Balanced gaming - and please keep this thread nice

[ravenborne]

I don't think the goal should be perfect balance, the goal should be just toning back extremely overpowered models that make the game unfun, while shoring up the weak ones. It's not something that will ever end.

In my experience, a scheduled release of errata/FAQ is a good way for a game company to go. This goes a long way towards adding stability to the community while addressing balance concerns. This might be once every 6 months, or per year, whatever the company decides.

[96p]

In my Opinion Malifaux is pretty much balanced... broken but balanced. Every Master can be played in a way that your opponent just crawls under the table and cries himself to sleep. Yes there are Masters that seem better then others, but mostly they're just played "wrong" or by the wrong people. For example: I'v seen many others be very effective with Lucius+ LadyJ but for me it never seemed to work (many other, much more complicated crews did)

A little cuddle here and there and especially to counter mechanics that run against RAI and I see no problem at all.

[Serigala]

UKrocky recently proposed addressing balance through a proposed tournament comp pack, but his thread got hidden beneath all the heated debate in another thread started at the same time.

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?32798-Introducing-UK-Malifaux-Tournament-Comp-Pack&highlight=malifaux+comp

His approach, of simply adjusting the SS costs of models that are rarely fielded in competitive play is simple and elegant. It doesn't break any game mechanics or risk creating new monsters.

Clearly it won't be perfect, but being based on players actual choices is probably the best way to allow imbalances to be addressed.

[morella]

I agrees, adjusting costs/SS pools and win conditions is the way to go.

And I was hoping Rock-Paper -Scissors would come up - but such games as that can only be balanced if there are an odd number of choices, it breaks down for sets whose magnitude are even and greater than 2.

[Halflingspy]

One thing that I think 'balances' Malifaux is the number of options that can be taken during a game. It is not simply a rush-and-kill (although yes, every game I've played has had at least one round of that), but a game of objectives and out manuvering. There have been many times where I have been cremating my opponent in a slugfest, and have ended up tying or losing the game thanks to not being able to stop them from lighting dynamite, and the other way around.

I have to admit, for the first near-year I've played this game, I found it easy to complain about Neverborn lists, or the sheer brutality of the Guild in comparison to the fragility of Arcanists due to high point costs. But, since school let out and I've had a lot of time to look over the game and get in back-to-back matches, I am seeing that groups like Marcus can't win in an out-and-out fight, but they can win regardless. This isn't because of his hit-and-run so to speak, but just because of the different amount of options available on the board.

Yes, it isn't a perfect 'balanced' game, but after using Marcus and a well placed Waldgeist to brutally melee down Lady J, or Ramos using explosions against a Perdita team, its certainly much, much better off than any other miniatures game that I have played.

(Side note: Go is an amazing game, right next to Chess)

[Boscotopia]

And Boscotopia, my point was, in my experience, companies fix one problem, and another always appears. I just don't see that that richness and complexity can coexist with balance, although I am a mathematician, so maybe I just have a different concept of balance, which is the other reason I started this thread, to get others ideas on what that might actually mean.

And by the way, I've been here since the beginning of the game, and this company has never sat back and done nothing about issues that need fixing. A few months or even a year is actually quite soon for fixes based on my experience with the gaming world.

Who cares about what the other companies are doing? We are talking about this game. If I told you that I did not see the problems I see here on games like Infinity and Hordes, you would say either, "then go play those games," or, "those are different games/they have different rules/you are wrong". You insulate yourself and deflect any criticism like this is somehow a reflection on you and it isn't. As I said before, I do not know you - I am not speaking to you. I am speaking to Wyrd.

The fact that they put out a flawed product in the first place is a problem. Just like Microsoft products, we stay with them because once they do get it right, it is pretty great, but there is something to be said of the practice of putting out an inferior or partially finished product.

How long has the game been around and they are still fixing the core rules?

We are going on to Book 4 and they still have not fixed Book 2?

I don't know what you do for a living (you mentioned mathematics before, which is cool. My girlfriend and I are in the same field) but from what I have seen, taking a year to fix a problem that should have been resolved before release is how you lose a lot of business in the real world. Blaming the industry is a cop out.

