My depressing growing opinion of 5 turns

[PierceSternum]

Usain Bolt wins many 100's by several yards.

Cut to 85, his margin would be considerably smaller.

That is becoming my perspective of M2E. Better crews "run out of time" to create the full margin of victory they would have otherwise.

5 turns feels like an artificial constraint to obscure things and slap a label of "balance" on them. Imagine how "balanced" the game could be at 4, or 3 turns?

I get that its entirely too late to change. I just wish that more time had been taken...

I am a bit sad.

[zFiend]

Could you maybe add some turns of your own with your opponent?

[PierceSternum]

I think maybe you did not understand what I mean.

I think that 5 turns is a band-aid on internal bleeding. And that it artificially makes many games seem closer than the direction they are going by simply "stopping" the game before it reaches its natural conclusion.

And since some final scores are closer for now, we think this must be balanced.

I wonder when people learn to play swarm lists very fast what this game will look like. (Aside from pretty terrain covered in markers for many scenarios)

[Dracomax]

I disagree. I think the issue is that, often, those crews that are having a hard time with their "full margin of victory" are likely those crews which spend too much time doing other things now. I like 5 turns specifically because it now makes time pressure an actual thing.

You don't have time to spend 3 turns killing each other. You have to choose each and every AP whether you are going to try and kill, block your opponent, or advance yourself. You can't just do everything anymore, and that is a good thing. the fact the scores are closer is largely irrelivant, and I don't think it has anything to do with balance, other than the fact that it tends to ensure that the game is not balanced around who can kill their opponent by turn 4 and then complete objectives any more.

And I say this as a Collette/Lady J player in M1E.

[Fetid Strumpet]

The problem I see with that argument is that it is making the flawed assumption that 6 turns was the 'natural' game length. The number of turns is always an artificial construct to the mechanics of the game. Does it mean that the original RISK, with no time limit is any more pure or real a win condition than the RISK games that have come out with turn limits? Who is to say that 6 turns wasn't also a band aide that covered the bleeding hiding what the game should have been at 10 turns.

Ill say that when they first changed the game to 5 turns during testing I felt the same as you initially, but the thing that I have found is that 5 turns just works better for making a player make interesting choices in how they are going to deal with the opposing crew, vs getting their own goals done. I can understand if for some reason you dislike the 5 turn format, but unfortunately it is what it is. I personally despise the dual faction mechanic, and have since they introduced it, but I still like the game enough that that mechanic isn't a deal breaker for me. Hopefully you'll make the right decision for you, and if you never play in anything official then feel free to change to time limit with your particular group.

[Csonti]

IMO 5 turns is definetely better and makes the game much more concentrated and tense. And I play this game from 2009, so I have some experience with 6 turns games.

[DeleteAccount]

I also initially felt that the change to 5 was pretty arbitrary, but after playing it a bunch, I prefer it more, and this from a resser player who used to need 4-5 turns to get his groove going. Between the mechanic changes, profile changes and scheme changes, I don't feel like I need 3 turns of setup anymore nor that I can get away with destroying the enemy crew and doing schemes and stratgies on the last 3 with ease. Although it depends on Kirai who was my main early game destroyer.

Basically, I've lost a few Nicodem matches plainly because I did too much killing for my own good and got bogged down by my opponent's tempo, that isn't the fault of not being a 6 turn game, it's my fault for letting myself get shangaid instead of focusing on what I need to get done.

[mythicFOX]

Malifaux has always had the potential for games to swing heavily turn to turn.

You seem to be asking the question; is this game balanced if it's played to six turns?

It may be the game is unbalanced if it's played to six turns. To me however that is irrelevant once you accept the game is being played to five turns. The game's natural conclusion (as you put it) is the five turn mark now, not the six turn mark.

IMO the question we should therefore be asking is; is this game balanced if it's played to five turns?

Time will tell.

Note: Where I say 'played to x turns' I mean this as 'played to a distribution game lengths based on flipping for extra turns at the end of turn X'. That however is a mouthful.

[therat]

I must agree with Draco & Strumpet. If you go into the game knowing full-well that there are 5 turns to complete your objectives and you can choose to design a crew and have them act according to that restraint, the only reason a crew cannot pull ahead is that it is not designed to win in 5 turns. It cannot be played like a 6 turn game anymore and crews must be made and played to reflect that. Some setups that are pure killy (Reckoning, Assassinate, Murder Protege, etc) could run a 1.5 crew and be fine. But if you need to get to the other half and drop a lot of markers you've gotta change how you're gonna do it without that extra turn.

