Title masters in need of adjustment?

[esqulax]

Very interesting to read some of the comments here. Especially since a lot of the masters called out are not the ones I would have been expecting. Also, before titles I would definitely have agreed that NVB was in a poor spot, but I feel that a lot of their titles are very solid and I am surprised to still hear them mentioned as weak. 

Also, could someone please explain to me what makes Yan Lo 2 and Mei Feng 2 considered so strong ? 

[Erik1978]

Yan Lo 2 has great movement without spending actions, Obey, excellent attack, and tactical actions (card shenanigans).

His ability to place within 3 each time his Mv 7 pet dog moves for any reason is a bit much IMO. It's very effecient and the dog has Laugh off, can give Yan Lo an extra attack each turn and regenerates. Burying the pet dog can disrupt his plans I suppose.

Can't tell you why mei Feng 2 is strong, need more experience.

 

[Gheist]

I mean to be honest: introducing a second Version to every Master and thus changing up the guessing game during Crew Select and the way the stat Cards of all other models interact within Crew/Faction is an immense change to the game. Although i rather came late to the party of trying everything out, i have maybe managed to play/play against/ see videos of 60-70% of every Master and i think i tend to spend a lot of time on this game.

So my point is: we are still in the test phase. I get see to stuff every week that is really strong that i didn't know about (or get it deployed in my face).

As much as I always think that stuff that can win against me is OP, i think the more realistic step is to ask myself: what can I do? whats the play or the Countertech?

Also before I list 20 things that i think could be reworked, whats the goal of the rework? is it just taking the edge off the strong stuff (like with the last Explorer Society rework) or do we want to balance factions vs each other? Because I feel that most things are beatable if you deploy the right stuff and know what you are doing, but not every faction Matchup has the same guessing window while selecting Master/Crews, as for example thats whats up with Ressers/Outcast right now, they often have more valid choices while the opponent has to correctly guess what he is up against to have an equal matchup (like maybe Jedza2 makes for sad komainus)

Sry for the amount of text: i think i would also like to know why some crews win sooo much more than others, and then make a contribution as to why, so we would need some statistics here first?

So in Case of Yan Lo2 who seems to win a bit more than other masters:

i feel it's because of the general Mobility of him and his Petminion, and the amount of AP they can generate. So my Suggestion would be: Take away the laugh off so i can Screw up his Positioning. Make the bonus action from the Upgrade only into 'Yan Lo may take a general action' (which is still superstrong in my opinion) and things would be a bit easier for the opponent. Bury and obey is not accessible to so many crews that it counts a s valid countertech in this case (in my opinion)

and try to make a list? or actually playtest stuff thats up for nerfs with a group of experienced players?

 

[Erik1978]

Quote

I think I would also like to know why some crews win sooo much more than others, and then make a contribution as to why, so we would need some statistics here first?

I suppose the short answer is: some of them are way stronger than the average, like Yan Lo 2 and Kirai 2, and that's why we would like to see an adjustment?

[Gheist]

56 minutes ago, Erik1978 said:

I suppose the short answer is: some of them are way stronger than the average, like Yan Lo 2 and Kirai 2, and that's why we would like to see an adjustment?

yeah well okay but there have been different demands for nerfing YanLo2 already regarding different things and it would be nice to know what exactly is there to nerf Because i only played him once (badly) but if think the ability to go everywhere on the map and then just teleport enemy models to within 6 inches at will a powerful experience (endless power!). When I am palying against YanLo2, what buggers me the most is that i cannot shove/push the darn Komainu somewhere else.

I think a good rework would be either/or, or at least putting the shooting attack to stat 5 instead of stat 6,or taking away the ignoring friendly fire, but not all at once because then it would be a joke to play against him. And i think its easy to overbalance stuff the other way, right Ivan? na okay debatable, but

I feel like it's easy to say: This is strong and that is strong, and it's because of all those abilities on the card but the important question is: what is good change? Because there should remain some motivation to still play the model after the rework. and if you want to demonstrate a good change, make a change suggestion play a game and record the result or write up the experience kind of thing, like a playtesting realm inna video game....

so what would you change on kirai2's card? make the WP duel for join us Wp 11? Wp10? Make the summons have the Kirai 1 Summon Upgrade?

