privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Jul 2, 2019 19:55:59 GMT
Some stuff, I'm bad at removing these quotes.
The main issue I continue to have is entry point for new blood. You simply have to have a decent amount of entry into the hobby to keep revenues growing and a virtuous circle of activity. But I have long ago reconciled that marketing chops are not a strength of the Wilson family and until ownership gets diluted this is not going to EVER be solved.
I think the new games are going to satisfy the new blood entry. If every model works for WarmaHordes, it's a slow roll into the hobby, rather than requiring someone to jump to a $40 or $50 single faction battle box. Mew players are totally going to buy into a well supported, well advertised mini-skirmish game like that, as long as it is well advertised and well supported.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 2, 2019 20:31:05 GMT
The main issue I continue to have is entry point for new blood. You simply have to have a decent amount of entry into the hobby to keep revenues growing and a virtuous circle of activity. But I have long ago reconciled that marketing chops are not a strength of the Wilson family and until ownership gets diluted this is not going to EVER be solved.
I think the new games are going to satisfy the new blood entry. If every model works for WarmaHordes, it's a slow roll into the hobby, rather than requiring someone to jump to a $40 or $50 single faction battle box. Mew players are totally going to buy into a well supported, well advertised mini-skirmish game like that, as long as it is well advertised and well supported. To be fair, I think the battlebox to full army progression is a much bigger hurdle. The two player box sets also make entry a lot easier.
|
|
|
Post by feketelovag on Jul 2, 2019 21:51:35 GMT
You might want to listen to the keynote about Neo-mechanica again because the story it tells also sounds a lot like the Infernals winning there as well. Basically, the defenders hold the line until Convergence opens a gateway/wormhole/whatever to another planet so people can escape only to never look back. Riot Quest gets officially announced. PP says it is pretty much the game that depicts what the Iron Kingdoms are like after the Infernals get their way. Since Iron Kingdoms – Mad Max Edition would be a pretty boring and depressing game that nobody would play, they dress it up with cartoony graphics. Yay! So, what happens if the Infernals *don’t* get their way and don’t collect their 2/3 of all souls? I think that is where Warcaster – Neo Mechanica comes in. The Infernals don’t get their pile of souls, so they withdraw their part of the bargain. The magic takes 5000 years or so to start to decline. As the magic declines, technology begins to take its place – hence the importance of the Convergence of Cyriss and them being alluded to at the end of the Warmachine / Oblivion clip. So, if Riot Quest is what happens if the Infernals get their way, and Warcaster – Neo Mechanica is what happens if the Infernals don’t get the bargain fulfilled, what does that make Oblivion? It is the T-intersection that ends the road with 2 different paths. Being the story tellers that they are, PP have decided that Oblivian is going to be the beginning of a back-burner / slow decline ending for Warmachine / Hordes.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 3, 2019 7:25:22 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me if the main game was put on the backburner for a while. They just don't know how to reach that goal of theirs and make this thé competitive (balanced) miniature wargame on the market.
- late mk2, a couple of lists are dominating the tournaments >>>> enter mk3 - mk3 did vary the the top of the powercurve, but proved hard to balance >>>> enter thememachine - chopping up the game into a 100 minifactions isn't all that easy to balance either >>>> enter CID - introducing an armsrace into the developmentcycle =\= balance, who knew?
Regardless, the playerbase remains hopefull and is allways looking forward to the next step towards excellence. Well I'm here to stomp on your hopes (or a actually, offer a realitycheck) because a game this big is never going to get there. Especially not when those that do get involved in these community integrated development cycles are allways asking for a bigger nuke. GG it's astonishing how people want one thing (competitive landscape please) and ask for something completely different (big red button please) and even think such a cycle leaves them satisfied... untill a few months later the next res button proves to be even larger amd their faction is "totally out of whack". Yes sometimes it sucks to get what you want.
So what is PP supposed to do? They must have caught on to the fact this doesn't work and it doesn't help them to achieve what they want. Using everything they have learned and looking at the succes GW has had with their balanced minigames focussing on "side"games must look extremely appealing and, where releasing competitive miniaturegames are concerned, a lot less frustrating then drowning in the pitfall they've manoeuvred themselves into.
