The less biased Great Joker Debate

[Jonas Albrecht]

And what data do you base that on? Besides, we're speaking about a claim irrelevant to the entire argument. I shouldn't have made it in the first place and so I said. I apologize if it causes you a distress, but I wasn't even speaking about the results of the matches, odds or any hard data - merely of perception of the perception of the controversial issues among the players.

Can we try to be strict and to the matter on less ephemeral topics?

Of course, but that requires not making claims that cannot be backed up.

You have the very proof in front of your eyes - this very thread and many before that. You just refuse to see past the dust and realize this is not rules discussion and not an exchange of opinions about what the Malifaux can become in the future, but ideological tug war about one very narrow problem - randomness. This tug war has been repeated on every single miniature gaming forum I know and typically to the same end.

So if someone wants to understand why the mechanics are as they are, they should talk to the person making the decisions. Even if the designers posted their explanation here, it will result in just another such thread. This is the nature of the beast - it works for discussions on concrete issues, it doesn't work when we cross the line to ideology.

No, what I have proof of is that if people don't like a topic, they will go out of their way to make that known to those who do want to discuss things. Check out the post I made, #118.

[Q'iq'el]

And let me add my view of the discussion doesn't change whether we discuss RJ in general or its interaction with HTW.

At least one my crew is rich in HTW models and every now and then I lose something HTW due to random events. I consider it a mishap, I try to save the game and if its over, I play again. I haven't been to a tournament for a very long time, but when I still had time for those it was WHFB and things were more random than this. Sometimes things go against you and that's it.

The problem with the argument for change to HTW is not that the ability causes a high chance of disappointment. The chance is very low and the ability is highly beneficial despite the RJ issue. For some players the rare chance of losing the game because of that is unacceptable even as a possibility, never mind personal experience.

This is why this remains ideological discussion whether we focus on HTW or remain talking about the place of random swings in Malifaux in general.

[Jonas Albrecht]

There's nothing ideological about the math behind Hard to Wound.

[dgraz]

How much of a problem? How did you quantify the amount of problem I or other people have with Red Joker?

The number of times I've seen the same old arguments + the number of pages taken up by them x the number of threads derailed by it = how much of a problem.

But claiming that the poll proves nothing only convinces me that it is pointless to discuss this with you further.

@Jonas - I find it interesting that you accuse others of belligerence but show so much of it yourself.

[Jonas Albrecht]

@Jonas - I find it interesting that you accuse others of belligerence but show so much of it yourself.

For that I apologize, I'm trying to keep things restrained. Might I get your answer to my post at #118?

[Q'iq'el]

Of course, but that requires not making claims that cannot be backed up.

I'd admit you're in the right if not for the fact you are having issue with manner of speaking rather than factual error relevant to the discussion. You don't have data to the contrary yourself and you are not interested in disproving it, which would be a waste of time anyway, since it wasn't about the current poll, but about my impression of the past polls.

I'm not sure what sets you off in my custom of voicing my impressions, but I'd point out It's a bit too personal that you continue picking up on this in such a way. How about letting go after the mistake has been explained and being more tolerant about people who actually do not follow your own thinking patterns? I understand forums leave too much to imagination, but I can assure you I do try to be exact where necessary.

No, what I have proof of is that if people don't like a topic, they will go out of their way to make that known to those who do want to discuss things. Check out the post I made, #118.

You can judge the value of the thread not only on the level of civility of the exchanged arguments, but also on how flexible and reasonable people are about the issues they argue - when thread works, at least some people change their points of view or see the reasoning behind the other side's point of view.

The moment it becomes a fest of "+1" posts, people start questioning credentials of the other posters and nitpicking on topics entirely OT to the thread, you can objectively say the thread is a failure and not a discussion.

[Jonas Albrecht]

The moment it becomes a fest of "+1" posts' date=' people start questioning credentials of the other posters and nitpicking on topics entirely OT to the thread, you can objectively say the thread is a failure and not a discussion.[/quote']

What you're saying is that the actions of the people who did not want to have this debate proves that it's a failure. I'm sorry but that just comes across as circular logic.

Since the question is being resisted, I'm tempted to draw my own conclusions, but I'll ask again: I want to have a discussion about Hard to Wound. If I make my own thread, should I expect similar treatment of the topic from you and the others here?

Edited July 14, 2012 by Jonas Albrecht

[Q'iq'el]

There's nothing ideological about the math behind Hard to Wound.

