July 2017 Errata

[Math Mathonwy]

5 hours ago, spooky_squirrel said:

So from my perspective, rebalancing the cost of the Stuffed Piglets up to 3 and maybe taking a look at the Bayou Gremlins cost might help some of the other models see more play.

You'd still see no Survivors because there are Slop Haulers and Lightning Bugs.

This year I believe I've seen cries of n€rf on every single Gremlin model commonly used. Gremlins are now number five in tournament rankings and people hope that the half of the faction that is being used should be n€rfed heavily.

I just don't know, man.

[trikk]

54 minutes ago, Math Mathonwy said:

You'd still see no Survivors because there are Slop Haulers and Lightning Bugs.

This year I believe I've seen cries of n€rf on every single Gremlin model commonly used. Gremlins are now number five in tournament rankings and people hope that the half of the faction that is being used should be n€rfed heavily.

I just don't know, man.

Out of curiosity, What do you mean by number five?

 

 

 

[Math Mathonwy]

2 hours ago, trikk said:

Out of curiosity, What do you mean by number five?

In @Bazlord_Prime's stats analysis here:

Gremlins are ranked number five in both UK and US rankings.

But the exact position isn't very relevant, just that they are clearly not at the top so n€rfing the whole faction as some people seem to be suggesting doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

 

[Von Woozle]

On 31/07/2017 at 6:33 PM, Elessarion said:

Yep. Can be invaluable for helping Wong hit models that are out of his LOS. I've never taken more than 2 and probably wouldn't, so I don't mind this change. Eliminates the playstyle of spamming them.

 

Can't see myself buying them over Bayou's because they are far to random with damage to ever be consistent and are clearly never worth 3pts.  All they had to do is limit their use or they could have dealt with real issue aka the pigault.  Really terrible that they ruined lots of models because they were too short-sighted to think a little further..

[trikk]

6 minutes ago, Von Woozle said:

Can't see myself buying them over Bayou's because they are far to random with damage to ever be consistent and are clearly never worth 3pts.  All they had to do is limit their use or they could have dealt with real issue aka the pigault.  Really terrible that they ruined lots of models because they were too short-sighted to think a little further..

I don't think the pigapult was ever tbe reason for this change.

[catbat07]

1 hour ago, trikk said:

I don't think the pigapult was ever tbe reason for this change.

The pigapult wasn't the problem.

[Von Woozle]

Care to explain the issue because clearly I'm missing it.  Personally I thought GG17 already Cuddled the pigapult compared to gg16.  I never used it because it's not fun.  It really should be a fun model seeing how silly it looks.

Well making stuffed piglets cost 50% more wasn't the solution.  If spamming them was the issue they could have  limited the amount you could buy because Invalidating models is never good design.   Stuffed piglets were never over priced or broken, they just needed a tweak.

[trikk]

10 minutes ago, Von Woozle said:

Care to explain the issue because clearly I'm missing it.  Personally I thought GG17 already Cuddled the pigapult compared to gg16.  I never used it because it's not fun.  It really should be a fun model seeing how silly it looks.

Well making stuffed piglets cost 50% more wasn't the solution.  If spamming them was the issue they could have  limited the amount you could buy because Invalidating models is never good design.   Stuffed piglets were never over priced or broken, they just needed a tweak.

The issue was cheap activations available across an entire faction. Limiting the amount wouldn't work because they begin to be an.activation problem around 2.

 

Now I'm no expert but for Stake a Claim Pigapult still seems useful.

[Da Git]

While I can't speak for the Gremlins, the errata to Practised Production and Air Gamin makes me very happy! 

Since the Mechanical Rider now got a decent cuddle to its summon, hopefully we can go back to Metal Gamin and make Protection of Metal worthwhile. A range of 6" would be a great place to start... 

[edopersichetti]

2 hours ago, trikk said:

The issue was cheap activations available across an entire faction. Limiting the amount wouldn't work because they begin to be an.activation problem around 2.

 

Now I'm no expert but for Stake a Claim Pigapult still seems useful.

This seems to be your personal opinion - which many people do not share. The problem was lists hiring 4 to even 6 Stuffed piglets to gain activation advantage for cheap. I agree that this was a concern.  But hiring 2 Stuffed piglets does not tip the scales. Now, the problem is that people will be hiring exactly 0 of them.

Ultimately, the only master that will not be impacted (negatively) by this change, is Somer, who was already the best Gremlin master - making tournament choices even more limited, in a faction that is already struggling.

