|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 14, 2017 1:46:33 GMT
On Moot Point Will Paganini said that the reason for the Haley 1 nerf was because of her interactions with the Hurricane and I can honestly see that.
We are already going to knock down heavies and scramble them so they can't shake it. It'd be maximum bad manners if they were also - 2 SPD for the trouble vs your arm 22 jerk.
Is Haley 1 competitive? Currently, no. Probably not with the hurricane either. But the effect that combo would have would have been so negative a lock down that I could totally see PP saying that needs to not happen.
I hope a future CID brings Haley 1 into competitive play, because her model is stunning. But the answer isnt in giving her back - 2SPD, and the tears from opponents just aren't worth it with Hurricane stomping around.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Mar 14, 2017 2:01:38 GMT
That doesn't explain the -1 WJP at all, since she can still take up to two Hurricanes if she wants.
And doesn't explain why, if the -2 SPD had to go (that is a totally reasonable thing for many reasons, not just for Hurricanes, that I can understand), they couldn't just replace it with something else or at least remove it and reduce the cost of the spell.
That is my issue with PP recently. I can understand the reasons behind many of their decisions, but it's how they deal with the problems recently that I can't understand at all.
If someone insults you, and you bring out a gun and kill him, I can totally understand WHY you did it, but I can't understand why your "answer" to the problem was so unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 14, 2017 2:31:41 GMT
That doesn't explain the -1 WJP at all, since she can still take up to two Hurricanes if she wants. And doesn't explain why, if the -2 SPD had to go (that is a totally reasonable thing for many reasons, not just for Hurricanes, that I can understand), they couldn't just replace it with something else or at least remove it and reduce the cost of the spell. That is my issue with PP recently. I can understand the reasons behind many of their decisions, but it's how they deal with the problems recently that I can't understand at all. If someone insults you, and you bring out a gun and kill him, I can totally understand WHY you did it, but I can't understand why your "answer" to the problem was so unreasonable. Unreasonableness is in the eye of the beholder. Imagine if Mad Dogs were nerfed to 8 points, which was a common call for a nerf. Imagine if PP did that, and then a month later Winter Guard Command came out. Then Mad Dog spam suddenly got advanced move. Pretty bad, right? Future releases impact current choices for a reason. So maybe the best option for now is to hit them hard, harder than is reasonable, so when the future offender comes out you can see whether it gains any traction back before trying to correct the piece back later using your own balance team and CID. Pagani said in that same interview that when he saw behind the curtain that everything is done for a reason, and I'm tempted to take that at face value. Their reasoning might be flawed or wrong, but there is a reason. I can definitely see a reason to intentionally over correct to see what happens when context changes.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Mar 14, 2017 2:43:52 GMT
Problem is, how long before that context change? Because if that changes happens in two years, it would be a lot better to make balanced nerfs and eventually make additional nerfs if the environments puts the piece over the curve again, instead of doing what you say, that is overcorrecting something, leaving it as shelf material for months or years, and maybe rebuff him if the change coming after doesn't bring him back.
I have heard both the statements of Will Pagani you are referring to, but they were both months old, and still there is no sign of that "future changes", even in the things we have been teased about for the next months.
As an example, what could make Haley1 really need that -1 WJP? What kind of battlegroup would make her unbalanced, that a -1 WJP would avoid? Maybe it exists, mind you, but I totally fail to see it and I totally fail to see why the issue had to be dealt with months or years ahead, leaving a crushed warcaster when we aren't even sure that the problem would really present at all.
Same with the -2 SPD. Why not changing it with something else enterely? Will Pagani here said that he feel that the malus as it is now (range 8) is still worth it since "Centurions". Do you agree with him? Do you feel that Centurions needed to be made "more viable" like he said in that post? I can't understand the reasoning behind that kind of statements, but maybe it's a my problem.
That said, it's hard to have trust in a company that I can't understand at all, even if maybe it's my fault not understanding them. Being uncertain of their choices, makes me uncertain of mine. I was starting another faction recently, but not being able to figure out if I will still like this game tomorrow (either for the game itself or for the support/lack of support the community is going to get) doesn't help to convince me that is better to continue to spend my money on this game blindly instead of being cautious and see what happens first.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Mar 14, 2017 3:56:03 GMT
I think that the biggest kicker about the mad dog and Haley1 nerfs is that PP will probably never touch them again. It's not like an entire faction (Skorne) is subpar. It's just a couple of models that they batted down, and left to die. I have very little hope of playing Haley1 again unless it is for purely nostalgic reasons.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Mar 14, 2017 4:45:16 GMT
I think that the biggest kicker about the mad dog and Haley1 nerfs is that PP will probably never touch them again. It's not like an entire faction (Skorne) is subpar. It's just a couple of models that they batted down, and left to die. I have very little hope of playing Haley1 again unless it is for purely nostalgic reasons. And I am still shocked by the removal of my favorate caster. I can't have a game since it, although it is not the whole reason but I have no idea how to utilize my force.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 14, 2017 5:16:45 GMT
Getting annoyed at PP when they tell you reasons and you don't understand them isn't PPs fault. I have no evidence for my assertion of overcorrection for balance, but I surmise it as a result of what they have done.
