Neverborn Intrafaction Balance Musings

[Kirby]

5 hours ago, Eclipse said:

@Kirby On the lower end of the power scale of 13 ss models? Etc., etc.? Thanks mate, that gave me a good laugh  Nekima is awesome, she is my most dreaded cruise missile that I can deliver to any enemy model and wreck it, growing stuff all the while. She does not cost 13ss for me - I always take The True Mother and Rapid Growth on her for a Growth Missile. If carefully executed I can create great board swings where I kill one or two models while summoning a Tot and growing another one to a Young.
What you said in relation to Nekima ought to be due to not having seen used as best as possible - while delivering the Killjoy bomb and Ashes and Dust are tried tactics and a no-brainer.

Your comment emphasizes my point, rather than disputes it.  The situation you describe is "if carefully executed".  So yes, in the perfect setup and with expensive upgrades she can kill things while summoning useful models.  It's certainly awesome when it happens, but hardly reliable without careful planning.  You need a cooperative opponent, living models that don't have better things to do than wait to be grown, and investing the AP of several members in the rest of your crew (most often including your master) to set it up.  Even after all that, she is still quite easy to remove with any beater or solid ranged attacks that can get to her first.

This is not to say she isn't good.  She's excellent.  I take her all the time.  But yes, in a vacuum she is lower overall when you consider utility, survivability, and killing power when compared to other 13ss models in the game.  She often requires a good deal of resource investment to do her job.  When she does her job, she is very disruptive and strong.  She just needs far more help to do her job than other 13ss models in their respective factions.

[Math Mathonwy]

3 hours ago, Lordgimpet said:

As someone who has every single NB models, you have to understand that what is considered viable is purely up to the individual. each model has its strengths and weaknesses and when a model is continually used incorrectly by many it is often then incorrectly commented on as being weak or OP depending on the situation.

based on your list  in the OP depending on what you feel should be improved kind of shows me how you either play with those models or believe how you should use them, so rather than change the models. have you considered changing how you approach their use?

Is it possible to have models that are below the curve? If it is, how likely is it that zero models in a given Faction are below the curve? I think that it is a bit simplistic to assume that just because the rules are as they are that they are perfectly balanced.

[Eclipse]

29 minutes ago, Kirby said:

Your comment emphasizes my point, rather than disputes it.  The situation you describe is "if carefully executed".  So yes, in the perfect setup and with expensive upgrades she can kill things while summoning useful models.  It's certainly awesome when it happens, but hardly reliable without careful planning.  You need a cooperative opponent, living models that don't have better things to do than wait to be grown, and investing the AP of several members in the rest of your crew (most often including your master) to set it up.  Even after all that, she is still quite easy to remove with any beater or solid ranged attacks that can get to her first.

This is not to say she isn't good.  She's excellent.  I take her all the time.  But yes, in a vacuum she is lower overall when you consider utility, survivability, and killing power when compared to other 13ss models in the game.  She often requires a good deal of resource investment to do her job.  When she does her job, she is very disruptive and strong.  She just needs far more help to do her job than other 13ss models in their respective factions.

What you say about Nekima about sums her up. If I understand correctly when you say "below the curve" that means "requires more effort/preconditions"? If so, technically judging based on the performance maintenance required coupled with resource investment then I can see why you find her "below the curve". Still, we do not play in a vacuum, which contributes to the enjoyment of the game (to me at least).
There is a reason why I love playing Nekima but would not take Ashes and Dust, etc. even if they were in-faction: I love making things more difficult for myself most of the time. I also love making models that need far more help to do their job work well (or hell forbid, work stellar). I get the most excited getting the greatest potential out of models (the most unique way, if possible). For some models that's easy, and that often bores me. For other models it's not, so we occasionally fall in love with each other. This is what happened with Lucius, and with Fuhatsu, and with Nekima. The way I say things can sound rather rude sometimes, I hope that I did not offend you.

[Kirby]

Oh no, no offense taken at all!  I know text posts can come off as more stern than they're intended, mine included.  We're having a polite discussion, no worries!  

But yeah, that is exactly what I mean by "below the curve" when comparing Nekima to other high-cost/high-output models across the various factions.  I still think she's absolutely worth her 13ss, but I have a feeling that she's lacking defensive traits like Terrifying, Hard to Wound, etc. due to the availability of things like Lilith's everything, Growth, Pandora's activation control, etc.  This certainly makes it a bit unfair to compare her to other faction heavy-hitters in a vacuum, but let's be fair it's not like Howard Langston doesn't have cheap access to on-demand Fast or two masters that make Reactivate available.