[trikk]

8 minutes ago, edopersichetti said:

This seems to be your personal opinion - which many people do not share. The problem was lists hiring 4 to even 6 Stuffed piglets to gain activation advantage for cheap. I agree that this was a concern.  But hiring 2 Stuffed piglets does not tip the scales. Now, the problem is that people will be hiring exactly 0 of them.

Ultimately, the only master that will not be impacted (negatively) by this change, is Somer, who was already the best Gremlin master - making tournament choices even more limited, in a faction that is already struggling.

Nobody gets 2 factionwide activations for 4 SS. Or 3 for 6 SS. For me 2-3 was enough of a reason because it allowed high numbers of very good models combined with a high activation number which isnt possible outside of Gremlins.

 

I really wouldn't call them a struggling faction and I think most top players agree with that. I'm not saying they are top 1 or unbeatable.

I will try to get my hands on some to have a different perspective.

[KrazyIvan]

The Pigapult wasn't the issue. The issue was that Stuffed Piglets were never intended to be hired as spamable activations. Putting a rare limit on them was never going to be a good option due to Taxidermists summoning and how many Stuffed Piglets come in the Creative Taxidermy box.

[Adran]

27 minutes ago, edopersichetti said:

This seems to be your personal opinion - which many people do not share. The problem was lists hiring 4 to even 6 Stuffed piglets to gain activation advantage for cheap. I agree that this was a concern.  But hiring 2 Stuffed piglets does not tip the scales. Now, the problem is that people will be hiring exactly 0 of them.

Ultimately, the only master that will not be impacted (negatively) by this change, is Somer, who was already the best Gremlin master - making tournament choices even more limited, in a faction that is already struggling.

For what its worth, I also believe that the issue with stuffed pigs was the cheap activation control. 

I think that if you wanted the stuffed pig for the purposes of being a stuffed pig, then the extra stone per pig is still reasonable. If all you wanted was a cheap activation to increase your activation control, then the pig is not the default choice anymore. 

I think that Sommer is probably affected as well.  And I agree with Ivan that reducing the rare limit was not going to be an option because they sell them in 6s. Not saying  this change is the best solution, but I think it makes stuffed pigs do what they originally intended them to do. 

Other changes all seem good and on the whole worthwhile. 

[edopersichetti]

3 hours ago, Adran said:

For what its worth, I also believe that the issue with stuffed pigs was the cheap activation control. 

I think that if you wanted the stuffed pig for the purposes of being a stuffed pig, then the extra stone per pig is still reasonable. If all you wanted was a cheap activation to increase your activation control, then the pig is not the default choice anymore. 

I think that Sommer is probably affected as well.  And I agree with Ivan that reducing the rare limit was not going to be an option because they sell them in 6s. Not saying  this change is the best solution, but I think it makes stuffed pigs do what they originally intended them to do. 

Other changes all seem good and on the whole worthwhile. 

If what they were intended for is sit on the shelf, then yes this change is perfect

[DrayZed]

The forum post has been changed to reflect the correct wording on "Practiced Production" but the news post on the front page has not.

"https://www.wyrd-games.net/news/2017/7/31/summer-errata"

[edopersichetti]

3 hours ago, Adran said:

For what its worth, I also believe that the issue with stuffed pigs was the cheap activation control. 

I think that if you wanted the stuffed pig for the purposes of being a stuffed pig, then the extra stone per pig is still reasonable. If all you wanted was a cheap activation to increase your activation control, then the pig is not the default choice anymore. 

I think that Sommer is probably affected as well.  And I agree with Ivan that reducing the rare limit was not going to be an option because they sell them in 6s. Not saying  this change is the best solution, but I think it makes stuffed pigs do what they originally intended them to do. 

Other changes all seem good and on the whole worthwhile. 

In all seriousness, I think that most of the Gremlin players would disagree with the fact that you'd still hire them - and they are the ones that know how their crews work best. For 3SS, Stuffed Piglets are now too expensive to hire as Pigapult ammo, and in every other situation a Bayou is just more flexible, and significant: Wong himself won't hire them just to blast off of them (might as well blast off of a Bayou).
So, at the cost of repeating myself, I see these becoming mostly a summon-only model.

