Jump to content

NOVA Open TO Report


nix

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

if you are facing ANY faction go in KNOWING what they do. read up on their tactics and at the same time look for any weakness. Going blindly into a tournament setting means you will get passed around like a prize in a prison yard.

i feel like a lot of people hear neverborn and give up even before the game begins... or just switch to neverborn and become part of the perceived "problem".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are facing ANY faction go in KNOWING what they do. read up on their tactics and at the same time look for any weakness. Going blindly into a tournament setting means you will get passed around like a prize in a prison yard.

i feel like a lot of people hear neverborn and give up even before the game begins... or just switch to neverborn and become part of the perceived "problem".

Is that seriously what you think of this problem? That's it's the OTHER players?

It's not a perception. It's reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a relative malifaux tournament newbie (only been to 3 this year) but having played the game since the beginning. I do not throw a fit if I see someone playing neverborn I just try and out think my opponent. Just so you all know I play guild and do not see myself as a highly competitive player but I do love a challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Between watching the big competitive players in the tournament, playing a few pick up games, and rereading everything I have to say this was a very fulfilling experience for me. I am definitely coming back but next time I'm competing!

I feel like I have achieved a Malifaux Level Up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, at similar time we have this torunament reported by Osoi in the events forum, with rather even spread of factions: Viks take 1st spot, top 10 has 2 Guild, 3 Arcanist, 3 Neverborn and 1 of each Rezzers and Outcast crews.

For the sake of argument let's assume it's not the factions. What's different?

Players? (skill level, experience, competitive culture?)

Format?

Crews?

Is it possible Gaining Grounds isn't perfect and some formats are considerably less fair than others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a large part to winning is actual skill level of the player. An example would be giving someone a knife yes it is dangerous in someones hands as a weapon. But you can give a ham sandwhich to someone in the special forces and they will still find a way to kill you with it.

You also have to look at the local players versus "out of towners", this conversation came up a few months ago during a warmachine tournament. You can have people gaming in the same store and yes they might actually be good. But once you have a tournament you can have out of towners come in looking for easier prey. People who thought they were good come across people that are better, get shell shocked and lose.

Like I said not sure if that's a valid "thought" or not but I have seen this happen many times. Better players will rise to the top regardless of faction and i t comes all from experience. Keeping a level head in a losing situation, keeping eyes on the objextives, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All those things are true. If I had to put weight on one of them, it would be Player skill. However, the real answer is best players + best Masters = win.

David and Dixon are two of the best players in the game, and they were playing two of the best factions in the game.

Zee still managed to take 3rd with a Master everyone thinks sucks. Zee is a developer and its crazy what he can make crews do.

Players who know their crews, and then the better players with the better crews will win out just by a tad.

Edited by ravenborne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this brings up the question, what is player skill? In Malifaux, you have to really know your models. So a big part of skill is knowing what your models can do. But its also about thinking creatively, adapting to circumstance, and knowing what the enemy crew can do. Then on top of that, you have to make good decisions and never fail to remember the objectives. Its an awful lot to manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The players you know are easy to judge, but there's also the over all level of the community. Few good players in an average community will throw the results off, but very good players in a very solid community will have little impact on the outcome. That's common sense at the very least.

I'm not sure if I'm reading the results right, but it seems Nova tournament has wider gaps in scores than the "Dead Man's Head". Wouldn't that be a good indicator there's higher discrepancy in player's level at the Nova tournament?

Of course it still tells us little about the absolute level of the players skill, thus making it impossible to compare the events directly, but at the same time, wouldn't it indicate the factions actually do get pretty even when the player's skill is reasonably equal?

Obviously it can be all down to the culture as well - players not bringing lists community dislikes, for example.

Another thought I had was related to the fixed master format of the "Dead's Man Head". While Fixed faction is the "common sense" balanced format, with choosing the master for the job being the formula for the balanced event, is it possible the Fixed master format makes people go for well rounded masters rather than specialists?

Last but not least, if I'm not mistaken, Perth tournament was 30SS, while NOVA was 35, right? Perhaps there's certain size at which the most expensive combos or model spam simply overload the system and the tournaments should be kept below that size?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Size (soul stone wise) does also have an impact, most people are used to 35-40 if they had to do a 25-30ss tournament it throws off their game somewhat. They cannot pull off the same combos they are used to, if they take expensive models what happens when they lose one and cannot hold/get to objectives?

but yes it is hard to measure these things unless you were physically at the tournament checking up on the players and not in a game yourself. Because if if a person brings a "killer net list" army and "know" what they are supposed to do. They may not be able to quickly adapt to losing a "key" piece to their army. A good player can keep on going and adapt to the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think player ego has its place within this argument as well. If one is beaten it is natural for one to look to examine the causes and seek outside factors which contributed to that outcome. Viscerally, no one likes to feel that their inadequacy was the cause of their lose. "Oh sure I lost, but it's only because you were playing Neverborn. If the match had actually been fairly balanced you wouldn't have beaten me".

