Jump to content
Kai

Third Edition is Coming!!

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Polar43 said:

maybe im not grasping this correctly , but besides what I am assuming are a specific number of tournaments, you can still use the removed masters any other time.

I would think casual, lgs or with friends was 90% of games played, in which case, surely those you play with are not going to care or whine about your master choice?

Im not being argumentative, Im just trying to get a feel for why people would be very upset over what I imagine is maybe 10% of their gaming time

 

being new though, I may be speaking of things I know nothing of....

That's exactly what I think.

10 hours ago, Thedeadclaw said:

Honestly if that's an amount of money you don't get upset about I think you're fundamentally in a different situation than those of us who are miffed about it :P

Refer to the comment I quoted before ;) I'm still going to play Nicodem a lot, with my friends, in regular tournaments that TOs (a.k.a. the stores) allow them (if the playerbase wants to play with that rule, we are the customers, why it shouldn't be allowed?). I play to have fun, and I really like competitive, so I don't care not being able to play in narrative tournaments which could influence the lore with specific masters. I can play them with any of my other 6 masters ^^

3 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

Paying for something to be pro-painted vs painting it yourself for dozens if not hundreds of hours makes for a somewhat different bond to the minis. Just saying.

I found painting pretty boring, don't have the skills and specially don't have the time to do it by myself. I prefer to invest my time for the hobby in playing or any other thing.

I'm a bit concern about the card size, I think that increase the size is a huge mistake, especially if you do it only for the art. I am one of those (and my group of friends the same) who likes to have all the cards on one side of the table and be able to check everything or let my opponent read them carefully. Bigger cards only bring disadvantages (more expenses in form of sleeves, new transports bags, deck boxes...) and absolutely 0 practical advantages, only a minor visual one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Snowhateswinter said:

Malifaux is my favorite game, and I was super excited when I saw m3e on the website. Then I saw that nonthematic crews will have penalties. This, in my humble opinion, will take away all of the game’s charm. I loved the ability to have so many models to choose from, but this won’t be a factor anymore. No tournament player will penalize their crew so it’ll be the same crews time and time again. On top of that some masters have very small thematic crews at the moment, which would penalize them further. I’m holding out hope that the penalty will be an OKAY model you can only take in thematic crews, or an upgrade you can only get in thematic crews, or maybe even the WM/H method of getting a few bonuses for thematic crews without removing competitiveness of nonthematic crews, but from what I’ve heard it looks like you’ll have to pay more for nonthematic models. If this is the case I’m afraid you’ve lost me and my gaming group.

It doesn't matter what the hiring rules are.  You will see the most efficient crews played over and over in competition, so the only solution to this is good game balance.  

 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fetid Strumpet said:

Your complaint about what could happen is exactly what happens now. The competitive crews are the same masters with the same small model pool over and over again with little variety. The best models with the best masters show up over and over with little variety. The fact that you “can” play a suboptimal crew doesn’t mean anyone does.

“If” they manage to actually make every master competitive, even if each master only has a small selection of competitive cookie-cutter crews, I’ll take that over what we have now. At least then there will be a different crew in events for every master played as opposed to one-ish crew for every faction played.

That of course assumes all masters are competitive, which is where I hope they focus their balance attempts on. Everyone I know who plays the game got into it because of some particular master, and I dislike it when a person selects a master they love and then gets told well you can play them for fun but they aren’t competitive so don’t play that master in events.

I realize that isn’t a universal truism but it’s my experience.

Yes that is true of big tournaments like adepticon, but in small game groups like mine we could really build any crew we wanted without fear of being underpowered. 

With the new edition it seems we will have to be underpowered to build the crew we want.

That being said wyrd hasn’t disappointed me yet so I’ll hold out hope

  • Agree 1
  • Respectfully Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to all the card size comments. Why does everything think it's just for art? We've only see the front side of cards. We all know current Malifaux cards have a lot of text on the back. I think it's hasty to assume it's "a marketing decision" or "just for the art" rather than a technical one to fit more rules on the back, and then they might as well fill the extra space this gives them on the front with eye-catching art that will attract people to the game.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Philosfr said:

Mason has mentioned that they've ensured that each keyword has enough support, meaning we'll likely see more models with keywords than they have today. Things like Lelu and Lilitu already had several because they overlapped several crews, I can easily see them expanding this to more models. So it might be premature to say some master's won't have enough models.

 

Additionally, if they expand the keyword pool big enough, then even playing "in theme" will resort to diverse crews. I understand your fear. From 1E, I have always wanted to be a Rasputina player, but I always hated playing with the very specific set of models that she wanted. I loved Lilith because I could leave all my Nephilim at home and pick a diverse list and still be competitive. I don't like the idea of "net-listing" a pre-packaged crew. But if I had 30 models to choose from for a master that were "in-theme", that probably is enough for diverse lists.

