|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 4, 2017 4:01:32 GMT
inherent bias is not expressed bias and...there's really no point in continuing this argument. Suffice to say I believe that I make reasonable efforts to control for my own faction bias, and that I am relatively successful in doing so. As to Haley2, I would ideally want to see how she plays in SR2017 for a good month or so, as an SR change can easily shake up a caster enough to balance (or unbalance) them. Failing that, my options would be: 1. change her feat to be either shakeable, OR to have some other restriction on targeting (LOS, raise her CMD to 12 and make it CMD, etc.) Comparable control feats (Sorscha1, Denny2's old feat, etc.) all have similar restrictions. It would make her have to play further back, as well, meaning the potential area to avoid would be less. Since those feats also have additional benefits (mostly to hit buffs,) I could also see layering on an additional effect (maybe -2 speed) on affected models as a way to ameliorate the change, if it turns out to be too much. I would test it without the added benefit first, though - the other control casters don't have Haley2's incredibly deep spell list, for the most part. OR 2. Replace Telekinesis with something else. I'm honestly not 100% sure what, but I'm thinking something along the lines of a 3" enemy-only push effect, similar to Helynna's redirection blast or Helios' drag gun. TK is arguably the best control spell in the game, and layering it on top of an unchanged Haley2 feat gives her too many options to come forward and be totally safe on feat turn (by turning shooting threats around,) on top of the other uses of TK for threat extension, clearing charge lanes, etc. Whatever spell that replaces TK should be reasonably powerful and versatile, but not on the same level as TK. Test one of the two options and go from there. Part of the problem with fixing Haley2 is that so many parts of her kit are almost certainly seen by PP staff as 'iconic' and thus are not going anywhere, and that includes most of the less-important levers you could tweak to change her kit - field marshal future sight, time bomb, temporal acceleration and domination are almost certainly here to stay. Cool. I'm of similar mind. We really do need to watch what happens with sr17, although I'd give it more like 2-3 months. Making her feat shakable might be okay, although it will certainly make Haley much more vulnerable during feat turn to assassination. Now, that might be the goal, but we would need to determine if this takes it too far. The problem with command range is that its a fluff rule. Haley will never get a high command because command represents the chqracter's ability to lead an army. Irusk has a high command because that's one of his things. Haley isn't like that. I don't see PP giving her cmd 12. What I would like is a change to feat range that is neither cmd or cntrl. In CID, make her feat range 16 (not control, so no squire bonus) and see what happens. And I'd be careful with the tk change. By making it enemy only, it decreases her threat ranges by 1, and even more in rough terrain, stops her from changing their facing, and really does drop down her power. H2 really is a difficult caster to change, because PP clearly has things they are set on keeping. I have to say, the fluffy requirements/preconceptions PP has about certain models is a source of continual frustration to me. Too many times the community will be telling them (even on the CID - see Khador Gun Carriage, Grymkin Scary Tree etc.) that their idea is not working, and they'll insist on sticking to their concept regardless. Anyways, enough griping about PP, more (constructive) griping about Haley2! I could see making it a static range, though my inclination is that 16" is still too high. If we're not tying it to her CTRL, why not 14"? why not 12"? at least to start, then find the break point and go from there. Regardless, I feel like making it shakeable is the more 'elegant' solution, if only because it fits with established PP practice. It would give her some bad matchups (which she doesn't have many