Are Rotten Belles too Good?

[Fireuser]

In a recent Battle Report, it was commented that Rotten Belles seem to be an auto include for rezzers. So, in an effort to to thread jack, I started this thread for discussion on the matter.

I personally do not think that they are. Granted, I run them frequently. However, my current model collection consists of 6 belles, 3 punk zombies, seamus, cck, sybelle.

I am of the opinion that rezzers lack ranged options, so belles stand out in this regard.

Nurses have a ranged 6 action.

Crooked Men have a rather sad ranged attack. (I'm sorry but 1/2 blast /3 blast damage and poison is hardly the epitome of a ranged attacker).

The Hanged have 2 ranged options, a low damage attack that does terror stuff, and one that screws healing (I love this one).

Sybelle can shriek.

Mortimer can fling rot, and allow movement.

Honestly given how melee-centric the faction is, I am not surprised that Belles are valued.

It was suggested that they may be too good, and should perhaps lose a suit on their lure. I think this would be disastrous to them (and to Seamus and Sybelle to a lesser extent).

So I guess the questions are: Do you always field Belles, why or why not?

[zFiend]

I always field Belles with Seamus. For their board control and because, come on, zombie hookers with an insane man.

But no, they are not too good in any way and should be left the way they are. Lose a suit on their lure? As you said, disastrous.

[Claymore65]

I think the reason they MIGHT be at least "seen" as overpowered is a number of factors. The Auto-suit is understandable, it's probably more the fact they have a Ca of 8 (most masters only get 7), and 8 Wds, which is way above most 5SS models. Combine that with pounce and some other tricks, and they are very good for their cost. I'm not saying they necessarily are overpowered, but I can understand the concern. They are tough, cheap, and their lure (frankly) is better than anyone else's in the game (even more expensive models). The Oiran do have 8 Ca as well, but they lack their survivability (only 6 Wds, no Hard to Wound) and auto-suits. The Beckoner costs 2 more SS, and while her Lure is also auto-suited, it is only Ca 6, and she isn't as survivable either (only 7 Wds, no Hard to Wound). I can see where someone can view them as a little too powerful for 5SS. IF they need a cuddle, I wouldn't say it should be losing a suit, I would instead say they lose Ca 8 and switch to 6 or even 7, which is much more the norm for a 5SS model. I'm not saying they are overpowered (I haven't played against them much), but if they are that's what I would change.

[Tony LiPira]

Belles just do the Lure thing, and not much else, but they do it really well. If their Lure got cuddled, they would change from an excellent one-trick model to a mediocre one-trick model.

[Kogan Style]

I always field 2 Belles, the lure is perfect for our melee centred crews (I play Seamus and beta test Molly) and provide a great disruptive tool. I find their damage to be limited (usually chipping away with 1 dmg per hit) so I don't feel they are too good.

Are they the Ressur equivalent of Guild Austringer auto-includes? Yes! Are they unbalancing and as dangerous as 2 Austringers? In my opinion no. Their lure is fantastic but they rely on other models to deal the damage (as they should)

[Ratty]

I always felt lure was great for postioning, but you always need other models to do something once the enemy model is positioned.

So even if they were approaching auto-include for utility, I don't think you would ever spam them.

[rancor709]

There good no doubt. But there are a lot of good models. Belle's provide some of the best control in the game, in general ressers are very strong positional control faction. Its hard to write a resser list without a belle in it, or without a plan to make at least one they are very good. But they themselves are not game winning, they set up your other pieces for success and if you bring a friend pounce is just nasty. Not to mention the trigger to get rid of cards on lure.

Overpowered no, but limited to 3 absolutely.

[Mason]

I always felt lure was great for postioning, but you always need other models to do something once the enemy model is positioned.

So even if they were approaching auto-include for utility, I don't think you would ever spam them.

I think that pretty much sums up my concerns on them. They're nothing you'd really spam outside of Seamus or Molly, but for 10ss it seems as if two of them are near auto-include in Resser lists.

I don't think it's a "rush out and nerf them" situation, but I wanted to at least mention my thoughts on them in my battle report, since one of the goals of M2E was to move away from auto-include models.

[decker_cky]

I think that pretty much sums up my concerns on them. They're nothing you'd really spam outside of Seamus or Molly, but for 10ss it seems as if two of them are near auto-include in Resser lists.

I don't think it's a "rush out and cuddle them" situation, but I wanted to at least mention my thoughts on them in my battle report, since one of the goals of M2E was to move away from auto-include models.

Yeah....I think people are underestimating the value of having a model as tanky as belles are too. Austringers and Belles both feel like models that made it out of beta too strong - both basically have master level stats on a key ability while being extremely cheap. If Belles dropped to Ca7 (still the best suited lure in the game) and Austringers dropped to Sh 6 (still incredible for an ignore cover/LoS attack), then both would still be great models. Probably too late for an errata, but I feel like models like that really skew a lot of the other models that (guild riflemen vs austringer sticks out to me).

