Gamers Lounge Ep. 77 - Therapy

[HalcyonSeraph]

If brightly colored chits displease you, have you looked at the laser-cut wood ones? I suspect there will be new ones for M2E that will serve as scheme markers. The link below is to corpse/scrap tokens. They're very attractive, and don't distract from a well-put together board, to my eyes, at least.

http://store.advanceddeployment.com/corpse-scrap-token-set/

I have these and they are awesome.

[nix]

I am going to try and respond to a couple points/questions/quotes from the thread:

As a thought exercise, I would ask Nix: what do you think people would be complaining about if the editions had gone 2, followed by 1.5?

I'm not entirely clear what your asking, but let me try and decipher. If I miss your point then please PM me or repost the question in another way.

If I understand your question, your asking how I would feel if Malifaux V2 were the original game released and the current update changed the rules and game to be what 1.5 is. If V2 had been the original game I would not have played it as much as I did. I would have been very unlikely to become a henchman. It would most likely have replaced the GW games I was playing, but I doubt it would get more play than the occasional game (2-3 times a month). It would likely mean I would be FAR FAR less invested in the game on both the effort and the actual model/rules/decks/etc perspective. My suspicion is that it would strongly resemble my collection of PP Hordes (I bought 1 faction well below 50% market value, play less than 3 games a month, rarely buy new models or stuff).

That said, this is a very hard perspective to take since its only conjecture of what would have happened if things had been reversed.

I will ask one question about the counters issue that they brought up in the episode. Has it really been that big of an issue for people? I played a game of Squatter's Rights where at least one of us was doing the Line in the Sand scheme and didn't have issues keeping track of which counter was which. Maybe adding in corpse/scrap would have exacerbated it, but I think that making it 1 counter/dead person actually helps with this.

Fetid answers this nicely below. At this point the added markers have detracted from the game for me. I will say that this is a bigger detraction for Spencer (I believe) than for me however.

I think most people are playing on boards that aren't perfectly themed, with models that are various levels of painted and unpainted, with the occasional piece of terrain that doesn't match or the like. I'm sure we've all played a game where the terrain was piles of books and coke cans. I personally don't think markers detract any more than that, if at all.

This is likely the case. I have been blessed to never have to play on a board that was not using some type of themed terrain. It may not have been perfectly themed but I have never once used books, coke cans, or other non-gaming terrain in a mini-wargame. This strongly influences my preference toward the additional markers.

I agree, the markers do not detract from the type of board you describe. That said, I would not play a game on the type of board you describe (books/coke cans/not fitting terrain). To that end, I actually have a strong dislike for using most of my GW 40K themed terrain in Malifaux games and avoid it as much as possible. Many of the 40K style ruins are too futuristic for my likes. I will reemphasize, I am blessed to not only have a store with excellent terrain, but to also own a tremendous amount of suitable terrain for all the games I have played. Much of this terrain has been donated and used through the past years as the themed terrain at multiple tournaments such as Adepticon (sometimes for ~ half thier tables).

I think their point was that the visual appeal of the game is a big thing, and that all the theoretically multi colored markers that are going to be cluttering the board detracts from that aesthetic in a large way.

Quoted as reference for the above question.

I'm not mocking it at all. I'm just trying to understand. Do you insist that your board match the bases of your models? How about your opponents models? If so, ok, that is more hardcore than I imagined. If not, then why does that not bother you but a marker does?

Do based that do not match the terrain bother me? No. This is because on the typical models the base is often obscured by the models that are mounted on them. The models draw the eye while the base is a background component that is easier to blend into the overall board (or be masked by the overall look of the board with models on it).

That said, I do prefer to play my guild on my cobblestone Houses of Malifaux table in part because the bases match the board. From that perspective, its pretty clear that I fall into your "that is more hardcore than I imagined".

I don't care how many times he's "given it a chance"..........he's never given it a chance.

DGraz, I respect your opinion given here. I am pulling out this specific quote because I expect you know different. I expect you know different simply from the communication you and I had at the start of the play testing and you understand better than most the "change I gave it" and the issues I brought up. Just because you came around to liking the V2 changes and I still do not is a sad reason to say you now believe I have "never given it a chance".

