Wishlist for Gaining Ground 2?

[ooshawn]

my wish, make cheap models worth something. give more incentive for thematic crews. Build the storyline. Hold more leagues.

[belorey]

2 hours ago, Cats Laughing said:

I understand the idea, especially given how Fast/Slow work, but I don't think Distract/Focus would really result in better balance.  Focus is available to every model (except certain models like Archie) but Distract is not evenly spread around factions, much less keywords.  Colette certainly doesn't need this sort of buff.

Agree, but i think Colette is not tier-s because of Distracted. They have other problems like easy acces to stunned and Coryphee Duet as a killing machine. Add a Rider to reactivate the Duet so the mix get even stronger. 😂

[belorey]

1 hour ago, Jesy Blue said:

What if you could give a model I base contact Distracted as a general action?

Not bad, but then they should change other models like Field Reporter that right now they are not played and they basically give distracted as attack.

[Harlekin]

5 hours ago, ooshawn said:

Hold more leagues.

This might be the solution for cheap models not doing much. In a league those cheap basterds really make a difference. 

Doesn't help with wishlist for GG2, though.

[extremor]

How about 4 strategies and none of them are killy? I at least would like to see how the meta  evolves around that. 

[belorey]

On 3/8/2021 at 5:52 PM, belorey said:

I would let 1 killing strategie and few schemes based on kills because there are some factions that don't have the mobility. So they cannot score easy moving around but are good killing enemies.

@extremorthis is what we were speaking at first page of the post. And the quote is what i think.

As a Guild player outside of Dashel minions we have no mobility for schemes all around the board so thats no fair. 

[extremor]

@beloreyWhat if the schemepool would change and there would be way more schemes to score „near“ but depending upon opponent models (like runic binding)? 
I think most crews I read about that need nerfing are brutal and flexible. I would love to see more control then beating. 

[belorey]

25 minutes ago, extremor said:

@beloreyWhat if the schemepool would change and there would be way more schemes to score „near“ but depending upon opponent models (like runic binding)? 
I think most crews I read about that need nerfing are brutal and flexible. I would love to see more control then beating. 

Runic Binding noooo please. I think is the worst scheme of the game. Very hard to do and need too many resources. 

But maybe an Strat that you need to take control of them and defend from enemies. So if you are B2B at the end of the turn you score 1VP. It could be 1 50mm marker and you must deploy in the midle of your side of the table. They must take control of yours and you have to take control of the opposite.

[extremor]

Just now, belorey said:

Runic Binding noooo please. I think is the worst scheme of the game. Very hard to do and need too many resources. 

But maybe an Strat that you need to take control of them and defend from enemies. So if you are B2B at the end of the turn you score 1VP. It could be 1 50mm marker and you must deploy in the midle of your side of the table. They must take control of yours and you have to take control of the opposite.

I come from TOS and I really like the scheme. Maybe if there are more like that and scoring gets more difficult in every way...? But that’s not a wish I have but a direction the game could evolve to 

[belorey]

3 minutes ago, extremor said:

I come from TOS and I really like the scheme. Maybe if there are more like that and scoring gets more difficult in every way...? But that’s not a wish I have but a direction the game could evolve to 

I don't know how it works in ToS but in Malifaux nobody takes It because is sooooooo hard to score. So you are giving a strong advantage to your rival.

[eddy]

I hope there will be no strategy like recover evidence. It is bad if strat litteraly cripple whole crew like Tara

[Adran]

53 minutes ago, belorey said:

Runic Binding noooo please. I think is the worst scheme of the game. Very hard to do and need too many resources. 

What if all schemes were this hard to score? If It's not taken at the moment because other schemes are easier, then you can just make all schemes that hard. 

[extremor]

That’s what I meant. It may be worth trying imho. Maybe simply rushing to beat wouldn’t be that strong anymore...

[belorey]

2 hours ago, Adran said:

What if all schemes were this hard to score? If It's not taken at the moment because other schemes are easier, then you can just make all schemes that hard. 

If the game becomes a duel between two crews dropping schemes in a exactly point to make a perfect position without any need to attack each other to score VPs, or even worst, if spend PA on attacks makes you loss the game because you have not enought resources to move and interact to score those hard VP. Then this game will change from a wargame with models to a eurogame with models.

[Harlekin]

14 minutes ago, Adran said:

What if all schemes were this hard to score? If It's not taken at the moment because other schemes are easier, then you can just make all schemes that hard. 

Which would be another way from keeping players from spending too much ressources on killing. 

On the other hand, getting stuff killed becomes even more of a disadvantage and so it's not unlikely that killing first, scoring second remains a legit tactic.

 

10 minutes ago, belorey said:

change from a wargame with models to a eurogame with models

Besides the fact that you might slightly over exaggarete a tiny bit, this might not be a bad thing. 

