Game Balance

[Ratty]

Very true.. Kirai will really annoy Lady J... What's that I don't need corpse counters and I can run away from your Master all day...

I don't think Seamus is that bothered with her. He generally doesn't need many corpse counters to run, and Seamus can negate the bonus that Death Marshalls get against Lure.

Counterspell is annoying, but you just avoid directly targeting models that can counterspell you, or run them out of cards so they can't resist.

I've yet to find a Master that can't be beaten by any other Master. There are a few that come close, Orphelia vs Hamelin. But even then you can win you just have to be very very canny.

[Hookers]

Marcus and Sommer are two of my favorite masters in the game.

I play with only book 1 gremlins routinely and there are people who think that they are broken (in a powerful way. especially when its about to hit the fan in turn 3 or 4 and they don't have a hand).

Sommer's crew excels at having creative ways to get around targeting restrictions, but I have yet to play against Hamelin so I can't really speak to that.

As far as matchups are concerned, Gremlins are not a faction, Outcasts are and I don't think anyone could argue with a straight face that there's anything in the game that Outcasts as a whole can't handle.

Sure the game is not balanced around you and your buddies all having just a random starter box, but it never was intended to be.

[Wasp]

The big difference to 40k is the activation is designed to max kill during a models activation in malifaux there are plenty of schemes or actions available that do no damage. Unlike 40k and other games you can wipe me off the board but I can still win. This game is far less about killing every model but specific models might be your Target.

I didn´t compare Malifaux with 40k / fantasy / or LoR. All this GW games aren´t realy tactical. My favorit game is Flames of war and even there kills means nothing get your target means all. I can win the battle without take a single enemy platoon out as long as I hold my objective and deny the enemy do the same with their.

So the Malifaux style of game looks good for me. Some friends invite me to some Hordes games but after 5 matches it would be boring. Everytime the Armys clash at the middle of the map an then the one with the better combo win. I ask, didn´t you play any mission...every time you hunt down the enemy Master!?? They looked infidel MISSIONS???

So, the Tactics and Shemes of Malifaux are a good way to balance the game, at a fist look. At a second one it´s start be the same as above. With only a few models or crews some Tactics are very difficult to win other are to easy. Treasure Hunt with collette are a home run in the first two turns. Assasinate...a horror for the crew. Deliver a Message with the Dreamer easy.

I hate to compare a game with another one, but I can´t explain the differents on an other way.

At Flames of war each Nation and Unit have it´s strengthen and weaken and only the player and his tactics make the differents. Ther aren´t many matches that end with an draw. But all Armys and nation´s have the same chance to win every mission. At Malifaux you must have a Crew that can do the mission well. You must have to be flexible and a wide range of mini´s to reach the same chances like in other games.

That´s the conclusion for me after a few month of playing malifaux. It´s would be not realy balanced until you reach this break even point, where you can place a wide range of crews and miniatures.

[tadaka]

The problem is starting players get screwed by bad match ups. Then when players start tournaments it starts all over again.

I see it all over the forums when a tournament is run players want to limit what crews you can use so many points sideboard or one set list. So then you get stuck in bad match ups in a competitive environment and you lose because x has a much easier time winning there mission then another player. Unfortunately this is the worst for many of the lower power masters who need to be at there best for example Marcus. While Pandora or Ortega crews can do any mission well with. The fact is some crews need to be able to bring the right tools for a given fight or they will get crushed.

[Wasp]

Yes that´s it. I think, may I play malifaux the next year and buy one crew after another, then more and more I think malifaux is balanced. But at the point where I reduced to one crew once again the first feeling comes again.

Malifaux isn´t a bad game over all. But it´s have a weak point, the begining and the time where you are reduced to one crew or master.

Malifaux may work very well when you have the choice between your crews and you can choose the crew wich you think are perfect for the tactic. When not, it came to missmatches and all your skill can´t help you, because your crew can´t implement your choosen action.

