to be avoided.

But new masters do have to come eventually, I would imagine.  They drive the insanity forward, and despite the rather large quantity of masters currently (Across the factions) it would seem Wyrd isn't doing a poor job with keeping things relevant and playable.  And I think they know better than to splurg out 21 new masters every new book (Or at least know how to do it right, if they do), but I certainly hope they don't stop all together as well.

[zFiend]

I do hope for more masters at some point. But first I'd like to see the models released for the 3 books at hand and to release all those models is going to take a long time. After they are done though and released I wouldn't be opposed to a new master per faction for example. 

[Bengt]

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

[zFiend]

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

That would be great actually. I'd love to see that. But what faction would that be? 

[Bengt]

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

That would be great actually. I'd love to see that. But what faction would that be? 

A few possibilities of the top of me head:

Another tribe of Neverborn (like Gremlins are a kind of Neverborn).

With the Guild in Malifaux being a total mess after Shifting Loyalties and I guess SS exports being held up, a force from earth could show and try to take control. Either earth Guild guys or some other lot that has taken over after earth Guild turned out to be a bit of mess themselves and collapsed when the SS deliveries seized.

The monsters from The Other Side.

[Philosfr]

I'm not a fan of reading comments like "no new masters". I don't think additional masters are a problem unless the new masters somehow make old ones obsolete. Yes, it's tricky to balance, but with Wyrd's upgrade system, I think it's very possible to add additional masters that don't automatically screw up the game. I definitely want more of everything...

Except, maybe factions? I'm not sure about this one. First, it's a large amount of new stuff. It would be the small faction that didn't have a full toolbox and the forums would be filled with arguments why they should get more new stuff than other factions against people saying to go play a 'real faction' if they want the full set of toys. I don't think Wyrd would come out with 7 new masters and a full line of henchmen, enforcers and minions all at once.

Plus, a new faction doesn't offer much of anything to existing players. Sure, there are people like me who have virtually every model from all the factions, but I would imagine we're a distinct minority. But take my wife who really only cares to play Guild (for now anyway, she's relatively new to Malifaux). Unless there's cross faction new/Guild, she wouldn't care.

I wouldn't necessarily argue against a new faction, I certainly would buy the new faction (but then I'd buy anything new for Malifaux), but I'm also not going to jump on the bandwagon asking for one. Give us stuff for the existing factions first would be my vote

[Fetid Strumpet]

I'm not a fan of people asking for new masters. To me it shows a complete lack of imagination and a lack of understanding of how the upgrade system can be utilized to expand and change the way the current crop of masters operate. Additionally consider that in adding a new master you are adding an entire crews worth of new models that need to fit into existing structure as well as an entire extra infrastructure for them, upgrades, henchman, enforcers, minions, avatar, and such like. 

Personally I'd rather see the game expand via upgrades and a small selection of new models per faction each book rather than the bloat that constantly adding new masters will cause. There are multiple masters whose theme hasn't been expanded in years, and more masters will only exacerbate the problem. Sonnia, finally, after 3 years of only adding the witchling handler to her initial line up got the sanctioned spell aster, as the starter set. Seamus hasn't seen a new model added to his theme since twisting fates, and in fact lost one because he can't hire Molly any longer. 

Frankly there are a great deal of masters that could use additional fleshing out before I'd be personally think the game would need another master. My opinion anyway.

[LordZombie]

Wasn't that the point of the upgrade cards? The ability to change a model without changing the model. There are lots of way the current 37 masters can be made totally different just by adding in new upgrades. Something as simple as adding a new list of models a master could take, or as complex as totally changing how a master plays. Picture Seamus with an upgrade that lets him take Showgirls, or an upgrade that turns Rasputina into a combat master. This would take lots of testing, but would be easier than making a new master for a faction or a totally new faction. I feel we are really at point, we don't need more new, we need to just need to digest what we got first. 

[Philosfr]

On Upgrades - I completely agree that upgrades can change the way things play. Some are great about it, like Molly and Dreamer for example. Others, not so much. But upgrades should add new playstyles, not just mimic someone else. So Seamus with Showgirls. It's either not different enough that it still plays like Seamus with Belles, or it ends up feeling a little much like a Colette crew with a different master. Now if it was an upgrade that let Seamus hire Showgirls but then utilized the Showgirl in an unusual manner (I'm thinking hostage situation, some drawback to using them, but when they die they auto-summon Belles), then that might be fun.

