My critique of third edition and what I hope to see changed

[esqulax]

Now let me start off by saying that I absolutely love this game. It is by far the best miniature game I have ever played, so all my critique in this post is fueled by nothing but love for an amazing game and a hope to see it continue to get even better. I will also make a quick point that I have won several local leagues/tournaments, not to try and brag, but just to point out that I do at least have some experience with the game and am not just some guy who lost his first few games and decided to make a whining forum post. 

That said I do have three areas where I feel like third edition took a step back compared to second. 

1. Cheap models. 

I have said this before, but I feel like Wyrd really failed to consider the massive indirect nerf that pass tokens were to cheap models. It was not uncommon in second edition to take cheap models solely for the extra activations, but now since that is no longer an option there are a whole bunch of 3-5 SS models that are all but useless. Sure a game with as many options as Malifaux will always have some of those options be less viable, but if we look at all 3-5 SS models compared to all 8+ SS models I feel like the percentage of models I would never choose to field is way, way higher in the 3-5 SS bracket. 

2. The change to Focus. 

Malifaux third edition strove to streamline the game, which in my opinion was a good thing. I believe that is also why Wyrd changed focus to not run out at the end of a turn so that Focus and Defensive could be combined into one action. So far though, it has not been my experience that focus gets used defensively very often, instead I often see models stacking focus to 3-4, before the initial fighting occurs, which to me breaks the intent of the game and nullifies a lot of models defensive abilities that focus on giving minus flips. 

The problem here is twofold. Firstly, models that pulse out focus are way too action efficient, when you can bunch up your crew and give focus to around 7 models with one action.

Secondly, in strat/scheme pools were it is possible to play defensively, it is not uncommon to see models take one action and then concentrate to save up focus. This means that the guy who plays offensively and spends his actions engaging the enemy rather than concentrating will be at a disadvantage when he arrives. I do not believe that it is healthy for any game system to have a built in mechanic that rewards a camping playstyle.  

I would really love to see a change to focus as it currently exists and either have it decay at the end of a turn or not have it be stackable. 

3. Summoner masters.  

Long story short, I feel like summoner masters are too powerful as the game is right now. If I were to make a list of the top 10 strongest masters currently, it would almost just be a list of the various masters that can summon. I believe the problem primarily lies in the fact that summoner masters are too good at negating what are supposed to be their weaknesses. You need a high card to summon in the model? Most summoner masters have really good card draw. The summon comes in with slow? Most summoner masters can easily remove the condition. This is all coupled with the fact that most summoners summon their models in with full hp, compared to second edition where they had usually taken some damage when they entered the board. This makes them unbelievably good at grinding out the game. 

I feel like Wyrd were onto the right track by making summon upgrades, but these should really have had some kind of negative stipulation attached to them to make the summoned model a weaker version of itself. Giving all summoner masters different debuffs to the models they summon could also really help setting the different masters apart making them feel unique. 

TLDR: Cheap models are mostly too weak, focus is a bad game mechanic the way it currently is and summoner masters are too strong. 

What do you think? Am I completely in the wrong here ? 

Edited November 9, 2020 by esqulax

[katadder]

so to go over your points:

Cheap Models still have play, 2 actions that can actually do strats/schemes are better than a pass token any day of the week. Plus most people seem to save pass tokens for init turns 2-4, activation control really only comes into it maybe turn 1, and then turn 5 if you need to go last to score, which by this point cheap models are usually dead.

 

Change to focus - yeah this is slightly annoying but hopefully there will be some fixes upcoming in next errata as like you say it does take away from peoples defensive options.

 

Summoner masters - this has been gone over loads of times, I think most of us sit in the camp they are not even slightly OP and certainly are not winning tourneys. Yes you can summon something for an action, but beater masters can often kill that thing in an action, sometimes more than 1 thing. the resources for a decent summon are not being used to attack/defend. if you have used that stone and a 13 to get a great model you will get hit more often, or hit the enemy less.

 

overall 3e is in a great place IMO, they balanced summoners better than 2e, they also balanced hand size to go with that. Swarms where you activate 10 pointless models then all your big hitters go last are gone, so thats great too.

