|
Post by Azuresun on Oct 20, 2017 11:22:59 GMT
I feel like the point stands either way. Both could be a great inclusion in Steamroller. I'm starting to think that the list selection / building process needs to be revised in some way. Making specialists the standard (so people will be less inclined to put "Pathfinder?" or "Magic Weapons?" gear checks in their list in the first place) would be a start. I know in Malifaux you declare your faction, then you generate the table and the scenario, and only then do you select your list.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 20, 2017 11:27:41 GMT
I feel like the point stands either way. Both could be a great inclusion in Steamroller. I'm starting to think that the list selection / building process needs to be revised in some way. Making specialists the standard (so people will be less inclined to put "Pathfinder?" or "Magic Weapons?" gear checks in their list in the first place) would be a start. I know in Malifaux you declare your faction, then you generate the table and the scenario, and only then do you select your list. While that would be interesting, I like to get home before midnight usually, I dread to think how much time that would add to each round
|
|
zich
Junior Strategist
Posts: 690
|
Post by zich on Oct 20, 2017 12:06:30 GMT
I'm not sure how compatible such an approach would be with the inflexibility added by theme forces. Might be something to try in a non-theme tournament, maybe with model preselection (e.g. bring 150p, play 75p).
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Oct 20, 2017 12:25:43 GMT
Nice suggestion! The Malifaux version is simply excellent. It allows the player to react on opposing faction and the objectives. It helps to increase the feeling that YOUR choices affect the outcome of the game - not design flaws or dice (cards in Malifaux' case).
I don't know about you guys, but I build lists pretty fast in WM/H, and the time constraint could be easily reduced by putting a 5min clock on the list building phase.. with the option to start earlier if ready.
Maybe the list dynamics in WM/H are such this wouldn't change much, but I don't think this kind of inclusion would have any negative effect.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 20, 2017 12:33:25 GMT
Nice suggestion! The Malifaux version is simply excellent. It allows the player to react on opposing faction and the objectives. It helps to increase the feeling that YOUR choices affect the outcome of the game - not design flaws or dice (cards in Malifaux' case). I don't know about you guys, but I build lists pretty fast in WM/H, and the time constraint could be easily reduced by putting a 5min clock on the list building phase.. with the option to start earlier if ready. Maybe the list dynamics in WM/H are such this wouldn't change much, but I don't think this kind of inclusion would have any negative effect. The problem would be that someone who owns the entire collection for a faction and brings the most models would have an advantage over someone who does not own much, or could not bring much (maybe due to travelling on public transport). If I see my opponent has not brought a particular counter with them that day to something I can build from my entire collection, then I have a massive advantage
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Oct 20, 2017 12:36:37 GMT
...Wait, you mean that's not how you guys play? When on Vassal we:
- Ask for a game - Say what faction we play - Build/select lists - Roll for scenario - Roll for first - GL & HF and play
|
|
|
Post by darrwood on Oct 20, 2017 12:39:51 GMT
If you are looking at it that way, the only thing you could get your table, and scenario. Rather than bringing two lists, players bring two casters/theme combinations.
It would limit construction to those themes, give you a good idea about what your opponent will play, while also making it so you don't have to bring everything. It also sidesteps all the problems of free points, since you build list after theme/caster are chosen.
Additionally, players should have a really good idea about what goes in their theme/caster combination so the only changes would be minor adjustments, IE add magic weapons/pathfinder/RFP.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 20, 2017 12:45:01 GMT
If you are looking at it that way, the only thing you could get your table, and scenario. Rather than bringing two lists, players bring two casters/theme combinations. It would limit construction to those themes, give you a good idea about what your opponent will play, while also making it so you don't have to bring everything. It also sidesteps all the problems of free points, since you build list after theme/caster are chosen. Additionally, players should have a really good idea about what goes in their theme/caster combination so the only changes would be minor adjustments, IE add magic weapons/pathfinder/RFP. At that point you might as well not bother with the whole thing
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Oct 20, 2017 12:48:19 GMT
Nice suggestion! The Malifaux version is simply excellent. It allows the player to react on opposing faction and the objectives. It helps to increase the feeling that YOUR choices affect the outcome of the game - not design flaws or dice (cards in Malifaux' case). I don't know about you guys, but I build lists pretty fast in WM/H, and the time constraint could be easily reduced by putting a 5min clock on the list building phase.. with the option to start earlier if ready. Maybe the list dynamics in WM/H are such this wouldn't change much, but I don't think this kind of inclusion would have any negative effect. I know nothing of Malifaux but my initial impression with a game set up and army selection like this in warma hordes is not exactly enthusiastic. I like not knowing what terrain is on the table until I get there and meet my opponent. I also enjoy discussing with my opponent about the terrain to make sure we think it is fair for both of us (eg: Im playing wurmwood and there are like 4 forests on the baord.) But I also like games get right into it and I feel players constructing boards would not only cause more arguments in the game, but also take extra time and inevitably both players would subconsciously want terrain that would help them throughout the game. As far as list selection...It is really hard. The game seems a lot more Gear Check oriented. Players tend to ask hard questions with tourney lists and if you cannot answer those questions you are gonna be in trouble. EG: Makeda cats requires healing denial or very, very high volume of accurate and powerful attacks to compensate for the silliness that is tough, steady, stay death kittens with dodge. Circle mostly asks the question: Can you ignore terrain? If you cannot typically circle can have an advantage and most people tend to try and fit some form of "pathfinder" into a list for most match ups anyway thanks to SR2017. Khador jack spam asks "can you kill 200+ boxes of arm 20 jacks before they can kill you?". The game seems to be designed around these questions and it is becoming a serious problem in competitive play.