As far as "fleshing out current masters", I don't like adding things that are so "in-theme" that it's hard to play with much else. Rasputina was my first master and still has a cherished place in my heart, but I very quickly grew tired of the very one-dimensional crews she had. They all looked very similar with just a couple of changes. She's too good with her "in-theme" stuff that you don't really want to include a lot from other things. In this regard, I totally see new masters solving that problem. A Neverborn/Arcanist dual-faction crew that was made up of human cultists and cold mountainous Neverborn. Lots of the crew has Frozen Heart, but the master doesn't actually use it. They would fit nice with Rasputina, add some interesting cross-over, and make two factions consider the new options. This seems a lot better than just adding "icey something X and icey something Y" that only Rasputina really cares about.

[Bengt]

I'm not a fan of people asking for new masters. To me it shows a complete lack of imagination and a lack of understanding of how the upgrade system can be utilized to expand and change the way the current crop of masters operate. Additionally consider that in adding a new master you are adding an entire crews worth of new models that need to fit into existing structure as well as an entire extra infrastructure for them, upgrades, henchman, enforcers, minions, avatar, and such like. 

 

This post shows an extremely narrow understanding of other people's motivations. And it's presented in a very insulting way. A very important aspect of adding new Masters would be getting new models to paint, upgrades does nothing for this. Alternate sculpts would do as well, but the only current kind of alternate sculpts (Nightmares) are just ridiculously expensive as they can only be bought directly from Wyrd, you are getting close to 3 times the cost of a normal crew box when you add in postage and customs.

Except, maybe factions? I'm not sure about this one. First, it's a large amount of new stuff. It would be the small faction that didn't have a full toolbox and the forums would be filled with arguments why they should get more new stuff than other factions against people saying to go play a 'real faction' if they want the full set of toys. I don't think Wyrd would come out with 7 new masters and a full line of henchmen, enforcers and minions all at once.

If they are going to keep the same number of Masters in each faction, any addition would mean seven additions (minus any dual faction Masters, but that goes for a new faction as well). Obviously you would need to add more "regular" models if you go for the faction option, but consider the current numbers. The current factions have some 50-60 models each, Crossroads has 176 models, Shifting Loyalties has 41. So it's not really that many new models when compared to the previous books.

Sure, it will take a while to have all the actual models out for the faction. But having a "crippled" faction doesn't seemed to have stopped people from playing Somer and Ophelia in their lonesome for quite a while.

[mythicFOX]

<MODHAT>

A friendly reminder to stay respectful of each others ideas and viewpoints.

Some of the language being used is starting to get a little inflammatory and I'd hate to see an interesting topic descend into shouting.

Thanks!

</MODHAT>

Edited September 30, 2015 by mythicFOX

[Fetid Strumpet]

Wasn't meant to be insulting bengt, I was mirroring the previous posters opening language.

Also I'm not overlooking new models to paint. The designation of master or not has no bearing on the modeling aspects of the game. Several models in the game could easily have just been masters or not. The fact that Anna nee Lizzy is a henchman and not a master has no bearing on how fun or rewarding to paint. Nightmare Tara is arguably a more plain sculpt in every conceivable way than the art we've seen of Anna, but she's the master, not Anna.

Rember I never said I want no more models, I just personally don't want any more masters. Adding more masters is in no way a requirement for adding new models.

[ArcticPangolin]

I agree with Fetid about fluff and fleshing out characters. More Masters results in more bloat and less focus on understanding characters and their motivations, which for me is a large part of the appeal of Malifaux.

Additionally, Masters have the largest impact in affecting how games will play, sometimes turning aspects of the rules on their heads or taking them and turning them up to 11 (eg Levi's gank cycle, Tara's Burying/Fast manipulation, Brewmaster's Drinking Contest). Balancing new models is an art in itself, but more models that have such a huge impact on the game takes considerable and exponential work the more of them there are.

Plus my poor, poor wallet. How am I going to feed my kid with all this tempting tasty plasticrack?

[Omenbringer]

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

If they are going to continue to add models to the game this is likely the best way to do it (and likely why we now have two more factions for the game than in the last edition). Continuing to add to the existing factions will just decrease the variety of models that are actually played (due to optimization) and also the uniqueness of each Master/ Faction. Warmachine is a great example of this hazard (when it started the factions were fairly clearly defined with strengths and weakness, now the lines are heavily blurred and in some cases no longer exist).

In my opinion you are already starting to see this in Malifaux. The upgrades have a bit of potential to offer new styles of play for the existing Masters/ Factions, though also carry the dangers of obsolescence. You can not sustain unlimted growth without invalidating things.

