Jump to content

Third Edition is Coming!!


Nef
 Share

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, SunTsu said:

This is obviously a discussion for the beta, but setting a cost that does work only if you hire a second master, it seems a vaste of design space... I mean, if I got a master and his titem for free, choosing the most expensive one gives obviously an edge.

I assume that depends on what else you're hiring.  If you want 90% of one crew but you want to take a more expensive Master to do something as well, it might be cheaper to hire it at a higher cost than have the rest of the crew be out of the higher master's theme and pay +1 for all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2018 at 10:55 AM, Mason said:

Hiring a model that does not share a keyword with your leader is at +1 Cost.

I'm really not a fan of adding a merc tax to every in-faction model that doesn't share the master's keyword. People react better to positive reinforcement rather than negative, plus keeping themed crews as optional is always better than making them the rule. There should be a benefit to playing themed crews rather than a penalty for playing crews that aren't. Just make it so themed crews gain a crew-wide bonus, or make abilities that work better with in-theme models, that way non-themed crews are just as good, but people who stay in-theme get a little bonus. Unless the intent is to completely phase out non-themed crews, in which case why not just get rid of factions entirely and have each master as their own faction.

  • Agree 3
  • Respectfully Disagree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the +1 Cost was a means of reinforcing thematic crews without giving them a flat stat advantage. Instead it becomes an issue of cost efficiency which I believe is less universally objectionable. Pro level players wont do a lot of mixing without meta incentives to push them, but casual players likely wont mind paying the extra stone or two for something different every once in a while. If stat increases was the reward for thematic crews we'd see a lot less experimentation as outside models would be missing the natural synergy of thematic crews and also the stat advantage of a thematic crew.
If the negative presentation really matters they could always increase the base cost of every model by 1 and have thematic models cost 1 less, giving players the sense of a bargain for thematic crews, but it would ultimately be the same thing.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SunTsu said:

Yep, but remain the fact that if the costs are different and the first madter/totem is free, you will introduce a disparity...

Maybe the intent is for all masters to be costed the same.  

 

2 hours ago, Shadowdragon said:

I'm really not a fan of adding a merc tax to every in-faction model that doesn't share the master's keyword. People react better to positive reinforcement rather than negative, plus keeping themed crews as optional is always better than making them the rule. There should be a benefit to playing themed crews rather than a penalty for playing crews that aren't. Just make it so themed crews gain a crew-wide bonus, or make abilities that work better with in-theme models.

You could just assume the benefit of hiring in theme is a discount on the hiring cost. In the the long term , the bonus being cost is going to be universal. Learning bonuses to other crews sounds relatively complex. I often miss things like a +1 wp bonus from other cards. 

It also is quite restricting to have a universal bonus to all models in that crew, to then make models have to want that bonus. Think how often Vanessa gets to use her Ml expert.  And if you just make it a buff from some models, such as bite of winter, then you are locking some choices down in crew selection. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like very much the Idea of non-keyword penalty. I really hate the idea of Allstar crews, with always the better cheap scheme-runners, the most killy-efficient enforcer, the most buffing and versatile henchman... And different Master each time. 

Now you'll have to play your Master's crew, with maybe a pair of out of crew allies. 

This could be the form of returning to 2ss Stuffed Piglets. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Adran said:

Maybe the intent is for all masters to be costed the same.

Mmmmm.... Hard to see things that way for me... I don't think that is possible to write two masters so balanced to have exactly the same value. At least, you can do it at the beginning. But when, in a future, you will need to make some errata, dropping a tool like the model's co,, st could be difficult to deal with. If you think how many master had been balanced also cutting their cache (the last one was Sandeep, just few time ago...), you can understand what I mean...

 

About costs, I would suggest to evaluate increasing model's ss cost a bit, let's say each 2ss going to 3ss. This will gives a better control over the value points of single models, particularly the cheaper ones, while at the same time letting standard crews go to 100ss (including master+totem hiring) remaining less or more at the same models count.

