|
Post by Soul Samurai on Jun 19, 2018 11:34:05 GMT
I don't think those fit the requirement of 'obviously the thing it's supposed to be'. I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean? That a dismounted Drakhun doesn't look like a Shocktrooper? The only differences are the helmet and shoulder iconography aren't they? Though let's be honest, unless you're familiar with a faction or the models are wildly different no one really knows what caster version a model actually represents. All the Butchers look the same to an opponent for example. I assume many tournament players ARE familiar enough with popular casters to tell the difference? Perhaps warcasters were a bad example, but I imagine that after a long day of mental exertion you might be told that you're playing against Sorscha 2 but not really fully process that and just slip into thinking it's Sorscha 1 (even if it's just for a few minutes while making a few tactical decisions) if your opponent is using the Sorscha 1 model and you're very familiar with them as you play them both. Even if it's not terribly common, it CAN (and would) happen, which is enough of a reason to take steps to prevent it. Anyway, like I said, bad example, it's just the first thing that came to mind. What you allow in casual games is pretty much irrelevant. In the context of competition rules, yes, but I do like to try to be clear so I was just trying to cover all the bases. You would be hard pressed to find anyone that will refuse to play against someone with some proxies and what is left of the community is pretty focused on tournament play. Casual games are generally practice for competition. I don't know why you think that or how correct you are, I only know that I've never been very competitive myself. I find the the thought that very few casual players are left to be a little depressing, but that's a different topic. We'll restrict this conversation to tournament play then. (BTW even if no-one would refuse to play someone for a certain reason, it could still create negative play experiences that it would be nice to try to avoid; if someone wanted to play "base machine" against me with, I wouldn't refuse to play them, but I would find it harder and less fun to play than a game against someone who has the correct models or functional proxies, so I would prefer it if the other player didn't put me in that situation). So what really matters is what we allow in a tournament list. A cardboard cut out of a tanker with a picture stack on the front and some text saying: "Suppression Tanker", is actually more clear than if you're running Butcher 1 or 2 with the correct model. If people cannot afford to chase the latest theme releases and tournament metas (9 Slayers anyone?), should they be excluded from tournament play? Themes have made playing in tournaments more expensive than it has ever been... I'm thinking I might have misunderstood the nature of your original complaint? I thought you were complaining about the rule that you can't use an unmodified PP model as a proxy for another, but now I'm getting the impression that your objection is to the "majority of PP parts" rule? If that's the case, then, well, I would certainly LIKE it if that wasn't a rule, but I fully understand PP wanting people playing their game, using their rules (all given out for free despite a lot of time, effort and money put into the development, maintenance, and continued balance of), to actually use their models, at least in an "official" setting. I mean, they gotta make a living, right? As far as themes creating a bigger barrier to entry; I don't know for sure, but I don't play themes and one big reason why is that, despite playing Warmachine for several years now, I wouldn't be able to play any theme without making a whole BUNCH of purchases. I don't really WANT to put a lot of time, effort and money into purchasing and assembling a bunch of models that I wasn't particularly interested in just so I can stop playing with the models I already have, which I originally purchased because I like them. So yeah, I'm with you on that. But I'm not a typical Warmachine player so my opinion means little here.
