Hamelin is better than we think

[ZiggyQubert]

If you announce these I will sac/kill and resummon the models, Cuddling your schemes

Kidnap never needs to be anounced even for the 2vp

I note we're now suggesting a LOT of changes across the board when you take into account everyone's opinion on this.

a bunch of changes have been suggested, I would asume that only one or two of them would actualy be implimented if any changes were made

Most models can move and attack once, why not rats? I think they only got slow as an opening stat to make it easier to track which have been summoned etc... (can you imagine having 4 non-slow and 3 slow rats?) Havig said that, I don't understand why the have Impetuous to give the +ive flips...

Rats can move and attack once... they use there 0 to push and then there action to attack, removing instinctuial forces them to use the 0 to push and then they cant get the + to there next action, if they were already in melee then they could still use the +, hence it makes them somewhat less effective without compleatly Cuddling them

[Drake]

I think Magic's comment about Sac/kill was referring mostly to Grudge and Protege, rather than Kidnap. The first 2 would be fairly useless against Hamelin really,as he can kill his own models before you get the chance kill kill/finish them off.

[Cats Laughing]

I apologize for the mini rant... I guess what I'm saying in summery is that interaction = fun. Strangled options = not fun.

I agree.

Not being able to interact with a model is pretty unfun.

I'm not experienced enough to make statements about being broken or what would make for a more balanced game, but on the fun side of things, it would be more fun to be able to interact with Hamelin, by changing Bully.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Yes, the fact that Bully is on all the time effectively is what makes it problematic.

[Omenbringer]

There's something in this, especially as he only needs one on the board now. You could understand it was important when he needed to keep them within 3", but I agree in principle - although not sure how you've worked out the casting cost (is it the same as a Hollow Waif or something? That's a bad comparison if it is) And don't forget it needs to bear in mind his limited card mechanic for cheating - i.e. it can't be too hard to do

The casting cost was worked out from similar Resurectionist Masters Summoning spells (which all require a physical component). With the errata to Indiscriminant Void I think the Stolen should go back to only having 1 on the board at a time (they are after all a free 3 SS model that he can bring out when ever he wants for 1 AP).

Disagree with this. He has to sac a model to do it, it's a big enough bind as it is (irrespective of "but he has sooooo many models")

So many "free" models to sac (and when sacing the right models can get another free rat).

Don't understand - you mean the -2wp etc? You seem to be missing HE HAS TO SAC A MODEL - that's a pretty high price you know

Most of the models he will be sacing to feed his spells are going to give him a free Rat anyway (plus he can always bring out a "free" 3 SS The Stolen every turn).

I'd love a new edition which rebalanced all of the crews. Nothing major, just minor tweaks to bring them more in line with each other.

This is inevitable. Edited June 14, 2011 by Omenbringer

[Omenbringer]

I think Magic's comment about Sac/kill was referring mostly to Grudge and Protege, rather than Kidnap. The first 2 would be fairly useless against Hamelin really,as he can kill his own models before you get the chance kill kill/finish them off.

This is one of the main reasons he is so powerful in play, he can sac his own models (with a benefit) to deny VP's to the opponent as well as easily render enemy models unable to complete objectives because they are now Insignificant. I am all for having some denial built into a Master/ crew but it shouldn't be this prevailent and easy.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Omenbringer

[Q'iq'el]

I'm sorry, but don't bring "fun" as an argument to the discussion about balance. This is the most subjective thing there can be.

Personally I always enjoyed tailored army lists, because I felt it is fluffy - when someone goes to war, he prepares against the enemy he has to face. It also makes the combat more challenging.

Many of my friends would tell me it's crazy, because a tailored list counters your moves and it turns into a chain of frustration.

I never got the hatred for gunlines and castles - I always thought it's fun to take apart a case-tete build out of Dwarfs or Empire troops in WH FB. And once you took it apart, it was unplayable for the opponent anymore, so he had to come up with something new.

People notion of fun differs. For some it's pwning face, for some it is inventing insane combos, for some it is obsessing over a list you cannot beat till you manage to beat it.

Either way, the worst possible motive for asking for re-balancing your opponent's master is to say it is "unfun" for you. If it isn't fun for you, tell him not to bring the master - it's personal matter between you two, not a balance or gamestyle issue at all.