I think you are not reading the posts you are arguing with. I said at the very start of this side-conversation of ours that neither side has much of a problem with at the very least a general understanding of the rules or the math involved here. This is why I don't think this is a discussion about rules.

What people differ at is a view point - some claim both loosing and winning by such a freak and random occurrence is a fun-killer for them and can't be fixed other than by removing a possibility of such occurrence. When you confront it with a point of view, such as mine, that a freak occurrence presents atypical challenges and a gaming experience which most likely will never be repeated again (as the odds are small), not to mention the fun of damage control, the quick shift in priorities (a certain win may turn into a fight for a draw, for example) etc., you realize there is no common ground here and the issue is ideological indeed.

Would you agree to a situation where chance of RJ killing a HTW model in one swing was reduced by half? It would still occur, right, so it isn't acceptable. But then if it is removed altogether, what are my chance of ever getting the random swing I consider so enjoyable?

This is in very general terms solvable by development path change. Does Wyrd heads towards more GW-like design philosophy (fun Casual games which can be played in tournaments even if this really isn't the designers' goal) or are they betting on tournament audience to propagate and keep the game going in the future? This is the sort of decision that trickles down and settles these issues. The players are in different places and simply don't have any need to agree with the other side.

---------- Post added at 05:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 PM ----------

What you're saying is that the actions of the people who did not want to have this debate proves that it's a failure. I'm sorry but that just comes across as circular logic.

Since the question is being resisted, I'm tempted to draw my own conclusions, but I'll ask again: I want to have a discussion about Hard to Wound. If I make my own thread, should I expect similar treatment of the topic from you and the others here?

Actually I think the people who are in favor of continuing the discussion and the people trying to get their arguments across in here do just as much of these here. Mind you I'm not saying these things shouldn't be talked about. I'm just suggesting a better forum, where such a discussion will lead anywhere, for the reasons explained in my post above. Feel free to continue though. Off to work for me, so I'm signing out.

[dgraz]

For that I apologize, I'm trying to keep things restrained. Might I get your answer to my post at #118?

For H2W and my feelings on it; my OP

This is about the Red Joker, if you believe that H2W needs a change then make your own poll.

And a little deeper in..........

So far, it appears that the biggest deal is not the RJ itself, but how the RJ interacts with HTW. So if some other topics come up about HTW it would make more sense to me. I don't play Rezzers and I've never gotten frustrated to have a 4ss Death Marshal get killed from an RJ strike....so I don't plan on being very involved in that discussion.

I have seen some belligerence in the thread.......but I personally have done my level best (for at least the first ten pages or so) to remain respectful of other's views and even complimented their intelligence and ideas.

Edit: and I have to get up in a few hours to go to work so off to bed for me.

[Jonas Albrecht]

Then let's continue this discussion at another time.

Maybe. It's super exhausting.

[Gruesome]

holy meta-explosion...

somehow the discussion is now about what one ought to be able to discuss?

I burned my fingers on the stove of "threads should be about what the OP posted" a while back... Not going there again.

Its pretty clear to me that its mostly people that are regularly exploded by RJ that feel one way and that its mostly people that are not exploded regularly on the other side.

I am sure there are exceptions crossing the lines...

Its been said, OFTEN, by people like Guy in Suit that he purposely cycles RJ as often as possible to get it to flip as often as possible when facing H2W.

That is a really good idea.

I was honestly surprised(yeah, I said it!) to hear about people that still sit on the RJ in their hand against heavy H2W lists waiting for some rare opportunity to cheat it in, but YMMV, I guess.

So, what we are left with is a defensive mechanic that can be taken advantage of by specifically trying to BARELY hit (Often saving better cards for important specific moments) so as to purposely INCREASE the negative flips.

Most of the time the results will be weak damage. Knowing that, before the game even starts allows a person to plan for it.

I am sure that the same good players that are trying to cycle RJ as often as possible also recognize the value of models whose weak damage is 2, or even better, 3...

And that might have triggers like critical strike, etc...

So, we are left with players that recognize that barely hitting is good enough as you save your best cards for key spells and attacks you want to guarantee and you go through your deck as fast as possible and every so often, one of your opponents models simply explodes rather than gets pecked to death.

You could try the same against anyone, but you know that models with H2W1 or H2W2 go through your deck much faster.

People can call that theoryfaux if they want... I call it, "What happens to me when I face a good player".