[tadaka]

Wasp just noticed in a past post you put out that your playing showgirls. They are one of the best all around crews for most any goal. I find it odd you are having a hard time with Crid. Have you looked at the showgirl tactica they are a solid all around crew that does not need much help.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

*whispers*

When official Organized Play arrives, there may be some special rewards for those players who have learned a little bit about winning with all 5 factions

From thread: http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18846&page=2

Now if you are still arguing that the game is unbalance when you compare one master match up to another. As you can see from the designer that the intentions of this game is that you would buy multiple crews from different factions and from same faction. The rules clearly reinforce this same idea. It goes against the very intentions of the game designer and the rules as stated to play a fixed list game after game.

If you are mention the imbalance of the game when playing fixed list with fixed list than it is invalid to the whole design. Though this might be how some people are playing this game, if they are, they are putting themselves at an obvious disadvantage. I know I love Lady J but if plan on playing a game with the idea that I want to win I will not run her every game.

Now there are some masters that have attributes that allow them to complete far more strategies and schemes more proficiently than other others. In my experience Perdita is going to get more jobs done better than Lady J, but this not evidence of imbalance because the game is designed to allow me to freely pick which of the ladies I will take after I know what I need to do to win the game. I will have an idea as to what master my opponent will take either by knowing the player is or by knowing their strategy and what master out of their faction will best complete it.

This game is fairly balanced if you play it the way the rules and design imply.

[mythicFOX]

Discussions of balance always have a number of issues around them.

In order to discuss the balance of a system impartially the player base offering needs knowledge of the entire system as a whole, in other words having access and practice every option. Very few players and play groups have such unlimited access.

With even a key component missing from a play group their player’s views of balance in the system will be skewed. Player skill also comes into the equation as if one part of the puzzle is represented by weaker players this will again colour a play groups opinion of the balance.

Tournament results also contain some level inherent bias in their own tournament systems built in from scenarios, scoring and pairing. All this is before we get into player bias based on their own collections, as a Dreamer player how keen am I to see him fixed?

All this makes discussing balance in the game difficult.

Now I personally do believe there MAY be some things in the game that need better balancing, however given the above I’m not sure the community yet has the resources to wield the nerf stick with any degree of accuracy.

When we have a formal tournament system from Wyrd (cancelling event bias), and enough events have been run under this system with published results we may be able to better understand if and where the nerf axe must fall.

Until then we can only theorise, and ‘fixing’ the games based on message board opinion is liable to do as much harm as good.

All IMHO.

[LoboStele]

Well, based on what was run at GenCon, and more or less what has been tossed around the last 6 months or so, it looks like the official Wyrd tournament format will likely be the 'pick a faction' type, not a fixed Master/crew. And it's quite obvious that the game design is centered around that as well.

So for me, it's fairly obvious that someone who wants to run a fixed Master/Crew tournament is clearly going against the grain of the game design. So it makes sense that you would run into issues. Anytime you play a game in a way different from how it was designed, it probably isn't going to work right. If you try to play Life but use the rules from Sorry, you might still be able to play a game, but it probably won't be as much fun.

Incidentally, based on the prior comments, I would say about myself, that "I play Arcanists". And yes, I am 100% comfortable playing against any other Master so far. Sure, some matchups are still a royal pain in the rear if I happen to select the wrong master, but overall, I can do quite well. In fact, I typically end up playing the Showgirls for nearly everything except for Slaughter. And even then, I've managed to beat crews like the Dreamer even under Slaughter (granted, I think I only won that game with 2VP for Slaughter and 3 VP for Schemes, lol...had to play hide-and-seek ). So, any Strategy can be accomplished by any Crew. It's just a matter of playing very carefully when you happen to get those nasty matchups.

[Buhallin]

That works better, but our reason to buy Malifaux as a second game was broken. The idea behind, cheap game with a few minis fails. You must have a big range of minis to deal with the other crews and the different tactics.

Even if you expand to include multiple masters, Malifaux is one of the smallest scale miniatures games out there. Even covering pretty much every model you'd need for an entire faction is probably less than what a standard Warmachine/Hordes army would be.

You also don't really have to get every model in a faction to handle the flexible crews. Look at goals and needs - have a master/crew mix who can handle X, and another for Y. If you really want to keep it down, there are several crews who make very good generalists. In short, just because you might have to get more than one box set doesn't mean the "few minis" concept of Malifaux fails.

