|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Jun 19, 2017 12:06:52 GMT
What incentive is there to play themes that are not powerful? Many people want to play the game and have a chance to win. Why then would they disadvantage themselves with bad themes. "Makes good stuff better" is how you play to compete with all the other similar themes. There are two options from here. Either make all themes powerful. Or all themes trash. Which would you prefer? Careful, someone could fall down that huge excluded middle and break their leg! I'd like it if themes widened the range of "good lists" by giving a way to play fluffy, thematic lists and making them as viable as a take-anything list. Instead of turning already good lists into amazing lists. Oh no you called me out. So witty... We already have that middle ground. You just don't see it because in a competitive game just "good" isn't good enough. That's why I'm saying only the extremes remain. The Iron fang theme, I think, is the best example we could ever hope for. It makes a good list while being restrictive and doesn't go over the top. As much as people hate it Children of the Dragon is the same. It's completely playable, has an interesting twist on our normal play style and model selection. To list more I have experience with directly: Infernal machines, Blindwater's theme, WGK(non-rocket spam), Wild hunt, Bones of Orboros, Ravens, Hammerfall? the dwarf one. They are all thematic and they are "Good". Also No theme outside of maybe JotW (i still can't imagine it was intended this way) made an "already good list better". When themes came out nothing just got magically upgraded. No, not even Fyanna or Thagrosh 1 got a direct upgrade. Sacrifices had to be made and lists evolved. But you only see the end product so it seems like it was always just the way it is now. For the 400th time Fyanna has to sacrifice choices and has gone through different meta evolution to get where she is and it is only by coincidence that it works out better than our "norm". I can rattle off a dozen different casters/solos/beast that people can take to ruin her. But the socially constructed meta is blind to anything not already accepted. Someone will beat JVM's Fyanna list and magically she won't be such a boogeyman. Now I'm sure you're going to rave over WGK and Vlad 1 rockets. Well Vlad 1 rockets was never a thing, in or out of theme. So what the theme did was actually facilitate making a list that was never good enough, competitive. Exactly what you're wanting from all the other themes. So I ask again, What extreme would you like to take things? We already have plenty of middle ground themes.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Jun 20, 2017 19:43:20 GMT
Oh no you called me out. So witty... We already have that middle ground. You just don't see it because in a competitive game just "good" isn't good enough. That's why I'm saying only the extremes remain. The Iron fang theme, I think, is the best example we could ever hope for. It makes a good list while being restrictive and doesn't go over the top. As much as people hate it Children of the Dragon is the same. It's completely playable, has an interesting twist on our normal play style and model selection. To list more I have experience with directly: Infernal machines, Blindwater's theme, WGK(non-rocket spam), Wild hunt, Bones of Orboros, Ravens, Hammerfall? the dwarf one. They are all thematic and they are "Good". Also No theme outside of maybe JotW (i still can't imagine it was intended this way) made an "already good list better". When themes came out nothing just got magically upgraded. No, not even Fyanna or Thagrosh 1 got a direct upgrade. Sacrifices had to be made and lists evolved. But you only see the end product so it seems like it was always just the way it is now. For the 400th time Fyanna has to sacrifice choices and has gone through different meta evolution to get where she is and it is only by coincidence that it works out better than our "norm". I can rattle off a dozen different casters/solos/beast that people can take to ruin her. But the socially constructed meta is blind to anything not already accepted. Someone will beat JVM's Fyanna list and magically she won't be such a boogeyman. Now I'm sure you're going to rave over WGK and Vlad 1 rockets. Well Vlad 1 rockets was never a thing, in or out of theme. So what the theme did was actually facilitate making a list that was never good enough, competitive. Exactly what you're wanting from all the other themes. So I ask again, What extreme would you like to take things? We already have plenty of middle ground themes. I'd like the extreme of no extremes, and I'd like themes to broaden the number of competitive lists, rather than reinforcing a gap between have and have-not factions and seemingly only giving good stuff to the weaker factions by blind chance. Yep, competitive players will all gravitate towards what's best, that's no reason to make no effort to close the gap. You seem determined to prove that I'm saying something else (and that I have an agenda to take away Legion's toys), but I'm really not. If I were magically in charge of this instead of just moaning about it on the internet, I'd like to tone down the extremes and the gear-checks, and use actual errata to balance factions instead of themes. Every benefit people attribute to theme forces seems to boil down to "Since we can't get actual errata to balance our faction / this model...."
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Jun 20, 2017 22:41:56 GMT
You seem determined to prove that I'm saying something else (and that I have an agenda to take away Legion's toys), but I'm really not. If I were magically in charge of this instead of just moaning about it on the internet, I'd like to tone down the extremes and the gear-checks, and use actual errata to balance factions instead of themes. Every benefit people attribute to theme forces seems to boil down to "Since we can't get actual errata to balance our faction / this model...." Not PP's choice, although that's an oversimplification. We got a Bane theme to improve Banes, but Banes got some non-theme attention as well. It's a balancing act (no pun intended) with more considerations than only "make each model balanced against each other model" apparently. We may not like every aspect of this exercise, but things are rarely perfect in life after all. The question is not whether we approve of every decision PP makes, but rather whether we approve of the total package. And while I have no problems with players commenting about things they'd like to see being handled differently, in fact I encourage it, I do think we should avoid looking at this in black and white.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 21, 2017 2:27:21 GMT
Storm divisions fluff is that it is all electrically immune models.
It makes all models immune to electricity.
Ergo, Storm division is too restrictive, it should be allowed to take all models.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 21, 2017 2:34:01 GMT
Storm divisions fluff is that it is all electrically immune models. It makes all models immune to electricity. Ergo, Storm division is too restrictive, it should be allowed to take all models. Octavius, you genius. Let us go to the CID right now. Surely, PP will listen to such good reasoning!
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 21, 2017 2:38:17 GMT
Storm divisions fluff is that it is all electrically immune models. It makes all models immune to electricity. Ergo, Storm division is too restrictive, it should be allowed to take all models. Octavius, you genius. Let us go to the CID right now. Surely, PP will listen to such good reasoning! At heart I am a fluffy player who just wants to play fluffy lists.
|
|