[belorey]

26 minutes ago, Harlekin said:

Besides the fact that you might slightly over exaggarete a tiny bit, this might not be a bad thing. 

Hahaha sure is a exaggeration but i think the people can understand the point. Am i right?

I'm agree that a balance is needed between killing and scheming. I'm playing with Nellie and i know what It means to add OOK to get some damage on the keyword. But i don't want neither to forget that 2/3 of the card's back are Attack Actions and i want to use too to smash enemies. 💪

[Adran]

48 minutes ago, belorey said:

If the game becomes a duel between two crews dropping schemes in a exactly point to make a perfect position without any need to attack each other to score VPs, or even worst, if spend PA on attacks makes you loss the game because you have not enought resources to move and interact to score those hard VP. Then this game will change from a wargame with models to a eurogame with models.

I don't see malifaux as a war game anyway, it's an objective driven skirmish game. I've not yet managed it this edition but I've won games in all the other editions where I've been wiped out and the other side haven't. ( in one case the opponent ended the game with more models than they started with). 

[regleant]

Honestly, I just want GG2. I don't even care what it is, just want a change.

[RisingPhoenix]

8 hours ago, Adran said:

What if all schemes were this hard to score? If It's not taken at the moment because other schemes are easier, then you can just make all schemes that hard. 

There's a big danger in this.  See, if all schemes get harder across the board, eventually everyone realizes "shit, the only way I can do that is table my opponent."  Then they realize "hey wait, they can't score their schemes while I'm busy murdering their stuff, because their schemes are too complicated!"  

Then it becomes more AP efficient to just murder your opponent, because you don't really need to worry about spending AP on scheme denial or being outscored - the schemes take too many actions and you can just use the best status effect for action denial.  

You don't want schemes like Runic Binding that common because it won't force people to use more schemy models to score them, it'll reward killy crews who use murder to stop the action-heavy schemes.  If I saw 5 schemes that were as tough as Runic binding I wouldn't try to build some sort of scheme-running Tara crew with teleports everywhere, I'd take Leveticus and wipe my opponent off the map.

[Jesy Blue]

There's two things I loved that I know we'll never get back from 2nd edition, but I'm gonna mention them anyways:

1. The static scheme that was in every scenario.  There used to be 4 random schemes plus a Scheme that was in every game. I'd want to make it a stupid hard one to pull off though, so you could always go for it, but it was super hard to get both points for it.
2. Faction Specific Schemes, they were schemes that were available to be put in the pool only if you were playing that faction. I say this as the Outcast player who had the worst/best faction scheme (when you declared the scheme you gained 3 soul stones but you could not gain points from the scheme.... obviously it was called "Money First").

[ShinChan]

23 minutes ago, Jesy Blue said:

Faction Specific Schemes, they were schemes that were available to be put in the pool only if you were playing that faction. I say this as the Outcast player who had the worst/best faction scheme (when you declared the scheme you gained 3 soul stones but you could not gain points from the scheme.... obviously it was called "Money First").

This was great honestly, I wish we could have that back, even if it's not even for Gaining Grounds.

[RisingPhoenix]

Completely outside gaining grounds, I was thinking when I was brainstorming variants, it'd be awesome if they published some sort of "variant pack".  Cards for a whole bunch of wacky schemes, some markers to be used for truly unusual stuff, maybe some models even for things like gun turrets or treasure chests.

Just casual stuff that's certainly unbalancing but also fun.  If Wyrd gave it a kick, the community might take off with it.

Or it's "too complex, eh who wants that" and no one gets it, who knows?

[ooshawn]

I think community schemes for a set league or tournament would be amazing. maybe even a community errata. especially since wyrd seems shy to pull the trigger on anything

[Harlekin]

2 hours ago, RisingPhoenix said:

Or it's "too complex, eh who wants that" and no one gets it, who knows?

I like your ideas but I'd prefer to see it in an expansion (ideally a campaign book like Shifting Loyalities) and keep the general GG straight for competitive play. 

Most of the times, I choose style over substance with miniature gaming (campaign over hardcore competitive) but I still want to have the option of going into a game as balanced as possible if I am in the mood of getting in a real clash of intellects. 

[Adran]

7 hours ago, RisingPhoenix said:

There's a big danger in this.  See, if all schemes get harder across the board, eventually everyone realizes "shit, the only way I can do that is table my opponent."  Then they realize "hey wait, they can't score their schemes while I'm busy murdering their stuff, because their schemes are too complicated!"  

I'm not sure this is true, based on the last 10 years. What ever the schemes are like there is a group of players who kill first and score later. If I can score a couple of points while you are killing me, that you can't get back after you've killed me, then the schemes approach can work regardless of the difficulty.