The flip side of the coin is that when we win, we often want to believe it was ourselves and ourselves alone which was the determining factor in our victory. For some reason the majority of humans, or at least humans versed in western culture, seem to favor the underdog. No one publicly likes to be seen as the someone who has a strong advantage beating up on theoretically weaker opponents. "Neverborn is not stronger than other factions. The game is balanced equally across all the factions. Luck and skill were the sole determining factors in the victory I just achieved".

From my perspective I very much enjoy playing many different games systems, and I take a great deal of time analysing different rules sets. I will be the first to admit I could be wrong in my impressions, I am after all human, and my perspective is definitely colored by the lens through which I view the game (the ressers btw). But my impression is that Neverborn do enjoy a competitive edge over the other factions. Exactly how much of an edge is really open to various interpretations. I personally think the edge is there however, using it to decry your own lose or denying it exists to feel more justified in your victory doesn't change any of the facts.

Again, from my perspective, the edge exists and is real. However player skill still does have alot to recommend it. In a previous analogy I compared the power level disparity to the Neverborn being a fully automatic pistol and the other factions being revolvers. I stand by that analogy although we can definitely argue over the exact disparity between the two armaments. However, as someone earlier in this thread has stated, player skill can be a large determining factor in the outcome of any engagement. If we were to give the aforementioned "revolver" to a special forces commando, and then gave the "automatic pistol" to an average civilian, and put them in direct competition with each other, I'm pretty certain we all know who the safe bet says would come out on top. So yes, an extremely skilled player can definitely get more effective performance out of any master in the game, even ones that have been rightly or wrongly labeled "Sub-Par". The issue comes in both with the current game design, and the fact that if you have equally skilled players, utilizing advantage becomes the key to victory.

Basically, at bottom, I feel that the NB advantage comes from the design philosophy behind them. As one of Nix's play group stated on a tactica interview on his podcast, Neverborn are very very fast, hit very hard, and are very tricky. The edge comes to play in the fact that the way the game is currently won on objectives, those are the very traits engineered to provide victory.

First on the list: Speed. The faster crew in an engagement has a huge advantage in a myriad of ways. The first is tactical control. The faster crew often dictates the terms of the engagement. The faster crew sets the terms on how and where the battle will be joined, or if battle will be joined at all. A Dreamer crew for example can very easily, with no effort at all, chose not to engage the enemy for the entire length of the game if it is advantageous to do so. Only a few crews can force any kind of engagement on the Dreamer should he decide that the conditions of battle favor him more if he doesn't engage. Also, those few crews who can force "some" kind of engagement on the Dreamer are exactly those crews that are looked on as being "top tier", and it is this very speed which makes them, in my opinion, those favored by competitive players. Speed also helps in that, partnered with the next source of the Neverborn edge, it gives them the flexibility to determine when to accomplish their objectives. A crew that is very fast can use this advantage by gaining more time. A speedy crew can afford to use activations outside of the direct parameters called for by their schemes and strategies. They can afford to spend time tussling with an opponent for a few rounds, before zipping off on the last turns to then go and complete their objectives. Conversely they can rocket off to their goals, complete them, and then spend the rest of their activations attempting to deny the opponents theirs. Slower crews do not have this luxury. If you look at the crews considered to be "sub-optimal" by many in the wider community, Raspy, Ramos, Nicodem and so on, you'll notice that the one thing they all have in common is a low movement rate, and very little crew movement and manipulation tricks. They cannot afford to spend activations in doing anything but the direct pursuit of their own objectives, which also means they have less activations to spare for the denial of opponents objectives. Circumstances might favor this style style from time to time, but in agraget terms, speedier crews will winout in more situations.