[Nephalumps]

I agree with Mindshred and decker_cky.

I absolutely appreciate that the Belles have a limited role and they need to be good at it, but Ca 8 on their Lure is very, very strong. One of our gaming buddies puts a Belle or two in every list, so I've been on the receiving end a fair bit. Any time if I'm not out of LoS the Lures are coming, and they're going to stick because even with a good hand I'm lucky to avoid one.

I feel like the Belles and Austringer both ended up with higher attack values due to "legacy" and/or the idea that they needed to be really good at their job. But in both cases I think you could drop them by a point and they'd still be very good, with the bonus that the other player has a hope of actually avoiding the attack if they have a high enough card.

[Malal]

I'm of the opinion they are too good for their cost, it's not the lure itself that pushes them over though, it's the discard cards trigger combined with their high Ca...even that wouldn't be a problem if they could be neutralized but H2W with 8 Wd's prevents that.

Imo, they should lose a Wd or 2, they'd still be a strong choice, able to do what they're designed for but equally if you put the resources towards killing them you wouldn't be bashing your head against a wall.

[Fetid Strumpet]

If you are beating your head against a wall in killing belles, you are doing it wrong. They drop in the exact same average amount of swings that it takes to kill a Terror Tot in my experience. Belles may have more wounds, but I'd say that any swing directed at them will hit on average about 95% of time, at least in my experience.

[Malal]

A terror tot can be killed in 2AP, 1 to focus, 1 to kill with a cheated in card for damage, (playing Grems at moment so will compare Hog Whisperer as equal SS cost) so severe Dmg or moderate if Dumb Luck triggered. H2W on a Belle means you need a 3rd AP for focus x2, then you'd HAVE to trigger Dumb Luck and cheat severe.

Alternately 4x Weak Dmg to kill a tot compared to 8x Weak Dmg to kill a Belle.

Remember it'll be possibly harder still to kill the Belle as if they've lured and hit their trigger you have less cards in hand AND a tot's job as a scheme dropper is generally going to bring it closer to you whereas a Belle is effective from 18" away.

It is entirely possible I'm doing it wrong (if so, please do give me a tip), or maybe Gremlins in general just struggle with Belles but I don't see it as the exact same average amount of swings (and no where near the same amount of AP once range is taken into account)

[Kogan Style]

This is my experience of them too, if anything they feel like they drop sooner now than before (but that may be due to slow to die making it feel like they had extra staying power) Tanky is definitely not how I'd describe them. YMMV.

[dgraz]

If you are beating your head against a wall in killing belles, you are doing it wrong. They drop in the exact same average amount of swings that it takes to kill a Terror Tot in my experience. Belles may have more wounds, but I'd say that any swing directed at them will hit on average about 95% of time, at least in my experience.

I hate it when you try to use this logic. With the Tot, you have the choice by using decent cards or focusing to get past his higher Df.....after that, any hit is going to be very bad for him....and there are plenty of models that can kill them in one shot.

With the Belle, you can spend all the cards you want, barring a decent damage track and a RJ, you're still going to need more AP to finish her off.

And saying you shouldn't waste your time killing them is only valid in some situations. They so easily alter your position on the table that sometimes you need to prioritize them as high value targets....when you have situations where you need to drop scheme markers in certain places, or be somewhere........the Belle auto-Lure is very bad for you.

They are virtually auto-include in any rezzer list. I agree with Decker......if their CA dropped they would still be excellent models. Same as the Austringer, dropping SH wouldn't hurt their value.

[Fetid Strumpet]

You may hate the argument but is 100% my experience as someone who uses both very frequently. It takes the EXACT SAME amount of average swings to kill both in my experience, draining the exact same resources from my hand. Now you personally might find it different, but you cannot say my experience is wrong.

Additionally I didn't say you shouldn't attack them. I normally lose mine in 2-4 swings with an average of 3 to kill one. The two doesn't happen very often, but even models that have decent moderates slip a moderate or severe through Hard 2 wound around an average of 1.5 times a game.

There are ALOT of models in wave 1 that I also think were too strong. In one way or another, however I think the better question is do they BREAK the game by their presence? Unless we are going to agree to wholesale non stop adjustment of every aspect of every model then only things, like Nexus of Power, which actually break the game should be actually errata'd.

Personally I felt Belles never should have gotten their slow effect, and should never have had their walk increased to 5. But it is what it is, they don't break the game, so I feel in general we should live with it, unless as I said the errata will be a living document we don't mind making adjustments to the majority of models.

[Kriltic]

Strange, as a Resser playing I've never seen Belles as that high up on my priority list because I feel that, while they are good, they only have a limited set of abilities/tricks and are only auto-includes for Seamus and Molly. Nicodem may hire one depending on what else he takes but I usually spend the stones elsewhere.

