Exorcist - one too many anti-resurrectionists?

[DeleteAccount]

problem with that is that evrything has to be rewritten, just because we have a small discussion here?

Well, like I've stated, I'm too new to judge much of anything. If any rewriting has to be done, Wyrd will be the ones to decide, my point is they haven't shown to fear doing stat changes and if Hatchedhead's post is as correct as it inspires me, doing a good rundown on a lot of book 2 stuff will help and if Marcus sucks as much as stated in here, a little butt slap up will be appreciated for him.

[DeleteAccount]

No, not really.

It may open it up to a greater effectiveness against crews which tend to sac their own stuff, but that's not the same as being game-breaking. It just makes it like so many other things in Malifaux - situationally good depending on the scenario, your opponent, etc.

Actually, it is a very big problem, at least for resser lists that are based around summoning. I pretty much have to play Kirai accepting I'm 2 points down from the get go just because I play vs Neverborn(same exact problem if you go nicodem or McMourning puppy legion) or I go with a resser "elite" army which isn't that easy to achieve and is mostly a monopoly by Seamus since he is the one that cares by far less about sacking his own stuff except for exceptional emergency healing. Change kidnap to killed by a neverborn model and I'd be AOK with it, and yeah, Pandora would have a hellish time getting it since she barely ever kills anything directly, but Kirai can't do any of the resser schemes and you don't see me having a problem with that.

[sephiroa]

Well, like I've stated, I'm too new to judge much of anything. If any rewriting has to be done, Wyrd will be the ones to decide, my point is they haven't shown to fear doing stat changes and if Hatchedhead's post is as correct as it inspires me, doing a good rundown on a lot of book 2 stuff will help and if Marcus sucks as much as stated in here, a little butt slap up will be appreciated for him.

it's possible that they will do that, but I'm not sure.

[Buhallin]

Actually, it is a very big problem, at least for resser lists that are based around summoning. I pretty much have to play Kirai accepting I'm 2 points down from the get go (same exact problem if you go nicodem or McMourning puppy legion) or I go with a resser "elite" army which isn't that easy to achieve and is mostly a monopoly by Seamus since he is the one that cares by far less about sacking his own stuff except for exceptional emergency healing.

Kidnap being in play or killed has nothing to do with summoning. It has to do with sacrificing/using your own models.

Yes, Kirai is on the short end of it. But McMourning is perfectly viable without carving your own dogs up each turn - I kill one usually, and that's it. I'll admit I don't play Nicodem, so I may be missing something, but anything he sacs comes off the summoned models.

This is the "faction balance" Calmdown is so tired of hearing about. Does Kirai have a potential weakness against Neverborn? Sure. But you've got three other masters to choose from. I understand that you're a Kirai player, and looking at Kidnap sucks for you. But that's not the same as it being a game-breaking scheme which contributes to the uber-brokenness of the Neverborn.

[pgbsamurai]

Actually, it is a very big problem, at least for resser lists that are based around summoning. I pretty much have to play Kirai accepting I'm 2 points down from the get go just because I play vs Neverborn(same exact problem if you go nicodem or McMourning puppy legion) or I go with a resser "elite" army which isn't that easy to achieve and is mostly a monopoly by Seamus since he is the one that cares by far less about sacking his own stuff except for exceptional emergency healing. Change kidnap to killed by a neverborn model and I'd be AOK with it, and yeah, Pandora would have a hellish time getting it since she barely ever kills anything directly, but Kirai can't do any of the resser schemes and you don't see me having a problem with that.

And any one taking Grudge and announcing is out 2 points because as a ressur you sac your own models, denying the grudge and making a 35 ss list into a 40, 45 or 50ss list.

[Ratty]

You don't need to drop VPs with Kirai against Neverborn, I've had Kidnap pulled against me multiple times and I rarely give VPs away for it, start with 3 Seishin, and summon Ikiryo rather than other models until you have killed some models and got some placed Seishin, they can't choose Seishin you didn't have in play at the start of the game, so these are fine to sacrifice, as long as you protect 2 of the Seishin you started with they don't get any VPs for Kidnap, all you lose is the ability to sacrifice 4ss of models which you can still use as scouts and Into the spirit world targets and to out activate the opponent.