[Rathnard]

I feel like it's worth pointing out that Warmachine/Hordes (WMH) is currently at about 160 Warlocks/Warcasters. Now it's not an entirley fair comparison. After all, the synergies work differently between the Warcaster and it's army and there are certainly Warcasters who are noticably above or below the power curve.

But still, if WMH can fit in that many Leader-level models, each with their own unique rules and synergies, then surely there's room in Malifaux for at least a few new Masters?

 

Personally I don't care if there's new Masters or not, so long as Wyrd ensures the game stays fresh and balanced from year to year. The details as to how they do that are irrelevant to me. I feel like Wyrd has a good track record of keeping the game balanced so if they think they can add new Masters (or whatever else) to the game, then I'm fine with that. 

[Omenbringer]

I feel like it's worth pointing out that Warmachine/Hordes (WMH) is currently at about 160 Warlocks/Warcasters. Now it's not an entirley fair comparison. After all, the synergies work differently between the Warcaster and it's army and there are certainly Warcasters who are noticably above or below the power curve.

But still, if WMH can fit in that many Leader-level models, each with their own unique rules and synergies, then surely there's room in Malifaux for at least a few new Masters?

 

Personally I don't care if there's new Masters or not, so long as Wyrd ensures the game stays fresh and balanced from year to year. The details as to how they do that are irrelevant to me. I feel like Wyrd has a good track record of keeping the game balanced so if they think they can add new Masters (or whatever else) to the game, then I'm fine with that. 

A bit of a misrepresentation there as they also have those 160 Warlocks/casters spread across how many different factions/sub-factions (seem to recall 13 or so)?  Additionally, as you point out, despite having multiple options in each faction for your lead model, there are still many that are virtually never played, even in extremely casual environments. Aside from the Warlocks/Casters, there are also many available models that rarely if ever see table time. Do we really want to see that in Malifaux? Also consider that Privateer Press models dont have access to upgrades which can fundamentally change the power level of the designed model. Lastly, even Privateer Press has recognized that there is a limit. Many of the new books haven't really introduced many new options, several new books offered a total of 3 new models for each faction. And even those new options are generally speaking "character" models that are going to be limited in there competitive format appearances.

Having participated in more than a few of Wyrd's play tests (with many of you) it has gotten increasingly difficult to keep the "character" (Uniqueness) of models and maintain the relative balance that you cite. It is my opinion that the upgrade system and non-unit structure of Malifaux will increase the speed at which Malifaux reaches critical mass. Could be wrong but would rather see the current batch of model interactions shake out before adding even more (this was an issue with the first edition of the game).

[Tawg]

Good gosh, I wasn't getting notifications on this thread, I assumed as the person that started it I didn't need to do anything to further be aware of things being posted.  I'm use to just having my topics fall to the way-side, so I didn't even look here for the past day or two, durp!

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

That would be great actually. I'd love to see that. But what faction would that be? 

A few possibilities of the top of me head:

Another tribe of Neverborn (like Gremlins are a kind of Neverborn).

With the Guild in Malifaux being a total mess after Shifting Loyalties and I guess SS exports being held up, a force from earth could show and try to take control. Either earth Guild guys or some other lot that has taken over after earth Guild turned out to be a bit of mess themselves and collapsed when the SS deliveries seized.

The monsters from The Other Side.

I agree very much that factions with over-lap or cross-utility would be an amazing tool to utilize.  I also thoroughly love the goal of brainstorming new faction potentials for various cross-combinations of the factions.  The fluffy ramifications are always fun to imagine!

I'm not a fan of people asking for new masters. To me it shows a complete lack of imagination and a lack of understanding of how the upgrade system can be utilized to expand and change the way the current crop of masters operate. Additionally consider that in adding a new master you are adding an entire crews worth of new models that need to fit into existing structure as well as an entire extra infrastructure for them, upgrades, henchman, enforcers, minions, avatar, and such like. 

Personally I'd rather see the game expand via upgrades and a small selection of new models per faction each book rather than the bloat that constantly adding new masters will cause. There are multiple masters whose theme hasn't been expanded in years, and more masters will only exacerbate the problem. Sonnia, finally, after 3 years of only adding the witchling handler to her initial line up got the sanctioned spell aster, as the starter set. Seamus hasn't seen a new model added to his theme since twisting fates, and in fact lost one because he can't hire Molly any longer. 

Frankly there are a great deal of masters that could use additional fleshing out before I'd be personally think the game would need another master. My opinion anyway.