[SoylentRobot]

burn me at the internet stake if you want, but ive always felt that the widow weaver is too cheap for what it can do with web markers. pretty much every model in the faction likes the enemy to have bad WP, and each marker giving a cumulative -1 is pretty powerful. I'd either have the widow weaver increased to 10ss or have it so that the penalty from the markers doesnt stack.

[chryspainthemum]

31 minutes ago, SoylentRobot said:

burn me at the internet stake if you want, but ive always felt that the widow weaver is too cheap for what it can do with web markers. pretty much every model in the faction likes the enemy to have bad WP, and each marker giving a cumulative -1 is pretty powerful. I'd either have the widow weaver increased to 10ss or have it so that the penalty from the markers doesnt stack.

Keep in mind that you need los to the markers. Also keep in mind that at 30mm, any model can stand on them and prevent los since they are ht0.

[SoylentRobot]

1 hour ago, chryspainthemum said:

Keep in mind that you need los to the markers. Also keep in mind that at 30mm, any model can stand on them and prevent los since they are ht0.

WHAT

That's nuts, im going to have to try that

[LunarSol]

The most problematic thing about Nekima is probably the Doppleganger, as it lets her reliably get 2 activations in a row.

[Philosfr]

55 minutes ago, LunarSol said:

The most problematic thing about Nekima is probably the Doppleganger, as it lets her reliably get 2 activations in a row.

I wouldn't go that far. Sure, the Doppleganger could get a set of Nekima's attacks, but that's not remotely the same thing as Nekima just activating twice. Nekima has a lot of other things going for her that a Doppleganger can't copy. I don't know how many times I've finished off a HtK model with Nekima cutting herself to avoid wasting an attack as an example.

[LunarSol]

It's more the ability to activate her last in a turn and reliably immediately activate her first the next turn I was referring to.

[Philosfr]

3 hours ago, LunarSol said:

It's more the ability to activate her last in a turn and reliably immediately activate her first the next turn I was referring to.

Even without the doppleganger you have a 50-50 chance of being able to do that, and if you're willing to spend resources (i.e. stones) better than that. I think giving Howard re-activate and getting him to go virtually 3 times in a row would be much worse

[Ludvig]

11 hours ago, Philosfr said:

Even without the doppleganger you have a 50-50 chance of being able to do that, and if you're willing to spend resources (i.e. stones) better than that.

Someone doesn't face arcanists with the  to initiative a lot I hear. Being able to cheat a 12-13 is the only way to get initiative against arcanists in my experience.

[Twg]

Nekima is a glass cannon and although she hits hard it's often still difficult to set up a charge. Her effective range is 9" which is far shorter than some other big beaters such as the Carberus with leap and the option for an upgrade to provide it with fast (about 20 inches I believe) . Certainly it seems far easier to use the Howard and he has better defences should he not kill his target. Nekima is just a stand out model for Neverborn in my opinion, not the game. Again, the Doppel loses a lot of her versatlility against Arcanists who almost always take the positive to iniative.....very annoying! 

In relation to the widow weaver, you have to remember that a stiff breeze will put her down. Defence 4 and terrifying 11 means that she won't last lost in melee, but has to be fairly close to put down those markers. 

[Ludvig]

7 hours ago, Twg said:

. Again, the Doppel loses a lot of her versatlility against Arcanists who almost always take the positive to iniative.....very annoying! 

She is actually more useful against someone with a positive. Without her you are almost guarantued to lose initiative, with her you have a decent chance of cheating so high that you actually win it. You need to cheat a lot higher but it is basically your only chance of ever getting initiative so increases her usability rather than lessens it in my eyes.

[Philosfr]

59 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

She is actually more useful against someone with a positive. Without her you are almost guarantued to lose initiative, with her you have a decent chance of cheating so high that you actually win it. You need to cheat a lot higher but it is basically your only chance of ever getting initiative so increases her usability rather than lessens it in my eyes.

The math isn't quite that bad. A positive twist vs a straight flip is about 66% to 33%. It's a little less precise due to cards and not dice, but it's a good rule of thumb. I agree that this usually feels like always going second, but it's not that much worse than 50-50

[Thana.]

