|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 17, 2017 5:03:29 GMT
Because cards are just cardboard you buy. Minis are way more money and effort to paint. People will not be up for a rollercoaster of spending cash. Cards are also whatever. Really you can't get attached to factions because power creep will make them irrelevant. In Wargames what If I like a certain element? Im not here to play only with whatever sub faction you just released. Maybe I actually wanted to play the slayer?
|
|
|
Post by drach42 on Jun 17, 2017 12:49:49 GMT
As is often the case on boards I disagree pretty strongly with many of these opinions. The corruptor is probably one of the best ranged jacks in the game, I have started running 1 with a death ripper and a night wretch as my standard denny1 package. I run 2 with shade1(I have tried 4 but I didn't like it as much) and gaspy1. Defense 13 when put into cover becomes dicey even for rat 7 boosted shots. The versatility of making an arc node, the 5in pow 10 Aoe, or just boosting a pow 14 on a debuffed target is strong. In my opinion slayer is in a great spot as one of the cheapest viable heavies in the game. It is fragile but hits way harder and/or is faster than anything else in that class.
The reaper is also in a great spot, drag threat makes my opponents waste time ensuring they position correctly or loose a heavy with little reprisal. It is also a fantastic assasination piece.
All in all the slayer chassis is cheap and has great output, with the drawback of being fragile. Our jacks are glass cannons, for those that haven't heard of the reference, they have great output and mobility but at the sacrifice of durability. This tends to mean that they are more difficult to use but have higher returns when used well. I will take slayers and reapers over juggernauts anyday.
All of these are my opinion, so take it if you want.
|
|
walden
Junior Strategist
Posts: 136
|
Post by walden on Jun 17, 2017 17:24:19 GMT
As is often the case on boards I disagree pretty strongly with many of these opinions. The corruptor is probably one of the best ranged jacks in the game, I have started running 1 with a death ripper and a night wretch as my standard denny1 package. I run 2 with shade1(I have tried 4 but I didn't like it as much) and gaspy1. Defense 13 when put into cover becomes dicey even for rat 7 boosted shots. The versatility of making an arc node, the 5in pow 10 Aoe, or just boosting a pow 14 on a debuffed target is strong. In my opinion slayer is in a great spot as one of the cheapest viable heavies in the game. It is fragile but hits way harder and/or is faster than anything else in that class. The reaper is also in a great spot, drag threat makes my opponents waste time ensuring they position correctly or loose a heavy with little reprisal. It is also a fantastic assasination piece. All in all the slayer chassis is cheap and has great output, with the drawback of being fragile. Our jacks are glass cannons, for those that haven't heard of the reference, they have great output and mobility but at the sacrifice of durability. This tends to mean that they are more difficult to use but have higher returns when used well. I will take slayers and reapers over juggernauts anyday. All of these are my opinion, so take it if you want. I haven't used the corrupter so I'm not sure on its usability. However I have used both the slayer and the reaper. I haven't used the reaper very often, but I always appreciated the toolbox he gives. Being able to Eden's the threat of your army is fantastic. Yes, most of us have heard of the term 'glass cannon' , though in the slayers case it's better called 'glass'. The only way he hits hard is with debuffs. And now that we cannot hotswap debuffs it makes it hard to spread that around and have them do work. They never get there points back for me unless I take them swarm style.
|
|
|
Post by seymourgutz on Jun 19, 2017 21:17:18 GMT
phasing out minis based on a timeframe is ridiculous. Why? This hobby involves a significant financial investment and invalidating purchases would be a cynical shortsighted ploy against existing customers, and a losing gamble, because a sizeable percentage of players (myself included) would abandon PP forever if this was the sort of untrustworthy company they turned into.