[PierceSternum]

I do not care how many turns the game is. I am not arguing for a different length.

I am not "making an argument" for anything.

I am stating what the game feels like to me. Five turns feels constraining and it feels like in the games I am in, one crew would clearly win, sometimes by a LOT, but they just do not have time to make the margin as large as it would because the game is shorter now.

Eventually, I happen to believe that we will get better and THEN we will start discovering how to speed things up.

Then the "illusion of balance" that I feel that shortening the game has created will be dispelled.

I get that I have not been overly clear about my concern.

I do not believe that the game is as balanced as others seem to, and that's with the limited palette of models currently available.

I think that once swarm lists get MORE variety that their speed and margin of victory will increase.

I think that by decreasing the turns to 5, that the developers have hidden imbalances temporarily behind better crews not yet knowing how to, or having all the tools yet, to go fast enough to make it obvious how much better they are.

Edited August 19, 2013 by PierceSternum

[TekDekay]

It is an interesting theory and certainly could prove to be true and while I agree that I don't think any useful evidence to be able to prove it, one way or another, will be available till the model pool expands and people get more comfortable with the ruleset it is a scenario to watch out for certainly.

@Razhem: sounds like he was clarifying his initial post...you should consider keeping comments on topic and not making it personal as per the newly re-stated forum policy.

[Joel]

I think you may be overestimating the swarm a little.

[PierceSternum]

I think you may be overestimating the swarm a little.

Its possible. Although, I think its also possible that people are underestimating it because so many of their games are often to try new models rather than make a broken list, perhaps they did not face many.

[mythicFOX]

I think it's fair to say there isn't enough experience of M2e to know one way or the other yet.

Personally I understand people's concerns about high model count crews, but I don't yet see why they're likely to be any more of a problem now than they were in 1.5.

[PierceSternum]

I think it's fair to say there isn't enough experience of M2e to know one way or the other yet.

Personally I understand people's concerns about high model count crews, but I don't yet see why they're likely to be any more of a problem now than they were in 1.5.

Markers is the difference so far for me.

I can drop one, then use second AP to move to engagement of an enemy model. Whether you kill it that turn or not, its still your AP getting tarpitted that turn. With 5 turns, when I put 11 or 12 models on the table, I will tarpit your entire crew. Maybe even kill some of them.

Chuck Nicodem into the mix and they come back. BIGGER. I do not care about the half wounds. It takes two hits to kill punk zombies no matter what, and if you do NOT kill it, then you get flurried.

I do not care about killing you. I just want to keep you engaged for as much of the game as I can throw models in your direction, with Nicodem reanimating as needed to KEEP you engaged. (Engaged = no interactions)

And this is just what I like.

Better players will think of more wicked things to do with all that AP. And what will we do then. Make the game 4 turns?

[mythicFOX]

I'd argue that there comes a point fairly quickly where dropping more markers doesn't equal scoring more VP. Raw model count is also less relevant to strategies than it was in 1.5. Reckoning actively discourages swarms, and model count isn't that relevant in Turf War either.

I'm not seeing the link between game length and swarms being better? Can you expand on that for me.

[Duck21]

I think it's fair to say there isn't enough experience of M2e to know one way or the other yet.

Personally I understand people's concerns about high model count crews, but I don't yet see why they're likely to be any more of a problem now than they were in 1.5.

In 1.5 if you summon a horde you get a horde of week fighters. Now because of interact actions significant puny hordes are much more valuable. They don't need to fight anymore. All they need to do is multiply (Preferably faster than opponent can kill them) and spam, spam, spam markers.

[Jonas Albrecht]

I simply do not see a problem with using the turn limits as a factor in balancing crews.

[DeleteAccount]

In 1.5 if you summon a horde you get a horde of week fighters. Now because of interact actions significant puny hordes are much more valuable. They don't need to fight anymore. All they need to do is multiply (Preferably faster than opponent can kill them) and spam, spam, spam markers.

Do remember that recently summoned models can't drop scheme markers.

Not saying this can't become an issue, but a big part of scheme markers is WHERE they are placed, not just putting them on the table. You can have 10 bayou gremlins, but if your scheme is power ritual and you can't get to the corners, you won't achieve jack meanwhile a silurid has a lot better chances of getting it done. I also saw a game where scheme markers were being placed everywhere and it bit my opponent in the nards when he couldn't place markers for his other schemes because of the proximity between the other markers he started spamming around. The minefield does help some schemes, but can hinder your actions for others.