 

[Paddywhack]

I feel like a good deal of the 'feels bad' from Yan Lo actually comes from Komainu's Empty Vessel. A move 7, Armor 2, HtK, TtH that has a positive to all Duels is a bit much. It gives Yan great mobility and a strong defense (as one of the counter seems to be to kill the minion with his reliquary). It's a lot on a 6ss model that can also get an unpgrade for Terrifying and Regen+2. And you can take two... If the Komainu was a bit easier to actually kill, I don't think people would be yelling quite as much about Yan2. He'd still be strong, but there would be some counter and he wouldn't feel invincible. 

The Bonus on Yan2's upgrade should probably limit the action a bit more (general action or maybe make it so it has to target the model with the Reliquary - so probably an Obey for a move/attack/interact on the Komainu). 

[Jordon]

For me, I feel like there are still core elements of the game that require more attention than balancing individual models. Certainly you want to address some of the more heinous interactions (33 + Tara2 for example) but for the most part I think the core game still has more immediate issues that need resolving.

Personally, I still see focus spam as a huge problem. Turn one absorbing as much focus as possible before nuking everything turn 2 is a big prevailing issue. Should focus really be able to last all game? Kinda seems to defeat the entire purpose of being "focused" when you do it but then 4 turns later, finally cash in on it.

Hazardous also seems to be getting out of hand. When you can have crews stacking so much hazardous and the ease at which things can be manipulated within these stacking auras feels really bad and non interactive.

Making cheap models matter.... The list goes on

I feel like there needs to be some work in addressing these core concepts that inherently will shift how some of these crews operate - for better or worst. Trying to build mechanics that layer on top of shaky rules just seems to invite more problems.  

[Gheist]

41 minutes ago, Jordon said:

For me, I feel like there are still core elements of the game that require more attention than balancing individual models. Certainly you want to address some of the more heinous interactions (33 + Tara2 for example) but for the most part I think the core game still has more immediate issues that need resolving.

Personally, I still see focus spam as a huge problem. Turn one absorbing as much focus as possible before nuking everything turn 2 is a big prevailing issue. Should focus really be able to last all game? Kinda seems to defeat the entire purpose of being "focused" when you do it but then 4 turns later, finally cash in on it.

Hazardous also seems to be getting out of hand. When you can have crews stacking so much hazardous and the ease at which things can be manipulated within these stacking auras feels really bad and non interactive.

Making cheap models matter.... The list goes on

I feel like there needs to be some work in addressing these core concepts that inherently will shift how some of these crews operate - for better or worst. Trying to build mechanics that layer on top of shaky rules just seems to invite more problems.  

but: does the one thing exclude the other completely?

i'm not superinclined to agree that focus doesn't work proper, but some crews stack it a bit too easy. Hazardous is sometimes stupid but there is meanwhile a lot of 'ignore hazardoustech" as well. I think i would love to agree if examples were given for hazardous, i can only think of Anya+grave goo which never worked for me because my opponents didn't let themselves be duped.

---> i had expected something like reworking the shadow rules and measuring distances while standing on top of terrain when i read your post

[Fetid Strumpet]

For me Kirai2 and Yan Lo2 definitely need nerfs. Do not agree Seamus does. The fact that you need to build differently for both was one of the stated design goals. Not sure if VS needs it, but his draw card mechanic generates so much value over the course of a game it should probably be looked at.

Not sure how to take Y2 down a peg, but the stoneable hole in the world, and the action less marker removal for cards seem to be the biggest targets for me.

