Rotten Bells, Lure is too Much

[mythicFOX]

Anyone who claims otherwise needs to also line up to clamor for Jakob to be nerfed hard, as I remember a high percentage of finishers in the UK GT were using him.

 

Just as a correction on that it was the UK Masters, not the GT. The masters is an invitational for the top 16 ranked players in the UK. The top four had Lynch with them, however IIRC two weren't using him predominantly. 

 

Also the way the scheme pools fell in the last round of Swiss and the first round of knock-out probably gave Lynch a slightly easier ride through than is average IMHO.

 

So I wouldn't draw massive conclusions from this. Lynch isn't actually taking that many events down at the moment IIRC.

[PolishSausage]

Ultimately I have to agree with Fetid that the data we have here in Chicago is data we got  through usage of said models.

 

I enjoy playing the list and I would still play the exact list if the casting was dropped to 6 without a word of argument. My opponents give me the stink eye once I start chain luring tho ><

 

This "Lure-op" data might come out to light over different game store in coming months, to argue now is way 2 early.

 

I still advise the nay sayers to try the list and focus on schemes and strategy and play it towards vp allocation and denial. If you play this list and try to generate kills on turn 3-4-5 with bells you are not playing it right.

[Fetid Strumpet]

I wasn't claiming he was, just that we can't look at one Tournament result and claim proof. I'm happy to be corrected however as I'm on the other side of the ocean. Thanks Mythic Fox!

[Justin]

*scans thread*

 

*sees mention of Hoffman*

 

People have seen the remote mines upgrade, right?

 

*ninja vanish*

[tadaka]

Part of the problem, and its a small but significant part, is that once a model is printed for a particular ss cost it tends to skew what that ss cost can do and is worth. In this game system there is no objective, default rubric we can point to and say "this! This is THE definitive 5 point model!" We've even all seen how that works in effect, look at all the book 1 models that were fine when they were in their own little pond, but as soon as book 2 got printed the best models in that book redefined what a particular ss cost model was. We are even seeing it in the current edition in the Samurai. On paper Samurai are amazing for their cost to my eyes, but in effectiveness... What is the almost universal comment that comes up when the Samurai is discussed, "samurai are ok,... But they're kind of crap because for less cost I can get an Illuminated who are amazing" I hear a variant of that comment all the time, which means that the Illuminated is redefining what the expected ss cost of a model is.

 

This is valid but I have fiddled with your example a lot recently. It is not just Illuminated there are a number of models that are same cost or cheaper that are flat out better. When its 1 model you have to look at that model case in point Belles. When its I can find 4 models i would take just about every time then you look at the model and well well go "But they're kind of crap because for less cost" i can get ......

[Joel]

Just as a correction on that it was the UK Masters, not the GT. The masters is an invitational for the top 16 ranked players in the UK. The top four had Lynch with them, however IIRC two weren't using him predominantly. 

 

Also the way the scheme pools fell in the last round of Swiss and the first round of knock-out probably gave Lynch a slightly easier ride through than is average IMHO.

 

So I wouldn't draw massive conclusions from this. Lynch isn't actually taking that many events down at the moment IIRC.

Slight correction - only 2 of the top 4 were using lynch - Luke and Craig. The others were Lilith (and I changed out to pandora for the 3rd/4th decider game).

He's not come close to winning at an event since.

[mythicFOX]

Thanks Joel.  You and Greg had him with you though right?

[DeleteAccount]

Well, this escalated quickly...

 

Abridged version of my opinion on rotten belles, I don't see how spamming them can give such good results as some people are stating here. I do still feel Ca 8 is too high and if it became Ca 6 I'd still use them without batting an eye, only I'd use the slow more than I do now, at the moment I always put in a rotten belle in all my resser lists because they are easily our best 5 SS model. I don't believe belle's are autowin, I do believe they are too good for their cost at something that can cause a lot of pain to opponents for simple mistakes, but I've had games also where they have barely been a factor, they are just the minority.

 

As for proposing a global cap even though I don't believe spam is an issue is because I'm in the camp of putting firewalls for maybes, I really don't think anything in the game is worth spamming to such a degree, but by putting a hard cap you make sure that if you ever screw up making something too spammably good, that something will block it.

