The less biased Great Joker Debate

[Math Mathonwy]

So is hard to wound. If you hate it so much don't take models that have it...

Dude, what the hell?

[Boscotopia]

Your just as likely to flip the black as the red, in fact more so since the black overules the red, oh your opponent is just as like pull one of his/her deck as you are

Also how much damage can a low point model do on a severe 3,4 not much more than that, now if he/she were to flip a red joker the damage would be between 5-8, a high point would have 10Wd and possible some armour of some sort so no one shot kill

Death Marshal hits Bad JuJu with HTW2 and gets the Red Joker he will do at least 8 damage and up to 11 damage - AND it is a kill at 12 Dg if the attack flip had a Ram in it.

So, yeah, I agree with Orboros that it kinda sucks when it happens, but when doesn't it suck to get hit? Me flipping an ace and them flipping a 13 sucks, but that doesn't mean we eliminate aces and 13. I am with the camp that wants to buffer HTW.

I just wanted to clarify what Orboros was saying and show he is correct in that respect without you thinking he meant that a totem could destroy a 10 point model with a Red Joker........... I hope he did not think that.

[PierceSternum]

I've tabled a fair few Resser players in my day, and more than once via a RJ on a negative twist - But they all fail to realize that I've been cycling my RJ through the deck the whole game rather than hold it, and that if they weren't HTW they only would have been tabled sooner. I don't divulge this after the game as it would seem unsporting - but if all this whining continues I may have to start the Enlightenment

been "cycled" against many times... realized it every time... when you play rezzers, you take H2W.

But whatever...

[Guy in Suit]

been "cycled" against many times... realized it every time... when you play rezzers, you take H2W.

But whatever...

Edited original post -you are right, I was quite hasty! Novice players who think they are just sooo unlucky when RJ pops up tend to not see whats going on...

[Buhallin]

Armor doesn't have the drawback that Hard to Wound does because Hard to Wound is a much, MUCH more powerful ability. Removing an opponent's ability to cheat damage in most circumstances is absolutely huge. Everyone hates seeing the Red Joker flip on an extra H2W, fine... how often do you actually see that, compared to someone cheating for it on an even damage flip? Have you ever watched Rasputina trying to get her blasts off against a H2W-heavy crew?

Armor just doesn't do that. Even just on the damage numbers, Armor vs. H2W is mostly a wash. I don't think it's a stretch to say that a from H2W consistently reduces the damage by at least one step, right? That's going to match Armor +1 in all cases, and frequently Armor +2. There are a few cases where you can get more than that, but they're typically very specialized crews. It's hard to compare those without knowing exactly how they're factored into a model's cost.

Spirit is a solid defensive ability, but it's not in the same league as H2W either. Spirits universally have fewer wounds, so the end result is a tough but not invincible model, and that's before you get to the relatively large number of things that can bypass it.

[CRC]

Ok, so I had an idea for the RJ that I haven't seen before. It's like this:

1. The RJ is a 14.

2. The RJ follows normal card choice rules, (does not override )

3. The RJ is not canceled (or affected in anyway) by the BJ.

4. If the RJ is in a flip, regardless of whether it's chosen or not, you get something good, depending on the flip type.

For an attack flip, you flip an extra card as if you'd spent a soulstone.

For a healing flip, you heal an extra card worth.

For a damage flip, you damage an extra card worth.

etc.

So, say you're hitting a flesh construct with a 1/3/4 attack and are making a damage flip at :-fate. You get 5, RJ, 9. You have to take the '5' doing 1 damage, but you get to flip an extra card of damage.

If you got 5, RJ, BJ, you'd do zero damage, plus an extra card for the RJ.

This is a pretty radical proposal, but I thought I'd make it in case it helps.

[CrouchingMoose]

I voted yes, and here's my reasoning. The only change I would like to see to the RJ is it's toned down to act like everything else...As it stands it single handedly holds the most sway over the game (yes even more than BJ does and here is why).

First off, I do like the randomness it can add to the game. I believe that it also fits amazingly with the fluff. The idea that you could make an amazing shot and fate itself conspires against you to make the shot fail to hit its mark in any significant way screams Malifaux to me, as does narrowly hitting your target while those same fates alter reality to make that shot much more deadly that it should have been.

