|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Aug 7, 2017 20:57:51 GMT
Chris thinks Cygnar and Cryx are a genuine problem and hasn't won anything since they nerfed the Mad Dogs, he didn't just win because of Mad Dogs but at the time he won, Cygnar weren't getting played as well in NA as they were in Europe. Pat Dunsford and Tim Banky are both switching to Grimkin and feel they have game into Cygnar. That doesn't mean the game is balance, it just means they released another faction that can compete. Seriously guys, stop fixating on how the top players are playing and start analyzing what faction they are playing that is constantly putting them on the top tables, because spoiler alert, player skill will only get you so far, eventually you have to realize you need to switch faction if you want to win a big tournament. daaaamn! that's some mighty Infomercial logic you got going there "You too can get these abs! just call our 800 number right now!" lol, I'm sure chickenslayer can tell you exactly what he was won recently. You're insane if you DON'T think that winning events is a combination of faction choice, list building, AND good play. They're all factors, and while I know it's tempting to just go "p.5 says GIT GUD NOOB" there is a very real disparity in faction performance. Yes, you need to have excellent play to win at the highest levels, but you ALSO need to not be handicapped by your faction of choice. It's kind of like how in Overwatch,you don't see Mccree in a lot of high-level comps. It wasn't that there were no good Mccree players, nor that a bad 76 player outperformed a good Mccree - but there was enough of a difference between them that he simply didn't see play, and to make it so that where the skill levels are equal, the more powerful choice has the advantage. Same goes for Warmachine - all the tech in the world won't let you win if you play badly (except in the most ridiculous of bad matchups) but it damn well does matter when skill levels are closer. And at a high-level tournament, you can generally presume that most players will be skilled - it's kind of the whole point of a 'high level tournament.' |
|
Arcaux
Junior Strategist
Posts: 724 
|
Post by Arcaux on Aug 7, 2017 22:10:49 GMT
daaaamn! that's some mighty Infomercial logic you got going there "You too can get these abs! just call our 800 number right now!" lol, I'm sure chickenslayer can tell you exactly what he was won recently. You're insane if you DON'T think that winning events is a combination of faction choice, list building, AND good play. They're all factors, and while I know it's tempting to just go "p.5 says GIT GUD NOOB" there is a very real disparity in faction performance. Yes, you need to have excellent play to win at the highest levels, but you ALSO need to not be handicapped by your faction of choice. It's kind of like how in Overwatch,you don't see Mccree in a lot of high-level comps. It wasn't that there were no good Mccree players, nor that a bad 76 player outperformed a good Mccree - but there was enough of a difference between them that he simply didn't see play, and to make it so that where the skill levels are equal, the more powerful choice has the advantage. Same goes for Warmachine - all the tech in the world won't let you win if you play badly (except in the most ridiculous of bad matchups) but it damn well does matter when skill levels are closer. And at a high-level tournament, you can generally presume that most players will be skilled - it's kind of the whole point of a 'high level tournament.' My sarcastic response aside, this is pretty much spot on. Yes we understand there is an issue with people whining about everything they lose to being OP. This isn't that, this is a systematic domination of the game by 1 faction for a full year. This is the the best players in the world, who play the faction, even coming out and saying: "Yes Cygnar is broken, and something needs to be done" A good player with a bad faction will smash an average player with the best faction, I get that, but at the top of the tree everyone is good and they are all good and more and more of them are making the decision to switch to Cygnar if they want to win tournaments. |
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Aug 7, 2017 23:09:39 GMT
You're insane if you DON'T think that winning events is a combination of faction choice, list building, AND good play. They're all factors, and while I know it's tempting to just go "p.5 says GIT GUD NOOB" there is a very real disparity in faction performance. I actually do agree that all 3 factors influence an outcome. I truly believe that. But all 3 factors don't influence the outcome in the same way, and the weight of each factor is certainly not the same for everyone across the board. For example: The winner of a game between 2 players of equal skill, assuming no mistakes, will be resolved by the strength of each list. On the other hand, the winner of a game between 2 players with similar lists will be resolved by their skill. Commonly in these internet discussions, players will default to weighing List/Faction choice heavier than personal skill. There's a phenomenon in Psychology called the Dunning–Kruger effect, where people of "low skill" overestimate just how skillful they actually are, i.e. they're so inept that they can't recognize their own ineptitude (likewise people of higher skill usually underestimate themselves). Which is why I'm very skeptical when people say there's a "real" or "obvious" disparity. I'm just tired of it. There may very well be a disparity, but I frankly don't care, because I personally don't have any control over it. I rather discuss things I do have control over, like my own play, my lists, and my execution. The ubiquitous moaning and groaning over how PP hasn't nerfed X or Y has done more to reduce my enjoyment of WM/H than any Haley_2 player has ever done. |
