Jump to content

Using the starter box to create a Guild McMourning list...


OracleToronto

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Surrealistik said:

But he's not Pareto efficient outside of those two parameters when we're considering Peacekeeper and Howard Langston as bases of comparison, which is my point. Overall both of these models, even with the SS premium factored are still in balance better than Ryle, regardless of the fact that he reaches a compromise/midpoint between them on two traits; that would not be a Pareto efficient choice so much as a generally inferior one (barring some situational corner case where his specific combination of traits would be somehow preferable to either as Hoffman; context!; which I've yet to imagine). A true Pareto efficient choice with these models defining the extremes/boundaries/metrics would feature at least a rough compromise/averaging between their strengths and weaknesses with respect to every important quality/parameter (cost, damage output, utility, etc in addition to durability and mobility).

I'm asking this as a polite third party.  What definition of Pareto efficiency or Pareto improvement are you using?  Because it doesn't appear to be the standard one.

Here's a definition which appears to be standard:

Quote

Pareto improvement is defined to be a change to a different allocation that makes at least one individual better off without making any other individual worse off, given a certain initial allocation of goods among a set of individuals. An allocation is defined as "Pareto efficient" or "Pareto optimal" when no further Pareto improvements can be made.

So for Ryle to be the "Pareto efficient" choice, it DOES NOT mean that Ryle is the best in any category, or even that Ryle is better than the worst possible value in any category.  It just means that all of the alternatives happen to be worse than Ryle in at least one category.

In other words, if a model performs better than Ryle in some category, that model also performs worse than Ryle in some other category.

The definition does not require or expect the "efficient" choice to be a compromise in all of the criteria.  It's just "All of the other choices are situationally worse in some way, while possibly being situationally better in others."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, solkan said:

I'm asking this as a polite third party.  What definition of Pareto efficiency or Pareto improvement are you using?  Because it doesn't appear to be the standard one.

Here's a definition which appears to be standard:

So for Ryle to be the "Pareto efficient" choice, it DOES NOT mean that Ryle is the best in any category, or even that Ryle is better than the worst possible value in any category.  It just means that all of the alternatives happen to be worse than Ryle in at least one category.

In other words, if a model performs better than Ryle in some category, that model also performs worse than Ryle in some other category.

The definition does not require or expect the "efficient" choice to be a compromise in all of the criteria.  It's just "All of the other choices are situationally worse in some way, while possibly being situationally better in others."

???

If it's true that Ryle is a "Pareto efficient choice" simply because all the alternatives happen to be worse than Ryle in at least one category, then the PK and Langston are also technically "Pareto efficient" vs each other and Ryle, as the alternatives discussed are all worse off in at least one category: both the alternatives of HL and Ryle vs the PK are worse off in terms of durability. Both the alternatives of Ryle and PK vs HL are worse off in terms of mobility.

In a true Pareto efficiency, per what you quoted and what I stated earlier, it's not possible to make one individual (game stat/quality in this case) better without penalizing/detracting from another.

Ryle certainly doesn't meet that definition vs the PK and HL; his game statistics simply aren't configured in that way when PK and HL define the poles and parameters; this model is by no means a Pareto efficiency when compared to those models.

 

EDIT: I will note that I emphasized the idea of 'compromise/averaging' between PK and HL's strengths and weaknesses as that is what Myyra appeared to be concerned with; the mechanical equilibrium/midspace between them, specifically durability and mobility, where he wasn't greatly surpassed in these regards. I don't know why Ryle would be considered 'Pareto efficient' compared to these models outside such an idea of compromise and outside of those metrics; the observation that he's 'Pareto efficient' here specifically is furthermore useless; why bring it up?