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on Jun 19, 2017 22:58:12 GMT
because it costs 5-10 dollars to buy a pack of cards, while some models cost upwards of 150 dollars (and come disassembled and unpainted?)
|
|
|
Post by gobber on Jun 19, 2017 23:14:52 GMT
This hobby involves a significant financial investment and invalidating purchases would be a cynical shortsighted ploy against existing customers, and a losing gamble, because a sizeable percentage of players (myself included) would abandon PP forever if this was the sort of untrustworthy company they turned into. Privateer has more or less committed to not invalidating their players' purchases like GW has. The few instances that have come up (cephalyx bloats, bad seeds/ATGM, zerkova's vanguards, etc) have involved a burst of at least partially justified internet tooth gnashing. I may not quit the game entirely if this happened, but I'd buy *way* fewer models. I can be relatively assured of getting close ~50% of msrp on the used market, which means acquiring underused models on sale is a reasonably safe bet (even if I have to wait a year or more to be buffed to usability). If they started invalidating models like that entirely, there's absolutely no way I'd continue that behavior. If the community around me saw a similar decline, it's possible I'd just get out entirely (and probably lose much of the 50% resale value of what I already own during the mass exodus).
|
|
kuarnix
Junior Strategist
Posts: 145
|
Post by kuarnix on Jun 19, 2017 23:57:07 GMT
Yeah, I suspect the strongest action they could take in that way is basically an extended version of ADR.
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 20, 2017 4:05:01 GMT
This hobby involves a significant financial investment and invalidating purchases would be a cynical shortsighted ploy against existing customers, and a losing gamble, because a sizeable percentage of players (myself included) would abandon PP forever if this was the sort of untrustworthy company they turned into. Privateer has more or less committed to not invalidating their players' purchases like GW has. The few instances that have come up (cephalyx bloats, bad seeds/ATGM, zerkova's vanguards, etc) have involved a burst of at least partially justified internet tooth gnashing. I may not quit the game entirely if this happened, but I'd buy *way* fewer models. I can be relatively assured of getting close ~50% of msrp on the used market, which means acquiring underused models on sale is a reasonably safe bet (even if I have to wait a year or more to be buffed to usability). If they started invalidating models like that entirely, there's absolutely no way I'd continue that behavior. If the community around me saw a similar decline, it's possible I'd just get out entirely (and probably lose much of the 50% resale value of what I already own during the mass exodus). Ho boy, where to even begin? Man, do I even want to? Not really, actually, but here goes. All hobbies are a significant financial investment. I spent a ton of money earlier this year on hiking equipment, and that was just to get a basic set of gear together (tent, boots, mess kit, etc.). I have a friend who builds computers for fun and another friend who builds cars. Both of those hobbies take way more time and money than Warmachine. If we want to stay in the realm of gaming / collectibles, I know more than a few people whose MTG collections are worth thousands upon thousands of (US) dollars and most of them have been playing that game for over a decade. Let's not pretend like wargaming / Warmachine has a monopoly on expense or even time - it doesn't. That said, there is an argument to be made for the emotional attachment that comes with assembling and painting minis. That actually makes sense, and is unique (by and large) to miniatures games. This is a much more compelling stance and one that holds up under scrutiny, unlike the financial burden one. As for a "Standard Format"... listen, I get it, I really do, but y'all have to have realized that PP has for sure thought long and hard about the long term health of their game and come up with some sort of plan to keep things from getting out of hand. They can't keep releasing new models forever and expect the game to stay balanced and fun - there will just be too many variables to keep track of, not to mention model redundancy. In fact, I'd wager that themes are PP's way of addressing these issues while not using a standard format. Take Idrians and Errant over in Menoth for instance. Back before the Exemplar theme no one was playing Errants at all since Idrians did the same job, but better. There was much grumbling and gnashing of teeth. But look, a new theme force! And one where you can take Errants but not Idrians! Suddenly, two units that were suffering from overlap are both seeing play because themes have separated them from one another. Another example would be the Gatormen Posse in Minions. They are hot garbage out of theme but suddenly there is a super awesome theme just for them that awards a much needed power boost without actually changing the base model. I personally think a Standard Format for competitive play would have been an acceptable solution to the model bloat problem, but if PP's answer is to compartmentalize factions through liberal use of themes then I'm willing to see how it works out for them. I'd also like to point out that while Standard in MTG is the most competitive format there are still major tournaments for the Modern, Legacy, and Commander formats. Just because a Standard format exists doesn't mean all of the older models get lit on fire and hurled into the sea. We're also all going on the assumption that things would rotate on an annual cycle. What if it's every edition? That would mean, what, a model would be Standard legal for 6 years or so at least before getting rotated out? I don't know about you but if my $30 Seether is Standard legal for 6+ years I think that's a pretty good deal. This is all just my opinion, obviously, but I think that having a Standard-esque format makes a game better not worse.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 20, 2017 5:00:09 GMT
Ho boy, where to even begin? Man, do I even want to? Not really, actually, but here goes. I freaking quit magic because you keep investing money in a game which value continues to drop. Maybe one business model doesn't carry over. And it STILL causes powercreep and stuff.Their collections if just left untouched would all DECREASE in value over time except for MAYBE few rare accidental overpowered cards that Wizards still hopefully doesn't have the heart to make power creep versions of. Magic the Gathering is a business model that depends on impulse buys, addiction, and just being really big. Your comparisons are UTTERLY flawed because whilst you invest way more money, your hobbies are ones of practicality. You invest more money for better equipment or better computer stuff because its objectively better. Not because your stopped at the park and told to buy the equpment all over again. Also, not every game can follow the same business model. Because this isn't a collecting hobby as much as a crafts hobby.
