|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jan 25, 2019 9:43:30 GMT
(Until we get an official name, a placeholder might help.)
I thought that it would be good to start a new thread for discussion of the new limited format that @los_Jaden and Jeff Olsen are working on. I'd appreciate it if they could jump in and break it down for us in their own words, but for my own part, I am definitely interested in this. I have given significant thought to the dynamics at play in general if not to this idea in specific, having just heard of it. I do appreciate the work that they're doing on this and their willingness to discuss it with us.
So, any thoughts on the idea or its implementation?
|
|
|
Post by hocestbellum on Jan 25, 2019 9:51:12 GMT
Well, I think actually summarising what was said in the other thread would be a good starting point: No sense having people wade through 15 pages to find details! PPS_Jeff and I are working on a smaller format game size for competitive play and introducing the game to newer players. He might be showing it off at lock and load this year. I'll give you the bullet points: 25 points 5-6 pieces of terrain 4 scenarios, all super central ALA mark 2 destruction No huge based non-casters Incorporeal models cannot contest or control things Zones and flags controllable by basically everything Win by 3, not by 5 No Feats or Arcana FA 1 (except WAs) Themes don't give you deployment bonuses (no Ambush, Advanced Move, +2 deploy, +1 to go first) Deploy off the clock, 35 minute deathclock (for tournaments only) Off the top of my head, potential banned Casters that we will test for inclusion in the format before formalizing anything: Butcher 3 Butcher 1 Makeda 3 Kromac 2 Borka 2 Stryker 2 Vlad 1 Thagrosh 2 Karchev Xerxis 2 Child Harbinger Reznik 2 Reznik 1 Siege 2 Caine 2 Terminus Skarre 3 Thyron Discuss!
|
|
|
Post by P'tit Nico on Jan 25, 2019 10:09:34 GMT
Playing without feats seems weird. A lot of casters would not be very interesting to play / competitive without their feat.
|
|
|
Post by hocestbellum on Jan 25, 2019 10:16:27 GMT
Okay, for my part, I'm very interested. Mitigating the effects of high-impact models such as the huge bases and certain casters is a good step. These changes, along with the Incorporeal change, feat removal, and the scoring changes, would seem to imply that they're trying to remove situations where you've lost before you start playing, and reduce the incidence of massive swing events in the game.
But this doesn't seem like a competitive format, as was implied in the other thread. It's like Training+. Streamlined, minimal decisions to make, minimal models to deal with, quick to play.
But there's not enough flexibility, I feel, for it to be competitive.
|
|
|
Post by kovnikninehouse on Jan 25, 2019 10:29:26 GMT
Playing without feats seems weird. A lot of casters would not be very interesting to play / competitive without their feat. Between this and banning casters i don't think it is good for the game. The warcaster/warlock are what makes this game unique and interesting. Without them its just another war game. Also banning is a slippery slope once you start banning then you just make the A tier casters OP instead of the S tier and you will still have only certian casters played. Instead of banning for this format only maybe they can lower the impact of the S tier casters that they seem to think would be a problem. For intance Butcher1 feat instead of an extra D6 its and extra D3. Or maybe you cannot feat until you are within a certain distance to the enmy warcaster? Nevermind about my talk of feats as i forgot they might remove them
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Jan 25, 2019 10:55:14 GMT
Between this and banning casters i don't think it is good for the game. The warcaster/warlock are what makes this game unique and interesting. Without them its just another war game. Also banning is a slippery slope once you start banning then you just make the A tier casters OP instead of the S tier and you will still have only certian casters played. Jaden mentioned in the other thread that the banning is more about personal output than (perceived) powerlevel. If a caster can personally take out a whole unit or a couple of heavies in such small games, the game can be rather lopsided.
