Game Balance

[Cats Laughing]

Again, incorrect. Warmachine was brought up by someone other than myself--to be fair, I have a small amount of Khador and my original Menoth that I use and that's about it. Therefore, I am not overly familiar with the tournament scene in that game. Go figure, eh?

And yet you make the following comments?

Instead, I responded to the points that were made, with what knowledge I have. I fully admit that it's possible to have two Warmachine lists for a tournament that do not share a single model, and that it's likely to be a relatively common situation. However, I will also state, flatly, that the scale of Warmachine is larger than that of Malifaux, and that the total investment in building two playable lists can be substantial, but is not quite the same as buying playable lists for all the Masters in your faction in Malifaux.

Let me get this straight, you claim to have relatively little experience in the tournament scene for Warmachine/Hordes and yet you also claim that two lists sharing not a single model is likely to be relatively common and also that buying those two lists would be cheaper than buying an entire Malifaux faction?

The last one (about the costs of 2 lists vs a full faction of Malifaux) is implied in your statement, but not outright stated, so feel free to correct me on this point.

I play Warmachine/Hordes regularly and follow the tournament scene. Seeing two lists for a tournament without any overlapping models is very uncommon. Most factions have a few models that you almost always want to take. Most models work with all casters/locks(Masters) of a faction, and in this Warmachine/Hordes is a bit different from Malifaux.

If you look at the lists for the winner of the recent Templecon, you'll notice that:

The format required 4 different lists with 4 different casters.

The winner took a spawning vessel, Anyssa Ryvaal, and a Shepherd in all 4 lists

He took Shredders, Hex Hunters w/Bayal, and Striders in 3 of the lists

He took Ravagores, Legionnaires, Angelius and Scytheans in 2 of the lists.

Full lists here -> click

At full retail (the crossed out prices on the warstore) his lists come out to:

List 1: $352.86

List 2: $299.86

List 3: $300.86

List 4: $307.86

Even with the overlapping, you're looking at an additional ~$50.00 to upgrade to a second list.

Compare any one of those lists to the cost to purchase every currently available model for the Guild on Wyrd's Online Store: $275.50

(note, this was calculated by purchasing the boxed set models via the individual clamshells rather than the boxed set deals, which leads to a higher price than picking up the boxed set deals, I also included both Austringer poses)

While I completely understand the desire to not pick up additional Masters for flavour reasons (I basically don't have any infantry in my own Khador army and in Malifaux I have no intention to add Ramos or any of his critters to my Rasputina collection), I don't think you can really make any arguments about cost being a problem.

Regarding the idea of restricting yourself to models based on flavour or other non-competition reasons, you can't really complain about tournament balance if you choose to self-handicap within the system.

That said, I would like to see a reasonable amount of balance at the Master level for casual play. It probably isn't good for the game long term if new players get frustrated from losing not because they are new, but because their chosen Master has no chance of winning. I do think the ability to pick schemes and the fact that many strategies don't require killing helps keep this from being a problem. However, I haven't played enough Malifaux to make claims about whether the game is balanced reasonable at the Master level. If the only balance issue is with Gremlins vs Hamelin in a specific strategy, then perhaps a simple fix on that front is needed and we can all play Malifaux happily ever after.

[Fulgrima]

Call me old fashioned but I see a massive difference when it comes to game balance between people that are activly trying to be competative and those that are just playing with there friends for fun.

I can't think of a single miniature game out there that will allow you to take whatever models you like and be considered truely competative it is always about making the current best meta list going. If you want to be competative at a tournament setting you will more than likely have to choose one of the more powerfull masters Pandora, Dreamer, Kirai etc and build a list around them.

This doesnt meant that you need all the models in a faction to be competative as most of them would probably be useless with the master you are taking. For instance if you take alot of non nightmares with the dreamer you are only hampering yourself and if that is what you choose to do its not the games fault it would be your list design.

However I do feel that there are some things that need buffing and others that may need a cuddle in the future as a Marcus player he could do with alot but that is a whole other rant haha.

When it comes to casual play between friends I think that is easily sorted to be honest as you can agree that you wont play ohpelia v haemlin every week as one player is just going to get shafted and if your friend wont agree to that there are bigger issues.

