Balancefaux 2.1 - format for a new errata!

[Maniacal_cackle]

2 minutes ago, Cheshiredog said:

Maybe not 100% on topic, would you share what's combo with Tiri?

It was actually only 18 damage last time I played against Iron matron, but: make Iron matron fast. Attack four times (straight flips because of Greatsword).  Do 3/4/5 damage on straight flips four times = 12-20 damage.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Oh I forgot to mention you can have Parson give Matron extra positives to damage to make it even more consistent/can even straight flip stone users.

[Regelridderen]

2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Oh I forgot to mention you can have Parson give Matron extra positives to damage to make it even more consistent/can even straight flip stone users.

And you can take it to 24+ given that it has a built-in Pass Through -trigger.

[santaclaws01]

56 minutes ago, Regelridderen said:

And you can take it to 24+ given that it has a built-in Pass Through -trigger.

The extra attack and pass through are mutually exclusive.

[Regelridderen]

15 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

The extra attack and pass through are mutually exclusive.

Ah yes, I see. 

[Cheshiredog]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:43 PM, Maniacal_cackle said:

It was actually only 18 damage last time I played against Iron matron, but: make Iron matron fast. Attack four times (straight flips because of Greatsword).  Do 3/4/5 damage on straight flips four times = 12-20 damage.

Ok, I was aware of it. Was thinking that maybe someone took Montresor, gave staggered or something and created combo with Tiri attack. But no - it's just using poor Memaw to smack others.

Thanks for feedback

[zeno]

Glad too see someone doing something to help the game!

Sad to see that it is necessary.

But I remember seeing this power creep or whatever you decide to call it when Explorer's Society was released as well. Some other top dogs got needed, some deserved it, so the new hotness could take its place.

And now the cycle repeats itself.

Hopefully Wyrd isn't taking cues from another certain tabletop Games company.

[Maniacal_cackle]

I think in Wyrd's case it isn't malicious at least.  The errata seems to face lots of challenges so they probably can't do as much as they'd like to.

[Regelridderen]

15 hours ago, zeno said:

Hopefully Wyrd isn't taking cues from another certain tabletop Games company.

Explorers, Burns, Madness... The pattern is hard to ignore, it seems that Wyrd banks on a pay to win strategy.

Which is sad, as it becomes harder and harder to endorse the game, as you set people up for disappointment.

It's got the best and most interesting design core of any miniature game out there. A vast and diverse model range – that counter to purpose gets invalidated by the Nexuses, Damians, 'ditas and what else that comes out off the charts.

-

I, personally, have given up on buying anything new 'faux. And with 20+ crews I'd otherwise be what the game industry would deem a 'whale'. Except I don't do Pay–To–Win, I play to have fun, and if getting a Damian ends up invalidating my Collette or Ironsides, I end up with a third of the fun.  

M2E ended with Sandeep vs. Nicodem being the only viable masters in the game. There's no point in repeating that scenario.

[zeno]

1 hour ago, Regelridderen said:

Explorers, Burns, Madness... The pattern is hard to ignore, it seems that Wyrd banks on a pay to win strategy.

Which is sad, as it becomes harder and harder to endorse the game, as you set people up for disappointment.

It's got the best and most interesting design core of any miniature game out there. A vast and diverse model range – that counter to purpose gets invalidated by the Nexuses, Damians, 'ditas and what else that comes out off the charts.

-

I, personally, have given up on buying anything new 'faux. And with 20+ crews I'd otherwise be what the game industry would deem a 'whale'. Except I don't do Pay–To–Win, I play to have fun, and if getting a Damian ends up invalidating my Collette or Ironsides, I end up with a third of the fun.  

M2E ended with Sandeep vs. Nicodem being the only viable masters in the game. There's no point in repeating that scenario.

Yepp, and the packing of the new title masters pretty much says it all. It really stinks.
At least put masters of the same faction in one box.
I will not endorse that kind of business and recommend people around me to proxy, will even help with 3D prints.
Feels like going from M2E to M3E with the same greedy packing in the new crew boxes. But at least they had the special order program back then.

And yes, me and some friends keep coming back to trying the game due to the neat game mechanics, some of the lore, and some of the miniatures.

[Math Mathonwy]

2 hours ago, Regelridderen said:

Explorers, Burns, Madness... The pattern is hard to ignore, it seems that Wyrd banks on a pay to win strategy.

Which is sad, as it becomes harder and harder to endorse the game, as you set people up for disappointment.

It's got the best and most interesting design core of any miniature game out there. A vast and diverse model range – that counter to purpose gets invalidated by the Nexuses, Damians, 'ditas and what else that comes out off the charts.

I actually think that Burns was remarkably well balanced considering the absolutely insane scope of doubling the number of Masters in the game. Sure, there were a couple of OP ones and a couple of lackluster ones but I think that no one could've gotten that amount of stuff right on the first try.

Madness is a sadder case, IMO, since the scope was so much smaller and the OP stuff being so far above the curve.

But all of that said, I very much doubt that they are intentionally making the new stuff OP. There is always the incentive of making new stuff appealing and erring on the side of too powerful instead of too weak kinda makes sense (making stuff that doesn't have any impact seems like a bad idea even from the players' POV) but I very much doubt that anyone in the design team is going "let's make Witness completely bonkers in order to make it sell well."

[Regelridderen]

4 hours ago, Math Mathonwy said:

I actually think that Burns was remarkably well balanced considering the absolutely insane scope of doubling the number of Masters in the game. Sure, there were a couple of OP ones and a couple of lackluster ones but I think that no one could've gotten that amount of stuff right on the first try.

Madness is a sadder case, IMO, since the scope was so much smaller and the OP stuff being so far above the curve.

But all of that said, I very much doubt that they are intentionally making the new stuff OP. There is always the incentive of making new stuff appealing and erring on the side of too powerful instead of too weak kinda makes sense (making stuff that doesn't have any impact seems like a bad idea even from the players' POV) but I very much doubt that anyone in the design team is going "let's make Witness completely bonkers in order to make it sell well."

No, it’s not that 100% of the stuff is overpowered, Lord Cooper and Basse never caused much of a fuss either, but it’s the obvious outliers that are way too efficient and just seem to ignore the design principles of the rest, Spiritwalker, ‘dita, Damian to name a few. And then why have a mock ‘nerf’ round, when you just bring out new stuff with the same problems later. Then you might as well just not bother.