|
|
|
Post by skittles on Aug 7, 2017 23:41:25 GMT
I have no hard metrics. However PP is down on the IC2 list. Also lots of ancidodal complaining on the Facebook groups. What is the IC2 list? I'm not familiar with that and a Google search turned up nothing. It's actually ICv2, I just can't spell. Self reported retail sales metrics by quarter I believe. www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/08/tabletop-industry-the-top-5-games-are.html |
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Aug 7, 2017 23:58:07 GMT
You're insane if you DON'T think that winning events is a combination of faction choice, list building, AND good play. They're all factors, and while I know it's tempting to just go "p.5 says GIT GUD NOOB" there is a very real disparity in faction performance. I actually do agree that all 3 factors influence an outcome. I truly believe that. But all 3 factors don't influence the outcome in the same way, and the weight of each factor is certainly not the same for everyone across the board. For example: The winner of a game between 2 players of equal skill, assuming no mistakes, will be resolved by the strength of each list. On the other hand, the winner of a game between 2 players with similar lists will be resolved by their skill. Commonly in these internet discussions, players will default to weighing List/Faction choice heavier than personal skill. There's a phenomenon in Psychology called the Dunning–Kruger effect, where people of "low skill" overestimate just how skillful they actually are, i.e. they're so inept that they can't recognize their own ineptitude (likewise people of higher skill usually underestimate themselves). Which is why I'm very skeptical when people say there's a "real" or "obvious" disparity. I'm just tired of it. There may very well be a disparity, but I frankly don't care, because I personally don't have any control over it. I rather discuss things I do have control over, like my own play, my lists, and my execution. The ubiquitous moaning and groaning over how PP hasn't nerfed X or Y has done more to reduce my enjoyment of WM/H than any Haley_2 player has ever done. If it bothers you, stick to the faction forum. Why the heck are you posting in a thread that (apparently) bothers you to read? Unless you happen to enjoy whining about whining (which is what this post is) you're accomplishing even less than we are, by posting here. |
|
zich
Junior Strategist
Posts: 690
|
Post by zich on Aug 8, 2017 4:34:34 GMT
What is depressing is that we had this very thread about a thousand times and we still have not come even close to some form of consensus. Some people want top casters/lists to be nerfed, others do not. That's about as far as we've gotten over the years. I suggest we abort here.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Aug 8, 2017 8:52:37 GMT
You're insane if you DON'T think that winning events is a combination of faction choice, list building, AND good play. They're all factors, and while I know it's tempting to just go "p.5 says GIT GUD NOOB" there is a very real disparity in faction performance. I actually do agree that all 3 factors influence an outcome. I truly believe that. But all 3 factors don't influence the outcome in the same way, and the weight of each factor is certainly not the same for everyone across the board. For example: The winner of a game between 2 players of equal skill, assuming no mistakes, will be resolved by the strength of each list. On the other hand, the winner of a game between 2 players with similar lists will be resolved by their skill. Commonly in these internet discussions, players will default to weighing List/Faction choice heavier than personal skill. There's a phenomenon in Psychology called the Dunning–Kruger effect, where people of "low skill" overestimate just how skillful they actually are, i.e. they're so inept that they can't recognize their own ineptitude (likewise people of higher skill usually underestimate themselves). Which is why I'm very skeptical when people say there's a "real" or "obvious" disparity. I'm just tired of it. There may very well be a disparity, but I frankly don't care, because I personally don't have any control over it. I rather discuss things I do have control over, like my own play, my lists, and my execution. The ubiquitous moaning and groaning over how PP hasn't nerfed X or Y has done more to reduce my enjoyment of WM/H than any Haley_2 player has ever done. It's because on the internet, we can't measure skill. We also can't account for terrain that doesn't exist yet, nor can we account for that one rando 24 that behemoth rolls onto denny under butcher 1 feat. All that's left is list consideration. |
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Aug 8, 2017 13:32:00 GMT
This is just one tournament, with one sub set of players, in one area, in one country, in one particular meta.
I played in an 12 person tournament last Saturday where protectorate had the most players of any faction (3!).
Clearly protectorate is in need of a good nerfing since they were most played? I say this in jest, please no nerfs!!
|
|
dagowit
Junior Strategist
Posts: 171
|
Post by dagowit on Aug 8, 2017 13:45:35 GMT
What I would like to know is this: How many good players are forced/persuaded to switch factions because they constantly hear that X or Y is the only way to win?
Many of the people at the Iron Moot invitationals are players who end up there year after year. Are they there again because they switched factions or simply because they are some of the best players at the event? Nobody knows what would have happened if they had stuck to their original factions (in fact, the players who met in the final have been playing Cygnar and Cryx exclusively since before the release of mk3. I remember being stomped by his Coven list long before Themes were released).
