Fixed lists

[Math Mathonwy]

Every once in a while someone comes to a Faction-specific forum and posts a list and asks whether it's a good one or not. Within minutes someone comes along to tell them that there are no fixed lists in Malifaux and that you need to tailor your list to the battlefield, opponent and strat and scheme pools.

Yet it seems that the US meta is ruled by fixed lists. It seems that most of the major tournaments are being won by lists that don't customize any but rather run the same list come hell or high water and win every game.

So I was thinking that maybe we could discuss this. A couple of questions that you may or may not take into account when formulating an opinion:

How come? And is this common in the UK scene as well?

Is this good for the game?

Should we start telling the list-posters that yeah, that's a nice list but consider switching that Baby Kade for an Illuminated?

Any other thoughts on the matter?

[Myyrä]

You can create fixed 40ss lists that cover over 90% of usage cases, and then add one or two models and some upgrades to fit the exact scenario and opposing faction in a 50ss game.

One thing to note about those lists is that they often aren't very thematic and rely on a very small pool models that are effective no matter what they are facing. That means that when that excited new player comes to the forums and asks how good his Lady Justice + Death Marshals lists is, the nicest thing you can tell him is that it might manage to pull its weight if the stars are right. The way we go about doing that is say that there aren't fixed lists and the list needs to change to match the scenario. The alternative would be to tell him to pick up Sonnia + Papa + Franc + Austringers and forget about playing Lady Justice.

 

[trikk]

I partly agree with Myyra. Going all thematic is fun but rarely the themes correspond with competetiveness.

 

Lady Justice is of course playable, give her Frank, 2 Recruiters, Queeg, Effigy and probably an Austringer and she can probably compete in a decent manner but has its drawbacks

This is also dependant on how do you know the players you play against. For example if you know your oponent is only playing master X in Outcasts you can get away with it.

But in a tournament enviroment with possible 8 masters in the pool of you`re oponent you can`t tailor your list for one, so this is where the optimized core list come in.

 

[katadder]

I often used fixed lists (my raspy list hasnt changed this year at all) and even take fixed crews fairly regularly to tourneys.

the advantage of a fixed list for me is you dont tend to forget your forces abilities (apart from price of progress, i always forget that) and know how to get the best out of them 

[-Loki-]

This thread makes me so glad I'm not very competitive.

Thematic crews is what drew me to the game.

[LunarSol]

I think the primary issue is simply that models aren't very well specialized within their points bracket.  It means that when you get all the pieces into place correctly and get a working machine, its not as simple as swapping one part out for another.  For example, if you've got a 4 SS bit of support and could use something slightly different in this situation, the fact that it probably costs 5 SS means that you have to take apart quite a bit more than what you're looking to substitute to make it work.  

As far as thematic crews are concerned, the primary issue is just that there aren't very many keyword synergies in the game, period; and the ones that do exist are generally very minimal.  The keyword buffing upgrades are all a little expensive and niche too, though one thing that I think would be great in the future is a set of new, powerful keyword upgrades similar to the theme force kind of thing other games do to improve this a bit.

[Ludvig]

 

Should we start telling the list-posters that yeah, that's a nice list but consider switching that Baby Kade for an Illuminated?

Any other thoughts on the matter?

I'm pretty sure a lot of list advice in these forums already is in the form of "Remove list and fit in Franc and Locobox" or something to the same extent.  It's not a coincidence that every guild beginner ever has gotten the tip to get Perdita and a box of austringers. We should just do stickies in each forum that say: These are the boring netlists that let you win, post if you want to discuss the fun side of the game

I'll have a chat with actually competent players from around here and ask, but I'm pretty sure a lot of them have a fixed or semi-fixed list. If nothing else it takes time to get familiar with models and some don't combo very well so switching about hurts you. In my eyes, the question is really if the winners of every tournament plays the same/similar lists between metas or if different players win with different lists (even if the same player always plays the same list).

[Gnomezilla]

Are all the fixed lists optimized for killing, or for board control a.k.a. optimized AP usage bent to the purpose of wasting as much enemy  AP as possible? I only know the Guild list can lock down enemy AP behind flame walls. I began to write about scheme pools which reward not clearing the board, but if the fixed lists are board control instead that's a dead end.

[#Maxi]

That's exactly what we're discussing in our local gaming club.

Sadly (cause I think this leads to a poorer game) fixed list trend is growing fast.. Though the game is studied for the scheme based building, too many times it's simply better (note, in terms of competitiveness and winning chance, non surely in game's depth and appeal) to keep the same fixed list - usually full of big hitters - eventually changing 5/7 SS basing on the strat-scheme setup.

The reason? Me and my friends are still wondering about it, but we found at least one: in the earlier phases of the game (books 1 and 2 just to be clear) the overall trend was models having something strong and some weakness, good in doing something but not in something else (for example, fast but fragile, good damage but very slow and so on..) so you had to adapt your crew focusing on the models strong in what THE CURRENT MATCH required, avoiding the ones having their weakness in what you needed.