I never said Wyrd was a terrible company nor did I say Malifaux was a terrible game; I think the contrary towards both. What I have said and will continue to say is that there are issues with their playtesters not catching the problems before release and Wyrd does take too long to fix the problems. The game takes a back seat to the miniature production. They may be dedicating some time to the issue but they should be focusing on using the majority if not all of their energy on fixing it. There are plenty of models out there right now - I doubt there would be riots if a quarter had no releases and was spent just tuning the game to be the shining example for the gaming community.

I am sure you will find something to take offense to in what I wrote since that seems to be your thing with me, so I am going to use 2 AP (Quick Reply is a 0 action) and activate Filled with Stones.

[Setoth]

Who cares about what the other companies are doing?

Well if it's a pretty uniform problem across the industry then that would be a significant indicator that the problem isn't quite so easy to fix. Granted, it wasn't until recently that the mini wargaming industry has been able to really break out from the shadow of 40k (not counting historical minis re-enactment games) but still I don't know of any games that are really all that well balanced. WarmaHORDES comes to mind as being one of the better ones in terms of balance, but it's been out a lot longer than Malifaux. Not to mention the fact that Malifaux is very multi-variable and can be measured in a lot of different ways because of how strategies and schemes work, so I can understand changes taking a bit longer than something like WarmaHORDES which seems to focus mostly on KILL CASTER.

None of this is to say the criticisms are invalid. I'm far too new to make that judgment and I plan to stick around because I love the fluff and playing casually. But I wouldn't discount industry performance as a benchmarking tool.

[morella]

I was just clarifying a previous post I had made that had seemed to be misconstrued. And no, this thread was not intended to be about Malifaux, which is why I posted it in General Discussion.

I know I made a comment elsewhere that you took personally, and posted my apology there. Sorry I got under your skin so bad, totally not my intent.

As for what I do for a living, see my profile if you're interested.

[Boscotopia]

I was just clarifying a previous post I had made that had seemed to be misconstrued. And no, this thread was not intended to be about Malifaux, which is why I posted it in General Discussion.

I know I made a comment elsewhere that you took personally, and posted my apology there. Sorry I got under your skin so bad, totally not my intent.

As for what I do for a living, see my profile if you're interested.

If I was not already in love with my girlfriend, I would probably be in love with you. A mathematician who games and farms. Awesome. Don't get mad at that. It is a compliment. Promise.

:Paralyzed_Puppet:

Also, no need to apologize. This a game forum, words cost a penny and mean even less. I have plenty of perspective and know all of this amounts to steam in the wind.

As Socrates said, (if we believe Plato.....) The unexamined life is not worth living. Examine away.

Which brings us to a cool Master or Henchman: The Philosopher.

[ravenborne]

Game industry maxim: "Ideas are easy, execution is hard."

[morella]

Just want to say to all - we (grand sweeping gesture) can actually find a way to work out our differences and miscommunications. But Eric, you still owe us Miss Understanding.

[Gruesome]

Who cares about what the other companies are doing? We are talking about this game. If I told you that I did not see the problems I see here on games like Infinity and Hordes, you would say either, "then go play those games," or, "those are different games/they have different rules/you are wrong".

No... That's how YOU talk to people, not Morella, stop projecting...

I am sure you will find something to take offense to in what I wrote since that seems to be your thing with me,

Projecting again.

I find it difficult to put forth the effort to appreciate many of your points because you are so consistently abrasive. I am going to just stop reading them now because they irritate me so frequently, not in content, but tone, and then I make off-topic posts like this one as a result.

Good luck!

[SpiralngCadavr]

As others have stated, WM/H does a very good job making a balanced game, though it does get repetitive. Seems like most scenarios just come down to "force people to get their casters close to the enemy," if there are any.

I've been finding Dominion very balanced, as, like a lot of older games, everyone starts with the same resources, but, unlike older ones, the options and availability of resources means that you get a lot of variety in strategy, where you react to the "scenario".