[Helm]

I'm somewhat hesitant about posting in this thread and even more hesitant about asking questions personally, but something's been niggling at me a little.

DGraz, I respect your opinion given here. I am pulling out this specific quote because I expect you know different. I expect you know different simply from the communication you and I had at the start of the play testing and you understand better than most the "change I gave it" and the issues I brought up. Just because you came around to liking the V2 changes and I still do not is a sad reason to say you now believe I have "never given it a chance".

Nix, there are certain aspects of the more technical comments that you made in the podcast that I'd very much agree with. A few of these come in the form of critisisms of particular rules, often of the niche variety. I'm thinking about things like the loss of Towards/Directly Towards and issues with the Disengaging Strike rule. (Reading the rules again, I'm not certain that the Disengaging Strikes rule as written works how you say it does, but it serves as an example.)

I'm aware that you have been involved from the playtest from a very early stage, and that I have no idea what went on there beyond very general terms, and that what I'm asking about is really none of my business. However, seeing such a list of issues when there's nothing more to be done in terms of repairing them is somewhat upsetting to me, having brought up issues with rules and models that have often been resolved to (sometimes beyond) my satisfaction.

Is there any reason that we are (or I am) only seeing this list of issues now, when they can no longer be discussed usefully in public? It may be that they were all brought up on these forums and I simply didn't read those posts, and it's definitely the case that other people in the beta could have noticed and posted issues, so the onus is hardly on you in particular. Nevertheless, a little more detail on this would take some small weight off my mind.

I certainly haven't the right to know details or to assume what actions on your part would be correct, and I'm sure that a portion of the playability of the game is yours as much as or more than any other beta tester. It just saddens me to see concrete issues that I or others could have been working on while it still would have made a difference.

[Dracomax]

To be fair, Nix has said he raised them all in the private Beta. I know for a fact that many of them were raised in the public beta.

Some issues had a lot of discussion, others seemed like they were posted and ignored, or treated like "you are an idiot for even bringing this up"

At times, it was very discouraging.

[mattbird]

To be fair, Nix has said he raised them all in the private Beta. I know for a fact that many of them were raised in the public beta.

Some issues had a lot of discussion, others seemed like they were posted and ignored, or treated like "you are an idiot for even bringing this up"

At times, it was very discouraging.

sounds like every other playtesting group I have ever been involved with.

I wonder how much of the dissatisfaction stems from being involved in the playtesting? It definitely left a sour taste in my mouth from back when I did it for other companies.

[nix]

I'm somewhat hesitant about posting in this thread and even more hesitant about asking questions personally, but something's been niggling at me a little.

My intent (and Spencers as we discussed it offline) for this thread was to open up any discussion that came from the podcast. If anyone is feeling unwelcome or hesistant to respond in the thread, please feel free to email either one of us (or both of us) directly. We are more than willing to discuss this offline as well.

Bill @ gamerslounge.coda.net

Spencer @ gamerslounge.coda.net

Onto your question. I cannot speak in depth about what was and was not covered during any closed playtesting I was involved in. That testing, specific information about the models and rules, and the process in genereal is covered under NDA except where there have already been exceptions.

What I can say is that every issue I raised in the podcast, and every issue that I find that I do not like in V2 was raised at some point since January 2013. Some of these were raised in the closed play testing, some were raised in the open beta test. Some were raised in private emails with a variety of Wyrd employees including Mack, Justin, Eric, and Nathan, some in private conversations directly with Mack and Justin.

At this point I feel confident that all my concerns and issues were raised during the process and were understood by Wyrd developers of V2. I fully respect the decisions that Wyrd made and has moved forward with in the development of the new version. Some of my concerns (a fair number) were addressed in some manner. Other concerns I raised were not. I would hope that Wyrd, and the community at large, respect that the podcast was an unfiltered expression of the areas of V2 that I do not like.

Now, as the point above is very personal for me, I would not assume to answer for Spencer on the same point. As came across (I hope) in the show, there are still points where Spencer and I are not in full agreement on the good/bad of V2 as well. I will let Spencer answer the question as he sees fit.

As to some of the animosity I have seen in the thread, I want to make a point that I thought was clear previously but may not be as clear as I thought.