Now it's possible to find models good in everything, or at least for many more tasks, with more strong traits and less weak angles, with an overall higher medium stats than before (ml/sh/ca 6 is the new 5), and ss costs in line to the old ones.. why (again, if you're trying to maximize your crew efficiency) you should not to take'em? And this leads to the fixed crew, good for everything, composed by the models that optimize the ss cost/quality ratio. And it's sad, but it's true...

I sincerely hope that as soon as possible there will be a U turn in this approach, that's maybe possible only by acting on schemes and strats to make (if not impossible) at least harder to find utility in semi-fixed lists.

[Ludvig]

 

ason? Me and my friends are still wondering about it, but we found at least one: in the earlier phases of the game (books 1 and 2 just to be clear) the overall trend was models having something strong and some weakness, good in doing something but not in something else (for example, fast but fragile, good damage but very slow and so on..) so you had to adapt your crew focusing on the models strong in what THE CURRENT MATCH required, avoiding the ones having their weakness in what you needed.

Most of the horribly broken stuff is in early books so I'm not buying your reasoning. That entire Sonnia list is a perfect storm of book 1 stuff that was a bit too good and has loophooley abilities.

[Ludvig]

I think I've said it before but I'll say it again:

People will try to find even the tiniest above the curve thing and/or loophole and exploit it to get an edge, that's probably human nature. It's hard to regulate that away. Pushing for more and more tournaments with rewards for winning (above the already quite alluring bragging rights) only enhances that drive. Even in friendly games it's hard to stay away from wanting to win (at least it is for me) so when I know a model is above the curve I'll be tempted to take it over something that is below the curve. It's like Samael vs Francisco in a Sonnia list... One of them is going to do a better job about 99,9% of the time so unless I'm trying to throw the game I will be more inclined to pick one of them.

[#Maxi]

 

Most of the horribly broken stuff is in early books so I'm not buying your reasoning. That entire Sonnia list is a perfect storm of book 1 stuff that was a bit too good and has loophooley abilities.

Book 1 or 4 it's not the core of the problem.. the core is that there are models that, for the same cost (or even less) do more things and are better under every aspect than others. That brings to fixed lists imho.

[#Maxi]

 

I think I've said it before but I'll say it again:

People will try to find even the tiniest above the curve thing and/or loophole and exploit it to get an edge, that's probably human nature. It's hard to regulate that away. Pushing for more and more tournaments with rewards for winning (above the already quite alluring bragging rights) only enhances that drive. Even in friendly games it's hard to stay away from wanting to win (at least it is for me) so when I know a model is above the curve I'll be tempted to take it over something that is below the curve. It's like Samael vs Francisco in a Sonnia list... One of them is going to do a better job about 99,9% of the time so unless I'm trying to throw the game I will be more inclined to pick one of them.

Exactly, totally agree

[Ludvig]

I think it's kind of natural for players to gravitate towards fixed list in their own progression. The boring part is if every player around the globe makes the same decision on what that list is. I haven't seen much about this Sonnia list in the last two years even though it won a major tournament two years in a row.

[Yipikayey]

People will gravitate towards fixed lists no matter what you do. From a competition standpoint, it's the most rational thing to do. Either you flip coin to see if you can capitalize on metagaming and winning your opponent's on the selection crew, or you play something which is kind of like a take all comers. The first option seems awesome, but it's the second option the one you can really practice for.

[Dogmantra]

I'm trying to collect my own thoughts on this, but in the meantime I think it's interesting to note that the winner of NOVA the past two years, who probably at least partially prompted this thread had this to say on A Wyrd Place after saying he was going to switch to 10T for next year:

[Question] Do you think there is an all situations, one list to be found in TT like your Sonnia, or are expecting to have to switch things up from round to round?

[Winner's Answer] Not even close. I change masters on the regular when playing 10t.

[trikk]

I had the same thoughs but I think its kind of due to Sonnia, Justice and partially Perdita to be one dimensional in a way that they mostly deal damage. So when you create their lists you buff the crap out of them. Hence the papaboxes and Franciscos. McCabe, Nellie and Hoff have a larger competitive hiring pool. 

[LunarSol]

I think its definitely more of a Guild thing than a Game thing.  Guild has generally lacked good cheap minions to focus on schemes, which rather limits the options of what can and cannot be good in the faction.  I'm actually really curious what can be done now that Field Reporters exist.

Guild also just has a lot of issues with redundant options and honestly a lot of mediocre stuff.  Henchmen are definitely the worst, with all of them until the last book essentially costing 9 SS and being an unfocused mix of melee and range.  Francisco is the best of this template for a variety of reasons, but its not like he's that crazy.  If you ask people what the best henchman in the game is, he's far from the first to spring to mind.

It's not all doom and gloom, but I definitely feel when I look through Guild models a sense that there's a lot of generalist taxes, which makes it pretty easy to gravitate towards the models that do something truly exceptional like shoot across the table without LOS or lock models away in a box.  I think Wave 3/4 has done a lot to shake up the faction, but its going to be tough to break up the old gang.  I do think if anyone can do it though, Nellie can.

[Blacks85]

 

Is this good for the game?

Yes, this game is fixed list rather than build freely your crew among all the models of your faction.

