|
Post by sirk on Mar 12, 2017 10:28:40 GMT
Spam lists are only about battlegroup, and regarding to that, I have always thought that FA U makes no sense at all. If it were FA 2 for all jacks and beasts (maybe you can 3 for lights), a lot of troubles would be resolved for the better.
|
|
Grimolf
Junior Strategist
Posts: 246
|
Post by Grimolf on Mar 12, 2017 16:19:37 GMT
I am not personally going to buy into a spam list. I don't want to play one, and I don't want to risk seeing the models I purchase in large quantitites get reduced in power. If others want to play spam lists, however, that's their right. I'll figure out how to deal with their spam on the battlefield.
Theme lists are potentially interesting, but I see them as being very difficult for PP to balance well. On the other hand, I'm not eager to go out and purchase multiple copies of a unit. I like the look of Ghost Fleet, but I'm not eager to go and buy multiple units of Revenant Crew in order to maximize my theme benefits. That annoys me a little, but again, if others do it that's fine.
|
|
vitzh
Baby's First Wargame
Posts: 8
|
Post by vitzh on Mar 12, 2017 17:35:16 GMT
To add something further, if theme lists continue as they are now every list is likely to become a theme list. This may be intended but is hard to say right now.
|
|
|
Post by AdeptusB on Mar 12, 2017 19:23:08 GMT
I like the core idea of Theme Forces: rewarding fluff consistency with mechanical benefits that help counterbalance lists that focus on statistical superiority without regard to fluff-logic. The implementation of that idea is often imperfect, of course, but not enough to put me off the concept entirely.
Spam lists, on the other hand, are just flat-out unfun to play against, which is bad for the health of the game.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 13, 2017 11:53:51 GMT
Spam lists I honestly don't care about. If a model is broken, then its broken at 1 model to infinite models. FA restrictions just place a band aid on a problem and isn't an elegant fix, neither are increasing points scales. I like facing lists that spam certain stuff because its a fun game. Its about leveraging your strengths into your opponents weaknesses on a larger scale.
Theme Forces I find have a myriad of pros and a couple of cons, but I am leaning towards them being a net positive to the game. I like having good reasons to run thematic armies, I like restrictions being used to drive list design. Seeing Storm Blades/Lancers/Gobber Mechanik units? Thats awesome! That's really good!
On the other hand, you don't see many characters outside of their caster, which is good and bad, but mainly it sucks when a Character Jack/beast isn't good with their caster, like Brickhouse. I think if PP wants to, they could push the Theme concept to be the more balanced and better way to play the game. Stop putting a premium on non-theme and make 'choosing a theme, with the strengths, weaknesses, options and limitations' that go with it.
To do this they would need to shift the balance a little bit, include more characters into themes, include more mercs into themes, but it could work.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Mar 13, 2017 12:08:24 GMT
The biggest problem with themes is that they are not everywhere (So more points for some) and the underlying themes about them.
Because Warjacks are machines most themes will allow any/all non-character jacks in Cygnar, Khador, Cryx. Mercs, Ret have additional limitations which get reflected on the themes and make them even more pass/fail. On the Hordes side it's worse, the models beeing grouped into families turn the themes in mini-factions which severely limits the ways to use them and will translate into a point disadvantage. Circle has the usual living vs construct themes, Legion has Nephilim and Flying as ways to reduce the BG composition, Skorne and trolls seem to escape unscatheded for now... Minions have the same limit as Mercs.
I still see no upside to spam lists. You can have jack/armor/infantry/defense skews without having the same model over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Mar 13, 2017 12:10:25 GMT
Spam lists I honestly don't care about. If a model is broken, then its broken at 1 model to infinite models. ...
100% true but having a 1pt "advantage" because X model is undercosted isn't the same as an infinite PT advantage. It sidesteps the problem by greatly reducing it's impact.
