|
Post by Tekanan on May 7, 2017 9:00:49 GMT
If we're looking to equalize the power level of warmachine and Hordes, number 2 is the better option - 3/4 is about the maximum number of heavy beasts you can run in most hordes lists, due to both fury/point cost issues. Personally according to my playstyle and preference, this is the route I'd wish to go. However with PP and most people loving the option to play 5+ warjacks, Option 1 is IMO the best compromise to stop list spamming.
|
|
|
Post by Morganstern on May 7, 2017 9:35:55 GMT
The problem isn't power up. The problem is PP changing the points level in MK3 to make things more granular while simultaneously being very lazy in balancing point values. There are to many cheep, spamable Jacks out there that make abusing power up easy.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on May 7, 2017 9:46:52 GMT
Option 1 penalises playing anything but High Focus casters in factions based around using Warjacks. I'd love to see your thoughts on this. Can you explain more? For Option 1: FOC 5 casters can Power Up 5 warjacks for free. FOC 6 casters can Power Up 6 warjacks for free. FOC 7 casters can Power Up 7 warjacks for free. FOC 8 casters can Power Up 8 warjacks for free. I only find it penalising if you intend to play a 7+ warjack list. Then yes, the restriction voids playing FOC 5 and FOC 6 warcasters. However, it seems like majority of the sane people don't play more than 6. For Option 2: FOC 5 casters can Power Up 3 warjacks for free. FOC 6 casters can Power Up 3 warjacks for free. FOC 7 casters can Power Up 4 warjacks for free. FOC 8 casters can Power Up 4 warjacks for free. You can power up one warjack extra for having FOC 7. This is a huge boost but for FOC 5-6 warcasters, it only means they need to be creative in their list building and tactics. Is also ties in to the fluff that warcasters with a higher sense of arcane magic can do more things. Im playing kraye or Darius or God forbid, karchev. I go back to the mk 2 world of choosing to play a caster with jacks, or just play Haley because she runs jacks and infantry fine. Does Gorten want to run some bunnies? Too bad, take some glorious highshields instead. I don't see why 1 focus is so much of a problem for casters while warbeast get multiple fury for free. In a game where most pieces dies after being committed, even frenzy in occasionally isn't a big deal. This edition is great for warjacks, and that's awesome because warjacks are the coolest part of the setting. Warjacks still need more focus to do anything meaningful. I'd just make beasts run for free if there is such an issue.
|
|
spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on May 7, 2017 9:50:24 GMT
Well PP can't do a FA Cap by this point, but what about the Maurader? It's more resilient then powerful. PP sure can do an FA cap. It would annoy me a hell of a lot less than Premeasuring changes because I know its for the good of the game I've said it before, but limiting the number of a type of 'jack or 'beast will not limit 'jack (or 'beast) spam at all. If you limit all 'jacks to FA3, I can still spam two or more different types of 'jacks (or beasts) that have a similar role in lists. In other words, it would result in a sort of pseudo-diversity where although you can see lots of different types of 'jacks, they all perform the same function. And that's before we get to the lesser beasts of Legion and Skorne. Legion can create lessers in game by means of the Spawning Vessel and Reptile Hounds are designed to be spammed (Serriously, they don't work if you don't take at least two). Add to that the fact that an FA of more than 2 is, for the most part, meaningless at the 75 point level and there is almost literally no reason to change the FA. In fact, PP have only ever increased FA (Stromclad went from FA2 to FAU for example). I feel that the best solution isn't to impose a game-wide FA limit on 'beasts and 'jacks (and yes, it would have to be both), but to examine and re-balance the models that are spammed or the caster that they are taken with. Ultimately, neither is popular; FA because it directly invalidates purchases and nerfs because they indirectly invalidate purchases. But, the effects of imposing a game-wide FA limit will affect far more people directly than nerfing a single interaction.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on May 7, 2017 11:48:18 GMT
PP sure can do an FA cap. It would annoy me a hell of a lot less than Premeasuring changes because I know its for the good of the game I've said it before, but limiting the number of a type of 'jack or 'beast will not limit 'jack (or 'beast) spam at all. If you limit all 'jacks to FA3, I can still spam two or more different types of 'jacks (or beasts) that have a similar role in lists. In other words, it would result in a sort of pseudo-diversity where although you can see lots of different types of 'jacks, they all perform the same function. And that's before we get to the lesser beasts of Legion and Skorne. Legion can create lessers in game by means of the Spawning Vessel and Reptile Hounds are designed to be spammed (Serriously, they don't work if you don't take at least two). Add to that the fact that an FA of more than 2 is, for the most part, meaningless at the 75 point level and there is almost literally no reason to change the FA. In fact, PP have only ever increased FA (Stromclad went from FA2 to FAU for example). I feel that the best solution isn't to impose a game-wide FA limit on 'beasts and 'jacks (and yes, it would have to be both), but to examine and re-balance the models that are spammed or the caster that they are taken with. Ultimately, neither is popular; FA because it directly invalidates purchases and nerfs because they indirectly invalidate purchases. But, the effects of imposing a game-wide FA limit will affect far more people directly than nerfing a single interaction. I don't care about jack/beast spam. Some tiers and casters are built around playing all beasts/jacks/infantry. That's awesome. When a single type of jack/beast/infantry becomes the most efficient option then something else is needed. Karchev bringing 100 points of Jacks. Cool. Karchev bringing 100 points of Mad Dogs is a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Morganstern on May 7, 2017 11:58:49 GMT