[Rufess]

Meta can be changed easily by new GG. Currently no S&S requires massive action so you cannot see the value of cheap models. It is not a trouble at all for Wyrd to make new S&S that rewards huge models count. The good ol' "Counting model number on each table quarter" type of Strategy can simply do the job. Likewise they can handle the summoner "issue" with new S&S that punishing summon upgrades.

Another thought to the summoners, most of them, if not all, are being powerful not simply because of their summoning. Dreamer has Lucid Dream, Sandeep can draw card from concentrating, Somer hands out numerous additional attacks. I am not sure is nerfing summoning the silver bullet for all of them at once.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Rufess

[esqulax]

5 hours ago, katadder said:

Cheap Models still have play, 2 actions that can actually do strats/schemes are better than a pass token any day of the week. 
 

True, but my point isn't that cheap models have no role or all are useless, but a very large number of them are just plain bad. Off the top of my head there are Bloodwretches, Orderlies, Terror Tots, Corrupted Hounds, Molemen, Hoarcats etc. 

5 hours ago, katadder said:

Summoner masters - this has been gone over loads of times, I think most of us sit in the camp they are not even slightly OP and certainly are not winning tourneys. Yes you can summon something for an action, but beater masters can often kill that thing in an action, sometimes more than 1 thing. the resources for a decent summon are not being used to attack/defend. if you have used that stone and a 13 to get a great model you will get hit more often, or hit the enemy less.

overall 3e is in a great place IMO, they balanced summoners better than 2e, they also balanced hand size to go with that. Swarms where you activate 10 pointless models then all your big hitters go last are gone, so thats great too.

 

Well I don't argue that pass tokens aren't a good addition to the game, but I was actually of the belief that most people seemed to think summoners were overtuned this edition. Also I am curious what beater master can kill the summoned model in a single action ?  And what summoners in 2ed you consider as strong as the ones now? (With the exception of Nicodem near the end of 2.ed) 

Edited November 9, 2020 by esqulax

[Plaag]

7 hours ago, esqulax said:

Now let me start off by saying that I absolutely love this game. It is by far the best miniature game I have ever played, so all my critique in this post is fueled by nothing but love for an amazing game and a hope to see it continue to get even better. I will also make a quick point that I have won several local leagues/tournaments, not to try and brag, but just to point out that I do at least have some experience with the game and am not just some guy who lost his first few games and decided to make a whining forum post. 

That said I do have three areas where I feel like third edition took a step back compared to second. 

1. Cheap models. 

I have said this before, but I feel like Wyrd really failed to consider the massive indirect nerf that pass tokens were to cheap models. It was not uncommon in second edition to take cheap models solely for the extra activations, but now since that is no longer an option there are a whole bunch of 3-5 SS models that are all but useless. Sure a game with as many options as Malifaux will always have some of those options be less viable, but if we look at all 3-5 SS models compared to all 8+ SS models I feel like the percentage of models I would never choose to field is way, way higher in the 3-5 SS bracket. 

2. The change to Focus. 

Malifaux third edition strove to streamline the game, which in my opinion was a good thing. I believe that is also why Wyrd changed focus to not run out at the end of a turn so that Focus and Defensive could be combined into one action. So far though, it has not been my experience that focus gets used defensively very often, instead I often see models stacking focus to 3-4, before the initial fighting occurs, which to me breaks the intent of the game and nullifies a lot of models defensive abilities that focus on giving minus flips. 

The problem here is twofold. Firstly, models that pulse out focus are way too action efficient, when you can bunch up your crew and give focus to around 7 models with one action.

Secondly, in strat/scheme pools were it is possible to play defensively, it is not uncommon to see models take one action and then concentrate to save up focus. This means that the guy who plays offensively and spends his actions engaging the enemy rather than concentrating will be at a disadvantage when he arrives. I do not believe that it is healthy for any game system to have a built in mechanic that rewards a camping playstyle.  

I would really love to see a change to focus as it currently exists and either have it decay at the end of a turn or not have it be stackable. 

