Hot take: should charge be reworked?

[Maniacal_cackle]

Okay, time for a hot take from a random discussion without thinking it all through, just to throw it out there.

What if we got rid of focus.

Then we removed the free attack from charges.

Then we made charges give you a positive to attack and damage flip on the next melee attack this activation. 

It would keep charges at two AP worth of value while reducing the threat ranges of the game. It would also mean it would be easier to control models to stop them positive flipping. 

The idea being cheap models would be more valuable and positioning would become a bigger deal if Archie couldn't just hit you from 19 inches away for example.

Secondary hot take: maybe I should have started the discussion with asking if threat ranges are too big and contribute to the problems for cheap minions.

(This is of course possibly an idea for a next edition or a malifaux 3.5, as it would be a big task to change this for the current cards...  although maybe it would work).

[solkan]

Who needs a melee attack, anyway? 
Edit:  Maybe if you have a grievance about a model like Archie, lead with that instead.  😛 

[Azahul]

Sounds like it makes the fast models just moderately swift, but makes the slow models excruciatingly slow. Remember this isn't a relative change. For some models this halves their threat range. For other models it reduces it by less than a quarter. And let's not get into what it does to non-melee attacks, or how it makes protracted brawls into Serene Countenance models impossible. The impact is not evenly distributed.

 

See, the thing with big sweeping changes is that they just set a new baseline for the game. You aren't going to fix whole archetypes of models without breaking other archetypes in the process. This change isn't inherently bad. It just sets a new normal for the game and will create new classes of underplayed models that will only see table time if you approach each one with specific targeted buffs.

 

...but that is also the situation we are in right now. Some archetypes don't work well (mainly low cost combat Minions). We could buff those models to see play by buffing them individually instead of a grand sweeping core rulebook change, and it would likely be a better fix than shifting the baseline and rendering other model types less useful. 

 

I get why it's appealing to think that one or two core book fixes would suddenly fix the problems of all the underplayed models in the game. It isn't even entirely impossible that it wouldn't. It's going to have collateral damage though, and you could more easily fix that damage by fixing up the current set of collateral damage models in the current context we're more familiar with than try to guess at the most heavily impacted models in a new context and land on the benefits they would need to see play.

[Da Git]

While I largely agree with @Azahul, I'll bite!

Another less impactful idea would be attacks generated by the chargeaction can't use focus. That would mean that you can no longer 1-shot things from ~11 with ease.

[theamazingmrg]

Just off the top of my head...

 

• If we remove focus, what does that do to Distracted?
  • If we remove distracted as well, where does that leave Ivan?
• Whats the knock-on effect on abilities like Charge through and Extended Reach?
• How does this improve the survivability of low-cost Minions?  They can still be taken out with a Severe from any model with a decent damage track, except with this change that attack gains positives it might not normally have had.

[Mycellanious]

I don't really see an issue with Focus or Charges rn. Especially since I am one of the players who really likes to run cheap models. The biggest problems I have had are Guns and the Dead Rider pulsing out damage. I'm very VERY happy if my opponent wants to Walk-Charge, use Focus to kill my Moleman instead of doing literally anything impactful with their activation lmfao

[Mycellanious]

Oh also don't forget that due to the Walk tax this would hurt 2 smaller models MORE than it would hurt 1 big model

[Adran]

You are getting fairly close to rules for earlier editions in many ways, with charge forcing you to use 2 actions to complete.  In first charge was an increased move and a to damage for a (2) action. In M2e it was an increased move and 2 attacks for ( 2) actions. ( because it turned out that most of the time it wasn't worth the charge because the 2 attacks you suffer in return generally hurt more).  

when M3 decided to do away with action points, and so some actions taking up more of your allowance, it had the effect of increasing the threat range as models could walk and charge. Or increasing the damage as you could focus and charge ( in addition to not ending focus at the end of turn). 

It's possible to change it. But it alters all sorts of things. Focus is the solution to negative flips and without it it's almost impossible to hit when distracted serene countsnce or concealing. 

[Cats Laughing]

So your proposed change only takes 4" off Archie's 19" threat range, while giving him a positive to one attack's attack & damage flips (something he normally can't get due to Numbskull not allowing him Focus), while conversely it takes 5" off the threat range of a Malifaux Rat while providing a pseudo-focus on the very weak 0/1/1 they get.

