|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 21:31:58 GMT
This is one of the longer cids -- three weekends. Perhaps you should compile some stats about what other factions received in terms of length of cid and number of models. Copied from Lanz on the CID forums: Cygnar CID: 8 new models, 11 legacy rebalances. Total: 19 Gators CID: 10 models, 19 legacy rebalances. Total: 29 Trolls CID: 9 new models,21 legacy rebalances. Total: 30 Cryx CID: 12 new models, 8 legacy rebalances. Total: 20 Legion: 5 new models, 11 legacy rebalances. Total: 16 Definitely the smallest CID to date. Went a little longer than most, but fewer new models, and much fewer rebalances than (particularly) the hordes factions that have gotten CIDs thus far. thelat - shitposts like that are even less helpful than the saltiest of salt-filled posts...which this is not.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 16:49:29 GMT
I think they mentioned on Twitter that they are adding it to the Kriel Company Theme Force as well. Is that another push to make it more appealing? #Wedon'tchangerulesjusttosellmodels. RIP.
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 30, 2018 6:41:43 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 6:41:43 GMT
Maybe. He never did achieve the kind of oppressive winrate I associate with casters that really do need a nerf, though. And while his feat was a timewalk, the counters and workarounds to it were numerous enough that I'm not convinced he actually needed to be changed. He's definitely still a strong caster, I just have a hard time with how dang quickly he got nerfed (despite not putting up the kinds of results other casters have) while casters like Nemo3, Denny1, etc take months of years to get seen to. And don't even get me started on Una2. She 100% needed a nerf, but the speed at which the nerf hit was unprecedented (I don't think she'd even been fully released.) I blame bad playtesting more than anything else for that one, though... I agree on WurmWood. strong but not necessarily in need of a nerf. RE:Una2 though, I totally think she got nerfed fast enough. blame bad playtesting all you want they had an entire edition of the game with the same effect and they deemed it too strong to stay in mk3. I think Una2's nerfed feat should have been changed to +3 ARM and retaliatory strike for the BG. /s Una2 needed a nerf, but - more accurately - she should never have released as she was. The cynical side of me sees her get released in the state she was, people buying a metric Firetruck ton of griffons, then her getting nerfed 3 months later. She was way too good, she needed a nerf - and I said as much at the time - but it should never have gotten to the point where she had to be nerfed so soon after release. It's one thing where a model is buffed, or new releases occur, or a theme drops and that model becomes the center of an overpowered list. It's quite another when a caster whose design screams 'spam griffons' is released with the dev team apparently not having tested her ability to spam griffons.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 2:06:36 GMT
I wonder if they got fewer preorders than they expected...
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 30, 2018 1:39:51 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 1:39:51 GMT
Hey oncomingstorm Wurmwood did kind of need a nerf. Timewalk feats are no fun. And his 14”ish Bubble of tress was...oppressive. Maybe. He never did achieve the kind of oppressive winrate I associate with casters that really do need a nerf, though. And while his feat was a timewalk, the counters and workarounds to it were numerous enough that I'm not convinced he actually needed to be changed. He's definitely still a strong caster, I just have a hard time with how dang quickly he got nerfed (despite not putting up the kinds of results other casters have) while casters like Nemo3, Denny1, etc take months of years to get seen to. And don't even get me started on Una2. She 100% needed a nerf, but the speed at which the nerf hit was unprecedented (I don't think she'd even been fully released.) I blame bad playtesting more than anything else for that one, though...
