Constructive Malifaux Feedback

[Malovane]

I'm wondering if the greater majority are saying "No, this is fine."

Generally, those who are happy with something don't feel the need to comment on it. Its almost always the unhappy that will "shout the loudest" about whatever they feel is broken. Sometimes the sentiment is valid and commonly accepted by the community, other times its debatable. Jokers seem to be a rather binary case - you like the mechanic or you don't which probably boils down to personal preference for degrees of randomness and level of lethality. I'm not sure where the majority lies, but I'm not sure it matters. The clear result of the thread is there isn't a communal opinion that jokers need a change. Leaves continuing the debate an act of futility in my opinion, particularly when there are areas the community seems to agree need fixing. Those should be the focus of discussion.

And *I* think the greatest imbalance in game play right now is in Strats/Schemes and model costing. Not that the game is unplayable or anything like it. But if there was not this forum, and you simply asked me what I was looking at, that's what I'd say.

100% this. Strats/Schemes in particular since they are the win condition. Making sure they are fairly tightly balanced seems critical. Model cost in general seems pretty good to me. More a case of isolated instances needing tweaks than a need for sweeping revision.

In that regard, topics should probably be split into separate threads for clarity of discussion. In regard to scheme balance, I heard on a recent podcast that they were originally not intended to be perfectly balanced. The original design intent was to provide a gradient of difficult to allow players to challenge themselves by taking more difficult schemes. If that is true, I think a lot of the current "difficult" schemes make sense. They exist as fluffy personal challenges. However, I would personally rather see a more level difficulty scale between schemes coupled with a broader selection of schemes particularly in the area of faction/master specific.

In terms of strategy balance, I'm curious to see what master in each faction are held as best for each. Further, I'm curious to see what factions, if any, are commonly seen to have the advantage in each strategy. Collodi and Colette immediately come to mind in a few cases for me.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Malovane

[fishtank]

+1 to the Strategies and Schemes thing.

As a (mostly) Guild player I look at some schemes and just think "there's no way I can do that." Just look at Raid and Round up - both of them pretty much boil down to "destroy your opponent's crew to a man". Whatever my opponent is playing he'll likely have something dirt cheap (a Bayou Gremlin, a Terror tot, a Steampunk Arachnid, a Canine Remains) that will be run off into a corner and hide where my mobility challenged crew will have a hard time reaching. God forbid I choose "Eye for an eye" against acrew that can happily sac/summon models. Sure, I could hide my schemes, but that's as much handing my opponent VP in my book. You have to aim for 8. Taking Bodyguard game after game is not that much fun...but at least I control my own ability to complete it.

Let's not even get into the Master specific schemes...I have a hard enough time making one enemy into Witchling a game, let alone two.

meanwhile, some factions have stuff like "Sabotage", which are auto-VP.

Still...all this has been discussed by people far better at the game than my sorry self. I hope it's being looked at.

[JayBarlekamp]

I'm with the Nerd.

The biggest problem I see is the schemes (some are ridiculously easy, and others are down right impossible.)

Easy:

Sabotage

Kidnap

Levi's (if you don't achieve this you've probably lost anyway)

Down right impossible:

Seamus'

Som'er Teeth's

And as far as models go, there are very few that are undercosted (stitched, maybe coppelius) but there are quite a few that are overcosted (Ice Golem, Warpig, Hans, Bishop, JuJu, Malifaux Child) I'd love to see a reworking of the point values to make the lesser used models more attractive.

[Hatchethead]

I'm wondering if the greater majority are saying "No, this is fine."

Probably. Though I fall firmly on the side of believing that severe + moderate/severe is simply too big a swing--and it has nothing to do with my love of HtW Ressurectionists--I don't believe it will ever change. I've always thought the RJ was OTT. Y'know. Back "before it was cool".

That's right. I'm a joker hipster.

It's a core mechanic. It's clear that the designers want swings of this magnitude to exist. Bad Things Happen, and all that. I'm happy to toss in my two bits whenever the topic arises, just as I do whenever someone suggests that leaders be announced prior to hiring crews (something I strongly support, and have for many years), but I always assume I'm in the minority when I do.

And *I* think the greatest imbalance in game play right now is in Strats/Schemes and model costing. Not that the game is unplayable or anything like it. But if there was not this forum, and you simply asked me what I was looking at, that's what I'd say. Jokers wouldn't even be on my first page.