You also seemed worried about the Guild's counters - they're definitely there, but there are masters within every faction who avoid them. Marcus doesn't do much direct casting, so Criid's anti-magic doesn't affect him do badly. I believe Kirai's spirits get around Lady J's anti-undead, which is mostly focused around corpse denial. Even sticking within a specific master/crew, you can change things up to mess with them. I often run a set of Canine Remains and Hanged with Seamus - certainly not his standard, but the heavy anti-Wp focus can be problematic for the Guild.

[Mentat_Canis]

Just looking at the game rules I think you should see that a fixed master or fixed list just does not work for tournaments. I think the best way to limit the perception i have more money I win is say go 2 masters with 35-50 points of sideboard to pick from. That way you have to know what 2 masters you want to play and you will have 2-3 lists for each building with your sideboard.

I primarily play my showgirls when I want to play competitive and I have bad match ups and strategies but that's why the 2nd master is Raspy. As for Ratman against green dudes ya that sucks but Ratman vs viki or levi or freakcorp isn't that bad.

I think this game is very well Balanced around having fun and giving everyone a chance to win and those people who say they don't want to have to get a 2nd crew well then live with what you have it isn't built around masters, as my 2nd game I find it what I need cheap to get into and cheap to expand I mean a crew costs less then a full squad of infantry in other games.

Great Job Wyrd

[James.]

A character-driven skirmish game set in the world of Malifaux.

This quote is, in part, what attracted me to the game of Malifaux. I've been playing Flames of War and so one for a while and got quite sick of phrases like "balance issues" and "power gaming".

Each game is like a mini story for me, filled with little anecdotes that stay with you like yesterday when I played my Gremlins for the first time and Francois was locked in combat with 2 wounds left and pretty much had to activate his duelling sword trigger to take something down, but also kill himself!

Little stories and fun anecdotes that can be laughed about at the time they happen, and for a long time afterwards. Sure we all play to win, but I for one (and my friends too) always pick a faction and master before rolling anything up, because it's all about the story.

We've written several peices of fluff to work into our games and so on, so the game itself finishes the story that has already been set. This would be impossible if we picked factions/masters later on.

Of course, the way you play is your own choice, but I've been wargaming long enough to know if everything was perfectly balanced it would be a boring wargame!

There is however a perfectly balanced game, using miniatures that we all could play if we really would like too, one filled with epic battles fought out between two hardened players, and you don't even have to paint your figs for it!

Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess

James.

[nilus]

Just as a side comment about Chess. I know several people have mentioned Chess as the ultimate balanced wargame. But the reason Chess is balanced is really simple. Each side is playing the exact same faction. You'll find that any wargame becomes balanced if both sides play the exact same crew or army.

[James.]

Just as a side comment about Chess. I know several people have mentioned Chess as the ultimate balanced wargame. But the reason Chess is balanced is really simple. Each side is playing the exact same faction. You'll find that any wargame becomes balanced if both sides play the exact same crew or army.

True, but the reason chess is being used as an example is because you have no choice but to use the same faction. Your point is a good one though, people could just play the same crews for balance, and they'd soon find themselves very bored I'd think!

James.

[Wasp]

Wasp just noticed in a past post you put out that your playing showgirls. They are one of the best all around crews for most any goal. I find it odd you are having a hard time with Crid. Have you looked at the showgirl tactica they are a solid all around crew that does not need much help.

With only the starter box it´s isn´t a all around crew. I have six minis but two are insicnificant. The box arround Criid have five minis and all count. To play strategies where you need "...more than..." minis then your enemy I have to go to confront the crew and move on the weak side of the shogirls. That and the couterspells hurt me a lot in the first games.

Now I have a Gunslinger, Johan, Corypheén ...but since that I only played once and a shared "Treasure Hunt" isn´t realy a challenge for the miep miep showgirls

Of course, the way you play is your own choice, but I've been wargaming long enough to know if everything was perfectly balanced it would be a boring wargame

I don´t think so. It´s a diffents between balance and equal opportunities. The first is a pro for all games, the second one make it boring.

Powergaming and FoW both excludes each other...

Even if you expand to include multiple masters, Malifaux is one of the smallest scale miniatures games out there. Even covering pretty much every model you'd need for an entire faction is probably less than what a standard Warmachine/Hordes army would be.