What I have observed in my own games is that part of the problem lies in the type of lists you meet. For a long time, people have been used to countering high-ARM 'jack spam lists. Suddenly infantry becomes a thing in Cryx and people are still adapting.
I'm not saying the popular lists aren't insanely strong. It just seems that people have forgotten the mk2 days when you needed, say, an RFP counter in every tournament pairing to play into Gaspy2 (although whether that is good for the game is another discussion). All I am saying is that everyone (me included) have been complaining about Storm Lances yet - despite there being a ton of Cygnar players - I think I saw two lists with Storm Lances at the Iron Moot (both under Stryker3). Some things change without errata (the changes to Storm Lances are not live yet).
|
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Aug 8, 2017 14:20:02 GMT
Are we back to needing more data? Definitely. Winning almost every major tournament in the last six months isn't statistically significant ;-) Like with Wurmwood, Karchev, and Una2, we need (current date + 6 months) data before we change anything. |
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on Aug 8, 2017 16:32:58 GMT
It just seems that people have forgotten the mk2 days when you needed, say, an RFP counter in every tournament pairing to play into Gaspy2 (although whether that is good for the game is another discussion).. I haven't forgotten about needing to bring specific counters to stand a chance against meta warping lists, I just don't like that, after getting to the point where there was very little like that after the nerfs to Mad Dogs, Una 2 and High Reclaimer, we've gone back. I'd also appreciate if the answers to meta warping lists weren't expensive and difficult to transport models. I'm okay with buying a Naga Nightlurker to deal with stuff like Arcane Shield and Incorporeal models, I'm less okay with buying battle engines to deal with Ghost Fleet. |
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Aug 8, 2017 16:49:56 GMT
It just seems that people have forgotten the mk2 days when you needed, say, an RFP counter in every tournament pairing to play into Gaspy2 (although whether that is good for the game is another discussion).. I haven't forgotten about needing to bring specific counters to stand a chance against meta warping lists, I just don't like that, after getting to the point where there was very little like that after the nerfs to Mad Dogs, Una 2 and High Reclaimer, we've gone back. You do realize that practically nothing has changed since then right? We got the "problematic" Themes back in December 2016 (Heavy Metal/Storm Brigade and Ghost Fleet), the Errata that nerfed Karchev was in January, the errata that nerfed Una/High Reclaimer was in February. Since then there has been Not A Single release that has cranked any of the Top Theme lists to 11. Saying "we've gone back" is disingenuous, since all that really happen is that the meta evolved naturally. People were praising PP back in February because there were no real boogeymen anymore, and without any significant releases between now and then, people now think the game "went back" a step? |
|
isotope
Junior Strategist
Posts: 634
|
Post by isotope on Aug 8, 2017 17:05:59 GMT
Watching how people react to strong lists in other factions is like watching kids on a playground. One kid is running around having fun and pushes another kid down.That kid gets a bruise and tries to cry to the the teacher( PP) that the kid pushed them. Thankfully the teacher has said "deal with it". Now it's on you do go push the kid back( or kick his ass behind he bleachers). So maybe instead of crying about being pushed down( ghost fleet, heavy metal) go find a way to get even( break the mold and try new lists/things others havent). How long was ghost fleet out( and called shit) before someone made it work? Maybe your faction has a diamond in the rough too.
|
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Aug 8, 2017 17:12:34 GMT
Watching how people react to strong lists in other factions is like watching kids on a playground. One kid is running around having fun and pushes another kid down.That kid gets a bruise and tries to cry to the the teacher( PP) that the kid pushed them. Thankfully the teacher has said "deal with it". Now it's on you do go push the kid back( or kick his ass behind he bleachers). So maybe instead of crying about being pushed down( ghost fleet, heavy metal) go find a way to get even( break the mold and try new lists/things others havent). How long was ghost fleet out( and called shit) before someone made it work? Maybe your faction has a diamond in the rough too. You know you could have saved us the trouble of reading a lot and just said " git gud" |
|
isotope
Junior Strategist
Posts: 634
|
Post by isotope on Aug 8, 2017 17:15:13 GMT
Watching how people react to strong lists in other factions is like watching kids on a playground. One kid is running around having fun and pushes another kid down.That kid gets a bruise and tries to cry to the the teacher( PP) that the kid pushed them. Thankfully the teacher has said "deal with it". Now it's on you do go push the kid back( or kick his ass behind he bleachers). So maybe instead of crying about being pushed down( ghost fleet, heavy metal) go find a way to get even( break the mold and try new lists/things others havent). How long was ghost fleet out( and called shit) before someone made it work? Maybe your faction has a diamond in the rough too. You know you could have saved us the trouble of reading a lot and just said " git gud" Sure, but a lot of people around here need a more detailed explination. 8 pages of this nonsense is just obsurd. |
|