The second component to the Neverborn edge: Hit very very hard. The Neverborn combat machine is very very nasty. Even though I do not buy the argument that Neverborn are "glass cannons", by making the argument that they are the Neverborn supports are at least admitting that Neverborn hit excessively hard. As the individual in the Tactica interview on the Gamer's lounge said "I'm gonna hit you really hard, and really hard, and really hard". This hard hitting power is extremely powerful when coupled with Neverborn speed. This is because control is such a huge aspect to all games, but in Malifaux in particular. If you can control how the opponent's forces react to yours the game is in the bag. It is why abilities such as Falling back, and paralyze are such powerful tools in any commanders arsenal. By inflicting either of these states on an enemy model you effectively reduce the amount of finite resources your enemy has to achieve victory, his activations. The greatest control you can assert on an opposing model, however, is death. A dead model loses his commander ALL of the resources left to it "it's theoretical remaining activations" as well as providing additional activation advantage to the killing player. The less models you have the more you enemy can shift activations to less critical units so his more important ones can destroy you after you've committed yourself for the turn. Certainly going first at some critical junctions is important, but I'm certain we all know what a powerful tool being able to out activate your opponent is. A crew that hits extremely hard is going to be more lethal to their enemy than one that does not. Couple this to the speed to determine where any engagements often happen, and you have a marked advantage in being able to apply the status effect of death to the opposing crew. In addition, even though death itself can often provide additional resources of a sort to opposing crews, Corpse and Scrap Counters, many of the more popular Neverborn minions avoid this by being Nightmares, and thus suffer none of a living models vulnerabilities, like Terror, but also even deny the additional resource of leaving counters for an opponent to utilize. Add the final facet to the Neverborn equation and you see why many people feel Neverborn are overpowered.

The last component: Neverborn are very tricky. Neverborn, more than any other faction, seems to have direct tricksy synergies built into them from the word go. Other factions do have these things, it is 100% true, but Neverborn have them down in spades. It would take much to long to go into them all at any depth in this post, especially considering how long it is getting. However I shall do so if someone wants to severely debate this point. I will say that if you examine the Neverborn faction as a whole, there are no glaring weaknesses. Neverborn models support each other across the range in a better and more efficient manner across the board than other factions. A Neverborn player certainly can put a sub optimal crew together and be trashed by his opponent. An inexperienced or flat out bad Neverborn player can absolutely fail to control his crew correctly, because at the end of the day, Neverborn masters do require a degree of skill to manipulate them to their most efficient use of their tricks. A bad Dreamer player will be annihilated if if screws up on timing or placement of his crew, and so even though I feel Neverborn have an edge over other factions they are not an "Easy button" to win the game. This being the case, if one assumes equal player skill on both sides, a Neverborn player has a little something extra going for him. Again assuming player skill is equal, in any matchup that one were wagering money on, the odds are in favor of NB. You still might lose but statistically "Always bet on Purple"

EDIT: I think I might have not clarified my final view very well in the last paragraph. It amounts to this: Neverborn are more powerful than other factions, although we can argue the exact level of the power differential. A very skilled player can definitely beat a NB player, and NB are not the easy win faction. NB, outside of very possibly one or two fixes should be left alone. If you are beaten by a Neverborn player in a tourney, deal with it, crying about how they had the edge means nothing. If you are playing Neverborn, for whatever reason, realize that there is at least a perceived impression that you have an edge, accept that. And finally just play the game and have fun, whatever faction you play.

Edited by Fetid Strumpet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehh, we have other threads to discuss the faction advantages. This is an opportunity to compare two tournaments, played and reported almost at the same time and having completely different outcome - one with strong Nevernborn dominance, the other evenly spread.

So the question is why? Can anyone comment about the specifics of both tournaments? Were there many new players? Were the lists soft or hard? How did format affect the balance?

Hopefully some Australian players can pitch in with their observations.

Edited by Q'iq'el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm the guy who finished 4th in the Through the Breach on Friday. First, thanks to Bill for organizing a great tourney. I just started playing 2 months ago and I had a great experience (partly due to playing well).

I played a Lilith grow list and I must say it is the easiest to get started in Malifaux with, especially in a small SS game. Not too much thinking, just grow and beat up the other guy. My day started by being blown out against Kirai, who I never played against and was unaware of a lot of the tricks. It happens and is part of the growing pains this game has. The last three were against crews that I was familiar with and played against previously. I feel this largely contributed to my success. Also, thanks to being blown out in the first round, I never played any of the other top 11. My last game I won 8-1 and that shot me up the standings. That to me seems like a flaw in the scoring system. But really, is there anything better?