Right next to the fun factor is asking for balance because your favorite list build with your favorite models cannot deal with something. We are supposed to change the lists on a whim and collect the entire range of miniatures (at least the entire range our masters can hire). It is not a game where you are at the top of all your options from the get go - it is a collectible game and collectible means your power and ability to address some crews grows as you collect the minis.

If you feel you lack an option, buy a mini that gives you the option. Change the master. Get some new terrain to play in (which may shift the balance). Again, this is not something which should be dealt by Cuddling and rebalancing of the models themselves.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Necromorph]

@Q

Agree 100%. Start swinging the cuddle bat with reckless abandon and there will be consequences in the long term...mark my words.

[Fetid Strumpet]

I think we will have to just agree to disagree then. I don't think we are looking at this issue the same way at all. I'm not advocating a change because I think Hamelin needs to be cuddled. I'm advocating a change because passive control abilities like Hamelin's Bully are a fundamentally bad design choice in such an elegantly interactive game system. Malifaux is an entire game system built on interacting with ones opponent. Anything which shuts that interaction down with no way to counter it breaks the system.

[Math Mathonwy]

People notion of fun differs. For some it's pwning face, for some it is inventing insane combos, for some it is obsessing over a list you cannot beat till you manage to beat it.

Either way, the worst possible motive for asking for re-balancing your opponent's master is to say it is "unfun" for you. If it isn't fun for you, tell him not to bring the master - it's personal matter between you two, not a balance or gamestyle issue at all.

Imagine a Master with zero interaction from the opponent that wins exactly 50% of the time. Have, I dunno, play solitaire with the faith deck with rules that makes the game 50% win or lose. Perfectly balanced and you'd love to play against one time and again?

So yeah, fun has quantifiable components to it. One is interaction. Taking away interaction means less fun in 95% of the cases (unless there is too much but that doesn't seem like a problem that is likely to be had in Malifaux in the near future).

Right next to the fun factor is asking for balance because your favorite list build with your favorite models cannot deal with something. We are supposed to change the lists on a whim and collect the entire range of miniatures (at least the entire range our masters can hire). It is not a game where you are at the top of all your options from the get go - it is a collectible game and collectible means your power and ability to address some crews grows as you collect the minis.

If you feel you lack an option, buy a mini that gives you the option. Change the master. Get some new terrain to play in (which may shift the balance). Again, this is not something which should be dealt by Cuddling and rebalancing of the models themselves.

*citation needed

In other words, what do you base these claims on? Did Wyrd say at some point that they intentionally strive to make some of the Masters rock-paper-scissors so that if you happen to pick Gremlins to go against Hamelin you autolose? I somehow doubt that.

Also, you fail to justify the idea. Why make that hypothetical design decision (well, to sell more minis, but that sounds a bit tinfoil hat territory)? How does it produce a better game?

Finally, why extend it only to some crews and then not make this implicit? Ortegas have no hard counters. Colette has no hard counters. Actually, it seems that most Masters have no hard counters. Kinda blows you theory out of the water, doesn't it?

@Q

Agree 100%. Start swinging the cuddle bat with reckless abandon and there will be consequences in the long term...mark my words.

"With reckless abandon?" That kinda takes the meaning out of your statement. Of course doing X with "reckless abandon" leads to bad places! Now, was there someone who suggested doing the balancing with reckless abandond?

[Q'iq'el]

I think we will have to just agree to disagree then. I don't think we are looking at this issue the same way at all. I'm not advocating a change because I think Hamelin needs to be cuddled. I'm advocating a change because passive control abilities like Hamelin's Bully are a fundamentally bad design choice in such an elegantly interactive game system. Malifaux is an entire game system built on interacting with ones opponent. Anything which shuts that interaction down with no way to counter it breaks the system.

That is definitely a narrow view of the game. Interaction between models themselves is merely an aspect of Malifaux. Crew design and flexibility is immensely important - you are asked to choose your masters and hire the minions after you learn the location of the encounter, it's unique characteristics and the job you'll have to do there.

Not only is that indication of the intent, but it makes it clear if there's something your minions cannot deal with, take different minions or even different master. It hardly makes it paper-rock-scisors, but it does make it a game where crew design is one of the crucial factors.