[Calmdown]

And any one taking Grudge and announcing is out 2 points because as a ressur you sac your own models, denying the grudge and making a 35 ss list into a 40, 45 or 50ss list.

The difference there is that you have a choice not to announce Grudge, and if you do choose to pick it, you have the choice to put it on a model that you want to see sacced in this way. You probably still wont take it, but you dont lose 2 VP by doing so, you simply alter the conditions.

Kidnap has no such restrictions, and is completely unknown to the opponent. And regardless of the fact that it's obvious, it's pretty much impossible to not lose a Kidnap. I've never had a Neverborn player not take 2vp from it. If a Neverborn player doesn't announce schemes, you have to always play like you're 2vp down on turn one. People seem to fixate on "oh, just outwit your opponent and don't sacrifice those models" which is fine unless he's picked super-weak models that he's going to sneeze in the general direction of and kill for 2 vp.

Oh, and this is nothing to do with Kirai. This scheme is a mostly auto-complete against almost every list. Killing 3 models when your scheme is unannounced isn't difficult. There would be nothing wrong with Kidnap if it was announced, and in fact in many circumstances it would be better than Kill Protegee or Grudge (kill 3 models without restriction can often be easier than killing 1 model with restriction, and at least Kidnap has a halfway house of 1vp for one kill). So at worst Kidnap is as good as other schemes. In general it's better and is the premiere choice for a Neverborn player.

No, this doesn't singlehandedly make Neverborn broken. But an advantage is an advantage, and there's no reason why one faction should get one when others dont.

I don't know. I could have sworn I read something from someone official mentioning a "Book 2 v2 Project", but I can't back that up and I don't want to perpetuate a rumor. You would have to ask someone with a top hat, I reckon.

Didn't help

Edited August 22, 2011 by Calmdown

[sephiroa]

And any one taking Grudge and announcing is out 2 points because as a ressur you sac your own models, denying the grudge and making a 35 ss list into a 40, 45 or 50ss list.

exactly

[ProdigalPunk]

This is the "faction balance" Calmdown is so tired of hearing about. Does Kirai have a potential weakness against Neverborn? Sure. But you've got three other masters to choose from. I understand that you're a Kirai player, and looking at Kidnap sucks for you. But that's not the same as it being a game-breaking scheme which contributes to the uber-brokenness of the Neverborn.

I feel like our side says "it's going to rain, you should bring an umbrella" and your side hears "There is a Hurricane coming, board up the house". There is some middle ground between, perfectly balanced and unbearably broken. This is where most of "my side" stands I think.

My second complaint is half the time your side will acknowledge the problem and dismiss it as trivial. There have been many times when I or other members of this board think something is broken and the opposition basically agrees and just sort of shrugs it shoulders and says "what are you going to do"? I can not tell if those people are just on the winning side, or if complacence is an acquired taste. But I think that is what annoys me most of all, is that when people do say something, the general consensus is "sit down you are rocking the boat". Either the eagerness of people to ignore valid points and focus on trivial ones that are easier to dissect (all parties in all arguments everywhere do this though, so that one falls on my side too).

[DeleteAccount]

And any one taking Grudge and announcing is out 2 points because as a ressur you sac your own models, denying the grudge and making a 35 ss list into a 40, 45 or 50ss list.

True, but you can decide to not take that scheme after seeing my list and if you chose a fat model and keep it hidden, you shouldn't have much of a problem getting it done. With Kidnap even if you don't end up choosing it, it utterly constricts my list making when playing against neverborn, so I'm shoehorned into a resser "elite list" and on Kirai for my fear of losing 2 from the get go to kidnap and since it's hidden, my opponent can look at my chosen list, decide that kidnap ain't worth it with all the big critters around and just go for any other scheme.

[Dolomyte]

This is what I hate most about the malifaux forums, you guys draw in on a single example so specifically to the ignorance of the overall issue.

who cares if the neverborn opponent is taking kirai, who cares if they are taking hamelin. Kidnap is basically a kill three model scheme, using your models, your opponents models, poison, anything. as long as they are off the table you get three points. Best of all, its one of the 2 schemes in the entire game that you can get 2 points without having to announce it at all (The other is thwart, which is IMO much harder to accomplish)

I would be ok with kidnap if it had the rider "this scheme must be announced" like EVERY OTHER SCHEME

Edit - Which is not even on the real issue. which is neverborn are significantly more powerful as a faction then any of the others.