Finally, scheme destroying abilities are being discounted and they will be big, I had a match pretty much be based on keeping Cojo down because if he could move twice and use his 0, half my scheme markers would go the way of the dodo (thanks nurse). Scheme marker destroying abilities are being pretty undervalued at the moment, but they can be momentum killers, specially if your scheme achievers are crappy models that once engaged can't get back out reliably to put more up.

[Adran]

Christine Ohurughu would have lost the 399.9m Hurdles. She won gold in the 400m Hurdles though...

And Micheal Johnson once held the 200m world record that was less than twice the 100m world record, but he could not get close to the 100m Record.

There is not a direct corrolation between the points difference of the crews and the length of the game. In the old rules I've played games where I was winning at the 6 turn limit, but the 2 extra turns that the game gave us turned it into a major loss for me.

I agree that the requirements to balence a game for 5 turns are different than the requirements to balence a game for 10 turns, but I don't think you can say that that was an artifical constrant.

And to be honest, if it becomes obvious in a game who is going to win then I can find playign out the rest of the game laregly pointless (I'm thinking things like Monopoly here, when you know who is going to win a long time before they finally bankrupt the last player).

If this game has managed to get the game to end at the point when the winner is deteremined, but before it becomes a whitewash then that sounds like the ideal time to end the game.

I personally don't think it has. The game is more balenced, but its still not perfect. There are some crews that are likely to score well in early turns, but then spend the last few hanging on, whilst others won't get into stride until turn 4, and hope that in the last 2 turns they can overturn the deficit they encountered in those first 3 turns.

Those are both balenced options.

I've tried playing Swarm lists and against swarm lists in the Beta, and whilst I found they were viable, they weren't auto win.

There are also models out there in most factions already that do amazing against a swarm. I hope the game doesn't have to resolve into a scissors-paper-stone model, as whilst that is technically balenced, it doesn't make for fun games, but If I know my opponent is Gremlins, it might well be worth my while including a model with blasts, or some other area effect damage. Just like the old game...

I haven't found the game to be as you are saying, which is a shame, as from my viewpoint, it seems the perfect time to end a game.

[ttsgosadow]

Interesting thread, with some good opinions and views!

A lot of people, myself included, have tried to break the game during beta to see if the game 'works'. Summoning was a big thing of it, as was spam lists. Might even be the two things we tested the most! We couldn't break it enough.

If this is the right choice, and theres an underlying problem we will notice soon enough once more tournaments will be played. So far, in my playing group, player skill still has endless more effect on the outcome of the battle, then list selection (or luck, for that matter).

[TekDekay]

Nah, just cuddle Nicodem...I never liked that guy anyway. Too creepy.

Definitely sound like an interesting test scenario. Just my 2 cents.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Well, I've haven't found "swarms" to be that effective anyway either, I think it is like the reverse of. There are advantages, but there are disadvantages too. Also even if swarms have an advantage, which is something I'm still very far from allowing, how is that different from 1.0 where better models were the advantage? How many times did you hear frustrated new players log in and ask why they were losing constantly using the models that came with their boxed master sets and being told to buy all this individual models that were just better. An advantage to one or the other isn't really a big deal to me as long as there is still a reason to bring both types. In 1.0 you might bring one or two low cost models and the rest would be big uber elites, even if the swarm tends to be better there is still a place for bigger models as well.

I personally think this situation is like the Drowned from last edition, it looks one way on paper, but it hasn't played the way you would expect in reality, at least in my experience, yours of corse might be different.

[Forar]

Unfortunately, it's purely academic and impossible to test, since choices will have to be made based on an expectation of going X turns. Can't just play 5 turns, see who 'wins', and then play another turn and see who 'wins' then. Both players would have been making choices based on getting to either 5 or 6, they're mutually exclusive, as you either spend or hoard resources until the perfect moment, and that extra turn is huge.

Which is why, in my experience, games that go an extra due to a flipped card can become very swingy. You can't count on it happening, and thus have to play like it won't happen (aiming to win on turn 7 is unwise if you can't guarantee it'll even happen), thus if it does happen it messes with everyone's plans.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Forar

[Duck21]

Just out of curiosity what are two opposing crews (who were at each other’s throats seconds ago) do after the end of turn 5. Dust themselves off and leave opposite directions.