 

Sounds like well thought out change

[SEV]

Well @Maniacal_cackleposted this a little bit after midnight NZ time... He was probably drunk on fermented sheep milk and had a severe sleep deprivation induce by non-stop bunny sitting.

Beside this nonsense I agree with @Azahul... Aussie 1 Kiwi 0.

[cbtb11235813]

There are already a lot of complaints about the game being too slow, and its difficult for many people to finish a 5 round game during a typical tournament time limit. I think slowing the game down further by reducing threat ranges and lowering action economy would just make that issue far worse. This is to say nothing about the tsunami-sized ripple effects others have mentioned above. A hot take indeed.

[Maniacal_cackle]

I think most of those points miss the point about it being an edition change, so presumably cards would be reworked around it. But fair points!

It does seem like the transition from m2e to m3e increased threat ranges? And that's a big part of what made cheap minions weaker, alongside the pass tokens changes?

5 hours ago, SEV said:

Well @Maniacal_cackleposted this a little bit after midnight NZ time... He was probably drunk on fermented sheep milk and had a severe sleep deprivation induce by non-stop bunny sitting.

Beside this nonsense I agree with @Azahul... Aussie 1 Kiwi 0.

I'm vegan xD

But yes the sleep deprivation was real, she needed her meds at 4am every night 😢 Finished though!

[solkan]

5 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

It does seem like the transition from m2e to m3e increased threat ranges? And that's a big part of what made cheap minions weaker, alongside the pass tokens changes?

I don't really see how the pass token changes made cheap minions weaker.  Especially since the main purpose of taking a large number of cheap minions was to be able to time out when the crews more expensive models activated, and increase the chances of double activating.  "The person with the most models gets to choose which ones can't be hurt" or "The person with the most models gets to choose which models can be hurt" really isn't something that should be encouraged in a skirmish game.

 

[Maniacal_cackle]

8 minutes ago, solkan said:

I don't really see how the pass token changes made cheap minions weaker.  Especially since the main purpose of taking a large number of cheap minions was to be able to time out when the crews more expensive models activated, and increase the chances of double activating.  "The person with the most models gets to choose which ones can't be hurt" or "The person with the most models gets to choose which models can be hurt" really isn't something that should be encouraged in a skirmish game.

 

I think it makes them weaker but also was a totally worthwhile change.

But it does raise the issue of maybe other things need to be tinkered.

While I don't think cheap minions are garbage, or that MSU is totally not viable, but I'd say the deck is stacked against cheap minions this edition.

From what I hear, pass tokens, charge, and focus all contributed to this decline.

[Mycellanious]

The way the game was described to me first starting out, was that cheap models did less but had better stats, while expensive models did more but had worse stats. Butin M3E, more expensive models are expected both to do more AND have better stats. Maybe that's what it would take for them to be worthwhile? If the default for 4-5 stone models was a statline of 6/6/6?

[Maniacal_cackle]

4 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

The way the game was described to me first starting out, was that cheap models did less but had better stats, while expensive models did more but had worse stats. Butin M3E, more expensive models are expected both to do more AND have better stats. Maybe that's what it would take for them to be worthwhile? If the default for 4-5 stone models was a statline of 6/6/6?

That's an interesting angle for sure!

It feels weird flavour-wise, though?

[Mycellanious]

32 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

That's an interesting angle for sure!

It feels weird flavour-wise, though?

Not necessarily. The Smaller Models are more agile and capable of dodging, while the bigger models are slower, but because they can take more hits (have more wounds) they don't dodge as if their lives literally depended on it. 

[Azahul]

1 hour ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

From what I hear, pass tokens, charge, and focus all contributed to this decline.

That is undoubtedly true, but changing those features isn't the easiest way to get cheap models to see play. If Winged Plagues were Cost 1 or 2, I would probably hire them. Same goes for all the unplayed Cost 4 models. It's a blunt force solution but it would work, and honestly have fewer broader implications than massive reworks to the core rules.

 

It is worth noting though that this is a solution increasingly in want of a problem though. Malifaux Burns did a serious number on the quantity of low cost models not seeing play. Is there even a faction with more than three Cost 4 or less models that just do not see table time? Yeah, the Malifaux Burns solution of making most of them summons was about as blunt force as my "make them Cost 2" idea, but it did seriously diminish how many such models we have to worry about.

