|
Post by gargs454 on Aug 24, 2018 18:57:04 GMT
All asymmetrical games have this problem, even board games where differences between factions are minimal and often mean just one or two special rules/faction - there are best/worst factions even in finely tuned euros like Terra Mystica or Scythe. The more asymmetry, the more imbalance. That's why wargames have the most problems with that - because their main selling point is characterful factions and variety of choices. Well that's kind of the point of my question because by and large Infinity has managed to avoid that problem despite being an asymmetrical game. In particular they have avoided the netlisting problem of "This is the list that will dominate". I'm not saying its perfect, I'm just saying that its interesting and I'm curious as to why WMH hasn't been able to come close to achieving it. I'm also certainly not suggesting that WMH is alone in this regard. I have no experience with WH, Guild Ball, Malifaux, etc. Just curious as to what the specific issue might be, if having a lead Warcaster/Warlock, etc. is enough, or what.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Aug 24, 2018 19:22:40 GMT
All asymmetrical games have this problem, even board games where differences between factions are minimal and often mean just one or two special rules/faction - there are best/worst factions even in finely tuned euros like Terra Mystica or Scythe. The more asymmetry, the more imbalance. That's why wargames have the most problems with that - because their main selling point is characterful factions and variety of choices. Well that's kind of the point of my question because by and large Infinity has managed to avoid that problem despite being an asymmetrical game. In particular they have avoided the netlisting problem of "This is the list that will dominate". I'm not saying its perfect, I'm just saying that its interesting and I'm curious as to why WMH hasn't been able to come close to achieving it. I'm also certainly not suggesting that WMH is alone in this regard. I have no experience with WH, Guild Ball, Malifaux, etc. Just curious as to what the specific issue might be, if having a lead Warcaster/Warlock, etc. is enough, or what. Infinity is the least asymmetric war game out there. You can find variations of the same thing in every faction with only small differences. That's why Infinity is able to pull it off.
|
|
|
Post by gargs454 on Aug 24, 2018 20:00:28 GMT
Well that's kind of the point of my question because by and large Infinity has managed to avoid that problem despite being an asymmetrical game. In particular they have avoided the netlisting problem of "This is the list that will dominate". I'm not saying its perfect, I'm just saying that its interesting and I'm curious as to why WMH hasn't been able to come close to achieving it. I'm also certainly not suggesting that WMH is alone in this regard. I have no experience with WH, Guild Ball, Malifaux, etc. Just curious as to what the specific issue might be, if having a lead Warcaster/Warlock, etc. is enough, or what. Infinity is the least asymmetric war game out there. You can find variations of the same thing in every faction with only small differences. That's why Infinity is able to pull it off. Thanks, was curious about that. Perhaps part of my lack of understanding there was that my main faction is Ariadna, which seems to be a bit more asymmetrical than most of the factions being so low-tech and all. (No hackers, no true TAGs, etc.) They still do a good job of balancing the unit types though, which is nice. I guess this leads to the question of do we want to see WMH become less asymmetrical in order to help balance things out? Even in Infinity its not as though the different factions are lacking in a particular identity. Ariadna has the low-tech, high arm, fire bringing camo spam, YJ has lots and lots of HI plus a design asthetic that screams YJ, PanO is the shooty, hi-tech faction. Nomads are the hacking specialists with a variety of swiss army knives, Haqq has doctors galore and the highly religious elements, etc. Its an interesting question I guess to me because obviously the WMH community has expressed a lot of complaints (not unjustified) at the increasing lack of faction identity between factions but yet, that hasn't really avoided the issues of the dominant lists ruling the circuit, etc.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Aug 24, 2018 20:09:50 GMT
Its also got an incredibly small # of unique models despite only being 2 years younger.
|
|
|
Post by gargs454 on Aug 24, 2018 20:15:00 GMT
Its also got an incredibly small # of unique models despite only being 2 years younger. In part an advantage, I'd guess, of having notably fewer factions. That coupled with smaller number of models per list too (at least in general -- though CHA can get up to 40 or so models if they really want to). ;P
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Aug 24, 2018 20:16:31 GMT
It makes it more difficult to maintain a company though.