of now) into ranged lists (and particularly ranged jack-heavy lists) and I don't see that as a bad thing, either. She covers too many matchups too well at the moment, IMO. As to the loss of TK, I fully understand the implications of losing it (I play Rahn and Krueger2, and DANG do I love that spell.) I don't think that it would be a power reduction that renders her unplayable, or even bad, though - it'd be a 2 cost spell, so she can still cast it on two different targets for threat extension/control, and she can still use it to deny ranged attacks by shoving them out of range/behind terrain. In select situations, it might even be better, by letting her push jacks and beasts out of control. There would just be more counterplay to it, in terms of putting your stuff behind walls/other models/in terrain. She'd still be able to swing threat extensions of 5" with temporal acceleration and Force Grip, but she WOULDN'T be able to swing a 6" non-linear threat extension with the back strike bonus built in. I dunno, it would honestly be my preferred option for fixing her, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. It's still thematically similar to TK, and it's very much a 'TK but less so' sort of spell that preserves her ability to do most of the things she could do before, but makes them a little less strong, a little harder to pull off, and a little harder to play around. It's definitely what I'd do for my first swing at a fix.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 4, 2017 2:05:58 GMT
I want to remove Mobility. Mobility is stupid. Stupid good yes, but still stupid. Give him Escort instead if you need, but I want Broadsides or Mobility replaced with Guided Fire so I can finally play that sweet sweet Destroyer gunline with the free jack kits I got. I have to say, Escort and Iron Sentinel is dirty. Having said that, this could be a good change, as it would decrease his ability to absolutely monopolize the board with zippy cheap khador jacks, make him actually play like terrain is a thing that exists, while still preserving the repositioning utility from the added speed. That being said, I do think it's a sidegrade rather than a downgrade, since it's an upkeep, not a 3-cost spell he has to recast every turn.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 4, 2017 1:53:58 GMT
inherent bias is not expressed bias and...there's really no point in continuing this argument. Suffice to say I believe that I make reasonable efforts to control for my own faction bias, and that I am relatively successful in doing so.
As to Haley2, I would ideally want to see how she plays in SR2017 for a good month or so, as an SR change can easily shake up a caster enough to balance (or unbalance) them. Failing that, my options would be:
1. change her feat to be either shakeable, OR to have some other restriction on targeting (LOS, raise her CMD to 12 and make it CMD, etc.) Comparable control feats (Sorscha1, Denny2's old feat, etc.) all have similar restrictions. It would make her have to play further back, as well, meaning the potential area to avoid would be less. Since those feats also have additional benefits (mostly to hit buffs,) I could also see layering on an additional effect (maybe -2 speed) on affected models as a way to ameliorate the change, if it turns out to be too much. I would test it without the added benefit first, though - the other control casters don't have Haley2's incredibly deep spell list, for the most part.
OR
2. Replace Telekinesis with something else. I'm honestly not 100% sure what, but I'm thinking something along the lines of a 3" enemy-only push effect, similar to Helynna's redirection blast or Helios' drag gun. TK is arguably the best control spell in the game, and layering it on top of an unchanged Haley2 feat gives her too many options to come forward and be totally safe on feat turn (by turning shooting threats around,) on top of the other uses of TK for threat extension, clearing charge lanes, etc.
Whatever spell that replaces TK should be reasonably powerful and versatile, but not on the same level as TK.
Test one of the two options and go from there.