Alternately, even the idea that adding Ryle to PK and HL doesn't detract from the effectiveness of either and thus is Pareto efficient isn't necessarily true given the opportunity cost and alternate synergies (Brutal Emissary for example).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Surrealistik said:

If it's true that Ryle is a "Pareto efficient choice" simply because all the alternatives happen to be worse than Ryle in at least one category, then the PK and Langston are also technically "Pareto efficient" vs each other and Ryle,

They are. I thought that much was obvious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yes as mentioned using him instead of Sebastian and zombie puppy would be a step away from poison almost entirely … but I figure if your meta has a lot of condition removal it could be a good alternative - tossing "spot weakness" on Ryle could equal a few longe range surprises for your opponent the first few turns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, OracleToronto said:

*blink blink* ... Plus you know ... He fits the "crazy Doctor" "mad scientist" theme... So there's that...

And that's why we do not leave Ryle unattended around McMourning! He does not need a, quote, "fresh coat", end quote! (If you want some popcorn I've got it cooking atop the peacekeeper's heat sink plating. Sorry about the 'butter' but that was the only grease in the workshop with the correct melting point.)

 

I thought efficiency was Howard Langston (where hireable) for maximum wounds removed per AP, Ryle for maximum targets hurt per AP preferably combo'd with an effect multiplied by number of targets, and peacekeeper for absorbing the most enemy AP for hiring cost.

There is another unquantifiable benefit in Ryle having a 40mm base instead of the others' 50mm. It had saved me many a traffic jam on the boards I used to play on. (Wait--nowadays I can field a proper, 50mm x2 or x3 bases all practically touching one another, Hoffball, and not immediately be constrained by terrain. This changes everything!)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Myyrä said:

They are. I thought that much was obvious.

Are you serious?

What was the damned point given I was originally asking whether or not Ryle was actually worth taking in Hoffman given the alternatives? Plenty of models are technically "Pareto efficient" if your sole criteria was that each model be surpassed in at least one thing by the others (still not true Pareto efficiency). Was your objective to worthlessly name drop an economic concept? A Guild Hound is fucking "Pareto efficient" on the basis of SS cost compared to PK and HL. Useless.

But then again, you are fond of making trite, unhelpful observations when you're not being pointlessly needling aren't you?

On 2016-09-23 at 2:21 PM, Myyrä said:

Pro tip: Use them to summon traps.

Brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Surrealistik said:

What was the damned point given I was originally asking whether or not Ryle was actually worth taking in Hoffman given the alternatives? Plenty of models are technically "Pareto efficient" if your sole criteria was that each model be surpassed in at least one thing by the others (still not true Pareto efficiency). Was your objective to worthlessly name drop an economic concept? A Guild Hound is fucking "Pareto efficient" on the basis of SS cost compared to PK and HL. Useless.

I can't even think of a Malifaux model that isn't Pareto efficient. I'm rather surprised it took this long for anyone to notice that. There was an actual point to that post beyond being a joke, though. The point was that you shouldn't be taking a Guild Hound to do a Peacekeeper's job. Look at the strengths of a model and you won't need me to tell you why it can be useful.

Quote

But then again, you are fond of making trite, unhelpful observations when you're not being pointlessly needling aren't you?

I actually am. Very observant of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

I can't even think of a Malifaux model that isn't Pareto efficient. I'm rather surprised it took this long for anyone to notice that. There was an actual point to that post beyond being a joke, though. The point was that you shouldn't be taking a Guild Hound to do a Peacekeeper's job. Look at the strengths of a model and you won't need me to tell you why it can be useful.

I actually am. Very observant of you.

Or how about offering some useful advice for a new player, which I very much was at the time, rather than stating the fucking obvious in the most pointlessly obtuse way possible (i.e. "lol reading the model will tell you how it's good/when/why you should use it... even when it's ambiguous or there's corner cases/value you may not be aware of as a new player!")? I made that thread so I could save time and not have to learn through naive theorycraft and trial and error whether Ryle was worth using vs its powerful alternatives in a Hoffman list, and when (and gave you the benefit of the doubt, under the mistaken assumption you were trying to say something of value). Evidently for you it's pointless to have any kind of model discussion thread in order to tap the experience, perspective and knowledge of others despite that being a massive and obvious time saver in many cases; ridiculous.

