Third Edition is Coming!!

[daniello_s]

6 minutes ago, Adran said:

My normal opponent wins initiative something like 80% of the time, so I learnt to play and not care about the flip. If my opponent wants to spend their good cards to go first, I'm fairly happy with that.  I just set up the turn so that there are two different good first activation's for me, I expect the oppoennt to stop one if they win initiative, but I still get the other. 

Seeing the popularity of the models and upgrades that affect the initiative flip in M2E, I'm not surprised they have done something like this to make the ability available to all players not just those with doppleganger and Trixie. 

Maybe it is better to drop these kind ability/upgrades at all rather than giving it to everybody?

[Da Git]

7 minutes ago, Adran said:

Seeing the popularity of the models and upgrades that affect the initiative flip in M2E, I'm not surprised they have done something like this to make the ability available to all players not just those with doppleganger and Trixie. 

I think it's great for this too, I just would have gone the other way & said no one gets nothin'! (excuse the double negative).  Honestly though, I never saw the appeal of the Doppelganger and never played her (might also be because I can never flip TNs, so needing a mass 7s for her, Graves and others didn't help!).  Ill Omens was also super powerful in that if your opponent flipped a 2 to your 1, you didn't have to cheat very high whereas now they can over cheat you.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Not seeing how being able to cheat the initiative flip is bad because it changes the random luck of flipping one card, to the random luck of what’s in your hand. It’s all random. However when both players can cheat the flip it gives them both more agency, but it’s still mostly random ultimately.

 

[lusciousmccabe]

It's a bit less random than stoning for initiative though since you know what you're going to get when you cheat. Personally think it's a good move if only for streamlining since bayou two card is about the only other time you did a reflip, and even that counted as cheating rather than being it's own stub of a thing. 

[DeleteAccount]

I can live with cheating initiative, buy I'd rather just have an alternating initiative system.

[WWHSD]

3 hours ago, Da Git said:

What makes people think they haven't just rolled Peon & Insignificant together? To me, having separate rules for Peon & Insignificant was kind of superfluous and confusing, so that's what I'm hoping... I'd highly doubt they'd make Rats & Raptors count for strats & schemes and the like.

It does appear that Peon and Insignificant are being combined into Insignifcant. Based on the spoiled M3E cards, The Jackalope is an Enforcer and Insignificant.

“Insignificant: This model is ignored for the purposes of Strategies and Schemes, and it may not take the Interact action.”

[WWHSD]

1 hour ago, Razhem said:

I can live with cheating initiative, buy I'd rather just have an alternating initiative system.

I don’t like the idea of alternating initiative in Malifaux. Knowing that you are going first in the next turn reduces the risk of overcommiting a model late in the turn. I’m also not all that keen on games that are won by having initiative in the final turn being decided by a flip that took place at the start of the game.

[DeleteAccount]

1 hour ago, WWHSD said:

I don’t like the idea of alternating initiative in Malifaux. Knowing that you are going first in the next turn reduces the risk of overcommiting a model late in the turn. I’m also not all that keen on games that are won by having initiative in the final turn being decided by a flip that took place at the start of the game.

True but it also means you can plan knowing you won't get initiative and at least from my experience, turn 2 and 3 initiative is the most important one.

I've also gotten a good chunk of wins and losses pretty much on the initiative flip going or not my way, I'd rather make it something more plannable for, but I'm certainly ok with being able to cheat. Definitely consider it an improvemente compared to stoning for it.

[Thrawnic]

I like the idea of balancing multiple masters against activation control. Sure, you could bring Reva, Molly, and Kirai, in the same list, but you will be bringing precious little else and your opponent will get the chance to throw all their ire at one master a turn and bring them down. Not to mention the huge disadvantage you would be putting yourself at in terms of scheme running potential. Plus they will all be drawing on the same pool of soulstones and will thus be much more limited than bringing a one master list built to support them and able to use their soulstone reserve without other friendly masters draining you.