|
|
|
Post by P'tit Nico on Jan 25, 2019 11:47:43 GMT
Between this and banning casters i don't think it is good for the game. The warcaster/warlock are what makes this game unique and interesting. Without them its just another war game. Also banning is a slippery slope once you start banning then you just make the A tier casters OP instead of the S tier and you will still have only certian casters played. Jaden mentioned in the other thread that the banning is more about personal output than (perceived) powerlevel. If a caster can personally take out a whole unit or a couple of heavies in such small games, the game can be rather lopsided. The list above doesn't really reflect this. I guess Reznik1 is in there because of Engine of Destruction, but then why aren't Feora1 and Locke in this list too? Without his feat, Terminus isn't really more of a threat than Darius! Do you want to ban Darius? If this is about personal output, where are Morghoul and Rhyas? Why Butcher 1 and 3 but not 2? Even if you base the list upon personal output, it is highly subjective and is also a slippery slope.
|
|
|
Post by hocestbellum on Jan 25, 2019 11:53:49 GMT
It's worth pointing out that the list was in no way comprehensive, and was more of a 'these are some of the ones we need to look at'
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Jan 25, 2019 12:33:17 GMT
It's worth pointing out that the list was in no way comprehensive, and was more of a 'these are some of the ones we need to look at' Even a "these are the ones I can remember when thinking about it for 10 seconds"
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Jan 25, 2019 14:11:09 GMT
So I wish them luck and god speed.
If I was doing it I would be moving in a different direction. The assumption here seems to be that it is the "front of the card" that is mostly the problem - core rules that get fussy and challenging barrier to entry.
I would argue it is the back - and the combination of various models that ramp things up to an 11 that create an overwhelming curve for many new players.
And thus I would take the approach of MtG with its prepackaged decks. Create on a yearly basis (cause that seems right) 1-2 lists per faction. Allow SLIGHT variation to a limited number of solos/alternative jacks. Try as much as possible to get balance (might mean a lot of Sturgis and Hark to keep the power level low). Limited scenarios. And then let people play. As Ganso on another thread said, you can monetize with alternative casts for the featured casters for that year's "Vangaurd"
The attractive quality of this is that it satisfies VARIOUS segments of the community. New players can focus on a limited number of models to "git gud" with (we all have heard the admonition - play a list 25 times before changing). They also will only have to think about a limited number of OPPONENTS odels as well - minimizing the number of gotchas. But experienced players will also be challenged. No long about bringing power - they will have to work even harder on positioning, cominging up with a plan, etc. etc.
Anyway, my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Jan 25, 2019 14:11:33 GMT
Makes sense. At least it would be fun to try even if it fails.
I would also ban Butcher2 and literally every other caster than can solo kill a heavy despite them not being very competitive currently. They banned a lot, but missed some like the one eye elf dude, Kozlov, Madrak, etc.
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Jan 25, 2019 14:32:33 GMT
I would also ban Butcher2 and literally every other caster than can solo kill a heavy despite them not being very competitive currently. They banned a lot, but missed some like ... Kozlov. I get the idea, but I think banning battlebox casters would be a problem. If you're meant to be running a more introductory format, removing the caster that comes with an accessible entry point to the faction seems contrary to that.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jan 25, 2019 14:33:45 GMT
I like it, I hope it's introduction isn't "too little, to late". Also, it will be up to the community to embrace the format not deny its existence and continue 75pts business as usual. Limitations seem ok for the start. Banning options which have too much impact at this size of the game, like Feats or Huge Bases is great and necessary (I find it similar to WH Border Patrol/Combat Patrol, which were excellent formats with their limitations. Sorry, PGs, no Big Red Win Button for you ). Even if it isn't perfect in the beginning I hope it can be fine tuned quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 25, 2019 14:48:57 GMT
Playing without feats seems weird. A lot of casters would not be very interesting to play / competitive without their feat. Yeah, if you're going to allow them in Battlebox/JML, there is no reason not to allow them in this format, even if it is "quicker".
|
|
|
Post by MacGuffin on Jan 25, 2019 15:00:55 GMT
Regardless of the parameters of this new format, I am very excited for it. Any option below 75 points would be welcome. I hope it becomes a viable and commonly-played competitive format.
|
|