Part of the problem with fixing Haley2 is that so many parts of her kit are almost certainly seen by PP staff as 'iconic' and thus are not going anywhere, and that includes most of the less-important levers you could tweak to change her kit - field marshal future sight, time bomb, temporal acceleration and domination are almost certainly here to stay.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 4, 2017 1:12:44 GMT
I have played her, though not extensively, as I don't enjoy crutching on power casters to win (case in point, I never played pre-nerf wurmwood.) I've played AGAINST her extensively, however, which i would say places my experience on par with your own, but without the pro-cygnar bias you consistently display. Yeah, man, you don't sound biased at all. I'll always be hesitant about nerfing anything, because it's really easy to ruin a model, and really hard to find a good and reasonable change. Curious as to where you're drawing an inference of bias from. I play Cygnar, Retribution, and Circle. At various times, I've called out models from both Circle and Cygnar as being OP, and in need of a nerf, as well as models from other factions. On the old forums, I was one of the earliest players calling for a nerf to wurmwood, I was vocally onboard about the nerfs to Una (though less so, because I didn't buy into her spam, and I'm the only Circle player in my area, so it wasn't a problem in my meta) and I've continued to call out Haley and Storm Lances as in need of a nerf, in addition to calling out Heavy Metal (and Jaws) as being a poorly designed theme. By all means, disagree with what I'm saying, but there is no reasonable metric by which you could call me 'biased.' In contrast, in the year that Mk3 has been out, I've seen OctaviusMaximus comment on model power level in 3 circumstances: 1. Cygnar model X is too weak, needs a buff (see Cygnar CID thread running at the moment) 2. Cygnar model X is fine, does not need a nerf (Storm Lances, Haley 2) 3. Other faction model X is OP, needs a nerf (Karchev, most recently.) THAT is what bias looks like, and I'm calling it out accordingly. As to nerfs being necessarily over the top, I disagree. That has been PP's pattern in the past, but with CID up and running, I think we could reasonably see some measured, well-thought out nerfs to problem models that leave them playable, but not OP.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 4, 2017 0:17:17 GMT
By all means, let's change Harkevich, but let's NOT change an extremely powerful caster (who is a very difficult to win matchup into at least two factions) to make him unilaterally better.
I actually agree with Rowdy Dragon (for once) in that I agree that a caster who doesn't use half of his kit is broken and in need of a fix. But something has to give to make him less of a powerhouse for melee jacks. Swap mobility for something else (guided fire?,) replace the +3 arm component of the feat with something that promotes ranged engagement...don't talk about swapping his crappy nuke for a powerful buff spell, because if pp has any sense at all, it will never happen.
Seriously, some of the comments on this thread read like 'Haley2 dies to guns, she should get stealth and shield barrier, and swap out her hand cannon.'
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 3, 2017 23:49:07 GMT
How can either of you claim how op she while not playing her? Lol. I have played her, though not extensively, as I don't enjoy crutching on power casters to win (case in point, I never played pre-nerf wurmwood.) I've played AGAINST her extensively, however, which i would say places my experience on par with your own, but without the pro-cygnar bias you consistently display.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 3, 2017 23:20:35 GMT
I always refused to play haley2 when I played Cygnar. I never wanted to hear my opponent say "well you only won cause you played a broken BS OP caster". I don't believe she is broken or OP, but I don't want an opponent to make me feel bad about winning either. When I played Cygnar, I dropped Haley2 exactly twice. Both times were into relatively experienced players with decent lists (dropping Haley2 into someone who's unprepared, inexperienced, or wants a casual game is dirty, and you should feel bad if you do it,) and both times I wrecked them, despite my relative unfamiliarity with the caster. She's really not that hard to use (there are many, many casters with higher skill caps, including Haley3) and she has so many tools that the only danger I was really in was of clocking myself exploring all the options that I had. She isn't broken, she is most certainly OP by any reasonable metric.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 3, 2017 2:09:50 GMT
