|
Post by peemster on Jan 25, 2019 0:48:16 GMT
No Feats! Wow. That's the one thing I don't like about this idea, but also I get that that decision probably has to be made for the format to exist.
Awesomesauce! Maybe the "PG project" on the Discord doesn't need to happen after all.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 25, 2019 0:49:22 GMT
I'll give you the bullet points: 25 points 5-6 pieces of terrain 4 scenarios, all super central ALA mark 2 destruction No huge based non-casters Incorporeal models cannot contest or control things Zones and flags controllable by basically everything Win by 3, not by 5 No Feats or Arcana FA 1 (except WAs) Themes don't give you deployment bonuses (no Ambush, Advanced Move, +2 deploy, +1 to go first) Deploy off the clock, 35 minute deathclock (for tournaments only) out of curiosity, are any of these rules being tested for inclusion in the core game (as I believe happened with lightning immunity in COI?) Some of those rules target a few of my main issues with the current SR packet (incorporeal models controlling/contesting, deployment bonuses - particularly +1 to go first - having a disproportionate impact on the game; etc. I will say that I'm not sure how I feel about no feats. They feel very integral to how the game is balanced and to the 'flow' of the game in a lot of cases.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jan 25, 2019 0:53:28 GMT
Off the top of my head, potential banned Casters that we will test for inclusion in the format before formalizing anything: Butcher 3 Butcher 1 Makeda 3 Kromac 2 Borka 2 Stryker 2 Vlad 1 Thagrosh 2 Karchev Xerxis 2 Child Harbinger Reznik 2 Reznik 1 Siege 2 Caine 2 Terminus Skarre 3 Thyron If the criteria is along the lines of 'casters which have a disproportionate personal impact on the table', I would suggest that Skarre1 and Barnabas2 should likely also be tested. Skarre1's personal damage output is one of the highest of any caster's in the game, and Barnabas2 straight up dominates the field if the appropriate tools to deal with him are not brought.
|
|
|
Post by peemster on Jan 25, 2019 0:57:04 GMT
Give us the scenarios, Jaden, and we'll playtest this format!
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 25, 2019 1:00:15 GMT
I'll give you the bullet points: 25 points 5-6 pieces of terrain 4 scenarios, all super central ALA mark 2 destruction No huge based non-casters Incorporeal models cannot contest or control things Zones and flags controllable by basically everything Win by 3, not by 5 No Feats or Arcana FA 1 (except WAs) Themes don't give you deployment bonuses (no Ambush, Advanced Move, +2 deploy, +1 to go first) Deploy off the clock, 35 minute deathclock (for tournaments only) Oh damn! if you manage to put the game on a standard size kitchen table (without the Rumble nonsense) I'm in! I especially find it interesting that you arrived at the same conclusion as I did about Feats, i.e.: You could remove them to flatten the learning curve and WM/H will still feel like WM/H
|
|
|
Post by LoS Jaden on Jan 25, 2019 1:16:24 GMT
A couple responses to various questions:
I don't believe that any of the changes are being considered for the core rules, but I'm not privy to internal pp playtesting, just this project.
Casters would be banned based off either personal output or insane table impact ala sevy2s free spell every turn.
That list I posted is off the cuff and super duper in the test phase right now. Don't take it as gospel.
The only scenario we have worked out is destruction from Mark 2. Units and jacks score zones, solos and jacks score flags. Casters score both.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 25, 2019 1:41:48 GMT
A couple responses to various questions: I don't believe that any of the changes are being considered for the core rules, but I'm not privy to internal pp playtesting, just this project. Casters would be banned based off either personal output or insane table impact ala sevy2s free spell every turn. That list I posted is off the cuff and super duper in the test phase right now. Don't take it as gospel. The only scenario we have worked out is destruction from Mark 2. Units and jacks score zones, solos and jacks score flags. Casters score both. Have you guys considered taking a different approach to the format in regards to what gets played? Maybe take a White List approach instead of a Black List one? Building a stable of 6 to 8 casters per faction that all are balanced against each other seems like a fun experiment.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 25, 2019 1:49:02 GMT
A couple responses to various questions: I don't believe that any of the changes are being considered for the core rules, but I'm not privy to internal pp playtesting, just this project. Casters would be banned based off either personal output or insane table impact ala sevy2s free spell every turn. That list I posted is off the cuff and super duper in the test phase right now. Don't take it as gospel. The only scenario we have worked out is destruction from Mark 2. Units and jacks score zones, solos and jacks score flags. Casters score both. Have you guys considered taking a different approach to the format in regards to what gets played? Maybe take a White List approach instead of a Black List one? Building a stable of 6 to 8 casters per faction that all are balanced against each other seems like a fun experiment. Hello, ADR!
|
|
|
Post by LoS Jaden on Jan 25, 2019 2:10:25 GMT
Nah, that's adr, and this is meant to be inclusive.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 25, 2019 4:18:14 GMT
ADR.... notice the point I made about something being ignored if it doesn't get picked up by the WMW circuit Le sigh
|
|
snoozer
Junior Strategist
Posts: 467
|
Post by snoozer on Jan 25, 2019 6:29:35 GMT
The format sound really interesting!!! I like the approach to get a real second competetive size to the game!