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 30, 2018 1:26:05 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 30, 2018 1:26:05 GMT
My entire point is that the "health of the game" should be managed not by nerfing things, but by giving people counters against them, so long as doing so is feasible. Nerfs should be the last resort to stop something that cannot be fixed in the immediate future by buffs. It should be saved for game-breaking interactions that people have no chance against, not something that's simply powerful in the right hands and situations. That argument has never ever worked for me. First, not all factions actually HAVE the counters equally available in the first place. Second, when you have to counter several different game-breakers across your two lists, it goes back to Mk2 where you needed the often highly specific tech to handle Terminus, Lylyth2, MMM, Harbinger, Runes of War, Elemental Evolution, Fist of Halaak, Bradigus, Haley2, Saeryn, Asphyxious2, Body & Soul, Rayvn and (gasps for breath) in two lists. Variety in lists suffers when you have too many "answer at list-building or don't bother showing up" matches. Mk3 has stamped hard on highly specific gear checks (Una2, Ghost Fleet, Wurmwood), and long may that continue. Nerfing is simply better for the health of the game as a whole. I've said this before, but an underpowered thing just means that one thing doesn't get taken. An OP thing is much more damaging, choking out options not just within its own faction, but every other one. I COULDN'T AGREE MORE (sorry, I just had to...). To be fair, sometimes PP does screw up and nerf models that don't need nerfing (in retrospect, I'm not convinced Wurmwood ever needed a nerf, and Haley1/Ossyan certainly didn't). Sometimes they go overboard and nerf a model out of the game, rather than into line with the rest of the meta. That doesn't change the core fact that judicious and measured nerfs are an overall pro for the health of the game. And Firetruck Nemo3. Because I would like to be able to play a pairing that doesn't include Krueger2 once in a blue moon, please.
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 29, 2018 20:42:53 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 20:42:53 GMT
krigsol - I fundamentally disagree that lists like Nemo3 (and to a lesser extent, Skarre1...which is really a problem with the Wraith Engine, by the by) are good for the health of the game. There should be counters in list building and in play to strong lists, not just counters in list building. The game is waaaay too large (and is only getting larger, as new themes go through CID, new models are released, and old 'bad' models become viable) for the two-list pair to even remotely handle all of the OP crap in existence. The two-list format is a necessary pressure valve to the size and complexity of the game, it is not the be all and end all of balancing models. My entire point is that the "health of the game" should be managed not by nerfing things, but by giving people counters against them, so long as doing so is feasible. Nerfs should be the last resort to stop something that cannot be fixed in the immediate future by buffs. It should be saved for game-breaking interactions that people have no chance against, not something that's simply powerful in the right hands and situations. Read the remainder of my post. I don't think we disagree on core premises (models should be nerfed only when not easily solvable by buffs), but I 100% disagree that the only metric of whether a model is too good is whether it's part of a list that is sweeping cons with no meta answer in sight. That leads to reactivity, and (frankly) a constant cycle of lists dominating the meta for months at a time before PP gets it together to nerf a model that anyone in their right mind could have seen was above curve. The meta has a limited capacity to answer problem lists. There is some elasticity built into the two-list system, and that is a good thing, because it means that the meta doesn't (usually) immediately break when someone discovers a good list. But it's not unlimited, and PP has to be proactive about nerfing clear outliers when they appear, or they will get themselves into a GF/DH situation on a too-regular basis.