I feel this is actually the only serious problem with Book 2 - players who start with Kirai or Colette get completely wrong idea of the game, enclosed in all the Book 2 synergies. All the book 1 experiences clearly helped Wyrd to design more captivating masters too and it's hard to persuade players to show flexibility, which was absolutely normal in the Book 1.

Hamelin is hardly the only case of a master you have to deal with by the crew design.

Then you can find a plethora of examples of Encounters where a perfectly capable master is rendered useless by the circumstances - A Nicodem crew in the Bog, doing Shared Treasure Hunt can do absolutely nothing about the situation. They move 1.5~2" a turn! If they face a flying crew on the top of that (or Silurids), they simply have no chance of winning whatsoever and interaction between miniatures doesn't even come into play.

Obviously this is an extreme case and obviously such a match wouldn't be fun. But the player isn't supposed to bring his slow crew to this mission and if he insists, it's his fault, not the opponents.

It may be, that you need to bring specific miniatures or specific masters to deal with Hamelin. It doesn't make it paper-rock-scisors, because the modification doesn't merely depend on the opponent you face (in fact, you don't really know what you'll face until after you hire your crew) - you also need to take Encounter and Strategy into consideration.

But this game is much about designing combos as about designing combo-breakers and that has been obvious from the beginning. There's no need to ask for quotes about that.

P.S. And let's not build strawmen. There's no need to imagine most boring game ever to prove there's some objective quality to "fun". We're not dealing with most boring game ever, we are dealing with complex game people enjoy at different levels. Miniature interaction is merely an aspect of it and nothing more.

On the top of that, Hamelin is a master that can block many models from attacking him, but it hardly blocks "interaction" altogether, merely direct assaults. You can also deal with his abilities in multitude of ways (crew design involving alpha strikes, starving him out of the models to sacrifice, overloading him with targets etc. etc.).

[Math Mathonwy]

It may be' date=' that you need to bring specific miniatures or specific masters to deal with Hamelin. It doesn't make it paper-rock-scisors, because the modification doesn't merely depend on the opponent you face (in fact, you don't really know what you'll face until after you hire your crew)[/quote']

The point of RPS is that you don't know what your opponent is playing so that's a pretty weak argument.

Yup. Still, some crews are rock to another's paper on the crew level. The fact that there are other variables on different levels doesn't invalidate this.

It wasn't a strawman. You said that fun is the most subjective thing there is, which is simply not true. I demonstrated that through a trivial example to make it easier to grasp.

Try playing ten matches of Ophelia vs Hamelin and then try playing ten matches of Lady Justice vs Nicodem (or even Rasputina vs Pandora to take magicpockets' top and bottom tier Masters). I'm pretty sure that I know which ten matches will be more fun.

Now this here is a strawman since no one said that it blocks interaction altogether. I suggest you familiarize yourself with what a strawman means as it obviously is eluding you in a bit of an embarrassing way.

It's an automatic ability that denies the most common way of interaction between opposing models, therefore it crucially lessens interaction is what everyone has been saying.

[magicpockets]

Just to say I'm dropping out of this debate as it's starting to lose its constructiveness - I think there's some valid observations and ideas, but now too many people just trying to prove they're right rater than objectively discussing Hamelin. We'll just have to see what Wyrd do (if they feel the need to do anything which they may not) and roll with it.

[jdomin2]

I just would like to hope that the constant derailment of this thread into a discussion on balance in miniature games vs wyrd vs weapons in first person shooters vs random speculation of all masters being hit with a "cuddle bat" vs warhammer would stop and we can talk about hamelin.

Most importantly omenbringer put forth some ideas about balancing hamelin that don't fundamentally change anything about his "play style".

I'd like to see more comments on hamelin versus masters other than ophelia (duh no win for her) and collette and lcb.

Honestly, how hard does he fare on average against the bulk of masters in the game, aka Book 1. You are looking at a 3-1 weighted amount of masters with Book 1 vs 2 but I commonly see people only comparing power level to Kirai, Collette, and LCB, which honestly may seem ok to all the ppl who got in after last Gencon, but does nothing to those of us who saw the balance days from Book 1, when df 8 was the broken trait and nino and sam hopkins ruled the day, and perdita shot through walls.