I don't think Som'er is affected at all - he gets activation control via summoning and Bayou gremlins. And ultimately, I also disagree with the opinion that rarity was not going to be an option

First of all, it didn't have to be exactly Rare 3, but it could have been something like: you can only hire 3, but have max of 6 on the table (after summons etc.) Or they could have introduced a mechanics similar to Oxfordian mages to buy them as a batch, for example, you can hire the first 3 as a batch for 6SS but then the cost increases. Or, again, each extra pig after the second costs 1SS more: so you get 2 for 4SS, 3 for 7SS, 4 for 11SS etc.

All of the above are just some examples of how their usage could have been restricted to hiring just 2-3 of them, not by strict limitation, but simply by making it not convenient. After all, several models are sold in boxes that are larger than needed: I'm not going to complain about having to buy 3 Depleted or 3 Will o Wisp etc. when I only ever use max 2. 

I strongly disagree, instead, with the idea that 2 activations for 4SS or 3 activations for 6SS is a problem. The problem is in the higher figures. Most factions can get 2 activations for 6SS instead of 3, so the deal is getting just one more activation at most. One more. Is this really what opposing players are worried about, a Gremlin crew with one more model than theirs?

Also, as much as people try to deny it, Gremlin mechanics are designed to compensate some inherent weaknesses specific to the factions. Gremlins have reckless, have offensive power, have healing, and have numbers. You just can't hate them for being so, it's the way the faction works. If other factions don't get access to 3 activations for 6SS, one could say that Gremlins don't have access to many models with Armor +2 or +3, Neverborn don't have access to good healing, and so on. Factions are different, and work differently. So, prevent lists with 4-6 Stuffed? Sure. Prevent lists with and remove what little advantage 2/3 Stuffed could have provided? Not so sure.

Sorry for the rambling, I don't generally like to complain, I just find this change is not the best for the game as a whole (and I'm not the only one).

[edopersichetti]

On a side note, I agree that all of the other changes were needed (Wind Gamin, Practiced Production etc.) - and in fact I see no one complaining about those

[trikk]

4 hours ago, edopersichetti said:

In all seriousness, I think that most of the Gremlin players would disagree with the fact that you'd still hire them - and they are the ones that know how their crews work best. For 3SS, Stuffed Piglets are now too expensive to hire as Pigapult ammo, and in every other situation a Bayou is just more flexible, and significant: Wong himself won't hire them just to blast off of them (might as well blast off of a Bayou).
So, at the cost of repeating myself, I see these becoming mostly a summon-only model.

I don't think Som'er is affected at all - he gets activation control via summoning and Bayou gremlins. And ultimately, I also disagree with the opinion that rarity was not going to be an option

First of all, it didn't have to be exactly Rare 3, but it could have been something like: you can only hire 3, but have max of 6 on the table (after summons etc.) Or they could have introduced a mechanics similar to Oxfordian mages to buy them as a batch, for example, you can hire the first 3 as a batch for 6SS but then the cost increases. Or, again, each extra pig after the second costs 1SS more: so you get 2 for 4SS, 3 for 7SS, 4 for 11SS etc.

All of the above are just some examples of how their usage could have been restricted to hiring just 2-3 of them, not by strict limitation, but simply by making it not convenient. After all, several models are sold in boxes that are larger than needed: I'm not going to complain about having to buy 3 Depleted or 3 Will o Wisp etc. when I only ever use max 2. 

I strongly disagree, instead, with the idea that 2 activations for 4SS or 3 activations for 6SS is a problem. The problem is in the higher figures. Most factions can get 2 activations for 6SS instead of 3, so the deal is getting just one more activation at most. One more. Is this really what opposing players are worried about, a Gremlin crew with one more model than theirs?

Also, as much as people try to deny it, Gremlin mechanics are designed to compensate some inherent weaknesses specific to the factions. Gremlins have reckless, have offensive power, have healing, and have numbers. You just can't hate them for being so, it's the way the faction works. If other factions don't get access to 3 activations for 6SS, one could say that Gremlins don't have access to many models with Armor +2 or +3, Neverborn don't have access to good healing, and so on. Factions are different, and work differently. So, prevent lists with 4-6 Stuffed? Sure. Prevent lists with and remove what little advantage 2/3 Stuffed could have provided? Not so sure.

Sorry for the rambling, I don't generally like to complain, I just find this change is not the best for the game as a whole (and I'm not the only one).

And I don't agree that the issue started at 4+. 

Wong, Ooh Glowy, Do Over

Swinecursed x2

Burt with Cheater,

Tavish

Old Cranky

Merris 

3x Stuffed Piglets.

4 min 3 damage models, 10 activations total.