This game has just grown too big, which is what many people have been saying when mk2 came to a close. Adding onto a big pile doesn't nake it smaller, no matter how much you wish it were so.
It will be really easy though to start releasing smaller games that can be balanced an competitive, that tie in with the main game as well. It will allow them to keep supporting the main game without this stress of achieving perfect balance immediately shuting down that effort.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 3, 2019 15:52:01 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me if the main game was put on the backburner for a while. They just don't know how to reach that goal of theirs and make this thé competitive (balanced) miniature wargame on the market. - late mk2, a couple of lists are dominating the tournaments >>>> enter mk3 - mk3 did vary the the top of the powercurve, but proved hard to balance >>>> enter thememachine - chopping up the game into a 100 minifactions isn't all that easy to balance either >>>> enter CID - introducing an armsrace into the developmentcycle =\= balance, who knew? Regardless, the playerbase remains hopefull and is allways looking forward to the next step towards excellence. Well I'm here to stomp on your hopes (or a actually, offer a realitycheck) because a game this big is never going to get there. Especially not when those that do get involved in these community integrated development cycles are allways asking for a bigger nuke. GG it's astonishing how people want one thing (competitive landscape please) and ask for something completely different (big red button please) and even think such a cycle leaves them satisfied... untill a few months later the next res button proves to be even larger amd their faction is "totally out of whack". Yes sometimes it sucks to get what you want. So what is PP supposed to do? They must have caught on to the fact this doesn't work and it doesn't help them to achieve what they want. Using everything they have learned and looking at the succes GW has had with their balanced minigames focussing on "side"games must look extremely appealing and, where releasing competitive miniaturegames are concerned, a lot less frustrating then drowning in the pitfall they've manoeuvred themselves into. This game has just grown too big, which is what many people have been saying when mk2 came to a close. Adding onto a big pile doesn't nake it smaller, no matter how much you wish it were so. It will be really easy though to start releasing smaller games that can be balanced an competitive, that tie in with the main game as well. It will allow them to keep supporting the main game without this stress of achieving perfect balance immediately shuting down that effort. Your belief in the causes and effects of themes, CID, and so forth are incorrect. Your analysis is flawed. Privateer was open and forthcoming about changes to themes and faction subdivisions and so forth as soon as this edition launched. The overhaul of their playtest cycle into CID was in the works in June 2016. I talked to Privateer staff members at Lock & Load 2016 and they discussed all of this stuff.The “conspiracy theory comedy of errors” version you posit above is as wrong as can be.
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Jul 3, 2019 16:22:27 GMT
I think mk2-mk3 big rule change was overall bad for the game in retrospect because of how it alienated bunch of people at the same time for various reasons. Doing smaller cid-sized changes is the best way so far. Sure, cid creep is real, but that's better than just big barely tested reset of everything.
I can't remember a big edition change that ended up well for other games either.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 3, 2019 16:28:58 GMT
The arrows were supposed to indicate a course of events, not a matter of cause and effect. Nor was there any conspiracy theory in there, how did you even get there?
What I tried to point out is that, imo, they will not be able to balance this game to the level they want to, and that I think the several steps they have taken to balance the game here just brought imbalance somewhere else, and were sometimes counterproductive as a whole (cid). It has been a jugglingact, which must be extremely tiring.