Just imagine mtg without a 4 card limitation, not the same game at all. Probably not a good game at all.
|
|
|
Post by sideshowlucifer on Mar 13, 2017 15:44:29 GMT
I hate theme lists for much the same reasons Haight posted, they are either craptastic and ignored, or they are so good that they make playing out of a theme against them a big disadvantage. They are insanely hard to balance. I was hoping that if they continued the idea of theme forces it would be more giving unique abilities or something to models and none of the free points. I'm also not a fan of how restrictive some themes are while others are pretty open to things you would take anyways. I think the Cryx theme and Legion flying theme are good examples on how restrictive they should be. Sadly, PP already has said they want themes to be a large part of the game and think about 90% of players will playing in one theme or another. My guess is it will be 90% of people playing in a very small amount of themes since some are obviously way better than others.
As for spam lists, yep hate them. I got tired of them in MKI with Seraph spam and really hate jack spam now in MKIII even more. It's not fun to play against and it isn't fun to play, unless your that guy who just enjoys crushing your opponent's desire to play. Sadly, I also see no change coming here since themes kinda reinforce spamming.
This whole edition is turning into something I'm just not excited about and I find myself skipping more and more WM days at the shops to do something else. It's been great for my money since I'm not spending any on gaming, but between the state of MKIII, the forums loss, and the PG's being disbanded, I just don't want to support them until I can get a more clear picture of what the future looks like.
|
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396
|
Post by Haight on Mar 13, 2017 16:29:16 GMT
Sideshowlucifer, my one regret is I have but one like to give.
I literally could have written that post, verbatim.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Mar 13, 2017 17:18:59 GMT
First off, if themes were supposed to not give points then they need to remove all free solos and officers, then tamp down some of the costs of said models as a whole so people can fit some of them. Otherwise, PP has nailed exactly what to do with theme bonuses in the Khador theme revamp: give bonuses based on what OTHER parts of the theme are complete. Imagine if Protectorate's infantry theme worked like this:
One Daughters unit gets ambush.
For every officer of Temple Flameguard, one non-temple flameguard unit may use the Iron Zeal ability once per game.
For every unit of cleansers, one warjack, unit, or solo may gain fire immunity.
For every unit of Flamebringers, one unit or solo may gain pathfinder.
If Pyrrhus is in the army, one unit of Temple Flameguard gain advance move.
and so on. I realize it'd be a %*&%$^ to balance or record keep, but PP's pretty much gone digital: it should be possible.
As for spam, it's not always effective or boring, and FA is a poor way to do anything about it. What's more, "spam" does not necessitate the same exact model(hello 3 crusaders, 3 indictors, and 2 castigators would be titled "warjack spam" by pretty much anyone). Interlocking theme bonuses, however, are an excellent way to fix spammy themes. In general play, you simply have to reward people for having an army capable of handling multiple objectives. Since you can't count on an unnamed, unspecified opponent to not spam and give you those varied objectives, the new steamroller capture types might actually be the right choice.
In the end, unfortunately, these discussions are even more moot than before. PP isn't going to change the game based on them, and now won't even see them so I have no idea what they'll think people have issues with. The game we have includes spam and obviously unbalanced themes that give free points and almost random bonuses. I guess that's what we'll play.
|
|
|
Post by socialirregular on Mar 13, 2017 17:44:02 GMT
Got to say as a Legion player, not super happy with theme forces. I have to imagine that because of the 'free' points we get from them by taking beasts - we won't be getting a faction (or even Hordes)-wide reduction in beast costs like I had been hoping for. Unless they re-balance the themes to take into account the new point costs, which I kind of doubt. And like others have pointed out, I'd rather each model be fixed/changed than attempting to use restrictive list building to compensate for below-average ability.
|
|
|
Post by phantasmagorium on Mar 13, 2017 19:10:51 GMT
I like theme forces. I think they are intentionally being used as a balancing point as the game grows ever larger.
I'm also fine with spam. To be honest, most of the "combined arms lists" people wail about not seeing look like shit on the table because the various subthemes don't mesh. Miserable Meat Mountain might have been a monster to play into, but it was damned pretty.
|
|
|
Post by Kibasreign on Mar 13, 2017 20:07:26 GMT
I personally think spam lists help to bring balance. Ultimately I think they are/can be broken but if a model is good enough to spam it's probably doing something way under its point cost and needs to be fixed. With constant errata updates this allows for models to be fixed rather quickly and should help bring a more balanced game.