[Maniacal_cackle]

31 minutes ago, Azahul said:

That is undoubtedly true, but changing those features isn't the easiest way to get cheap models to see play. If Winged Plagues were Cost 1 or 2, I would probably hire them. Same goes for all the unplayed Cost 4 models. It's a blunt force solution but it would work, and honestly have fewer broader implications than massive reworks to the core rules.

 

It is worth noting though that this is a solution increasingly in want of a problem though. Malifaux Burns did a serious number on the quantity of low cost models not seeing play. Is there even a faction with more than three Cost 4 or less models that just do not see table time? Yeah, the Malifaux Burns solution of making most of them summons was about as blunt force as my "make them Cost 2" idea, but it did seriously diminish how many such models we have to worry about.

I think at this point most small models are playable, but it is relatively rare to see lists with lots of small models which feels like it should be a part of the meta. And I don't think tinkering individual models will get there.

Thus suggestions for next edition!

[Jordon]

What if damage flips were always uncheatable? Seems like cheap minions are too easily one-shotted due to the ease of focused damage flips cheating a severe. Without being able to cheat damage flips (maybe certain models can have exceptions) you'r relying on naturally flipping a severe, which is statistically a lot more unlikely.

However I also agree that it'll be nearly impossible to fix the issue with one graceful core change. 

[Azahul]

33 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I think at this point most small models are playable, but it is relatively rare to see lists with lots of small models which feels like it should be a part of the meta. And I don't think tinkering individual models will get there.

Thus suggestions for next edition!

I mean, I disagree that tinkering with individual models wouldn't get us there. If you made everything Cost 5 or less in the game Cost 1 then you'd probably see every crew run number heavy.

 

That obviously isn't the solution, but it does indicate that somewhere on the balance spectrum is a tipping point where spamming models becomes viable, regardless of institutional disadvantage. Cost is hardly the only lever that could be pulled either. A Cost 4 model with Stat 7 Min 3 attacks would be spammed a fair bit I imagine.

 

This isn't the first game I've played where particular model types or even whole list archetypes were considered unviable because of the core rules of the game. Those games that tried to address or fix those problems rarely did so with core rule shifts, most did it with buffs to the specific models that were the problem. And in many cases they not only found that there was absolutely a point at which those disadvantaged model types became viable, but that it was even possible to make them busted good by pushing the envelope a touch too far. I would hope to avoid that particular problem, but with so few low cost models left genuinely in need of help Wyrd could afford to focus their attention quite a bit.

[Fetid Strumpet]

From my perspective the biggest issue with survivability of low cost minions is the change of focus lasting across the turn limit. Being able to easily stack and retain focus until you need to use it really messed up the math on defensive abilities. Things like Serene Countenance would have been amazing defensive abilities in 2e, but now they are very Meh. Min dmg 3 or better is still important, but it was WAY more important in 2e as it was MUCH harder to get moderate/severe dmg, since you often had to give up an entire action in order to get that bonus, and you could still miss. 
 

I think the charge change definitely increased threat ranges, but I personally regard that as a good thing. The game moves and flows better than in previous editions, in my opinion. I think a lot of the kinks in the 3e system just came from advancing the game rules well in a few important areas, but not fully understanding the implications of those changes and still operating under the assumption other abilities were still as powerful or impactful with them in place. The importance of min 3, Lures, Negative flip on attack defensive abilities being big examples in my opinion.

[Adran]

Ahh, the eternal question – why are cheap models rubbish?

I think there were several changes from the last edition to this edition that have caused this issue,

Pass tokens, Focus, Charge, Initiative, Scoring.  Focus and Charge are sort of tied together and Pass tokens and imitative are tied together.

 

Since this thread started about Charge, I’m going to start there. The M2e charge was a (2) action which let you move your Cg distance and make 2 attacks against the same target. The M3 Charge is a 1 action that lets you move your walk and make 1 attack.