As such I can understood if they stopped trying to achieve that level of excellence.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 3, 2019 18:04:18 GMT
I think mk2-mk3 big rule change was overall bad for the game in retrospect because of how it alienated bunch of people at the same time for various reasons. Doing smaller cid-sized changes is the best way so far. Sure, cid creep is real, but that's better than just big barely tested reset of everything. I can't remember a big edition change that ended up well for other games either. Yes I mostly agree to that. At the same time I think that, had CiD been used to bring every model it touched out to be solid instead of borderline overpowered, the game would have been much better of, and it would have given them much more breathing room to develop new models. It is a lot easier to balance new releases if you are allways balancing towards the same powerlevel. So maybe I should recant my original position, maybe the game can be balanced. It's just that CiD hasn't been doing it. If memory serves the first khador cid is probably the only one that did that. Many models were tweaked, resulting in many models comming out solid. Thinking of big edition changes. I think warhammer fanatasy did a decent job with 6th edition where they really got a handle on herohammer (which they messed up again an edition later) that plagued 5th. 8th edition had some changes to core rules that really upset balance (the horde rule should never have applied to all units, and most high level spells wer insane) but the armybooks were pretty damn solid, which was a huge relief because 7th messed up so big with some of the armies (demons and dark elves primarily). Overall the most balanced edition in warhammer fantasy, and the worse offenders could have been fixed with just two houserules. Pretty good.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 3, 2019 18:25:44 GMT
I think mk2-mk3 big rule change was overall bad for the game in retrospect because of how it alienated bunch of people at the same time for various reasons. Doing smaller cid-sized changes is the best way so far. Sure, cid creep is real, but that's better than just big barely tested reset of everything. I can't remember a big edition change that ended up well for other games either. Yes I mostly agree to that. At the same time I think that, had CiD been used to bring every model it touched out to be solid instead of borderline overpowered, the game would have been much better of, and it would have given them much more breathing room to develop new models. It is a lot easier to balance new releases if you are allways balancing towards the same powerlevel. So maybe I should recant my original position, maybe the game can be balanced. It's just that CiD hasn't been doing it. If memory serves the first khador cid is probably the only one that did that. Many models were tweaked, resulting in many models comming out solid. Thinking of big edition changes. I think warhammer fanatasy did a decent job with 6th edition where they really got a handle on herohammer (which they messed up again an edition later) that plagued 5th. 8th edition had some changes to core rules that really upset balance (the horde rule should never have applied to all units, and most high level spells wer insane) but the armybooks were pretty damn solid, which was a huge relief because 7th messed up so big with some of the armies (demons and dark elves primarily). Overall the most balanced edition in warhammer fantasy, and the worse offenders could have been fixed with just two houserules. Pretty good. When it comes to CID I was honestly shocked when I found out how PP handled it. I got into WMH about a year and a half ago, and at the time the main draw for me was (aside from the amazing IK aesthetic) the notion that the game isn't pay to win, but rather skill based, compared to a flood of complaints I saw at the time in pretty much every miniature forum / youtube about WH40K. I don't really know 40K too well, but the gist of the complaints was that GW releases a new, huge, and above all, expensive machine everyone once in a while that makes everything before it totally obsolete. Now sure, stuff like the Supreme Guardian isn't ball busting broken, but AFAIK skorne have been winning tournaments -very- consistently since it's release. Same for DevHost when it was released, etc. The biggest appeal of WMH, gameplay wise, is the tight ruleset and good game balance - which makes it so weird that PP decided to compromise the latter for the (old?) GW marketing model. Sure, it sells more models in the short run, but you're giving up a part of your game's core identity for it. I'm not hopping on the doom train, but I do think the way management handled CiD was extremely shortsighted.