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Oct 20, 2017 13:35:17 GMT
Specialists should be made baseline, I agree. Maybe give less points for them than now.
Malifaux way is obviously not usable. You can have a whole faction in 20-30 models there while bringing your whole faction of wmh with you is a crazy idea.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Oct 20, 2017 13:44:40 GMT
Oh no, I wasn't actual referring to just you Oncoming I meant I've been seeing this sentiment a lot across both the internet and in my play group. I think the issue is that some factions are hurt more than others: Trolls and PoM are defensive "answer" factions moreso than Cryx and Khador's "question" factions, for instance. Having the questions become this widespread makes things unmanageable for the answerers.
However, if Khador can reliably bring armor in some form, cryx pretty much always brings a lot of infantry, Cygnar brings either one but it's good range, and so on, the questions are a bit simpler and easier to answer in a pair of lists.
|
|
|
Post by mallios on Oct 20, 2017 16:02:31 GMT
What if instead of free models, themes gave points towards a sideboard you could swap in after seeing your opponent's list?
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Oct 20, 2017 16:06:40 GMT
Specialists should be made baseline, I agree. Maybe give less points for them than now. Malifaux way is obviously not usable. You can have a whole faction in 20-30 models there while bringing your whole faction of wmh with you is a crazy idea. I actually agree--a large crew in Malifaux is maybe 10-12 models, so bringing a lot of stuff and then choosing is a lot less fiddly. But I think there needs to be something to allow for more flexibility in list selection.
|
|
|
Post by HubertJFarnsworth on Oct 20, 2017 16:24:41 GMT
What if instead of free models, themes gave points towards a sideboard you could swap in after seeing your opponent's list? Specialists already exist, TOs need to just use them.
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 20, 2017 16:48:52 GMT
I think the issue is back to themes. Themes create gear checks by rewarding spamming one type of model. This is either troopers or jacks/beasts. The way free points work rewards people to build these absurd skews, which is what has created this situation. You see this in a lot of factions, Ret has Halberdiers that move 1800 gobzillion inches per turn or Vyros 2 with a bunch of High Arm light jacks. Khador has jacks with Harkevich or lots of dudes. Cryx is the same.
It seems that the days of building two "all around" type lists, one to handle some amount of dudes and another favoring armor, are gone. Like, yes, they sort of did the same things, like the old Haley2/Stryker2 pair, but the skews they were intended to handle were not nearly as wild. Stryker2 might have taken the B13 to handle dudes, and Haley took vanilla gun mages, and each had a jack or two. Hell, at the start of MKiii I had three different lists I played:
Maddox: With 3 heavies, stormlances, and devil dogs. Darius: 3 heavies, Sword Knights, and utility solos Haley2: With either a colossal or heavy, stormlances, and thorn.
^^^^Those lists are very similar. They did different things, sure, but if you wanted to fight against me you wouldn't be shut out. Here's my lists now:
Haley3: Stormlances, a heavy, thorn, and stormblades. Haley3: Trenchers and light jacks Nemo1: Four heavies, 4 lights, 4 solos
And I don't think that's as bad as what other factions present. Nemo throws 200+ boxes on the table that are basically immune to shooting. My Haley lists are all dudes, but Cygnar doesn't really have spammable dudes like Cryx or Mercs does. Even trolls seems suddenly abusive with the new Champs. People are creating this wildly divergent lists because you can't go into all your games with one game plan. Cygnar does Heavy Metal a little differently, usually creating a shooting list (Caine3, all the chargers) and a melee force (Haley2, 3 Stormclads). And even then, when you are facing a similar amount of boxes, fighting those forces is completely different.
I found this problem when I dropped Nemo1 into what I swore was a Sevvy2 matchup and instead I got Vinny, I found myself in a nearly unwinnable position.
And, again, the problem stems not from the models themselves, but the fact that players are rewarded for building these skews and hurt when they do not.
Do you want to play a more balanced force? Well, you'll play 15 points down from your opponent. Do you want to play wild skews? Well, you or your opponent might lose at list selection.
|
|