Jump to content

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


esqulax

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

 

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

A lot of Tara's strength was also in the fact that GG0 was a very board position heavy scheme pool, which she excelled at since she was able to throw models around all over the board and reposition clear across the board in a pinch. GG1 has a lot more that requires direct interaction with the opponent, reducing the value of both that massive mobility and the end of turn chain activations.

 

Still good, but the scheme changes went a long way towards reducing her strength even before the Aionus nerf. Certainly doesn't strike me as OP post-GG1.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before writing this I actually started off with "I'll just comment briefly without getting too verbose on this" and here I am laughing at myself...

--

Low SS models are intentionally bad because they get more (possibly double) AP per SS than higher cost models. AP at the end of the day is the most important resource in Malifaux, and two 4ss models literally get twice as much AP as an 8ss model, depending on the quality of bonus action. Granted, they also have to use more move actions (total between them) to get in position, however they can also be in two places at once. All of these models are inherently more efficient at performing general actions throughout the game thanks to this fact. Although 3-5ss models are never absolute stars, they do great for their cost and different cheap models perform a variety of roles. Onryo are decent blasters, fighters, supporters, and schemers. Wicked dolls are crazy cheap, highly mobile, stealthy, and can perform some support roles. Old Cranky gives an Aura. Crooligans and Necropunks are insanely good schemers. Low River Monks are great healers. Test subjects are tanky as hell. Every Effigy is a cheap, tanky (for it's cost) model with a few unique abilities. Bayou Gators output some great damage. And so on and so forth. I will admit that MANY low SS models are sub-par choices in crews, but I think that has to do with those models either being summonable (Flying Piglet, Canine Remains, Tengu, All Gamin), or filling a niche that isn't valued highly (Guild Autopsy, Saboteur, Union Miner) or just being bad models simply on their own (Desperate Merc, Orderly), not because 3-5ss models are bad. I think a big reason for the "not valued highly" category is a separate issue of every crew's "core no-brainer takes" being upwards of 30-40 ss, allowing only 1-3 models of actual crew customization.

I think a big root cause is that right now the strat & scheme pool allows both crews to focus too much on the fight, and many schemes focus on keeping models alive/above-half-HP for VP. Aside from breakthough, spread them out, and symbols of authority there are no schemes or strategies which really push having to spread around the board and score objectives in multiple areas of the map (Corrupted Ley Lines somewhat does this, but the focus is more on making it from strat marker to strat marker in a single turn, not spreading out and being able to make an advantage in AP work for you. Also cheap models can be a liability since having the Lodestone bearer (or model about to receive the lodestone) die is a massive detriment in that scheme often meaning you're a turn behind). I'm sure in GG2 this will be flipped again and more power will return to taking more lower cost models.

--

I don't see a problem with the Focus mechanic. In fact, I love it. It provides actual counterplay to minus flips, whereas in M2E models with Serene Countenance or Finesse were virtually un-hittable. It also makes blasting viable (Onryo, Big Hat) and can even be used on defense. Mass granting of focus in an AOE is a separate problem, and has to do more with "too much action efficiency" being able to turn 1 AP or a bonus action from one model into 5+ AP for your other, often more important models.

--

Summoners are definitely powerful. Not as overpowered as in M2E, but still up there. The problem again comes with action efficiency. Your master (or henchman, sometimes) can turn 1 AP on Turn 1 into up to 9 AP + bonus actions (possibly 18 if multi-summoning) over the course of the game. This additional AP comes with Health which your opponent has to get through, or an engagement range which your opponent has to maneuver around, so even if the summoned model is dealt with, you are trading your 1 AP for multiple of your opponent's AP. And that's only Turn 1 - the summoning master gets to do it again turns 2 and 3 for only slightly less returns (7 AP, then 5 AP plus bonus actions) each time. Also keep in mind that most summoners can summon forward, meaning it's technically even MORE effective AP if you include the AP that would have needed to be spent to get that model into position in the first place (especially for low-Mv models like Drowned or Transmortis Students). For this, it usually only costs the summoner a high or high-ish card and more often than not a SS. In the VERY worst case if the summon doesn't ever activate but absorbs 2 attacks from an enemy master and dies that's not even that bad of a trade.

