Ciaran Posted July 26, 2011 Report Share Posted July 26, 2011 I guess this whole post can be summed up by saying 'Different strokes for different folks'. If you like casual, stick with it. It won't be perfect, but nothing ever is. If you like the competative scene now, stick with that too. It's not perfect either, but that's ok too. Agreed, on all counts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CannibalBob Posted July 26, 2011 Report Share Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) and an incredibly uninteresting win condition I have played miniature games for about 20 years now, and for the last few years I have mainly played WM/H. I have pretty large collections for the factions I own - mainly because I like the looks of the minis and there is actually some semblance of strategy and thought to the game (unlike 40k anymore). But more and more I have gotten to the point where I agree with the above quote. There are a number of things I don't care for in WM/H, but there are also a lot of things about the game I really like. However, what has simply started to grate on my nerves about WM/H is the terribly boring win condition for the games. The vast majority of games are assassination games and little else. Even when you play with scenarios, most of them seem damn near unwinnable and simply force the armies to play a bit forward and end in assassination or just counting points of dead stuff. This got me looking back into Malifaux. I originally bought the book when it came out, but I have to say that it did not have the best layout and was a bit of a jumbled read. Although I bought the Viktorias box set when it originally came out I never did play the game for some reason (most likely something distracted me and I lost interest). But I recently picked up the small rulebook and I have to say that it is a massive improvement. Altogether I find the game highly interesting, and the main reason is due to the emphasis on varied objectives. I have always loved skirmish games (Necromunda, Gorkamorka, and Mordheim were brilliant - too bad GW was not brilliant in supporting them), but Malifaux strikes me as even better than any other skirmish game I have played. The only thing I think the game lacks is a good set of rules for continuing campaigns - which is something that skirmish games are generally very good at. The objective oriented nature of the game strikes me as a great way to deal with situations where one crew is at a disadvantage in damaging and killing another crew. In addition, I have always preferred alternate activation games to i-go/u-go games. Alternate activation limits player downtime, and it also adds a lot more strategy in that you have more opportunity to react and foil your opponents plans. It also limits the hazards of a losing to a simple mistake. Edited July 26, 2011 by CannibalBob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Posted July 26, 2011 Report Share Posted July 26, 2011 We might well be "arguing" issues entirely based on perceptions and opinions, and down that path awaits madness....and locked threads We most likely are. Like I have mentioned, I find Malifaux to be pretty fairly balanced on a Master level, with a few outliers at both ends. Things like Snow Storm are amazing--it takes a crew that could not compete in several Strategies and gives it a thematic way to work. Plus, the model's pretty darned nifty, too. On the other hand, you have things like the Alp bomb which probably needs to be toned down somewhat. To be fair, I'm slightly confused how that got past platters anyways. But it's not like there's really a lot of work needed to make all the Masters (and Henchmen even) viable in single-crew formats. Maybe Book 3 will bring the answers. Who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magno Posted July 26, 2011 Report Share Posted July 26, 2011 @ Hookers, There is one game where you don't need the "best" models to win or be competitive. It more the mechanics that enable the balance, some like it some hate it. Take it ofmr leave it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenrir Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 @ Hookers, There is one game where you don't need the "best" models to win or be competitive. It more the mechanics that enable the balance, some like it some hate it. Take it ofmr leave it. Warhammer Fantasy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math Mathonwy Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 It seems to me like many of the people posting when we're talking about "balance" and "being competitive" have different views of what each is. Some feel that something is balanced and competitive if you CAN win games with a master, even if they're not particularly good at it, but if you have fun, thats all that matters. Others feel that the two mean that the game has to be balanced so flawlessly that everyone is equal. Neither view is really correct. No, the game cannot be perfectly balanced. Hell, MMO's have trouble balancing 5-10 classes, let alone 20. However, it would be nice if weak masters were more readily addressed through either errata or adding models that help them actually overcome abysmal matchups is some way to give them a boost. For those who say, "Master x is fine, i've seen him win a game once, don't take it so seriously," doesn't work that way. You can't tell someone how to feel about something, and if you're making a GAME, there are some people that will take it competitively/too seriously (sports are games too, you gonna tell someone who just lost a national championship to "not take it so seriously"). I, for one, am a competitive minded player. I'm not win at all costs, but I don't like to lose, and even if I'm playing for fun I'll still be a little annoyed when I lose...unless ofc I'm drunk, but w/e. That's just how I am, from hockey to video games to ttg's, I always feel some need to be competitive, and I know I'm not alone there. If you make a game that promotes league and tournament play, and there are imbalances, then you can bet it will attract a competitive following, and that they sure as hell will let you know about those imbalances in the game. I don't think that the game can be balanced properly, due to it's basic design and the fact that 20 masters and all unique minions, but telling folks that got suckered into playing underpowered masters to "get over it" and "stop taking it seriously, it's a game" is NOT the answer to the issue. Historically, I agree. TBH with GW you need to swap armies and start from scratch almost every year if you want to be competitive as the Meta swings that fast. One year you might have to play Demons of Chaos or an army designed to beat DoC, next year it may be Space Wolves. Eh, it's not quite that bad, I don't think. When I still played in the WHFB tournie scene, my basically unchanging 2000 points of Vampire Counts did very well for many, many years. Also note that Daemons of Chaos really never did very well in 40k once people got the faintest idea of how to play against them. At least with Malifaux the balance doesn't shift horribly every release. Hamelin might be good, but a lot of the original Masters have a fairly good chance of beating him if you you know what your doing, and if you have 2 Masters you can definitely field something that can win. At leas if the Hamelin player doesn't know what he's doing. Warhammer Fantasy? I'm almost 100% sure he means either Alkemy or Helldorado. ...or maybe that Spanish game... what's it called? Oh yeah, Nemesis! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundwave Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Eh, it's not quite that bad, I don't think. When I still played in the WHFB tournie scene, my basically unchanging 2000 points of Vampire Counts did very well for many, many years. My Beastmen army didn't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Warhammer Fantasy? All Things Zombie, it's based on the oldest system I've found to have a true reaction system. It's probably not the one he's referring to, it's the one I like though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magno Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Mo not the one I'm referring to, but I never knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Mo not the one I'm referring to, but I never knew that. I figured you didn't I would check it out, there's a fantastic blog by Vampifan that follows his mostly (solo) campaign. I don't always play dice games, when I do, I prefer Chain Reaction 3.0.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 That thread is actually pretty fair in its assessment. Malifaux is an absolutely awesome game. I play it more than every other, and I enjoy it more than every other, on a week-to-week basis. Is it a good tournament game? No, its terrible. It's unbalanced, less than half of the masters are capable on a competitive level. Some of the masters interact with your opponent so little you might as well be playing Solitaire (Hi Collette). From a game design point of view, Malifaux is sheer genius. Unfortunately, it has a genius level of random madness in the rules too, with so many ridiculous rules issues and needed erratas that you can't even blame Infinity players (Infintiy who's rules are like a historical war re-enactment in sci-fi form and who's rulebook is like the Malifaux book if you took the pages and reglued them in a random order) for finding it complex and confusing. And the balance in Malifaux is one of the worst around. I really think you need to cut the Magno guy, and the others ragging on Malifaux, some slack. It's entirely possible to love a game (I love Malifaux) and be fully aware that it's massively flawed. No need to wear rose tinted spectacles all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magno Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 The rage at me has more to do with my comments on the game design methods and approach and some other assertions on how the game is played and its similarities to WM. Some I still maintain, some I stand corrected, some in hindsight (by merit that tone is difficult to interpret in text and easily misinterpreted), I should have made more gracefully in respect to some members here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) Magno, you're not such a bad guy when you're not being a jerk (I don't think you're a jerk) Actually, it's the internet, we're not experiencing 90% of the communicative form so it's easy to to misread things. I'm sure the defense of our sense of validity of the game rules in general didn't help the situation. Either way, welcome back? I hope you'll stick around more. My general rule has become: It's just impossible to argue opinion as fact, and as much as we don't like it, that's really what has been run round in circles. I WILL say again, it cracked me up that it was happening when I running a tournament.... of Malifaux.... where people had fun.... since it's toy soldiers and all I thought that last part pretty important Edited July 27, 2011 by Ciaran ooops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magno Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Oh, I never left. I just went into lurker mode after GenCon '09 and activate only around GenCon. We've finally gotten a stable Malifaux group here in the ABQ area. Already have a small post GenCon event planned where prizes are GenCon goodies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 That's cool then, I hope the event is a success! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Caroland Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Man-hug all around? :friday: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Man-hug all around? :friday: Only us men can be involved in the man-hug :/ Sorry Nathan... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamwyrd Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Yay....man-hug. Ill hug you Nathan for all the work your doing getting ready for "the Gen of Con." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Caroland Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Hrmmm, ban ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Well, with that threat, and in light of the point Iamwyrd made.... and cuz I like the game y'all made, and stuff.... Okay, you can join in :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 There is no eye contact during the man hug. This thing needs ground rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ciaran Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Good point. No cheek grabbing either, unlike last time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osoi Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 First rule of man hug is you do not talk about man hug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nerdelemental Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 Good point. No cheek grabbing either, unlike last time Whelp. That leave me out, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q'iq'el Posted July 28, 2011 Report Share Posted July 28, 2011 There are people out there who'd pretend to man-hug you, while secretly planting evidence! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.