So....fix point costs? The problem isn't that themes do get underplayed models into play, because even Stannis Brocker is pretty good at 0pts. But it's not evenly distributed. When themes become "take the 10 Storm Lances you were taking anyway with the restriction that you can't take things you weren't going to take anyway, have all the support you were going to take for free", then we're back to Machinations of Shadow. They did. You getting a rebate of a free model is the costing them appropriately. I would never own a jakes or nyss on hellion otherwise. A. That's not the same as fixing the point cost. If a model is overcosted, it will still never be paid for, and it will be used in theme only to the extent that it's superior to the other possible free models. B. Neither of those are good examples - Jakes is not a bad Jr. by by any means, and I was using her to good effect even before Heavy Metal. Her main issue is that Jr. is straight better in most lists, and you often have a hard time fitting two Journeymen into an average list. The Hellion is a point overcosted. That's all. If it was worse than that, you still wouldn't see them in Oracles, because forsaken/other choices would still be better.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 2, 2017 21:41:50 GMT
1) Marauders 2) Rockets 3) Themes life Defenders of Ios with 4 units of Halberdiers 4) Ghost Fleet with min units for max Weapons Attachments 5) Hunters with Sloan I didn't try that hard, some stuff might be just very strong not OP, but you get the point. You forgot Dervishes in Creator's might but ssssshh they are only playable with Amon so hush Also Chargers with Caine3, Griffons with Vyros1/2 (not problematic, but strong) and Neraphs/Flying warbeasts with Fyanna. However, I don't think FA is the answer - any issue should be solved by toning down 1 piece of the problem interaction and going from there.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 1, 2017 9:38:32 GMT
themes that are actually more thematicIn fact, I'd say you have the only real theme force if we define theme force as "list that allows you to represent fluff in a way you couldn't without it". I agree, actually. I had a very positive reaction on first seeing Kingmaker, because it seemed like an interesting option in terms of list building, without being obviously overpowered in a linear fashion. It's limited in terms of the Warcasters it can take on a thematic basic, not just a keyword basis, and it lets you take options you couldn't access out of theme. I mean, forget balance, the themes lately have been very...boring. Take X points of Y type of unit, get free Y type UA/Solo. random benefit 1 with in game effect, random benefit 2 that gives a special rule to a unit. No caster restrictions. It's all very formulaic, and it screams spam from the get go. I'm really starting to hate the concept of themes... Deller - I'll admit that I had a brainfart moment and thought infernal machines gave free stuff for Warjacks, not thralls (why is Infernal MACHINES the thrall theme, anyway?!) Yeah, it's a fine theme. Not overpowered in the slightest. I really dislike themes that give free points for spamming already spammable models, which is at the heart of my dislike for Heavy Metal, Jaws, and Oracles.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 1, 2017 5:54:53 GMT
I think what PPs problem was that I think they really shouldn't have released themes until they were ready. What I mean by that is that some themes, of course, depend on unreleased elements to make them "Whole". And that the "Jack" themes should not have been released until the other themes where complete. As much as that would have maybe spoiled some fun, in the long run, it would be healthier. At the moment a themes viability depends mostly on if it's based on something good or not. That idea can apply to anything, shouldnt release Caine 3 till they fix Haley 2. Shouldn't release brickhouse till they fix ace. If they didn't release themes there would be consternation that things that are good in theme but bad outside of it need to be fixed. Lancers are ok, but never taken outside of theme because thorn is better. There is now a reason to bring a lancer. But what about whether they weren't allowed to release a theme until they fixed the thing the theme would fix? Doesn't that make their release never happen? It becomes a paradox. Yes and No. What should have happened was they shouldn't have released Mk3 until it was fully balanced, including an open Beta, and (if themes were going to be so integral to balance) several themes for each faction, available immediately on release. They're doing the open beta now anyways, and it's painfully obvious that several factions were rushed out the door unfinished. It's also obvious that some factions (or aspects of factions) are desperately awaiting themes to make them playable, or (conversely) that certain themes are waiting on future releases to become viable. That ship has sailed, so yes, the options are more limited. I firmly believe, though, that they should be devoting more energy to fixing the unpolished factions they released, ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 31, 2017 20:42:02 GMT