3. Summoner masters.  

Long story short, I feel like summoner masters are too powerful as the game is right now. If I were to make a list of the top 10 strongest masters currently, it would almost just be a list of the various masters that can summon. I believe the problem primarily lies in the fact that summoner masters are too good at negating what are supposed to be their weaknesses. You need a high card to summon in the model? Most summoner masters have really good card draw. The summon comes in with slow? Most summoner masters can easily remove the condition. This is all coupled with the fact that most summoners summon their models in with full hp, compared to second edition where they had usually taken some damage when they entered the board. This makes them unbelievably good at grinding out the game. 

I feel like Wyrd were onto the right track by making summon upgrades, but these should really have had some kind of negative stipulation attached to them to make the summoned model a weaker version of itself. Giving all summoner masters different debuffs to the models they summon could also really help setting the different masters apart making them feel unique. 

TLDR: Cheap models are mostly too weak, focus is a bad game mechanic the way it currently is and summoner masters are too strong. 

What do you think? Am I completely in the wrong here ? 

agreed

1) summoners are too strong, some models and keywords(dreamer, asami, minako rei with summon of 2 katashiro per turn) need to be nerfed

2) a lot of focus condition on such models as ophelia, fuhatsu are so annoying

3) models with cost 5 or less are very bad as they can be killed very easy and dont get any vp

4) actions with no tn (like scatter) must be reworked because they effect on scoring vp without any resist

5) laugh off (like phiona)must be reworked-same story - make intaract between opponents in very hard way

 

[LeperColony]

7 hours ago, katadder said:

Summoner masters - this has been gone over loads of times, I think most of us sit in the camp they are not even slightly OP and certainly are not winning tourneys.

I can't claim to speak with any degree of certainty since my "evidence" is anecdotal, but from the sentiments I've seen expressed here and in other venues, I feel most opinions are that summoners, while maybe not broken, are above the curve.  The tournament issue is commonly understood to be due to round timings.  In events with more permissive timing, they may be better.  For instance, the final of the Vassal World Cup was summoner vs summoner and went over the time, but the players played it out anyway.

As for my opinion on the topics in the thread:

Summoning:  OP, but not auto-win.

Focus:  Too good, should be changed to a single  to almost any duel or flip (probably anything except soul stone damage reduction).

Low Cost Models:  On the whole, problematic.  The best tend to have strong defenses that make it difficult or inefficient to remove them.  There are a few standouts, but most aren't great.  Also, in Malifaux but unlike in other games, LCM also have to compete with just not being taken, since unspent points have value (and a lot of value).  In 40k, it's just a loss to not spend all your points.  In Malifaux, pretty much nobody goes into a game with zero stones.

 

[touchdown]

Concentrating for focus is not overpowered. It's slightly worse than attacking twice, and it would actually have to be slightly better to be worth doing given the variation of outcomes in attacking. eg, if a severe or 2 weaks kills a model, taking the chance with a lucky severe and potentially dropping a scheme marker to score a vp is the correct move.

Models that can pulse out focus incredibly efficiently may be a problem but that's not really a problem with focus as a mechanic itself.

[esqulax]

2 minutes ago, touchdown said:

Concentrating for focus is not overpowered. It's slightly worse than attacking twice, and it would actually have to be slightly better to be worth doing given the variation of outcomes in attacking. eg, if a severe or 2 weaks kills a model, taking the chance with a lucky severe and potentially dropping a scheme marker to score a vp is the correct move.

Models that can pulse out focus incredibly efficiently may be a problem but that's not really a problem with focus as a mechanic itself.

Well I do believe stacking focus is a problem due to the reasons in my original post, but I definitely agree that spending an action to focus and then attacking afterwards is not a problem 

[Maniacal_cackle]

1. Cheap models - I agree, they're generally pretty weak. There are often times in a game where I don't summon a model because giving up a pass token is just too big a loss, even when there is no other downside. Now of course this sort of decision should be happening, but I feel it is too strong a factor at the moment. One possible solution is giving some low cost models an ability: Ability: this model is not counted when calculating pass tokens. This model may not activate until all friendly models with this ability have already activated.

Something to make better use of their AP, without just being used as a pass token without generating one (so the beaters can activate last).

2. Focus feels fine and great to me. I used to stack 7-8 on two models early in the game, but realised it isn't the smartest thing to do. Opponents can strip focus with condition removal, or even just kill the model before it uses all its focus. At least for Forgotten, the models that can super-stack focus aren't the best ones to have it. Maybe I haven't played against the keywords that really abuse this, but it feels like since so many attacks have condition removal built into them, it is okay.

