Jump to content
Lucidicide

Gaining Grounds 2016

Recommended Posts

 

1 minute ago, Chumbalaya said:

The game wasn't designed for single master. 

This.  I also think trying to balance around single master isn't wise either.  Also I wonder how many fixed master events you'd have to go to on average before this showed up in the pool?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

The game wasn't designed for single master. 

It was designed to be fair and competitive for all Masters though. Having one scheme that completely neuters the way certain Masters are supposed to play is poor design. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chumbalaya said:

The game wasn't designed for single master. 

But some players, newer players, are playing single master by necessity. In growing communities it can be very damaging if this actually harms Levy very much. It's also possible that Levy is good enough that he can agree to give away 3 points per game like this and still win, tbh.

Anyway, I also really like that Exhaust isn't removed by an interact, just a regular tactical action. Very cool change from Cursed Object.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonahmaul said:

It was designed to be gape and competitive for all Masters though. Having one scheme that completely neuters the way certain Masters are supposed to play is poor design. 

Were you outraged that Lucius had a hard time competing when Make Them Suffer popped up?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

Were you outraged that Lucius had a hard time competing when Make Them Suffer popped up?

I am outraged EVERY time Make Them Suffer (or Reckoning) pop up. ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

Were you outraged that Lucius had a hard time competing when Make Them Suffer popped up?

There's a huge difference between schemes being easier/harder for certain Masters and a scheme that completely neuters Masters and gives your opponent VPs without them having to do anything to earn them. Plus nobody plays Lucius competitively ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonahmaul said:

There's a huge difference between schemes being easier/harder for certain Masters and a scheme that completely neuters Masters and gives your opponent VPs without them having to do anything to earn them. Plus nobody plays Lucius competitively ;-)

Isn't that more cause for concern than Leveticus not being able to faceroll every game?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Red Moon Head said:

I'd have maybe preferred something like:

1VP first time they are removed from play

2VP first time they are at half wounds

3VP if they die

But hey, onwards with the March of the death marshals I say!!!

That would still mean no 3VP Assassinate against Levi which is a problem. Waifs/Levi should have been FAQ'D so that if Levi couldn't Unbury at the end of a turn he counted as dead (friends suggestion, I was messing around suggesting re-wording Assassinate!)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its not great for levi however I have been fixed master tourneys with melee masters and deliver a message was 3 auto points for opponents so this will not change how I play levi. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jonahmaul said:

It was designed to be fair and competitive for all Masters though. Having one scheme that completely neuters the way certain Masters are supposed to play is poor design. 

So don't play Leveticus if assassinate comes up? There are other Outcast masters you know. Like Hamelin or von Schill who are harder to kill. In the same way that Ironsides basically handed over free points for reconnoiter and Ramos just gives you make them suffer. You can choose not to summon, but doesn't that basically counteract the way Ramos is meant to play? Deliver a message on Lady J was always a piece of cake also. I just don't agree with your reasoning, and I'm assuming this wasn't an accident. They thkught about this very carefully, probably specifically to shake things up so we don't see the most commonly taken masters as often.

25 minutes ago, tomjoad said:

But some players, newer players, are playing single master by necessity. In growing communities it can be very damaging if this actually harms Levy very much. It's also possible that Levy is good enough that he can agree to give away 3 points per game like this and still win, tbh.

Anyway, I also really like that Exhaust isn't removed by an interact, just a regular tactical action. Very cool change from Cursed Object.

Okay, so for new players who are forced to play Levi (even though he Might be called a poor choice as a first master), stack the pool to avoid assassinate? I started with Ironsides and my opponents were happy to avoid stake a claim and reconnoiter while I was getting my head around the game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fetid Strumpet said:

Not to be pedantic, but it actually doesn't completely neuter the master's in question. As a devotee of hyperbole myself, I do feel obligated to point it out in this case. Completely "neutering" them would be along the lines of preventing them from even being able to make use of their rules, as in they mechanically could not actually use them. This single scheme doesn't do that. They can still use their mechanics, nothing prevents it. It doesn't even make it more likely that you will lose the game, as the mechanics have absolutely no bearing on how many points the master in question can accumulate.

The best case you can make for this is that it in general means the enemy is going to easily get 3 points. In my experience it is VERY difficult to deny well picked schemes the opponent chooses in any case, and most of my games came down to who was able to more deny a point or two in the Strat. But even barring that all it does is make it easy for the opponent to gain points in the same way summoners had to deal with Make Them Suffer. Sure the level of ease in gaining the points isn't exactly the same, but the situation, IE using a master's mechanics in the way they were intended to work creates a situation where more points will be given up to the opposing player is exactly the same. And it wasn't as if there was actually all that much more effort required to gain those points. We can certainly agree that the amount of effort is different, but let's not pretend that minimal effort or not, it still generally meant that if you brought a summoner into a Make Them Suffer Game and used their summoning rules that your opponent WAS going to get those three points. The ultimate effect, even if the amount of effort differed, was the same.

That isn't to say I don't respect your view, nor that I can't understand why you feel the way you do. Totally get your reasoning. I just don't agree with it.