I don't care about jack/beast spam. Some tiers and casters are built around playing all beasts/jacks/infantry. That's awesome. When a single type of jack/beast/infantry becomes the most efficient option then something else is needed. Karchev bringing 100 points of Jacks. Cool. Karchev bringing 100 points of Mad Dogs is a problem. Not to mention that playing against that kind of list is just plain boring.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on May 7, 2017 12:27:08 GMT
I don't care about jack/beast spam. Some tiers and casters are built around playing all beasts/jacks/infantry. That's awesome. When a single type of jack/beast/infantry becomes the most efficient option then something else is needed. Karchev bringing 100 points of Jacks. Cool. Karchev bringing 100 points of Mad Dogs is a problem. Not to mention that playing against that kind of list is just plain boring. Meh, no game is boring to me in Warmachine. There is always something to do. Those games remind me of tower defence
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on May 7, 2017 13:07:26 GMT
Option 1 penalises playing anything but High Focus casters in factions based around using Warjacks. I'd love to see your thoughts on this. Can you explain more? For Option 1: FOC 5 casters can Power Up 5 warjacks for free. FOC 6 casters can Power Up 6 warjacks for free. FOC 7 casters can Power Up 7 warjacks for free. FOC 8 casters can Power Up 8 warjacks for free. I only find it penalising if you intend to play a 7+ warjack list. Then yes, the restriction voids playing FOC 5 and FOC 6 warcasters. However, it seems like majority of the sane people don't play more than 6. For Option 2: FOC 5 casters can Power Up 3 warjacks for free. FOC 6 casters can Power Up 3 warjacks for free. FOC 7 casters can Power Up 4 warjacks for free. FOC 8 casters can Power Up 4 warjacks for free. You can power up one warjack extra for having FOC 7. This is a huge boost but for FOC 5-6 warcasters, it only means they need to be creative in their list building and tactics. Is also ties in to the fluff that warcasters with a higher sense of arcane magic can do more things. So people playing Amon, Karchev, Harkevich or Vyros2 (all FOC 6, all casters I typically see with 8 jacks or more, usually no more than 3 of the same), are they in the minority of the sane people or are they not part of the sane people at all? I'd add Ossrum too, but him I see with 8+ jacks only half the time.
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on May 7, 2017 13:09:52 GMT
I've said it before, but limiting the number of a type of 'jack or 'beast will not limit 'jack (or 'beast) spam at all. If you limit all 'jacks to FA3, I can still spam two or more different types of 'jacks (or beasts) that have a similar role in lists. In other words, it would result in a sort of pseudo-diversity where although you can see lots of different types of 'jacks, they all perform the same function. And that's before we get to the lesser beasts of Legion and Skorne. Legion can create lessers in game by means of the Spawning Vessel and Reptile Hounds are designed to be spammed (Serriously, they don't work if you don't take at least two). Add to that the fact that an FA of more than 2 is, for the most part, meaningless at the 75 point level and there is almost literally no reason to change the FA. In fact, PP have only ever increased FA (Stromclad went from FA2 to FAU for example). I feel that the best solution isn't to impose a game-wide FA limit on 'beasts and 'jacks (and yes, it would have to be both), but to examine and re-balance the models that are spammed or the caster that they are taken with. Ultimately, neither is popular; FA because it directly invalidates purchases and nerfs because they indirectly invalidate purchases. But, the effects of imposing a game-wide FA limit will affect far more people directly than nerfing a single interaction. I don't care about jack/beast spam. Some tiers and casters are built around playing all beasts/jacks/infantry. That's awesome. When a single type of jack/beast/infantry becomes the most efficient option then something else is needed. Karchev bringing 100 points of Jacks. Cool. Karchev bringing 100 points of Mad Dogs is a problem. Correction: was a problem. I don't see anyone doing that anymore.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 7, 2017 13:36:25 GMT
Well now they just take 10 mauraders seriously the only time I think Jack Spam is a legit problem right now is Khador marauders. I can handle 7-8 heavies but once you get to 9+ things just fall apart. It is boring to play against for most people. I play Mohsar so most games for me are a challenge and force me to play dynamically. It's also fun to watch my opponent make hard choices
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on May 7, 2017 15:11:33 GMT
Is there actually a list that's still a problem with unlimited power up?
