Jump to content

Gamers Lounge Ep. 77 - Therapy


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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.

Just because I understand the reason a change was made does not also mean I think its a good reason for the change. I understand the reasons why most (if not all) the changes I mention in the podcast were made. I do not think most (if any) of them are good changes, and I do not like any of them and how they affect the game play.

I find it very intriguing to watch the people who are fans of V2 make two arguments which seem to be contradictory to me.

  1. Malifaux V2 is a different game. Treat it like a different game and you will like it.
  2. You have to Let Go of your memories of Malifaux Classic to enjoy Malifaux V2

On the first point, I do not agree Malifaux V2 is a different game. It has the same name, same characters, similar card flip mechanic, and I am using the same models. It's an update to the game that I do not like. On the second point, there are now mechanics in the core of the game (Core Rules, how models are built, objectives of the actual game) that I do not like. Despite understanding them (and in some cases especially because I understand the reason the change was made) I do not enjoy the new game.

Your probably correct, I am not going to enjoy V2 in the long run. I just do not like portions of how the game plays. This is akin to why I will probably never like Flames of War, since I just do not like Historical wargames and probably will never like Infinity since I do not like the order/activation point pool mechanic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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"?

... and They can do the same mistakes ....

and that is not the worst case scenario ... They can make bigger mistakes.

All we can do is to express our opinions to bend the Creators will into better M2E. Only part of the model is betta tested - so we have to put our energy into the future of M2E.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You present an impossibility.

You're comparing a movie I enjoy greatly to something that doesn't exist.

It's strange, isn't it

Walking into the shops and seeing those 4-disk boxed sets

You'd think that nowadays they could put the extras on the disks of the films themselves, rather than filling a whole different one with them?

I don't know if you're like me, but I never end up putting the Extras disk into the player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it very intriguing to watch the people who are fans of V2 make two arguments which seem to be contradictory to me.

  1. Malifaux V2 is a different game. Treat it like a different game and you will like it.
  2. You have to Let Go of your memories of Malifaux Classic to enjoy Malifaux V2

Seems like this is pulled right out of my last big post.....so I'd like to respond.

I agree that this is bad. My saying it was not to imply that this is what people need to do.....I was saying that it's what I had to do. I could not accept the changes compared to 'Classic' and I almost resigned my Henchman status and sold my stuff.......the problem was that there was no other game system that I wanted to play....so I said to myself; "Self ('cuz that's what I call myself), what's this? M2E? Skirmish game, no dice....cool, let's try that out."

I was upset that I had to take that path and I'm still filled with nostalgia for 'Classic', but as I mentioned before....I rolled. I was one of the ones that was strongly of the opinion that they had years of solid data on what was wrong with 'Classic' and they could have just fixed what problems there were.......they didn't go that route....I didn't get what I wanted.......I threw my temper-tantrum and got over it.

That was MY personal path. Not saying it's right or that other's should have to do the same.....lots of people still see it as virtually the same game and I agree that parts of it are.....but I couldn't look at the whole that way. I actually mentioned in my post that you were not wrong in feeling the way you did......I felt that way also.....I was simply explaining how I got over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the first point, I do not agree Malifaux V2 is a different game. It has the same name, same characters, similar card flip mechanic, and I am using the same models. It's an update to the game that I do not like.

I sort of agree with this part at least. At the risk of overusing a comparison, the same thing happened during the D&D 2nd to 3rd transition and even more so during 3rd to 4th.

But it's not contradictory to say that 3rd edition D&D and 4th edition D&D are very different games, and also say that they are both D&D. Both of those statements are true. 1.5 and M2E are different games. But they are both Malifaux.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill and Spencer,

While I do not agree with many of the complaints about M2E, I'm glad to see that you're still part of this community, as you've obviously invested a lot of time and energy into the game in the past.

I think the reasons I find myself disagreeing with you have as much to do with the amount of time we each have to devote to this game as with the rules themselves. As you can see by my post count, I barely have time to skim these forums every few days and certainly do not have time to post frequently. Having already taken the time to listen to your (long) podcast, however, I figured I may as well spend a little more time responding.