It was suggested somewhere prior in the thread that if H2W is that much trouble that I ought not to take models with it, which is an interesting point. I still think that H2W is a very nice ability. Its particularly good when I face someone that camps the Red Joker.

Besides that I would STILL rather play the models I *LIKE* even if they occasionally explode than not take them because of the Red Joker. (Not to mention that would mean excluding more than half the models I own)

That does not mean that I would not like to see something done to mitigate the downsides of RJ with H2W when I see it MOST GAMES.

It does not always take out my master/linchpin model, but any model that just explodes out of nowhere is a problem.

I think that people like me have tried pretty hard to clearly spell out our issues and, for the most part, the arguments seem to be that we are simply WRONG.

What I would be interested in knowing is if rather than telling me that my experiences are wrong, that someone explain to me how THEY would be harmed if H2W affected RJ differently?

Do people feel that H2W would be too powerful?

As an aside, I'd be interested in knowing what the average damage spans are from weak-moderate-severe...

Take a stat line like 2/3/4...

A model with Armor +2 effectively has H2W+WeakFlipIncluded with no downsides when its a severe flip and even BETTER than H2W when its moderate or weak without increasing the odds of flipping the red joker.

Edited July 14, 2012 by Gruesome

[Math Mathonwy]

Ahh' date=' this part of my post. Well, from my experience they do. No data, because the search feature is pain. Even if I'm wrong on the general statement, which to speak frankly wasn't necessary at all, on this subject we have a rather solid result with a decent vote count too.[/quote']

The previous contentious issues have had about ten active posters with about six on the side of no change and about four on the side of change. Just like here. No polls that I remember.

[Buhallin]

Do people feel that H2W would be too powerful?

As an aside, I'd be interested in knowing what the average damage spans are from weak-moderate-severe...

Take a stat line like 2/3/4...

A model with Armor +2 effectively has H2W+WeakFlipIncluded with no downsides when its a severe flip and even BETTER than H2W when its moderate or weak without increasing the odds of flipping the red joker.

I'm not sure people think it would be too powerful. I think for the most part people just accept that it's part of Hard to Wound, and that it's a pretty rare event. As I tried to point out earlier, unless you're cataloging which card comes up with the Red Joker, you don't actually know if Hard to Wound makes a difference or not. "He flipped the Red Joker against Seamus" doesn't actually tell us anything.

As for the comparison to Armor, it's going to vary a lot. With a 2/3/4, sure, Armor's probably better. But there are plenty of cases where there damage spread is more than 2, and you'll often find that on heavy hitters. Secondary effects are also a lot easier to get against Armor. Rasputina would much rather see Armor than Hard to Wound, and I can't tell you how many times I've resorted to shooting my own Golem in the back when facing Rezzers. And, finally, I think Armor +2 is the exception. Ice Golem, Peacekeeper, etc - you see it on very hard targets. Armor +1 is more standard on models that you'll see Hard to Wound 1 on, and H2W1 can typically beat that level of damage reduction.

[Math Mathonwy]

The number of times I've seen the same old arguments + the number of pages taken up by them x the number of threads derailed by it = how much of a problem.

I have never seen the argument put forth, that RJ as a balance for H2W is bad since RJ doesn't happen every game, so the balance doesn't work on a single game basis. Several people have made the claim that that balance is important but none have even tried to refute the counter.

But claiming that the poll proves nothing only convinces me that it is pointless to discuss this with you further.

The problem, as I see it, is that you're not discussing the issue. You're doing a meta-discussion and trying to silence people, not engage them.

This isn't meant as an attack on your person, but rather a note on the way you have conducted yourself here, and I'm afraid I can't formulate this more nicely (which grates me since I have nothing personal against you), but the thing is that Sandwich, though I disagreed with him rather strongly, added a lot more to the discussion, IMO, than your tack of going "Shut up!!! The poll tells you to shut up!!" so I'm not seeing you stopping "the discussion" with me as much of a loss, I'm sorry to say

[dgraz]

Maybe. It's super exhausting.

Agreed.

The problem, as I see it, is that you're not discussing the issue. You're doing a meta-discussion and trying to silence people, not engage them.