From the looks of it perhaps it's just me who thinks like this...

[dgraz]

You may hate the argument but is 100% my experience as someone who uses both very frequently. It takes the EXACT SAME amount of average swings to kill both in my experience, draining the exact same resources from my hand. Now you personally might find it different, but you cannot say my experience is wrong.

No, you're not wrong. Especially when looking at it in the vacuum of average swings........unfortunately, we don't play in a vacuum and the demands of the game rarely afford you the opportunity to settle for average all the time.......that's why I said that you can choose to make the Tot go away........the Belle does not allow you that choice. That is a big difference.

Experience.......okay. Just the other day I played against NB with Marcus. Marcus was engaged with a Tot, but wanted to be somewhere else with at least most of his AP.........however, I really didn't want the Tot behind me dropping Breakthru markers........so I dropped a card for two abilities off of Trail of the Gods.....+3 Wk and +2 Dg......one shot, cheating to hit....weak damage = dead tot.........Marcus then used two AP to go where he needed.

A Belle would not allow me that choice.

[Fireuser]

A Necropunk would have denied that to you as well. I am afraid that I do not agree that every model should be one-shottable. Rezzers tend to be hardy across the board, in order to make up for lack of shooting and some rather low damage tracks.

[dgraz]

I am afraid that I do not agree that every model should be one-shottable.

No one said that. We're getting a bit off track I think, but my comment was only a challenge against the claim that a Terror Tot is as survivable as a Belle.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Which I find them to be. There was a game I played where all Seamus did in the game was attempt to hit Terror Tots, but with his gun, (not Focused) and following up with Live for Pain, and I hit the Tots a total of 1 time in a 5 turn game. So it really depends on how each of us personally defines survivable. I define it as how many resources it will on average take you to remove the model from the game, but in AP and cards. For myself Tots and Belles seem about the same. If you define survivability only in terms of actual hits, then belles are certainly going to be more resilient then Tots, but only because they are going to be hit way more often than tots will.

But you are correct we are off topic.

[DavicusPrime]

I'm not an expert but it sounds like belles are just what they're supposed to be. They're zombies which are supposed to be kinda hard to kill and can take damage that would drop the living pretty quick. They're supposed to be able to draw other models out with their special abilities and diminish their wariness (losing cards with their trigger) in order to make them easier targets for their master and his/her other assets.

If you take bunches of them, you're going to really irritate your opponent. But they aren't going to be killing things so well on their own. And there are models out there than can tarpit them and eventually eliminate them.

Off topic, but similar issue in my mind: Austringers seem to be the same thing. They're a sniper that uses an animal like a cruise missile to attack things out of LOS. They're supposed to be annoying and difficult to draw out. The range makes sense for the type of attack.

These models don't seem to break the game to me, but they are effective for what they do and force an opponent to change things up to counter them. If I get to play against them more and can't sort it out, I may change my tune, but I'm not convinced yet that they need changing.

-DavicusPrime

[decker_cky]

Even if you accept them as being as resilient in duels (I don't), the difference against pulse/blast damage is huge.

[Fetid Strumpet]

I think part of the issue on this is, let's just for the moment accept that both models *may* be too strong. I question wherther this is grounds for Errata. I personally feel the Illuminated and Jakob are too strong, should we errata them? Once those have been toned down what will next feel like it is too strong? Will the evening out of a few models then create a new level at which things need to be smoothed out? And whose impressions are we going by for "Too Strong?".

Now just to be clear, I am 100% a proponent of proactively fixing things that break the game. If something is making the game play the way 1.5 pre errata Dreamer did, or pre-errata Hamelin, or Kirai, or Colette, or Pandora, then I feel a well thought out and tested errata is justified. However if single models slip through that are too strong, but are not breaking the game, then that issue becomes more muddled. I feel errata should be used sparingly, but with 100% certainty when something breaks the game. Now if Ressers were winning or dominating the competitive scene overwhelmingly, the way NB and Outcasts seemed to be last edition, then looking at what was causing that and attempting to correct it would see me first in line asking for such a fix. I don't think we are anywhere close to that for the majority of things in wave one. For example I also feel Austringers might be too powerful, but I absolutely do not agree that we should errata them. I feel Illuminated arte way too strong for a 7SS non-unique model, but would not support changing them. And I feel this way because currently absolutely non of these models, from my perspective, are breaking the game.

[Mastershake]

Belles just do the Lure thing, and not much else, but they do it really well. If their Lure got cuddled, they would change from an excellent one-trick model to a mediocre one-trick model.

You mean like the Beckoner who has a lower Ca stat, lower Wd count, no H2W comparable damage track, no melee range, same Df and costs 2 stones more? If the Rotten Bellle is fine, the Beckoner isn't.