Is there a general survivability difference?

[Ludvig]

Read this in a happy tone please. I am not being negative, just posing a question.  

It seems to me that these days no model is safe. It doesn't matter how many layers of protection you tac onto it, anything goes down pretty fast. There might be a couple of buffs in TT that are hard to circumvend but native model abilities seem mostly to be countered.

It's the same with mobility, Viks bouncing around Blood used to be a pretty big deal and now Nico, the poster child for a slow backline summoner can threaten the enemy deployment zone turn onr.

Back when people were still playing book schemes Bodyguard was usually easy (if you knew you would reach turn five). Stuff like riders could pretty much guarantee those scheme vp or at least require a heavy ap investment. If bodyguard came back in the current state of the game I'm not sure anyone would take it. 

 

Not sure if I just have a bad memory or if this is a thing. What's your experience?

[Tors]

Every week there pops up a new problematic combo/list/general idea here. Especially since the first balancing Errata. I almost wish wyrd wouldn't have opened this can of worms. If people played half as much as they complain maybe someone would notice the game doesn't have half as much problems as this forum wants you to belief. 

[Adran]

No model was ever safe from me (or with me) so its not a new problem. I think one of the things that has come up is the player skill and awareness has improved as a whole, and schemes like Protect territory used to be viewed as easy points, but that's because no-one seemed to put any effort into denying it, where as I'm not so sure that would be the case now. (I know I used to be quite confused by the "must take" schemes there used to be as I was generally good at denying the points to those when other people seemed to not try). 

Its possibly more noticeable now because there is a wider selection of beaters out there, meaning there are more ways to circumvent your protections than before,  but you still have to puck the right one to kill the model. Also things like Thallarian quellers, Terracotta Warriors and 1000 faces have all made it easier to react to your opponents list after you get to see it, and its much easier to react offensively than to react defensively with the upgrades we have out there. 

[Ludvig]

@Adran You may be right, perhaps it's just local player skill that has risen.

 

1 hour ago, Tors said:

Every week there pops up a new problematic combo/list/general idea here. Especially since the first balancing Errata. I almost wish wyrd wouldn't have opened this can of worms. If people played half as much as they complain maybe someone would notice the game doesn't have half as much problems as this forum wants you to belief. 

Wasn't sure if you took this as a complaint thread so I changed my title to use a more neutral word. I'm not complaining but trying to see what others think. Since there seems to be some confusion I just want to state that I am very positive towards this game and like playing it but also like talking about it so I make threads to create discussions. I'm positive   So far it also seems like I am just imagining things.

As far as errata goes I think the change that Viks and Levi couldn't take the rat engine pretty much makes up for any amount of whine threads. Back when that started becoming the only two lists you saw in a tournament I was close to quitting the game so I would not roll back the errata. Every single miniature game has balance issues because it is inherently hard to control every aspect of play, the good ones listen to their community and the bad ones don't touch those balance issues for years.

From what I remember the unbeatable list threads were around long before they started doing errata. Given Adran's reply here my memory might not be the best though. A lot of first post users have on the forum is coming online and asking for advice against something that seems unbeatable to them. This has been true since m1e where certain masters were just complete hard counters to others. Those posters often have despair and negativity after being beaten by the same thing several times but the overarching feel of the community is helpful and trying to help them figure out sollutions which is productive.

The fact that there are a couple of threads discussing errata as a possibility for underplayed or percieved overpowered models isn't non-constructive to me, discussing how to keep the maximum number of models relevant feels constructive. If there were like 10 errata discussions to every tactical discussions it would kill the mood but Gremlins and Arcanists have one and two threads respectively out of the 25 or so posts on their first pages while guild doesn't seem to have a single current discussion dedicated to errata. Certain rule threads have an air of negativity but that might be because those rules are a bit cumbersome and unintuitive. I'm not really getting where your feeling of these forums being mostly negative and complaint-riddled is coming from. What type of content would you like to see more of to feel that there is some positivity?

Sorry if this became a long response, I just percieve these forums as a mostly positive place.

[Tors]

Malifaux to complex, Thoughts and prayers for 3th Edition, Alpha Strikes to powerful... thats only in this area ad Hoc. Add a few hundred posts discussing nerfs to half the masters in game and the weekly change from Gremlins OP to Gremlins unplayable broken.

I won't discuss this issue at long because this will become a quote war with textwalls like your one above and i am a non-native so that typing  is terrible time consuming for me and it wont bring any usefull Solution either.

People like to complain, especially on the Internet (and this skews even further as happy and content playerd don't have much reasons to voice their opinion, they usually just play the game) and it will be always easier to justify the own shortcomings with system immanent imbalances.

[Gnomezilla]

This articulates the reasons behind ‘omg too much min3 these days’ a lot better, so I’m grateful. (Much as ‘there’s a skill disparity between alpha offense and alpha defense, and it’s an NPE for both parties when the alpha attacker doesn’t understand alpha defense but his opponent does: we are playing at different levels but I cannot play at less than my best in order to defend—then I curbstomp him and don’t enjoy it either’ was much more thorough and thoughtful than ‘omg noobs with alphas got into my tournament this is unforgivable’.)