[nilus]

As others have stated, WM/H does a very good job making a balanced game, though it does get repetitive. Seems like most scenarios just come down to "force people to get their casters close to the enemy," if there are any.

Its worth noting that for Hordes Machine to get where its at it had to go through several iterations of the game(Prime, Hordes[i know its a seperate game but the rules did change in it], Prime remix and then finally MK 2). And it can be argued that it lost a lot of its "character" when it went to Mark 2.

[edonil]

I've been finding Dominion very balanced, as, like a lot of older games, everyone starts with the same resources, but, unlike older ones, the options and availability of resources means that you get a lot of variety in strategy, where you react to the "scenario".

Wait, the card game? Someone else on here plays?! Awesome! And as much as I do agree that it is a pretty balanced game, Tactician breaks it in a heartbeat, lol.

[Omenbringer]

If indeed these pro-gamers find the problems, why not utilize them for play testing because whomever they have now is terrible...... I mean Microsoft terrible. How many patches does it take to get it right?...

How long has the game been around and they are still fixing the core rules?

We are going on to Book 4 and they still have not fixed Book 2?

I don't know what you do for a living ... but from what I have seen, taking a year to fix a problem that should have been resolved before release is how you lose a lot of business in the real world. Blaming the industry is a cop out.

Had planned on not entering yet another debate on this subject however these two things got me.

Playtesters are volunteers, we do this because we enjoy the game and genuinely want to make it better. Often times the community blames the playtesters for not seeing all the power combinations that may exist or develop without considering timelines or unique information that may not be available to the rest of the community (like having the developers tell you how something is supposed to work instead of having to figure it out) or that they may have been seen but were considered unlikely to occur or be interprited in that way. There are almost infinite variables and combinations of things that need to be considered when playtesting models (and with each release the number of permutations increases dramatically) some tangible (probability of occurence) and some not so much (individual skill level of the players). The time lines are tough and though we strive to release perfection, a playtest will never discover every possible "broken" combo (several good examples of this have been listed already) that will be found after general release to the gaming public (hell even the open playtest that Privateer Press did for the MKII release didn't find or fix everything).

In short there isn't a product that is released perfect on the first go, Malifaux is no different. I do think that Wyrd does a great job of fixing identified imbalances while maintaining the integrity of the theme (the Dreamer is a perfect example of this). And though fixes may take longer than we like (something I too have often been frustrated with), they are usually only needed once. The core rules have actually stayed surprisiningly stable since the initial release of the book, what has really been done with the Rules Manual and the new FAQ/Errata/Clarification sheets is a tightening of language and standardization of interpretation (nothing really dramatic has been introduced or taken away).

As others have stated, WM/H does a very good job making a balanced game, though it does get repetitive. Seems like most scenarios just come down to "force people to get their casters close to the enemy," if there are any.

Warmachine and Hordes are only really balanced against the top tier stuff, there are definately horribly imbalanced things in the game.

Take for example one of my favorite Warcasters (and the one that got me into the game back in the early days) Amon Ad Raza. He was and is a very bottom tier master that will almost always be outclassed by any of the top tier guys. In a noncompetitive environment he is loads of fun to play with but there is a reason you never read about him appearing in the competitive environment. He is not the only one either just the one I am most familiar with.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Omenbringer

[morella]

Its worth noting that for Hordes Machine to get where its at it had to go through several iterations of the game(Prime, Hordes[i know its a seperate game but the rules did change in it], Prime remix and then finally MK 2). And it can be argued that it lost a lot of its "character" when it went to Mark 2.

This. I think people forget that the game (Malifaux) itself is less than three years old. And a lot of kinks have been worked out in that time period. I don't know if it's just a generational thing, or if I've just developed patience (which, shocking), but I don't get a lot of these arguments for that reason. And my opinion, because I'm a fluff person, I'd rather have character if it had to be an either/or proposition. Not saying it does.

Anyway, thanks to everyone for posting, it's interesting to hear about some of these other games, though every time I think about getting into another one and I need to lock myself into the shed of shame and smother myself in all the unpainted plastic (and metal).