[Ratty]

I currently think there's only one or two truly "might as well not play" set up right now: Ophelia vs. Hamelin in a Shared Slaughter

I'm not entirely sure about this.. If you get Pere in amongst their rats you could easily rack up enough kill points that there would be no way Hamelin could win. remember every rat you kill gives you points, so if you kill the same rat 4 times that is 8kill points. So if pere flames a group of 4 or 5 rats and then does it again when they respawn, that is 20kill points in a 35Vp game. That means the rest of your crew only needs to kill another 7 or 8 rats and you would win even if Hamelin killed your entire crew.

And again the argument again comes in a void. How many people will walk into a store with a friend to get into a new game without doing some searches online, asking some questions online, chatting to some players that already play or talking to a store owner. I mean if you were getting into WarmaHordes and brought two armies of the models you liked between you with no knowledge of how the game worked how balanced would the 2 forces be. Most people will actually find out if their two boxes are going to be fun to play against each other.

I find it ludricous to work on the assumption of this theoretical player that doesn't do any research and then buys the hamelin box and Orphelia, which is a 1/506 chance. probably even lower as how often do you and a friend want to play the same faction when you get into a game.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Ratty

[Uncle]

The last one (about the costs of 2 lists vs a full faction of Malifaux) is implied in your statement, but not outright stated, so feel free to correct me on this point.

Perhaps it's better to say that I have less of a problem spending more money on a game that lets me use somewhere between 20 and 50 models regularly as opposed to one in which I apparently should be buying 30-40 models to use 6-10. Does that make a little more sense?

I play Warmachine/Hordes regularly and follow the tournament scene. Seeing two lists for a tournament without any overlapping models is very uncommon. Most factions have a few models that you almost always want to take. Most models work with all casters/locks(Masters) of a faction, and in this Warmachine/Hordes is a bit different from Malifaux.

Oh, I agree. However, I also would not be surprised by the guy who's playing Talion/Madhammer or something like that, or the guy who's running Karchev/Irusk (hey!) and doesn't have a single model in common.

While I completely understand the desire to not pick up additional Masters for flavour reasons (I basically don't have any infantry in my own Khador army and in Malifaux I have no intention to add Ramos or any of his critters to my Rasputina collection), I don't think you can really make any arguments about cost being a problem.

Cost is a problem due to the scale of the game. I shouldn't be looking at comparable costs between a 6-10 model game and a 20-50 model game.

That said, I would like to see a reasonable amount of balance at the Master level for casual play. It probably isn't good for the game long term if new players get frustrated from losing not because they are new, but because their chosen Master has no chance of winning. I do think the ability to pick schemes and the fact that many strategies don't require killing helps keep this from being a problem. However, I haven't played enough Malifaux to make claims about whether the game is balanced reasonable at the Master level. If the only balance issue is with Gremlins vs Hamelin in a specific strategy, then perhaps a simple fix on that front is needed and we can all play Malifaux happily ever after.

Here's the thing: we can talk about how "killing isn't required" until the cows come home, but it really is. Dead models cannot take objectives and cannot stop you from taking yours. Plus, the easiest (and in some cases, only) way to get an opponent to drop a counter, move off a marker, or whatever is to kill him.

That's the problem with A Line in the Sand. If a Rat Catcher or Hamelin is standing on some dynamite, there is no way for a Gremlin to arm or disarm it.

I'm not entirely sure about this.. If you get Pere in amongst their rats you could easily rack up enough kill points that there would be no way Hamelin could win. remember every rat you kill gives you points, so if you kill the same rat 4 times that is 8kill points. So if pere flames a group of 4 or 5 rats and then does it again when they respawn, that is 20kill points in a 35Vp game. That means the rest of your crew only needs to kill another 7 or 8 rats and you would win even if Hamelin killed your entire crew.

Now, Ratty, why would the Hamelin player ever take a single rat in these circumstances?

And again the argument again comes in a void. How many people will walk into a store with a friend to get into a new game without doing some searches online, asking some questions online, chatting to some players that already play or talking to a store owner. I mean if you were getting into WarmaHordes and brought two armies of the models you liked between you with no knowledge of how the game worked how balanced would the 2 forces be. Most people will actually find out if their two boxes are going to be fun to play against each other.

For what it's worth, I've jumped into several games like that, either for fun or because they were new. When Warmachine came out, I bought a Kreoss starter before I knew anything about the game because it looked good, for example, and there are countless other games that I picked up because friends were playing without doing research beforehand--HeroClix comes to mind especially.

