Is broken now broken?

[nilus]

Most of my shared slaughter games see 1 model die, or both players chilling out in their deployment zone/moving around until turn 6 then trying to cap one kill and get their schemes.

Exactly, which is not the point of the Strategy at all. Its why I have throw it out of my events. That and I have a problem with the current ruling with Stiched Together and slaughter, but that is a whole other debate.

[Buhallin]

Take Calmdown, so many people attack him and say he only wins because he plays broken crews (most recently, "He's only winning with Rezzers because he takes Von Schill") - I mean WTF? Very few acknowledge the general skill at Malifaux that goes into his games and the insight it takes to use a crew to the level where you're opponents cry "broken". Truth is, I'd bet he'd beat most people on here with a crew drawn out of a hat.

Just to be clear and fair, since it seems my Calmdown+Hoffman comment may have been misinterpreted - I was referring to his ongoing trend of complaining about broken models in the most absolute "I'm right and everyone else isn't" manner we all know and love, to include the snarky comments he's thrown in his sig in the past. I have no doubt he's a great player, and I'd never claim that was because he played only "broken" models. I actually wasn't aware that anyone threw that particular accusation at him - for all my issues with him, I think it's a deeply unfair criticism of someone who obviously knows the game, and wanted to correct any idea that I was jumping on that bandwagon.

On the larger point, you're saying exactly the same thing I was about tadaka - Malifaux is a game where someone who really knows the system and abilities can do absolutely magical things that make your head spin. In large part, that's why I question the validity of your "multiple local meta" argument - you were basically taking a set of ringers into a variety of local environments, stomping them with models they'd possibly never seen played and almost certainly never seen played the way you did, and then saying "See? Everywhere I go, people think Hamelin is broken."

[Justin]

Gamers + Internet = Overreaction.

[rancor709]

Gamers + Internet = Overreaction.

And the Quote of the Day is your's good Sir!

---------- Post added at 08:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------

I want to stick my neck out here and say something about "skill" as opposed to "broken".

Firstly, I agree 100% that the cries of "broken" from people freshly stomped into the ground vastly exaggerate the problem. Losing badly because you didn't know how to play against something doesn't make it "broken" - it's more L2P. But people don't like being told L2P (whether it's meant insultingly or constructively) so they blame the opponents crew, and don't even think it's how good the other player is.

Take Calmdown, so many people attack him and say he only wins because he plays broken crews (most recently, "He's only winning with Rezzers because he takes Von Schill") - I mean WTF? Very few acknowledge the general skill at Malifaux that goes into his games and the insight it takes to use a crew to the level where you're opponents cry "broken". Truth is, I'd bet he'd beat most people on here with a crew drawn out of a hat.

And it's something that p*sses me off as well. I'm a very good player (if anyone wants to start another "You're so cocky to say that" attack like last time, go get a life) but so many times I hear that it's only because I play broken crews -

I start with Zoraida - people play me, lose badly and tell me she's broken.

I move to Pandora - people play me, lose badly and tell me she's broken.

I move to Hamelin - people play me, lose badly and tell me he's broken.

I move to Levi - people play me, lose badly and tell me he's broken.

I then move to SOMER FFS! - and now the consensus seems to be that he's broken!

Sure there's a lot of strong Masters in there but to me broken is something a complete n00b can pick up and effortlessly win with - not a crew that has taken months of thinking and practice to work out the interactions and actually get good with. (Disclaimer - I still think bury and Hamelin's crew mechanics are the two closest things to "broken" in the game)

(Also, on this, I don't think the argument that two players of equal skill buying starter boxes at random should expect an equal fight is valid. Some Masters are strong out of the box with limited growth potential, and others are seemingly weak out of the box but play awesomely with some practise - and some are awesome out of the box and "awesomer" with practise. That's how it is with a game designed for large and varied crew selection.)

So, rant aside, I do think there are certain serious balance issues that need addressing, but the harsh reality is everyone on here is at a different skill level and some people are going to be able to "break" crews and beat people (irrespective of the crew), and some people are going to buy the best powerplay lists out there and lose because they're just not as good as everyone else.

