Maniacal_cackle Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 1 minute ago, Rufess said: I do agree that tournament is a better place than causal play to collect data for balancing. But then I also know GAMES came to the end because they had gone too far on the competitive scene. The frequency of errata could change how players play the game as well. During the open beta of M3E when models were changing on a weekly basis, players tended to call for a nerf instead of learning to play against when encountered strong models. In another game where it takes turn to playtest every faction in monthly basis, players from other factions just randomly yelling "OP pls nerf" instead of actually playing it. These maybe a bit too extreme as examples, but I believe there is theory can be found in common. The period between errata should be long enough for players to overcome the knee reaction and actually play and learn the problematic models. Discussion can help for sure, but it is not much better than theorycrafting. Not that I am a competitive player so the top tablers can just ignore my comments here.🙃 That's a fair point, and it's possible errata every 6 months would be too frequent xD Although it depends on philosophy. If Wyrd shifted to an errata every 6 months AND changed to a philosophy of smaller changes at a time, that might be viable (although that again requires reworking their philosophy on how often a specific model can be errata-ed). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEV Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 48 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said: Some stuff is so miserable to play against it should be nerfed, whether or not it is winning tournaments/competitive games. I disagree with that... NPE is a subjective experience. Casual layer will self-adjust... That's call auto-regulation and that why you rarely need power errata for casual play (but you might need errata to make thing more coherent or streamlined). If something is widely considered as a NPE most play group will avoid it. But if the same things shows up in tournament and is not winning... well who care? You can play Hoff2 all day long... The only exception to that is something that generate super random wins (see the beginning of hearthstone). Like a master that would be awfully but as a bonus action of flip a card that can't be cheated, if you flip a severe tou win, if you don't you loose. This would be horrible for competitive play and would require an errata even thoug you would be unlikely to win a tournament with it. Beside that... of course we'll have errata. This is the last resort to balance the game. Even though I think it's more elegant when you manage to do it with a rules errata (focus, summons) than a card errata. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 They could also change the cycle up a bit. Currently we have... New releases in November. New Gaining grounds and errata + FAQ in March. We could have something like... New releases in November. New Gaining Grounds and FAQ in March. Errata & FAQ in July or so. This way there'd be a longer gap between the first errata after new releases, and it'd have the added benefit of allowing errata to finalise after seeing a new GG environment. That said, I can imagine this one may be logistically difficult as it would possibly mess with playtesting windows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 20 minutes ago, SEV said: That's call auto-regulation I don't really buy the auto-regulation argument. You see a similar thing in MTG (rule 0), but people often struggle to agree exactly on what they're doing unless there's a specific format (like 'singles' or 'cEDH' or 'waac'). It's hard to make a format name for 'don't really want to play against Explorer's Society.' It's also awkward to go "I know you bought and painted this crew you're excited about, but I don't want to play against Cadmus." And on top of that, technically everything can be subject to auto-regulation. There's nothing stopping TOs from saying "for this tournament, Archivist loses Ill omens." But I don't think that's very practical. EDIT: Actually, it is interesting to note that I experience far more auto-regulation in tournaments than I do in casual play. Many tournaments I attend state no singles, no DMH, etc, whereas in casual play I get to play whatever I want if I just give people a heads up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vangerdahast Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 1 hour ago, Maniacal_cackle said: They could also change the cycle up a bit. Currently we have... New releases in November. New Gaining grounds and errata + FAQ in March. We could have something like... New releases in November. New Gaining Grounds and FAQ in March. Errata & FAQ in July or so. This way there'd be a longer gap between the first errata after new releases, and it'd have the added benefit of allowing errata to finalise after seeing a new GG environment. That said, I can imagine this one may be logistically difficult as it would possibly mess with playtesting windows. If I remember correctly, During M2E, it was: January, New Gaining Grounds, Faq, Errata. June: Faq, Errata. And June was for "emergency" erratas like Archivist could be. January for "rework" erratas like Von Stook or Colette. Perhaps going back to this can be a solution. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 Just now, Vangerdahast said: If I remember correctly, During M2E, it was: January, New Gaining Grounds, Faq, Errata. June: Faq, Errata. And June was for "emergency" erratas like Archivist could be. January for "rework" erratas like Von Stook or Colette. Perhaps going back to this can be a solution. I think they were talking in the podcast about possibly going back to this model. But of course there's just so many challenges for Wyrd at the moment between awesome new releases, covid, worldwide supply chain disruptions, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azahul Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 3 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said: I think they were talking in the podcast about possibly going back to this model. But of course there's just so many challenges for Wyrd at the moment between awesome new releases, covid, worldwide supply chain disruptions, etc... Gosh awesome new releases are such a big challenge to deal with. Poor Wyrd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted November 1, 2021 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 5 hours ago, SEV said: I disagree with that... NPE is a subjective experience. Casual layer will self-adjust... That's call auto-regulation and that why you rarely need power errata for casual play (but you might need errata to make thing more coherent or streamlined). If something is widely considered as a NPE most play group will avoid it. Wasn't Paralyze removed basically due to people finding it NPE? In fact, I think that NPE stuff is the main difference in "balancing" for casual vs competitive and rather important. I mean, I'm not sure how casual players could be adversely affected by balance errata aimed at competitive play but ignoring NPE since it isn't winning tournaments is a thing that could affect casual play. As for errata schedule - I heard tell of Kirai2 summoning 15-19SS worth of models four turns straight in a game. Now, maybe this is balanced but if it isn't, at the current pace she would be like this until 2023. And I mean, I feel that it would be a complete miracle if the titles didn't have any OP stuff. If the errata schedule will be made more frequent I feel that then there's more hope for errata and I would most heartily welcome it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trikk Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 I actually think NPE errata is for the casual player and balancing is for competitve. If you have a new player and he gets NPE demolished (like Tara2 kidnap) there is a high chance he will not play again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddywhack Posted November 1, 2021 Report Share Posted November 1, 2021 14 hours ago, SEV said: If something is widely considered as a NPE most play group will avoid it. But if the same things shows up in tournament and is not winning... well who care? You can play Hoff2 all day long... While some of it may be subjective, there are most definitely things that are bad for the game. And if it's not getting played because it's avoided in casual and not good enough in competitive, that is a perfect reason to fix it. Something isn't working correctly. Ideally, everything should be fun and playable. I don't think everything is going to be top tier competitive, but I don't think the fact that 'it's not winning' should be the benchmark for leaving an NPE in the game. Otherwise why spend the time creating that model and rules? If it's so obviously broken that people don't want to be 'that guy' in casual play, but it's not winning in competitive play, then it needs to be fixed imo. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RisingPhoenix Posted November 8, 2021 Report Share Posted November 8, 2021 My belief and hope is that Wyrd has been working on first Explorers then Title Masters since M3E's release, and that as a result they've been reluctant to buff models when we basically have only "half the picture" of the game. In addition, a mass buff would mess up playtesting. As a small example Sebastian was pretty underwhelming for McMourning 1.0, but McMourning 2.0 makes better use out of both his summoning and out of Canine remains, turning him into a huge dog/corpse engine. If they'd have buffed Sebastian for being meh, they'd probably have had to turn around and nerf him. So I think there's a very good shot with GG3 we'll get a lot of small buffs that we've been waiting for with GG1/2. As for nerfing, I mostly overall like the nerfs, with only a few truly inexplicable ones. Generally they've been using a lighter touch than they did in M2E which is good. And some things are just too strong. You don't want models that show up in every list, or masters that can draw 10 cards a turn and summon, or keywords that are optimal for every scheme and strategy. I'd hope they'd be more frequent, especially a mid-season adjustment to strats/schemes that they teased by going from the yearly format to the 1/2/3 etc. format (letting them do GG2.5 for instance). But COVID and the sheer mass of models they needed to test probably got in the way. So in the future with the game more stable, they have a better basis to make those sorts of small adjustments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cats Laughing Posted November 16, 2021 Report Share Posted November 16, 2021 On 11/1/2021 at 6:00 AM, Math Mathonwy said: I'm not sure how casual players could be adversely affected by balance errata aimed at competitive play It's not likely, but a poorly done errata could unintentionally hit models that don't need the errata which can create unfun situations for casual players. One that'll point to here is the summoning token interaction with small mindless summoned models (like stuffed piglets and malifaux rats) and The Jury. All you competitive players probably don't care much, or will say don't play Wong/Hamelin into Lady J/Guild, but it is an errata that has made things less fun for casual players in the specific instance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Oogie Boogie Posted November 16, 2021 Report Share Posted November 16, 2021 most games change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.