But honestly, all of that is more of an aside than anything else. I do not think that having a matchup that is pretty much not worth playing is going to be a good thing for Malifaux. It certainly wasn't for 7th Edition.

[Ratty]

Perhaps it's better to say that I have less of a problem spending more money on a game that lets me use somewhere between 20 and 50 models regularly as opposed to one in which I apparently should be buying 30-40 models to use 6-10. Does that make a little more sense?

You really don't need 30-40 models. You probably need 2 Masters that compliment each other and 2 crews which probably have a bit of cross over. Eg for Pandora + Zoraida I have Stitched Together and Coppelius that work well for both crews. You can probably get together a tournament ready force with about 12 models.

Cost is a problem due to the scale of the game. I shouldn't be looking at comparable costs between a 6-10 model game and a 20-50 model game.

In what world is this true.. Warmachine is mainly a 40+ model game. Malifaux is a 12+ model game.

Now, Ratty, why would the Hamelin player ever take a single rat in these circumstances?

If he doesn't run any rats, he will probably be running at a disadvantage, and eventually whatever happends there will be rats. Add to this the fact there is only one model in Hamelin's crew Orphelia's mob can't target, it doesn't matter much. You can't kill Hamelin, but there are plenty of models you can kill to get Kill Points.

But honestly, all of that is more of an aside than anything else. I do not think that having a matchup that is pretty much not worth playing is going to be a good thing for Malifaux. It certainly wasn't for 7th Edition.

I think the difference wasn't the fact that there were bad matchups in 7th edition, it was there were only 2 matchups in 7th edition. Demon Army vs Demon Army or Demon Army vs Anything Else.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Ratty

[Fulgrima]

Perhaps it's better to say that I have less of a problem spending more money on a game that lets me use somewhere between 20 and 50 models regularly as opposed to one in which I apparently should be buying 30-40 models to use 6-10. Does that make a little more sense?

Oh, I agree. However, I also would not be surprised by the guy who's playing Talion/Madhammer or something like that, or the guy who's running Karchev/Irusk (hey!) and doesn't have a single model in common.

Cost is a problem due to the scale of the game. I shouldn't be looking at comparable costs between a 6-10 model game and a 20-50 model game.

I understand the concept but what force would require you to have 30 models? to consider yourself competative even with the worst case of ophelia v haemlin if you take it at faction level which you would need to in that case as more gremlins wont help. An additional vik force would not add that many models. I think in some ways your arguments are valid just greatly exagerated.

[Adran]

I still think Sommer Vs Hamlin has got some legs, as it is very easy to remove Hamlins control hand. (Just target one of the other models in his crew). Then you decide when the hamlin player is able to cheat whilst you craft an amazing hand ready for one great turn.

And whilst you don't have much that can hurt Hamlin, you are able to do so (Even if its shooting the Gremlin standing next to him and getting the blast damage off).

I will agree that Ophelia vs Hamlin will almost certainly not have the Gremlins killing Hamlin. But they don't have to to be able to kill him to get several victory points.

And Ophelia isn't even a master. Sure, she can lead a crew, but using a henchman instead of a master is putting yourself at a disadvantage.

You migth try and claim killing is required, but I disagree.

I had an 80 point brawl when I only killed 3 models and was unlucky to only draw the game. (And I killed two of those models to get scheme points. Chosing other schemes could have meant I didn't even need that. )

Every one of my models was killed, but if any one of about 10 flips had gone my way I would have won regardless.

Scissors, Paper, stone is a balanced game (even more so when you add in Lizard, Spock), but if you always bid stone you will lose.

[Uncle]

You really don't need 30-40 models. You probably need 2 Masters that compliment each other and 2 crews which probably have a bit of cross over. Eg for Pandora + Zoraida I have Stitched Together and Coppelius that work well for both crews. You can probably get together a tournament ready force with about 12 models.

It's certainly possible in some circumstances, particularly if you're shopping for most impact in fewest models. In other situations, you will need 40 models--look at someone who wants to play Som'er as his/her primary Master, for example, with Vickies and perhaps Freikorps as backup.

Heck, my Showgirls have 11 models for up to a 35 ss game. If I were to add, say, Rasputina or Ramos, I'd be hitting the 20-model mark pretty easily (and I'd go even higher if I chose Ramos due to the summoning).