I agree with this entire statement. Schemes especially need work, and current model costing is ... not ... good. Simply adjusting stone costs would make a large number of models viable again, without needing to tweak stats, and there are definitely models that need to cost more.

Both issues would appear in my top 5, jokers wouldn't even make top 20.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Hatchethead

[dgraz]

I put up a poll about the Red Joker:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?33224-Poll-The-Great-Joker-Debate

[Malovane]

Sure, I could hide my schemes, but that's as much handing my opponent VP in my book. You have to aim for 8.

I think this is part of my perceived imbalance as far as schemes are concerned. There is this interesting mechanic of hidden vs revealed that generally goes unused because it immediately puts you down a point in most cases. Hiding 2 schemes is almost 100% handing your opponent a win. Playing at that kind of point handicap doesn't seem to offset the hidden aspect. Your opponent doesn't have to worry about stopping you, they just have to focus on their own points. Of course, that might be more a symptom of several revealed schemes being on the "easy" side of things.

I think part of the problem is a lack of a gradient in scoring schemes. With all schemes basically being 1 pt + 1 pt for announced, there isn't a lot of wiggle room for balancing. Definitely needs work in the risk vs reward department.

Looking just at something like Frame for Murder. Announcing it makes it nigh near impossible. If you're going to frame someone, you shouldn't be telling them about it. It seems like the kind of scheme that should always be hidden. Earn 1vp if the select model is killed by non-master enemy model. 2vp if killed by enemy master.

My Little Friend - its hard enough getting the copycat killer to kill anything let alone a high stone model or a master. I feel like taking the scheme should grant a buff to the little guy or at the very least have a condition that awards 1vp.

[Adanedhel]

I'm with the Nerd.The biggest problem I see is the schemes (some are ridiculously easy, and others are down right impossible.) Easy:Levi's (if you don't achieve this you've probably lost anyway)

If Levi's scheme is a problem for you, I'd like to point out that due to the specific wording Leveticus cannot get the bodyguardscheme, his own scheme is a harder version of bodyguard (additional restriction of dieing 4 times), whereas other masters just can take the bodyguardscheme as a usually relatively doable scheme.Yes Levi's scheme is relatively easy compared to some other Master specific schemes, but he also in practice gets one less general scheme (Even Steal Relic with Ophelia is doable in comparison with how the Bodyguard restriction off never going off the table works).And when people 'for fun' decide to end the tournament with Slaughter, and imposed schemes Bodyguard/Assasinate you really get a feel that having an easy master specific scheme isn't worth the hassle losing bodyguard as an option presents.

[Malovane]

If Levi's scheme is a problem for you, I'd like to point out that due to the specific wording Leveticus cannot get the bodyguardscheme, his own scheme is a harder version of bodyguard (additional restriction of dieing 4 times), whereas other masters just can take the bodyguardscheme as a usually relatively doable scheme.Yes Levi's scheme is relatively easy compared to some other Master specific schemes, but he also in practice gets one less general scheme (Even Steal Relic with Ophelia is doable in comparison with how the Bodyguard restriction off never going off the table works).And when people 'for fun' decide to end the tournament with Slaughter, and imposed schemes Bodyguard/Assasinate you really get a feel that having an easy master specific scheme isn't worth the hassle losing bodyguard as an option presents.

Another thing that might be worth noting is cases where games are time restricted. You may not even get to the end of the 4th turn to have levi die. Whereas the time constraint actually makes bodyguard easier to pull off - only have to survive 3 or 4 turns rather than 6+. Not to mention the possibility of levi living through a turn making the scheme even less likely to pull off under time constraints. When considering potential time restrictions, I think we definitely start to see a further distinction between easy/hard schemes. Again, I'll fall back to the lack of a score gradient. Levi dies 2 turns - 1vp. 4 turns - 2 vp. 6 turns - 3vp. Something along those lines would provide a better balance against the usual bodyguard in my mind.

[nilus]

Another thing that might be worth noting is cases where games are time restricted.

Well that's a case for changing Gaining Grounds, which I think a lot of people are for. Honestly an extra 15 minutes to every round time would make a world of difference.