 

Thats a sample list with mostly no reckless drawbacks, quite sturdy models and 10 activations.

 

[edopersichetti]

36 minutes ago, trikk said:

And I don't agree that the issue started at 4+. 

Wong, Ooh Glowy, Do Over

Swinecursed x2

Burt with Cheater,

Tavish

Old Cranky

Merris 

3x Stuffed Piglets.

4 min 3 damage models, 10 activations total.

 

Thats a sample list with mostly no reckless drawbacks, quite sturdy models and 10 activations.

 

Sure, this looks like a good list - in certain scheme pools (I don't see any scheme runners, for instance, apart from Merris). But what is the problem with this list? Is it unbeatable, broken, or overpowered? I don't think so. Many of my lists have 9 activations anyway, and without fielding Stuffed Piglets. In the list you mention, there are no reckless weaknesses since there's only Burt and Merris with reckless! Plus Merris, Cranky and the Piglets are all pretty easy to kill. 

Personally, as a Gremlin player, I think the real problem is when you see lists like this:

Zipp. Earl. Skeeter, Burt, Frank, 2xRooster, 5x Stuffed + upgrades.

That's 12 activations, lots of movement and the usual 2 big beaters, plus crazy roosters and Zipp messing around. Now, this, I agree, is a little bit hard to counter. But I never played a list like this anyway, since it's just not fun. Being competitive is one thing, but stretching lists to this point is not to my taste.

So yeah, I think the list you mentioned above would be competitive even if you replaced the 3 Stuffed with 2 Bayous, all you lose is one activation (but you also gain 2 scheme runners). We might have to agree to disagree, but I don't see any problems with 3 Stuffed.

[Hot4Perdita]

I just got in from a game I played this evening where I found out about this new errata. What a bunch of crap! I just spent over $150 last week to assemble a new Arcanist crew. Just got them painted, put them on the table tonight, then my Mechnical Rider can't summon on a 6 because I'm informed of this stupid errata! I flipped a 6, which should have worked, but because of the errata I had to burn a high card from my hand, which totally screwed up one of my later activations.  Then, to make it worse, I couldn't  drop the scheme marker where I wanted cause of the errata. 

 

I contacted Wyrd last week about my disdain for errata they put out, and my suggestion on how they could fix things they need to fix without changing the models stats (I.e. Making an upgrade for a model to counter such effect). Their response was basically to say sorry, tough, and make no acknowledgment of my suggestion. I guess their answer it to errata some more stuff this week. 

 

Some of you may have read my previous posts on this issue of errata. This is not the first time I have ponied up cash for models that they come along and screw up after the fact. I think I am done spending money on this game. Every time I do, they change what I buy, and my money is wasted. I spent two weeks of reading, researching, and $150 spent to acquire this crew, and the most expensive ($ wise) model of the bunch gets errata for the worse and ruins the whole strategy I had for using it. 

Most of the time, this errata makes no sense. You change my austringer where I can't spend (1) AP to focus to get an 18" range for (1) AP of a measly 1/3/4 attack, yet a Rotten Belle can Lure twice with a Ca 7 with an 18" range with no TN or Focus requirement? See, makes no sense. I'm not saying the Belles should be errata-ed, but just an example to show how these errata do not make sense nor fit the purported purpose Wyrd claims.

Wyrd, please take note of this disservice to your customers. You are going to lose customers due to the way you do this errata, and I am seriously thinking of being one of them. I can't spend money on something that could potentially not work as advertised. I now have over $100 worth of models you have nurfed in the last year. I will go play other games that don't change things in a blink of an eye when someone happens to play good with it. God forbid anyone figure out a good strategy and try to win a game with it. My advice is to make an upgrade for models to counter said strong effect, or wait and compile data and change it when you release a new edition. Or, just maybe, do the model's stat right the first time?

 

One last note: Why does the forum change the word "nurf" (with an "e" instead of "u") to the word "cuddle" when you post on the forum?

[santaclaws01]

13 minutes ago, Hot4Perdita said:

I just got in from a game I played this evening where I found out about this new errata. What a bunch of crap! I just spent over $150 last week to assemble a new Arcanist crew. Just got them painted, put them on the table tonight, then my Mechnical Rider can't summon on a 6 because I'm informed of this stupid errata! Then, to make it worse, I can't drop the scheme marker where I wanted cause of the errata. 