This isn't meant as an attack on your person, but rather a note on the way you have conducted yourself here, and I'm afraid I can't formulate this more nicely (which grates me since I have nothing personal against you), but the thing is that Sandwich, though I disagreed with him rather strongly, added a lot more to the discussion, IMO, than your tack of going "Shut up!!! The poll tells you to shut up!!" so I'm not seeing you stopping "the discussion" with me as much of a loss, I'm sorry to say

I've posted numerous times that I created the poll with the intent to try and stop people from bringing up the RJ debate and derailing other great threads. There was a Seamus tactica and Calmdown's 'constructive' thread that were completely destroyed by it and several other threads have seen it for at least a few pages.

I'm not in a meta-discussion or any other discussion about the RJ. I choose not to debate something's merits if I don't have hard facts to back me up, which I don't as far as how the RJ works or how often it screws you over. I have, through this thread, shown hard facts that a strong majority of the people who visit this forum have no need to see the RJ change.

It's a non-issue to me on how it works. I'm fine with it as is and I'd probably be fine if there were some minor change to it. So I'm not strongly in either camp. I'm in the camp of 'please stop derailing threads'.

I know full well that I won't change your (or anyone else's) opinion whether the RJ needs change or not, nor do I wish to, so I see no need to 'engage' anyone in that discussion. I understand and respect your position on it and I have never once told anyone to "shut up". I have politely requested to let it go since it won't be changed no matter how much the minority wants it to.

And just for clarity, when I say let it go, I don't mean "shut up" at all....I would rather see you guys put your considerable mental energy into changing something that may actually see some change (like strats and schemes or SS costs)....but if you'd rather spend your time discussing the RJ that's your business. What I do mean is stop bringing it up in so many threads and derailing them off topic........create an RJ thread or a H2W thread and keep the discussion there....stop forcing it on people that don't need it (like Obamacare).

Some people have mentioned belligerence or rudeness or whatever.....and I agree that there has been some of that in this thread. But honestly I don't know how much more clear and/or polite I can be. If you can't see my position by now or if you are offended by me then I'm at a total loss.

[Malovane]

Long post was long. Edited to hide personal perception of RJ/H2W behind spoiler tag and emphasive the more constructive part of my post.

Open Spoiler

Having an ability be balanced across games but not within a single game is bad design

I have to disagree that this is bad design. Its just a part of the randomness of Malifaux. Its a feature/mechanic that I happen to enjoy. I'd go so far as to make the exact opposite claim - that its good design. I may not hit the RJ/BJ every game. That doesn't make them unbalanced. That makes them random. Its really no different than dice based games. I may not roll snake eyes every game of warmahordes, but it will sometimes happen, and it will sometimes wreck my plans. The RJ's presence doesn't make H2W unbalanced within a single game. Does the fact that I flip triple severe on a double negative damage flip make H2W unbalanced? No, it just means I got lucky.

When the RJ shows up, H2W is too weak, when it doesn't, it's too powerful.

I don't think the RJ showing up makes H2W too weak. I think it mirrors the BJ showing up on H2W. I certainly don't think its too powerful in every other case. Its strong, but players can adapt tactically by trying to cycle the RJ. I think Malifaux does a great job of providing that kind of tactical option to manipulate your odds.

In general, the RJ doesn't exist to be some balance to H2W. The RJ is simply an element of random chance - the critical hit of Malifaux. H2W doesn't exist to save you from critical hits. H2W does exactly what it says - it makes the model harder to wound - both by reducing the opportunities for your opponent to cheat damage and reducing the typical amount of damage suffered from a flip.

but any model that just explodes out of nowhere is a problem.

I think this is where I have a differing perception. I don't see the "model explodes out of nowhere" as a problem. I just see it as random chance. I enjoy that factor. Yet, I can understand why others don't. Every model has a chance of exploding out of nowhere thanks to the RJ. With H2W, that RJ will just tend come off the top of the deck rather than out of your opponent's hand.

someone explain to me how THEY would be harmed if H2W affected RJ differently?

It really boils down to the specific change. Depending on the severity of the change, I would argue the possibility exists to make H2W too powerful and too dependable. The devil lies in the details. Now that being said, I do agree that there is room for a change to H2W in relation to the RJ.

In general, H2W reduces the max potential damage of a hit. However, in the event of a RJ, it does not do this. I believe this could be corrected. I brought this up back in post #103 by way of Dustcrusher's blog, but it seems to have been lost in the shuffle or ignored, so here it is again.