|
|
shiver
Junior Strategist
Posts: 150
|
Post by shiver on Jul 3, 2019 19:29:23 GMT
I think mk2-mk3 big rule change was overall bad for the game in retrospect because of how it alienated bunch of people at the same time for various reasons. Doing smaller cid-sized changes is the best way so far. Sure, cid creep is real, but that's better than just big barely tested reset of everything. I can't remember a big edition change that ended up well for other games either. 40k 8th edition has been absolute gang busters for Warhammer 40k. ITC has grown by incredible amounts to end up with things like 600+ people events that STILL have to turn people away. Look at adepticon and at the LVO...talk about huge... Of course, after the incredibly horrid game that 6th and 7th were, it was bound for a come back, so there is that. AoS 2nd edition, starting at soul wars has also been incredibly good for that game too. I think its how much better than its predecessor it is. Look at 5th ed dnd vs 4th. Now, i'm not a guru on DnD at all, but form what i understand on sales, 5th edition is way better and better received because its just so much better than 4th (which was a massive reversion in the depth to which a character could be made and played, from what i understand). For MK3, not to beat a dead horse for too long here, but MK3 was very poorly built, and it showed from the start. While i have no doubt that most games go throw some or at least a little bit of retraction between major editions, i think this phenomenon hit PP hard.*Pardon the typos, busted up hand and on phone*
|
|
|
Post by autocorrecthaslimits on Jul 3, 2019 19:52:17 GMT
I think mk2-mk3 big rule change was overall bad for the game in retrospect because of how it alienated bunch of people at the same time for various reasons. Doing smaller cid-sized changes is the best way so far. Sure, cid creep is real, but that's better than just big barely tested reset of everything. I can't remember a big edition change that ended up well for other games either. Yes I mostly agree to that. At the same time I think that, had CiD been used to bring every model it touched out to be solid instead of borderline overpowered, the game would have been much better of, and it would have given them much more breathing room to develop new models. It is a lot easier to balance new releases if you are allways balancing towards the same powerlevel. So maybe I should recant my original position, maybe the game can be balanced. It's just that CiD hasn't been doing it. If memory serves the first khador cid is probably the only one that did that. Many models were tweaked, resulting in many models comming out solid. Thinking of big edition changes. I think warhammer fanatasy did a decent job with 6th edition where they really got a handle on herohammer (which they messed up again an edition later) that plagued 5th. 8th edition had some changes to core rules that really upset balance (the horde rule should never have applied to all units, and most high level spells wer insane) but the armybooks were pretty damn solid, which was a huge relief because 7th messed up so big with some of the armies (demons and dark elves primarily). Overall the most balanced edition in warhammer fantasy, and the worse offenders could have been fixed with just two houserules. Pretty good. Yes they have pushed new models, but its not like thats all CID did. Other good cid's of recent were steelhead, primal terrors, and retribution. None of these were considered "gamebreaking" CID, all had great updates to older stuff. Then there is the themepocolapsye,grave diggers(which everyone thought haley3 would rule the meta forever, remember that?), black industries and darkhost, both skorne redo cid/erratas, northkin for trolls, armored core. All the CID's have had legacy models updated. Legion players got carniveans, skorne titans, everyones collosals and battle engines improved. CID has let some overturned models through, but i believe not even tharn stagnated the meta. The new shiny wrecks face, but theres a difference between having to find an answer (trending) than there being no answer(OP). I agree there could be more balance, and definitely the pace of CID was too much. We cant find answers when new questions pop every up month. And battlengines I think should at least have 2 damage grids for each side as they are in essence super beasts and fucntional till last box, which is lame for a 26-40 box model. Some rules make no sense (long leash and cntrl spells, all the destroyed vs boxed vs disabled) rules that leave bad tastes or sudden upsets with new models, PP's love of trending rules shield guard, eyeless sight stuff, now everyone gets sprays). But theres stil plenty of space to add and tweak rules and models, and never have I showed up to a tournament and gone " fml time to play a different faction." And this is after iona has wrecked my mercs 5 ways to sunday top table a few times. Then I figured out a list, and now its 50/50ish. I guess I just don't buy the doom and gloom, I just play my game and try to beat my head into a wall first before asking for change. As for balance, we must have played different versions of WFB as my skaven player and lizardman player and myself a beastmen player would disagree about "balance 😁." Mk3 has some issues, but outside of iona ive never been deleted off the table trivally by handfulls of magic dice or blocks of costed 500 american oil dollars of infantry like 8th ed. P.S.- iona players often forget reinholt has spyglass. Stealth dropped iona+ Mortars or seigecrawlers + FFE swapping = happiness.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 3, 2019 20:24:20 GMT
Autocorrecthaslimits I think you were missing the point. When you want to balance a game but don't want to touch áll models, you should attempt to bring all the models you dó tweak to the middle of the pack, not try to repopulate and slightly move up the top of the powercurve almost every single time.
I'm not saying CiD was something terrible. I'm saying it had nothing to do with balancing. Which is not to say balancing never happened because, sometimes it did. I think the carnivean is a perfect example of that.