 

I contacted Wyrd last week about my disdain for errata they put out, and my suggestion on how they could fix things they need to fix without changing the models stats (I.e. Making an upgrade for a model to counter such effect). Their response was basically to say sorry, tough, and make no acknowledgment of my suggestion. I guess their answer it to errata some more stuff this week. 

How exactly are they supposed to Cuddle models with an upgrade? Either it's optional and will never be taken, or it's mandatory and at that point is the exact same as changing the base card with other interactions to consider(like Hans shooting it off or Jack Daw dealing extra damage because of it). Not to mention they did fix upgrades for other models before and for the most part have not been well received at all, so your suggestion isn't exactly a new or original idea.

Some of you may have read my previous posts on this issue of errata. This is not the first time I have ponied up cash for models that they come along and screw up after the fact. I think I am done spending money on this game. Every time I do, they change what I buy, and my money is wasted. I spent two weeks of reading, researching, and $150 spent to acquire this crew, and the most expensive ($ wise) model of the bunch gets errata for the worse and ruins the whole strategy I had for using it. 

It's still a good model. If your strategy is completely voided by not being able to top deck a summon over half the time, or not having multiple scheme markers in the same place, the problem isn't the model.

Most of the time, this errata makes no sense. You change my austringer where I can't spend (1) AP to focus to get an 18" range for (1) AP of a measly 1/3/4 attack, yet a Rotten Belle can Lure twice with a Ca 7 with an 18" range with no TN or Focus requirement? See, makes no sense. I'm not saying the Belles should be errata-ed, but just an example to show how these errata do not make sense nor fit the purported purpose Wyrd claims.

Austringer was Cuddled to buff Lucius and so they would be less of an NPE. Belles were erratad, and their lure being Ca 7, which is quite literally all they will be doing most games, isn't a problem. It's still counterable and still beatable.

Wyrd, please take note of this disservice to your customers. You are going to lose customers due to the way you do this errata, and I am seriously thinking of being one of them. I can't spend money on something that could potentially not work as advertised. I now have over $100 worth of models you have nurfed in the last year. I will go play other games that don't change things in a blink of an eye when someone happens to play good with it. God forbid anyone figure out a good strategy and try to win a game with it. My advice is to make an upgrade for models to counter said strong effect, or wait and compile data and change it when you release a new edition. 

You know what also drives away customers? Having to play against things that aren't fun. A model that can force discards from half the board away without LoS isn't fun. A master getting   that can already attack without LoS and a high value and damage with no reliable way to counter it isn't fun. Your opponent being able to spend around 20% of their stones to have around half of your activations is not fun. A model being able to be anywhere on the board and get free VP unless you devote significantly more stones than they spent into it is not fun. Changes are made for the health of the game. Everything that has been errata'd needed it for one reason or another.

 

One last note: Why does the forum change the word "nurf" (with an "e" instead of "u") to the word "cuddle" when you post on the forum?

 

[Hot4Perdita]

54 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's still a good model. If your strategy is completely voided by not being able to top deck a summon over half the time, or not having multiple scheme markers in the same place, the problem isn't the model.

Not true. With the crew I was running, and the situation I was in,  I needed every card in my hand. Without going into detail on the game I played, which will take too long, going from needing a 6 to an 8 pretty much guarantees you having to cheat a card, which is a huge. Hell, they could have at least lowered the cost to hire from 12 to 10 to make up for what they took away from it. 

54 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Austringer was Cuddled to buff Lucius and so they would be less of an NPE. Belles were erratad, and their lure being Ca 7, which is quite literally all they will be doing most games, isn't a problem. It's still counterable and still beatable.

NPE? Not familiar with that term. And the belles will lure you almost every time. How many Wp 7 models do you know of? Off the top of my head without looking, I can think of one that I own, and she's a master. A belle will beat you 8 out of 10 times on lure, which will pull you off strategies, pull you out of range of your buffs, and totally ruin your game. If anything needed an errata, it would be them. But I still don't believe they should errata them. Instead, I will find ways to keep them from luring in the first place, as hard as it is. Why should the people that invested time and money in their belle models be punished? I can think of many more things in the game that is way more powerful than needing a 6 to summon or focusing to get 18" on a measly 1/3/4 attack. (Think Seamus' hat trick to deny damage, even on a red joker, the Two Victoria's buffs and killing spree, etc.). 