Malifaux is not a system where two players of varying skill are going to have an even/balanced game, and nor should it be. So please, before you cry "broken" stop and ask yourself if you lost because your opponent's crew is more powerful than yours, or because you simply aren't as good or flipped bad cards.

And sorry for the slight derail, the balance discussion is important but I just wanted to put some perspective in there about skill which is all to often overlooked or marginalised - especially when people think flaming Wyrd or the RMs over everything they lose to is a justification for their lack of playing ability. Inexperienced and/or poor players give valuable insight into crews and game issues, but it just p*ssed me off when people post about how broken stuff is because they lack the knowledge/experience/ability to play against it (or a lot of the time because they didn't see the "broken" thing themselves before it was pointed out) - and I think that's where most of the damage is done to non-players perception of the Malifaux system.

Okay, let the flaming begin....

Adam, I agree with what your saying here. Player skill in malifaux is huge its one the reason I am so in love with this game. Because it actually rewards skill and understanding of the rules as opposed to line up and roll sixes! There are some mechanics that should be looked at and you and I again agree on them, bury despite my love of Soulstone miner and with the continually regenerating rat horde. However I too grow tired of this and that is Overpowered it needs to be cuddled now.

I have played a lot of different minatures games none with the true variety of models and abilities and paths to victory that malifaux has and non nearly as skill based as malifaux. A large part of the problem as you said MagicPockets is the forums are a mixing pot of all different skill levels and stages in malifaux development. And the thing I can tell you about malifaux the first time you play against someone that understands there crew and you dont' know what it does you will likely be steamrolled but you will learn a lot. A skillful player will beat a lesser skilled player in malifaux 90/100 regardless of crew selection on both sides. And that is okay, when I was growing up if you got knocked down you got up and tried to figure out how to beat it. There is incredible combos and strong play potential in every crew in malifaux you have to look for you have to experiment, heck you might have to lose some games. But you learn more from losing than from winning but you learn nothing from not trying. We've all had kick your butt loses that have made us all crazy, its how we deal with them after that seperates us. Malifaux is a game of fun, and if your opponent is constantly kicking your butt with the same crew, might I humble suggest you swap crews for a game. The other player may find some trick in your crew you hadn't thought of or you might see something in theres that they hadn't seen. Or they may see that just having those models in front of them doesn't make them awesome. Balance is something we all love to call for, but how many of us understand that if player skill is the largest determining factor in winning than you have what your looking for already. That's not to say some rules interactions could do without some love and attention to make the game more solid, no one wants to play solitare in a miniatures game especially the one playing solitare.

I love this game and before we run for our pitchforks on advocates of the game, or start mobbing up because "I got beat by this man with a crazy gun and a bowie knife and really bad hair, and I had never seen him before and he has to be broken cause I'm awesome and no one has ever beat me so it must be broken..." Look at your own cards, and find what you can do against that guy read your cards, think about what you can do well, think about how he beat you not that he beat you! More thinking less reacting, and lets start asking for help, hey how do you beat this not, how can I ever win agaisnt this broken combo. And stop thinking that your crew sucks, focus on its strengths and making those count and for the love of all that is malifaux remember strategies and schemes are what wins games, well that and a skillfully played Seamus

Sorry for the rant, Peace Love and Malifaux.

[Todd]

Now I wonder what prospective new players will think about this thread?

[Justin]

I start with Zoraida - people play me, lose badly and tell me she's broken.

I move to Pandora - people play me, lose badly and tell me she's broken.

I move to Hamelin - people play me, lose badly and tell me he's broken.

I move to Levi - people play me, lose badly and tell me he's broken.

I then move to SOMER FFS! - and now the consensus seems to be that he's broken!

This isn't exactly a coincidence.

And it's not just because you're good with those masters (although I'm sure you are).

You and CalmDown are also very vocal on the forums. And you talk about the crews you play. You have pointed out many times on here that Hamelin is 'broken'. And CalmDown has pointed out that the dreamer is 'broken'. And...you play Hamelin, and he plays dreamer. So, now you start Gremlins, and...CalmDown starts making posts about how to fix their brokenness, and people follow suit. And, lo, all of the crews you guys play have a habit of getting declared broken.