But, when you measure how much the RJ influences fate, compared to any other card, then the results are one sided. In essence, I believe its not masters or factions lacking balance, but it is the fate deck that should be re-balanced. Here are the statistics that make me think this.

1. Flips for Duels and Initiative

During these flips, all cards follow a predicted pattern.

Aces: 1 and printed suit

Twos: 2 and printed suit

Threes: 3 and printed suit

and so on through 13.

BJ: 0 and no suit

RJ: 14 and choice of suit

This example, I would call balanced. In it, BJ is one step (each step in this instance is a value of 1) below the lowest non joker card, and the RJ is only one step above the highest non joker card. As for suits, Jokers don't have them printed so we must define them to fit their position. I would argue that being able to pick a suit is worth more than +1 and a forced suit to a duel total thanks to triggers, while I would also be tempted to take a 13 with a suit over a 14 with no suit...so to keep the jokers as the 2 opposing ends of fate's tapestry, we must grant them their suits as shown.

2. Damage Flips

Since the amount of damage done is determined more by models and less by cards, we have to look at this one more metaphysically.

Ace through Five: Weak

Six through Ten: Moderate

Eleven through Thirteen: Severe

I consider these to each be one step or level of damage to be dealt. Now lets look at the Jokers

BJ: No damage... this would be the step below the lowest step on the above list.

RJ: Ranges from Severe + No Damage to Severe + Severe.

This means RJ ranges from equal to the highest step on the above list to 3 steps above the Severe step. In order to remain the BJ's opposite, RJ would always do Severe + Weak, just 1 step above Severe. This would also need to cut out the extra flip.

3. Healing Flips and Damage Mitigation

These flips are like the first section I mentioned, except that the final numbers are calculated differently and the RJ full value can become dependent on the model flipping it.

Ace through Five: 1 Wd

Six through Ten: 2 Wd

Eleven through Thirteen: 3Wd

Once again the numbers change by 1 between each step. On to the Jokers.

BJ: 0 Wd ... once again 1 step down from the lowest non joker flip

RJ: All Wd

This is where the full value of a RJ can vary...when it only does a little extra, it's not as noticeable, where as when it heals a model from 1 Wd left back to say 10 Wd remaining, it's much more game changing. If RJ were to follow suit and be BJ's equal, it would need to be set at a permanent 4 Wd like aNicodem's Mass Grave ability.

Thats just my view on it, yes I like the effect the RJ provides on the game, I just think that sometimes, its effect is top big when you compare it to anything else that could happen.

[notmikehill]

This discussion is getting old. I voted no because the joker is fine as is. You're all upset over a mechanic that each player has yet the odds of getting hit by the damage joker is a 1/54 chance on that single flip alone. Sorry if I sound out of line but I feel like these threads cause whining for the sake of whining.

[Malovane]

2. Damage Flips

Since the amount of damage done is determined more by models and less by cards, we have to look at this one more metaphysically.

Ace through Five: Weak

Six through Ten: Moderate

Eleven through Thirteen: Severe

I consider these to each be one step or level of damage to be dealt. Now lets look at the Jokers

BJ: No damage... this would be the step below the lowest step on the above list.

RJ: Ranges from Severe + No Damage to Severe + Severe.

This means RJ ranges from equal to the highest step on the above list to 3 steps above the Severe step. In order to remain the BJ's opposite, RJ would always do Severe + Weak, just 1 step above Severe. This would also need to cut out the extra flip.

I have to disagree here. The BJ is actually also a potential 3+ step shift in damage. Its not that you're getting 1 step less, its canceling out what you would have gotten instead.

Instead of a weak you get nothing - 1 step down

Instead of a moderate you get nothing - 2 steps down

Instead of a severe you get nothing - 3 steps down

Instead of a RJ you get nothing - 4 to 6 steps down

RJ is definitely 0-3 steps above severe, but BJ is 1 to 6 steps below. You have to consider the full potential damage lost when looking at the power of the BJ, if that makes any sense. Its more apparent when you look at the result during a positive/negative twist to damage.