11 hours ago, Philosfr said:

The math isn't quite that bad. A positive twist vs a straight flip is about 66% to 33%. It's a little less precise due to cards and not dice, but it's a good rule of thumb. I agree that this usually feels like always going second, but it's not that much worse than 50-50

Just wrote a computer program to test it out and,  to the nearest whole number, you're looking at a 30%,62%,8% chance of w/l/t vs a plus flip. Since ties are reflipped you are indeed quite close to 33% vs 66% vs a plus flip to initiative ignoring soulstone use (which favours the player with the + to initiative). 

 

19 hours ago, Twg said:

Nekima is a glass cannon and although she hits hard it's often still difficult to set up a charge. Her effective range is 9"...

You don't need to charge to do work with Nekima, especially not with a doppelganger in your back pocket. Assuming you can force through all your attacks and the initiative on the next turn and assuming you always do weak damage pre reduction/prevention you're looking at...

28 damage if within 7 inches of your target

24 damage if between 7-9 inches of your target

20 damage if between 9-13 inches of your target

16 damage if between 13-15 inches of your target  

 

 

Anecdotally, from what I've read of the UK scene the #1 player and the previous #1 player both hire Nekima and doppelganger irrespective of s&s. If the two most successful tournament players in a country that has lots of tournaments are routinely spending 40% of their soulstones on Nekima and doppelganger then it seems likely that these are high on the power curve models. Also anecdotally, as a player who spams Nekima and doppelganger vs good players myself to good results I consider both of them to be comfortably in the top 5 non-master models in the faction. 

2 cents added  .

[solkan]

To put that positive flip vs. regular flip in perspective...

If both players are flipping regular initiative, the result is roughly the same as rolling a D6 with the results:

1 - 3: I win initiative

4 - 6: You win

For a positive flip vs. a regular flip on initiative, the result is roughly the same as:

1 - 4: I win initiative

5 - 6: You win

And reflipping initiative is the realm of confirmation bias, since you're paying to reflip after you know the odds of successfully reflipping.

 

[Ludvig]

If an arcanist got like a 10-11 I would probably not try to beat their flip with a ss since I don't like my odds. If I wanted to go first I might however cheat in a 12 and a lot of players wouldn't cheat against that even with a   so I have now guarantued my desired result (although at a high cost. 

I'm aware it's anecdotal but in my last three games vs arcanists I lost every initiative flip that I didn't cheat with a doppleganger and they never bothered to try and flip above me when I spent a 12-13 on making sure to go first. I have no idea if it was worth the card and it is not statistically accurate according to those who know that sort of stuff. Since you get the  to the stone reflip too I would argue that it has a pretty hefty influence on the result but a lot (maybe most of the effect) is psychological, most people simply won't try to flip against 11+ results.

[Clyde_Davis]

I don't agree with any of the debuff suggestions in the original post. And in terms of the suggestions of models to improve, I find Candy, Barb, Kade, Sorrows and the Mature all competitive models and more often than not they prove to be the bane of my opponent.. I don't think it should be a question of reviewing models to make them easier and more straightforward to use but rather reviewing how you're using them. I'm not saying that there are some models in NB that do have little appeal, but of the models listed in the original post - if they're used in the right combinations with the right timings (as much as the game allows), are probably some of the most potent NB models.

[orkdork]

12 hours ago, Clyde_Davis said:

I don't agree with any of the debuff suggestions in the original post. And in terms of the suggestions of models to improve, I find Candy, Barb, Kade, Sorrows and the Mature all competitive models and more often than not they prove to be the bane of my opponent.. I don't think it should be a question of reviewing models to make them easier and more straightforward to use but rather reviewing how you're using them. I'm not saying that there are some models in NB that do have little appeal, but of the models listed in the original post - if they're used in the right combinations with the right timings (as much as the game allows), are probably some of the most potent NB models.

I didn't suggest making anything "easy or straightforward", and would suggest that if you think these models are some of our most potent, then you might need to review how you play the stronger models in the faction.

I'm not losing games. No idea why those who disagree with me assume I'm having trouble with these models or something. Quite the contrary...

[Philosfr]

14 hours ago, orkdork said:

I'm not losing games. No idea why those who disagree with me assume I'm having trouble with these models or something. Quite the contrary...

I think it's just a matter of how "this model is below par and needs a buff". If I think that model is strong and routinely have success with it, then the assumption is you don't know how to play it. 