 

Also, I'd suggest everybody to leave the keyboard alone for a week or so, and schedule vassal/real matches all over whaazoo to test the percieved issue.

[Joel]

Lol - I had all the neverborn in my bag as usual - had no intention of using him though

[Manic Mouse]

The thing I find is though the Lure is very good, it normally takes 3 models to get anything out of it, One model to get the Luring model into position, or 2 Belles moving and Luring once each, + something that can do damage. At this point you are normally talking 17SS of models working in concert to get an effect. Now generally I find 17SS of melee or shooting models can easily get equal if not better results.

 

For example 2 Belles + Seamus to lure out a model and shoot it... For the Same points you can have Lilith and Mature Nephilim rampaging through the enemy lines.

 

I feel the Belles are where they are because the Rezers have little to no shooting, the Belles themselves do not do much damage (and taking out models is important, every Belle you take is a model that isn't doing direct damage). Rezers really have no way to cover lanes and control the game as they can't set up a sniper to cover a route across the board.

 

also +3 is hardly auto success, if I'm playing against Guild there is a lot of Sh 6 against my Rezers average Df 4, which is +2, but shots do miss.

 

Honestly I have to agree with this.  Lure doesn't even do any damage.  You can use it to get a model out of position to attack it with other things and sure it's useful but I hardly find it the "auto-win" people are talking about in this thread.  Also remember, although it's Ca 8 it's a Wp Df so it's really only a +2.  Belles do one thing and one thing well, move models about.

 

Bringing them down to Ca 7 would be reasonable if they're too strong (which is debatable).  But at Ca 6 you're talking about +0 ability to do the single thing they can do.

[rancor709]

I'm not convinced one way or the other if the solitary belle herself is the problem or if the problem is a hidden universal issue where taking say x number of anything over turns the system balance. Such as taking x number of dogs has the same issue as taking x number of belles or x number of Punk zombies. The belle has an out-liar  casting stat which is at the games soft mathematical cap, I say this because the Stone upgrades that boost stats hard cap the boosted at no more than 8. So there are really 2 questions at work here, 1 is a cast 8 on a movement spell that targets wp too strong on an individual model basis? If yes adjust the stat, If no is there a critical mass of said ability that it fundamentally alters the game state and the game math to a point that the outcome is never in doubt? If Yes what is that critical mass and adjust the rarity to be below it. 

 

Having played with belles a lot, I can say I dislike the belle horde, I can be more effective with just 2 belles than I can with 6 as I have greater variety and interest in playing that way. However I firmly feel and said on many occasion I believe there is a case for larger amounts of rarity in the game on most if not all model types. I think fundamentally taking a large number of anyone model type in a single list creates a large skew result.

[tadaka]

Lure does plenty of damage its called pounce. That being said its not about doing damage. It is one of the most powerful counter objective spells in the entire game. And the 5ss model is the best in the entire game at it. Malifaux is not about killing things most games. it about objectives and this model is amazing in that capacity.

[E.T.A. Hoffman]

Show of hands, who here has actually played with and against Bell spam? Spam = at least > 4 Bells

[The Godlyness]

Are you watching me. Outside my window waiting to see my hand? Creeper. Played against it once or twice i dont remember.

[Manic Mouse]

Lure does plenty of damage its called pounce. That being said its not about doing damage. It is one of the most powerful counter objective spells in the entire game. And the 5ss model is the best in the entire game at it. Malifaux is not about killing things most games. it about objectives and this model is amazing in that capacity.

 

Correction: it gives you the possibility of dealing damage with a successful flip if you lure them into melee range.

 

Should lure be removed from all the other 5ss models that have it too then?  Sure they aren't as good at it, but they also do lots of other things better than Belles.  Belles are the best in the game at it because it's pretty much the only thing they're good at (for their cost).  I could get behind a reduction to Ca 7 if it's too much (after enough data has been collected), however lots of people in this thread are calling for Ca 6.  This would be a "my threatening gun" all over again, the model would be rendered useless with a double cuddle.  at +0 to lure I would see little reason to spend 5SS on a belle, when for the same cost you have other models with the same lure AND other great abilities. Performers would be objectively better than belles at that point, for the same cost.  And anyone can take them for 6SS, so even in Seamus lists they would probably be preferable.