In what world is this true.. Warmachine is mainly a 40+ model game. Malifaux is a 12+ model game.

This may be a playgroup thing. I've honestly yet to see a non-Gremlin or summoning force that goes over 10 models in 25-35 ss. Are you guys playing bigger games, or is your area more prone to using cheaper models?

If he doesn't run any rats, he will probably be running at a disadvantage, and eventually whatever happends there will be rats. Add to this the fact there is only one model in Hamelin's crew Orphelia's mob can't target, it doesn't matter much. You can't kill Hamelin, but there are plenty of models you can kill to get Kill Points.

For some reason I was under the impression that Rat Catchers are untargetable just like Hamelin. If that's not the case, then I apologize.

I think the difference wasn't the fact that there were bad matchups in 7th edition, it was there were only 2 matchups in 7th edition. Demon Army vs Demon Army or Demon Army vs Anything Else.

This is true to an extent. There were some armies that could theoretically compete with a Daemon list, and then you had things like Ogres, in which a three-year-old with a Bloodthirster could win against an entire 2500 point list.

I understand the concept but what force would require you to have 30 models? to consider yourself competative even with the worst case of ophelia v haemlin if you take it at faction level which you would need to in that case as more gremlins wont help. An additional vik force would not add that many models. I think in some ways your arguments are valid just greatly exagerated.

You will never see a force with 30 models in a standard Malifaux game, but to have three Masters ready to go for a tournament, or two Masters that have a plethora of options (think Som'er and Leveticus for example, or Kirai and Nicodemus), you can break that 30 model mark pretty quickly. On the same token, you can run two beatstick lists and rarely, if ever, need more than 15 models, so it depends on what you're trying to do.

You migth try and claim killing is required, but I disagree.

I had an 80 point brawl when I only killed 3 models and was unlucky to only draw the game. (And I killed two of those models to get scheme points. Chosing other schemes could have meant I didn't even need that. )

Every one of my models was killed, but if any one of about 10 flips had gone my way I would have won regardless.

It is entirely possible to win a game without doing much, if any, killing. My point remains, however, that the best and easiest way to win remains killing. Otherwise, several crews have no option to cause a model to drop, say, the treasure or get away from the dynamite so they can disarm it. Or of simply clearing models from areas where yours need to be.

[Fulgrima]

You will never see a force with 30 models in a standard Malifaux game, but to have three Masters ready to go for a tournament, or two Masters that have a plethora of options (think Som'er and Leveticus for example, or Kirai and Nicodemus), you can break that 30 model mark pretty quickly. On the same token, you can run two beatstick lists and rarely, if ever, need more than 15 models, so it depends on what you're trying to do.

Exactly if money is an issue then you can create cheap solid crews and have options. Or by picking a good master to start with (would involve research) then you can build one crew with enough options to be competative in 99% of situations. There is no need to have that many models to play in a competative enviroment.

There are of course crews that do require more models i.e the summoning ones but that would be the same with any mini game.

[Uncle]

Exactly if money is an issue then you can create cheap solid crews and have options. Or by picking a good master to start with (would involve research) then you can build one crew with enough options to be competative in 99% of situations. There is no need to have that many models to play in a competative enviroment.

See, there's the problem: "pick a good master." There really shouldn't be "good" and "bad" masters, but there really are. Also, remember that for quite a few of us, there are just a handful (and sometimes only one) master that appeals to us.

As an example, I have been considering getting back into WoW. However, I have found that my favorite class (Hunter) is terrible at my favorite activity (PvP). Therefore, I haven't jumped at the opportunity. If I was drawn into Malifaux by Marcus and did some research online, I probably wouldn't play Malifaux.

[Tograth]

With *any* wargames system, you will find that not everything is perfectly balanced. This isnt actually a bad thing - by far the easiest way to balance stuff is to homogenise it, which destroys the whole point in playing. By having differences, you make each game unique and fun, as opposed to boring.

Saying that, Malifaux is by far the most balanced wargame I've come across. Sure, there are a few masters who unbalance the game in certain situations, but they are the exceptions, rather than the rule. Im looking purely at Hamelin here versus the gremlins. Ive yet to come across any other combo which is an auto lose (and even then gremlins vs Hammy isnt). It all comes down to the player being flexible enough to think on his or her toes with relation to coming up with new tactics etc.