Now, I'm not trying to attack you here, at all. You're excited about what you play and...you talk about it. Cool, I do too. But people are listening, and when they hear all of the tricks which crew X can do from an experienced player, it looks a lot better than crew Y which nobody happens to be talking about, because the talkative folks are playing other things.

So, the skill level of the player fielding a certain master can affect the community's perception of that master, yes. But the community's perception is also influenced by how much and the manner in which those player's post.

Edited February 25, 2012 by Justin

[Q'iq'el]

I'd like to add to Lalo's post - just as some crews get promoted and instantly deemed broken, so you can see minions that get completely ignored, because they don't belong to the cool crews or cool builds... and even though there are tricks they can pull out and some solid synergies to employ, they are completely ignored because the forums do not count them in the super-class.

Gremlins are not the only example of this. Nicodem's recent re-evaluation can be tied to Calmdowns blog too. Hard to remember he used to be counted among absolutely the worst masters in the game and definitely in his faction (now it suddenly is Seamus?!).

But try to go somewhere less popular, like Black Blood Shaman, and there's virtually nothing in terms of new ideas how to use him. Even Aethervox skimmed over him (or rather, the reviewer clearly had too little practical experience to draw tips from), though they typically try to be thorough in their master reviews.

Edited February 25, 2012 by Q'iq'el

[Calmdown]

Good posts Lalo & Q.

[Spiku]

Actually he simply made a post stating that they gremlins are broken; someone else made the topic "breaking gremlins", to which neither Calmdown nor Magicpockets were contributing the "broken" combos.

While people attach weight to the words of the forum "personalities", that doesn't change the fact that Neverborn come out on top in local groups with far less effort than others.

[magicpockets]

This isn't exactly a coincidence.

You and CalmDown are also very vocal on the forums. And you talk about the crews you play. You have pointed out many times on here that Hamelin is 'broken'. And CalmDown has pointed out that the dreamer is 'broken'. And...you play Hamelin, and he plays dreamer. So, now you start Gremlins, and...CalmDown starts making posts about how to fix their brokenness, and people follow suit. And, lo, all of the crews you guys play have a habit of getting declared broken.

Now, I'm not trying to attack you here, at all. You're excited about what you play and...you talk about it. Cool, I do too. But people are listening, and when they hear all of the tricks which crew X can do from an experienced player, it looks a lot better than crew Y which nobody happens to be talking about, because the talkative folks are playing other things.

So, the skill level of the player fielding a certain master can affect the community's perception of that master, yes. But the community's perception is also influenced by how much and the manner in which those player's post.

Firstly you have to realise how Calmdown and I (and others) see broken - whilst there are rules imbalances in the game and things which need changing (Hamelin has about 4 or 5 things which could change to balance him out, for me Dreamer has 2), we see "broken" as playing Malifaux - it's about working out ideas and strategy that use the crew to their best advantage and enable them to take on any other crew. It's other people who see us finding exploits in the rules and crying for fixes - but the truth is the vast majority of things don't need fixing as they can be countered, it's just when there is a skill imbalance in a given game that it's an issue, but if I play chess against Kasparov I expect there would be a skill imbalance too.

That said, perhaps we need to give more thought to the cavalier way we refer to "breaking" things and I'll certainly bear it in mind.

As for your post, I agree 100% and get what you're saying. The problem for me is that my approach to Malifaux is "standing on the shoulders of giants" - I like to start with a clean slate, get as much advice, debate and discussion about a crew/model, and then build on other people's ideas and understandings. That, combined with a deliberate losing streak with the new crew builds (ask my local club, literally thrown models into stuff and see how well it does) is what leads to really understanding and getting the most from a crew.

Take my Levi thread, there's a handful of guys on there who have contributed so many ideas and without (for example) TwitstedMetal I never would have been able to take "breaking" the SS Miner to such an extreme, not would I have noticed the Bette Noir hello/assassinate/fast to bury trick which has now got people saying Bette is "broken" - and likely this whole "bury is broken" thing wouldn't have blown up the way it has (people had come to terms with LCB and Hoffman).