Another angle to consider is that the summoner gets to bring a toolbox to every game AFTER crews are revealed and deployed, whereas every other crew takes their risks and gambles and has to stick with them. If you need a scheme runner, you can summon one of those. If your frontline is suffering, summon a tarpit or fighter. Von Schtook is probably the worst offender here, seeing as his summons are perfect for different types of situations.

A problem with some Summoners is that they are too swingy in power. A Dashel with a 13 in hand on Turn 1 is probably in twice as good of a position as a Dashel without. Same thing goes for Asami, so much so that she often takes the sub-par Emissary just to mulligan her hand. For this issue Kirai, Somer, Sandeep, Dreamer, and Schtook don't suffer as much, as they are all perfectly happy to summon with moderate or low-severe cards which are rare to not get. Also, the F%*#ing Black Joker - usually the Black Joker comes up and it sucks, but it allows luck to skew the game too much IMO when it comes up on a Once Per Turn action which is core to your crew's function like summoning. I really think "Once Per Turn" actions should be "Succeed once per turn." It's much like getting a perfect, or awful opening hand in a card game - it makes your chances of winning or losing that game skyrocket. This luck factor is not an issue when 3-5 games are played every round of a MTG tournament, it's much more of a issue in this medium where even top competitors can struggle to finish a game within 2 hours and tournaments consist of 3-6 games total.

Other types of summoning like Levi, Lynch, McMourning, and Sonnia I'm sure we can agree are not problematic, and some might even need buffs. These are usually very limited in model type, require killing enemies in a specific way, or require too many resources/setup to be repeatable throughout the game. It's really the "summon anywhere within range" masters plus Schtook, Dashel, and Dreamer which are the core complaint magnets.

 

If we assume summoning is a problem, the question comes up of what to do about it. In M2E where summoning was even more powerful, other crews competed by having just as broken mechanics. Sonnia was the worst offender, simply deleting entire crews on Turn 1. Viks were also an issue for much the same reason, sling-shotting and eliminating everything within a bubble. Lilith would steal your opponent's most important model and have her crew murder it (much like Colette is able to do now - I HATE this mechanic but that's a different conversation). Levi would delete a model or two every turn, teleported everywhere, and was unkillable (I think he summoned too - but less than masters like Kirai and Dreamer, obviously). Seamus was similar to Levi and also summoned here and there. And so on.

This design philosophy makes some sense. "If summoning masters can be *this* efficient and effective with their AP, then non-summoning masters/crews need to be able to generate roughly the same amount of value out of their features to compete effectively." Or in reverse - "The summoning masters' other features need to be below par compared to non-summoners." I think this might be where the problem is. Most summoning masters are still grossly effective with their other abilities and actions. Som'er gets a 2/3B/4BB gun at up to Stat 7, can focus as a bonus action near Cranky, basically has butterfly jump, and gives his whole crew Bayou-Two-Card and Pig-Eating Grin (also, Good Ol' Boys are ridiculous). Dreamer has a gun which ignores Armor and Incorporeal, lots of Min 3 in his crew, stitched are DUMB, and the Lucid Dreams mechanic. Kirai begins summoning twice in mid-game when Ikiryo is killed, with The Whisper can guarantee good triggers from her other actions, and her whole crew is incorporeal and deals passive damage to enemies. The Yan-Lo/Toshiro engine of course has Yan-Lo being a god in mid-late game. Sandeep has an obey, can draw LoS/range from friendlies, and his crew generates way too many cards and other effects. Von Schtook has an AoE focus distributor, gives out fast, some good blasts, draws lots of cards, and has the tankiest summons in the game. I don't know enough about Tara's playstyle.

Dashel and Asami are outliers in my opinion. Dashel is unspectacular himself but is carried hard by summoning executioners, and just being a Guild Master which gives him Pale Rider and Phiona Gage. Asami is beautifully designed IMO, as her summons don't last forever without constant upkeep nor are they individually disgusting except for the Jorogumo, but she can pull off insane stunts like 26"+ Yokai assassination runs, double Akaname 17" scheme marker drops, double Akaname slow/poison bombs, and double Tengu 4+ AoE healing.

As long as we don't create an overpowered hellscape like M2E where every competitive crew has a nuclear bomb in it's pocket and it's only a matter of who alpha strikes first, I think some buffs and nerfs for key crews could do well to level the playing field, and I think so far Wyrd has done a good job with this. I wouldn't want summoning to go away, as I LOVE idea of summoning in most games, and the mechanics especially in Malifaux as opposed to other tabletop games I've played where summoning gives you some worthless throwaway unit (I'm looking at you, Warhammer).