Kinda the whole point of a wargame, huh?

For example, a lot of folks talk about Marcus as being one of the weakest masters out there, and yes, for a new player, he certainly seems to be. The big thing is though, that he isnt necessarily weak, but rather has a different focus and a steeper learning curve than a lot of other masters.

Marcus was my first crew, and despite having expanded my collection to the other arcanists and other factions, He still gets more table time than most, and thats because I know how to use him, I know his strengths and weaknesses and I know that he's a paper cannon.

I can see the validity of the point that some folks are making with regards the cost of entry to the game, but its really a non issue - If you are interested in the game, then the money you spend on it gives you far more bang for your buck than just about any other hobby.

For instance, say you splurge and buy the entire Guild range, plus the books etc you need to get started. Going by Maelstrom's RRP prices, thats 245 pounds.

for that 245 pounds, you get 32 minis, 3 rulebooks (RP, handbook, rulebook), and one deck.

An average person would spend a good 96 hours painting all of that (conservatively, 3 hours per model. most folks spend more time than that). On top of that, you have all the games you would play with it all. Say you play a game a week, for a year. Thats another 104 hours spent playing with them.

that, right there, is 200 hours plus worth of enjoyment and entertainment for 245 pound.

Now, tell me of *any* other hobby which gives you the same return on your investment?

movies?

you're talking 10 - 15 pound per dvd or cinema trip. thats maybe 19 or 20 trips to the cinema.

Books? thats 24 books, on average. (books are also pretty good value for money, depending on your reading speed and inclination to reread)

computer games? thats 5 computer games, which works out to (conservatively) 120 hours of fun and frustration.

music? again, thats anywhere between 24 and 30 cds.

boardgames? call it 40 pounds a boardgame. 5 or 6 boardgames for the same investment.

My point is, sure, malifaux can be quite expensive if you go all out, but the amount of enjoyment and use you get out of it is well worth it.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Tograth

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

See, there's the problem: "pick a good master." There really shouldn't be "good" and "bad" masters, but there really are. Also, remember that for quite a few of us, there are just a handful (and sometimes only one) master that appeals to us.

As an example, I have been considering getting back into WoW. However, I have found that my favorite class (Hunter) is terrible at my favorite activity (PvP). Therefore, I haven't jumped at the opportunity. If I was drawn into Malifaux by Marcus and did some research online, I probably wouldn't play Malifaux.

you continue to pick out the extreme examples for money cost as if they are the norm or even most popular. Yes if you want nico you will need a lot of models, that is not a flaw it is the nature of a summoner. It sounds like you would feel it is a more affordable game if summoners were not in it or they could only summon specific models that are really cheap. With the later option that would probably mean lesser detail models which would go against wyrds origins.

Ortega, death marshals, sorrows, dreamer, seamus, viks are all pretty affordable crew examples.

As for ophelia and ham, that is again an extreme not a norm and again this game is designed without fixed lists. It is a faction to faction game. If this game is balanced it would that no crew is without at least one crew in each faction that can counter or fight on same footing.

So for example Ham can be countered or played on equal footing with Perdita, seamus, nico, ramos, dreamer, and ham himself.

There are masters that have fewer or more counters than others but that is not a balance issue as long as they have one in each faction. The more or less idea is to create more and more unique play styles that will appeal to a larger audience. That is smart.

There are less than a handful of extreme examples of disadvantages like ham and ophelia. Of all those example I there is at least one or two strategies and a few schemes that the disadvantaged crew can still complete. That doesn't mean it is an auto lose situation with a little luck they could still prevail. This game use a random factor so luck is still a part of this game like all other war games that use dice.

[Uncle]

With *any* wargames system, you will find that not everything is perfectly balanced. This isnt actually a bad thing - by far the easiest way to balance stuff is to homogenise it, which destroys the whole point in playing. By having differences, you make each game unique and fun, as opposed to boring.

Agreed, and perfect balance is completely impossible to create. The easy catches, however, should have been caught.

Saying that, Malifaux is by far the most balanced wargame I've come across. Sure, there are a few masters who unbalance the game in certain situations, but they are the exceptions, rather than the rule. Im looking purely at Hamelin here versus the gremlins. Ive yet to come across any other combo which is an auto lose (and even then gremlins vs Hammy isnt). It all comes down to the player being flexible enough to think on his or her toes with relation to coming up with new tactics etc.