|
|
|
Post by gargs454 on Aug 24, 2018 20:24:58 GMT
It makes it more difficult to maintain a company though. True. Especially if you are not releasing a lot of new products. I wonder how much they bring in from their "agreements" with the assorted accessory/terrain manufacturers. That said they did finally release the RPG and they do seem to be picking up steam on releasing new models/sectorials. Would be interesting to learn what their profits are vs. a company like PP or GW. Not that we'll ever find out of course.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Aug 25, 2018 6:47:50 GMT
I just counted things up, it looks like 27 players did not take Lich3 when they could, which shakes out to be be just over half. So about half of the players that could bring Lich3 because someone hadn't already brought it on their team did so. That doesn’t really surprise me. Unless your team’s game plan is to throw other team members on grenades to get the Cryx player a good matchup, Asphyxious3 9 Slayers probably shouldn’t be in the Cryx pair. Asphyxious3 crushes his good matchups, but a lot of what’s on the rise in the meta right now absolutely crushes him. Anamag Primal Terrors is a hard dodge for Asphyxious and 70% of Legion players brought it, with Legion being the 4th most popular faction. If anything there’s less Primal Terrors than I expected at this event. I think the overwhelming majority of teams that brought Asphyxious3 will be looking to get their Cryx player a good matchup during the pairing process. I think the overwhelming majority of teams that didn’t are going to throw their Cryx player on the grenade and hope the opponent was only prepared to see Asphyxious3/Skarre1 out of Cryx.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Aug 25, 2018 8:21:36 GMT
The paring process makes it easier to dodge bad match-ups than to prey on your good ones.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Aug 25, 2018 9:45:45 GMT
The paring process makes it easier to dodge bad match-ups than to prey on your good ones. I agree, but I think the meta came very well prepared to deal with Asphyxious3. I look at a team like Australia Wobblegong, and I wouldn’t really wanna drop Asphyxious3 into any of those players.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Aug 25, 2018 13:32:39 GMT
On a related note though, one thing that it seems has pretty much always been the case is that Warmahordes is a game where the list makes a huge, huge difference in the outcome. My question is: What is it about Warmahordes that leads to this? Is it a reflection of the Warcaster/lock model? Something else? I ask because I don't have a ton of experience in other wargames on which to draw from or even knowledge as to whether or not this is common. The only other game I have much experience in is Infinity which, curiously enough, doesn't have this same issue despite having numerous different factions that each tend to have a unique feel to them.
I think it comes down to how extreme skewing and crazy stat bonus / special rule stacking in Warmachine is not only possible and encouraged by themes, but is actually the best way to play the game. You want your list to be as low-interaction as possible, and stuff like 9x Slayers is simply the current logical extreme (and not even the worst, historically) of that principle. They're lists that say "I'm going to execute my plan and win, and it doesn't really matter what you're doing unless you're skewing harder than me."
It's been a while since I played Infinity, but I seem to remember it's pretty hard to get to that level of non-interaction. And in Malifaux, you can choose your list after you know what faction you're playing against and what the scenario is, and focusing on the scenario rather than killing the enemy team is much more workable.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Aug 25, 2018 16:08:34 GMT
They're lists that say "I'm going to execute my plan and win, and it doesn't really matter what you're doing unless you're skewing harder than me."
This is why I have a love/hate relationship with WM/H (and probably why I need to really dabble more in 40K). That kind of gaming to me is anti-social (or at least "meh-social"). It encourages deep netlisting discussions (which I guess are interactive) and then gaming that is inwardly focused - do I properly execute my opening. It is VERY competitive chess like. I tend to be a gamer that enjoys more back and forth - mutually agonizing over dice rolls and imagining big stompy robots smashing each other.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Aug 25, 2018 16:43:55 GMT
Extreme skewing and crazy stat bonuses have always been a part of WMH, in mk 2 it was all def skew for khador, arm skew with xerxis bricks and beasts in skorne. Its not a new thing worsened by themes at all.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Aug 25, 2018 17:26:46 GMT
Extreme skewing and crazy stat bonuses have always been a part of WMH, in mk 2 it was all def skew for khador, arm skew with xerxis bricks and beasts in skorne. Its not a new thing worsened by themes at all.
Oh yes, though themes added another layer of special rules that opens up more possibilities for crazy combos, and stuff like the Man O'Wars or (jack theme here) are designed to skew from the ground up and often to eliminate the downside of skewing.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Aug 25, 2018 18:36:39 GMT
I just don't see it as actually increasing skew. "i'm a well balanced list that has all kinds of aspects" has been hit-or-miss for as long as ive ever played the game and usually hinged on an "op" caster to carry it.
|
|