A Different Kind of Discussion on Balance

[edonil]

Alright, so a few disclaimers to start things off. I really don't want to see "Neverborn are Broken/Overpowered" mk 37 in this thread. Isn't the point of what I want to discuss. I also would love to see this treated as a serious discussion, so if you feel like firing off a quick little "this is crap and shouldn't be paid attention to" when someone answers something, please don't bother. If you disagree with someone, give them (and the rest of us) the courtesy of at least explaining why. Well, with that done...here's where I'd like to start:

Do they, though? If you assume you cannot win if you don't bring exactly the right counter to your opponent's Neverborn master, then it may seem so. But I think the experienced players have contested this notion on every step - you don't need to counter opponent to win. It may help, but even that depends on situation - fixating on opponent can lose you the game just as easily.

That is why I suggest we are over-fixating on the combos and counters to them, rather than on working around them and despite of them.

I found this to be a very interesting concept that Q'ig'el put up, and I wanted to ask the community if this really is what people have found. I know it's possible to win by completely ignoring what your opponent brings. Part of the reason why I like the game, actually. But do you guys really think it's to the point that you can be at a disadvantage, or at least not optimal (say, bringing Lady J against a Resser opponent using Kirai when you planned for Nicodem, or anyone expecting Pandora and running into Dreamer) and be able to just work around them? If so, how do we do this?

[karn987]

Alright, so a few disclaimers to start things off. I really don't want to see "Neverborn are Broken/Overpowered" mk 37 in this thread. Isn't the point of what I want to discuss. I also would love to see this treated as a serious discussion, so if you feel like firing off a quick little "this is crap and shouldn't be paid attention to" when someone answers something, please don't bother. If you disagree with someone, give them (and the rest of us) the courtesy of at least explaining why. Well, with that done...here's where I'd like to start:

I found this to be a very interesting concept that Q'ig'el put up, and I wanted to ask the community if this really is what people have found. I know it's possible to win by completely ignoring what your opponent brings. Part of the reason why I like the game, actually. But do you guys really think it's to the point that you can be at a disadvantage, or at least not optimal (say, bringing Lady J against a Resser opponent using Kirai when you planned for Nicodem, or anyone expecting Pandora and running into Dreamer) and be able to just work around them? If so, how do we do this?

I firmly believe so. I tried to make a point before where you've already jumped on the path to losing if you start just reacting to your opponent. Part of reacting to them, is worrying about dirrectly countering their best combo's or worse, worrying about countering all of their combo's. Once you get into this mind set, your reacting to me and through this I can influence or even control you game play. Your first priority should always be your crew and getting your Schemes and Strategy.

I've always approached the game with the mind set of focusing on Strategies and Schemes. I believe it is a very core part of the game and that it is the correct mind set to have. From my personal experience, it's proven true. I've come out of many bad match-ups and won because I've not let myself get wrapped up in what my opponent has. I've stuck to the Strategies and Schemes I've come into the game with and done my best to make my plans work. Playing my Neverborn, or any other faction/Master I've found that not letting yourself get into that Reaction mind set helps you fight through a lot of it.

This Reaction mind set I keep bringing up is what I see over and over again when someone is faced with a bad match up. They worry, they start trying to dirrectly counter their opponents crew and lose site of their real objectives. Yes there is a certain amount of reaction you need to do in a game, but it becomes all to consuming more often then not. Half the time this is exactly what your opponent wants, your playing right into their hand. If they know you have a bad match up, they will try to capitalize on it and draw you into fighting them and fighting on their terms.

The key is to remain focused on your objectives, and avoid running into that trap. The more you know about your opponents crew, the better. You can probably see the trap coming and guess what they are going to try and do to you. Some times it simply comes down to just stalling and focusing on denying your opponent VP while you get just enough to win.

There is little doubt in my mind that experience plays a huge role in this to. The more experienced you are with your crew and the larger variety of crews you've used it against, the better chances are you can pull through. Why? Because you know your crew well enough that you don't get sucked into trying to counter every little thing. You make your plans and stick to them, you don't let your opponent force you into reacting to their every step. Planning can be a very good thing, but over planning can be a very bad thing and thats what this is. In essence, the moment you start worrying about countering what your opponent could possibly be bringing... you've started to over plan. Yes you want to take some things into consideration, but you don't plan to run into the Filth List, you don't plan to run into a Alp Bomb list, same with a Punk Zombie Swarm, a Levy Delivery System, a Guild Iron Wall etc.