And yes, überspells and huge blocks of elite infantry are the exact two things I meant that needed removing. Very easy to houserule by simply removing said spells and reworking the horderule to only effect models with a base cost of 6 or less, something to that extend.
|
|
|
Post by autocorrecthaslimits on Jul 3, 2019 21:13:45 GMT
Autocorrecthaslimits I think you were missing the point. When you want to balance a game but don't want to touch áll models, you should attempt to bring all the models you dó tweak to the middle of the pack, not try to repopulate and slightly move up the top of the powercurve almost every single time. I'm not saying CiD was something terrible. I'm saying it had nothing to do with balancing. Which is not to say balancing never happened because, sometimes it did. I think the carnivean is a perfect example of that. And yes, überspells and huge blocks of elite infantry are the exact two things I meant that needed removing. Very easy to houserule by simply removing said spells and reworking the horderule to only effect models with a base cost of 6 or less, something to that extend. I dont think I missed the point, I just see things from another angle or have different value out of CID. I agree with most of your points, with powercreep and god I wished they had stuck with CID being " top 3 and bottom 3 models tweaked" like they said begining if mk3. But at the same time, cid just wasnt solely powercreep ala 40k pre 8th. Alot of good life was injected into the game via new shifts and oldand new models fleshing out factions. To me balance isnt that a meta "settles" and theres a unchanging strive towards keeping powerlevels locked. There have been a good deal of nerfs in CIDs, denny, haley, random point increases, changes completely for models units to differentiate them. I do see a, general trend towards middle ground, albeit a new one. I can see how huge bases were pushed, but they updated 10 year old models in the last few CID and added a bunch of cool stuff. Ranged was king mk3 launch,then battlegroups, now its infantry. CID has helped people breathe new life into old models, and given new toys. And this for me kept me playing and kept things fresh. Change doesnt always mean powercreep, although it does happen eventually i bet. I guess I don't see the CID as negative as others.Even iona the boogylady hasnt invalidated everyones armies like 40k knights did, at least for the bottom fluff bunnies to middle tiers of competitive players. The dev hangout today talked about themeforce changes and further point fixing mainly to do exactly what you want to do, to" tweak underused models." As for 8th, Its been a while so maybe your overall right, but man my brown orcs needed a whole new codex, old models returned, a new game, and allies to fix them🤣.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 4, 2019 6:57:23 GMT
True, the game has definitely been alive, and I guess that's a good thing in a game where all commers lists aren't really a thing. I think I'm getting as close as can be with eThags, and CiD has been great for that list.
And all commers lists is something we have allways been striving for back when we played a lot of warhammer. This meant to excercise some restraint during listbuilding, but everyone was fine with that.
Which is a big difference I've noticed between communities I guess. Generally, people playing this game view excercising such restraint as bad thing. Everything goes right? It can be when balance is spot-on, but for a pickup game where you bring one list odds are you can get steamrolled because of a bad matchup. Which is a situation far removed from having to face demons in 7th or eldar in 6th+, that was complete garbage, but the truth is competitive play in WH needs (adopted) a rock-paper-scissors kind of solutions to avoid this. Please explain the balance in that because I never really understood?
I guess beastmen had it pretty bad. Might be because of the rediculous skirmish rules that were introduced in 8th? What a mess, and the third thing we houseruled. The 4th being scenery. We didn't really like pieces of wood walking to the other end of the table thrashing unsuspecting units. What were they thinking 😂
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Jul 4, 2019 15:30:02 GMT
What dirtyharrypotter is saying is pretty much correct. The so-called "balance" has been a joke (at least for me) in WM/H for a long time. The game might be fun and enjoyable, but the mechanics themselves don't - at the moment - serve balance. There is NOTHING to make weak models (or even lists) even borderline useful, unlike with some other non-GW systems.
Rock/paper/scissors is in its own way somehow balanced, but only within the metagame. Not inside the actual game itself. This has bothered me with WM/H longer than I can remember; you CAN'T determine skill level (if both players are decent) based on one game. Over the course of 10 or even 100 games better players win most of the time, but single games can be very bad experiences whether your winning or losing.. even boring.
I'm still sitting on my Cryx army and unwilling to touch the game anymore unless they do something about this. I'm very hopeful the new theme rules can alleviate this.
|
|