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 29, 2018 20:27:58 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 20:27:58 GMT
List? No. Model/unit? Hellmouth. I spent the first 8 months of Mk3 having every single legion player I encountered tell me that the 'Hellmouth was clearly OP, but that they neeeded it to make up for how expensive their landsharks were.' Well, the landsharks are getting some significant buffs, so we should be seeing some Hellmouth nerfs. PT is going to be a very strong theme (that will not be able to play into Nemo3, admittedly, but that's just the nature of the beast). It doesn't need an OP crutch model to function. I think you answered your own concern. If those OP Hellmouths can't create OP lists (and honestly - aren't even played right now) then they're OK inside faction. Also - nothing in Legion can really play into Nemo3 and thats issue. I've seen many players (usually different factions) wanting to balance PT around potato lists. They can. They haven't (and aren't being played) because they've lacked a theme for most of Mk3, and the themes they've been in (until now) were either not very strong, or very barebones. Look, Sentinels weren't in a theme until end of September last year...so they weren't being played. Doesn't mean they're not strong. Discordia isn't being played, because she's not in a theme (and doesn't synergize with Rahn) - doesn't mean she's not strong (seriously, the number of complaints that jack got pre-themes...). Wurmwood doesn't fit easily into a theme...so he's being played infrequently. Still a very strong caster. All the lack of hellmouths in the competitive scene recently proves is the following: ' themes are strong.' Themes are strong enough that there is a very, very small number of model combinations that are even worth thinking about going out of theme for. If a model doesn't have a theme, or doesn't have a good theme, it will not be played, unless it singlehandedly bends the meta over a fence. As for Nemo3, I've said it before, and I will doubtless say it again. The problem with Nemo3 and Legion is a problem with Nemo3. He needs ridiculously specific counters to even play into (most matchups are something like an 80/20 for him, under a good player). He has a few ridiculously specific hard counters, and that is the only think keeping him from taking over the meta more than he already has. He is a silly, stupid, and utterly over-the-top caster, and he (or electro-leaps) needs a nerf. Balancing anything against Nemo3 is a bad idea, because Nemo3 is himself egregious. krigsol - I fundamentally disagree that lists like Nemo3 (and to a lesser extent, Skarre1...which is really a problem with the Wraith Engine, by the by) are good for the health of the game. There should be counters in list building and in play to strong lists, not just counters in list building. The game is waaaay too large (and is only getting larger, as new themes go through CID, new models are released, and old 'bad' models become viable) for the two-list pair to even remotely handle all of the OP crap in existence. The two-list format is a necessary pressure valve to the size and complexity of the game, it is not the be all and end all of balancing models. Obviously a 50/50 winrate should not be the end result. It's not possible in a game with this many moving parts, especially with the resources PP has for testing, even with CID. But we should be moving towards more 60/40, 55/45 situations, where a bad matchup is a disadvantage, not a near-automatic loss. There are currently maybe...20 pieces in the game that I would call truly problematic in this regard, and those models should be nerfed. Not nerfed out of the game, like Mad Dogs were, but brought down to a reasonable power level a la the Wonder Twins, or Coven, or Storm Lances. All indications are that PP is doing this (albeit slowly), so we absolutely should not be comparing new models to meta-dominant models that will very likely be nerfed in the near future.
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 29, 2018 20:20:42 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 20:20:42 GMT
They are supposed to be competitive. They are supposed to be balanced against the top-level meta. These are the things that I'm supporting. Good players should be able to win tournaments with these factions. That is functioning as intended. I agree with this 100% But my question is, what is you "standard"? Do you want Coven dark host/denny gf/dreamer power level? Or do you want something else? I think it takes an approach from both directions. Bring down the stuff that is too good (cryx is getting there if its not already) and bring up the bad stuff. Meet in the middle/ish and open up faction diversity. I don't play legion, but being restricted to 1 theme (oracles) and 1 or 2 builds (flying beasts or double Throne is what I see) is annoying, I understand that. I'm hoping PT shows up more in the meta. I agree. This is what I was getting at. the fact that SoTN/NuTrolls and NuMinions are thriving in a meta with Nemo3, Haley3, Dreamer/Grymkin in general and Dark Host is concerning, and says some concerning things about where they will be once the remaining 'problem' models finally get brought down.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 20:16:21 GMT