Disclaimer (my beliefs about hamelin as a hamelin player):

Getting a stolen for free is too much. Compare his actual output to get a 3 pt model vs what masters must do for same benefit. Bully, as a blanket don't attack me, changes the interaction level too much for the enjoyment of other players. And if he is gone, insignificant should not stick on models receiving it from understand the soulless.

I will be testing a lot of the rec's posted in this thread. I will test mostly against Zoraida, Pandora, and the Viks.

[Ratty]

Getting a stolen for free is too much. Compare his actual output to get a 3 pt model vs what masters must do for same benefit.

How would you fix this? Sacrifice a friendly model and a casting flip?

[jdomin2]

How would you fix this? Sacrifice a friendly model and a casting flip?

I'm going test just a casting flip. I think needing a crow may be a bit much.

[Drake]

Compare Colette's casting of Dove. That requires an 8 card or higher to cast, and the cost of a Soulstone, aswell as an action (0). And that is for a 2ss model.

I would vote for either;

a) cc to cast + 1 or 2 ss

or

cc to cast and sac 1 model (and therefore no rat appearing as a result - completely removed)

[ZiggyQubert]

I'm going test just a casting flip. I think needing a crow may be a bit much.

I actualy like that idea, make it taka say a 10 or 12 to cast, then it's relatively easy to cast until he dies once then it is more difficult, would provide incentive to keep him alive and also interacts well with his card mechanic, in that it wouldent require cheeting fate untill he dies once. Althoug if it's a spell then his totem could also cast it (not necessarily bad but something to keep in mind)

Another option would be to keep it as is but require a discard, which is a higher cost for Hamelin then for most other masters, this would also not allow his totem to cast it.

Compare Colette's casting of Dove. That requires an 8 card or higher to cast, and the cost of a Soulstone, aswell as an action (0). And that is for a 2ss model.

I would vote for either;

a) cc to cast + 1 or 2 ss

or

cc to cast and sac 1 model (and therefore no rat appearing as a result - completely removed)

keep in mind that for Colette Soul stones are not a scarce resource, as she gets one for free every turn and can get them in so many ways (including a trigger on summoning the dove I believe) So using a soulstone to summon a dove is somewhere on par with making other masters discard cards etc

Edited June 14, 2011 by ZiggyQubert

[Necromorph]

Yeah...kinda with Magic on dropping out of the debate...now it's come down to Grammar Trolling/Nerd Raging, so there's no need to continue. The only other thing I'll say is that when talking about fixing something in a game, balance has to be considered, so it does have a place in the discussion, but maybe not to such an extreme level.

So when the discussion gets back to Hamelin himself I'll continue. Unless some asshat want's to point out how I spelled something wrong or used something out of context to try and make their own argument look better.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Necromorph

[Q'iq'el]

Compare Colette's casting of Dove. That requires an 8 card or higher to cast, and the cost of a Soulstone, aswell as an action (0). And that is for a 2ss model.

That is also for a model that can act as a soulstone and a model which provides considerable utility to the crew.

[magicpockets]

Unless some asshat want's to point out how I spelled something wrong

There's no apostrophe in "wants" you know...

Just kidding and trying to lighten the tone I'm going to post my final thoughts to try and get this post back on track (but until it does will keep an eye out but avoid getting into arguments) -

1. I think getting a Stolen for free was very important when they had to be within 3" of Hamelin. I think keeping them free after the change has an unforeseen consequence now he only needs one anywhere on the board to survive. A casting flip as set out by ZiggyQubert would be a good fix, especially with his thoughts that it gets harder after he dies. There should be no requirement to sac a model or ss though.

2. I really don't think Bully should prevent Gremlins or Construct from attacking him as per his hiring rules. This is fiar for Gremlin players.

3. I think Bully would benefit from a WP->14 or WP->WP dual to target Hamelin. However I realise this might not balance against him not getting any soulstones in his cache.

I think the above changes would be sufficient to balance out Hamelin without "Cuddling" him. How would you feel about playing against Hamelin with the above rules amended?

Also, I hope no-one at Wyrd takes offence at these kind of threads. Essentially all we're doing is giving you feedback after months of playtesting - we're not "demanding" changes or the like. I know it's a pain in the ass to deal with stuff like this and there's a risk that if you make changes the floodgates about other stuff will open - but that's a call only you guys can make and I think we all understand that.