[Fetid Strumpet]

That’s not exactly true. If some rumors are true you’d get all their totems for free as well, and I wouldn’t count on all the totems all being insignificant and keeping their current mechanics.

[Adran]

5 hours ago, daniello_s said:

Maybe it is better to drop these kind ability/upgrades at all rather than giving it to everybody?

Certainly an option.

I can imagine more players play in a way they want some ability to affect it than people who don't care, but at least this allows all players equal chance to affect it. Not sure I see much of a down side to this way, but if you can find one, I guess that's why we do beta testing. 

[LunarSol]

Glad to see the pass tokens added.  I've always felt activation control is the great flaw of alternating activation systems and ultimately just comes across as gamey and exploitive rather than creating the sense of dynamic interlocking play the turn structure tries to create over IGYG.  I've seen far too many games, including Malifaux turn into first turns of silly balking contests of red rover.  The first turn is easily Malifaux's worst and there are several things here that look like they're seeking to address it.  There will always be value in cheap models.  M2E's mantra was always that "good Masters don't walk" and that sentiment definitely applies to scheme markers as well.

Not too worried about the changes to Peon's and the like.  Enforcer mostly just let you add upgrades in M2E and we've definitely seen a lot of testing on the front of "Enforcer Minions" in things like the Thralls and other 9 SS minions.  Seems likely that Enforcer will just be reserved for name characters that can't use Soul Stones and overall I'm good with that.  Peon on Insignificant were definitely a problem in need of consolidation.  No real loss there.

Additional masters is a gamble, but they just need to be priced accordingly.  I do think its problematic to price them though, as if you don't give them universally the same cost, you can always take the better value for free.  Also, in terms of being your only master, its kind of hard to call things equal options and price them differently.  Totems shouldn't be a problem.  A good number of masters are designed with their totem being integral to their gameplay.  Generally these masters feel better designed than the ones who have tagalong totems (looking at you Guild).  The more a totem is just part of a masters kit, the more it makes sense to roll it in to their cost like we've seen with Levi and Huggy and the like.

 

 

[SunTsu]

7 hours ago, Fetid Strumpet said:

Not seeing how being able to cheat the initiative flip is bad because it changes the random luck of flipping one card, to the random luck of what’s in your hand. It’s all random. However when both players can cheat the flip it gives them both more agency, but it’s still mostly random ultimately.

I agree with you and others that said cheat initiative is good.

I have to underline that moving from the pure luck of a single flip (that you can reflip spending one stone, but however remain in pure luck category), it's very different that going to the "luck" of your hand. Sure, the cards arriving in your hand at the start of the turn are essentially random. But the focus is moving from simple randomness to resource economy: have I cheat an high card to get initiative, or it's better to use it later? Overmore, knowing I can cheat initiative, I can get an high card in myhand from the previous turn in order to take initiative for myself on the following turn. That's not random at all, but it's resources menagment.

Finally, it's worth to underline that in m2e only few crews (gremlins and neverborn in particular) could cheat initative, and models providing this ability are largely overused. Giving everyone the chance to cheat nitiative by default is a good move for me, that subtract something random from the game, giving an additional layer about how to use your resources. Tha't always good for a game like Malifaux.

I always thought that uncheatable initiative sounded a bit strange in Malifaux...

 

[edopersichetti]

20 hours ago, -Loki- said:

If you look at Cojos card from Gencon, he has an ability called Frenzied Charge, which lets him ignore the once per activation limit of Charge. 

The Ice Golem has Flurry, which was one per activation. After taking a melee action you can discard a card to take it again.

If these are examples of what’s happening to (2) actions, it’s more about increasing player choice during a given activation rather than spending time to set it up, and increasing AP efficiency. You get the same result - you can charge and then spend your second AP attacking again, or hit a model 3 times using Flurry.

But now if your second attack from Flurry or first attack from Charge kills the enemy, you have a choice of what to do next rather than having wasted AP.