Kinda the whole point of a wargame, huh?

I'm not certain if Malifaux is the most balanced game I've played, but it's certainly up there alongside a few other, smaller games. However, keep in mind the game is still in its infancy, really--the rest will be to see if the balance is maintained, or improved, with more books and more models.

I can see the validity of the point that some folks are making with regards the cost of entry to the game, but its really a non issue - If you are interested in the game, then the money you spend on it gives you far more bang for your buck than just about any other hobby.

Just about, yes, although there's the pervasive element of MMOs, which can provide over a hundred hours' "enjoyment" a month for fifteen bucks. Futhermore, the big issue with arguing the validity of wargames as a form of entertainment is that you need a second player to enjoy them.

Some of us are lucky to be able to get to a game store/club once or twice a month. If said person also plays more than one game, he's getting considerably little "value" for his money there. But that's his call.

you're talking 10 - 15 pound per dvd or cinema trip. thats maybe 19 or 20 trips to the cinema.

But, to be fair, that's approximately the same amount of hours spent. Even more, if you buy the DVDs and go through the director's commentary.

computer games? thats 5 computer games, which works out to (conservatively) 120 hours of fun and frustration.

Again, it depends on the game. Buy an MMO or a JRPG and you'll get a lot more hours of "entertainment."

I don't even want to think how many hours I spent on FFVII...

Ortega, death marshals, sorrows, dreamer, seamus, viks are all pretty affordable crew examples.

Absolutely (with the arguable exception of the Vickies, since their box set really doesn't do much for them). I'd also throw in the Freikorps as a good, cheap "all-rounder" crew, and the Showgirls.

Does that mean that you can't, very easily, need thirty or more models to be "competitive" in a tournament environment?

There are less than a handful of extreme examples of disadvantages like ham and ophelia. Of all those example I there is at least one or two strategies and a few schemes that the disadvantaged crew can still complete. That doesn't mean it is an auto lose situation with a little luck they could still prevail. This game use a random factor so luck is still a part of this game like all other war games that use dice.

This is an argument that really doesn't hold water. Luck is an integral part of any game that uses a random element, and minimizing it is more often than not something that experienced players try to minimize.

Certainly, if the cards favor me, I can expect to do well. That doesn't mean that gross imbalances (which, I will reiterate, I only see in one very specific case here) are justified.

[hippieshopper]

I would like to throw in my 2 cents.

Video games and this game seem to go in hand in hand by that reasoning.

As JPRoth said, Final Fantasy is a perfect example. I have access to all of my favorite old school Squaresoft games which costed roughly 40$ altogether...this has given me a lot of entertainment.

Maybe I am just a boring individual, but I have played through those 6 games so many times and it never gets boring even though I know Aeris dies, Ward loses his voice, you can't use magic in Oeilvert, Tidus is a ghost, and that Fei and Id are one in the same.

As far as Malifaux goes, I agree that for a game of it's kind...it is amazing, because you can spend $100 and get a lot out of it. I personally don't count painting as fun, but the diversity in models and types and how most games and all that variety is amazing, even though I haven't played any other wargames. But I know some people who have.

Balance wise, I'd say Wyrd is doing pretty good. I think the more models that come out, the more balancing that needs to be done. This is where I see it turning into a slippery slope to craziness. I know that to stay competitive they need to keep releasing models, which could mean a lot of bad things if they don't do it right.

[Ciaran]

Balance wise, I'd say Wyrd is doing pretty good. I think the more models that come out, the more balancing that needs to be done. This is where I see it turning into a slippery slope to craziness. I know that to stay competitive they need to keep releasing models, which could mean a lot of bad things if they don't do it right.

Here is where I would say I trust Wyrd a lot. Their focus on creating a solid product for their community really shines through for me.

Having been involved as a player in this industry for quite a while I've never been more impressed with a company's ability to create interesting match ups. I say interesting rather than fair because of the randomized strategy component, and sometimes it just works out to be rough. Those hard fought near losses, or ties have been some of my favorite games. For creative players that practice both the game's hard skills as well as the meta game's soft skills I feel like there aren't any actual auto lose situations. Nothing I've seen so far I've seen on the tabletop or online have changed my thoughts on that.