I won't go point by point through your podcast, but one example of how the time you have to spend on the game colors our perception of the M2E rules is the upgrade system. You say that when the idea was first proposed, you wanted the upgrades to add more optional abilities while retaining the abilities on the 1.5 cards. While I understand that to you this means a richer game, to me the prospect of needing to learn and memorize yet more abilities is headache-inducing. It's not that I wouldn't want to play such a complicated game if I hypothetically had hours each day to spend perusing cards and upgrades, it's that I don't have that kind of time. The more choices that can be made on the table, the more Malifaux can reward in-game decision-making as opposed to time spent haunting the forums, reading Pull My Finger entries, or memorizing model abilities. For some, doing your Malifaux "homework" (as another post put it) might be as enjoyable as playing the game itself, but for me there are just too many other things in life to attend to. In no way do I mean to cast aspersions on those who still have so much time for their hobby along with work and family commitments. If anything, I'm a bit jealous of those who get to play so often and grateful to those who go a step further and liven my commute by podcasting about their hobby experiences. All I'm really trying to say is that I can see why someone with more time to spend on Malifaux might prefer first edition, while I and others with more busy schedules might appreciate the focus of second edition.

This is not to say that I don't share some of your concerns about M2E, though my reasons are often different. To take the same example, the upgrade system worries me because there will often be clearly optimized "choices", which will quickly become stale and ultimately emphasizes the listbuilding phase of the game (a major reason many of us have fled other game systems).

A final note on the format of the podcast: Because you agreed on almost everything, the conversation was a bit of an echo chamber. I'd also be happy hear less bile directed toward the designers, forumites, and straw men in future episodes, but it's your podcast. These are just the opinions of listener and I have no sense of entitlement or expectation that you follow these suggestions. The thing that drew me to the Gamer's Lounge in the first place was the detailed tactical analyses of models and their relative strengths. Here's hoping that you eventually warm to M2E enough to go back to that sort of content. If not, I wish you the best in finding another game that better suits your interests and hope you stay in the tabletop mini hobby in some capacity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems like this is pulled right out of my last big post.....so I'd like to respond.

I agree that this is bad. My saying it was not to imply that this is what people need to do.....I was saying that it's what I had to do. I could not accept the changes compared to 'Classic' and I almost resigned my Henchman status and sold my stuff.......the problem was that there was no other game system that I wanted to play....so I said to myself; "Self ('cuz that's what I call myself), what's this? M2E? Skirmish game, no dice....cool, let's try that out."

I was upset that I had to take that path and I'm still filled with nostalgia for 'Classic', but as I mentioned before....I rolled. I was one of the ones that was strongly of the opinion that they had years of solid data on what was wrong with 'Classic' and they could have just fixed what problems there were.......they didn't go that route....I didn't get what I wanted.......I threw my temper-tantrum and got over it.

That was MY personal path. Not saying it's right or that other's should have to do the same.....lots of people still see it as virtually the same game and I agree that parts of it are.....but I couldn't look at the whole that way. I actually mentioned in my post that you were not wrong in feeling the way you did......I felt that way also.....I was simply explaining how I got over it.

I'm at the same point. I dislike the simplification of crews and models, the less intricate and less fluffy abilities and interactions. I would rather play 1.5 than 2.

But I know that 2 is all I'm getting, and would rather play M2E than any other skirmish game. So I am going to eat my vegetables so to speak and move on with M2E, while still missing what I loved about 1.5. I will look at boring models like the new iron zombies and yearn for he interesting versions we would have gotten in 1.5, but I need to accept that those versions will not exist.

It is sad that rather than be excited about M2E Dreamer, Yan Lo and Hoffman I'm just praying that they haven't been too butchered. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still totally confused when people say that the people who created v1 are not the same as the people who created v2. I've lead both efforts. Every single rule in both editions was either written or approved by me. The direction and results of both editions were created by me, and are my responsibility. The people who have assisted me have done tons of work (in some books many more hours than me) and added immensely, but that doesn't change the fact that the regardless of who was working on the book, the results were heading in the same direction.

So please stop trying to blame a change in the people working on various books for the changes in the rules. That has nothing to do with it.