Of course, we know it's not quite that simple, but you're inferring the exact same thing in your comment:

14 hours ago, orkdork said:

I didn't suggest making anything "easy or straightforward", and would suggest that if you think these models are some of our most potent, then you might need to review how you play the stronger models in the faction..

You're assuming that since we find models like Candy and Baby Kade useful, that we must not be playing the other models you consider strong effectively enough. It's the flip side to the same coin.

I don't think it's out of malice or assuming ignorance, but there's been no other explanations put forth that would explain why both sides think they know better than the other side. So, without further ado, I think it's a matter of meta's. I've heard (maybe incorrectly) that the UK scene has very different lists than the US scene. I would say it's quite likely that you'll find similar differences in regional areas around the US as well. It could very well be that Candy and Baby Kade just don't perform as well when the opponents are playing a different style list, but are quite potent when playing in the local lists.

There would need to be more in-depth analysis of the tournament lists in regional and national level games to be able to tease out how true this was. But the fact that there's not consensus and that there are several who argue for both sides of models like Baby Kade probably means these models are fairly well balanced, and the shifts of the meta are all that shifts the likelihood of their inclusion.

We could certainly focus on other aspects of your list like Beckoners, and there would likely more agreement that these models rarely make a list. Beckoners are too tied to the Brilliance mechanic and therefore only function in a Brilliance heavy list in my opinion, so rarely ever get fielded. So while your list as a whole might be more for your meta, there are likely models that are below par for the faction that most everyone can agree on regardless of meta.

[chryspainthemum]

Biggest challenge in balancing miniatures games is sample size. Compare to Dota or magic, where you can draw upon data from thousands of games. The biggest malofaux tournaments have what, around hundred games played? Than keep in mind that there is rarely any tier listing involved (ie. Anyone can show up and compete, thus skewing model performance) and you end up having to judge things anecdotally, which is, obviously, far from perfect. 

[Twg]

There does seem to be models getting buffs that a lot of people thought didn't need upgrading. We got Iggy. The arcanists got the Slate Ridge Mauler. +1 wlk +1ml and a new casting action. It always performed very well when I played against it. Not looking forward to these in the future.

[orkdork]

5 hours ago, Philosfr said:

I think it's just a matter of how "this model is below par and needs a buff". If I think that model is strong and routinely have success with it, then the assumption is you don't know how to play it. 

Of course, we know it's not quite that simple, but you're inferring the exact same thing in your comment:

You're assuming that since we find models like Candy and Baby Kade useful, that we must not be playing the other models you consider strong effectively enough. It's the flip side to the same coin.

I don't think it's out of malice or assuming ignorance, but there's been no other explanations put forth that would explain why both sides think they know better than the other side. So, without further ado, I think it's a matter of meta's. I've heard (maybe incorrectly) that the UK scene has very different lists than the US scene. I would say it's quite likely that you'll find similar differences in regional areas around the US as well. It could very well be that Candy and Baby Kade just don't perform as well when the opponents are playing a different style list, but are quite potent when playing in the local lists.

There would need to be more in-depth analysis of the tournament lists in regional and national level games to be able to tease out how true this was. But the fact that there's not consensus and that there are several who argue for both sides of models like Baby Kade probably means these models are fairly well balanced, and the shifts of the meta are all that shifts the likelihood of their inclusion.

We could certainly focus on other aspects of your list like Beckoners, and there would likely more agreement that these models rarely make a list. Beckoners are too tied to the Brilliance mechanic and therefore only function in a Brilliance heavy list in my opinion, so rarely ever get fielded. So while your list as a whole might be more for your meta, there are likely models that are below par for the faction that most everyone can agree on regardless of meta.

You seem like a cool dude

Yes, I was a bit drunk and being petty in return for what I perceived as pettiness/strawmen. I apologize and I will stop!

A couple things:

1. I'm talking about intra-faction, meaning that I model I list as "weak" within the faction could well be perfectly viable outside the faction. I personally believe that Neverborn are a tier 1 faction.

2. As far as meta, my experience in the West Coast US/Canadian meta is new: I've only been to two 2-day tournaments for a total of 10 major tournament games. However, my experience thus far is that the UK players are right on about Neverborn. While I'll certainly admit to being relatively new, my opponents were not: highly active henchmen, the creator of PMF, masters qualifiers, dudes who travel the country playing big Malifaux events, etc... I started the larger of the two events playing against the previous year's winner and went undefeated, so I was among awesome players out of the gates. I wouldn't feel so confident in my assessment of the faction if it weren't that folks with a crap-ton of significant experience were highly impressed with my crews, which are by in large right in line with the UK meta (sans Joel Henry, who plays an intriguingly different Pandora game than I do, but got me going in the right direction with Chompy Dreamer, who is legit). The TO, a consistent WFB GT winner, saw my painted model set and remarked that "in those 20 models, I see 4 very different tier 1 crews".