I never asked for more Masters.  What I can not fathom is the notion of quelling a regular disbursement of new masters.  They are fundamental to generating excitement and inspiring players.  And while new ways to play a master might be mechanically dynamic, if I hate the factions or masters available currently, I will not be more excited to see them do new tricks.  Granted there is a decent amount of flavorful composition in Malifaux that lends itself to appealing to someone in at least one way, but you understand the point.  Players get more excited about new things typically.

The thing that gets me is that I feel like many people who were looking to stem Master-flow based it on the notion of avoiding unbalancing the game, or making too many variables for Wyrd to keep things easy without breaking them.  To which the counter point of offering new upgrades for variant play-styles on existing masters offers no advantage, because changing a master in a meaningful way to create new play options would inflict the same sort of issue on the game.  Potential imbalance.  But if that is not the primary objection to new masters then I find it far less odd.  I just had assumed that players were misunderstanding the implications of certain twist to the game.  Which is why I brought up Anna Lovelace, since she has a rather strong pull on the game (That's a gravity pun, yes).  What I fear is models/abilities/potentially upgrades for old masters/or what have you, that become far too staple in the game.  I have not played terribly much, but I see Anna being a strong contender for hard to resist when building crews.

On Upgrades - I completely agree that upgrades can change the way things play. Some are great about it, like Molly and Dreamer for example. Others, not so much. But upgrades should add new playstyles, not just mimic someone else. So Seamus with Showgirls. It's either not different enough that it still plays like Seamus with Belles, or it ends up feeling a little much like a Colette crew with a different master. Now if it was an upgrade that let Seamus hire Showgirls but then utilized the Showgirl in an unusual manner (I'm thinking hostage situation, some drawback to using them, but when they die they auto-summon Belles), then that might be fun.

As far as "fleshing out current masters", I don't like adding things that are so "in-theme" that it's hard to play with much else. Rasputina was my first master and still has a cherished place in my heart, but I very quickly grew tired of the very one-dimensional crews she had. They all looked very similar with just a couple of changes. She's too good with her "in-theme" stuff that you don't really want to include a lot from other things. In this regard, I totally see new masters solving that problem. A Neverborn/Arcanist dual-faction crew that was made up of human cultists and cold mountainous Neverborn. Lots of the crew has Frozen Heart, but the master doesn't actually use it. They would fit nice with Rasputina, add some interesting cross-over, and make two factions consider the new options. This seems a lot better than just adding "icey something X and icey something Y" that only Rasputina really cares about.

I agree, it would be very interesting to see a keyword (Like Belle/Showgirl/Freikorps/Etc.) that is spread out across many factions, with masters that utilize them specifically more limited.  It's actually something that already happens, with things like Puppets and Collodi or the fact that all Friekorps are generally Mercs so everyone can hire them, as well as masters/henches that are dual-faction and can bring in members of other factions to the crew (Toshiro, Lynch, Misaki, McMourning, Etc.).  But having that sort of thematic spread supported with mechanics is always wonderful to see, although center piece figures for specific crews that cry "Build around me!" are also a potential for changing up how a crew is played.

I agree with Fetid about fluff and fleshing out characters. More Masters results in more bloat and less focus on understanding characters and their motivations, which for me is a large part of the appeal of Malifaux.

Additionally, Masters have the largest impact in affecting how games will play, sometimes turning aspects of the rules on their heads or taking them and turning them up to 11 (eg Levi's gank cycle, Tara's Burying/Fast manipulation, Brewmaster's Drinking Contest). Balancing new models is an art in itself, but more models that have such a huge impact on the game takes considerable and exponential work the more of them there are.

Plus my poor, poor wallet. How am I going to feed my kid with all this tempting tasty plasticrack?

I think masters are not the only ones that offer strong alterations to the game though.  As I have mentioned previously, Anna Lovelace is a very strong character, and I think one of the defining features that truly balances her is the fact that she is a Mercenary.  The fact that anyone can potentially have access to a very strong counter to crews based on pushing everything around means everyone has to stay on their toes.  And that's an interesting point about Malifaux, in that they offer the ability to mold your forces once you have knowledge of the game's specific conditions, such as the faction match up and Strat/Scheme.  That means you can potentially call someone's motive in faction and seek to counter it before hand (Such as Merc Anna/Hanna, who are both good at specific goals, and available to everyone).  But it also hurts games where players have less available models, because then inability to switch up crews can create poor match ups on a regular basis if the players don't understand the idea of maintaining fun between themselves.