Hard to Wound reduces the severity of the additional flip when a Red Joker shows up for damage by one i.e. HtW 1 makes any Severe a Moderate, and HtW2 reduces Severe/Moderate to Weak

This leaves the general strength of the RJ alone and bumps the strength of HtW. It would reduce the max potential damage by a number of steps equal to the level of Hard to Wound. It won't mean absolute survival after taking a RJ hit, but it tweaks the odds just a touch. Would this change be enough to ameliorate the situation or does a prospective change to H2W need to go farther? If farther, what do you propose?

Those on the other side of the debate - are you opposed to such a change? do you feel such a change would be going too far?

Edited July 14, 2012 by Malovane

[Gruesome]

I'm not sure people think it would be too powerful.

It's weird to me then that so many are so vehemently opposed if that were the case.

As for the comparison to Armor, it's going to vary a lot. With a 2/3/4, sure, Armor's probably better. But there are plenty of cases where there damage spread is more than 2, and you'll often find that on heavy hitters. Secondary effects are also a lot easier to get against Armor. Rasputina would much rather see Armor than Hard to Wound

That's a really good point. Attacks with blasts on the moderate and/or severe are considerably less powerful against H2W than armor. (assuming H2W helps bring out a weak flip)

---------- Post added at 01:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:30 PM ----------

In general, H2W reduces the max potential damage of a hit. However, in the event of a RJ, it does not do this.

that should read "does not do this while also increasing the odds of seeing RJ.

I believe this could be corrected. I brought this up back in post #103 by way of Dustcrusher's blog, but it seems to have been lost in the shuffle or ignored, so here it is again.

I noted it, and in fact was a participant in the comments of that entry. I really liked his idea and said so there.

This leaves the general strength of the RJ alone and bumps the strength of HtW.

And that is why I am a fan of looking at H2W now rather than RJ.

I am an example of someone that "changed his mind" on RJ through these discussions regardless of whether anyone says that no one listens and no one changes their minds.

What I perceived as a problem because of its REGULARITY and DEGREE had more to do with the fact that as a 100% rezzer that seldom plays Kirai, that I was seeing this far more than the average player/poster here because of the large amount of H2W on models that I enjoy playing for a large number of reasons.

I can't help but believe that if people encountered this as often as I do, that they would feel the same.

I can't prove it. But I *DO* believe it.

[Buhallin]

It's weird to me then that so many are so vehemently opposed if that were the case.

I really don't think people are vehemently opposed to changing H2W or the Red Joker, for the most part. But there are side issues with it that are rather strongly disagreed with.

The Seamus tactica that dgraz mentions is a good example. To hear some tell it, Seamus isn't worth playing, and honestly the entire Rezzer faction isn't worth playing, in large part due to H2W. I disagree with that pretty strongly, and for all the "Just stay out of the conversation if you don't like it" I'm not going to sit around and let people create what I feel is a misinformed view of the game.

That is where I think the defenders' vehemence comes from. It's less an issue of thinking H2W would be broken if it were changed than it is disagreeing with the implications of what it means if H2W needs to be changed. And the "Oh god, can we PLEASE talk about something else?" fatigue certainly plays a part too. Nobody is saying you CAN'T talk about it yet again, but plenty of us WISH you wouldn't.

I can't help but believe that if people encountered this as often as I do, that they would feel the same.

And this is where a lot of the rest of the disagreement comes from. I play Rezzers, and rarely Kirai - my standards are either Seamus or McMourning. There's rarely a game that goes by where I don't have H2W2 on the table, and I can't tell you the last time I've had one of them eat a Red Joker, much less one caused by H2W. When facing H2W2 (like Teddy), I've never found delving to be all that useful - if I'm going to be hitting a target 4-5 times to try and find the Joker, then that's probably going to kill it anyway.

And that comes back, yet again, to the question of variance. Because it's not "How often does a model with H2W get killed by a Red Joker?" it's "How often does Hard to Wound cause a model to die when it wouldn't have otherwise?" Is the Joker the first card pulled, or the last? Was it on the first attack, or the fifth? These things make a difference, and I don't think anyone has made an actually solid case for the question of variance.

And at that point, we're talking what people like or dislike about the game. I'd be willing to bet that if we started looking, we could find plenty of rules that 20% of the playerbase dislikes.

---------- Post added at 02:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 PM ----------

I have never seen the argument put forth, that RJ as a balance for H2W is bad since RJ doesn't happen every game, so the balance doesn't work on a single game basis. Several people have made the claim that that balance is important but none have even tried to refute the counter.