And it's the same with Gremlins, we (Calmdown and I) saw Spiku play them in a way we'd never seen before, and it made us actually read their cards - and that led to this "breaking" Somer idea we've come up with. And much of what we're thinking is built on ideas already developed by the community and being discussed now (for example, there is a glorious post by Spiku in one of the threads which must have taken hours to write).

But none of that would have been possible without a niche of players contributing ideas which I could build on, so the forum posting etc is kind of a catch-22.

I'd like to add to Lalo's post - just as some crews get promoted and instantly deemed broken, so you can see minions that get completely ignored, because they don't belong to the cool crews or cool builds... and even though there are tricks they can pull out and some solid synergies to employ, they are completely ignored because the forums do not count them in the super-class.

Gremlins are not the only example of this. Nicodem's recent re-evaluation can be tied to Calmdowns blog too. Hard to remember he used to be counted among absolutely the worst masters in the game and definitely in his faction (now it suddenly is Seamus?!).

But try to go somewhere less popular, like Black Blood Shaman, and there's virtually nothing in terms of new ideas how to use him. Even Aethervox skimmed over him (or rather, the reviewer clearly had too little practical experience to draw tips from), though they typically try to be thorough in their master reviews.

I agree, but think it's an Internet issue - people want to play the best way in their crew (most people should I say?) so will gravitate to the perceived strongest minions. And you dont see a lot of creativity as, like I said in my recent podcast chat, it takes a high level of skill to work out the last 10% of how to play a crew to it's best - and I think only a few people on here tend to do that.

Take ukrocky and what he did with Marcus. Marcus was a complete Joke master and Craig made him a force to be reckoned with and a lot of people on here now think Marcus is a strong master. Now, Craig didn't change the rules or play with different rules, he simply worked out the right way to play Marcus - and not everyone can do that. Same with Nicodem, same with Somer, same with Rasputina... but being realistic, I don't think anyone can help Guild. *wink*

It's the same as netlisting decks in Magic, web designers copying the design of Apple's website, and people going to the current bar/club that the celebrities frequent - people have a tendency to emulae what they know is working.

Also, whilst I think skill is an issue, let's not forget that a lot of people don't get as much opportunity to play as others (I get 3/4 games a week sometimes) so they're not going to spend the time experimenting, they want to play a solid crew they can have fun and win with - which again causes people to gravitate to proven minions/masters.

Lastly, budget is an issue too. I'm fortunate that I run my own business and am good at it so can afford to buy every Gremlin model on a whim to try them out, and I work hard for that so don't feel guilty about it. But some people can't do that so don't have the full selection to play with and, whilst proxying can get you so far, there's no substitute for having the mini in your case so you can "give it a go". That again means people are going to buy, and therefore focus on, the minions they see as the ones they should include.

It's a complex issue but there are always going to be fashionable masters and minions, I think what's important is that we rethink what we mean by "broken" and accept that losing badly to a crew doesn't mean there's a problem with game design. For example, if I get a bunch of mates together and play soccer against Manchester United, we're going to get pwnd big style, but that doesn't mean soccer is broken.

Actually he simply made a post stating that they gremlins are broken; someone else made the topic "breaking gremlins", to which neither Calmdown nor Magicpockets were contributing the "broken" combos.

This is actually true, we haven't posted anything on how to play Gremlins.

[Iron Skies]

but being realistic, I don't think anyone can help Guild.

Challenge accepted sir.

[magicpockets]

Challenge accepted sir.

Love it lol

[Q'iq'el]

I agree, but think it's an Internet issue - people want to play the best way in their crew (most people should I say?) so will gravitate to the perceived strongest minions. And you dont see a lot of creativity as, like I said in my recent podcast chat, it takes a high level of skill to work out the last 10% of how to play a crew to it's best - and I think only a few people on here tend to do that.

I agree with everything said about this question, but I'd like to point out it goes beyond internet forum culture. The reasons you state are all of course valid, but I think realizing there's a cultural push for the strongest and most competitive crews, that affects even entirely casual players, is a good first step to actually letting go and starting to invent own crews.