On the other hand, the story of the Masters and their motives isn't entirely dependent on not releasing new masters.  Although I can understand the desire that no one is left entirely in the dust, I think it is healthy to have a rotation with old themes making way for new.  Although for Malifaux that is not yet something that is happening exactly.  Though we did see progress from 1st Ed to M2e, with characters changing station and the story progressing.  I would however expect that Wyrd does not need to release new editions of the game to fuel further progress, but I don't know how possible the idea of rotating format/model availability is exactly.

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

If they are going to continue to add models to the game this is likely the best way to do it (and likely why we now have two more factions for the game than in the last edition). Continuing to add to the existing factions will just decrease the variety of models that are actually played (due to optimization) and also the uniqueness of each Master/ Faction. Warmachine is a great example of this hazard (when it started the factions were fairly clearly defined with strengths and weakness, now the lines are heavily blurred and in some cases no longer exist).

In my opinion you are already starting to see this in Malifaux. The upgrades have a bit of potential to offer new styles of play for the existing Masters/ Factions, though also carry the dangers of obsolescence. You can not sustain unlimted growth without invalidating things.

Well, you can, I believe.  Though the growth is not the only thing that needs to be considered.  Well grown plants are often tended to carefully, and pruning the unwanted is certainly something that allows growth to blossom into something we would like to see.  On the other hand, unlimited growth without any sort of attempt to cull issues as they are presented/develop is more akin to simply allowing a bush to grow unhindered, potentially taking over the sidewalk we used to observe it from, or destroying other plants that were simply too close to it.  That is what needs to be avoided, not limiting growth all together.

 

I am curious, since no one has actually commented on it yet, does anyone have any opinion on a rotation based system for the game? 

Sorry this post was so long by the way, I really wish I had known this topic spurred a discussion, I would have loved to reply to people not all in one huge post.  Hopefully this isn't too much of a wall of text though, and still worth looking at.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Would never work. Before Justin became a wyrd employee we had a very big discussion in a thread about curbing op models allowed in the game in 1.0. While I didn't entirely agree with all his points, his main theme was that minis are not like cards. There is too much personal investment both in terms of money spent on individual minis, as well as time spent modeling and painting.

If they regularly retired or cycled minis out of the rotation it would destroy their game. A few people wouldn't care, but I remember the massive uproar during the transition from 1.0 to M2E when a few models, lynch for example, couldn't still hire every single model he was able to take in 1.5. And that wasn't a retirement just a small limitation. The same happened when the avatars were being tested and the desperate mercs guys got an early hint that avatars wouldn't be part of the official baseline game. Before it came out that they were legal proxies for the emissairies. Actually retiring models officially would doom Malifaux in my personal opinion.

I personally also do not agree with your premise that you need to keep adding masters to the game to generate enjoyment. I personally do not feel that is remotely true.

Edited October 2, 2015 by Fetid Strumpet

[Tawg]

Well to be fair, TCGs are rather pricey at this point, and simply building a land base for a top tier deck can be comparable to much of the spending you could put into a minis game.  Not that players/consumers would ever look at it that way.  Plus the biggest difference is that the cards are basically liquid assets, as you can easily trade value for value without batting an eye.  With miniatures not many people want to simply swap models, as either they are interested in doing their own work, or the value of aesthetics are often not there, meaning there is little reason to value.  Though you could trade models, just most people would sooner proxy than swap if they wanted to try something new without buying it.  And all of that is a fair point, and certainly divides the way the business model can be set up (Which I did note, maybe not as precisely).

Well, they already are almost, with the newest iteration of Avatars and Campaign upgrades that are stated as legal only in campaign.  Granted a lot of this is very much fundamentally an "Alternate" play style to the main game, so people don't feel like they are being cheated or denied things if they aren't given access to it.  But why can't something similar exist as the base game?

They don't need to exclusively ban all prior models or remove them in any way, I'm just suggesting that for their higher-level play, where players expect controlled and balanced games, perhaps having a 2-3 year window of what is "Tournament" legal is a decent idea to prevent unintended play issues.  Control is the goal, and not having to build all new abilities and interactions with the full game's worth of models effecting it would prevent accidentally poor designs (Or intentional, if they were meant to rotate out before the other model came in) affecting the game in a negative way.  But you could still fully play anything you want in any open format or friendly game, so I don't see how that is a huge issue, just like you're fully allowed to use Avatars in friendly matches if you please.  It's not like 2-3 years is so short people can't expect to invest more into the hobby, if they like the game.  Hell you'd spend more on Video gaming in such a span of time than you'd be forced to with this sort of rotation.