[JayBarlekamp]

If Levi's scheme is a problem for you, I'd like to point out that due to the specific wording Leveticus cannot get the bodyguardscheme, his own scheme is a harder version of bodyguard (additional restriction of dieing 4 times), whereas other masters just can take the bodyguardscheme as a usually relatively doable scheme.Yes Levi's scheme is relatively easy compared to some other Master specific schemes, but he also in practice gets one less general scheme (Even Steal Relic with Ophelia is doable in comparison with how the Bodyguard restriction off never going off the table works).And when people 'for fun' decide to end the tournament with Slaughter, and imposed schemes Bodyguard/Assasinate you really get a feel that having an easy master specific scheme isn't worth the hassle losing bodyguard as an option presents.

I actually don't have a problem with levi's scheme, I was just using it as an example of an easy scheme. My main issue is with the schemes that are nearly impossible to complete. How many players have you seen ever choose "Pig Food"? I've played Gremlins for quite a while and I've never had a situation where I thought I could achieve that scheme.

I'd like to see 2 schemes for each master and hanchman, a hard and an easy one. But there is a difference between hard and impossible, and Seamus and Somer fall into the impossible realm. I wouldn't take "Pig Food" if it was worth 4 VP or for that matter "My Little Friend"

[jmp_mydog]

I agree with this entire statement. Schemes especially need work, and current model costing is ... not ... good. Simply adjusting stone costs would make a large number of models viable again, without needing to tweak stats, and there are definitely models that need to cost more.

This is probably the biggest issue. It seems that all games go through the same process.

• Original models/game comes out.

• Game takes off and grows

• New models come out that are better costed (and fill weaknesses) in relation to abilities because of the experience developers/testers have with the existing models.

• Older models lose favor

• New Edition of the game attempts to rebalance

• Rinse and Repeat

I think many companies are more transparent about this process and gamer's have grown to expect this life cycle. My memory is a little cloudy but didn't Warmachine come out with Mark 2 after the fifth or sixth book?

As far as the Schemes and Strategies go they way they currently exist they seem to have two varieties Easy and straightforward like Bodyguard, Holdout, Kidnap and then down right difficult like My Little Friend and most of the master specific schemes. The way I see it is you have schemes you pick to have fun or challenge yourself and you have schemes you pick when winning is your primary goal.

Personally I see each game as a story event that I want to play out. With that in mind I tend to pick my schemes to fit with the strategy thematically. For example with the Supply Wagon Strategy it makes sense to me that the master would be transporting their cart of important stuff so they should be alive at the end so Bodyguard fits with this strategy. Then depending on my mood i might take My Little Friend with it because it makes sense to me that Seamus would be to concerned with the cart to wander around killing stuff, so sending his totem to take out the scariest obstacle makes sense.

Model costs will need to be reevaluated within the next two-three years to keep up with the releases, that's just part of a games life cycle (particularly games like Warmachine, Malifuax, Infinity etc.) eventually the number of models that fill similar roles becomes to great and others get left behind.

I think we're still early in the lifecycle of the game and rushing to put out a new version would only add fuel to the fire of detractors that complain about the "revisions and lack there of." Malifaux hasn't quite reached it's peak yet and shouldn't be rushed to revisions just because some models are less useful.

Edited July 11, 2012 by jmp_mydog

[CRC]

There is this interesting mechanic of hidden vs revealed that generally goes unused because it immediately puts you down a point in most cases.

What if revealing the scheme gave you an extra soul-stone, instead of an extra VP to complete?

(also many possibilities, like it costs you one not to reveal, whether the extra one can go above pool-max, whether we decrease pool max to compensate and so on.)

[Gruesome]

That is a pretty interesting direction...

[Malovane]

What if revealing the scheme gave you an extra soul-stone, instead of an extra VP to complete?

(also many possibilities, like it costs you one not to reveal, whether the extra one can go above pool-max, whether we decrease pool max to compensate and so on.)

In some cases that could work. Still wouldn't be enough in other cases. Even if I got to take the copycat killer for free and/or got extra stones, I doubt I would attempt to complete My Little Friend. I do think this would give another potential dial to use in tuning the balance of schemes. In some cases, this would probably break the balance. Bodyguard seems to be the common easy scheme brought up in discussion. Getting vp for completing and an extra-stone for announcing it seems too good. So as a blanket across the board change, I don't think it would work. As a case by case change, its got potential.