 

One of the reasons M2E has started to show some cracks is balancing huge model pools. When you have 100+ models to balance with a master, it can really make it challenging. Not to mention it can really restrict design space. "Rasputina could really use a model that does XYZ, but if we give her one, it will make Marcus WAY too powerful". So it's easy to see why they are doing that, and cleaning up the cross-faction hiring stuff by using keywords, but I do share your fears. I hope it's a wide keyword and not too narrow "you get to pick 7 of these 9 models to play with each game"

This is definitely a valid point, but even if 30 models could make a diverse crew eventually that would get a little stale. If the keywords are extremely wide like “zombie” and “nephilim” and “construct” it would be acceptable, or even if they were slightly more narrow (like maybe “follower” for Reva and “Frozen” for Rasputina) but each master had three or four that would be acceptable. As it seems I’m just worried that my favorite aspect of the game will be lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ShinChan said:

Bigger cards only bring disadvantages (more expenses in form of sleeves, new transports bags, deck boxes...) and absolutely 0 practical advantages, only a minor visual one.
 

Larger cards mean that we can use larger font sizes, which will in turn make them easier to read, especially for people with poor eyesight.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 2
  • Respectfully Disagree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Philosfr said:

As to all the card size comments. Why does everything think it's just for art? We've only see the front side of cards. We all know current Malifaux cards have a lot of text on the back. I think it's hasty to assume it's "a marketing decision" or "just for the art" rather than a technical one to fit more rules on the back, and then they might as well fill the extra space this gives them on the front with eye-catching art that will attract people to the game.

I don't think that with the emphasis on streamlinig and making the game easier to grasp comes even more rules text on the back of the cards...

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mason said:

Larger cards mean that we can use larger font sizes, which will in turn make them easier to read, especially for people with poor eyesight.

Current ones are not exactly difficult and with streamlining surely there are less rules on the cards so more space?

Larger cards create more issues on the game space (along with what sounds like alot of tokens) as well as making everyone buy some obscure card protector size, which for those of us with lots of models will cost a fortune.

Most comments I have seen for 3e have been positive but this is an issue that is coming up alot now.

@Mason Is there any chance we can get the card dimensions so we can start  shopping early instead of being a mad rush for this obscure size

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping for larger cards. I really hate the font size of the current ones since I can't read them very well after a days work. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mason said:

I actually said, "Collodi will still be playable in casual play, as well as in tournaments that allow the "Dead Man's Hand" models."

Just clarifying since you used quotation marks but then paraphrased me.  :)

Just wondering what your “clarification” is further clarifying? Does it really change the message?

Shame Wyrd representatives dont answer the actual concerns a part of their playerbase or potential playerbase is voicing and rather make statements like above.

  • Respectfully Disagree 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol_Sorrowsong said:

More keyword models means new models or old models gaining similar keywords.  I'm looking forward to more Sky Pirates! Or perhaps changing Sky Pirate to Bandit and having more crossover on that branch now that Zipp is in OC too.

YOU CAN’T TAKE THE SKY pirates FROM ME!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have any official comments about how crew boxes will be changed after m3e hits life? I'm talking about last realized boxes (especially Parker's one and Zipp's). If it's only a question of new stat cards and upgrades, than I can continue to grow my army without any doubts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Teluriel12 said:

Just wondering what your “clarification” is further clarifying? Does it really change the message?

Shame Wyrd representatives dont answer the actual concerns a part of their playerbase or potential playerbase is voicing and rather make statements like above.

I'd imagine he's being careful about not getting mis-quoted due to internet chinese whispers. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment I have refreshed my email every 5 minutes for the past 3 hours and 23 minutes waiting for word about the beta testing.

Looking on the bright side I still played 40k 7th edition and there is no way that Malifaux can be worse than that. 😂

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very excited for M3E, been playing since the beginning of this year, but I am worried. I play Neverborn and my main 2 masters and Collodi who may or may not be playable, and Lynch who is exclusively 10T. Depending on how this pans out my Neverborn models might be invalidated entirely, forcing me to switch to 10T. 

 

Mentally = Cautiously optimistic.

Financially = Not prepared for this.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having listened to the Max Value podcast I am a little concerned with a claim of their's about M3E, namely that the ranges and movement of models is potentially going to be increased. I find this concerning because this game is already outrageous with its threat ranges with many abilities capable of reaching the enemy on turn 1 in standard deployment already, if anything there should be a greater emphasis on positioning in the 3rd edition. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Snowhateswinter said:

At the moment I have refreshed my email every 5 minutes for the past 3 hours and 23 minutes waiting for word about the beta testing.