 

Finally, about out of theme tax, I find that a flat +1ss is wrong. +1ss on a 3-4ss model means increasing 25-20% its cost, while on a 13ss model this increase is less than 8%, so less than a third impact and finally a negligible penalty after all. Also, this means essentially that factions have no more real existence...

A different approach could be to write on the model card the variation cost (if any) to hire it in or out of theme. For example a December Acolyte cost's could be 8(-1) or 7(+1) respectively giving a bonus to hire it in-theme or a malus hiring it out-theme (I prefer the bonus version after all, but both would be viable). In this way we can set a fine tuning cost for each model, letting cheap models hireble with smaller/no penalties while bigger models higher. Coupled with the moderate ss cost increase I wrote above it should go sinergic. This would free also the need of a "versatile" definition, since a model that show no variation in cost would be automatically a versatile model.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Up until now wyrd has managed to release masters who differ enough, that personal flavour, scemes compatability or meta-ranking were reasons to pick a certain master. I don't think that a gain of 2-3 points invalidate this. Even if Sonja is 3 points more expansive, i am pretty sure Lucius performs better, playing ply against resser...

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

 

As to the non theme tax, the percentage is tied to the frame of reference. 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 and Remote clutter. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zebo said:

I like very much the Idea of non-keyword penalty. I really hate the idea of Allstar crews, with always the better cheap scheme-runners, the most killy-efficient enforcer, the most buffing and versatile henchman... And different Master each time. 

Now you'll have to play your Master's crew, with maybe a pair of out of crew allies. 

This could be the form of returning to 2ss Stuffed Piglets. 

I like it aswell. And this doesn't exclude hiring outside of your master-keyword. It simply requires it to be a key part of your overall "tactic". It'll make it more OK for some models to very good in specific crews that they normally don't belong in, since they are that much more expensive.

2ss Stuffed Piglets in 2019. A man can dream 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd imagine one of the reasons Wyrd might be reluctant to put a cost on the first master or go back to having a cache is that it gives the impression that some masters are just stronger than others. Now, obviously that can happen anyway, but giving them different costs means that any disparity is intentional and gives less of an impression that masters are meant to be awesome by default. They'd be more like any other Rare 1 model and that can have their failings made up for with some more hiring.

I kind of prefer the idea of aiming to get all masters balanced and handle pricing issues through their totems or occasionally upgrades. That way it at least gives the impression that all Masters are supposed to be on par. While you'll never get all of them exactly equal a cache/cost doesn't necessarily help with that, since misjudging the power level of a master just means they'll have more or less stones to play with than they should. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, lusciousmccabe said:

I'd imagine one of the reasons Wyrd might be reluctant to put a cost on the first master or go back to having a cache is that it gives the impression that some masters are just stronger than others. Now, obviously that can happen anyway, but giving them different costs means that any disparity is intentional and gives less of an impression that masters are meant to be awesome by default. They'd be more like any other Rare 1 model and that can have their failings made up for with some more hiring.

I kind of prefer the idea of aiming to get all masters balanced and handle deal pricing issues through their totems or occasionally upgrades. That way it at least gives the impression that all Masters are supposed to be on par. While you'll never get all of them exactly equal a cache/cost doesn't necessarily help with that, since misjudging the power level of a master just means they'll have more or less stones to play with than they should. 

I can totally see that line of thought. My only counter argument would be that multiple summoning masters might simply swarm the board with models and those masters should therefore be more heavily costed. I could be wrong though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, GrumpyGrandpa said:

I can totally see that line of thought. My only counter argument would be that multiple summoning masters might simply swarm the board with models and those masters should therefore be more heavily costed. I could be wrong though.

Yeah, I was more thinking in terms of what some people said about applying cost to the first master.