Likewise I disagree. And I think MtS is a poor comparison. It's a pretty easy scheme to score from no matter whether you're facing a summoner or not. There aren't that many hardy Peon/Minion lists and the scheme punishes you if you have no Peons/Minions in play so you have to bring them.

 

Levi's game play mechanics are built around him wounding himself to get (+) and Burying before coming back (and his 'free' Waifs are effectively counted in his stats and SS cache. Similarly there's two ways Dreamer is generally played.  As a summoner who uses Waking to Heal then Buries at the right time to reduce it or as a LCB beater (again needing to Bury).

 

Another massive difference between MtS (and every other scheme in the game) v Neutralise is that your opponent doesn't have to use AP or do anything to score VPS in the latter. They just have to let you play your game using the mechanics that your Master is designed to play with. You can't even counter to it as it's unrevealed so first time you know your opponent has it your down VPS. 

 

It's not an issue in friendly play/non-s8ngle Master events but having a scheme that is so poorly thought out in the way it impacts on certain Masters is poor IMHO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, jonahmaul said:

It's not an issue in friendly play/non-s8ngle Master events but having a scheme that is so poorly thought out in the way it impacts on certain Masters is poor IMHO.

I have to disagree with this part. I think this was well thought out, and there are already people saying they argued for it one way or another on the Henchman forums. Wyrd understood exactly what this would do and I am positive that it was tested and they opted to go for it. Now, I have a feeling, like you do, that this will be more punishing to some masters and play styles than was intended, but I'm also willing to admit that I cold well be wrong and that Levy will still be a valid (if suboptimal) choice with Neutralize in the pool.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kobayashi said:

Ugh... the estimated shipping costs to EU of the deck are roughly twice as much as the deck itself and this is standard and not premium shipping... do not like :(

Did you include the deckbox? Try deleting it - made over $10 difference to the postage!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never played Levi, but wonder if sniping and Abom creation might be a response to Neutralize being in the pool. Forgo his recursion mechanic and swarm the enemy to keep them from getting at Levi.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonahmaul said:

Personally I think Neutralize the Leader is terrible as it punishes people for playing the way Masters like Levi and Dreamer are designed to work.  Going to cause hell in single Master tournaments.

edit - shipping to the UK comes up as just over $3 which is pretty reasonable though it says 3-7 weeks!

Gaining grounds is designed to be a tournament rule set using the full set of malifaux rules (which includes masters chosen after the schemes are revealed). If you're a tournament organizer running a single master tournament (GG is a tournament ruleset), then they should probably compensate by choosing schemes that don't include Neutralize (or at least letting players know if it will be in play ahead of time).

 

Similarly, with new players, GG isn't really something that should be used while learning.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonahmaul said:

Likewise I disagree. And I think MtS is a poor comparison. It's a pretty easy scheme to score from no matter whether you're facing a summoner or not. There aren't that many hardy Peon/Minion lists and the scheme punishes you if you have no Peons/Minions in play so you have to bring them.

 

Levi's game play mechanics are built around him wounding himself to get (+) and Burying before coming back (and his 'free' Waifs are effectively counted in his stats and SS cache. Similarly there's two ways Dreamer is generally played.  As a summoner who uses Waking to Heal then Buries at the right time to reduce it or as a LCB beater (again needing to Bury).

 

Another massive difference between MtS (and every other scheme in the game) v Neutralise is that your opponent doesn't have to use AP or do anything to score VPS in the latter. They just have to let you play your game using the mechanics that your Master is designed to play with. You can't even counter to it as it's unrevealed so first time you know your opponent has it your down VPS. 

 

It's not an issue in friendly play/non-s8ngle Master events but having a scheme that is so poorly thought out in the way it impacts on certain Masters is poor IMHO.

 

How is this worse than having assassinate against Levi, with this scheme your opponent is almost guaranteed 3 vp, but you can still score full points, against Levi with assassinate your opponent is basically playing with a max 7 vp. Assassinate is on a crow, while this is on a number, this is showing up far less.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Lynch and McCabe player, I am noting how Collect the Bounty's errata made Rising Sun aggro Huggy a less though still viable option (which is exciting cause now I get to figure out my new optimum build for the scheme!) and how Show of Force was designed not to let McCabe players autowin with goodies from the boss.  The latter also seems to support Daw handing out curses without giving up points, and the thought of preventing 0 SS upgrade spam is quite smart, though my samurai are frowning. 

The variety of schemes interacting with the opponent's models are also really nice (take that Criid!), and I'm especially excited about Mark for Death.  The new ALitS also seems really cool though still super easy for McCabe (and thank gott I can't score deliver the Message turn 1 anymore!).  I like the look of inspection as well; I'm trying to figure out just how many stones to invest on each side, especially as the models may likely need to be able to take down the opponent's models doing the same thing.  Do I really just sink 14 stones worth of Illuminated into this cause they probably just win?  This will be especially interesting for Turf War and Extraction.

The crazy thing is that I have 2 weeks to study and try to jam some of these before my first big tourney this year.  All in all awesome job, Wyrd.  Thanks for keeping the game fresh and stirring up the metagame.  It does look like there will be a fair number of scheme pools that don't support the table your opponent as quickly as possible then mop up points method of play, and I like the new considerations in master choice and crew composition that we get to figure out.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...