I stand by Oracles, Heavy Metal, and Jaws, and frankly, I'd say the same about any theme that allowed Circle to bring any beast/gain free points for doing so. I find your choices just very...Personally arbitrary. The more restricted the choices, the more the benefits have to be BIGGER to make up for less of a selection, especially if they are vital or important. Yes, I agree, and when a theme lets you take everything you'd need in order to put together a viable list in theme (except for the support) and by so doing obtain the support for free, that's a problem. Themes should represent an actual choice between lists in theme and out of theme, and when you see something like Sloan in heavy metal, or Harkevich/Karchev in Jaws, it's problematic. There's no real tradeoff for playing in theme. Same goes for Storm Division, except the issue there (as you rightly pointed out) is that Storm Lances are so good that the loss of other infantry choices is fairly irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 31, 2017 20:31:12 GMT
It's a beast theme that makes us loose out on every single infantry model outside of ones with magic abilities. We have thus given up on the very popular Swordsmen, Warlords, Deathstalkers, Strider scouts, Raptors, Grotesques, and Grotesque assassin to name a few. So we literally have no jamming potential and little to no efficient anti-infantry. All the "eggs are in one basket" and the eggs are brittle as shit. We do have to make sacrifices. But looking in from outside the faction you are content to dismiss that. Even if that restriction was to be put in place what would that stop Oracles from bringing? The sorc & hellion? Fine I'll pay 6 and bring something else for free. Or Do you actually mean that we can't take CAs and things with 5 or less boxes? If that's what you mean then are you trying to ruin the theme structure just to hurt one list that I can just pay those 11 points for the fury management and NOTHING would change? I really am trying not to go ballistic but you are drilling one single list in one theme of one of the least popular factions in the game right now. We have one nice toy and you're mad about it? There are other themes that allow free models that have more than 5 boxes. I'd be fine with you paying to bring Hellion and get something else free, I'm totally fine with free CA and free 5 hitbox models. In my opinion Dragoons, Hellions, and other models that are 6+ points should not be free. Please, go ballistic... To be fair, the Sorc and Hellion isn't worth 6 points - she didn't get taken before Oracles, and she still doesn't get taken outside of it that I'm aware of. Same goes for the Pain Knight in Defenders - he's not worth 8 points (though he's probably worth 6.) For Shadows of the Retribution, I've never gotten a free Eiryss, because you usually want Eiryss3 as a CA on something, and Narn (again) isn't worth 6 points. Number of Free points isn't always the best indicator of free value the theme gives you, though if people ARE willing to pay the points for the S+H if it were to get removed as a free model choice, that does indicate that maybe early assessments of it's value were incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 31, 2017 20:24:25 GMT
Heavy Metal, Jaws of the Wolf, Storm Division, But not Infernal Machine or Creators Might? Because they ain't Popular. I'd say that Storm Division, in particular, is very specific in what it is, and its benefits are pretty lax overall (Just Free Points). Heavy Metal and Jaws, Infernal Machine, and Creators might are all "Jack Themed" theme forces. Very few choices of infantry, Jack Support, and the "Apex" jack are all that is allowed to be included. Infernal machines, I think might be balanced just on virtue of the fact that Cryx doesn't want to take a lot of jacks, period, so the trade-off is a real one. Cryx doesn't have a particularly good dedicated Jack caster at the moment. As to Menoth, we have literally 0 Menoth players in or near my Meta, so I'm always hesitant about commenting on Menoth balance issues, as I'm not familiar with them at all. And I may have been too hasty in calling Storm Division inherently problematic - the issue with that theme is probably just that Storm Lances are too good, and the theme would be balanced if Storm Lances were brought down in power. Still, I stand by Oracles, Heavy Metal, and Jaws, and frankly, I'd say the same about any theme that allowed Circle to bring any beast/gain free points for doing so.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 31, 2017 20:03:31 GMT
And I can still have those things and Typhon in the same list outside of theme. Hell I can have 2 free charging Pow 18 Neraphs and Typhon with 8 Pow 20 attacks and everything else in my list with +3str in a turn with Kryssa. That's my norm. But you can't get all of those things, AND free support/free upkeeps on turn one. Make no mistake, I agree with you that Legion beasts need a cost reduction and/or a buff, but Oracles is definitely on my Shit List in terms of 'themes that are waaaaay too broad for the benefit they offer,' along with Heavy Metal, Jaws of the Wolf, Storm Division, and to a lesser extent Defenders of Ios (though I don't see Ret players crutching on that quite as hard as the others, it's early days yet.)
|
|