Same thing applies to the healing/mitigation. Its not that the BJ is awarding zero, its that you're not getting the 1 or more wounds back. On average, its going to prevent around 2 wds from being healed. I think the RJ on the heal/mitigation should probably function the same as on damage - be an additional flip instead of a full heal, but that's still rather trivial in my mind.

[Ratty]

Also note, BJ affects Duels far more than RJ. Scoring 0 and not being able to cheat is far more damaging to a player (when compared to flipping a 1) than the advantage flipping a Red Joker gives you (over a 13).

[Omenbringer]

Small minion hits big minion -> small minion lands a bad/average hit -> makes a flip -> flips red Joker -> big minion dies

i voted yes

David and Goliath argument, one in 52 chance (1 card for the strike and an additional card for the damage flip) I am fine with it. The same thing can happen in other games as well, I have seen more far fetched things happen in Warhammer & Warhammer 40k.

[Sandwich]

This argument is a waste of time.

If you lose the game based on a clutch flip with a 1/54 chance, you weren't playing well to begin with.

The Joker mechanic is unique, simplistic, and avoidable.

It works perfectly, is not out of place, and shows up when or where ever it so pleases.

Hard to Wound is one of the strongest mechanics in the game and is really only balanced out by that random chance of flipping a seriously damaging card.

The one model who is detrimentally f*cked by the Red Joker, Seamus, has Hard to Kill and a powerful heal mechanic to save him if you ever fall victim to the Red Joker.

Most of this complaining hoohaw is just theoryfaux and has no practical value in a tournament setting, period.

Competetive gamers are going to be able to easily account and prepare for the Joker flip, and casual players are going to burst into laughter when the Sword Vic charges Seamus and deals 14 damage, and then blenders his entire Belle armada into fabulous ribbons.

Edited July 12, 2012 by Sandwich

[Gruesome]

our experiences differ.

[Math Mathonwy]

This argument is a waste of time.

If you lose the game based on a clutch flip with a 1/54 chance, you weren't playing well to begin with.

The Joker mechanic is unique, simplistic, and avoidable.

It's not avoidable. The fact that it happens rarely, doesn't make it avoidable. You're not making any sense here.

Also note that it is never 1/54 since your deck never has 54 cards in it.

It works perfectly, is not out of place, and shows up when or where ever it so pleases.

Ah, here you acknowledge that it is unavoidable. Cool.

Hard to Wound is one of the strongest mechanics in the game and is really only balanced out by that random chance of flipping a seriously damaging card.

So it's a balancing mechanic? You're utterly contradicting what you said earlier.

The one model who is detrimentally f*cked by the Red Joker, Seamus, has Hard to Kill and a powerful heal mechanic to save him if you ever fall victim to the Red Joker.

His powerful healing mechanic doesn't work in close combat with non-living, non-undead models.

Most of this complaining hoohaw is just theoryfaux and has no practical value in a tournament setting, period.

How many tournaments have you won?

Competetive gamers are going to be able to easily account and prepare for the Joker flip, and casual players are going to burst into laughter when the Sword Vic charges Seamus and deals 14 damage, and then blenders his entire Belle armada into fabulous ribbons.

Ah, OK, so it's again avoidable. Wonderful.

You're not making any sense!

How are you supposed to avoid it? By never getting hit? Good luck with that. And other than that, the basic nature of RJ is that it is indeed unavoidable. The fact that it only messes up every third or tenth or hundreth or whateverth game is beside the point.

So yeah, as you so nicely declared at the start, your argument indeed was a waste of time.

---------- Post added at 09:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 AM ----------

Many people seem to think that the RJ thing is a legitimate drawback for the H2W. Another common thought is that RJ is fine since it happens so rarely. People only remember those momentous occasions when it killed something supremely important, but in reality it happens rarely, so it's OK.

Both of those thoughts are utterly backwards.

RJ being as rare as it is doesn't balance H2W meaningfully in a single game. Having a "balance" mechanism that kicks in only every third game is outright horrible. It means that the ability is overpowered in two games out of three and underpowered in one game of of three. You can't balance stuff over several games since people play against different opponents and all in all consider a single game as a complete experience (there's no campaign system in Malifaux, nor anything else that would suggest that you're supposed to be playing three games in a row or something).