[DeleteAccount]

I really agree with the whole schemes and strategy thing. Specially the faction and master specific schemes, since the other ones are at least available to everyone. I would also like to see if Wyrd is interested in toning down the "autodestruction negates" schemes, it ain't particularly fun to see the other guy implode his whole crew after he gets enough VP to negate yours.

Also, if schemes were really intended to be of varying difficulty, it may be interesting for Wyrd to give them a small tags to identify them. That way people know that it's difficult by design.

[Lungboy]

If you gave the strategies a higher value (maybe 6 instead of 4 for a full complete or whatever) as well as balancing them a bit more then you'd have more room to tweak the points values of the various schemes to accommodate an easy/medium/hard scheme system.

[Mike3838]

I think an adjustment to the VPs for Schemes and Strategies would work very well to rebalance things.

I've just posted how it might be possible here:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?33236-Re-balancing-Schemes-Idea

[szma76]

I really like the idea of adding additional strategies and schemes. The game naturally has more story in it with the way VP's are earned. Giving us more stories to tell on the table top only makes it an even better experience for those of us that really enjoy that aspect of the game. (and I would assume that is most of us).

It was mentioned earlier in the post (if anyone can remember back that far) that a possible way to refresh out of date minions would be to change the strategies to include them, rely on their abilities, etc... I think would be a great way to dust off the old models.

Also, I want a chance to kick the dead horse around a bit so here goes (and no I am not going to comment of the RJ/ BJ, that is a dead horse beaten into dust*wink* (I am 36 and disgusted with my self for inserting that)), competition and tournaments in all table top games come down to specific lists and builds. There is always the power list that can take all comers. It may/ may not be right, but it is reality.

I have yet to see that game with variable powers that has made the game perfectly balanced. Is balance something to shoot for, yes. Will we get there, no. I know Calmdown was initially wanting to see more original models hit the table for competition and I agree that would be awesome.

That said I personally am happy with the release schedules, updates and adjustments Wyrd is making. It has not ruined the game for me. As I mentioned earlier it is about the story for me not the competition. Sorry that doesn't address Calmdown's comments constructively, but everyone else got to say their peace and I have read 32 pages of this post and need to type something. It was 32 pages after all...

[Adanedhel]

I actually don't have a problem with levi's scheme, I was just using it as an example of an easy scheme. My main issue is with the schemes that are nearly impossible to complete. How many players have you seen ever choose "Pig Food"? I've played Gremlins for quite a while and I've never had a situation where I thought I could achieve that scheme.

I actually did this once, to have a challenge, and I will do it again, as soon as I'm playing someone I'll usually win comfortably from, however, I won't take it anytime I need the victory points, it really is exceedingly diificult. I'd prefer it to be changed to If this models summons 2 Piglets during the game. So that you could achieve it by manifesting and casting Swamp Gas twice with trigger .

[Omenbringer]

I actually don't have a problem with levi's scheme, I was just using it as an example of an easy scheme. My main issue is with the schemes that are nearly impossible to complete. How many players have you seen ever choose "Pig Food"? I've played Gremlins for quite a while and I've never had a situation where I thought I could achieve that scheme.

I'd like to see 2 schemes for each master and hanchman, a hard and an easy one. But there is a difference between hard and impossible, and Seamus and Somer fall into the impossible realm. I wouldn't take "Pig Food" if it was worth 4 VP or for that matter "My Little Friend"

I have used it to decent effect (successfully) against Ramos Spider hordes and Nicodem' mindless zombie hordes. Those models are pretty easy (and safe) for Som'er to kill with his melee strikes.

I wouldn't mind seeing the points adjusted on those, since they are fairly difficult to accomplish, 4 might be a bit much though.

I actually did this once, to have a challenge, and I will do it again, as soon as I'm playing someone I'll usually win comfortably from, however, I won't take it anytime I need the victory points, it really is exceedingly diificult. I'd prefer it to be changed to If this models summons 2 Piglets during the game. So that you could achieve it by manifesting and casting Swamp Gas twice with trigger .

This could work as well but definately ties it to the Avatar as opposed to the normal form. Also this would move it from fairly difficult to really easy (especially with SS usage).