For K2 I’d make her summons get the K1 upgrade to force her to lean on her anchor to reality ability for herself rather than allowing her to use it move freely on her crew. I’d also limit her sundering to +2 or +3. Alternatively you could go after her trigger on her swirl that allows her to move, but that is so crucial and so signature to her if you hit that, I think you’d need to pull back on other nerfs.

[Mycellanious]

I think for me, Yan Lo's Keyword has a LOT of stat 7 attacks. And they aren't insignificant attacks either. Stat 7 Hole in the World, or Stat 7 give out Slow, or Stat 7 Obey are kind of nutty. And maybe giving out Focus should be Friendly Only? Cuz always being able to use my models to attack my models with Focus is pretty good...

[Azahul]

3 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

I think for me, Yan Lo's Keyword has a LOT of stat 7 attacks. And they aren't insignificant attacks either. Stat 7 Hole in the World, or Stat 7 give out Slow, or Stat 7 Obey are kind of nutty. And maybe giving out Focus should be Friendly Only? Cuz always being able to use my models to attack my models with Focus is pretty good...

Surely Yan Lo isn't stoning to get Focus on your models very often? You could always just relent against the friendly on friendly attacks if you want to guarantee the attack goes back to negatives, which feels a bit inefficient. 

[Math Mathonwy]

11 hours ago, Jordon said:

For me, I feel like there are still core elements of the game that require more attention than balancing individual models. Certainly you want to address some of the more heinous interactions (33 + Tara2 for example) but for the most part I think the core game still has more immediate issues that need resolving.

Personally, I still see focus spam as a huge problem. Turn one absorbing as much focus as possible before nuking everything turn 2 is a big prevailing issue. Should focus really be able to last all game? Kinda seems to defeat the entire purpose of being "focused" when you do it but then 4 turns later, finally cash in on it.

Hazardous also seems to be getting out of hand. When you can have crews stacking so much hazardous and the ease at which things can be manipulated within these stacking auras feels really bad and non interactive.

Making cheap models matter.... The list goes on

I feel like there needs to be some work in addressing these core concepts that inherently will shift how some of these crews operate - for better or worst. Trying to build mechanics that layer on top of shaky rules just seems to invite more problems.  

I kinda agree but the problem is that if you make Focus go away at round's end, for example, that would need a massive balance pass onto existing models. Aside from Focus stacking models, there are also models who'd become way better if Focus wasn't so readily available. Heck, Armor might become busted if there was less Focus.

Hazardous would require a bit less balancing but still lots of profiles.

That said, once could question whether the balance of Faux is fine enough that a big change like that wouldn't just skew it another way without really affecting the amount of imbalance present in the game. And that's a fair question -  I personally don't think that the balance is all that amazing, especially after the titles. And Wyrd already did adjust Focus so they aren't totally opposed to the idea of adjusting core rules.

All that said, I still kinda think that these sorts of overhauls are more likely to happen when M4e comes around, whenever that may be. Or maybe M3.5 if such a thing were to happen.

Finally, I think that it is still fair to talk about the problems in individual profiles and such even if one agrees that there are core rule issues.

[Math Mathonwy]

17 hours ago, Gheist said:

Also before I list 20 things that i think could be reworked, whats the goal of the rework? is it just taking the edge off the strong stuff (like with the last Explorer Society rework) or do we want to balance factions vs each other? Because I feel that most things are beatable if you deploy the right stuff and know what you are doing, but not every faction Matchup has the same guessing window while selecting Master/Crews, as for example thats whats up with Ressers/Outcast right now, they often have more valid choices while the opponent has to correctly guess what he is up against to have an equal matchup (like maybe Jedza2 makes for sad komainus)

That's a good question and an important framing. The way I see it, there are kinda three different cases (that often overlap):

1. NPE. A model might not be overpowered as such but create a ton of frustration for the opponent and it needs adjustment because of that. In M2e Brewmaster was a below-average Master but when he worked he could shut down the opposing crew and the opponent would have models but when he tried activating them they would just spend their actions failing simple duels and getting more poison so they would fail more duels. This was often seen as more frustrating than, say, Viks just killing the opposing crew.
2. Overly-specific counterplay. Touched upon in this thread but if the only way to beat a Master is to stack up on attacks that target Mv there's a problem because very few keywords can do such a thing and only in certain factions. Games shouldn't be decided at the "declare Masters" step.
3. OP. Some models are just too good and need toning down. The most common reason for Wyrd's errata. This is the one you can solve by just toning down the numbers while the other two usually require a bit more.