If RJ happened every game I probably would have less problem with it because then it would actually be something that can be anticipated and should be prepared for. But now it's rare enough to turn a game upside down every once in a while, which isn't something that you can reasonably prepare for.

[Sandwich]

It's not avoidable. The fact that it happens rarely, doesn't make it avoidable. You're not making any sense here.

Also note that it is never 1/54 since your deck never has 54 cards in it.

It absolutely is avoidable if you don't arrogantly throw important models into the line of fire.

And excuse me, it's a 1/48, dearest apologies.

Or perhaps 1/47, if you have an Arcane resevoir.

(And I think Lilith can get a hand of 8.)

Ah, here you acknowledge that it is unavoidable. Cool.

Semantics make you correct, congratulations!

The precise wording of my statement immediately invalidates my entire point, though vastly supported by a majority of gamers and with subsequent spine betwixt its shoulders, it does fall brutally flat upon its chiseled face for I stated that the card actually does exist within a game, woe be I.

So it's a balancing mechanic? You're utterly contradicting what you said earlier.

By "Is Really Only" I mean that "The only possible way to Counter Hard to Wound 2 is by, in a 1/47 chance, flipping the Red Joker.

I see no interpretation of that statement as somehow even remotely implying that the overall power level of Hard to Wound is hard countered by the existence of the Red Joker.

But alas.

His powerful healing mechanic doesn't work in close combat with non-living, non-undead models.

Except that he's (+1)Fast and can blast models in Melee with a Ca 7 (1)Live For Pain 3 times in a row to heal for a minimum of 6 Wd in a single activation, or, more spiffy, get Lured away but a cutesy-pie Belle.

How many tournaments have you won?

A total of 5 confirmed.

Ah, OK, so it's again avoidable. Wonderful.

You're not making any sense!

How are you supposed to avoid it? By never getting hit? Good luck with that. And other than that, the basic nature of RJ is that it is indeed unavoidable. The fact that it only messes up every third or tenth or hundreth or whateverth game is beside the point.

So yeah, as you so nicely declared at the start, your argument indeed was a waste of time.

It's flattering that each time you attempt to debunk my statements all you ever do is resort to semantics and nitpicking.

I believe this is, over the course of my existence on these forums, your fifth time using the same hairsplitting as always to attempt to drive home a point that is unfortunately very, very dull.

But to specifically reply to your final statement.

If I, for only a moment in my brief capacity for intelligence, am able to remember that you fielded a model with the express purpose to maim any of my beloved ladies, or more importantly, Seamus, I will be more than able to ensure, due strictly to foresight, your ability to maim any high priority targets.

Almost all (I'm sure there's one or two non-ressers with Hard to Wound) crews that are afflicted by the disease that is spouted out to the forums, have powerful deniability, via disables (Lure, Paralyze), Regeneration (Self Healing, Decay) or replenishment (Summoning).

This means that ALL models affected by Hard To Wound are replaceable, (Except against crews with (0)Last Rites, but again, abilities like that are a focal point of my complaints.) or have enough tools available to them to negate the ultra-power of the Red Joker.

If you are unable to pick up and move on from a single flip of the Red Joker, you shouldn't be complaining about that mechanic, you should be working on your tactical thought-process because you are currently severely limited in your ability for foresight.

For models without Hard to Wound, and specifically in the sense of Competetive play, the Red Joker acts as a great balancer of sorts.

While I do believe that a player who is able to grasp hold of, and maintain a clear lead throughout most of the game will win regardless, I think that the random popping of a Joker (Red or Black) can sometimes steer the game in a direction besides a stalemate, which actually makes tournaments between equally skilled players a lot more dynamic than it would be if we simply withdrew the mechanic altogether from the game.

Although on the flip side of that, WH40k has the random factor of dice rolls and a LOT of people switched to Malifaux to get away from the randomness of it all, so I can see where their argument comes from.