[Cats Laughing]

I'd like to mention that I agree (in theory) with JPRoth regarding a desire for a reasonable amount of balance at the master level. While the game is meant to be played at a faction level, it would be nice to allow players who only like specific crews to have a reasonable shot at winning.

Reasonable doesn't actually mean 50-50 though, since perfect balance is basically impossible without dumbing down the game down to the level of the card game "War" (probably also know by other games -> basically a simple high card flip, no modifiers, nothing additional).

I'm not sure where exactly reasonable would be, but from my limited experience and my reading of this forum, with the outliers of Gremlins vs Hamelin and possibly Marcus vs anybody(?) it seems that most match ups are fairly reasonable and Wyrd is working to make the game reasonably balanced across the board.

I noticed when I started playing, that Rasputina has a very slow crew and is at a disadvantage in movement related strategies (it didn't help that I picked the Steal Relic scheme in my first game against Seamus based on the stories in the rulebook However, in Rising Powers, Raspy gets Snowstorm, who gives her some movement tricks and probably helps her crews do better in those movement based strategies. I would not be surprised if Wyrd puts in a "fix" for the Gremlins vs Hamelin "problem", which might be as simple as a model that has a spell/ability that grants a friendly Gremlin Ht2 for a turn.

There is another area that "theoretically" Wyrd might be able to do better. I think each master's starter box should be within a reasonable points (stones) value of each other. Not all tricks for a Master need to be available. Indeed, you don't even need access to the Master's main trick. But you should be able to play one box against another with a reasonable chance of victory for both sides(assuming core strategies). This is good for promoting the game with new players, as they can just grab a starter box and the rules and start playing. I think Wyrd does a pretty good job of this, but as I've mentioned before, I don't have the experience with this game to state that with certainty. I do believe that there is always a chance to improve and I wouldn't be surprised if Wyrd agrees.

[Wasp]

There is another area that "theoretically" Wyrd might be able to do better. I think each master's starter box should be within a reasonable points (stones) value of each other. Not all tricks for a Master need to be available. Indeed, you don't even need access to the Master's main trick. But you should be able to play one box against another with a reasonable chance of victory for both sides(assuming core strategies). This is good for promoting the game with new players, as they can just grab a starter box and the rules and start playing. I think Wyrd does a pretty good job of this, but as I've mentioned before, I don't have the experience with this game to state that with certainty. I do believe that there is always a chance to improve and I wouldn't be surprised if Wyrd agrees.

I think that´s against the system behind malifaux. The fractions and even the single characters are to different that the startet boxes are belanced against each other in every Tactic. When Wyrd make this possible they broken with their gamemechanic I think.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Only a handful of starters are weak out of the box. Keep in mind the starters are designed with no overlap. Like viks would need overlap with levi to be better. Also model count is limited in starters. This is not a fair criticism since overlap would probably reduce sales for those wanting to get other masters. I know I would have bought starters I did if they overlaped at all.

As for master to master balance the game would change entirely to achieve that faction balance makes for easier design and far more diverse masters.

[Buhallin]

One other thing on the master vs. faction balance that I don't think has been brought up yet - replayability.

I play pretty much all of Spartan's games as well, and if there's one major weakness they have it's a lack of variation. Playing the same game against the same opponent with the same ships can only play out so many ways. It's getting better, but with their choice to make multiple games instead of focusing, my Firestorm fleet has a whopping 7 ships to choose from. Not a lot of variety.

JPRoth keeps bashing on the idea that you might have to own 20 or 30 models, but only use 8 in a given game. I know there are people who just buy a specific army and play just that army with no variation, but I find that gets repetitive quickly, even if I'm playing against different opponents. This issue doesn't resonate with me because I ALWAYS have more models than I need for just one army. I'm also not sure how someone who plays multiple factions can find this annoying, since by definition you can't use half the models you own in any game.

While it can be annoying for the initial purchase, and certainly has a few landmines for certain styles of players, the "8 of 20" model means that there's a good chance everyone will see different models on a regular basis. Combined with strategies and schemes, this gives Malifaux a range of play that, IMHO, no other tabletop game out there matches. In the long run, that's more important to me than whether there are a few bad combinations of starters.

[Cats Laughing]

Btw, on the subject of Gremlins vs Hamelin, does Hamelin ignore damage from blasts, auras or pulses?