Do far what PP has said is exactly what they have told us. If you want to not take that at face value then that is your prerogative, but if you then say you dont know why they do things then your missing the fact that your untrustworthiness is your own doing.
I'll have faith that PP will continue to think about the health of the game. So far thr game remains exceptionally healthy at the competitive level as all of the major problems have been removed. Hopefully balance errata occur to buff the bad stuff, but there is a lot of bad stuff out there that could use some help finding a place and as much as we wish it weren't, pp doesnt make much money off of errata, they do it off new releases and if that is an avenue to fix something, that is the way they will take.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Mar 14, 2017 5:44:42 GMT
Same with the -2 SPD. Why not changing it with something else enterely? Will Pagani here said that he feel that the malus as it is now (range 8) is still worth it since "Centurions". Do you agree with him? Do you feel that Centurions needed to be made "more viable" like he said in that post? I can't understand the reasoning behind that kind of statements, but maybe it's a my problem. It is no more than a joke, really. It is Haley you need to protect first and foremost, not Centurion, and it has large base. Such case means that the subjected enemy would be within about 6" of Centurion. Well, usually SPD 5 or less warjacks and beasts are can be stopped. But, if the specific corner case is worth considering, we didin't regard Stormguards as the pure garbage unit at the first place.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Mar 14, 2017 11:45:45 GMT
octaviusmaximus: Perhaps the issue is that the largely useless anti-warjack Cygnar abilities in Mk2 are game defining in Mk3 is the issue. Perhaps Scramble, Thorn's Lance and Domination are now too much on the warjacks/Warcaster they are on... Haley1 would mantain her identify without scrambe, she looks kinda lost it with TB nerfed.
|
|
|
Post by sideshowlucifer on Mar 14, 2017 11:47:55 GMT
Haley would have been fine with the -2 speed as normal and get rid of the DEF debuff. TB hasn't been horribly obnoxious since they allowed charges with a minus to speed and changed the aura to a burst.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Mar 14, 2017 11:54:23 GMT
octaviusmaximus: Perhaps the issue is that the largely useless anti-warjack Cygnar abilities in Mk2 are game defining in Mk3 is the issue. Perhaps Scramble, Thorn's Lance and Domination are now too much on the warjacks/Warcaster they are on... Haley1 would mantain her identify without scrambe, she looks kinda lost it with TB nerfed. I was already contemplating using her without casting temporal barrier much. Arcane shield, scramble and deadeye all on a caster with arcane vortex and a shoot twice feat? There is a lot going on there, all she needs is focus efficiency and a good arc node, and we have that! Hurricane will be a big deal for cygnar and I think Haley 1 has some pretty sweet things going on with it, even without Tb. She's probably not going to break into the top, but she's still got some moves.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Mar 14, 2017 12:32:29 GMT
She wasn't made unplayable, so sure, if you put up a decent list you can bring a decent casual game, but what are those things you are referring to, removing temporal barrier?
Scramble is just Disruption on demand, but Maddox and other casters also have it too, along with things like Snipe that make the Hurricane shine a lot more, as an example.
What is a list that now Haley1 plays well, and other casters in our arsenal won't play better?
Without TB, Haley1 is just AS, Deadeye, Disruption and a damage increasing feat, things that we have in a lot other casters along with other benefits.
Sloan in particular totally overshadow her. Similar feats, Guided Fire > Deadeye, and has Fire Group and her personal work on the top of it.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Mar 14, 2017 12:43:21 GMT
Yup, she's not our worst caster. She's boring. The worst thing to be. Even in her MKII incarnation, she was hardly OP. Oppressive and unfun, sure. But not OP. They crippled the part about her that was interesting, but left part of it there to taunt us. 8 inch range. Bah.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Mar 14, 2017 13:21:22 GMT
Yup, she's not our worst caster. She's boring. The worst thing to be. Even in her MKII incarnation, she was hardly OP. Oppressive and unfun, sure. But not OP. They crippled the part about her that was interesting, but left part of it there to taunt us. 8 inch range. Bah. Yeah, reducing range of SPD debuff to 8" is no more than taunt us. It is unusable in the real games so it have no real value, and it does nothing but make us angry.
|
|
|
Post by bloodsplatterartist on Mar 16, 2017 13:39:38 GMT
I played her a couple of time with the intention of just never casting TB after the nerf. Arcane shield, scramble and deadeye are still great spells and her feat is still pretty decent as well. It would be nice to se TB reworked into something better or replaced with something like Temporal acceleration or Spellpiercer. But I can at least see some scenarios where TB might still be usefull like mitigating High def spam or feats like Kaya3 or mordikaars. 4 foc is just so steep for the effect that I'd still only cast it in extreme circumstances.
|
|