Would you argue that miscasts aren't a balancing mechanism for Warhammer's magic system because you can go the entire game without a miscast? Any time there is random variation in a game system, there's a chance it won't show up in a game. By your logic, it's not possible to have a balancing mechanism which depends on cards, whether it's an activation target, a trigger's suit, anything.

The level of balancing provided, like any risk, is based on probability and impact. A low probability/high impact event is a decent counter, whether it occurs in every game or not. Yes, it's a low enough probability to not occur every game. But the impact is suitably high - if it weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Still.

[Malovane]

I can't help but believe that if people encountered this as often as I do, that they would feel the same. I can't prove it. But I *DO* believe it.

When I play ressers, I only play Seasmus and Nico. I see that side of the coin, but I don't feel the same. I just find the benifits of H2W by far and away outstrip the downside of the potential lucky damage flip - be that a 3x severe or a RJ.

[Ratty]

Seamus is my main master, Kirai is my favourite, but I don't play her nearly as much because some of my opponents find her hard to counter.

I can't think of a single game I've lost because of Red Joker on the Hard to Wound flip.

I do wonder if it's a playstyle issue. I generally I try to minimize his exposure, Seamus is tough, but I don't feel he should be running into the middle of the enemy cackling. You should be pulling enemy into his sights and then killing them with focused Flintlock shots. And because of this, Black Jokered Flintlock strikes or flipping low on Soulstone flips have had FAR more impact that Red Jokers on Damage flips against him.

[Omenbringer]

Seamus is my main master, Kirai is my favourite, but I don't play her nearly as much because some of my opponents find her hard to counter.

I can't think of a single game I've lost because of Red Joker on the Hard to Wound flip.

I do wonder if it's a playstyle issue. I generally I try to minimize his exposure, Seamus is tough, but I don't feel he should be running into the middle of the enemy cackling. You should be pulling enemy into his sights and then killing them with focused Flintlock shots. And because of this, Black Jokered Flintlock strikes or flipping low on Soulstone flips have had FAR more impact that Red Jokers on Damage flips against him.

I would have to agree with this Ratty.

Through coincidence I was playing a game last night with Seamus against Kaeris and a pretty standard crew. Seamus was badly injured by the Red Joker showing up on a flip against him, though it was spectacular I cant blame the loss on its apprearance. I had selected a poor crew to deal with the predemoninantly construct and high Wp Kaeris crew and thrown Seamus up field without thinking about what my opponent could do.

Generally Hard to Wound does provide a nice benefit to the Resser players in that it both effects the probability of moderate or severe damage and effects the ability to cheat the damage flip (forcing your opponent to succed with the strike by larger amounts).

With that said I could get behind a small change to the Hard to Wound ability that only allowed the the Red Joker to be a severe damage result on a damage flip (as opposed to severe + another) vice a carte blanche change to the Red Joker.

[Gruesome]

t behind a small change to the Hard to Wound ability that only allowed the the Red Joker to be a severe damage result on a damage flip (as opposed to severe + another) vice a carte blanche change to the Red Joker.

:Rat_HeartRed:

[Malovane]

With that said I could get behind a small change to the Hard to Wound ability that only allowed the the Red Joker to be a severe damage result on a damage flip (as opposed to severe + another) vice a carte blanche change to the Red Joker.

This goes too far in my opinion. Automatic 3 step reduction in potential max damage regardless of the grade of HtW is far too much.

[Math Mathonwy]

I've posted numerous times that I created the poll with the intent to try and stop people from bringing up the RJ debate and derailing other great threads.

I don't think that's a feasible goal, really. It is not your or anyone else's (moderators and admins excepted, naturally) place to tell people what they can talk about and I really doubt that this poll will do it. I will note, however, that at least I won't be bringing RJ up for a while, since I'm rather spent here.

I know full well that I won't change your (or anyone else's) opinion whether the RJ needs change or not, nor do I wish to, so I see no need to 'engage' anyone in that discussion.

But herein lies the difference. You see, I'm not an evil person. I honestly have the good of the game in mind and I'm utterly convinced that the current RJ leads to negative play experiences and is detrimental to the game. I also naively believe that if I can show the logic of how I came to this conclusion people will see it for themselves and come around. Alternatively, if someone can present strong reasons for me to reconsider my views, I will change them. Yes, really! The trouble is, that the evidence that people have shown has been very shoddy.