Blame me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played a game of 2E tonight (first in months) and found it exactly the same game I've always loved-honestly even better than before. I honestly cannot fathom what all the negativity is about. It's lost none of it's intricacies nor depth of tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're the one that's creating renewed interest at my LGS........DAMN YOU!!

whoa whoa, slow down, I'm just talking about rules. That other stuff you're talking about is probably Mack or Justin's fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I mentioned the changing of the designers, I assume you mean my post.

I am interested in understanding why you assume I am laying "blame" at someone's feet.

So, whatever you seem to feel you are defending... Ok. That's cool.

I bring up the fact that the people running the development effort of M2E did not run the prior development of any of the books. All I need do is read the credits to know that.

I brought up the trust factor simply because it was easy to see the development and maturity of the prior leads up to and culminating in book 4 and to therefore have amazingly high expectations for M2E.

There was this notion that we could just trust this "entity" called Wyrd, when, in fact, its a collection of people. And the people that I feel have earned that level of trust, if still involved at all, are certainly being kept at arms length from any interactions with us at best, and at worst, have had little or no say or input into what has happened.

So, to assume that the years of problem solving that are buried in the forums are known about and have been taken into account is not true, IMO.

Now...

That also does not mean that the "new guys" are not capable of creating a great game.

Its early and open beta was a great idea, IMO.

But, I am also careful about using years of trust built with the "old guard" to say that I just know this will work out because I feel like we have truly started over.

If I were really interested in "blaming" the owners of Wyrd for anything, I'd be far more inclined to ask why I just paid $45 for a Hoffman avatar whose rules you intend to make go away in a few months... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

side note: Nice to see Eric chiming in on the boards. One of the things that has separated Wyrd from so many other companies in the past years, and a continual selling point of mine to non-Malifauxers, is that Nathan and Eric actually interact with their customer base more that a little. (And obviously allow/perhaps encourage their employees, too)

They take the time to hear us, even if it doesn't sway them (which, assuming they are human, is hard to believe doesn't happen at different amounts at different times) and talk back to us. It's nice to feel that my effort, time and money dedicated to their creation is important to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was merely pointing out that the person behind the scenes in development of this book is exactly the same person as who run the previous books, so correcting your perceptions. I'm not one of those owners who just hires designers to make games for me.

And I was just using your post as an excuse to reply to something that I hear in many different places.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still totally confused when people say that the people who created v1 are not the same as the people who created v2. I've lead both efforts. Every single rule in both editions was either written or approved by me. The direction and results of both editions were created by me, and are my responsibility. The people who have assisted me have done tons of work (in some books many more hours than me) and added immensely, but that doesn't change the fact that the regardless of who was working on the book, the results were heading in the same direction.

So please stop trying to blame a change in the people working on various books for the changes in the rules. That has nothing to do with it.

Blame me.

It remind me situation in Russia before Revolution – Peoples believes that Tzar cares about them and that He is a good person – every bad things comes from Advisors and Governors of Tzar ;)

And situation with Malifaux 1.5 and M2E and Your Erik involvement is maybe a bit similar – quite strong group of Malifaux 1.5 Players cannot believe that You authorized such big change (in comparison between Warmachine I and II ed – I have to admit that change in Malifaux is BIG).

You have created Malifaux 1.0 and You Eric are condemning it to oblivion …

Edited by caen
Link to post
Share on other sites
You have created Malifaux 1.0 and You Eric are condemning it to oblivion …

I think you'll find that that happened a long time ago, actually.

Book 2 had a pretty massive impact on the game and playing styles and Crews now are nearly unrecognisable from then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were really interested in "blaming" the owners of Wyrd for anything, I'd be far more inclined to ask why I just paid $45 for a Hoffman avatar whose rules you intend to make go away in a few months... :)

Considering aHoffman came out AFTER M2E was already announced and after the beta was going on, and that avatars will be in Wave 2, no one but you can answer that question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I were really interested in "blaming" the owners of Wyrd for anything, I'd be far more inclined to ask why I just paid $45 for a Hoffman avatar whose rules you intend to make go away in a few months... :)

Because Avatars will still have rules and be usable in 2nd Edition?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information