[Jordon]

11 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

I kinda agree but the problem is that if you make Focus go away at round's end, for example, that would need a massive balance pass onto existing models. Aside from Focus stacking models, there are also models who'd become way better if Focus wasn't so readily available. Heck, Armor might become busted if there was less Focus.

Completely agree. I don't think these changes can happen in a vacuum and those models/crews whom rely on focus as a part of their core mechanics would certainly need to be included in a change like that. Which is why a broad change is very difficult to do without some kind of edition change.

I still think focus is a problem plaguing the game but the solution doesn't seem simple unfortunately. Even subtle alterations could have a drastic impact on certain models/crews. I do still think that such a change may need to happen for the overall health of the game.

 

Some things like Tara and 33 will need to get fixed as it ticks all the boxes of non-interactive, OP and extremely difficult to counter. However, I hope echo markers itself stays relatively in tact as it's a very unique idea and when used appropriately, is fun and fresh to play with/against. It's also the core ability on Tara2 and so would need to be very carefully looked at as over adjusting could be a killing stroke for the title.

Colette1 had a similar experience where Presto-Chango got altered as it was simply doing too much. However the "nerf" was actually brilliant as it toned it back, but also made it easier and with better triggers. So they took away with one hand but gave with another. I hope Tara2 would get a similar treatment.

There just needs to be limitations placed on either the action of 33 itself to ensure the broken combo is addressed. The best "nerfs" are the ones that limit the obvious issue but open up other new opportunities.

[Azahul]

5 hours ago, Jordon said:

Some things like Tara and 33 will need to get fixed as it ticks all the boxes of non-interactive, OP and extremely difficult to counter. However, I hope echo markers itself stays relatively in tact as it's a very unique idea and when used appropriately, is fun and fresh to play with/against. It's also the core ability on Tara2 and so would need to be very carefully looked at as over adjusting could be a killing stroke for the title.

Colette1 had a similar experience where Presto-Chango got altered as it was simply doing too much. However the "nerf" was actually brilliant as it toned it back, but also made it easier and with better triggers. So they took away with one hand but gave with another. I hope Tara2 would get a similar treatment.

There just needs to be limitations placed on either the action of 33 itself to ensure the broken combo is addressed. The best "nerfs" are the ones that limit the obvious issue but open up other new opportunities.

My personal fix for Tara2 would be to change Rewind from "place the target base to base with the marker" to "bury the target. Then immediately unbury the target base to base with the marker". Since any model in 33's Pine Box gets unburied when 33 gets buried it effectively ends the Rewind Kidnap play. Turning Rewind itself into a bury effect adds some synergy with Aionus and 33's bonus action. Otherwise to all extents and purposes the effect works identically to the way it does now, but removes the most problematic interaction. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

1 minute ago, Azahul said:

My personal fix for Tara2 would be to change Rewind from "place the target base to base with the marker" to "bury the target. Then immediately unbury the target base to base with the target". Since any model in 33's Pine Box gets unburied when 33 gets buried it effectively ends the Rewind Kidnap play. Turning Rewind itself into a bury effect adds some synergy with Aionus and 33's bonus action. Otherwise to all extents and purposes the effect works identically to the way it does now, but removes the most problematic interaction. 

It also allows the ability to affect laugh off or lodestone carriers.

[Azahul]

16 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

It also allows the ability to affect laugh off or lodestone carriers.

This is true, which I think ties into the goal of "remove the oppressive part and add some extra functionality to compensate".