Note though, that it is a valid opinion to just prefer the RJ as is - realize all the peculiarities it has and the huge swings it causes and then prefer it. That is valid. I do not agree with it, but I won't try to persuade such a person otherwise. But if people bring in faulty reasoning, like drawing lots of cards causes the deck's potential to dilute, I'll engage these logical fallacies and naively hope that by showing them as fallacies, people might change their minds. (Though in that case I was eventually exhausted when people without maths degrees don't bother to consider what I'm saying even after I tell them that I do basically this stuff for a living - that was a bit of a bummer, really.)

I have politely requested to let it go since it won't be changed no matter how much the minority wants it to.

I really don't see the poll result as that conclusive.

First of all, these sorts of polls are super-easily manipulated. A charismatic person talks about this in their gaming group and frames the discussion a certain way thereby convincing 20 of his friends to come and vote a certain way.

Second, many people have mentioned that they voted 'no' but they would still like to see some change made to the H2W mechanic.

Third, people are naturally resistant to change and therefore people on the fence on the matter will vote 'no'. This is especially pertinent in the case of people who really haven't deeply considered the issue at all.

Fourth, many of the people on the no-change camp frame the question in a false light. Ratty, an extremely respected member, framed the issue as people who like some randomness and people who hate all randomness. Now, someone undecided reads this and presses the no-vote faster than light since now 'yes' reads as an utterly terrible proposition. There were also others who framed the opposition as being in favour of eliminating the Red Joker utterly. Viewpoints that no one brought forth.

Finally, and most importantly, Wyrd make the decisions. If the proponents of the change can convince the Wyrd people, through logic, that some change might be useful, they will make it if they see it as being good for the game.

And just for clarity, when I say let it go, I don't mean "shut up" at all....I would rather see you guys put your considerable mental energy into changing something that may actually see some change (like strats and schemes or SS costs)....

As for strats and schemes, I don't have much to say, really. Some people consider the possibility of killing your own Master in order to keep a message from being delivered as an integral part of the strats and schemes. It's a preferential difference where I can not engage a faulty view and it's so different from mine, that I don't wish to have that conversation.

As for SS costs, I'm convinced that Wyrd won't be changing them. I really, really wish that some of the weaker choices were made competitive but I don't think that Wyrd will and I can see the logic in that. Errata of that style is very unliked in minis games and I can see Wyrd wishing to avoid that. It's not super-needed since too-weak doesn't break the game. So I don't see an SS cost discussion as useful.

but if you'd rather spend your time discussing the RJ that's your business. What I do mean is stop bringing it up in so many threads and derailing them off topic........create an RJ thread or a H2W thread and keep the discussion there....

This is a valid suggestion, IMO.

[brdparker]

...and I'm utterly convinced that the current RJ leads to negative play experiences and is detrimental to the game.

I hesitated responding to this thread because, honestly, I couldn't make up my mind. I do love the randomness, but...

The previous quote sparked me remembering every single time I would play my friend Nathan's Dreamer crew. Not that it was specifically the Dreamer, but somehow it was always against him, we would have the strangest bouts of luck in one direction or the other consistently throughout the game. I would be certain of killing LCB and flip the BJ, and he'd put the finishing blow on Nico/Marcus/whoever I was playing and do the same. I specifically remember a time when Killjoy was being slaughtered by LCB, but I had the cards in my hand to Onslaught a crap-load back at him as my S2D and then heal to full if/when I killed LCB. Last damage hit, of course, resulted in the BJ, but then my vulture (of all things) RJ'ed him to death the next activation... but it was still 11 SS's out the window when I could have had KJ stomping around eating face the rest of the game.

Point? I don't think the jokers lead to negative play experiences as writ. I think that many "joker experiences" in the same game lead to negative play experiences, as they detract from players' ability to judge a situation and think tactically, and it happens too much.

Solution? There are a number of ways Wyrd could take it, each with advantages and disadvantages (and I think the absolute "THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED" versus "THIS SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED" debate is ludacris, as any direction Wyrd takes the game would be correct if implemented well). I would personally enjoy seeing cards that interact with the RJ's and BJ's more, either by removing them for a temporal amount of time or shuffling them back in for a temporal amount of time. Maybe a cheap passive ability like:

Resilient: Models making duels within a pulse of 3" of this model ignore and flip a replacement card when they flip a joker.

And put it on models that are easy to kill. You want the randomness (perhaps the opponent has a lot of H2W)? Kill that model. Some thoughts for ya

Edited July 15, 2012 by brdparker