|
|
|
Post by Netherby on Jun 19, 2018 16:08:28 GMT
As far as themes creating a bigger barrier to entry; I don't know for sure, but I don't play themes and one big reason why is that, despite playing Warmachine for several years now, I wouldn't be able to play any theme without making a whole BUNCH of purchases. I don't really WANT to put a lot of time, effort and money into purchasing and assembling a bunch of models that I wasn't particularly interested in just so I can stop playing with the models I already have, which I originally purchased because I like them. So yeah, I'm with you on that. But I'm not a typical Warmachine player so my opinion means little here. That pretty much sums up what I was trying to get at. And if you did want to play competitively, you are pretty much forced to use a theme. No TWO themes... I mean sure, you 'can' technically play out of theme. But if you're competitive, then that goes against the whole point! PP will do what they want, but most events are run by the community. So we CAN allow people to play with models/cut outs/whatever that contain no PP parts. AND we can come up with a standard for what is a valid proxy that doesn't lead to confusion... While I'm sure some people will baulk at the idea, I would rather play against someone using a cardboard cut out to proxy the $250 of new models than have them excluded from playing in a tournament at all.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jun 19, 2018 16:08:38 GMT
The "barrier of entry" to play the game is pretty much the same now as it was in Mk2 for someone JUST starting out, because in both cases you need to get your models, doesn't matter if they're uniform in Themes, or a mismatch outside. The only real barrier is wanting to go full on Competitive Mode. Strictly speaking, you could play the same theme with different casters and maybe a different Jack load out. But to really cover your match ups you need a second army that does different things, and that's only a problem for the competitive minded. Anyway, I don't think it's unreasonable for PP to ask their players to use 50% or More PP parts for their scratch built/kit bashed models. I mean, if my experience is anything to go by, a lot of us should have buckets full of unused bits (or even extra chassis lying around unassembled), that should be more than enough to kit bash some solos (btw, the Kit Bashing sessions at LnL are really fun!) I mean, come on, if this guy can make a tournament legal Deathjack out of Bonejacks, is it really so hard to ask for SOME effort? handcannononline.com/blog/2013/11/12/conversion-corner-deathjack-ripjaws/
|
|
|
Post by Netherby on Jun 20, 2018 5:24:58 GMT
The barrier to tournament play is actually higher even for someone just starting. In Mk2 you could buy a few different things and come up with a couple of lists that were pretty different. In the world of themes you will need to buy multiple of the same thing that will only go in one theme. Like if you are just starting and want to play AC you are looking at 2-3 units of MoWs plus CAs, plus solos that all only go in that one theme.
But I'm not really talking about people just starting out here. I'm talking about current players and old players thinking of returning. Because when you already have a large army and you come back on the scene only to find out you have to spend $600 getting doubles of the stuff you already have and adding in all the support pieces JUST to make two lists, it's a pretty big barrier and turn off.
Which is why I think a more open proxy format should be allowed by the community. Then someone coming back or wanting to try a new theme can play in events, find out what they like and add stuff piece meal. It's better for the community and ultimately it's better for PP in long run.
|
|
|
Post by Soul Samurai on Jun 20, 2018 9:42:19 GMT
Do you feel like themes make huge bases more "mandatory"? Because those things aren't cheap.
I see what you mean now, but don't see most companies saying "you don't need to buy our products to play our game"; like I said, they put a lot of resources into developing and maintaining the rules that they give away for free in order to sell the models, so, well, they kinda want and need people to buy the models.
|
|
|
Post by Netherby on Jun 21, 2018 6:59:04 GMT
I don't know that themes are to blame for huge bases. I think it's more a case of buffs to some factions huge bases made them auto includes.
PP changing their model policies are a totally different discussion I think. What I'm more interested in is the community having their own model policies for events...
|
|
|
Post by Soul Samurai on Jun 21, 2018 7:08:21 GMT
PP changing their model policies are a totally different discussion I think. What I'm more interested in is the community having their own model policies for events... Does PP do much to support community events? Are most warmahordes events "official" or "community"? I know that GW didn't used to support tournaments at all back when I was in 40K, so organisers had no problems putting in place all sorts of house rules (which was pretty much neccessary as the game balance was very poor).
|
|
|
Post by Netherby on Jun 21, 2018 8:05:41 GMT
PP used to semi support events through the press ganger program. But since that was canned there is no support given to events. You can buy a prize kit from them (that is kinda expensive for what it is) and that's it.
Almost all events are community run. Even the qualifier events for the couple of 'big' official comps are community run.
We could basically do what ever we wanted. The worst they could do is say: 'your event doesn't qualify for Iron Gauntlet points if you don't follow the model rules'. And they have been screwing people over trying to run IG qualifier events for years, so that wouldn't be new.
|
|