A big thanks to Bill, Dixon and the rest of the folks at Huzzah on helping me learn the game. You all have sold me on this game and I will be a regular for a while. Time now to expand to another faction and maybe I'll be ready for the big leagues soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a blast in the beginners tourney. I came in second with Ressers playing Seamus all day because he's the only Res master I have. I'm very comfortable playing him and he's a lot of fun and that was my goal for the day. I caught some huge breaks to get as far as I did. Round 3 my opponent forgot about his evidence marker in my deployment zone (he put it behind a building, I didn't pay much attention to it either) and I barely was able to destroy the one I put in my own and was able to pull ahead with schemes. Round 4 my opponent forgot to use a 2nd cast of Repulsive with Zorida. It shouldn't have been an issue if I had remembered he hadn't activated her yet. As it were he wasn't able to push Seamus off the claim jump and I got him on schemes.

I had a great time all weekend and had a blast playing with and meeting everyone there. I continue to love playing games with wargamers and wish I had taken more time out of my weekend to play more league games as the ones I played were a blast (even the one where Z had Hoffman do 48 damage in a single activation :hahaha:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehh, we have other threads to discuss the faction advantages. This is an opportunity to compare two tournaments, played and reported almost at the same time and having completely different outcome - one with strong Nevernborn dominance, the other evenly spread.

So the question is why? Can anyone comment about the specifics of both tournaments? Were there many new players? Were the lists soft or hard? How did format affect the balance?

Hopefully some Australian players can pitch in with their observations.

The most likely explanation is random chance. If Neverborn were so good that them not winning a tournament by a landslide was some extremely unlikely anomaly, I'm sure that Wyrd would've reacted strongly long ago. As it stands, some people are saying that NB have an edge, meaning that their chances of winning, all other things being equal, are somewhat higher.

So getting results that buck this trend is very natural.

Not saying that it wouldn't be fun and educational to hear from the differences in tournaments, mind you. Just that the results of two tournies hardly prove matters one way or another :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy to pitch in here since theres more discussion than for DMH.

1. We had a pretty good spread of factions and masters with notable exceptions being: Leveticus, Seamus, Perdita, Zoraida & Lady Justice. Seamus was the ringer if required with me playing and as the moment I am the only one who plays him with any regularity locally. As Rathnard brought Marcus along instead of Zoraida that would explain her absense, and the lack Perdita and Lady J was a little surprising.

The Colette, Hamelin and Lilith players are all very competitive and had been practicing for over a month solid on getting ready for this event and I joined them a couple of times as well. I think Hamelin was done over a bit due to the issue of time limit although he had been working hard in the lead up.

The top 5 players have all been playing for a while with Number 7 being none other than Rathnard with Marcus. The big surprise for me was the Lilith player, I never would have picked him to come last as he is a good and experienced player.

We had 5 players that had under 10 games under their belt prior to the tournament but 2 of them placed in the top 10.

I think picking flexible Masters that you were familiar with was what would win you the tournament, and its the same thought I had from earlier in the year when I won our inaugral tourney with Seamus. The Jack of all trades Masters like Seamus, Sonnia, Lady J, Perdita, Colette, Nicodem, Zoraida, The Vikkys (with Von Schill) I see as the better placed to win. I like the idea of fixed master and limited faction pool but we are now looking at doing a six game fixed faction open pool tournament in the future.

Using the Core Strategies I think also influences the choice of Master as well as you pick a Master and crew that are most suitable to being able to complete those strats.

The whole day was tightly fought with only a handful of blowout 8-0 or 8-2 results. I have all the results at home and could give a blow by blow for those who are interested.

Both of the Pandora players and the Hemlin player said that they were able to take advantage of the fact that the majority of their opponents had never played against their master before.

The next 2 tournaments locally are going to be interesting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not saying that it wouldn't be fun and educational to hear from the differences in tournaments, mind you. Just that the results of two tournies hardly prove matters one way or another :)

That I perfectly agree with (regardless of whether you're being sarcastic or not). But as we have the balance arguments raging in other threads, it'd be nice to bring into light some other factors.

I think, for example, which is pure theory at this stage, that the size of the tournament should grow only with the experience of the community. Unless the community has a really close competition (reflected by the very small difference in the scores), it probably shouldn't go above 25 or 30SS.

Enabling more powerful combinations, theoretically, means the new players stand less chance and feed more points to the top players, influencing the results and skewing the perception of the game, which may be harmful in the long term (especially if you want to attract new players through your tournament system).

That ties in to the completely separate argument about the game's level of difficulty and the steep learning curve. Perhaps first-timers and people without access to extended crews shouldn't play in the same tournament as the top competitive players, but in its "light" version, with smaller crews and more restrictive setting? (Fixed master for example or at the very least fixed pool). At least until they get deep enough to "graduate" to the full tournament rules?

Edited by Q'iq'el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information