The thing is that right behind those "best of the best" crews are very solid crews that have a very good chance of winning if the draws and flips go their way (and actually even the strongest crews and masters still need good draws to win). The best of players have their time and resources limited too, obviously, so they go for the things they believe in and rarely test models they put less store in. This is why I like Calmdown's blog on Rezzers so much - it is comprehensive, even if it still excludes some models.

Theoretically speaking Pullmyfinger should be the place to go to see the tips and advice on how to play these less popular models, but the reality is the entries are mostly empty - not only because people wait for the top players to present the solutions, but also because there is a very strong feeling in the community, that only the top crews have any chance of winning and I think people who would otherwise be able to provide some entries for the Wiki, simply do not play these models.

And I think this attitude towards the game and the general gaming community view of the game caused by that are really misguided and caused in large part by the tone of discussions on the forums. From my own experience the gap between top crews and well designed "Malifaux B" crews is really small. Skill still plays much higher factor, than the special rules on the cards. If UKrocky proved anything with Marcus, it is definitely that.

But the large part of the skill comes in form of crew selection. Hiring is probably the single most important step in this game and it is often overlooked. People expect to compete with out-of-the-box crews [possible, in restricted environment] and blame the balance for their failure... and the forums do provide them with ammunition, because the top players are speaking about imbalance all the time. Sure, there is some, but let's put it in perspective - it is never auto-win type of situation, given equal skills, of course.

I suppose those are random thoughts on the way Malifaux is being perceived by general public, but I also rate the Calmdown's Resser blog very high, precisely because it discusses model selection and hiring process more than the math behind movements or deadly combos in the vacuum. We need this to happen to all the factions, seriously.

[magicpockets]

100% agree Q, great post

[rancor709]

I think what everyone from Calmdown, MagicPockets and a majority of people posting in this thread are trying and has been proven with a social experiment of "Gremlins are seriously broken" is that there is a lot of creative energy on this forum that could be used to find what crews do well instead of I got stomped.

I've played ressers since the game came out. I love them, always have always will, and some of the newer guys in our group when we first started out as a group thought my stuff was broken. Then they learned to play there crew and its starting to get to be even and interesting matches amazing how that works. When a master/faction minion isn't getting any love, well don't silently complain provide some input on them. If you don't like the tone of the forum be the voice that changes it. Again reading the gremlin thread was awesome, really all these master threads where most of the actual useful information is coming from the rest of the community not just the well know players. they are bringing up points, and other people are making logical counter points. Debate and experimentation its the way forward!.

[Nephalumps]

But the large part of the skill comes in form of crew selection. Hiring is probably the single most important step in this game and it is often overlooked. People expect to compete with out-of-the-box crews [possible' date= in restricted environment] and blame the balance for their failure... and the forums do provide them with ammunition, because the top players are speaking about imbalance all the time. Sure, there is some, but let's put it in perspective - it is never auto-win type of situation, given equal skills, of course.

Crew selection is absolutely a huge part of it; maybe overall the biggest part.

In my (reasonably limited) experience with the game, some of the strongest crews in the game are also the ones that "jive" thematically (primarily because they and the Minions they needed access to were designed in the same Book cycle.) So if I want to play Colette, I can pick up her box, some more Showgirl models, and probably field a pretty strong crew (if not mildly brain melting *wink*.)

Contrast this to Marcus: a player just starting out with Marcus can very easily put together a janky crew, because his starting box isn't great, and the huge number of Minions available to him make it very difficult to figure out where to begin. But even after you figure that out, you aren't out of the weeds, because the most effective ways to play Marcus involve using mixed armies (some Beasts, some Arcanist/Outcast models.) For a player who started out playing him to play an all Beast army, that can be a harsh revelation, especially when you look over at that Colette player who runs that ultra theme-y army and is still tearing up the table.

So there's a gulf between the way players want to play some of the crews, and how you need to play some crews in order to be able to hang with the newer Masters/Henchmen. This is absolutely not unique a phenomenon to Malifaux - I don't know how many Khador players I've seen quit in a huff after their all warjack and MoW armies keep getting tabled - but I do think Malifaux lends itself to it a bit more due to how strongly themed each of the Masters seem to a newer player.