Edited August 22, 2011 by Dolomyte
Because

[Dolomyte]

And any one taking Grudge and announcing is out 2 points because as a ressur you sac your own models, denying the grudge and making a 35 ss list into a 40, 45 or 50ss list.

The difference is you can pick your schemes. don't take grudge if your playing against rezzers. infact don't take grudge ever, in reality all masters have that (1) action that lets them sacrifice a friendly model for a soulstone, so they can do that to deny you the points. Thats a whole nother discussion on why some of the schemes are so stupid.

[sephiroa]

This is what I hate most about the malifaux forums, you guys draw in on a single example so specifically to the ignorance of the overall issue.

who cares if the neverborn opponent is taking kirai, who cares if they are taking hamelin. Kidnap is basically a kill three model scheme, using your models, your opponents models, poison, anything. as long as they are off the table you get three points. Best of all, its one of the 2 schemes in the entire game that you can get 2 points without having to announce it at all (The other is thwart, which is IMO much harder to accomplish)

I would be ok with kidnap if it had the rider "this scheme must be announced" like EVERY OTHER SCHEME

Edit - Which is not even on the real issue. which is neverborn are significantly more powerful as a faction then any of the others.

i agree with the announce,

but like your edit said, we where talking about the faction, and not scheme's

[Calmdown]

The difference is you can pick your schemes. don't take grudge if your playing against rezzers. infact don't take grudge ever, in reality all masters have that (1) action that lets them sacrifice a friendly model for a soulstone, so they can do that to deny you the points. Thats a whole nother discussion on why some of the schemes are so stupid.

There's a difference in here as well in that I think most Rezzer players (me included) would rather not be able to do this because it's lame, and doing it with Drain Souls is equally lame. There was a discussion about it recently.

Most people, in general, seem to be in favour of removal of lame game mechanics (another example - Stitched Together not counting as being killed by whatever killed it due to the "Does Not Die!" interaction) but this thread today seems to just be full of people intent in their belief that it's completely fine for one faction to be better than the others.

The mind really does boggle.

i agree with the announce,

but like your edit said, we where talking about the faction, and not scheme's

There is a whole other discussion about it, yes, as to why some factions and masters get good schemes and why some get bad ones. But honestly, that's not a *major* deal generally since you can pick and choose schemes that are better for you anyway (which is a reason that scheme uniqueness is bad - it turns the non-issue of scheme imbalance into an issue when a lot of masters/factions suddenly have a lot smaller pool of 'good' schemes to pick from). However, that's a different discussion from the Kidnap one. At least with other schemes there is choice and you have to at least do something for them and they have to be announced. Why one scheme breaks a core of the scheme rules is beyond me.

OK, Thwart too. But Thwart is bloody damn hard.

Edited August 22, 2011 by Calmdown

[pgbsamurai]

I had a Ressur player kick my but because he knew I took Kidnap. Didn't sack his dogs and had me running around the board trying to catch them while he achieved his other goals. He ended up winning and I didn't even get the kidnap. He played it well.

Is Kidnap annoying, especially to ressurs, absolutely. Is it overpowered, in my opinion I don't think it is any worse than Sabotage or, Death after Death. I don't think I have ever seen Nico survive to the end of an encounter and not be able to pull off death after death. Just because it forces you to play differently doesn't mean it is broken.

[Dolomyte]

This is the "faction balance" Calmdown is so tired of hearing about. Does Kirai have a potential weakness against Neverborn? Sure. But you've got three other masters to choose from. I understand that you're a Kirai player, and looking at Kidnap sucks for you. But that's not the same as it being a game-breaking scheme which contributes to the uber-brokenness of the Neverborn.

Factions are not properly balanced though, and that is the issue.

I'm going to make some vacuum assumptions. Lets say everyone is an even skill level, there is a tournament that is single faction, five rounds.