However, some casters almost require spam to be useful. Take 2una for example, she brings a specific benefit to 3 models in all of circle 2 of which are aweful leaving you with one option resulting in "spam". Ultimately I don't think the Scaresfell Griffon was the problem but the caster (feat). By allowing FA:U una becomes viable.
Theme forces I think are breaking the game and are way harder to fix. I think this is mainly due to PP's mindset that they want everybody playing in theme which "allows" broken themes to go unpunished because it's what they want to see. I like the idea of theme forces but free points does not balance easily. Also, it's not fun when your factions (circle) theme forces suck and your opponent (cygnar) has two amazing theme forces to work with. All that equates to you playing 15 points (one Jack/beast) down because you don't have equal tools...
In addition, I hate the idea that models suck but "hey you can play them in theme to fix them". If a model doesn't work then they should be fixed on the model level not being forced into a theme to allow models to be useful. I don't want to tailor an entire list to a group of models just because I want to use one unit that will never get played otherwise... Fix the model/unit so I can use it with whatever I want and where it fits, don't force it to fit.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 13, 2017 23:40:44 GMT
I personally think spam lists help to bring balance. Ultimately I think they are/can be broken but if a model is good enough to spam it's probably doing something way under its point cost and needs to be fixed. With constant errata updates this allows for models to be fixed rather quickly and should help bring a more balanced game. However, some casters almost require spam to be useful. Take 2una for example, she brings a specific benefit to 3 models in all of circle 2 of which are aweful leaving you with one option resulting in "spam". Ultimately I don't think the Scaresfell Griffon was the problem but the caster (feat). By allowing FA:U una becomes viable. Theme forces I think are breaking the game and are way harder to fix. I think this is mainly due to PP's mindset that they want everybody playing in theme which "allows" broken themes to go unpunished because it's what they want to see. I like the idea of theme forces but free points does not balance easily. Also, it's not fun when your factions (circle) theme forces suck and your opponent (cygnar) has two amazing theme forces to work with. All that equates to you playing 15 points (one Jack/beast) down because you don't have equal tools... In addition, I hate the idea that models suck but "hey you can play them in theme to fix them". If a model doesn't work then they should be fixed on the model level not being forced into a theme to allow models to be useful. I don't want to tailor an entire list to a group of models just because I want to use one unit that will never get played otherwise... Fix the model/unit so I can use it with whatever I want and where it fits, don't force it to fit. Tharn theme force has already won a Iron Gauntlet qualifier. It is a legit theme.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 13, 2017 23:45:20 GMT
I personally think spam lists help to bring balance. Ultimately I think they are/can be broken but if a model is good enough to spam it's probably doing something way under its point cost and needs to be fixed. With constant errata updates this allows for models to be fixed rather quickly and should help bring a more balanced game. However, some casters almost require spam to be useful. Take 2una for example, she brings a specific benefit to 3 models in all of circle 2 of which are aweful leaving you with one option resulting in "spam". Ultimately I don't think the Scaresfell Griffon was the problem but the caster (feat). By allowing FA:U una becomes viable. Theme forces I think are breaking the game and are way harder to fix. I think this is mainly due to PP's mindset that they want everybody playing in theme which "allows" broken themes to go unpunished because it's what they want to see. I like the idea of theme forces but free points does not balance easily. Also, it's not fun when your factions (circle) theme forces suck and your opponent (cygnar) has two amazing theme forces to work with. All that equates to you playing 15 points (one Jack/beast) down because you don't have equal tools... In addition, I hate the idea that models suck but "hey you can play them in theme to fix them". If a model doesn't work then they should be fixed on the model level not being forced into a theme to allow models to be useful. I don't want to tailor an entire list to a group of models just because I want to use one unit that will never get played otherwise... Fix the model/unit so I can use it with whatever I want and where it fits, don't force it to fit. Tharn theme force has already won a Iron Gauntlet qualifier. It is a legit theme.
|
|