I am not the king of the internet, nor looking for some "mustache twirling evil guy" in Wyrd. I have been a very strong supporter of Malifaux Classic and an even stronger believer and supporter of the gaming community that has grown up around Malifaux Classic. Spencer is in the same boat (here I will speak for him and let him contradict me if he likes). We both made decisions to stop being henchmen and have stopped recording our podcasts for periods of time because of the impact the new version of the game has had on our overall hobby and involvement in the Malifaux game and community. As we were both public figured on the podcasts and the forums (and blogs, etc), we received many requests for explanations why that was. We both held off making a podcast like episode 77 for a number of reasons, including contributing as we could to the playtest and waiting to see what the "final" result of the new version would be. This response actually increased the amount of pressure from the "community" to reveal our personal feelings and reasons for the decisions. We felt that after the announcement of the V2 update being sent to the printers was the proper time to do the recording. We also felt that Gamers Lounge was the proper venue for a variety of reasons including the fact that GL has always been raw and unfiltered in its approach to opinions.

I am not saying this to defend any opinions. I expressed my opinions and I do not feel they need any defense. I suspect and understand Spencer feels the same. We both expected some questions and further discussion to come from the podcast and braced ourselves for any animosity that was included. Those questions and that discussion is why this thread was created, not to create a spectacle.

I just thought that would be a helpful thought to consider for those who read this far.

---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ----------

sounds like every other playtesting group I have ever been involved with.

I wonder how much of the dissatisfaction stems from being involved in the playtesting? It definitely left a sour taste in my mouth from back when I did it for other companies.

I love the play testing process. I dislike the decisions that were made and the specific areas mentioned on the podcast.

[mattbird]

you are of course welcome to your own opinion, but tbh, much of the podcast came off as if "I just would have done it differently", as opposed to "this rule will ruin the game".

Usually playtesting is done to determine the latter, not cater to the former.

[dgraz]

DGraz, I respect your opinion given here. I am pulling out this specific quote because I expect you know different. I expect you know different simply from the communication you and I had at the start of the play testing and you understand better than most the "change I gave it" and the issues I brought up. Just because you came around to liking the V2 changes and I still do not is a sad reason to say you now believe I have "never given it a chance".

Sorry Bill. I remember the rage I was filled with in the beginning and our conversations led me to believe that you were, at least at some point, in a very similar position. I was able to do what you couldn't...or wouldn't I guess......give up 'Classic'. I just turned it off and looked at M2E as it's own beast. I'm not happy that I had to do that in order to appreciate M2E, but I accept that it's just like everything else in life.....I can't control everything. Perhaps it's actually my pessimistic nature and my 'get used to disappointment' attitude that allowed me to do it. Things in life suck....roll with it or suffer.....I rolled.

Looking at M2E on its own I was able to realize that it was still better than any other choice I had in MY area.....so I embraced it.

It's my belief, based on the conversations that we've had, the personal issues I know you've had with the company, your posts...both here and on your blog (which I've read in entirety), and you're podcasts (which I've listened to in entirety) that you're very hung up on 'Classic'. Believe me, I'm not saying you're wrong or unjustified.....even the small part that I do know, if it had happened with me, would probably have left me in the same position you're in now.....especially if I had been in that 'rage' frame of mind. From all of that, I just can't believe that you're truly capable, deep down inside, of "giving it a chance".

Again, not saying that you're wrong or that you should have to give up 'Classic' in the way I did. I'm just sad that you couldn't find a way to make it work. You know I have much respect for you and I like you as a person....I'm sure if we were closer to each other we would make fine friends.....so I'm not knocking you, I hope you understand that. When I'm trying to read you....again based on all available info....this is what I've come to believe. It's certainly possible that you've given it more of a chance than I can see and it just isn't for you....totally possible. I just don't believe that, but I'd be happy to admit that I'm wrong and I would emphatically apologize if I thought I was.

Respect,

dgraz

[Bacms]

Just heard the podcast and first of all I am hoping this don't come out as insulting or trying to force anyone into one side or the other. After all as a good friend of me keep saying every time we disagree, opinions are like asses everyone has one.

My first point is just about the inflated reactions to the podcast. It is clear during the whole podcast you guys are not happy with the change and sometimes it does feel you are disagreeing just for needing to disagree. I have been involved in the beta but only got a couple of games in so I am still undecided whether or not I like the new version.