Another less elegant but possibly better gameplay solution could be to just full-on rule "no summoning on turn 1". This keeps summoners mostly the same, doesn't destroy their attrition-like style of play, but just removes that overpowered bump in ~6-9 free SS on turn 1. This could make it easier to balance summoning masters since every summoning mechanic won't be abused on first turn. Couldn't tell you what story reason there would be for this restriction though.

--

My gut immediately went to: "I'd like to see the game move up to 60ss as a potential solution to both problems I mentioned above." This would give players 10ss more to customize their crews (imagine McMourning actually playing a little shooty with some autopsies!) since like I mentioned above I feel most crews' core models almost always make up 30-40 ss and leave me feeling like I don't have enough to play with in crew composition. It would also lessen the impact of every summon in the game, since more models are on the table to begin with.  On the other hand, obviously increasing the standard game size by 20% would have some cascading consequences for game balance especially when it comes to the hand and objective balance, and having an extra 2-4 models on the table would push game lengths much longer - which is probably a non-starter.

 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great points above.

I agree that to some degree low-cost models can be 'fixed' by addressing the schemes and strats, but then you're still going to have huge discrepancies between the models. Of course, arguably you have a pretty wide gap between high cost models with models like Madame Sybelle having a greater or equal cost to everything in the faction but masters and rider... But I think the core point of "on average, low-cost models are more likely to be unplayable for their cost" is an issue. Although this may be a meta thing as well - people tend to like the bigger, flashier models... So low-cost models tend to only get played when they're especially strong.

Focus... Could someone enlighten me as to what factions are really struggling facing focus stacking? I'm just not able to imagine it as a ressers player.

Summoners - I agree Dreamer's keyword is probably overtuned for a summoner. The min-3 issue especially is ridiculous. More models should have damage tracks like Serena or Alps in his keyword, so they benefit from flipping moderates and above. "Weak" cards should be a weakness of his keyword. That said, I have only lost a few games to summoners so far, so perhaps I don't have a true conception of their power. Can anyone point to events or perhaps recorded games where we can see summoners overperforming? I suppose on Recover Evidence things certainly seem slanted towards summoners, but that seems fine if only one strategy is heavily skewed towards them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 daydream+2 ancient pact, weadow weaver, serena, stitched, stitched, stitched/bbs

this crew can score everething

u need to deal with 3 stitched that could deal a lot of dmg with their gamble your life and they would get cards that are removed from the game, they can be easyly return back with weaver or dreamer, and stitched as dd can do same amount of dmg as executioner or golem and summon will be placed right into position, and u cant ignore them; focuses can be removed without tn by madness; strategy like ley lines can be ruined by madness by scatter without tn; weaver just drop!(why not create?) marker within 6 without tn, so symbols could be scored easyly too; two ancient packs wins initiative almost every turn while from your deck weak cards are removed at turn 3; incorporeal and armour are ignored by almost all keyword, htw doesnt saves when u flip with 2 negatives moderate or higher; with arcanists i dont see any chances with this crew because if i try to kill all this-it doesnt matter(i have killed 17 stones at the start of 2 turn) but than all my models just die from a lot of atacks, if i try to ignore and just scheming- my schemrunners just die because dreamer can control almost all the map; some crews like dashel, ophelia or sommer maybe can deal with it because of shooting or a lot of dmg with no resist, but they are broken too

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

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 always find this amusing. Some of this was 1 group (I think from the few people that thought it worked that way in the rules questions) reading the rules differently to others (and assumed Hannah could use her bonus action to charge),  the other parts of her errata not only didn't touch her summoning, they didn't actually touch her card. Her henchmen recieved an alteration to action which added a TN and removed the built in suit. 

I don't count that as a significant nerf. Others may disagree, but needing a 7 for the action to happen and a henchman needing a suit just means that you need some effort to control your resources. 

(and as an aside I don't know that you can say Solo tara was undefeated at large tournements, she won them, and the player that won was undefeated, but was that just 1 player doing well, or was it multiple players doing well? Were there any other Tara players at the event? Because the way most events are run, someone has to end undefeated, its just the nature of the Swiss pairing system). 