Q'iq'el also mentions the wiki, and that could be a huge help as well. I know when I was starting out in Warmachine, the BattleCollege did a lot to help me level my game up, and keep pace with the tricks my buddies were coming up with. The PullMyFinger wiki is a great start, but it's woefully short on really juicy information and guidance. Given how much there is to cover with some models (Masters especially,) that's understandable, but it's worth noting as an area that can be focused on which will give a lot back to the community.

[Cornelious1424]

I think the term broken has replaced "wow, that model is really good!" in some aspects. When they first released Jack Daw, my local community was in an up roar about his rules, declaring him as "broken". In reality, he is just a really good model, and I think we often jump the gun when we see new things like that. In our ever long quest to find a game that is perfectly balanced, we will always encounter imbalance, especially as a game evolves. For me, if all factions/armies were completely balanced, no system would be fun. The fun is learning how to deal with something that is "hard-nuts".

I think broken is broken, only because we tend to over use it when we perceive something to be really, really good. Life isn't fair and neither should gaming. The poor sap who can't enjoy the delicious taste of a Reeses cup because he can't eat peanuts due to an allergy, does he say his allergy is "broken"? No, he eats something else. So lets move on and accept imbalance and stop complaining the so called "Broken".

[Omenbringer]

Again reading the gremlin thread was awesome, really all these master threads where most of the actual useful information is coming from the rest of the community not just the well know players. they are bringing up points, and other people are making logical counter points. Debate and experimentation its the way forward!.

This is definately the strength of the "So and So is Broken" thread. Almost all of them contain good viable information (for both new and Experienced players), however they also showcase a few rules "loop holes" that need to be closed (i.e. the bury mechanics, infinte summon tricks, etc).

I am glad for them, because without them Some'r might still have the "Infinte Red Joker Draw" that he did in the early days of the game.

[FoeRender]

I agree with a lot in this post that I have read . now I haven't read every post as i just found this thread . I do say that the term broken get used all too often , but thats in every game out there . It takes a player to have a bad game and get stomped by something to have them cry on the forums about what they think is now " broken " .

I do have to say there are things that are a bit Favorited in the tourny scene , this is evident in the top placings in each event. I do feel never born is strong in all missions and scenarios to very strong in others its rare that they have trouble with anything . other factions on the other hand have definite weaknesses .

I for one I enjoy the game regardless and know how to play against them and can stop a lot of there tricks . but by far they are the hardest to stop IMO .

I know skill comes into play and how you build your list , but just look the big events and what dominates the top brackets . the top skilled players tend to play whats OP in fear of having to face it themselves . I play guild regardless !

I do have to say building your list before each game does help to level the field as well .

[SardonicArtery]

This thread is helpful to a new fella like me. Still having trouble deciding between McMourning and a Zoraida-led Collodi crew to start though.

[Boscotopia]

What makes Malifaux broken are the rules: they keep changing. We just got more errata...... rules are too vague in the book that their meaning is up in the air until there is a ruling on the forum, but guess what? I cannot go on the internet every time to check for the rules. I cannot go on the internet to make sure LCB is allowed to do that........ I love this game but it is all over the place with rules and stats. I would be fine if they went a few months without making any new models and just finally made ONE rulebook, ONE source that had what the gamer needs to play the game and sticking with it....... no more 1.5, 2,0, 2.5. Is this Microsoft?

[UberGruber]

What makes Malifaux broken are the rules: they keep changing. We just got more errata...... rules are too vague in the book that their meaning is up in the air until there is a ruling on the forum, but guess what? I cannot go on the internet every time to check for the rules. I cannot go on the internet to make sure LCB is allowed to do that........ I love this game but it is all over the place with rules and stats. I would be fine if they went a few months without making any new models and just finally made ONE rulebook, ONE source that had what the gamer needs to play the game and sticking with it....... no more 1.5, 2,0, 2.5. Is this Microsoft?

I tend to agree. While it's great that a company listens to its customers, there comes a point where too much change in too short a time is . . . well . . . too much.