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Wow. Interesting discussion.

I find it hard to judge the balance of the masters because of all the different factors that come into play.

I know I did extremely well when I played my different masters though I went at it with the strategy and schemes in mind while eliminating my opponent's crew was not high on my list.

I even won a couple of games where I had no models left on the table but racked up more VP's than my opponent. And this was during league games.

Players that focus on killing their opponent's crew tend to fall into the "balance" issue more often than those who focus on the VP's.

But I do agree players need more than one choice for a master in any faction do to the strengths and weaknesses each one brings. There are some bad match-ups, but that is how every war game with individual characters works.

Just my two cents.

Edited March 11, 2011 by Murphy'sLawyer

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Btw, on the subject of Gremlins vs Hamelin, does Hamelin ignore damage from blasts, auras or pulses?

No he doesn't so, I still don't see why ophelia vs ham is bad. Yeah they have one strategy contain power, where I would say they would be out 4 go but they still have 2 schemes they can try to complete. I have won and loss games 2 vp to 4 vp. Also in shared slaughter ophelia will likely win every time with all the rats killed. I think the language requires them to summon.

I think once ham has been out through this more people will realize he isn't so op. He is probably tier 1 like Pandy and Perdita but I don't consider them op.

[Uncle]

JPRoth keeps bashing on the idea that you might have to own 20 or 30 models, but only use 8 in a given game. I know there are people who just buy a specific army and play just that army with no variation, but I find that gets repetitive quickly, even if I'm playing against different opponents. This issue doesn't resonate with me because I ALWAYS have more models than I need for just one army. I'm also not sure how someone who plays multiple factions can find this annoying, since by definition you can't use half the models you own in any game.

If you purchase more models than you use willingly, congratulations. I do not consider it good game design to semi-force someone to buy more models than they will ever use at once.

No he doesn't so, I still don't see why ophelia vs ham is bad. Yeah they have one strategy contain power, where I would say they would be out 4 go but they still have 2 schemes they can try to complete. I have won and loss games 2 vp to 4 vp. Also in shared slaughter ophelia will likely win every time with all the rats killed. I think the language requires them to summon.

Starting off an automatic 4 VPs behind your opponent isn't really a good thing, and honestly, unless you were playing an Ophelia gunline and/or knew your opponent was going to run Hamelin, your only real source of blasts is likely to be Pere.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

If you purchase more models than you use willingly, congratulations. I do not consider it good game design to semi-force someone to buy more models than they will ever use at once.

No offense but this statement seems flawed not because your desires are wrong but because the class of game Malifaux IS makes buying extra models to play competitively almost necessary.

All miniature game systems have this in common, even Blood Bowl is like this, and it does not in anyway mean that a system is flawed.

Maybe you don't quite understand what the concept of "character" miniature driven games means fully because from what I hear you saying seems to be against what this class of game is.

Again I am not trying to be offensive but you have to be told straight, these kind of games all require you to purchase more models than you will be,able to play at one time and it is a sign of a good character driven game when this is the case. Different situations require different talents just like in real life.

That IS what draws people to the game for the most part. And it is never going to change either. Sorry if you didn't understand this when you bought into the game.

[Uncle]

No offense but this statement seems flawed not because your desires are wrong but because the class of game Malifaux IS makes buying extra models to play competitively almost necessary.

All miniature game systems have this in common, even Blood Bowl is like this, and it does not in anyway mean that a system is flawed.

Interestingly, no. Or at least, not to the extent of having an extra 150% of your "played" models sitting around.

I am an avid fan of Bloodbowl, which I would say is easily GW's best game. I'll also say that the only "spare" models my Dwarfs contain are the ones I chose to by as decorations--cheerleaders, a ref, coach, commentator, etc. Aside from that, I have 13 models, one of which can only be on the pitch for one play, giving me one reserve in case of injury.

In Necromunda, I own four Spyrers. Not exactly a lot of room to overlap there. I also have an Escher gang sitting somewhere in a storage facility, I'm sure.

My Warhammer army has 2 "leftover" Ogres. My Space Marine army is even worse--there's not a single model that I have bought that isn't used in the standard tournament list.

Perhaps I'm just frugal with my purchases, but I don't see the point in buying models "just in case." There are some that I buy specifically to paint, but that is very different from my playable forces.