I am however like everyone apprehensive about the change. Hence I started listening to your podcast with a real interest in understanding the reasons behind disliking it. And even if I do agree with some of the points and concerns you have mentioned, what is clear from the beginning is that even if you had good points the delivery was the main problem.

It is clear you guys are emotionally attached to the change, and I am not blaming you for that. This just proves how much we loved the game and how much effort and personal involvement you placed on the game. I think that is probably part of the problem why you dislike the new edition so much. It is basically like being out of a relationship which some of your friends might even said it wasn't good for you but you still love it. You raised some really good points about why some of the changes were so bad but you also criticize a lot of changes that you even admit they didn't make difference and they still don't but you are still annoyed they have changed it.

My personal opinion would be to actually recommend you to stop playing malifaux completely for a few months, forget about it, entertain yourself with some others games, and in a couple of months try it again.

You might still not like and it's all fine, remember that at the end of the day it is just a game, but at the moment I just think you are too emotionally attached to really give it a fair chance. I do however hope you do like the new edition. I still want to love the new edition, as malifaux is the game I have been playing for the last 7months and now everything else in the market feels badly designed and flavourless compared to it. Plus it was thanks to having people like you that were passionately enough about the game to promote, recruit people and organize events that malifaux and malifaux community is still one of the best in the gaming world, so it would be sad to see you gone.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Bacms
Spelling and correcting language mistranslation

[PierceSternum]

dgraz and nix, sitting in a tree... k-i-s...

As far as the malifaux community...

There was a time when I thought it was different and better.

I don't think that way anymore. Its just as petty and silly as any other on all sides of the fence.

Edited July 24, 2013 by PierceSternum

[dgraz]

I don't think that way anymore. Its just as petty and silly as any other on all sides of the fence.

I think they call that humanity.

me and nix kissing is no one's business but our own.

Seriously, I just want to show that you can have respect but still disagree.

[Mike3838]

I've just finished off the podcast, and thought I'd bob back with my thoughts. I'm afraid I disagreed with many of the points made, and was very tempted to come here and express those disagreements point by point. However, I think I can more succinctly illustrate why I disagree with many of the issues raised by using a single example:

Bill: "I can completely understand why they changed the Red Joker to be a mirror of the Black Joker, but did they *need* to do it? I *HATE* it!"

Bill, imho, right here is the reason why I think you're never going to come around to M2E. You have a fundamental refusal to let go of M1E, even when you acknowledge that there are good reasons for some changes that you hate. I mean, what does "need" even mean in this sentence? An opportunity to increase both the power *and* the characterfulness of the RJ was identified and implemented, but you're (apparently very strongly) opposed to that merely because it's something new in M2E... Just like many other examples in this episode, no justification was given in this episode for hating this change apart from that it's now different.

I'll second other people's advice - a few months' break may help you detach from M1E. It might not, but if you come back when Wave 2 is released and still don't like it, then you'll know for sure. It'll be a shame to see you go.

[Duck21]

Just because of that one comment you going to disregard everything else he said. That says a lot.

[caen]

If Malifaux 1.5 is so terrible/messed up/to complicated game that needs so many changes why Wy are here on WYRD forum? Why We are customers of WYRD?

90% of Us are here and are customers of WYRD because of Malifaux 1.0 or Malifaux 1.5 – we start our quest with WYRD because of previous version of Malifaux. So we are mistaken since the very beginning? Malifaux 1.5 was terrible since beginning or … become terrible after M2E was launched? Why M2E change our judgment about systems that bring 90% of us here?

And one more point, I presume that in 4-6 years third edition of Malifaux will be launched – and then M2E will be terrible game that need changes … or already is terrible game now?

[DeleteAccount]

Just because of that one comment you going to disregard everything else he said. That says a lot.

I'd say you didn't read the rest of his post if this was your conclusion.

If Malifaux 1.5 is so terrible/messed up/to complicated game that needs so many changes why Wy are here on WYRD forum? Why We are customers of WYRD?

90% of Us are here and are customers of WYRD because of Malifaux 1.0 or Malifaux 1.5 – we start our quest with WYRD because of previous version of Malifaux. So we are mistaken since the very beginning? Malifaux 1.5 was terrible since beginning or … become terrible after M2E was launched? Why M2E change our judgment about systems that bring 90% of us here?