As a newer player what I want is a ruleset that is essentially 'done'. I don't mind a tweak or two to correct gross imbalance bit too frequent tweaking is actually as bad as too little. At the moment I'm beginning to feel that certain models are too much in a state of flux.

I do understand the game is complex and balance is therefore necessarily hard to achieve. But I also think that expecting players to consult online errata is only reasonable to an extent.

[Soundwave]

What makes Malifaux broken are the rules: they keep changing. We just got more errata...... rules are too vague in the book that their meaning is up in the air until there is a ruling on the forum, but guess what? I cannot go on the internet every time to check for the rules. I cannot go on the internet to make sure LCB is allowed to do that........ I love this game but it is all over the place with rules and stats. I would be fine if they went a few months without making any new models and just finally made ONE rulebook, ONE source that had what the gamer needs to play the game and sticking with it....... no more 1.5, 2,0, 2.5. Is this Microsoft?

It's a bit against my principles to reply of a threadomancy of a 4 month post. Heck, even pre-errata, but sure, I'll bite.

I think the latest posting of errata/faq/clarifications is a helluva great job towards making Malifaux more balanced (almost as torn a phrase as "broken", eh?). Now, obviously, the best would be if Wyrd just made the system, no errors whatsoever and be done with it. Sadly, it doesn't work that way.

Since you bring up Microsoft, look at them. They're a multi-billion dollar company, and even they can't make a perfect system, so to expect anyone else to make a complicated, yet flawless system is a pretty naive stance. But as stuff surfaces, things gets patched up. Sometimes quickly, sometimes it takes time in order to not make new holes as the old ones are mended.

The other way to go would be "The GW way". Since people love to bash GW I tend to try to stay away from it, but they're the epitome of non-living rules. They have a core rulebook and armybooks which gets updated every so and so year, and between that there's very little in the way of erratas and faqs. Take Chaos Space Marines, for one - For several years people debated over how their Dreadnought rules were suppose to work. That's years of people debating, arguing, going RAI vs RAW and lots of groans. With Malifaux, you can ask questions and even get the game designers to come in and explain how it's suppose to work.

Sure, it's not perfect, but I'd rather have tons of info to search through when a question surfaces than to know that there's absolutely no support from the company that writes the rules, and that me and my opponent just have to "roll a d6" or something like that for 7 years until a new armybook is released and we can hope it's been fixed there.

And I don't think you should go on the Internet every time you're playing the game. Use the rules manual, and now, print the erratas from the homepage, and enjoy the game. If you and your opponent come across some questions during your games - take a note, and look it up later.

[thorinwolf]

righty then... im new to this game completely and i have had a run through but no proper games of substance yet (roll on tuesday). the guy who will be clearing up any rules problems i have, said a similar thing as to the general problems. he asked me as to what master i will be using/buying and i replied the dreamer as i really like the mini and have no idea as to wether he is any good or not. his relpy to it was "oh well thats just broken." now this immediatly put me off the idea of starting with this set up so now i will be running with the hag. (i havent told him this yet.) now my main gripe was that he declared my choice was broken. now further reading of said master has lead me to believe that he is not a good starting point for a colmpleete noobie. fortunatly i cut my wargaming teeth on 40k where every new army was "broken" and magic the gathering for my card stuff and yet again some cards were "broken" in that. so all in all yes the term is greatly dammaging to games, normaly only to new gamers or people who are new to the whole hobbie thing, fortunatly im 11 years into table top gaming and i bothered to read a lot about the game before i made my mind up. thats mt 2 pence from a complete green who has been bombarded with the term "broken" and i can see why some people would give up without even trying the game, alas we must as a community ( not just wyrd games but any system) break this trend of throwing "broken" around unless that game really is badly broken and is unplayable as a system..

as i said a n00bs views and ideas..

oh and sorry for spelling mistakes i have difficulty writing.

Ricky

[JisaacT]

When people say a char or faction is broken It makes me think they are bad at the game and cant figure how to handle certain situations. Yes masters can be more powerful than others but that is in every game you play. Not just tabletop games either. They just need to buck up and get better.