As a guild player, you can probably take perdita or austringer spam and have a good chance of winning / countering your opponents objective. I cannot honestly say that pure lady j, sonnia, lucius, or the mechanic have that. while you might be able to build a list to solidly complete your own, stopping your opponent will be tough.

as a resser player, you can probably take kirai and have a good chance of winning / countering your opponents objectives. I cannot say that for the others.

as an arcanist player, you can probably take colette and have a good chance of winning / countering your opponents objectives. I cannot say that for the others (especially not marcus or ramos)

as an outcast player, you can probably take hamelin or the victorias and have a good chance of winning / countering your opponents objectives. I cannot say that for the others.

as a neverborn player, you can probably take Pandora, Lilith, The Dreamer, Zoraida (maybe even collidi, he seems to do well), and have a good chance at winning / countering your opponents objectives.

They have four, possible five solid solid masters, which means that they can build a more diverse and still powerful army then the other factions, which allows for better completion of their schemes and strategies then the other factions. Also, in a five round tournament, schemes being unique, if your using one or two masters there are at most 15 schemes you can draw from. With neverborn you will have access to 17.

Does each faction have a counter to a specific neverborn master? Yes, I feel they do, however when your building your list you wont know what your opponent is going to take, you could build to beat pandora and get the dreamer, or build for the dreamer and get zoraida. As a neverborn player you can build with the assumption you will see perdita and or austringers, kirai, colette, hamelin or victorias. and be pretty safe in that assumption.

Edit - and even if your wrong, you still will have a good chance of winning, because your army is still pretty damn powerful.

Edited August 22, 2011 by Dolomyte

[Calmdown]

I'd love to know what the Wyrd game designers think of this. Clearly they've read this by now and I'd really like to hear one of:

a) justification/explanation of the fact that Neverborn have better masters/minions

disagreement that Neverborn are better, and justification as to why

c) refusal of current tournament stats (and opinions - read the gencon masters thread, no one is surprised by the Neverborn dominance) as representative of the game as a whole

Step up and defend your game Wyrd. You defended it against an Infinity player who knew very little about the game, even though he didn't realise just how correct his arguments were. So now let's defend it against people who understand it, and who love it, and who WANT it to get better...but can't see how that is going to happen.

[Jonas Albrecht]

I'm I the only one who finds the assumption that players will have access to or even want to play every master in a faction bothersome?

[Dolomyte]

I'm I the only one who finds the assumption that players will have access to or even want to play every master in a faction bothersome?

I find it bothersome too. especially now that im unemployed. Which I think even lends further credence to our issues with the neverborn. If you can only buy one master and a few models to go with him. Your likely going to face a few neverborn masters in a tournament you can do nothing about. and thats not fair. While I dont ever accuse games workshop of balance, they rarely leave the same faction at the top for an entire cycle, its much more likely that whenever your army gets a codex you will have a few months of them being flat out awesome.

[Jonas Albrecht]

especially now that im unemployed.

Sympathies, I've just gotten out of that hole. However, even if I were a trazillionare, virtually none of the faction masters hew close enough to a playstyle to find them equally enjoyable. I love C. Hoffman and Perdita, but I loathe the idea of fielding Lady Justice and Sonnia. I like Nicodem, but would soon reread Perdita's avatar fiction than play with McMourning or Seamus.

[Hatchethead]

i agree with the announce,

but like your edit said, we where talking about the faction, and not scheme's

Actually, we were talking about the Exorcist like four tangents ago ... but who's keeping score?

The only issue I have with Kidnap (as a Resser) is that the threat of Kidnap alone is enough to change how I play. If I go up against Neveborn with anyone other than Seamus, I feel the need to alter my play style to avoid handing over 2 VP. I'm already out of my comfort zone and all the Neverborn player had to do was show up.

[Justin]

I'd love to know what the Wyrd game designers think of this. Clearly they've read this by now and I'd really like to hear one of:

a) justification/explanation of the fact that Neverborn have better masters/minions

disagreement that Neverborn are better, and justification as to why

c) refusal of current tournament stats (and opinions - read the gencon masters thread, no one is surprised by the Neverborn dominance) as representative of the game as a whole

Step up and defend your game Wyrd. You defended it against an Infinity player who knew very little about the game, even though he didn't realise just how correct his arguments were. So now let's defend it against people who understand it, and who love it, and who WANT it to get better...but can't see how that is going to happen.