[Gheist]

8 hours ago, Azahul said:

This is true, which I think ties into the goal of "remove the oppressive part and add some extra functionality to compensate".

i think it's not less oppressive if you allow for more targets to be affected. I think if Taras Expedite would only allow non charge general Actions and maybe give not slow but something else (staggered comes to my mind) then the whole thing would be better.

The Problem for me is not that Tara can Kidnap stuff but that she can do so without risk or tradeoff

[Azahul]

1 hour ago, Gheist said:

i think it's not less oppressive if you allow for more targets to be affected. I think if Taras Expedite would only allow non charge general Actions and maybe give not slow but something else (staggered comes to my mind) then the whole thing would be better.

The Problem for me is not that Tara can Kidnap stuff but that she can do so without risk or tradeoff

Exactly. Changing Rewind the way I suggest prevents Tara from kidnapping models without risk or tradeoff. 33 can't Rewind if they want to keep a model buried, which means the kidnap trick leaves 33 exposed in the opponent's deployment zone for every single one of their models to punch.

 

In return a few more models can be impacted by Rewind, but offensive Rewinds aren't the part of Tara2 people are finding oppressive (Rewinding 33 is) so I think that's ok?

[Gheist]

1 hour ago, Azahul said:

Exactly. Changing Rewind the way I suggest prevents Tara from kidnapping models without risk or tradeoff. 33 can't Rewind if they want to keep a model buried, which means the kidnap trick leaves 33 exposed in the opponent's deployment zone for every single one of their models to punch.

In return a few more models can be impacted by Rewind, but offensive Rewinds aren't the part of Tara2 people are finding oppressive (Rewinding 33 is) so I think that's ok?

10 inch 6vs wp on your lodestone Carrier to bury you and place you next to the place where you stood before at a moment of my choosing? i think personally my answer would be: no thank you. I am not saying that it isn't a viable option, but it also adds to the possibilities of Tara2 and i would like to see if the Crew works if you just substracted from it. Ultimately thats only my opinion though

 

 

[Azahul]

3 minutes ago, Gheist said:

10 inch 6vs wp on your lodestone Carrier to bury you and place you next to the place where you stood before at a moment of my choosing? i think personally my answer would be: no thank you. I am not saying that it isn't a viable option, but it also adds to the possibilities of Tara2 and i would like to see if the Crew works if you just substracted from it. Ultimately thats only my opinion though

 

 

So you think the current version in which Tara is able to kidnap a model back to her deployment zone is less oppressive than her moving a Lodestone Bearer? Because she can kidnap Lodestone Bearers currently too...

 

This change is a subtraction. A big one. What she "gains" isn't something she didn't already have. And given that most competitive players seem to be unsure if she would have any functionality that would make her worth declaring over her original version without the kidnap I can't see her being any worse than Zoraida's Stat 7 range 20-something inches Obey to make your Lodestone Bearer run 10" out of position at the end of the turn.

[Gheist]

4 minutes ago, Azahul said:

So you think the current version in which Tara is able to kidnap a model back to her deployment zone is less oppressive than her moving a Lodestone Bearer? Because she can kidnap Lodestone Bearers currently too...

This change is a subtraction. A big one. What she "gains" isn't something she didn't already have. And given that most competitive players seem to be unsure if she would have any functionality that would make her worth declaring over her original version without the kidnap I can't see her being any worse than Zoraida's Stat 7 range 20-something inches Obey to make your Lodestone Bearer run 10" out of position at the end of the turn.

No that is not what i am saying. I think i clearly stated that my personal opinion is that I wouldn't make the change that way and i also clearly stated that it's not my decision to make. I am also totally fine if that's the absolute best suggestion and turns out to be what will be done So to get back to the productive side of this post: if you wanna test it out, give me a holler, we can do some vassal field tests. 

[Azahul]

I'm not really into testing fan rules myself, but I appreciate the offer. I'm not a playtester and I play games to have fun, not to provide data to back the opinions I espouse on the internet.