And one more point, I presume that in 4-6 years third edition of Malifaux will be launched – and then M2E will be terrible game that need changes … or already is terrible game now?

I started with M1, I liked it, surprise surprise, I like M2 more. Thing is that Wyrd probably has a series of sales data, maybe, just maybe, they feel that the rythm they are expanding at isn't as quick as they would like and that a lot of it may be because of how the M1 rules work and that they wish to make more attractive through M2. As in any edition change, people leave and people come on, but at the end of the day, if the player base has increased a nice amount, it was a good idea.

It isn't that M1 was always a horrible mess, it had it's flaws and loved it despite of it, this new version in my eyes cleans a lot of those faults, so it makes M1 seem a lot more clumsier than before. Same happened with warmachine, I loved the original till MK2 came out and noticed how much better it could be.

That you don't agree about it being better doesn't instantly make me and everybody that thinks it's better be wrong.

[Duck21]

If Malifaux 1.5 is so terrible/messed up/to complicated game that needs so many changes why Wy are here on WYRD forum? Why We are customers of WYRD?

90% of Us are here and are customers of WYRD because of Malifaux 1.0 or Malifaux 1.5 – we start our quest with WYRD because of previous version of Malifaux. So we are mistaken since the very beginning? Malifaux 1.5 was terrible since beginning or … become terrible after M2E was launched? Why M2E change our judgment about systems that bring 90% of us here?

And one more point, I presume that in 4-6 years third edition of Malifaux will be launched – and then M2E will be terrible game that need changes … or already is terrible game now?

Just want to add because of Malifaux 1.5 Wyrd can now afford producing plastic miniatures. Not bad for terrible/messed up/too complicated game.

[PierceSternum]

My summary of MOST M2E haters:

"M1E had several well documented flaws based on years of playing. And the full ruleset and entire line of models could have been addressed with the years of feedback in the time it took just to do wave one of a complete rewrite of every model in the game. Instead, by touching EVERYTHING you nee d lessly took away things i like."

PS. is my rpg ready?

Edited July 25, 2013 by PierceSternum

[mythicFOX]

Absolutism isn't helpful.

Malifaux 1.5 was neither perfect or terrible, it was/is a great game. Wyrd have taken the decision to move the game on with M2e.

M2e is moving Malifaux in the direction some people want it to go, so they're happy, a great game for them gets better. For some people M2e is moving in a direction they don't want it to go, and they're unhappy, a great game for them gets worse.

That doesn’t make one side or the other wrong, it makes them different. Like in most parts of life we need to respect people’s differences. There is no way to ‘make this not be happening’ we all have to choose what we want to do. It's for each of us to decide if we want to play M2e or not.

Whatever people decide to do I personally wish them all the best and every enjoyment from their hobby.

[caen]

That you don't agree about it being better doesn't instantly make me and everybody that thinks it's better be wrong.

You are right - I do not even try to suggest that Your opinion is not valid. My point is: Malifaux 1.5 is still great game - down of M2E is not changing IMO this simple truth.

[DeleteAccount]

You are right - I do not even try to suggest that Your opinion is not valid. My point is: Malifaux 1.5 is still great game - down of M2E is not changing IMO this simple truth.

And I'm perfectly ok with that. Lets just say that for you it's when a recipe changes and you are left hinking "it's not the same..." while for me it's "just not as good..." when I taste the old recipe. No more no less. If you have a strong enough community that is ok with it, I of course have no problem whatsoever with you staying with M1.

[Helm]

If Malifaux 1.5 is so terrible/messed up/to complicated game that needs so many changes why Wy are here on WYRD forum? Why We are customers of WYRD?

90% of Us are here and are customers of WYRD because of Malifaux 1.0 or Malifaux 1.5 – we start our quest with WYRD because of previous version of Malifaux. So we are mistaken since the very beginning? Malifaux 1.5 was terrible since beginning or … become terrible after M2E was launched? Why M2E change our judgment about systems that bring 90% of us here?

And one more point, I presume that in 4-6 years third edition of Malifaux will be launched – and then M2E will be terrible game that need changes … or already is terrible game now?