 

Anyway, back to the intial topic.  I personally think that one of the reasons that cheaper models seem weaker this edition is because of the abundance of Focus. For the last 2 editions focus was somethign that was only obtained to last the current turn, and unless you really needed to bypass a negative on the attack, was done to try and get a cheatable damage flip at the cost of only getting 1 attack that turn.  

In this edition its easy to get the focus at a non critical time, and use it to get severes when you want. As such its much easier to hit those 5 and 6 severe damages. That means its a lot less effort to remove cheap models, and so they are less likely to survive to take advantage of the extar AP they generate. 

I probably differ form most in that I think you could change the focus rules in lots of different ways, and most wouldn't need any other alterations. It would change the relative power of some models, and something that reduces the advantage of stacking focus on models will amke those models that can stack focus less popular, but I doubt they would suddenly become the worse models in the game. It would make a shift in the current power balance of various models but I don't think any of the suggestions I have seen would caus eany existing model to break the game, or become broken itself. 

Summoning has always been contentious. I think that the biggest problem is that what players seem to want is consistency. if you can't easily get your best summon off each turn, then people complain about the action. This has lead to it being easier to get the resources needed, be that access to suits or extra card draw. (you can see the same issue if you look at some of the discussions on the value of a non-suited leap. some people think its nearly useless on a non soulstone user because you might not get to do it). 

I think that this edition has less powerful summoning than last edition (due to the once per turn limit) but its less resource intensive, and so its much easier to get the maximum value from your summoning each turn. This may be leading to a slightly misleading view that summoning is worse this edition. (Or I could just be wrong, I'm not much of a summoner player, I generally can't make them work)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could I just point out that the op's statement "lots of cheap models are terrible" seems to be countered by "there are a few great cheap models, therefore all cheap models must be good", which obviously makes no sense.

It's worth mentioning (as brought up in several other threads), that one reason elite models are favoured over cheap ones in a tournament setting is time. A fix to this could be to improve the stats of cheap models but drastically cut down on their rules, keeping only what defines their role (although this would require a change to lots of cards, so won't happen this edition). This might however only offer a small benefit to experienced players as those cheap, low complexity models, still could have high complexity interactions with rules from other models... But there would still be some improvement.

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

I quite like the idea of just addressing cheap models through strats and schemes. Public enemies is a nice step, and is very different from Reckoning.

For something new, imagine something like a minion runic binding - choose an enemy at the start of the game, and have three minions/models within X" of it to score the point. Or even just 2/3 models within the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting points.

About cheap models... Depending on the list and the schemes/strategy, I like to I use them and there are a few of them like wicked dolls that I really like; but other are just plain bad, but that has more to do with the model than with the fact they are cheap. However the activation control and inititative is a good point, I usually keep my list with few models when I want to get back to back activations. I think there are some models in dire need of love, but other than that I don't find a problem here.

Focused... this had its own thread and I can see both points. A game with nerfed focused could be possible, but right now it'd unbalance a lot of things and will make a lot of defensive tech much better and healing more powerful imho (plus it'll leave factions that rely on agression without other ways to get :+flip to damage like NVB in a bad place). Players have always the posibility to include condition removal when a lot of Focused is expected. I like the suggestion of making Distracted anti focused, but not making them cancel each other (like Fast/Slow) as it'll be too good, but making that when Distracted is inflicted the other player may choose to remove the same amount of focused instead; that way the model can still do Focus + attack even with Distracted+2.

Summoning: Agree, they are slightly above the curve; but it doesn't help that some of those top tier masters has also a lot of good stuff or resource generation. The no summoning turn 1 rule could actually be quite good to help balance those (and speed games); during turn 1 is too easy to funnel resources into summoning (and this also noticeable with those non master summoners)

 

I'll add a  point that I personally don't like and is the power gap between masters; for example there is a lot of complaining about Dreamer in this thread and to be fair that master is very good and could take a hit; but at the same time it's the one keeping NVB relevant; with the exception of Zoraida any other NVB master range from underpowered to niche or easily countered. I'd like to see some serious hits to the good crews and buffs to the underperforming ones across the board; there are a lot of fun masters that are just not competitive enough when they face the top dogs.

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought regards Focus, as a means of not making it an issue when spammed, but not weakening it's seemingly primary purpose, of allowing a model to forgo two normal attacks in favor of one big one.