Hopefully summoning will be self limiting enough that there's no incentive to spam it via double masters. Otherwise, costing masters based on wacky combo potential seems like a good idea, but a nightmare to put into practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, GrumpyGrandpa said:

I can totally see that line of thought. My only counter argument would be that multiple summoning masters might simply swarm the board with models and those masters should therefore be more heavily costed. I could be wrong though.

There also seems to be less summoning masters with really only one master per faction heavily focused on summoning. 

The only exception might be Ressers with Kirai and Von Schtook, but we'll see how that goes in the beta. I'm guessing it will probably be too card/resource intensive to be effective. Just like if you took any combo of Kirai/Nico/Molly would be now (without engine anyway). 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Zebo said:

I like very much the Idea of non-keyword penalty. I really hate the idea of Allstar crews, with always the better cheap scheme-runners, the most killy-efficient enforcer, the most buffing and versatile henchman... And different Master each time. 

Now you'll have to play your Master's crew, with maybe a pair of out of crew allies. 

I agree! I think the forcing of Keyword symmetry would bring more varied, and thus, more interesting crews to the table. My problem is that the mechanic the Beta is currently trying to use to enforce it is the same one they just got done saying didn't work well (flat +1 SS to bring in)

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tors said:

Its didn't worked well for MERCS in M2E... didn't mean it won't work for thematic hiring in M3E.

I am pretty relieved those themes aren't enforced much harder. Clone Crews for every Master would be pretty boring. 

But isn't all star syndrome even more boring? 

3 hours ago, 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. 

Up until now wyrd has managed to release masters who differ enough, that personal flavour, scemes compatability or meta-ranking were reasons to pick a certain master. I don't think that a gain of 2-3 points invalidate this. Even if Sonja is 3 points more expansive, i am pretty sure Lucius performs better, playing ply against resser...

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

 

As to the non theme tax, the percentage is tied to the frame of reference. 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 and Remote clutter. 

You never ever saw a torakage hired as a merc even if it's a solid pic for his base cost. Johan was omniprwsent till the cost increase and going a bit more to the past, everybody and their mother used Von Schill in first edition.

The higher costed the model, the more bang for your buck. I have never thought "adding that merc is a 2% of my list" I think of how much more I'm paying for that single model compared to what it's costed to deliver and I'm not alone in that frame of mind.

With themes and factions it will be a lot more obvious. Why not hire Lady J every crew assuming she is still the best beater in the game it's just one more stone than her intended cost. Or Archie who I expect will still be around 12 and only goes up to 13. A night terror has a much lower chance of getting hired out of them though.

If extra cost for out of theme is like stated at the moment, it will devolve in themed chaff and faction all stars for the expensive stuff except for when the all stars are alreaduy in theme.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tors said:

Its didn't worked well for MERCS in M2E... didn't mean it won't work for thematic hiring in M3E.

I am pretty relieved those themes aren't enforced much harder. Clone Crews for every Master would be pretty boring. 

That's a good point. It looks like there will be more synergy within a theme than between them so there's a sort of stick and carrot effect going on which isn't there for mercs this edition. 

So I doubt you'd see (for example) Johan having synergy with M&SU if that's not one of his keywords. The general purpose stuff will probably get versatile while stuff like Ronin and Trappers will have abilities that are wasted in a non-thematic crew.

Hopefully that'll mean out of theme  will be worth the premium to fill certain gaps, rather than everyone gravitating towards the most cost effective option for each role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not seeing Rotten belles, monster hunters, charm warders, steam fitters, and their like in every single list seems like a win to me.