On a side, have you guys considered setting up a "feedback on rules" thread for conversations like this (maybe in the Rules Section)? It would move what can essentially be read as negative comments out of the main forum areas (I hate to imagine a new player reading all this as they read the Outcasts section) and give people a place to actively discuss any things they find which you can keep track of (whether or not you agree with them). Just another idea to throw out there.

MP

[Drake]

As it is I think a free 3ss model out of thin air for the sake of a 1 action is not balanced.

WIth regards my comparison about Colette, the Dove, although very useful,isnt a get out of jail free card like the stolen is.

A different comparison would be Ramos and his spiders. samess cost of model being created, except in his case it takes a (2) action to get the resource to make one, and his (0) action to cast the spell, so that is almost his entire turn (apart from one more spell) taken to create a model from nothing. Hamelin can currently do that for just a (1) action...

And for the record, my comment here is totally on topic so hopefully helps keep this thread on topic too.

[Ratty]

As it is I think a free 3ss model out of thin air for the sake of a 1 action is not balanced.

WIth regards my comparison about Colette, the Dove, although very useful,isnt a get out of jail free card like the stolen is.

A different comparison would be Ramos and his spiders. samess cost of model being created, except in his case it takes a (2) action to get the resource to make one, and his (0) action to cast the spell, so that is almost his entire turn (apart from one more spell) taken to create a model from nothing. Hamelin can currently do that for just a (1) action...

And for the record, my comment here is totally on topic so hopefully helps keep this thread on topic too.

It's also slightly different in the fact that if the model dies you just get another 2ss rat model to add to your horde. Being able to summon a model every turn means that over the course of the game you have 6 more rats added to the swarm.

The cost can't be a SS cost as he's got a 0 cache and that feels unreasonable. It also can't use counters as Voracious Rats means they aren't generated. I would go for sac a model, as all your really doing is saccing a Rat to get a model that when it dies gives you a Rat.

[Drake]

It's also slightly different in the fact that if the model dies you just get another 2ss rat model to add to your horde. Being able to summon a model every turn means that over the course of the game you have 6 more rats added to the swarm.

The cost can't be a SS cost as he's got a 0 cache and that feels unreasonable. It also can't use counters as Voracious Rats means they aren't generated. I would go for sac a model, as all your really doing is saccing a Rat to get a model that when it dies gives you a Rat.

Id go with that. Along with a cast cost to do it. That seems reasonable. Without the cast cost their still isnt much of a cost involved as if he swaps a rat for the stolen, and stolen dies leaving a rat, Hamelin hasnt lost anything, so cast cost should be included too to help balance the summon stolen mechanic

[Fetid Strumpet]

Yeah, I agree that my comments were just in a effort to honestly try to contribute to a game that has snared me very completely. Overall Malifaux's game system is one of the most elegant systems I've played. The game takes only a short time to teach someone, but a fiendishly long time to master.

My comments have been based upon 22 years of a gaming career and a personal philosophy of game design I've developed after in depth study of how different rules sets function. It is one of the aspects of the gaming hobby I truly enjoy. I hope no one on the forum or Wyrd took any offense to any of my comments. My sole goal was to try to give comments to improve the game.

One of the reasons I why feel so passionately about this issue is that over my years of examination of rules systems Passive Control is one thing I've seen drive people away from games. Wyrd's brilliant utilization of folklore provides very compelling draws for players into the game. I just worry that because certain masters can provide a negative play experience, by the very way the master is designed, people getting into the game and playing against such a master will be driven away.

In my own situation I almost started with Pandora because I love Greek Mythology, and loved the idea of a master based on psychological manipulation. When I researched her further I realized that if I ever wanted to introduce a new player to the game, playing Pandora's style against a new would be a way to drive them away, not keep them in. Hamelin, based as he is upon a very well known archetype can be a very big draw into the game for players, who could well be turned off be the fact that as part of his core mechanics he not only can make it very easy to prevent you from being able to do anything to the most powerful model in the list, but that there is no way around it.

Back to Hamelin as a whole, to get this topic back on track, has anyone looked at how Hamelin's crew interacts with terrain? I was looking at things recently and certain pieces of terrain that give bonuses for interact actions seem to break down when the swarm of rats gets involved.