As an example: When I build my Lilith lists I focus on what Strategy I have, what Schemes I think I can pull off, and how I want to do it. I take into account what faction I'm up against, but otherwise I don't let that dictate my core strategy. If I have say Line in the Sand, then I know I personally want a lot of early game speed. From there I decide Break Through would be a good scheme and Hold Out to go with it because I'm going to hit the center line first turn and I'm going to hold it with everything I have. So I pack in a lot of manuverability, making sure to tweak a thing or two to take into account my opponents faction and I'm good. So even if I end up against Hamelin (personally a master I consider a horrible matchup for Lilith in 90% of the cases), I've got my plan and I'm sticking to it. I can delay him easily enough and I should be able to counter his Schemes/Strategy, but I wont let myself fall into the step of just reacting to him.

Edited August 25, 2011 by karn987

[Vlad the Mad]

Fixation on your opponent can make your forget your strategies and schemes, leading to crews with little or no internal synergy towards achieving your goals. Also, it comes with a high risk of misreading your opponent's crew - as you said, Ressurectionists could mean Nicodem or Kirai, Neverborne could mean Dreamer or Lilith, Outcast could mean anything really.

Your crew and your objectives should be your first priority, your opponent comes after that. Also, many people make crew lists upfront, but in areas where people actually pick the terrain right before the battle, I would often consider terrain to be of more importance than your opponents faction.

[pgbsamurai]

I think this is one of the bigest learning curves for Malifaux. Most people getting into Malifaux have experience in other miniatures games, and most other miniatures games have the focus of killing the opponent's master or wiping all of their models off the board. Malifaux is different in that it focuses on succeeding at up to three different objectives every game instead of just kill kill kill. That kill kill kill mentality has to be unlearned when playing Malifaux. In this respect it is a lot easier for a complete newbie to pick up Malifaux than it is for an experienced miniatures player.

When you come from the kill kill kill mindset it becomes easy to have a reactionist view to your opponents list rather than focusing on what your crew really has to accomplish. If you focus your crew composition on achieving your objectives then your opponents list composition becomes secondary. Your opponents list does play a part, but it is no where near as game changing as it can be in other miniatures games.

In the end it comes down to unlearning the bad habit of focusing on your opponents crew and instead learning to focus on how you are going to achieve your strats and schemes.

[Calmdown]

There is a difference between bringing models to counter, and bring models that can handle, an opponent. You dont ever need to be able to do the former, but you always need to be able to do that latter.

Lists are generally best built based on both your strat/schemes, and the opponent's faction, with consideration to the terrain also.

In terms of countering, some factions are easier to predict than others. To use the easiest example (nb: not a whine!), if you play against Rezzers, it's a pretty good idea to bring things that are any or all of nonliving/undead, do not drop corpse counters, are immune to fear or influence; and you can generally be sure that you're going to counter at least some of what your opponent brings.

Being able to handle your opponent, though, is where some factions fall down. For example (nb: not a whine!) when playing against Neverborn, if you bring a crew that simply can't handle the Dreamer, you will lose. Your schemes and strats don't matter if your opponent is going to table or near-table you because you cant handle Chompy slingshots and alp bombs. And then, on the other end of the spectrum, if you bring a list that can handle Dreamer, you could find yourself having serious problems against a Lilith list that comes at you ultra combat heavy (lets not get into the specifics of what is good against what as that is very opinion based).

The upshot of that is, whilst you dont have to build your list to counter]/i] Dreamer or counter Lilith, the things that can even being to handle playing against them may be completely different; and since your opponent's master is pure guesswork, you can almost be rock-paper-scissored out of the game before it starts. The same is true for Outcasts to a large extent because of their varied selection of strong masters, although it's a bit less of an issue because they can all be handled by some variation on straight up combativeness. And the issue almost vanishes when you hit Arcanists and Rezzers, where their tier 2 lists (non-Collette and non-Kirai respectively) dont need anything in particular to deal with them so all that you need to do is make sure you can handle Collette or Kirai and you're good to go. Get down to Guild and you can handle any Guild master with pretty much the same list.

[jty3]

Sorry for the newb question, but can anyone give a quick one line summary of the following lists:

Filth List, Alp Bomb list, Punk Zombie Swarm, a Levy Delivery System, a Guild Iron Wall.

I know some are self-explanatory but I don't know about every one.

[ispep]

If all you do is focus on YOUR strategies and schemes, why play a multiplayer game? There needs to be direct interaction between both players, if there isn't you might as well just be masturbating.

[Jonas Albrecht]

If all you do is focus on YOUR strategies and schemes, why play a multiplayer game? There needs to be direct interaction between both players, if there isn't you might as well just be masturbating.

This is why Shared Strategies are vastly superior to individual ones. They force conflict while allowing you to pursue victory points.