Yeah I noticed the change to Flurry, I quite like it. So yeah, (2) actions are not being "translated" into actions that cost two actions (!) but rather, as options. I think this is good, but different. So I have to forget about the double healing....😆
By the way, did the Ice Golem lose his 3rd AP?

20 hours ago, Lalochezia said:

I think M3E looks like a far superior experience to M2E, and exactly what the game needs.

 

That's a bit simplistic LOL. Superior: I don't know how you can say that, unless you've been Alpha testing...it looks simpler, for sure, and I agree with you it is what the game needs - because what the game needs now is to grow, to attract new players, to become popular so it can contend with the "big games" out there. And for this, the game needs to be simplified a bit, inevitably (hopefully without getting to the "pew pew" of Space Marines). But superior I don't know - right now I can't think of anything superior to M2E
But yeah very "compact" answer

@Zebo thanks for your answer! I agree about the initiative. I'm really on the edge about pass tokens, but I guess we'll have to see how much they get used, if they burn quickly etc. Similarly not convinced about free totems. I'm ok with very few generic, versatile models. You still have plenty of options for a crew without needing many versatile models. I guess the idea is to have max 1-2 non-thematic, non-versatile models per crew. Say for instance an average 8-model crew: master, 5 thematic, 1 versatile and 2 non-keyword/non-versatile. That way, you just have to pay +2SS. So if you really need one or two models for a task that can't be accomplished by a keyword guy, you pay a little extra.

[edopersichetti]

19 hours ago, Parker Barrows said:

1. I like this. I have had many, many games come down to who gets initiative on a certain turn. I'd rather have some control. I may still have lower card than my opponent, so luck is still a factor. It just won't be the only one which is good when it can be so important.

2. I'm cautiously optimistic. Honestly, it makes me feel like I'm more likely to want my models to actually do something rather than just wasting a turn since I'm not really gaining an advantage for it.

3. Seems alright as long the themes come out right.

4. I'm fine with this. Models sticking around longer like a good thing.

5. Well, since shooting is taking some hits (+2 DF to cover for example), it seems like this will help keep it balanced. Really, it seems like models will be surviving much more this Edition.

6. I like this. It always sucked to throw away an AP just because you needed to kill that one almost dead enemy. This gives a lot more options.

7. Free totems are nice. It makes them feel much more part of the Master which I whole-heartedly support. I (almost) always play my Master's Totem no matter how terrible it is. Though I agree with others, I want any other Masters taken by the Crew to have to pay for their Totem (no extra cost though). Since Totems DO have a cost, I suspect they will cost for non-Leader Masters (though not sure if there will be a tax).

8. This is good.

9. This is also good. Peons were always so few it felt weird having a special class for super weak models. Just have them become minions.

ME3 will fix that. ;^)

1. Meh. So now the contest becomes on who has the better hand...also models like Doppelganger and Trixiebelle lose a lot of usefulness? 
2. Will have to see what Pass Tokens are used for, but just outright canceling the advantage of out-activation seems a bit hard. 
3. Agree. Actually really like this.
4. 50/50 here. Models sticking around is kinda nice, but on the other hand, some models becoming near-unkillable will be annoying. I always liked that in Malifaux, pretty much anyone could be killed if enough effort was put - and this was also because damage sometimes was pretty high. Also sometimes crazy random stuff happening with jokers, flipping three severe cards on a double negative damage flip (it happened!!) etc. 
5. A negative modifier was a 90% fail without focus, and the model in cover usually didn't even have to spend a card to make it so. This made the odd "hail mary" shot pretty useless (unless, again, one was willing to spend 2AP for 1shot). A +2df on the other hand can be very easily circumvented: in fact, sometimes the shooter is already at an advantage (say Sh6 vs Df 5 or Df 4) and so it looks like your cover will do absolutely nothing against the shot. I'm curious to playtest this, but I think the +2 Df means models in cover will be hit pretty much all the time, and the only difference the cover will make is that the attacking model may have to use a card.
So yeah I think shooty crews if anything are getting a boost...also with the reduction of engagement ranges!
6. Agree.
7. Not sure.
8. Agree.
9. I actually liked Peons - the idea of having super weak models that usually couldn't even interact but somehow still contribute to the crew's victory...