Focused +X: Before performing an opposed duel, this model may lower the value of this Condition by one to receive a :+flip to the duel. If the Condition was lowered to zero, it receives a :+flip to any resulting damage flip this model makes.

That way, stacking still has it's benefits, but isn't as bad as those who see it a problem, currently do. And there's a quasi-precedent with Swagger (no Focus isn't technically the same as zero Focus, but it's close enough).

If people are concerned that you can put Focus on an enemy model to make it not get the plus flip, make it "may lower the value of this condition by at least one", and that issue goes away.

Though then Obey Masters get to screw with it, but meh, if you're stacking Focus into an Obey crew, tough. Or you just don't allow Obey to spend Conditions, and probably tokens too, from enemy models, and one of the biggest criticisms of Obey crews goes away too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Morgan Vening said:

Focused +X: Before performing an opposed duel, this model may lower the value of this Condition by one to receive a :+flip to the duel. If the Condition was lowered to zero, it receives a :+flip to any resulting damage flip this model makes.

Seems a little inelegant. I would do:

Quote

Focused +X: Before performing an opposed duel, this model may end this Condition to receive a :+flip to the duel equal to this condition's value (to a maximum of 3?) and a :+flip to any resulting damage flip.

That way focus can be stacked infinitely for small benefits each stack, but can't be abused for :+flipto damage flip after damage flip (Looking at you, Seamus). However, we keep the benefits of models being able to carry a focus with them across turns in M3E. It makes sense in reality too - you can keep trying to concentrate harder, but once you break concentration and deliver the focused strike, you're back to normal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Biletsky, to a maximum of 3 is semi redundant. You can never flip more than 4 cards for a duel (although since you're also cancelling minuses it is still a little relevant).

To me, stacking focus doesn't seem nearly as scary as models that can generate it for free (bonus action or swagger, or in some cases both if facing Som'Er), though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem with Pass Tokens is that they allow you to auto-win initiative.

One of the weaknesses of cheap models is being easily killed before being activated and if your opponent is sitting on a bunch of Pass Tokens on turn 2 or 3 they can easily capitalise on that. Activation control is useful, but it is most useful on turn 1 (for avoiding/initiating alpha-strikes) and on turn 5 (for scoring/denying pivotal VP from end of game schemes).

Turns 2, 3 and 4 I find that I care about initiative way more than activation control because I'm usually getting in the thick of it, and I start looking at my opponents small models as a free Ill Omens +X.

Pass Tokens should be used for activation control more often so that they are an equaliser for spam crews instead of a disadvantage. Maybe limit the bonus to initiative to +1? Maybe change it to +flips so that you will probably win the initial flip but are on equal footing when it comes to cheating?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2020 at 12:53 AM, Maniacal_cackle said:

@Biletsky, to a maximum of 3 is semi redundant. You can never flip more than 4 cards for a duel (although since you're also cancelling minuses it is still a little relevant).

To me, stacking focus doesn't seem nearly as scary as models that can generate it for free (bonus action or swagger, or in some cases both if facing Som'Er), though.

Pulse focus is definitely the biggest issue, but I still have a problem with the way focus works in general. 

It is not exactly due to it being overpowered, but having your models take one action and then focus is often the correct choice early in the game, and it gives you an advantage if your opponent doesn't do it and rushes you down instead. This isn't exactly broken, but it just feels against the spirit of the game and I don't see a point in having the game rewards the player who plays defensively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2020 at 11:09 PM, 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.

Can I just quickly point out that when masters like Kirai and Asami are perhaps near the bottom of that list, that really just illustrates how good the rest of them are. (Maybe with the exception of Sonia, but I am not sure I would consider her a real summoner) 

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

20 minutes ago, esqulax said:

Pulse focus is definitely the biggest issue, but I still have a problem with the way focus works in general. 

It is not exactly due to it being overpowered, but having your models take one action and then focus is often the correct choice early in the game, and it gives you an advantage if your opponent doesn't do it and rushes you down instead. This isn't exactly broken, but it just feels against the spirit of the game and I don't see a point in having the game rewards the player who plays defensively. 

I disagree with this. This is the easiest first order counter to alpha strike crews. With plenty of crews it still makes sense to try to alpha and with others you end up with a cat and mouse of positioning, which is where the game gets fun and interesting to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information