 

My issue with your suggestion in turn is that it doesn't actually stop the kidnap with no retaliation. Nerfing Expedite does make it harder to pull off, but Tara can still use Stutter Time to allow 33 to Unbury. It won't be a Turn 1 Activation 1 play every game anymore, but the option will remain to have someone's Master buried and 33 in your deployment zone with minimal options to interact. You would be making Tara2 worse, absolutely, but the NPE would remain intact in its current form.

[Gheist]

7 minutes ago, Azahul said:

I'm not really into testing fan rules myself, but I appreciate the offer. I'm not a playtester and I play games to have fun, not to provide data to back the opinions I espouse on the internet.

 

My issue with your suggestion in turn is that it doesn't actually stop the kidnap with no retaliation. Nerfing Expedite does make it harder to pull off, but Tara can still use Stutter Time to allow 33 to Unbury. It won't be a Turn 1 Activation 1 play every game anymore, but the option will remain to have someone's Master buried and 33 in your deployment zone with minimal options to interact. You would be making Tara2 worse, absolutely, but the NPE would remain intact in its current form.

 

so my suggestion works like this:

If you go an unbury with expedite within 6 inches of Tara and take away the option to charge than it is only a possibility to bury a model within 6 inches+30mm of Tara with 33s Coffin action. If you give out staggered for expedite you cannot rewind the expedited model back to the rewind marker because it can no longer be moved by friendly abilities and actions.

Tara can now theoretically bury 33 with stutter time which would unbury the kidnapped model in its former space. So thats not a possibility for a play anymore.

So the situation is like this: my change would allow the expedite coffin kidnap with Tara 6 inches from 33 and 33 in base contact with the kidnapped model WHILE the opponent has an activiation to surely retaliate against either of them. In my head this is still an okay solution. If that still doesn't appeal it might be due to my lack of sleep

How can Stutter time unbury 33? Stutter Time buries a model with from nothing.

 

[Azahul]

8 hours ago, Gheist said:

 

so my suggestion works like this:

If you go an unbury with expedite within 6 inches of Tara and take away the option to charge than it is only a possibility to bury a model within 6 inches+30mm of Tara with 33s Coffin action. If you give out staggered for expedite you cannot rewind the expedited model back to the rewind marker because it can no longer be moved by friendly abilities and actions.

Tara can now theoretically bury 33 with stutter time which would unbury the kidnapped model in its former space. So thats not a possibility for a play anymore.

So the situation is like this: my change would allow the expedite coffin kidnap with Tara 6 inches from 33 and 33 in base contact with the kidnapped model WHILE the opponent has an activiation to surely retaliate against either of them. In my head this is still an okay solution. If that still doesn't appeal it might be due to my lack of sleep

How can Stutter time unbury 33? Stutter Time buries a model with from nothing.

 

All I mean with Stutter Time is that it can still give Fast. 33 has From Nothing. You can have Tara Rewind 33 and then give a model Fast with Stutter Time. Then bury 33 with Stutter Time and then unbury them by ending that Fast condition. Pine Box your target and Rewind back to the deployment zone to avoid retaliation.

 

Though, thinking about it, what you probably do is run up a friendly model and hit them with a Burn Out Rewind rather than bothering to interact with enemy models at all. That would be the easier trick. 33 can just unbury off a friendly model with Fast with much the same threat range as the Expedite trick, except now it probably happens on Activation 3 instead of Activation 1 (an activation to run a friendly model, Tara's activation to Burn Out Rewind that model, Rewind 33, Stutter Time 33. And then 33 activates, ends Fast on the friendly to Unbury, buries an enemy model and Rewinds back to their deployment zone).

 

If you make Expedite non-functional with her other abilities it certainly makes her weaker, but it doesn't remove the specific trick everyone complains about. It'll be harder to do but there will remain games where Tara gets to be thoroughly uninteractive.