Karchev took a big nerf with no boosts to hit, he's kinda bad against def now. Ret spams seems to be okay since they don't have cheap heavies to spam. Convergence spams don't have power up rule anyway.
So we're nerfing what, Amon and Gunbunnies? If Amon is to be unusable via power up limit, it will put Protectorate out of competition for good. Also why are we nerfing him, is there any Amon list that is broken in the world of iron fang/bane/exemplar themes running rampant? Gunbunnies? Are they that oppressive? Again, why delete the list when you can nerf bunnies themselves via point cost?
Meanwhile Kaya 3 synergy + fury mechanic is a thing. And nobody seems to be upset about that.
I think the issue resolved itself via themes and errata. Spamming cheap heavies is not the best thing you can do anymore.
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on May 7, 2017 17:20:49 GMT
Well now they just take 10 mauraders seriously the only time I think Jack Spam is a legit problem right now is Khador marauders. I can handle 7-8 heavies but once you get to 9+ things just fall apart. So one jack with one (two?) casters. Am I assuming too much to think that's hardly a reason to make a sweeping change that affects either Warmachine or the entire game as a whole?
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on May 7, 2017 17:26:53 GMT
I seriously don't get why would hanybody want to change power up at all. It just works fine the way it is now, beasts have nearly unlimited fury, heck, they are just a bit overcosted. I'm triggered lol.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 7, 2017 19:21:43 GMT
Well now they just take 10 mauraders seriously the only time I think Jack Spam is a legit problem right now is Khador marauders. I can handle 7-8 heavies but once you get to 9+ things just fall apart. So one jack with one (two?) casters. Am I assuming too much to think that's hardly a reason to make a sweeping change that affects either Warmachine or the entire game as a whole? That's exactly my point. The issue is mostly with The murauder. and particularly with Harkevitch. Mobility on Khador jacks is just a nightmare. Combined with his +3 Arm Feat it's just such an awful list to play against. At least Karachev jacks are still slow. I still think power up is too efficient. Every game is an uphill battle regardless of which faction is spamming jacks. I play protectorate too so it's not like I'm exceptionally biased against war machine. I just think it is way too easy to give jacks focus right now in contrast to thier cost.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 7, 2017 19:35:41 GMT
I seriously don't get why would hanybody want to change power up at all. It just works fine the way it is now, beasts have nearly unlimited fury, heck, they are just a bit overcosted. I'm triggered lol. If you've ever played a hordes faction you'll know that "unlimited fury" is not a thing. Our beasts frenzy and we lose them for a whole round. Most factions NEED an animus at a minimum to be able to have our heavies kill something half its cost. Hordes factions pay a steep premium for the ability to have 1 all out Turn. The issue is the Turn afterwards your combat ability and efficiency drops significantly as things have died and other things are frenzying. Kaya 3 has no threat extenders outside of hunters mark which is not exceptionally reliable. Her beasts are normally double the cost of jacks and outside of her Feat have no really survivability. There's a lot of Mat 7 in warnachine, It's really not that hard to kill warpwolves. I'm not saying hordes is underpowered. I'm not saying every beast is overpriced. I'm just saying that theres is a distinct attrition asvantage warnachine has over hordes due to points costs compared to output. Looking at stats alone does not show this. Playing lots of games shows the issue. You can't rely deny it's there. I suck it up and play the game. PP will never change power up. Mauraders will also probably be the same for a long time. I don't mind if you say Fury mechanically functions better than Focus. But don't try to argue with me about the practical in game applications and say Fury is better or "unlimited" I play Focus and Fury and I can promise Focus is easier to manipulate and work with by miles
|
|