A point listed above where we might start seeing double master lists as the norm, IE Lady J in every guild crew also feels like like a possible issue. I appreciate that it might get some weaker masters in the game more, but I really don’t want to see the beater master in every faction essentially become what Nekima was last edition. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 7thSquirrel said:

I agree! I think the forcing of Keyword symmetry would bring more varied, and thus, more interesting crews to the table. My problem is that the mechanic the Beta is currently trying to use to enforce it is the same one they just got done saying didn't work well (flat +1 SS to bring in)

I like the idea that SunTsu floated of each model having it's own "hiring tax" noted on the card. This allows high cost models to have a larger cost increase, and gives Wyrd another dial to fiddle with if it turns out that a particular model turns out to be a go-to model in it's faction even with the out-of-keyword hiring penalty applied.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Shadowdragon said:

I'm really not a fan of adding a merc tax to every in-faction model that doesn't share the master's keyword. People react better to positive reinforcement rather than negative, plus keeping themed crews as optional is always better than making them the rule. There should be a benefit to playing themed crews rather than a penalty for playing crews that aren't. Just make it so themed crews gain a crew-wide bonus, or make abilities that work better with in-theme models, that way non-themed crews are just as good, but people who stay in-theme get a little bonus. Unless the intent is to completely phase out non-themed crews, in which case why not just get rid of factions entirely and have each master as their own faction.

Yep - you can look at it as so the keyword models have a -1 discount  ;)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't need the themed enforced harder or softer necessarily, I would like them enforced "better" in the sense of using a mechanic that we know hasn't already failed once.

20 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

I like the idea that SunTsu floated of each model having it's own "hiring tax" noted on the card. This allows high cost models to have a larger cost increase, and gives Wyrd another dial to fiddle with if it turns out that a particular model turns out to be a go-to model in it's faction even with the out-of-keyword hiring penalty applied. 

I'm not against this. If it can be put into a form that is clear and concise it seems like it would be an improvement. I'm sure there are other ideas out there as well just waiting to be discovered.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, KingJocko said:

If the negative presentation really matters they could always increase the base cost of every model by 1 and have thematic models cost 1 less, giving players the sense of a bargain for thematic crews, but it would ultimately be the same thing.

Messing with the base cost of the model affects abilities that care about model cost (Monster Hunters have one in M2E, summoning abilities, M3E Marcus  upgrade attaching ability) and scoring for schemes and strats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out-of-theme is probably +1 penalty (instead of -1 in-theme bonus) just because addition is marginally easier in mental math than subtracting is. At least that’s been my experience with the re-costed models this year. Which is going to be a bit weird with the new condition giving -1 to duels. Not fatal, but a tiny slowdown for sure.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Razhem said:

But isn't all star syndrome even more boring? 

Not necessarily. Even if some "packages" like Nekima-Doppel-X or Iron Skeeter-Franc saw widespread use the rest of the crew usually changed. And it is quite natural for Tabletops to evolve some staples. There are always Models with a slightly better price/performance ratio and gamers find them given the time. If you reduce the pool of options (maybe because the non-thematic punishment becomes more severe, invalidating all non-thematics), there will be less competition for certain spots and you will see the same 8/10 people with master X every time (because why think about taking Teddy or Hooded Rider, if one is thematic the other automatically becomes invalid) I would prefer 2-3 Allstars over basically fixed Lists for every master. Of Course there is some hyperbole in there, but i hope it shows my point. 

 

56 minutes ago, Razhem said:

You never ever saw a torakage hired as a merc even if it's a solid pic for his base cost. Johan was omniprwsent till the cost increase and going a bit more to the past, everybody and their mother used Von Schill in first edition.

But thats because torakage suck ;) And dont fill a reasonable task niche. Johann was usually one of the best ways for condition removal on top of beeing a good beater. If you only wanted a beater you wouldn't have choosen Johann, but usually an infaction model. Points were only second on the Wishlist. With his points increased he wouldn't comfortably fit within most established list and you get the desired effect. But change his Condition removal to Outcast (or keyword) only and you would have tackeled the reason behind his omnipresence.

56 minutes ago, Razhem said:

The higher costed the model, the more bang for your buck. I have never thought "adding that merc is a 2% of my list" I think of how much more I'm paying for that single model compared to what it's costed to deliver and I'm not alone in that frame of mind.