This is mostly due to the fact that not all pieces were tested enough and balanced properly. You can clearly see - by picking Montresor and compare it with almost anything else - that it won't never worth its cost, so you put it away. The same for many more models around the game making - if fact - a 40SS fixed crew game plus couple of jolly models to hire.

The thing that pushed me into playing this game is the incredibly new and fun system to have many really different schemes and to have the possibility of doing the crew before the game just with these schemes / opponent faction intel by choosing among the 40+ models of my faction! Absurdly crazy fun.

Unfortunately, more I learn the game and more I pull out models from my case to leave in it only who deserves a spot...and they are very, very close to a fixed crew throwing away the most fun I've spot in this game.

I'm a competitive player, I've always approached all games as competitive as possible including Magic for 10+ years at pro level. My consideration are only in this direction, I try to make the crew most effective as possible.

I believe this game still have INCREDIBLE and AMAZING mechanics all around and I still believe it's possible to make almost everything balanced, or at least very very viable in a crew selection. Of course, this would require a hard play-test and a kind of 2.5 edition with almost 70% of the cards revised...

...but it would lead to a game extremely more fun to play at any levels - tournament, casual and campaign. Increase the variety, increase the fun, give everyone the possibility to play what he/she loves with a fair chance to win.

 

[trikk]

I still believe that a lot of the pieces depend on player preference and in a lot of ways fixed lists are not obligatory for most masters. Sonnia I believe is a really bad example because all she does well is damage so you want to buff your masters damage as its the best damaging piece in your army. Thats why you take Loco. She also quite fragile so you take Frank and Effigy. Thats 29SS with upgrades. 

 

If you look at a lot of other masters you can really switch between a lot of models.

[katadder]

 

This thread makes me so glad I'm not very competitive.

Thematic crews is what drew me to the game.

my arcanist crews are thematic and do well, so its not that thematic crews are not competitive, its just some people find other builds more so.

if you know your crew you can run thematic and still compete (especially in the arcanists)

[TheTrans]

Yeah set lists are certainly a bit of a problem, but it all depends on the master.

For instance I run a highly elite hoffball that  is nomrally 40-45 stones that don't move, with the 5 that can shimmy if I need it. But with Hoffman, he is only as powerful as his crew.

Where I have been using Reva recently, and her (maybe couple her with Vincent) runs pretty independent of her crew, meaning you can happily shift things around without her taking too many large negatives. 

I feel though, it is the master that dictates if they need a fixed list set up or not. @trikk has a very good point, about people wanting to maximize Sonnias damage potential, which is amazing, don't get me wrong. But in my sonnia games, I've found I like her as a summoner/damager, with plenty of schemey guys available for pushing schemes. 

But it is a little sad to see that net-listing is starting to rear its ugly head properly in the Malifaux community, which I suppose will eventually happen given the amount of models available to factions nowadays and therefore some options start standing at the fore. 

[chryspainthemum]

47 minutes ago, TheTrans said:

But it is a little sad to see that net-listing is starting to rear its ugly head properly in the Malifaux community, which I suppose will eventually happen given the amount of models available to factions nowadays and therefore some options start standing at the fore. 

Yea I don't get the netlisting 'problem'. Netlisting is great. It's a direct side effect of a game being documented well. If Malifaux is to be taken seriously as a competitive game, the tournament scene needs to be a lot more accessible and transparent (think Magic or online competitive games like LoL and Dota). And with that comes netlisting, which is a totally fine side effect. It's not like a list is even half the work of being a good player. I can guarantee that the top Pandora player in the world could give me their list and I'd still fuck it up. Or like Bilz could play a list I made and I'd play his Sonnia list and (probably :P) still lose terribly. Bring on the netlisting!

[TheTrans]

1 minute ago, chryspainthemum said:

Yea I don't get the netlisting 'problem'. Netlisting is great. It's a direct side effect of a game being documented well. If Malifaux is to be taken seriously as a competitive game, the tournament scene needs to be a lot more accessible and transparent (think Magic or online competitive games like LoL and Dota). And with that comes netlisting, which is a totally fine side effect. It's not like a list is even half the work of being a good player. I can guarantee that the top Pandora player in the world could give me their list and I'd still fuck it up. Or like Bilz could play a list I made and I'd play his Sonnia list and (probably :P) still lose terribly. Bring on the netlisting!

It's not about perceived power levels of the netlist mate, it is more about playing the same old shit time and time again... Thats more the issue/fear for me, not the whole working out what works.

[asrian]

8 minutes ago, chryspainthemum said:

Yea I don't get the netlisting 'problem'. Netlisting is great...Bring on the netlisting!

All I have to say to this is hell no. That takes half the skill out of it to me, which is observing the terrain, the strat/schemes, and a general idea (faction) of what the opponent it bringing and adapting on the fly. Net listing and power gaming (which ended up hand in hand) are why I quit playing 40k and WHFB and came to Malifaux. It was more strategic, more thought inducing. If it ends up going to nothing but flavor of the week online lists like GW games, then I'll be heartbroken. The lack of pre-built lists is a large chunk of the appeal to me in this game.