Is there any reason not to have you on ignore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Surrealistik said:

???

If it's true that Ryle is a "Pareto efficient choice" simply because all the alternatives happen to be worse than Ryle in at least one category, then the PK and Langston are also technically "Pareto efficient" vs each other and Ryle, as the alternatives discussed are all worse off in at least one category: both the alternatives of HL and Ryle vs the PK are worse off in terms of durability. Both the alternatives of Ryle and PK vs HL are worse off in terms of mobility.

In a true Pareto efficiency, per what you quoted and what I stated earlier, it's not possible to make one individual (game stat/quality in this case) better without penalizing/detracting from another.

It is possible for a system to have no choices that are Paleto efficient.  It is also possible for a system to have all of the choices be Paleto efficient.  Paleto efficiency is only one of the possible definitions of "best overall choice" when dealing with multiple criteria at once.  Personally, it's not a particularly useful definition if you're looking for things that excell in the various categories, but it exists for the same reasons median, mode and average do--each different definition has a different use.

It's also, as far as I can tell, sort of silly to have an argument about Pareto efficiency without bothering to discuss or agree upon the criteria being used.  Agreeing on the criteria and metrics is sort of the point--identify your choices, identify your criteria and metrics, score each choice if not inherent, and then the Paleto efficient choices become defined.  Otherwise you just have a running argument with shifting goal posts, or each party declares themselves right by their own definitions.

Howard Langston has no ranged attack, so isn't a Paleto improvement over Ryle.  And the Peacekeeper is more expensive than Ryle, so it's not a Paleto improvement over Ryle.  Whether any of the three are Paleto efficient depends on the criteria employed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Freman said:

Guys, is all this argument over the observation that Ryle offers a good mix of range, melee, and durability for his stone cost, but may be a little slow?

Specifically, it was the observation that if you're trying to do everything, Ryle is one of the "least bad across all criteria" choices, if you weigh all of the criteria equally.  And being immune to Horror Duels and having a heal isn't bad.  :mellow: 

After that, it was pretty good demonstration of the problem of asking a mathematician or similar individual the question, "What's the best model?"  That is, either someone tells you (see above) or else they make you think about what you mean and how you're going to compare models.  :huh:

Are there any suggestions on specific criteria that should be favored for a McMourning crew?  If there are, that might indicate other choices. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, solkan said:

Specifically, it was the observation that if you're trying to do everything, Ryle is one of the "least bad across all criteria" choices, if you weigh all of the criteria equally.  And being immune to Horror Duels and having a heal isn't bad.  :mellow: 

After that, it was pretty good demonstration of the problem of asking a mathematician or similar individual the question, "What's the best model?"  That is, either someone tells you (see above) or else they make you think about what you mean and how you're going to compare models.  :huh:

Are there any suggestions on specific criteria that should be favored for a McMourning crew?  If there are, that might indicate other choices. 

at the risk of stoking the fire that was more or less what i was hoping to achieve with this post ... there is always the "best" and even the "better than" options ... i will always care a great deal about theme and feel - and want to select "the best" option within that perimeters. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, OracleToronto said:

at the risk of stoking the fire that was more or less what i was hoping to achieve with this post ... there is always the "best" and even the "better than" options ... i will always care a great deal about theme and feel - and want to select "the best" option within that perimeters. 

This isn't actually always true at the list building stage. Opponent's choice of models is going to affect which models end up being most useful. That means that one needs to consider the risks and uncertain payoffs involved with bringing a model. To get a definitive answer under those conditions one needs to be able to formulate a probabilistic assessment of opponent's crew composition, choice of schemes, tactics, and their skill level. Only then can one tell which model will improve their chance of winning the game the most. Needless to say, this is pretty f*ing difficult to do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Surrealistik said:

Or how about offering some useful advice for a new player, which I very much was at the time, rather than stating the fucking obvious in the most pointlessly obtuse way possible (i.e. "lol reading the model will tell you how it's good/when/why you should use it... even when it's ambiguous or there's corner cases/value you may not be aware of as a new player!")? I made that thread so I could save time and not have to learn through naive theorycraft and trial and error whether Ryle was worth using vs its powerful alternatives in a Hoffman list, and when (and gave you the benefit of the doubt, under the mistaken assumption you were trying to say something of value). Evidently for you it's pointless to have any kind of model discussion thread in order to tap the experience, perspective and knowledge of others despite that being a massive and obvious time saver in many cases; ridiculous.