---------- Post added at 12:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 AM ----------

Many people seem to think that the RJ thing is a legitimate drawback for the H2W. Another common thought is that RJ is fine since it happens so rarely. People only remember those momentous occasions when it killed something supremely important, but in reality it happens rarely, so it's OK.

The balance to Hard to Wound, for Ressers at least, is that all ressurrectionist models are specific niche, or high enough cost that they're allowed to be multi-purpose (Shikome).

You will NEVER take a Rotten Belle for anything other than a Lure-tank.

You will NEVER pick up a Punk Zombie for their ranged support.

But I'm sincerely doubtful that anyone has ever looked at Hard to Wound and said "Oh, minus flips? I guess the ONLY way to counter that is the Red Joker."

Both of those thoughts are utterly backwards.

You're right, that's why some 90% of the forum population believe the Red Joker is perfectly fine.

RJ being as rare as it is doesn't balance H2W meaningfully in a single game. Having a "balance" mechanism that kicks in only every third game is outright horrible. It means that the ability is overpowered in two games out of three and underpowered in one game of of three. You can't balance stuff over several games since people play against different opponents and all in all consider a single game as a complete experience (there's no campaign system in Malifaux, nor anything else that would suggest that you're supposed to be playing three games in a row or something).

Hence the reason Wyrd doesn't balance models around the Jokers.

They're isolated events, and are treated as such.

If RJ happened every game I probably would have less problem with it because then it would actually be something that can be anticipated and should be prepared for. But now it's rare enough to turn a game upside down every once in a while, which isn't something that you can reasonably prepare for.

Your statement contradicts itself.

You're saying that because its so rare, you don't account for it.

But because you don't account for it, you lose games.

Every decision I make in a game is made with the possibility of a joker in mind, and I have 0 issues with it.

And ask anyone, I play a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot of Resurrectionists.

This is not the mechanics fault, it's your own.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Sandwich

[Math Mathonwy]

It absolutely is avoidable if you don't arrogantly throw important models into the line of fire.

So you play in a way where none of your important models are ever hit? Ok.

And excuse me, it's a 1/48, dearest apologies.

Or perhaps 1/47, if you have an Arcane resevoir.

(And I think Lilith can get a hand of 8.)

Plus the ini flip, plus the flip to actually hit. At a minimum.

Semantics make you correct, congratulations!

The precise wording of my statement immediately invalidates my entire point, though vastly supported by a majority of gamers and with subsequent spine betwixt its shoulders, it does fall brutally flat upon its chiseled face for I stated that the card actually does exist within a game, woe be I.

It isn't about semantics, though. Your first statement was that it is easily avoidable and second you say that it shows up where it pleases. That doesn't make any sense. If you want to flower-coat your statements, fine, but do understand that when you do so in a non-sensical way in a vain attempt to persuade the unwashed masses of proletarians through some attempt at serpent-like hypnosis, the more erudite and sagacious of your verbal sparring partners are going to call you on it.

Except that he's (+1)Fast and can blast models in Melee with a Ca 7 (1)Live For Pain 3 times in a row to heal for a minimum of 6 Wd in a single activation, or, more spiffy, get Lured away but a cutesy-pie Belle.

OK, you're the Seamus expert so I must be horribly mistaken, but I really honestly thought that Live for Pain's little gun symbol meant that it can't be used in close combat.

It's flattering that each time you attempt to debunk my statements all you ever do is resort to semantics and nitpicking.

I believe this is, over the course of my existence on these forums, your fifth time using the same hairsplitting as always to attempt to drive home a point that is unfortunately very, very dull.

Yeah yeah, yawn.

But to specifically reply to your final statement.

If I, for only a moment in my brief capacity for intelligence, am able to remember that you fielded a model with the express purpose to maim any of my beloved ladies, or more importantly, Seamus, I will be more than able to ensure, due strictly to foresight, your ability to maim any high priority targets.

Almost all (I'm sure there's one or two non-ressers with Hard to Wound) crews that are afflicted by the disease that is spouted out to the forums, have powerful deniability, via disables (Lure, Paralyze), Regeneration (Self Healing, Decay) or replenishment (Summoning).