The Boxes coast between 28,00 Euro to 45,00 Euro then I need up to 3 Minis per crew to round it up. We say for me in germany, avarage cost of 8,00 Euro per mini are another 24,00 Euro per crew. than one big mini (only for fun) Nekima would be 30,00 Euro. So I have a avarge cost per crew from 82,00 Euro to 99,00 Euro´s. That, for only three crews I spend for my small second game 246,00 Euro to 297,00 Euro. For that money I can buy a single Army in every system, even for high prices GW ranges. I think that isn´t realy cheap for a second game over all.

[Buhallin]

The Boxes coast between 28,00 Euro to 45,00 Euro then I need up to 3 Minis per crew to round it up. We say for me in germany, avarage cost of 8,00 Euro per mini are another 24,00 Euro per crew. than one big mini (only for fun) Nekima would be 30,00 Euro. So I have a avarge cost per crew from 82,00 Euro to 99,00 Euro´s. That, for only three crews I spend for my small second game 246,00 Euro to 297,00 Euro. For that money I can buy a single Army in every system, even for high prices GW ranges. I think that isn´t realy cheap for a second game over all.

You're comparing a single army purchase to buying 3/4 of the models for an entire faction. Hardly a fair comparison.

But even then, if you look at a more realistic purchase plan rather than just empty numbers, it's not as bad as you seem to think. A box set and 3 or so supporting models should be around $60-70. And yes, if you buy that 3 times, it would be slightly over $200. But that ignores overlap and reusability of the supporting models - Hanged and Punk Zombies work well with just about any master, Ramos can use Gamin almost as well as Rasputina, my Cerberus finds use in pretty much any Arcanist force I run, any Guild force can splash a Death Marshal or two against Rezzers, etc.

If we stick with your "Single army" side of things, then you can do that for $70 compared to $300 for most games. And the rock-paper-scissors exists in the other games, too - there are going to be matchups where your one army is at a severe disadvantage. The only real difference is that Malifaux is designed to let you adapt, where the others aren't. How that's gotten twisted into a negative, I'm not entirely sure.

[Wasp]

@ Buhallin

That arent empty numbers!? I have to pay this €€€ for the minis. I agree that malifaux isn´t balanced with even one crew, than it´s against the game mechanic.

Would I have three crews from three different fractions I have to pay the bills.

And the one army thing didn´t realy work. In other games I can play with one army. At malifaux, for the same game effect I need a wider range of crews.

But without this game mechanic I think Wyrd are a very bad company and wouldn´t do it for long. They would sell minis and that is okay...and for that the game mechanic is good, works with the selling strategy from the company

[Buhallin]

That arent empty numbers!? I have to pay this €€€ for the minis. I agree that malifaux isn´t balanced with even one crew, than it´s against the game mechanic.

My point is that your numbers are hollow - yes, they may be accurate if that's what you bought, but the scenario you describe isn't what is necessary. You don't have to buy (boxes + 3 support models + big model) x 3 in order to play the game with the intended level of variety. The boxes themselves present a lot of useful overlap, many clamshell minions can support multiple masters, and there aren't even 3 "big" models per faction.

And the one army thing didn´t realy work. In other games I can play with one army. At malifaux, for the same game effect I need a wider range of crews.

While Malifaux may lean towards reactive variety, there are a number of possible "All comers" crews that you can assemble very cheaply, and with careful selection you can add a lot of flexibility without adding a lot of models.

But even beyond that, I'm not sure your math works. I just did a scan of the store, and you could buy literally every Guild model currently released for $240. I'm not sure what exchange rates, VAT, and/or shipping might do to your totals, but I think the model spread you based your math on may not even be possible.

[mythicFOX]

Cue lively debate about European Tax legislation.

:hangman:

Me thinks we're getting off topic.

[Wasp]

LOL I need a green card. 240$ are curent only 170,00 €. For the whole Guild range I have to pay 271,47 Euro / 380 $ argh...

But right it goes offtopic..

Edited March 7, 2011 by Wasp

[PicklesGrr]

Now if you are still arguing that the game is unbalance when you compare one master match up to another. As you can see from the designer that the intentions of this game is that you would buy multiple crews from different factions and from same faction. The rules clearly reinforce this same idea. It goes against the very intentions of the game designer and the rules as stated to play a fixed list game after game.