EDIT: I also play ressers, where focus is inherently a bit weaker against us, so I'm probably underestimating it.

3. Summoning - just organised a tournament with three hour rounds, and I'm not sure a summoner lost a single round (except to other summoners). That said, it tended to be good players that were playing summoners. Certainly I haven't had difficulty beating summoners when I face them, but maybe my opinion will change after the World Series.

In general, I think it is actually card draw and other resource generation that is actually the problem. It is very good (regardless of crew), and it just happens to combo very well with summoning.

Dreamer for instance would be fine if you changed Ancient Pact to not overcome his weaknesses so easily. Ancient Pact single-handedly pushes Dreamer into OP imo.

[katadder]

Problem with those of you listening to the very few people saying summoners are OP is that those fee people tend to be the loudest.

Having played summoners and against them I find them no more OP than any other master.

As for beaters that can take models apart easily, you have your viks, nekima,lady J, titania cam easily destroy multiple models in an activation and there are others our there not listed here 

[ShinChan]

Focus stacking has its own countermeasures. Not many crews/models can do it, and if you're scared of it, bring condition removal. It was vastly discussed in another post, but the only reasonable "nerf" to focus I could agree on, was becoming a  to the duel and removing a  to the subsequent damage flip instead of giving a straight  to the damage. Otherwise, there a bunch of models that should be re-balanced due to the limits of focus.

Summoning masters are over the curve just when they have a lot of resources to support them, like card draw or stones generation (Hello Dashel and Sandeep). Cut a bit those resource generation and they'll be fine. Another (and bigger) problem with summoning, is the lack of Summoning Upgrades. There are some level of anti-summoning tech, but an important part of it works with the target having a summon upgrade attached. All models that are summoned should have one, so more anti-summoning abilities could be based on that.

Cheap models being bad is a problem, but I think that's a problem with models that are cheap and don't have a clearly defined role or they're just plain bad models. It's not good that there are cheap models with Armor +1 and HtW and 6 Wounds (yes, looking at you necropunks), while others sit at 5Wds and no defensive tech at all for the same price. There are good models at cost 3 (Wicked dolls) and decent models (Flying Piglet, Piglet) at the same cost, but I can't see how Corrupted Hounds or Canine Remains (for example) would be picked within their keywords. IMHO there are 2 tasks to do here, buff a bit the worst <5ss models and give some of them proper roles within their keywords.

 

[Maniacal_cackle]

Looking at cheap models that do seem playable, they either are just super efficient (crooligans, necropunks), play a critical role (restless spirit), serve a role by dying (Draugr, gravedigger, expendables), provide extra resources to bigger models via actions/movement/card draw/etc (day dreams, shieldbearers)...

And occasionally you see cheap models that synergise really well together and work well in packs (Belles, hounds, etc). I really prefer this design, but don't think it ever really works out as great.

[esqulax]

7 hours ago, ShinChan said:

Focus stacking has its own countermeasures. Not many crews/models can do it, and if you're scared of it, bring condition removal. It was vastly discussed in another post, but the only reasonable "nerf" to focus I could agree on, was becoming a  to the duel and removing a  to the subsequent damage flip instead of giving a straight  to the damage. Otherwise, there a bunch of models that should be re-balanced due to the limits of focus.

I feel like that nerf to focus would be way too harsh and would require much more rebalancing than not letting focus stack up to high amounts. 

I also feel that using an action to focus and hit harder in the midst of combat goes way better with the intent of the game and makes a lot more sense flavor wise rather than standing still and powering up by letting focus stack to high amounts. 

 

 

7 hours ago, ShinChan said:

Summoning masters are over the curve just when they have a lot of resources to support them, like card draw or stones generation (Hello Dashel and Sandeep). Cut a bit those resource generation and they'll be fine. Another (and bigger) problem with summoning, is the lack of Summoning Upgrades. There are some level of anti-summoning tech, but an important part of it works with the target having a summon upgrade attached. All models that are summoned should have one, so more anti-summoning abilities could be based on that.