This means that ALL models affected by Hard To Wound are replaceable, (Except against crews with (0)Last Rites, but again, abilities like that are a focal point of my complaints.) or have enough tools available to them to negate the ultra-power of the Red Joker.

If you are unable to pick up and move on from a single flip of the Red Joker, you shouldn't be complaining about that mechanic, you should be working on your tactical thought-process because you are currently severely limited in your ability for foresight.

For models without Hard to Wound, and specifically in the sense of Competetive play, the Red Joker acts as a great balancer of sorts.

While I do believe that a player who is able to grasp hold of, and maintain a clear lead throughout most of the game will win regardless, I think that the random popping of a Joker (Red or Black) can sometimes steer the game in a direction besides a stalemate, which actually makes tournaments between equally skilled players a lot more dynamic than it would be if we simply withdrew the mechanic altogether from the game.

You say that you're addressing my final statement, yet you spout something incomprehensible that doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything.

Although on the flip side of that, WH40k has the random factor of dice rolls and a LOT of people switched to Malifaux to get away from the randomness of it all, so I can see where their argument comes from.

40k is less random than Malifaux. It isn't a better system, but it is less random.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Math Mathonwy

[Keltheos]

/eyes the debate for flareups...

[Math Mathonwy]

The balance to Hard to Wound, for Ressers at least, is that all ressurrectionist models are specific niche, or high enough cost that they're allowed to be multi-purpose (Shikome).

You will NEVER take a Rotten Belle for anything other than a Lure-tank.

You will NEVER pick up a Punk Zombie for their ranged support.

But I'm sincerely doubtful that anyone has ever looked at Hard to Wound and said "Oh, minus flips? I guess the ONLY way to counter that is the Red Joker."

Yet those are some of the things that are being put forth by the proponents of status quo.

You're right, that's why some 90% of the forum population believe the Red Joker is perfectly fine.

That's neither here nor there.

Your statement contradicts itself.

You're saying that because its so rare, you don't account for it.

But because you don't account for it, you lose games.

I'm not saying that. Stop lying. I don't lose games, I win them, and I hate winning with the Red Joker.

And, even if I had said something like that, it wouldn't be a contradiction.

Every decision I make in a game is made with the possibility of a joker in mind, and I have 0 issues with it.

And ask anyone, I play a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot of Resurrectionists.

This is not the mechanics fault, it's your own.

You utterly failed to respond to any of the points I raised.

Also:

For models without Hard to Wound, and specifically in the sense of Competetive play, the Red Joker acts as a great balancer of sorts.

Hence the reason Wyrd doesn't balance models around the Jokers.

They're isolated events, and are treated as such.

man what

Edited July 13, 2012 by Math Mathonwy

[Ratty]

Ok peeps, take a step back and have a glass of water and maybe some cheese, cheese makes everything better.

I know this is a hot topic but I think different people want different things. Some people want a game with some swings, they like to live on a knife edge and never want to be 100% sure of success. Others want things to be certain and don't like randomness, these people will never like what the Red Joker means. I don't think these two groups will ever agree. They are looking at the game from totally different view points.

Saying that it is possible to plan for the Red Joker. Both decks exist as stacks and the chances of drawing a card from these stacks can be manipulated in game. If you haven't seen the Red Joker you can run down your opponents deck while minimising the number of Damage flips you take in return, this increases the probability the opponent will flip the Red Joker where it won't hurt you. There is also the skill of risk assessment, when is putting your model in danger worth it, when is it not , whether you have seen the Red Joker affects these decisions, just like whether you have seen the Black Joker should also effect your decisions. If you have a 13 in your hand is it worth focusing? It's doubling your chance of a Black Joker if you haven't seen it. The answer differs depending on the situation If it's that crucial flip that you need to get off, NO it probably isn't. If it's not a crucial flip maybe it might well be worth focusing as the chance of a Black Joker is low and keeping the 13 if possible is a good idea. On top of that there is ability to react when something like the Jokers come up. I've seen a lot of people who supposedly have 'bad luck', they have a single bad flip, give up and then make bad decisions. I personally don't believe in bad luck, there are people that maximize the impact of good flips and minimize the impact of bad flips, these people look lucky as you won't notice the bad flips, bad flips never seem to phase them. But you will notice the goods flips as they will be in the position to use them to turn the tide.