The theoretical threat range for most models increased in M3. The “average” model in M2e had wk5 Cg7 with a 2” melee.  That would now be walk 5 with a 1” melee.  So in practical terms the maximum range you could hit someone went from 9” to 11”, but the range where you could hit someone twice went from 9” to 5”, so at first glance whilst the maximum range is greater, you have a much shorter range when you can hit twice.

What you did gain was versatility. We all know that there are times when it is better to focus and attack once rather than to attack twice. In the first two editions of the game, it was almost impossible to focus and charge in the same turn. So if you are in that 5” zone, you have the chance to pick the best way to attack. You also didn’t have to commit your entire activation to this action, so if you are able to kill in one hit you are free to go and do something else with that second action. At the very least you could use it to return to where you came from and so still be doing what you were at the start of the activation.

In addition to this increased versatility, the focus does not end at end of turn change (and subsequent increase in the number of models that let other models gains focus somehow) has allowed the threat of a model with just 1 attack still be a significant threat.

The focus change has played a large part in the weakness of cheap models because it has made it easier for big hitting models to get severe damage, which is often sufficient to 1 hit the weaker model.

 

Pass tokens have played a large part in the loss of value of cheap models. They remove one of the largest advantages to extra models, the ability to out activate, without the risks of the cheap models. In addition to this, the pass token has an important part to play on initiative.

Cheap models let you control when you activate your important activations, so reducing the retaliation on them (which isn’t just attacks, it’s also removal of the scoring process you did).  But its fairly normal that come the mid to late game you actually end up wanting to front load most of your activations, and so the cheap models stop performing their job. Pass tokens don’t stop at this point, they allow you to control who gets initiative. When you combine this with the universal ability to cheat initiative that M3 added, you finally made it possible that you could guarantee a first activation if you wanted. This leads to the ability to play a much more aggressive game.

 

Finally scoring changed between the 2 editions. This is in three important ways.

Firstly, the total score is lower, in M2 each scheme was worth a potential 3 points, not 2. This increased the value of having models that were able to focus on scoring rather than fighting.

Secondly, the timing of scheme scoring changed. Previously it was possible to fully score a scheme by turn 3 (if I remember correctly), now you can’t score full points until the end of the game. This makes an important difference in both the durability required to protect the things down to score the points, and can force you to be in a certain spot at a certain time to score, which your opponent will know and be able to plan for.

Thirdly Strategy scoring changes to make each point harder than the last to score. Again, this means that typically you have to do something every turn to continue to score, rather than set up your required scoring early in the game and be able to leave it.

 

 

If I were to try and make a change to the “core rules” to try and improve the cheap models, Charge is probably the last place I would have gone. In part because it is probably the one that will have the biggest change to the rest of the game. I would consider changing the scoring, which doesn’t even need a rule change, it just needs a new gaining grounds. I would strongly consider removing the ability to cheat initiative, and also consider removing the initiative bonus pass tokens offer. I’m not sure that Focus could change anymore than it has, except possibly being a defensive mirror, so adding a negative to the damage flip against you if you use it when you defend.

 

Once you are looking at a new edition, there are so many changes likely that I wouldn’t really want to start the discussion in this way. I do think in the long term I found Charge taking 2 actions to get its affect is probably more interesting overall, and if they don’t want to return to the action point approach, then your suggestion is a neat way that could work.

[ooshawn]

I don't know man, too many models already feel like crap this edition. Anything that makes models weaker is out in my book. The game needs more buffs not more nerfs. Yeah some stuff needs nerfs, like the stuff that is just flat out better than every other option. But then even those universal , super models are just crutches for DogS$%* crews/factions. Sweeping buffs to a lot of cheaper models or unused stuff would be way funner than putting a bat to archie's knees. Wyrd Is just too light handed with changes to the game. I would venture to say that you and I probably play the same amount of games as the people that work at wyrd. 

[trikk]

19 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I think it makes them weaker but also was a totally worthwhile change.

But it does raise the issue of maybe other things need to be tinkered.

While I don't think cheap minions are garbage, or that MSU is totally not viable, but I'd say the deck is stacked against cheap minions this edition.

From what I hear, pass tokens, charge, and focus all contributed to this decline.

I don't think it's pass tokens, charges or focus.
I think it's that the focus required to take out more expensive models is a lot higher due to defensive tech. Killing cheap stuff takes away activations, actions and a lot of the time it's relatively easy.