 

I agree that part of what makes summoning masters too good, is too easy access to ways to mitigate their supposed weaknesses (card draw for example). I do not agree that, that is the sole reason they are above the curve. Dreamer for example, does a very good job of being overtuned just by being Dreamer. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

16 minutes ago, esqulax said:

I agree that part of what makes summoning masters too good, is too easy access to ways to mitigate their supposed weaknesses (card draw for example). I do not agree that, that is the sole reason they are above the curve. Dreamer for example, does a very good job of being overtuned just by being Dreamer. 

I dunno, Dreamer feels very doable when he isn't drawing 2-6 cards a turn and getting +2 to initiative.

[rober695]

1. You lost me on the cheap models thing. I think that is just flat out incorrect. Even a "bad" model can still walk and drop a scheme marker. Or flip a lucky red joker for burst damage. Both strictly better than using a pass token. And coming from gremlins 5 ss and down is littered with great models. 

2. Focus being able to stay after the round is weird. I still feel like the bigger problem is distracted isn't just anti focus. It should be a one to one imo. 

3. Summoning is ok. Its off balance in every game that has it. I think it's in a pretty good place in this one. Bigger issue is a case by case basis. Some summoners resource abilities are overtuned. Meaning they aren't punished enough hand, ss, etc... To make summoning happen. I think pass tokens and summoning upgrades do a pretty good job though. 

[Scoffer]

16 minutes ago, rober695 said:

I still feel like the bigger problem is distracted isn't just anti focus. It should be a one to one imo. 

This will make distracted too strong and seriously boost adversary and built-in [+] to attack flip. 

Now when a model has Distracted +2 (or more) it can concentrate with the first action, make a focused attack without [-] to hit and keep Distracted+1. If Distracted and Focused cancel each other, in the same situation there will be no way to make a straight attack flip. So it's two attacks with a [-], both most likely miss, a whole activation of a 8-9ss enforcer are wasted. No fun at all.

[Jinn]

58 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

This will make distracted too strong and seriously boost adversary and built-in [+] to attack flip. 

Now when a model has Distracted +2 (or more) it can concentrate with the first action, make a focused attack without [-] to hit and keep Distracted+1. If Distracted and Focused cancel each other, in the same situation there will be no way to make a straight attack flip. So it's two attacks with a [-], both most likely miss, a whole activation of a 8-9ss enforcer are wasted. No fun at all.

If it was one to one that doesn't mean it has to directly cancel. If they reverted Distracted to being  to attack and damage (which it was in the beta) then the crews that rely on it won't be so screwed by focus. You would still be able to focus and attack, you just wouldn't get the  to damage while also bypassing distracted.

[Regelridderen]

13 hours ago, ShinChan said:

Focus stacking has its own countermeasures. Not many crews/models can do it, and if you're scared of it, bring condition removal. It was vastly discussed in another post, but the only reasonable "nerf" to focus I could agree on, was becoming a  to the duel and removing a  to the subsequent damage flip instead of giving a straight  to the damage. Otherwise, there a bunch of models that should be re-balanced due to the limits of focus.

This is basically the same thing, as in most cases people end up with a - or worse - upon winning a duel.

The main advantage of focus is not the  and the randomness of drawing cards, but that you likely will be able to cheat in the severe damage (and that you most likely won't have to cheat first in the contested flip.

-

I haven't played vs. many focus spamming crews. The only thing that comes to mind as problematic is Tucket's Hollerin' and that got nerfed. Others like the Nephilim Shaman seems balanced by requirements and setups, meaning you'll need to activate, even sacrifice other models to do the spam.

-

Summoner's are great. Probably above the curve in many engagements and match-ups, but they're far from unbeatable. Particularly combined with amazing card draw mechanics, Like Som'er or Dashel. It's usually this that offsets the resource drain, that summoning is. But all Master summoned models come with their unique drawbacks, which is cool. The unfortunate thing is that enforcer/henchman summoners aren't capped in the same way.

-

Regarding minions, I disagree again with the OP. You won't have a hand to support a crew of enforcers and henchmen - or expensive minions. And you need the little guys to go handle your schemes and win you the game. Sadly not all minions are created equally, things like Ressur Necropunks are by far better models than Guild Orderly, simply from having Leap. That they then stack on a throng of other defensive abilities is just rubbing salt into the wound.