I'm not a Malifaux designer.

But, I still feel the need to say something here, because this is getting ridiculous.

I want to preface this with the fact that I agree, Malifaux is not an entirely balanced system. But I want to add: that doesn't bother me at all. I also want to add, everything I have to say about Malifaux I would apply to its competitors as well (40k, warmachine, infinity, etc).

Malifaux has, what? One hundred and fifty models after book 2? (not even going into three) They were designed by a team of 4 or maybe 5 people on a strict time schedule, and each model had to be unique and different from any other model they were designing, and they still all had to be balanced. Also keep in mind, this is a company, they need to sell their product. So, while a slightly too powerful model will still sell, a slightly underwhelming model will not. So, power scales up. So we have:

1) 150 *things* all which need to be totally unique AND equal

2) Limited time and resources in preparing those things

3) A trend in scaling up in power, which is necessary if you want to remain in business. (and I don't mean codex creep over time, I just mean in general. When a model is off the normal level of balance, you want to miss high in general. This isn't Magic with crap commons people will buy because they are sold randomly. People choose their models, so you want them to be appealing to people. All of them. Hard task)

Now I'm sure you're a perfectionist. And after playing the game for years and seeing tournament results it's easy to sit back and say, "well, this is blatantly broken, why didn't they fix that?" And the answer is simply: hindsight is 20/20. Also, you have no idea how many broken things were caught before the game was released.

Alright, so the inequity is here. Why not fix it? The answer to that is blunt and most people probably won't like it, but... consistency is more important than quality. Sure, the game could be more balanced, but at what cost? More errata? More V2 cards? Do any of you remember how annoying this game was to play with pages of errata for the first book? Do you remember new players randomly opening boxes and getting a V2 card and all of a sudden the rules to one of your models had changed? What's more important than quality? Both players sitting down and playing a game, and playing by the same rules, without having to argue over and question them constantly. Inconsistency costs the game players, that costs the company money. My single biggest complaint about Wyrd would probably be some of their attempts to fix the balance issues.

Why did the rules manual cause a resurgence in Malifaux? Because all of the rules were in one place. But it's a mistake to think it drew new people to the game: it got back old players who were sick of having to deal with changing errata. Now once those old players were back, they may have attracted new players, as they have their own circles of friends. But the key to the rules manual's success was not the cleaning up of the rules (that had already been done through errata and forum rulings) but the establishment of consistency. All the rules in one place. The more frequently they change, the more different places you need to look.

Ok, so we have an imbalanced system and no way to fix it, why doesn't that bother me? Because it's what I expect out of a miniatures game. It's what I WANT out of a miniatures game. I feel the same way about 40k and warmachine and any of Malifaux's competitors; they are inherently imbalanced systems. But, so long as they are not so imbalanced that I can tell the out come of the game before I even play it (and Malifaux is not that imbalanced) I enjoy it. I enjoy taking the "weak" crew and kicking people's asses. I enjoy recommending a "strong" crew to a new player. It's a part of the draw of the game for me. And, because of the random element, you never really know what is going to happen. I enjoy that it is heavily theme based.

I know a lot of people want it to be entirely balanced so that there is a "healthier" tournament scene. So that a tournament is more accurately the judge of the best player in the room. But, you know what? Until miniatures games get rid of cards and dice and any other sort of random determination, tournaments aren't going to provide that anyway.

To me, a bunch of people complaining that Malifaux isn't balanced on the tournament level is like hearing a bunch of chess players complain about how hard the pieces are to paint and that the pawns don't all have different names.

[Jonas Albrecht]

Surely there's some middle ground between demanding laser-like balance and just putting up with the flaws because you should expect them in a mini game.

[Justin]

Surely there's some middle ground between demanding laser-like balance and just putting up with the flaws because you should expect them in a mini game.

If you have it (in a form that doesn't just involve constant errata) I'm all ears.

[Jonas Albrecht]

If you have it (in a form that doesn't just involve constant errata) I'm all ears.

What do you consider constant? Would a yearly review of the rules be too much?