It looks like overall there's a shift towards removing randomness from the game (see the change to initiative, the less damage, the nerf to Red Joker etc.) which kinda goes against the idea of streamlining that is supposed to be the main goal...on top of losing the original Malifaux "Bad Things Happen" flavor. Mmm

[LunarSol]

One thing I like about cheating initiative is that it bakes in a penalty to going first in a round.  If you assume that whoever went first likely cheated a card to do so, in a way you can say going first reduces your default hand size.  That's not a terrible thing to add to the game.  Even if you go first by beating your opponent's cheat, the player who wins initiative still chucked a higher value card for the privilege. 

[Fetid Strumpet]

 

36 minutes ago, edopersichetti said:

That's a bit simplistic LOL. Superior: I don't know how you can say that, unless you've been Alpha testing...it looks simpler, for sure, and I agree with you it is what the game needs - because what the game needs now is to grow, to attract new players, to become popular so it can contend with the "big games" out there. And for this, the game needs to be simplified a bit, inevitably (hopefully without getting to the "pew pew" of Space Marines). But superior I don't know - right now I can't think of anything superior to M2E
But yeah very "compact" answer.

Ummm, just in case you were unaware, the person your response quoted is the former lead developer of Malifaux, and the individual who was vastly responsible for the redesign into M2E. So while you might not have to agree with him, he likely does have better insight into this whole process, from a design perspective

[WWHSD]

25 minutes ago, edopersichetti said:

5. A negative modifier was a 90% fail without focus, and the model in cover usually didn't even have to spend a card to make it so. This made the odd "hail mary" shot pretty useless (unless, again, one was willing to spend 2AP for 1shot). A +2df on the other hand can be very easily circumvented: in fact, sometimes the shooter is already at an advantage (say Sh6 vs Df 5 or Df 4) and so it looks like your cover will do absolutely nothing against the shot. I'm curious to playtest this, but I think the +2 Df means models in cover will be hit pretty much all the time, and the only difference the cover will make is that the attacking model may have to use a card.
 

We don't know how Cover and Concealment will work together. If a model that would have had Hard Cover in M2E benefits from both of them they get quite a bit harder to hit and damage. 

I like the idea of +2Df and ato the damage flip from cover. It makes models harder, but not impossible, to hit and makes it more likely they they'll just take minimum damage. Low Df models in cover were essentially guaranteed to be hit by a model with an attack stat of 6 that spent a focus. Cover makes it more likely that the defender wins the duel. Models with Df 6 get really hard to shoot with cover.

[Clement]

38 minutes ago, edopersichetti said:

1. Meh. So now the contest becomes on who has the better hand...also models like Doppelganger and Trixiebelle lose a lot of usefulness? 
 

Remember, right now we're looking at a very incomplete view of the new edition.  We have no idea how useful, or not, they will be.   We can be certain they will change, much like everything we've seen so far has changed, even if only a little.  Maybe they'll get some whole new thing, maybe they'll get to cheat face down.  Anything is possible except we can be certain it won't stay the same.

[-Loki-]

Even taking the Doppleganger or Trixiebelle I rarely cheated Fate even if I was losing the initiative. I took them for other reasons.

[SunTsu]

On 8/6/2018 at 7:56 PM, Adran said:

There are 12 points cost in the game and over 500 profiles I think someone counted, so it ought to be possible to have 40 or so models with equal cost. 

Sure there will be some that are wrong even after the testing and models will need errata. The aim of play test is to reduce the number of these. 

I think 2 masters have had cache cut and possibly1 raised over the last 5 years, so that's not enough for me to say it's not possible. 

I'm not sure I understood exactly what you meant...