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 20, 2017 5:28:46 GMT
Ho boy, where to even begin? Man, do I even want to? Not really, actually, but here goes. I freaking quit magic because you keep investing money in a game which value continues to drop. Maybe one business model doesn't carry over. And it STILL causes powercreep and stuff.Their collections if just left untouched would all DECREASE in value over time except for MAYBE few rare accidental overpowered cards that Wizards still hopefully doesn't have the heart to make power creep versions of. Magic the Gathering is a business model that depends on impulse buys, addiction, and just being really big. Your comparisons are UTTERLY flawed because whilst you invest way more money, your hobbies are ones of practicality. You invest more money for better equipment or better computer stuff because its objectively better. Not because your stopped at the park and told to buy the equpment all over again. Also, not every game can follow the same business model. Because this isn't a collecting hobby as much as a crafts hobby. And people dropping a couple hundred dolloroos on Ghost Fleet is different because...?
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jun 20, 2017 5:36:46 GMT
They get actual cool toys to spend hours assembling, painting and playing with instead of pieces of card whose worth is totally abstract and exists only in a player's(addict's?) head.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 20, 2017 6:13:01 GMT
Because ghost fleet is the most competative option at the moment. Competative players tend to rush towards anything.
Its a design flaw that pps attempting to fix with buffs to banez and the like.
Its not a design intention. People where PISSED when they had armies made weaker. It doesnt support your point.
|
|
|
Post by heckler on Jun 21, 2017 2:52:53 GMT
MTG has far more players than any mini's game. My WMH crew is about 25 people that cycle through (not that many weekly but that is the core that show up when they can; about 40 total if we count everyone over the course of a year). I also play Modern and Legacy for magic. Magic has about 100 players coming every friday for standard/draft. Modern fires with 20-30; legacy with 15ish.
It's far different because unsleeving cardboard doesn't spread the salt nearly as much as taking time and effort to build and paint a force that rotates out. If you believe the effect on the community as a whole would be a positive one, then I believe you to be a poor predictor of behavior.
WMH already had faction bloat to the point where they had more active SKU listings than GW as a whole about 4-5 years ago. This was actually the driving force behind the 10 man infantry boxes and 6/10 models per unit instead of 6 to 10 like in MK1. The problem is that GW makes new units for their games but at a far slower pace than WMH. Even at their current accelerated pace, they put out around 20 SKU's a year per game (more a lot of the time, but much of their new models are resculpts of current models) but WMH generates about 5-10 per major faction (caster, unit, UA, jack and solo minimum) every year (meaning upwards of 50 per year).
|
|
|
Post by tesoe on Jun 21, 2017 5:38:11 GMT
I think we've deviated of the topic of the Slayer chassis. It would probably be a good idea to open a new thread in the general discussion subforum to discuss the topic of retiring or cycling out models.
|
|
kuarnix
Junior Strategist
Posts: 145
|
Post by kuarnix on Jun 21, 2017 17:12:14 GMT
I think we've deviated of the topic of the Slayer chassis. It would probably be a good idea to open a new thread in the general discussion subforum to discuss the topic of retiring or cycling out models. Bile tomato is right. I want to talk about helljack tactics and combos, not setting up a "standard-style" rotation for warmachine (fun as that may be).
|
|