|
Post by Azuresun on May 8, 2017 22:33:39 GMT
tl;dr sr 2017 can't come soon enough. I like my wargame being about two armies beating each other to death, things dying and stuffs actually happening. Even if it will be broken unbalanced stuff, at least they would be more exciting. And if all armies could do that as well as Khador, there wouldn't be a problem. IME, scenario doesn't matter any more (but is more awkward to set up). I've had chances to make big plays and notch up 3 points in a turn, but that's not relevant any more and it's almost always better to just grind.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on May 8, 2017 22:44:07 GMT
tl;dr sr 2017 can't come soon enough. I like my wargame being about two armies beating each other to death, things dying and stuffs actually happening. Even if it will be broken unbalanced stuff, at least they would be more exciting. And if all armies could do that as well as Khador, there wouldn't be a problem. IME, scenario doesn't matter any more (but is more awkward to set up). I've had chances to make big plays and notch up 3 points in a turn, but that's not relevant any more and it's almost always better to just grind. Agreed. Players who play factions who like a fair fight don't like it when others don't play fair. They forget that if others play fair, they lose.
|
|
|
Post by HereComesTomorrow on May 8, 2017 22:49:07 GMT
And if all armies could do that as well as Khador, there wouldn't be a problem. IME, scenario doesn't matter any more (but is more awkward to set up). I've had chances to make big plays and notch up 3 points in a turn, but that's not relevant any more and it's almost always better to just grind. Agreed. Players who play factions who like a fair fight don't like it when others don't play fair. They forget that if others play fair, they lose. I won on scenario with Rhyas1 in one of my first SR2017 games. Just saying.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on May 8, 2017 23:15:27 GMT
Yea Khador is my biggest issue with SR2017. I've always been of the opinion that Khador is the faction that wants a fair fight, and if they get one they'll win 9/10 times. With a scenario packet that forces people to play either attrition or assassination I'm not sure how people are suppose to effectively deal with Khador. Most factions can't win an attrition battle against 300+ boxes at armor 20+ and Khador has some of the hardest casters to assassinate thanks to combinations of Winter Guard Kommand, being super tanky like Karchev, or having great defensive tech like cloud walls, wind wall, or stealth. The most effective strategies I've seen against Khador have been people playing for scenario with hard control casters like Gorten, Krueger2, or Deneghra1, and with scenario off the table I'm not sure any of the nonDeneghra control casters still have game into a Khador brick. When you have to play for assassination or attrition how are you suppose to effectively grind down Khador? cid.privateerpress.com/forum/battle-reports/battle-reports/battle-reports-steamroller-2017-week-1/7363-spread-the-net-axis-di-vs-harkevich-jawscid.privateerpress.com/forum/battle-reports/battle-reports/battle-reports-steamroller-2017-week-1/9068-cygnar-maddox-vs-khador-kozlov-quadrant-method-breakdown-75ptsI feel like games like these are going to become the norm. People know they can't attrition the Khador brick so they try to push scenario, but in the end they just lose out on attrition too hard. In these games the Khador player eventually goes for a successful assassination, but even if they didn't and just focused on finishing off the rest of their opponent's army they've got 2-3 turns to effectively rack up scenario points with not much that can effectively stop them. Hell in these games the Khador players even admit they misplayed hard giving up free models when they didn't have to and they still come out victorious. And then you have absolute abomination reports like cid.privateerpress.com/forum/battle-reports/battle-reports/battle-reports-steamroller-2017-week-1/8930-zerkova1-vs-vayl2-spread-the-net where apparently a game like this means everything is A okay aside from those OP death stalkers. I can almost guarantee if SR 2017 releases as is Mark3 Khador is going to bend the meta just as hard if not harder than Mark2 Cryx did.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 9, 2017 1:38:02 GMT
Agreed. Players who play factions who like a fair fight don't like it when others don't play fair. They forget that if others play fair, they lose. I won on scenario with Rhyas1 in one of my first SR2017 games. Just saying. We'll post the whole report! Love to hear about it and see what your tactics are!