Anyhow this post which was meant to be me saying calm down a bit and try not to offend other people or I will have to close this thread/give warnings seems to have got a bit longer.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Ratty

[Math Mathonwy]

I know this is a hot topic but I think different people want different things. Some people want a game with some swings, they like to live on a knife edge and never want to be 100% sure of success. Others want things to be certain and don't like randomness, these people will never like what the Red Joker means. I think these two groups will ever agree. They are looking at the game from totally different view points.

But that's a false dichotomy. I have never seen anyone espouse a view like that on these forums. All the people who want change just want to lessen the effect of the Red Joker, not eliminate it. Please don't frame the issue like that since it really, really clouds it.

I will go for some cheese now.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Math Mathonwy

[Rathnard]

So I read the first post and skimmed the last page...

It seems that the issue at hand is the likelyhood of getting a Red Joker on the damage flip vs Hard to Wound, and whether that's really a game-ruining issue for the main model that would care about such things - Seamus.

Against other models, I'd argue that the effort your opponent puts into making enough attacks to flip the Red Joker, is arguably worth the possible loss of your Hard to Wound minion. Just so long as you didn't stick that model alone and isolated in the middle of your opponents crew...right?

I suppose it could cause a serious issue for Malifaux's Favorite Ladies Man, if the opponent is able to put a significant number of hits on Seamus himself. Personally I feel that if that's happening, then the Seamus player has done something wrong and at the very least, should have pulled Seamykins out of danger with a Lure before it got that bad.

Of course I'm sure someone's going to accuse me of making rash assumptions about the Crazy Hat Man without having played him. But I like theorising and in any case, all this dissing of the Classiest Gentleman in Malifaux is he and some lovely belles are now sitting on top of my assembly pile. ;

More on topic, the proportion of people wanting a change is currently hovering at around 1/6 so it doesn't seem to be that contentious an issue.

So it's time to move onto another topic, like what models to start with for my awesome and game-winning Malifaux Seamus crew.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Rathnard

[Ratty]

So it's time to move onto another topic, like what models to start with for my awesome and game-winning Malifaux Seamus crew.

:Rat_HeartRed: Well start the thread already I like chatting about Seamus

[Cunning]

I suppose it could cause a serious issue for Malifaux's Favorite Ladies Man

But Levi doesn't have hard to wound.

[osoi]

So it's time to move onto another topic, like what models to start with for my awesome and game-winning Malifaux Seamus crew.

:Rat_HeartRed: Well start the thread already I like chatting about Seamus

Me too

[Gruesome]

Completely anecdotal facts.

Adepticon: (Forgot about this until now)

Cake Match... Playing against Spoon

Turn 2, Dead Rider Red Jokered off the board in one ranged hit. (He had the purpose with H2W2)

Not sure how many rezzers are here, but Dead Rider is kind of important to a rezzer list when you spend the points on him.

THIS WEEK:

My first and only two games at my new gaming store.

Two games with red joker flips on negative flips against my Seamus crew.

The first bringing aSeamus from 9 wounds to 1 (Hard to Kill saved his life, until his attacker hit him a second time with his next AP)

The second was last night as a gremlin blew an uninjured belle off the table in one shot. (not game ending, but certainly not helpful)

Someone somewhere above made the silly comment that if you are putting yourself in a position where a red joker flip could affect the game so much, then you were playing bad and I just laugh at that. aSeamus could not have been in a better place surrounded by models that were all about to learn how "wicked" he is.

Some crews quite simply have linchpin workhorses. I simply do not agree that one flip ought to have such a *LARGE* variation in expected outcome as to cripple how an entire crew works by removing its key model.

People can argue stats and "what they like" or what "should be" all day long. These have simply been my experiences and they are what forms my views.

I get that other peoples experiences are different. It would be super if they could recognize the same and stop acting like there is an objective truth in any of this or that anyone that thinks red jokers have too much of a swing are simply BAD players...