|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 10, 2017 1:02:56 GMT
Hey folks, just wondering what your thoughts are on bringing or expecting players to prepare 2 lists to a friendly, non-event gaming group.
Do u think we should always play with 2 lists or is it just something for tournaments/tournament prep? Is 2 list play a core part of the game? When would you avoid 2 list play and how would you change it?
I personally don’t enter competitive events, but enjoy WM/H in my gaming club and w friends.
One of those friends does play events and has encouraged us all to play Death clock (which we’d started using at the end of Mk2, then had a long hiatus w Mk3 so it got dropped til we’re upto speed again) and now he’s encouraging us all to have 2 lists, “otherwise you’re missing out on a core part of the game”.
Thoughts and supported opinions please
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 9, 2017 1:02:03 GMT
I’ve been working on Loki recently and quite impressed by the results. Any constructive C n C greatly appreciated. (hoping the attachments work) Hopefully I’ll post a few more previous minis in this collection later in the thread .... and of course any thing new that I get done.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 4, 2017 15:45:12 GMT
daveg Totally agree that the game is better on the table than online. Both can give a skewed perspective, but it’s only thru actual play that u really experience the game, all this internet chatter can quickly become offensive, argumentative and / or quite negative, mostly due to the lack of tone and because many of us (myself included) find it easier to voice our complaints than our happiness. Of course Circle could be better in so many ways and if we got all our wishes then all the other factions would have more reasons to complain. We’re noy in that bad a place really, and hopefully without too much Bones skew or griffon spam, we can still be a fun and varied force to play.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 2, 2017 12:44:38 GMT
I know Circle are their own faction and need to do things their own way, but if u compare our magic theme - Secret Masters to Legion’s magic theme - Oracles, the dynamic is quite a shift: Unit and solo options are far better. They generate freebies off beasts They’re not encouraged to buy non-Faction minions for a lame sac-pawn rule.
As has been said by others, we need a few unit/solo tweaks to make ours more viable.
Personally I wouldn’t want to see Wurmwood here tho, not only because he’s not blackclad, but because he’s so powerful in so many other themes. His janky moves combined w druids etc could quickly become OP.
A new blackclad solo would be nice to buff units around him, rather than relying on Fulcrum and Storm raptor to make our blackclad units function effectively.
It feels like Fulcrum is becoming a blackclad crutch in the way Primal is now a built in crutch for our living warbeasts.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 2, 2017 12:44:20 GMT
I know Circle are their own faction and need to do things their own way, but if u compare our magic theme - Secret Masters to Legion’s magic theme - Oracles, the dynamic is quite a shift: Unit and solo options are far better. They generate freebies off beasts They’re not encouraged to buy non-Faction minions for a lame sac-pawn rule.
As has been said by others, we need a few unit/solo tweaks to make ours more viable.
Personally I wouldn’t want to see Wurmwood here tho, not only because he’s not blackclad, but because he’s so powerful in so many other themes. His janky moves combined w druids etc could quickly become OP.
A new blackclad solo would be nice to buff units around him, rather than relying on Fulcrum and Storm raptor to make our blackclad units function effectively.
It feels like Fulcrum is becoming a blackclad crutch in the way Primal is now a built in crutch for our living warbeasts.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Dec 2, 2017 12:31:12 GMT
The Steamroller 2017 packet did a LOT to rebalance Mk3, with the scenarios demanding a mix of units and solos as well as the warmachine spam. Add in theme-aggeddon and it’s fairly balanced.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 25, 2017 16:55:27 GMT
Since our (circle’s) lesser warlock is pretty restricted and whimpy, maybe keep our druids as they are and make Una1 better and/or introduce another lesser warlock that’s more viable. (Tbf Una1 would possibly be viable again if she gave Long a Leash to her griffon battlegroup, but without buffs to Razorwing and/or Rotterhorn, I suspect she’d still just be running Scarsfells) I see that PP seem to be giving fury management buffs via the Fulcrum and other hidden bits. I can’t see why the Fulcrum should be good at removing Fury from beasts, but constructs I get, may be give a portion of that back into beasts somehow?
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 25, 2017 16:44:32 GMT
Thanks guys, I thought for a minute it could manage 15” natives threat. With Grayle feat/Warpath it makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 24, 2017 14:27:01 GMT
Does the Shadowhorn actually threat 15”?! So he can charge and still leap? That makes it better than Jump! - I had not realised this! ..... or have I misread Jump too?
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 23, 2017 23:25:09 GMT
Ok, so minor confusion over who goes inert and who stays active. But we still don’t have a Jack Marshall equivalent.
Lesser warlocks are equivalent to lesser warcasters so that is NOT what I’m talking about. (It doesn’t help that Una1 is one of the worst Lesser warlocks about, being restricted to such a poor selection of beasts and not really improving the beasts abilities, but in fact reducing their range and making herself vulnerable into the bargain. Her spells are just about trying to help herself and don’t work too well)
I’m hoping whydak is right and that CoI is a testing ground before it appears in WM/H.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 23, 2017 21:51:20 GMT
oncomingstorm I totally agree with u. But unfortunately marketing and sales always manage to win out over true balance and actually fixing the ‘broken’ parts
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 23, 2017 14:43:16 GMT
War games companies never stop tweaking a game these days until the just before a new edition comes out. In the case of a few they keep tinkering up to the very last day of old ed. Most often the theory is sold as improving the game, but it’s slso an amazing sales tool; they are a business after all. The trick being to keep a kind of balance so it remains playable throughout, yet giving each faction and parts of factions nudges into or out of favour,thus driving sales for those previously less favoured/new models. Just think of the sales generated by making anything spam a ‘thing’. They get a boom of sales over and above a balanced choice, then when it gets nerfed and pushed toward a different theme / spam, folk with go and fill the new perceived gaps.
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 22, 2017 17:30:12 GMT
All characters in the game now have a number after their names, including character warbeasts. Don’t take too much inference from it. Are u assuming this is why they made Nuala1 virtually pointless in Mk3? .... because she was going to ‘level up’?
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 22, 2017 17:21:19 GMT
I don’t play tournaments, so haven’t written 2 lists to ‘drop’ into particular foes. I instead pick a list and try to make it work against whatever I face. Tbh, I only know 1 person who plays WM/H and does have the 2 list mentality.
Am I doing it all wrong?
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Nov 21, 2017 14:01:43 GMT
Scenario is important because it means there’s 3 different ways to win the game: Assassination Scenario CPs Attrition leading to another by default
It’s more of a challenge to deny all of these to ur oppo while attempting to achieve one yourself. Forcing someone to deny your ‘victory by scenario’ is usually how we find the assassination opportunities, that we need to win.
I still find it difficult to win by scenario. In fact my last couple games won that way, were only such due to my oppo playing over-defensively due to my past assassination victories. If he’d been more aggressive as a whole from the start then I would’ve had no scenario presence = forcing me to beat the attrition:assassination curve.
|
|