On mobility: Symbols is a three-point strategy because holding two within 10” was getting too easy with longer aura ranges. (If Guard the Stash returns, it needs at least 12” between two stashes. Possibly more.) The mobility schemes had tougher and intriguing requirements in early iterations of GG18 to account for more available mobility, but none of the changes stuck after a well-reasoned argument that killing schemes were preferable to schemey always, so don’t handicap schemey schemes further. I expect that positioning schemes will be made more difficult, or scheme marker removal much more available, instead. (See also: mercenary bayou smuggler, messing with schemes and positioning.)

On tankiness: When I see an upswing in seeing Hoffman and/or Titania generally just because of their respective ability to reduce incoming damage, I’ll worry more, but for now people still calculate that almost all other aspects of the game count for more than tankiness.

Mind you, I have managed to break my regular opponent of trying for Eliminate the Leadership on Hoffman unless he has brought a black blood list to splash a lot of ping damage or Von Schill for multiple shots, but that’s one scheme out of many.

(Does anyone else find it amusing that Improved Harness Hoffman and all his armor dies near-instantly to Misery Summoning Woe-is-Me Pandora, but Woe Pandora can barely affect ‘minions are beneath my notice’ Indignation Titania as Titania deals with Pandora, but Indignation Titania cannot reduce at all and barely can avoid the damage from a nerd raging Improved Harness Hoffman? Rock-paper-scissors.)

[valhallan42nd]

Ya know, when you're not playing as often, us miss out on new alpha strike tech, like exploding fast/reckless François, and then your Yan Lo dies before he activates.

 

It's a bit much.

[4thstringer]

3 hours ago, valhallan42nd said:

Ya know, when you're not playing as often, us miss out on new alpha strike tech, like exploding fast/reckless François, and then your Yan Lo dies before he activates.

 

It's a bit much.

That's a good point.  It also isn't something you run into if your meta doesn't really like alpha strike lists.  It can make even the most pedestrian viks list feel unbeatable if you aren't on your toes.  

[4thstringer]

12 hours ago, Ludvig said:

Read this in a happy tone please. I am not being negative, just posing a question.  

It seems to me that these days no model is safe. It doesn't matter how many layers of protection you tac onto it, anything goes down pretty fast. There might be a couple of buffs in TT that are hard to circumvend but native model abilities seem mostly to be countered.

It's the same with mobility, Viks bouncing around Blood used to be a pretty big deal and now Nico, the poster child for a slow backline summoner can threaten the enemy deployment zone turn onr.

Back when people were still playing book schemes Bodyguard was usually easy (if you knew you would reach turn five). Stuff like riders could pretty much guarantee those scheme vp or at least require a heavy ap investment. If bodyguard came back in the current state of the game I'm not sure anyone would take it. 

 

Not sure if I just have a bad memory or if this is a thing. What's your experience?

I think you used to be able to look at an opposing crew and tell that bodyguard was really easy.  That's still the case, but a well made list is more likely to be able to stop most schemes given good play.

[Ludvig]

18 minutes ago, 4thstringer said:

I think you used to be able to look at an opposing crew and tell that bodyguard was really easy.  That's still the case, but a well made list is more likely to be able to stop most schemes given good play.

True, the old mech rider scores 6VP and there's almost nothing you can do about it was decidedly worse than the current gamestate. I find punish the weak super hard to not give away points on these days. I do exclusively play the two beastmasters right now so I guess I could do that cheesy raptor trick... Just not sure I have it in me.

[HadjiMurat]

I think Malifaux is devolving into more generalist masters. Maybe I am wrong but I feel in the first editions most masters was specialist, designed to solve specific strats and schemes. You needed to get more masters within your faction to cover the tasks ahead. Now, with both new masters and upgrades for old masters, I think this is changing. For me this is positive since you can use one master you really like and still got a fair chance to win, but also negative as you can loose the faction "feeling" you get when you need multiple masters in your faction to be prepared for a game. Well, thats my two cents.

 

[Ludvig]

I think the stated goal for m2e was that masters should be balanced on a master to master level so any master should have a decent shot at winning any strat against any other master. That is very hard to do without losing some individuality.

[Angelshard]

While I agree that traditional defenses such as incorporeal and armor are less effective, I disagree that survivability has gone down.

High df or wp is still effective, triggers that lets you push out of harms way works great. 

I was in a tournament last weekend where I played titania with audience and indignation against kirai. Titania pulled in 2 onryo and datsu and locked them down, they couldn't touch her from 4 turns.

Midnight stalker is a pain to get rid of and requires a major ap investment if you don't have the correct tools.

I don't think there's ever been a time when you couldn't remove any model with certainty, it's just a matter of how many ap you're willing to invest in it.

Personally my problem with defensive models is that they can often be ignored. I actually think that's become harder to do.