 

EDIT: And honestly even with things the way they are performers are probably better than belles.  Better damage, more versatile, can hand out reactivate and take interact actions while engaged.  Also flat out amazing triggers and can cripple models with seduction.  They're like the nurse and rotten belle had a better baby.

[mythicFOX]

Show of hands, who here has actually played with and against Bell spam? Spam = at least > 4 Bells

I've volunteered to, and in that sprint Csonti has offered to take me on. The previous page has the details of the game we'll play.

Can I ask you to forward him any thoughts lists or tactics you think would best arm him for our game. I really want to see this in action.

[Soundwave]

I've played with a bell-spammy list, and it is all fine and dandy until stuff like Vent Steam, Counterspell aura etc comes into play.

It's definately not unbeatable. What it is, is an all-eggs-in-one-basket kind of deal that will work incredibly against some lists and fail utterly against others.

[Pierowmaniac]

My thoughts:

 

Yes I agree Lure is good on Belles, but it should be because thats what they do and without it they would be a bit pointless.

.....however I personally think they really don't need the 'discard a card' trigger which is really just rubbing the opponents nose in it.

 

For the record I'd happily continue to use belles without the trigger and with a Ca reduction to 7, or alternatively with just a reduction to Ca 6.

[Brightmore]

Having played Belles a bunch and in some builds running 3. 

 

Lure is very strong, but it is balanced in that Resser's have very poor shooting. The problem with running 15+ Stones of bells, is once the guy gets there, then what? Belles are garbage in hand to hand. Now if you pull them into range of one of your beaters you can get solid pay out, but then your having 10+ soul stones that have only one job to lend a hand for another 7-10 soul stone model to do work.

 

Or you could just be Guild and spend that 10 Stones on guys with guns, and shoot and achieve similar damage output per stone. 

 

Lure is just this games mechanism to counter shooting without shooting. Most models with the real aren't actually that great in Combat, and are paying a steep price for the ability. 

 

When I started playing, I thought Rotten Belles were OP, particularly when my friends would play ultra shooting stacked crews, and I would pick off their models. Then my friend got wise and started running models I didn't want to lure making it a dead rule on their card.(Luring a Peace Keeper generally ends badly for you). 

 

To be fair, I get that 8 CA might be too strong for their ability, but I will also point out they have a ML of 5, and a min damage of 1. Personally, I would be fine with trading one point of CA, for a point of ML, no questions asked, or a meaningful trigger.  The discard a card trigger is there to synergize with Relentless assault, it actually doesn't come up much unless your playing a super belle stacked crews, but the rub is super belle stacked crews gets eatten alive by masters that are beaters, or strong enforcers.

 

Personally at CA 6, I am not sure I would run them anymore, I certainly wouldn't summon them.

 

If you want to complain about overpowered models, talk about Nurses that are insanely strong.

[ehren37]

The trigger is the worst part. Wish oiran had that trigger.

 

Or lower CA and the suit. Oiran needed a little love.

[Ausplosions]

Well OK lets have a look

Well. That's the problem for that group. There isn't even close to enough terrain on those boards.

[rgarbonzo]

On that board Rami and a Student would dominate. 

[Ausplosions]

If your protect territory is relying on a single model, in a single position, then you've been outplayed. It's fairly easy to have one model hitting it for multiple markers. setting up 2-3 would get you the VP even if one model is moved out of position.

This post sums up the ridiculousness of this entire thread.

I don't usually like to play the L2Play card.

But seriously.

Learn to play.

[Math Mathonwy]

It was stated several times that Lure has a 95% chance of success. How was this calculated? I don't, unfortunately, currently have access to my custom system for accurately calculating the probabilities in Malifaux (and really can't be arsed to code one again) but doing some quick and dirty calculations I'm getting a 75% success rate against Wp 5. Give or take three percentage points max, I'd say.

Now, I realize that cheating skews this and if you cheat a 12 you will win (and, let's face, 11 is enough in far majority of the cases) but surely that doesn't turn a 75% chance to a 95%? Especially if you're Luring like crazy with six belles (you simply can't cheat that much).

[Justin]

10 pages is about all this needs. Points have been made.

 

Feel free to post a new thread once test games have been played.