Grymkin pulled a 70% winrate at ATC. both the new Trolls and the new Minions were represented heavily (and highly) at LVO Masters. Haley3 gravediggers is the de facto Nemo3 pairing. You really can't argue that the results of CID are not extremely competitive. They might be balanced against the top-level meta (especially in light of the nerfs to the top performers in said meta), but the fact that everything that's come out of CID (except some of the Christmas models) has gone on to take top tables shortly after release is indicative of power creep. They are supposed to be competitive. They are supposed to be balanced against the top-level meta. These are the things that I'm supporting. Good players should be able to win tournaments with these factions. That is functioning as intended. I don't entirely disagree - though I think there's an issue when a theme goes directly from CID to top tables, because A) there is a substantial stable of models in the game I firmly believe are too good and should be nerfed, so if the new stuff is outdoing those models, that's indicative of a problem and B) right after release, players haven't had time to fully unlock the synergies of the theme...so they're probably not playing the 'best' lists that theme has to offer, yet. New models should be competitive. CID stuff should be competitive. But the number of times I've seen someone on the CID forums compare the new stuff against 'overpowered model X' and use it for the baseline is problematic. If PP goes that route, we're going to end up with either A) terrible internal balance or B) everything at the power level of Skarre1/Nemo3/etc AND C) endless power creep on a rotating basis, analogous to the GW codex creep. Did you ever play GW games? Because the current trend for PP is ringing some alarm bells for me, and for most of the old GW crowd I know. Rotating releases, increasing prices, removal of faction defining tools because 'npe' and 'totally not forgeworld' all feel very familiar...as does some of (definitely not all, praise Pagani and Hungerford) the Dev team's attitude towards the community.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 19:26:20 GMT
TK with kruger 2? I plan on trying him out in wild hunt and devo host with death wolves. Gotta keep em fed full with corpses. I don't know how effective it will be. You can also use it to load up kromac 1 for an extra 3 attacks in an activation. Don't discount spectral lash either. I think it is a fairly nifty ability on it. Boostable ranged spell on it is pretty good. My thoughts are that it will be good in Devo Host (especially after the CID gives us new and fun uses for corpses, I hope!) because it can load up a Ravager on the turn it goes in. My main issue with the theme's corpses at the moment is that the Death Wolves are the only real choice to put them on, because they can use them defensively (whereas a Ravager cannot). It will be decent-good in Wild Hunt, because Death Wolves are terrible without corpses (this is something I WILL be bringing up in CID), but quite decent with them. It will be very acceptable with Kromac2, as it lets him just casually wreck a Heavy or two without even touching his camp. Puppet master and spirit lash are both excellent side benefits, but I'll be bringing it for the corpses.
|
|
|
Cid
Jan 29, 2018 19:16:17 GMT
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 29, 2018 19:16:17 GMT
Yeah nothing but buffs this CiD. And people were still trying to get the BB more buffs after everything. I was at least hoping they would consider doing something...anything to chosen. Arm 16 was not the solution, but leaving them the exact same as week 1 release was...questionable. I thought enough reports showed some concern with how good they were at everything. But I guess that’s just how it’s going to be. Double chosen all the time now, even with a nice fix to warmongers! Woohoo! I feel rotwings were a missed opportunity...why they couldn’t just revitalize the Unit is beyond me. Hopefully they will change them a bit before final release. It could have been worse though. I just feel like it’s more power creep Well, obviously only buffs because Legion was in terrible place design-wise: elite priced models with mediocre stats. They couldn't play around it any longer if they've wanted to have any Legion players to buy PT. I mean - what is in Legion that needed nerf? Honestly, name ONE list in Legion that is problematic right now. List? No. Model/unit? Hellmouth. I spent the first 8 months of Mk3 having every single legion player I encountered tell me that the 'Hellmouth was clearly OP, but that they neeeded it to make up for how expensive their landsharks were.' Well, the landsharks are getting some significant buffs, so we should be seeing some Hellmouth nerfs. PT is going to be a very strong theme (that will not be able to play into Nemo3, admittedly, but that's just the nature of the beast). It doesn't need an OP crutch model to function. @forever_Blight - that's just not true. I know for a