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on May 9, 2017 4:59:09 GMT
Just because a portion of some elements is close to the edge doesn't mean you don't have centralized gameplay. Actual gameplay is resulting in all the action condensing in the middle of the table. There is no real depth of tactics, or any need to play intelligently. I'm just going to add a notch for greytemplar and continue like this. Most of his arguments sounds like someone who hasn't played much SR 2017. In my 10 or so games, the depth of strategy has dramatically increased. No longer am I forced to run into the maw of my opponent's army because I will lose on scenario if I don't. My opponent can score a few points and I can still claw back a win by attrition. The games often involve multiple flanks that each require tactical thought to work on. At the very least the depth is equal between 16 and 17, but in my opinion it is greater. It is absolutely not as simple as mashing things together in the middle. I am hearing lots of people on podcasts with similar negative feelings (just finished the last chain attack, for example) but then go on to say they've played 0-2 games. I know what it looks like on face, and I have had the same thoughts. But I got out there and played games, and it turns out scenario is much more live than it seems. It isn't always, but it certainly matters more than many people make it out to matter. I have played around 30 games with SR17, so I'm not coming from a position of nativity about how SR17 actually plays out. It may have the illusion of being live because you are actively scoring. But unless those points are actually contributing towards a scenario victory(IE: ending the game due to points scored) then its meaningless. Unless its possible to consistently score scenario victories when both players are competent then the scenario is actually dead. As it is, scoring points is just pointless busywork because its far too hard to gain a lead that actually will result in a victory before the game ends. So yes, you are just mashing stuff together in the middle to little actual effect. PP has just fooled lots of people into thinking there is stuff going on because you are scoring 1-2 points a turn. But because both players are doing that and the scoring system is what it is, it ends up being nothing of import. Just going back and forth till either one person gets assassinated or the turn limit ends. There is no decisive scenario victory unless one player just gets totally wiped out. Which is bad because that is a complete loss of a victory path that existed before, but doesn't anymore. I don't necessarily have a problem with them wanting to make combat in the middle of the table or assassination a bigger part of the game than it was previously. But totally destroying how the game was played before is not the answer. They've completely overreacted, in typical PP fashion. Instead of finding a nice compromise where maybe you would raise the points necessary to win the game from 5 to maybe 6 or 7, which was the format the game was most balanced around, they've decided to reinvent the wheel and throw out everything they and we worked hard on the last 10 years with Steamroller. There were many choices they could make to improve Steamroller. They choose the worst option.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 9, 2017 5:09:35 GMT
I think the whole Widget thing and the Scenario thing is to make the game's marketing about the same as the actual core gameplay.
This may require actually altering some factions though. Like if they want that some factions will need detailed touch-ups. Scenario Victory can go burn in hell.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on May 9, 2017 5:19:17 GMT
Except you're basically going to need to turn every faction into "X-flavored Khador" for that to work. And you'd still likely leave a majority of each faction's models as useless filler.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 9, 2017 5:24:55 GMT
Except you're basically going to need to turn every faction into "X-flavored Khador" for that to work. Not really. Most of what makes each faction unique still remains (I guess "Actually Kill the Opponents stuff" is too much like Khador?"). Just need to be better is all. Beasts as a whole need some rewiring to better function with animuses given to them. Many Gargantuans also need to be re-examined. I get that you like Scenario so I guess it's a difference of opinion? Again I find all your ideas bad, so I call this debate bedrock, where two people just share radically different opinions so it can't really be solved.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on May 9, 2017 5:46:27 GMT
Its not so much the Kill stuff part. its that you'd have to make everybody as durable as Khador. Most people can hit hard or harder than Khador can. But nobody is that tanky. And you'd basically have to make everybody as tanky as Khador to make SR17 actually a fair and balanced system.
|
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on May 9, 2017 5:49:10 GMT
That's not entirely true, gunlines are also very effective in SR 2017, I barely feel the need to move up the board at all now playing Lylyth 1 or 2.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 9, 2017 5:52:42 GMT
Its not so much the Kill stuff part. its that you'd have to make everybody as durable as Khador. No, I disagree. But the question is of course what remains a factions core Identity. So many factions just lost their identity in the MKIII transition.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on May 9, 2017 6:04:55 GMT
That's not entirely true, gunlines are also very effective in SR 2017, I barely feel the need to move up the board at all now playing Lylyth 1 or 2. I suppose that is true. But that still leaves us with the problem of needing to rebalance all factions to either be X-flavored Cygnar or Khador. Boring and samey.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on May 9, 2017 6:33:06 GMT
Its not so much the Kill stuff part. its that you'd have to make everybody as durable as Khador. No, I disagree. But the question is of course what remains a factions core Identity. So many factions just lost their identity in the MKIII transition. I find that a dubious remark. What were these identities and what did they lose? Protectorate players keep whining about their denial, while ignoring that their denial is still there and awesome.
|
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on May 9, 2017 6:58:30 GMT
That's not entirely true, gunlines are also very effective in SR 2017, I barely feel the need to move up the board at all now playing Lylyth 1 or 2. I suppose that is true. But that still leaves us with the problem of needing to rebalance all factions to either be X-flavored Cygnar or Khador. Boring and samey. I think it's more that other factions will have their pools of competitive casters shrink to the ones that are already good at long grindy attrition games or piloting powerful gunlines.
|
|