3. I'm not always advocating for huge buffs. For Barbaros, for example, I'm just advocating for his attack to fall inline with the standard for a 7ss model (and he's a 10). Ml 6 with a 2/4/5 is pretty much the standard for combat-oriented 7ss models. His weak would still be 2.

Also, the "augment strengths for flavor instead of weaknesses for ease" argument is a strawman. Of course model character and unique style is better than vanilla models. But you also have to watch for the rock-paper-scissors effect. Flavor is great. Win/lose at deployment is not. There are many, many considerations in model design. I'm not blind to them. Sorrows relying so utterly on MLC + incorporeal means they are hard-countered by blasters. Hard counters are VERY bad in a game that takes 2 hours to play!

Another way to look at it: in many cases I'm advocating for increasing a model's options. Candy with Ca6, for instance, would have more viable options on her turns, rather than relying so heavily on sweets/sours.

[Philosfr]

No need to apologize from my view, just making sure each side understands that this isn't politics... we can respectfully disagree and don't assume the other side are maliciously evil!

As far as your points:

1) 100% agreed. A model needs to be judged in relation to other choices. Saying a 7 SS model in a faction that has very strong upgrades and buffing units should be 100% balanced to a 7 SS model that is nearly lacking in support and has few good upgrades isn't very fair. But saying a 7 SS model in Neverborn should be as good as a different 7 SS model in Neverborn is fair. Illuminated are a stand-out in Neverborn, so another 7 SS model that is intended for a similar purpose needs to be judged in relation to the Illuminated or it'll never get taken.

2) Most of my games are in Minneapolis area, but I've played at Adepticon the last couple years in Masters and other Malifaux events there. I know I was in for culture shock the first year and did quite poorly due to being unfamiliar with the Adepticon meta. I played Lilith both years for all my games (first year because I had to, second year because I wanted to compare) with largely the same core crew selection. I did much better in the second year because I was ready for the different play style than I was used to. That's my only experience with different meta's, but it does illustrate it can make a difference. 

I also think personal play style matters. I used to use Lilith very different than I do today, and I can see how my crew selection has changed to go with it. Before Lilith was always played forward, very aggressively and I needed things that could keep up with her and keep her safe. I also selected schemes that nearly never needed markers, preferring things like assassination and bodyguard. As I grew more comfortable with Lilith and started playing her more to the rear, along with the new schemes relying more heavily on markers, my crew selection changed as well. I still don't take quite what the podcast/tourney consensus agrees with, because I don't like Lilith to be so passive. I like Lilith because she can swing her sword like a first rate beat stick, and I want to be able to use it. So my crews emphasis is on things like Lilitu and the Doppleganger to Lure to Lilith, which ends up working fantastically with Baby Kade.

3) Small buffs can have unintended consequences though. If Barbaros gets better as a 10 SS model, what will he end up replacing? He's already very tanky and fairly durable. If his offensive improves, what model might he now make subpar? Alternatively, if it's only a small tweak, then the balance can't be too bad as-is or it would need more.

I'm 100% with you on the anti-Rock/Paper/Scissors gameplay. I don't want model X to be a hard counter to model Y, but model Z crushes model X. Then you win or lose in a guessing game during list building. I'm not sure if focusing on flavor necessarily means that, but I do agree. Nekima is partially balanced by her very fragile nature. She's very offensive, but is built like wet tissue for any opponent that wants to try to get rid of her. If she was balanced by reducing offense (if OP) or buffing defense (if UP), then it takes away from her character a little bit. If she wasn't so all out nuts on offensive, she'd quickly be relegated to the shelf. She's fragile enough you often only get 2 rounds out of her, so she has to put out 13 SS worth of value in those two rounds. 

The other thing to keep in mind is value. 13 SS into one model means one set of activation. One model for schemes/strategies that are based on numbers. One target for super debuff's or a red joker on damage. It's "all your eggs in one basket". This has a cost of it's own that needs to be balanced. A 13 SS model that can do as much as a 6 SS and 7 SS model combined is less desirable than the 6 SS and 7 SS model.