 

54 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

You know what also drives away customers? Having to play against things that aren't fun. A model that can force discards from half the board away without LoS isn't fun. A master getting   that can already attack without LoS and a high value and damage with no reliable way to counter it isn't fun. Your opponent being able to spend around 20% of their stones to have around half of your activations is not fun. A model being able to be anywhere on the board and get free VP unless you devote significantly more stones than they spent into it is not fun. Changes are made for the health of the game. Everything that has been errata'd needed it for one reason or another

Again, they should compile all this and wait till a new edition. I think they tick off more people than you think. Part of the strategy of this game is trying to find things that work well or defend against the things you mentioned above. Also, the fun part is finding and building a crew you like to play and that works well. I play other games that I worked hard to get a good list for that I could win games with. It took time and money, but I was rewarded when I found out a good one that worked. And I don't have to worry about those companies coming along and changing it! It seems to me that when a good crew or combo is discovered in this game, they come along and destroy it. My guess is because they don't want a "good" crew that works, because then people will quit buying models after they have said crew. I don't think it has anything to do with "health of the game". I think when a crew gets too popular, it is a detriment to the sales of their other models, so they change it to cause people to go buy other stuff.

[Hot4Perdita]

Or here's another idea. If Wyrd insists on "nurfing" models, then they should offer a refund to those customers that have bought those models they decided to "nurf". That would be a good gesture to their customers.

[necroon]

Quote

Not true. With the crew I was running, and the situation I was in,  I needed every card in my hand. Without going into detail on the game I played, which will take too long, going from needing a 6 to an 8 pretty much guarantees you having to cheat a card, which is a huge. Hell, they could have at least lowered the cost to hire to 10 from 12 to make up for what they took away from it.

 The Mechanical rider is a good model for it's cost. It is not a 10 stone model by any means. I do not believe you have a fair or clear understanding of what a good balance mark is for a model's cost and if you think it's useless now, or unusable, or warranting a refund, you lack a grasp on general gameplay and what makes a model good.  

 

6 minutes ago, Hot4Perdita said:

Also, the fun part is finding and building a crew you like to play and that works well. I play other games that I worked hard to get a good list for that I could win games with. It took time and money, but I was rewarded when I found out a good one that worked. And I don't have to worry about those companies coming along and changing it! It seems to me that when a good crew or combo is discovered in this game, they come along and destroy it. My guess is because they don't want a "good" crew that works, because then people will quit buying models after they have said crew. I don't think it has anything to do with "health of the game". I think when a crew gets too popular, it is a detriment to the sales of their other models, so they change it to cause people to go buy other stuff.

Malifaux is a game primarily about building your crew to the scheme pool - not building a list to take to all different scheme pools. If your approaching the game from a perspective of building a specific list then you will consistently have a problem as you seem to be scoping out the problematic models - and seeing as you've had this problem twice now dare I say you are doing a good job at it, too!

I will gladly take Wyrd's approach to fixing a small handful of problematic models on a 6 month errata basis over other companies' regular edition and faction cycle any day of the week. Wyrd addresses things that make playing this game un-fun. Not the next game, not the next edition, this one. That's why I'm here - that's why a number of us are here and that is why we play this game over other games.
 

Quote

 

 I don't think it has anything to do with "health of the game". I think when a crew gets too popular, it is a detriment to the sales of their other models, so they change it to cause people to go buy other stuff.

 

No: You think it doesn't have to do with the health of your Malifaux - what you want the game to be. All models touched by this errata were done with good reason - the fact that you believe one of them was usable in a seemingly static list attests to that.

[Hot4Perdita]

9 minutes ago, necroon said:

Malifaux is a game primarily about building your crew to the scheme pool - not building a list to take to all different scheme pools. If your approaching the game from a perspective of building a specific list then you will consistently have a problem as you seem to be scoping out the problematic models - and seeing as you've had this problem twice now dare I say you are doing a good job at it, too!

If these models are so problematic, then they shouldn't have released them that way in the first place. 

12 minutes ago, necroon said:

I will gladly take Wyrd's approach to fixing a small handful of problematic models on a 6 month errata basis over other companies' regular edition and faction cycle any day of the week. Wyrd addresses things that make playing this game un-fun. Not the next game, not the next edition, this one. That's why I'm here - that's why a number of us are here and that is why we play this game over other games.

Un-fun? For the opponent of said model I guess, not the owner of the model. So you errata it and then it becomes "un-fun" for the owner of the model. 

 

Look, I think everyone is missing the point. The point is, when you purchase an item as a consumer, you expect it to work as advertised. When you spend your hard earned cash to buy something, and then a week later it does not work as advertised, you're going to be pretty ticked off.