fact that macdaddy and myself were extremely active during the Cryx CID, pointing out concerns with the models in that CID (and those that weren't - the Coven nerf was right in line with my suggestions, despite all the Cryx players Female Doging and moaning that it would make coven unplayable because they were 'totally fine.') The problem is that some people don't want their stuff to be balanced, they want it to be better than whatever the current meta-hotness is...AKA power creep. Currently, Chosen, Anamag, the BB, and possibly Golab (compare it to Warpwolf Stalker, seriously) are all examples of power creep. krigsol - Grymkin pulled a 70% winrate at ATC. both the new Trolls and the new Minions were represented heavily (and highly) at LVO Masters. Haley3 gravediggers is the de facto Nemo3 pairing. You really can't argue that the results of CID are not extremely competitive. They might be balanced against the top-level meta (especially in light of the nerfs to the top performers in said meta), but the fact that everything that's come out of CID (except some of the Christmas models) has gone on to take top tables shortly after release is indicative of power creep. EDIT: gonna second macdaddy's comment. Everyone has bias, but being able to be critical of that bias is the key. During the wold CID, I was also critical of some of the new wolds (and also the Harpy/Siren, which I still maintain came out of CID too good). During the BE CID, I initially thought the fulcrum was too good (everything else ended up getting buffed past it, but still...). I might have a track record of raining on other people's parade, but I call out stuff that's too good in my own factions pretty consistently as well.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 26, 2018 22:23:50 GMT
I'm not even gonna deal with the rest of your post, but suffice to say you seem to be laboring under a delusion... ...but I feel no need to engage with someone whose first resort in an argument is ad hominems.
srsly?If you can't see the difference between attacking the quality of someone's arguments, and attacking that person, I can see why you're having an issue here.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 26, 2018 21:43:08 GMT
1. Acceptable to the player means acceptable to all players, not just players of the faction in question. Acceptable 'to the game' is shorthand for 'acceptable to the totality of the player community.' I'm sure there are a subset of players that would love to play on easy mode all the time, that doesn't mean they should have OP crap. I'm not even gonna deal with the rest of your post, but suffice to say you seem to be laboring under a delusion that ... oncomingstorm, You seem to be misquoting 36cygnar24guy36 and my post. Perhaps you want to fix that, and also relax a bit? You come off like a ripe feces throwing ape. These are toys. Nothing more. Incorrect, but I feel no need to engage with someone whose first resort in an argument is ad hominems.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 26, 2018 21:06:14 GMT
I would say, the thing you have to do when designing and balancing models, is to take them to the worst scenario you can, and see if it is still acceptable to the PLAYER. ... I completely disagree with this line of thinking. YOU have to assume, Chosen are going to be played. That's all that matters. The whole picture needs to be considered when designing and releasing new models, not just the extreme end. Imagine if your boss thought like that... Hey, Larry, great work you did on all those other 99 projects, we know you only messed up one assignment, but it's unacceptable and you need to go.1. Acceptable to the player means acceptable to all players, not just players of the faction in question. Acceptable 'to the game' is shorthand for 'acceptable to the totality of the player community.' I'm sure there are a subset of players that would love to play on easy mode all the time, that doesn't mean they should have OP crap. 2. In my profession, if I take on 99 clients and handle their cases professionally, and on the 100th I fail to meet those standards, I will be harshly disciplined by the governing body of my profession. I may lose my license to practice for years, or even permanently. Even working in a less stringent field, completing 99 projects successfully won't stop you from getting fired if you royally Firetruck up the 100th. I'm not even gonna deal with the rest of your post, but suffice to say you seem to be laboring under a delusion that the way models get played is, effectively, random, such that any combination of models/casters is equally likely to find it's way onto the table. Players (at least, the players the game is being balanced for) do not just throw models into a list and hope for the best. They find synergies, and create lists around those synergies. Whether or not Chosen suck with, say, Thagrosh2, or are only 'mediocre' with Rhyas1 simply does not matter from a game balance perspective, just like it didn't matter that Storm Lances weren't particularly broken with Stryker2. If they're too good with Anamag, or Thags1, or who-the-hell-ever, they're too good period.
|
|