Is there any reason not to have you on ignore?

Actually his Advice is normally good, especially if it makes you think about what obvious gem he has given you. Telling you Pathfinders summon traps is actually pretty useful if you stop and consider how this effects your hand to try and make sure you hold the 6:tome, and is the 11:tome in your hand worth using for a trap or not. If you don't want to stop and think about what he says, then ignore him, but his answers will make you a better player (even if its just because you have to work out what he actually told you, rather than be spoon feed a rules answer).  

What he doesn't do, is what I consider bad advice, is tell you the answer, because the questions asked don't have an answer, they have a bunch of opinions, some of which are right and some of which are based on faulty logic. I find Myyras answers make me look at the question myself, which makes me a much better player. 

I can list a bunch of situations where Ryle is more use than a peacekeeper to me. . I can list a bunch of situations where he is more use than Howard Langstrum to me. Some of those situations will overlap. But that is based on how I use them. You may use them differently, and find that the way you use them means that my answer was wrong. 

One of the most important things to learn as a Malifaux player, in my opinion, is that other people are wrong. People often ask the question,

"Which is better, Ryle or the peacekeeper?" 

To which there isn't actually a right answer. But that doesn't stop a lot of us on the forums answering with our opinion, which will range from Fransisco to Mechanical Rider. (we're a funny lot). And a lot of the time we will state it as fact, which is wrong. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Adran

That's a pretty spirited defense of someone who contributed essentially nothing to the conversation in those threads; you are reaching hard.

Everyone else seemed to get the idea, providing useful and applicable feedback about under what conditions Ryle might be a good, and whether or not he held his weight in balance to HL and PK, with no one (that I recall anyways) providing a simplistic answer which would have indeed been bad advice in your view. In the Pathfinder thread, people offered many interesting and applicable suggestions and synergies beyond the obvious of using a 0 action to summon 2 SS worth of bog down every turn whenever possible, including things I'd never considered; it was edifying and spared me from pouring through the books doing theorycraft I would have otherwise had to undertake. Meanwhile, Myrra offered nothing of value in both cases.

I agree that sometimes you do indeed get legitimately bad advice; but that's the advantage and appeal of the hivemind. People tend to point out if advice is truly awful, and its consensus, even if it's not entirely accurate or valuable, often is, or at least contains some truth.

That said, there is no denying that there is advice of value to be had from these forums and model discussion, that good insights can save you a lot of time and trial and error; by contrast, the simple fact is that Myrra has thus far offered nothing beyond the obvious: yes, I'm aware that the Pathfinder offers the most value through trap spam. Yes, I'm aware that you can often determine a model's value relative to a situation via its stat block. That's not insight, that's a guy being a flippant ass and I'm honestly astonished you and the people who liked your post apparently think otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey everyone,

My name is Aaron. I work for Wyrd, and am the lead designer of this lovely game of Malifaux. You may not know this about me, but I take secret pleasure in using my moderator powers.

Let's stop talking about posters in this thread, and let's start talking about game questions. And let's try to leave snark, condescension, and insults out of it. I'm also going to alert the moderators to this thread so they help me keep a watch on it.

No one's in trouble, but it's time to move on to gameplay. Feel free to gush about how great of a designer I am (or how terrible). But let's leave each other out of it.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I played my first McMourning game.

Turn 3 the enemy crew suddenly disapreared.

 

McMourning surviced a turn of mad pigs biting at him - Gracie, Old Major and a Warpig.

Then Chihuahua and Sebastian came along and 6 damage a turn proved to be too much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...

Important Information