ETA: Omenbringer posted while I was typing, and I've got nothing to add really, just clarify that I didn't start this thread to have yet another debate. I was just curious about other game systems I haven't followed. And I think it has been fairly civil for the most part.

Edited July 13, 2012 by morella

[edonil]

As someone who played Warmachine for a while, I can attest that that game has tons of balance issues, and, frankly, they are far more prevalent than in Malifaux. I played Circle for a long time, and the gap between that entire faction and the top tier lists really was insurmountable. There's only so many times of playing against eGaspy Thrall list, or eDenny, or eScorsha Winter Guard Deathstar, or any of a half dozen more with running one of the most competitive lists that Circle has (the eKaya wolf build) and watching the game play out the same way every time in spite of research and tactic adjustments before a person just gets frustrated and either quits or buys one of those lists. That is a far cry from good game design. When you've got hundreds of different things to choose from across the whole of the game and the top winning lists are using the same couple of dozen options, something has gone wrong.

By the by, adding this so people don't misunderstand: This is not an attack on Privateer Press. I really did enjoy the game, and had a lot of fun with it. It's just that I see people saying that PP has made such a balanced game and that wasn't my experience.

Edited July 13, 2012 by edonil

[osoi]

@ Omenbringer, I too was remaining quiet on this but you have echoed my thoughts, expecially regarding playtesting.

[nilus]

If indeed these pro-gamers find the problems, why not utilize them for play testing because whomever they have now is terrible.

I have it on good authority that some of the top Malifaux players in several countries are part of the playtest group. Other top players were offered as well but turn down the chance. There is also a good balance of more casual players doing testing as well.

As a tester myself I find your comments about us being "terrible" ill informed and insulting. You can have your opinions on the game and that's fine but don't insult a large group of fellow gamers who spend a lot of time and energy doing there best to make the game better for everyone.

[Rathnard]

I'm gonna +1 Omenbringers above post. He hit the nail on the head.

One thing that anyone outside of playtesting tends to not realise (for ANY game) is that what you see in the final rules has often gone through many, many revisions since it's conception. And for every mistake or imbalance that's found after release, you can bet your arse there were dozens, if not hundreds of other issues that were spotted and fixed. The final product is orders of magnitude better than it's initial version, but short of having a very large playtest group working on it for at least a year, it's simply impossible to catch absolutely every flaw.

Back to the original post;

In my 15 years of wargaming life I've also played Warhammer FB, Warhammer 40k, most of the specialist games (note: I've not played Bloodbowl) and Warmachine/Hordes. In my opinion, none of them have been better balanced and more timely & effective in their errata's/FAQs than Malifaux is.

EDIT: I feel I should point out that I don't think the above competitor games are actually bad games. Irrespective of any imbalances I feel that Privateer Press has done an excellent job in designing Warmahordes for competitive play and despite GW's many, many flaws, they still produce some of the nicest looking minis. Also no other game system has the same opportunities and scope for converting and personalising armies as those produced by GW.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Rathnard

[morella]

Yeah, I have my issues with GW but I express it by spending my money elsewhere (here) for the last few years. But I'll never leave entirely. I may actually start some 40k again here soon, as I am having difficulty finding people to play Malifaux with, so I'm scheming to infiltrate and convert.

Eldar were my first love, And I'm not going to bash the company, but that is my basis for comparison in terms of speed of faq/errata and listening to the customers/fans (and I've noted before that Wyrd's speed in getting these out is impressive to me). Perhaps I learned to be patient because - Harlequins.

[Serigala]

most of the specialist games (note: I've not played Bloodbowl)

Shame on you!

[WarlockFiretop]

Is there an argument that tournament play with preconstructed lists encourages balance? Players have to bring 'all-comers' lists, because they can't know what they'll be up against. In theory, every list would have a balance of melee, ranged, offensive, defensive, buff, de-buff. In practice I have no idea: no experience of tournaments.

[edonil]

I've done it a lot in other game systems, and it doesn't there, but it might work differently in Malifaux trying that same approach.