And this doesn't apply simply to new masters.  Even under the plan to expand previous masters with upgrades that make them feel unique and fresh could fall into this same trapping, or potentially fit into a rotation scheme.  Honestly, I don't view new masters and new upgrades for masters differently.  They are both going to be asking the game to bend to a new set of rules, and if the upgrades don't give a distinct take on the master (IE, are not terribly unique), then they won't exactly be offering very much to the game anyways.  But at the same time, any upgrades that do alter the master in a significant way will still put a mechanical pressure on the game to not design new upgrades/models that accidentally make abusive situations.  I am taking a bit of liberty in assuming you intend for upgrades to alter the masters in meaningful ways, similar to how the Limited upgrades function currently, so forgive me if this is not true.

Regardless, the ground stands on theory that, as Omenbringer has pointed to, the game can not infinitely grow.  And while I can't venture a guess as to any sort of time span that would be required to effectively spoil the game with poor design interactions, intended or otherwise, I can make a few statements with a fair bit of certainty.

For one, Wyrd/Malifaux is not looking to end.  So in continuing, they must release more content to some extent.  Regardless of the form it takes, eventually toes will be stepped on, and designs may either limit the scope of future design, or be accidentally released with unintended consequences.  I think it's at least a preferable option to consider that such a time may come.  And I think a design choice to control this theoretical event is better than what many games seem to do, in edition resets.  And while the game has plenty of space to explore mechanically, space becomes more limited when nothing is ever at least side-lined to allow models to tweak concepts which would otherwise seem far too similar.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like there should be a way to implement a system.  And I don't know that people objecting is a sign that things shouldn't change, though considering the market is something that has to be done.

[Hungering Derpness]

...does it take to change a light bulb?

[Stux]

I think a new faction would be more interesting than adding more Masters/models to the existing ones. So that would be seven new Masters (less if some of the old ones go dual) and a healthy amount of models without complicating the combo-space of the old factions.

That would be great actually. I'd love to see that. But what faction would that be? 

Tyrants? Or rather individuals largely beholden to them.

It would take some rejigging of the current system a bit, but bare with me.

I'm talking masters like Rasputina, Hamelin, Tara, Shenlong. Raspy can be duel with Arcanists, Shenlong with 10T, Hamelin becomes pure Tyrants, Tara duels with Rezzers and loses Outcast.

With the loss of Tara and Hamelin, Outcasts can become a more defined mercenary company based faction, rather than a disparate catch-all faction (the status quo here is a bit of a bugbear of mine). To that end I'd also move Jack Daw to Rezzers. He's very different to other Rezzer masters, but is still a product of the same energies they use so for me it's not that much of a stretch.

That leaves us with a need for a few new Outcast masters to make up their losses, plus a few more Tyrant masters to add to the old ones given to that faction.

I realise this has turned in to a fantastical wish list rather than something with any real chance of happening

[solkan]

It's like Wyrd would want to start a second game to continue producing new models or something.... 

[Tawg]

...does it take to change a light bulb?

I guess that's the more typical question.  Same difference, the meaning gets across.

It's like Wyrd would want to start a second game to continue producing new models or something.... 

Yeah, I suppose that simply starting another game is a choice.  Although that has potential risk with appealing less mechanically or otherwise.  And it feels weird to think that a miniature game like this would be shelved and simply kept in a single state, a final state.  If that's what you're implying, that "closing the chapter" on Malifaux to prevent it degenerating due to design limitations/flaws inherent to games that seek to never stop expanding.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.  But it seems like going that route would be the same as asking people to stop caring.  I mean, certainly plenty of people are interested in the game as it stands, but with no new products ever I don't see the game drawing in new customers?  Especially when it's this style, where there is a very large selection of things to potentially buy, as appose to say, a board game, which you expect to typically purchase once and be done.  Although even board games often have expansions, but there are a great number stand on their own over the years.  Settlers of Catan or Carcassonne are two that despite not being new are quite likely to continue being purchased by board gamers.  But I can't imagine stock for a typical table-top wargame to draw in sales when the game no longer is generating new support or product.

[Durza]

I don't think thats what solkan meant, with a second game Wyrd can get more models out without overcrowding Malifaux, it can still get updates.

[Dogmantra]

I think it was an allusion to the fact wyrd have already announced a new minis game, though I forget what it's called. But even so, I doubt they'll stop producing at least something for malifaux for quite some time.