I'd suggest that you are exaggerating here. I haven't seen anyone on the forums say that Malifaux 1.5 was a "terrible" game.

However, with the previous cards, one or two of my friends who were dyslexic did not even consider playing the game. When doing demo games with friends, I always felt restricted in what Masters and Minions I could use in order to get across the basic concepts without burying people under niche abilities. People would walk over to see the fantastic models and be delighted, then would pick up a stat card. It's certainly true that some thrived on that sense of complexity, but a lot of others got a false impression and turned away.

When I first started Malifaux, I was in London in the summer before moving away from uni. Knowing nothing about the game, I grabbed the Dreamer because I loved what I read on the back of the box. Thinking it would be nice to have two sides that could be used to demo the game or combined into a bigger Crew, and loving the idea of a child with his toys, I also bought Collodi. Also Doppelganger for the model.

I read over the rules, listened to a podcast or two to get a sense of the game, and assembled the models. I didn't get my first game until later, living in an area with little wargaming. The guy had played before, and he was using Nicodem. I won that game with the Slingshot, and kept winning. We didn't have many games, but I think the guy won or drew only one of them.

The person in question is now a Henchman for that area, but I believe that his continuation with the game is down to his determination and personal love for the game's abstract concepts as much as the execution of Malifaux in reality. As you say, over 90% of the people here are here because of 1.0 or 1.5, but the people who have been turned away from the old game aren't represented.

I am not saying that Malifaux 1.5 is terrible, and indeed have heard nobody on these forums say that. However, for a new player or a player on a budget it had issues. I have always seen "faction balance" as a high-minded concept that has had serious negative impact on the game (introducing Kirai when people had been building collections around Seamus or Nicodem was not acceptable in my eyes, nor is the concept of having people buy more models in order to make their Crew playable against another particular Master). The reason you did not hear as many complaints on forums is that a) the people who hated those concepts had left the game and Wyrd had already made the decisions and built their game, so people like myself got on with it and kept playing Malifaux.

Now I see Wyrd moving away from some of the concepts that I do not like, and so I will be overjoyed to be able to demo 2.0 instead of 1.5 when playing with my friends. "Buy any of the starter boxes you like the look of, you can play balanced games just by expanding on that box" will be something that I can say truthfully. Malifaux 1.5 did not "become terrible" once 2.0 was launched; we've merely been taught by Wyrd that they have seen some of the problems and that we don't need to play around them any more.

[caen]

(introducing Kirai when people had been building collections around Seamus or Nicodem was not acceptable in my eyes, nor is the concept of having people buy more models in order to make their Crew playable against another particular Master).

It is a open quetsion if Kirai crew can be stopped by every M2E crew.

You point out problems with 1.5 meta but now we can not predict what problem we will face with M2E meta - we need cards for all models, more time and games in competetiv envirioment. Only then We can agree that M2E dealt with all 1.5 problems sucesfully.

[Helm]

It is a open quetsion if Kirai crew can be stopped by every M2E crew.

You point out problems with 1.5 meta but now we can not predict what problem we will face with M2E meta - we need cards for all models, more time and games in competetiv envirioment. Only then We can agree that M2E dealt with all 1.5 problems sucesfully.

This is, of course, entirely true. I wouldn't even agree that 2.0 has dealt with all 1.5's problems as it stands, in fact.

However, Wyrd's statement that they intend to balance the game Master to master gives me a lot of hope. Faction balance was a concept that made things harder for newcomers and could have been leveraged to make quite a bit of money. At the very least, seeing Wyrd state that their *intent* is to get rid of it makes me happier.

[PierceSternum]

When people keep saying "Wyrd is doing this" and "Wyrd is doing that"... It seems odd to me.

I can read all my books and credits pretty easily.

What there is are the people that wrote books 1 and 2. And that wrote 3 and 4.

Now there is the people writing M2E that are NOT the people that wrote the prior stuff.

Its like a sequel movie with new writers, actors and director that have their own perspectives.

The question is, will we get "Empire Strikes Back" or "Indiana Jones 4"?

[Dracomax]

My guess is that this is Aliens--both it and the movie preceding it are brilliant, but they are so different that some fans of one aren't going to like the other.