Looking on the bright side I still played 40k 7th edition and there is no way that Malifaux can be worse than that. 😂

Competitively, 7th edition was in a much better state than 8th edition is right now. It's taking a long time to get things right, and M3E will probably suffer similar hiccups.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I am worried about, with this announcement, is that wyrd will end up rushing m3e to the public (If it's still only in early, or even mid, development), for financial reasons, due to players slowing purchases down in preparation for the shake up on crew building. I, personally, probably won't buy anything else until the release, so I don't end up wasting money for a model/s that I would be unable to use with the master/s I have (without penalty), in m3e with thematic crew focus.

 

On the bright side, I have hopes that Parker Barrows might finally not be a handicap when on the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MalifauxDave said:

Having listened to the Max Value podcast I am a little concerned with a claim of their's about M3E, namely that the ranges and movement of models is potentially going to be increased. I find this concerning because this game is already outrageous with its threat ranges with many abilities capable of reaching the enemy on turn 1 in standard deployment already, if anything there should be a greater emphasis on positioning in the 3rd edition. 

I could see an inch added to everything to make getting around the board easier.  I would also assume there will be less ability to stack pushes which is what lets models get across the board turn 1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MalifauxDave said:

Having listened to the Max Value podcast I am a little concerned with a claim of their's about M3E, namely that the ranges and movement of models is potentially going to be increased. I find this concerning because this game is already outrageous with its threat ranges with many abilities capable of reaching the enemy on turn 1 in standard deployment already, if anything there should be a greater emphasis on positioning in the 3rd edition. 

They pulled their info from the release information on the Wyrd site.

 

Quote

From https://www.wyrd-games.net/table-flip

Gameplay Firing on All Cylinders: With adjusted Deployment Zones, increased threat ranges, and more mobility options, your models will be getting into the action nearly as quickly as you can put them onto the table.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Snowhateswinter said:

At the moment I have refreshed my email every 5 minutes for the past 3 hours and 23 minutes waiting for word about the beta testing.

Looking on the bright side I still played 40k 7th edition and there is no way that Malifaux can be worse than that. 😂

We likely won't be doing much with the Beta until after Gencon. :)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MalifauxDave said:

Having listened to the Max Value podcast I am a little concerned with a claim of their's about M3E, namely that the ranges and movement of models is potentially going to be increased. I find this concerning because this game is already outrageous with its threat ranges with many abilities capable of reaching the enemy on turn 1 in standard deployment already, if anything there should be a greater emphasis on positioning in the 3rd edition. 

Turns 2 onwards you already have to position to keep models safe, its a few crews that strongly threaten turn 1. If they make it that all crews threaten turn 1 the alpha strike is actually less powerful. Maybe it's similar to playing close deployment now, and also you can't hide a little engine safe in deployment ever. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wyrd, I love you guys, I hope you know that by now, but I have serious misgivings about this whole ordeal about sunsetting masters.

Dead Mans Hand is not a viable option.  There is no guarantee you'll be able to play them in tournaments, so anyone who is has any desire towards competitive play risks a lot hoping to back those masters without guarantee.  It creates a stigma around them that will force people away.  Then, even if the owner/player of the dead master's is fine with risking that, they might not find an opponent that wants to as well.  I don't care how optimistic some people seem to be about the chance of this, it is untenable so long as there is no guarantee.

It further more does not make sense that you guys have already stated they will be balanced, if that is the case, why bother with the restriction?

Saying its because of the story makes little sense either.  Ramos and Lilith have been captured for a year now, and people still have kept playing them without complaint.  I'm fine with bad things happening in the story, but it doesn't need to reflect in game in this way.

It also creates bad precedence for buying Wyrd in the future.  Maybe not next year, but in 4-5 years from now, ever increasing as time pasts is going to be the question "is it worth picking up this master?" "Is Wyrd going to deprecate this investment as well?"  I can't see any way this won't hurt sales.

The only logical argument I've seen for this decision is that Wyrd plans a drastically different return for these masters in the future so they want to keep non-official rules out there for them to keep going until the big reveal/redesign.  If this is the case, I feel Wyrd really needs to make an announcement they are coming, and people's money and time have not been completely wasted on these masters.

---------------------------------

Additional thoughts:

I'll take a wait and see approach on the card size, but I agree with the other misgiving of people in this threat.   I do not remember the 1.5e card sizes fondly.  Right now sleeves and card storage is plentiful  I worry about what hoops will need to be jumped through to store the cards.

 

I'm also worried about the use of tokens over various conditions.  It may be annoying to remember what all the conditions do, but they were easy to track by writing on the card.  Tokens imply another physical presence cluttering the board which i worry about.  Those have been turn offs for me in Warmahordes and Guild Ball.  Also where are these tokens going to come from?  Is Wyrd including them with the models?  Will they be sold extra at additional cost?  Will we need to make our own or find 3rd party?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 8
  • Respectfully Disagree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×