My thought was that the cost of a master is finally a tool that can be used as a levarage to help in balancing models both at the beginning of a game design, that later when you will discover some unbalance or you will add some new things that will need to rebalance the game.

So, deciding that all the master costs the same will results in dropping a tool that can be useful soon or later, or you will create an unbalance  in the game: because, when a player discover that a master perform significantly better than another  for the same cost, that player will always tend to choose him as free buy, and when the devs have to deal with the problem they will get a tool less to work with...

Instead, if the system force you to pay for each model based on its real value, including the first master, then there will be a simple tool to help in balance things.

[SunTsu]

On 8/6/2018 at 1:03 PM, Tors said:

Cache was never a very good working balancing element and even in recent errata the change of cache only mattered because it was a  50% swing.

Yes, it was 50%. Do you think it's few?

On 8/6/2018 at 1:03 PM, Tors said:

And after all there will be a beta. Point adjustments are one of the main things one could do there.  

Sure. But if rules will say you get first master+totem for free, the points adjustment how much can help?

On 8/6/2018 at 1:03 PM, Tors said:

1ss per model is always 2% of my whole List. Merc Tax didn't discriminated either and nobody reasoned that it's more effective to hire expensive  mercs over cheap ones. Either you need the abilities of a model or you don't. 

Factions matter. The penality is for non Theme infaction models. Multiple cost for different models is just needlessly complicated and against the intend to smooth things out

I never saw a player reason like you said. No one says "ok, that's just a 2% of my list". Basically, a player count what he heve to pay for what, and choose the most effective selection. Let's consider that the points of the models are effectively balanced. Let's say you have to buy 12ss in value of models, and you have two options: or 3x4ss models, or a single 12ss model. using a flat +1ss you would pay 15ss in the first case, only 13 in the second. Is it fair??? I don't think so.

Let's move on including masters in our reasoning. I guess that, if you hire a second master, you have to aythe flat +1ss tax. This, on a model that should cost around 14ss, it's really a little fee...

Instead, if you would pay a different fee according to the model you want to hire, the things would be much more in line for all the models (cheap or expensive), including masters that should get the highest fee to prevent a kind of Masterfaux, if you understand what I mean... 😃

 

[Zebo]

2 hours ago, edopersichetti said:

@Zebo  You still have plenty of options for a crew without needing many versatile models. I guess the idea is to have max 1-2 non-thematic, non-versatile models per crew. Say for instance an average 8-model crew: master, 5 thematic, 1 versatile and 2 non-keyword/non-versatile. That way, you just have to pay +2SS. So if you really need one or two models for a task that can't be accomplished by a keyword guy, you pay a little extra.

You may be right, but I'm understanding that each faction could have 3-4 versatile models, and this could lend to many clone lists. 

For example in Outcast I would like both Hodgepodge, 3-4 actual mercs (Bishop/Taelor/Sue/The Midnight Stalker/Hans/Johan/Big Jake), Killjoy and maybe Convict Gunslingers/Prospectors/Desperate Mercs to be versatile, a list of maybe 8+- profiles that can be added to any Outcast crew without penalty. 

I mean, a good group of profiles to go out of theme without entering in other's crews stuff. 

[Brandu]

9 hours ago, WWHSD said:

It does appear that Peon and Insignificant are being combined into Insignifcant. Based on the spoiled M3E cards, The Jackalope is an Enforcer and Insignificant.

“Insignificant: This model is ignored for the purposes of Strategies and Schemes, and it may not take the Interact action.”

Hmmm.... This also means that if there is any Upgrade cards that are "enforcer" only, it can now be used by the Jackalope. 

[wafew]

5 hours ago, LunarSol said:

 you can always take the better value for free.  ( In relations to hiring multiple masters )

Do note, that only the master you get for free, gets to hire the keywords without penalty.

If you wanted to play a game freikorps themed, and you wanted Leveticus, and if we pretend that Leveticus is 16ss, and von schill is 14ss, you would still want to get von schill for free, otherwise you'd have to pay all the freikorps tax.