Anecdotal evidence of course, but I started winning games, when I dumped half my Big'Unz and spent the stones on cheap minions.

[esqulax]

9 hours ago, rober695 said:

1. You lost me on the cheap models thing. I think that is just flat out incorrect. Even a "bad" model can still walk and drop a scheme marker. Or flip a lucky red joker for burst damage. Both strictly better than using a pass token. And coming from gremlins 5 ss and down is littered with great models. 

I feel like you are arguing against a point that I didn't make. I never said that all cheap models are useless or can't take interact actions. I do still feel that there are way more bad models that are cheap than there are bad models that are expensive. 
 

9 hours ago, rober695 said:

2. Focus being able to stay after the round is weird. I still feel like the bigger problem is distracted isn't just anti focus. It should be a one to one imo. 

I like that idea. 

9 hours ago, rober695 said:

3. Summoning is ok. Its off balance in every game that has it. 

I feel like you are contradicting yourself there. Summoning being broken in other systems does not excuse summoners being overtuned in Malifaux 

[Maniacal_cackle]

Out of all the M3E master summoners (Jakob, Dreamer, Sandeep, Som'er, Dashel, Sonia, Tara, Kirai, Von Schtook, Asami), only some receive complaints about being overpowered (Dreamer, Sandeep, Som'er, VS, Dashel)?

And of all those 'overpowered' ones the consistent theme seems to be excessive resource generation (plus armor on VS). In fact Dashel went from garbage tier to top tier just by changing the resource generation on his totem.

We could always settle this Plaag style - I'll happily play against Dreamer without Ancient Pact for example if anyone wants to test out the difference.

[Mycellanious]

35 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Out of all the M3E master summoners (Jakob, Dreamer, Sandeep, Som'er, Dashel, Sonia, Tara, Kirai, Von Schtook, Asami), only some receive complaints about being overpowered (Dreamer, Sandeep, Som'er, VS, Dashel)?

And of all those 'overpowered' ones the consistent theme seems to be excessive resource generation (plus armor on VS). In fact Dashel went from garbage tier to top tier just by changing the resource generation on his totem.

We could always settle this Plaag style - I'll happily play against Dreamer without Ancient Pact for example if anyone wants to test out the difference.

Firstly, there are different kinds of summon Actions, its not super productive to lump Masters like Jakob or Sonia in with the rest because summoning isnt their primary focus, ie: they arent summoning every turn. 

Second, I actually have seen lots of complaints over both the forums and AWP on every single one of those Masters, excluding Jakob and Sonia. Dont forget that Tara was insanely powerful, to point of solo Tara being undefeated in several large tournaments, and had to receive a significant nerf, as well as a more or less explicit call out in the Recover Evidence strategy. So Tara isn't being complained about right now because she has already received her nerf, the others havent, and GG1 isn't well suited for her. 

I do agree however that I don't think the issue with the masters is necessarily the summon Action; I think in general in Malifaux masters become problematic when they have tools to more than effectively mitigate their weaknesses.

Dreamer for example, is in theory supposed to be weak early, and unstoppable late from Lucid Dreaming and Summons. However, his crew also has the most unique Min 3 models in the game, and can field more than any other Keyword because Stitched are Minion 3 and Summonable. This means his crew can out punch you early, and out flip / activate you late. His early game weakness is more than mitigated by the amount of Min 3 in his crew. Also, he got a significant buff with the change to Stunned which was never really addressed.

Som'er is in theory supposed to be a swarm master, summoning lots of cheap models to bog down the opponent. In theory, this should be mitigated by things like Blast, Pulses, or Shockwaves. But at the same time his Auras give his swarm such high stats, and Bayou 2 Card gives them a second chance, making it very difficult for his models to actually fail simple duels. Compare that to something like Hamelin, who is also summoning-swarm master, but whose rats are very susceptible to AOE, and there is a stark contrast. 

So I think personally summoners are more complex than their summoning.