I would wager most people just look for the best/cheapest option for a given task. It doesn't Matter if the Tax on Nekima is only x% compared to y% on a smaller Modell. As long Nekima has the best price/performance ratio she will be taken.

56 minutes ago, Razhem said:

With themes and factions it will be a lot more obvious. Why not hire Lady J every crew assuming she is still the best beater in the game it's just one more stone than her intended cost. Or Archie who I expect will still be around 12 and only goes up to 13. A night terror has a much lower chance of getting hired out of them though.

If extra cost for out of theme is like stated at the moment, it will devolve in themed chaff and faction all stars for the expensive stuff except for when the all stars are alreaduy in theme.

You can't stop all star development. There will be a 'best for the Job' every time. No matter how fine the margin of pricing will become. The whole thing is a compromise between effort to "disguise the best" and divergence achieved. I don't think two point values will do enough improvement compared to the overall efford of implementing them.

  • Agree 1
  • Respectfully Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Tors said:

Not necessarily. Even if some "packages" like Nekima-Doppel-X or Iron Skeeter-Franc saw widespread use the rest of the crew usually changed. And it is quite natural for Tabletops to evolve some staples. There are always Models with a slightly better price/performance ratio and gamers find them given the time. If you reduce the pool of options (maybe because the non-thematic punishment becomes more severe, invalidating all non-thematics), there will be less competition for certain spots and you will see the same 8/10 people with master X every time (because why think about taking Teddy or Hooded Rider, if one is thematic the other automatically becomes invalid) I would prefer 2-3 Allstars over basically fixed Lists for every master. Of Course there is some hyperbole in there, but i hope it shows my point. 

 

But thats because torakage suck ;) And dont fill a reasonable task niche. Johann was usually one of the best ways for condition removal on top of beeing a good beater. If you only wanted a beater you wouldn't have choosen Johann, but usually an infaction model. Points were only second on the Wishlist. With his points increased he wouldn't comfortably fit within most established list and you get the desired effect. But change his Condition removal to Outcast (or keyword) only and you would have tackeled the reason behind his omnipresence.

I would wager most people just look for the best/cheapest option for a given task. It doesn't Matter if the Tax on Nekima is only x% compared to y% on a smaller Modell. As long Nekima has the best price/performance ratio she will be taken.

You can't stop all star development. There will be a 'best for the Job' every time. No matter how fine the margin of pricing will become. The whole thing is a compromise between effort to "disguise the best" and divergence achieved. I don't think two point values will do enough improvement compared to the overall efford of implementing them.

I just would much rather that each theme had their allstar even if it's artificially enforced instead of everybody using the same ones, and we both know that at an extra stone penalty, this will be how it goes, specially of taking the beater master of each faction ends up being worthwhile.

And there are enough references in the game at this point that I expect most themes to have more than 10 dedicated options for them as well as any versatile models and the benefits of having a duplicate or two in some scenarios.

As for masters being telegraphed, well yeah, I'm perfectly fine with you knowing that I'm likely to be spirit heavy since I declared Kirai or that I'm very likely to have to deal with bury shenanigans with Tara. Doing something out of the left field I hope is more to take the opponent by surprise and less about just going with a couple of allstars and some chaff that has to have no relation to the master just because it's better.

Ideally, if themed properly, my worries wouldn't even be an issue and the +1 would be enough, but I'd rather the system was flexible enough to cripple Archie if it turns to be better with Reva than with Molly without having to errata the whole thing or screw Molly over with an increased price since it was fine with her and it's her toy mostly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fetid Strumpet said:

A point listed above where we might start seeing double master lists as the norm, IE Lady J in every guild crew also feels like like a possible issue. I appreciate that it might get some weaker masters in the game more, but I really don’t want to see the beater master in every faction essentially become what Nekima was last edition

I have the same concern, especially after talking to people who actually test 3rd edition. I do believe that having two will be a competitive minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information