If you are mention the imbalance of the game when playing fixed list with fixed list than it is invalid to the whole design. Though this might be how some people are playing this game, if they are, they are putting themselves at an obvious disadvantage. I know I love Lady J but if plan on playing a game with the idea that I want to win I will not run her every game.

...

This game is fairly balanced if you play it the way the rules and design imply.

The original rules did not have picking faction as a step in the encounter design (I only just found out it had been added in the rules manual). I am pretty sure the designers did not intend players to get every model (hope perhaps bu not intend it) & have the ability to play as Mr super suitcase.

They do seen to intend that players should not be locked in to one list when they sit down to play.

There must be some middle ground between having every model & having a fixed list. Warmachine does this very well with a two list format, & also a 3 list use each one once format & I expect there is something like that that would work for Malifaux - either a small number of alternate lists (2 or maybe 3) or a sideboard or both.

The Guild is clearly the most egregious example of a counter picking faction - other factions just do not have their obvious nemesis abilities. In casual play it would be very frustrating to always face the guuild crew that locked down your tricks.

I haven't played enough to be anything like competent to commment on true balance but if there is a perception amongst new players that the game is hideously broken then it is not good for the game. Similarly losing & not having fun (Yesterday one guy got his one model - Lord Chompy paralysed 5 turns in a row & there were complaints about various other characters - Ortegas & Freikorps, I think this was just good natured though)

@wasp - when I played my one & only FoW tournament someone won with Bogward IVs & some armour 9 assault guns (Brumbar?) in Midwar. I hope that is no longer legal & so busted but you sure could powergame in FoW in 2008

[mythicFOX]

The original rules did not have picking faction as a step in the encounter design (I only just found out it had been added in the rules manual). I am pretty sure the designers did not intend players to get every model (hope perhaps bu not intend it) & have the ability to play as Mr super suitcase.

In Book 1 you picked faction when you picked your crew after Strategies. In Book 2 you picked your faction then strategies, then master and crew. This is not a change in the rules manual.

I want to address this idea that one guy will turn up to an event with every model and win because of it. Ultimately the reason this doesn't happen isn't financial. It's because a player needs to be able to USE each model effectively, this takes time to learn. A player with the time and skill to learn how to use every model in the right place in the crew and be proficient with them should be rewarded.

Personally I suspect even with a fully open system I don't think many people will change their whole crew every game. I just don't think the average player will be practiced and sharp enough with that many options.

The player who can learn to master every model available deserves the advantage they get for their devotion to the game.

[Buhallin]

I don't think it is off topic, actually.

Flexibility in crew selection is a core element of Malifaux's balance. The cost associated with achieving that flexibility is certainly an issue. As a similar example, can everyone compete in whatever the universal, open, play-with-every-card-printed format is in Magic? Sure, as long as they can drop the $$$ on a full set of Mox and Lotus. Is that balanced? I doubt anyone would argue that it is.

So is the cost for achieving that flexibility unreasonable, to the point where it ruins the low models count that many of us tout as one of Malifaux's big selling points? It's very important to appreciate that there's a spectrum between "fixed list" or even "two list" and "must own every model", and that seems to be getting missed here. Crews have to be able to fill roles in order to accomplish tasks. Those roles can often be filled by multiple models, and a model can typically fill that role for multiple masters. You don't have to own every model in order to fill out a crew.

[Buhallin]

LOL I need a green card. 240$ are curent only 170,00 €. For the whole Guild range I have to pay 271,47 Euro / 380 $ argh...

Now, just to be clear here: My count wasn't "One of everything in the store". I looked at what it would take to get all of the models, which meant that I didn't add a blister of Death Marshals because you get them in Lady J's box set (for example).

But if we did our math the same way, and that's right... Ouch.

[mythicFOX]

Actually Vintage (the MtG format you're referring to) when I last played (Mirrodin block) was very balanced. If you had the cards. The fact that players can't afford those cards is a barrier to entry, to compete at Vintage you needed a very expensive deck. Assuming you can afford and expensive deck the game is balanced.

Balance and price of entry are different things. If you can't afford any models you can't play at all, that's nothing to do with balance.

This comes back to my first post in this thread. Talking about balance requires you to work around red herring issues like the size of collections, player skill and local meta game.

<rows deperately back towards the topic>