[Maniacal_cackle]

25 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

 

Som'er is in theory supposed to be a swarm master, summoning lots of cheap models to bog down the opponent. In theory, this should be mitigated by things like Blast, Pulses, or Shockwaves. But at the same time his Auras give his swarm such high stats, and Bayou 2 Card gives them a second chance, making it very difficult for his models to actually fail simple duels. Compare that to something like Hamelin, who is also summoning-swarm master, but whose rats are very susceptible to AOE, and there is a stark contrast. 

Got a few thoughts on things, but just to check you're not applying Bayou Bash to defensive flips? It is only during their activation that they receive the buff.

If you're talking Lenny's aura, though, carry on.

[Mycellanious]

10 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Got a few thoughts on things, but just to check you're not applying Bayou Bash to defensive flips? It is only during their activation that they receive the buff.

If you're talking Lenny's aura, though, carry on.

Yep, just Lenny's Aura as far as mitigation goes. Maybe you could argue that Bayou Bash buffs the swarm to make it too efficient or that Pig Eatin Grin should be reworked, but those would be a different arguement than "somer is too good at mitigating his supposed weaknesses"

[ShinChan]

35 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

Firstly, there are different kinds of summon Actions, its not super productive to lump Masters like Jakob or Sonia in with the rest because summoning isnt their primary focus, ie: they arent summoning every turn. 

Second, I actually have seen lots of complaints over both the forums and AWP on every single one of those Masters, excluding Jakob and Sonia. Dont forget that Tara was insanely powerful, to point of solo Tara being undefeated in several large tournaments, and had to receive a significant nerf, as well as a more or less explicit call out in the Recover Evidence strategy. So Tara isn't being complained about right now because she has already received her nerf, the others havent, and GG1 isn't well suited for her. 

I do agree however that I don't think the issue with the masters is necessarily the summon Action; I think in general in Malifaux masters become problematic when they have tools to more than effectively mitigate their weaknesses.

Dreamer for example, is in theory supposed to be weak early, and unstoppable late from Lucid Dreaming and Summons. However, his crew also has the most unique Min 3 models in the game, and can field more than any other Keyword because Stitched are Minion 3 and Summonable. This means his crew can out punch you early, and out flip / activate you late. His early game weakness is more than mitigated by the amount of Min 3 in his crew. Also, he got a significant buff with the change to Stunned which was never really addressed.

Som'er is in theory supposed to be a swarm master, summoning lots of cheap models to bog down the opponent. In theory, this should be mitigated by things like Blast, Pulses, or Shockwaves. But at the same time his Auras give his swarm such high stats, and Bayou 2 Card gives them a second chance, making it very difficult for his models to actually fail simple duels. Compare that to something like Hamelin, who is also summoning-swarm master, but whose rats are very susceptible to AOE, and there is a stark contrast. 

So I think personally summoners are more complex than their summoning.

Everyone complains about something at some point, so complains without data are just empty. 

Tara won a tournament using a loophole on the rules with Hannah Lovelace. She was aldo favored by the GG0. She was never OP. 

Comparison between Hamelin and Som'er doesn't make sense, they're very different masters. 

Although I agree that it's not the summoning itself, it's the resource generation what imbalances a master. The problem with Som'er could be easily fixed making Lenny's aura work only in opposed duels. 

[Mycellanious]

Just now, ShinChan said:

Everyone complains about something at some point, so complains without data are just empty. 

Tara won a tournament using a loophole on the rules with Hannah Lovelace. She was aldo favored by the GG0. She was never OP. 

Comparison between Hamelin and Som'er doesn't make sense, they're very different masters. 

Although I agree that it's not the summoning itself, it's the resource generation what imbalances a master. The problem with Som'er could be easily fixed making Lenny's aura work only in opposed duels. 

 

Well yes everything gets complained about at some point, but I mentioned the complaining because I felt it was fairly consistent and widespread.

I dont know about the Lovelace Loophole, what I heard was that Tara was able to too easily generate too many pass tokens and get to activate 3-4 models at the end of a turn. It also wasnt just one tournament, it was quite a few to my knowledge. For me, I think Lenny's Aura really should be Minion only, maybe Bayou Bash too (with stat adjustments) and I think Bayou 2 card maybe needs a range reduction, but I have minimal experience with Som'er and most of my knowledge of him comes from poscasts