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jan 25, 2019 8:36:12 GMT
I have to question the conclusion that the game needs fixing at the core rules level It's either that or admit that it's basically a skirmish game that got too big for its rules to handle. It's not just attacking, the fact that all movement and placement is resolved model-by-model is much of what drives the need for super precision. Attacks are probably the bigger part of it, but regardless, they need to either get the model count of the average army down or change the rules so that the game can actually cope with it. And no, it cannot. I'm sorry, but if you think this game works just fine with 120 models on the table between two players, then you are simply inured to the kind of problems that would stop any new player before their third purchase. Ever notice how the best Warmachine batrep videos on Youtube, channels like Arcane Assist, play the game back in fast forward or a slideshow with the players giving play-by-play commentary, while no Warhammer channel has to do that at all? You can sit and watch the entire game in real time, with minimal edits. Try doing that with Warmachine. Count how many times you have to take a break, even how many times the game state has not significantly changed in the time it took you to get up and get a drink. Ever stop to think about what a problem that is? It makes the game look downright boring and WAY too intimidating for new players. So it looks too hard and not worth it at the same time. Now, add on top of that, while I'm citing Arcane Assist (and I don't mean to pick on my favorite WMH batrep channel) their last two videos have featured Makeda 3 Firetrucking curb-stomping one of the best players in the world who is running a very serious meta list. Yes, Banky made key mistakes, and it looks like Menoth isn't really gelling with him, but still, watching those games, I really do get a sense that there was never a dogganm thing he could have done. He can choose whether to lose by assassination or scenario, that's about it. Even if you want the most competitive game, who wants to compete with that? Malorian is literally the only streamer I can find who is even talking about or to new players. Every other channel is focused solely on competitive play. There is a website for beginners, and that's great, but honestly, I can't remember what it's called... One of the reasons why Warmachine's learning curve is more like a brick wall is that it takes two hours to play one game that can often be decided by one mistake made in the first 15 minutes. Sometimes you're stuck sitting through that for 90-minutes and the only lesson is "don't deploy like that" but it's even harder to learn that lesson when it's buried under a punishment that is far too harsh. Yes, if you "git gud" then you will make those mistakes less often, but learning how to progress through that stage and the next takes far longer than the vast majority of people have the patience for, especially when it's easier to just plead for buffs. Which brings me to my next point. We put too much emphasis on list building and not enough on tactics, and I say that as someone who is way better at building lists than playing them. Jaden has done great work on bucking this but he can't do it alone. Yes, list building is important, but how many perfectly winnable games have I crapped because of bad placement or sending the wrong unit after the wrong target? Yes, I can copy a list from Banky, Gerow, or Dancocks and very quickly see why it's even better than my lists (even a variant on the same shell) but I still have to play it better than I do. Lastly, nature vs nurture arguments are honestly ridiculous. Obviously, it's both. It's always both. The way that a game is designed and marketed goes a long way toward attracting a certain type of players, who in turn, tend to self-select and even push away those who want something else. Games that appeal to a very wide audience like Magic and WOW are the exception that proves the rule, and they can only do it with huge player bases, the biggest IP in their markets, and tremendous resources. A company can either lean into it or resist it, but at this point, this game has well established its niche and it's far too late to change that.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jan 25, 2019 9:24:30 GMT
Off the top of my head, potential banned Casters that we will test for inclusion in the format before formalizing anything: Butcher 3 Butcher 1 Makeda 3 Kromac 2 Borka 2 Stryker 2 Vlad 1 Thagrosh 2 Karchev Xerxis 2 Child Harbinger Reznik 2 Reznik 1 Siege 2 Caine 2 Terminus Skarre 3 Thyron I hate to say it, but you might have to add Grissel 2 to that list if I'm reading it right as to how casters get on it. Especially with the tougher casters gone and scenarios being concentrated in the center, she'd have very potent assassination lists that could be very hard to stop without dedicated anti-shooting. Unless gear-checking against gun lines in your second list is something that you want to keep here, then Trollock or danks or I could have her breaking the format within a week, depending on the particulars. I wish I were kidding. Grim can also be nasty in small games but he at least needs help to kill your caster, and usually from a dire troll. Similarly, Kolgrima and Madrak 1 are high A-tier and can kill casters on their own but generally need help, and in retrospect, Winter's Tide was probably a mistake and it should have been Frost Hammer after all, so that's a separate issue. And if you're making a list of casters to ban from any format for any reason, it's hard to leave Skarre 1 off of it. Really, though, I also think it's better to take this from the opposite direction and have a list of casters who are allowed. Ideally, that would simply use the ADR, as a 6-month rotation feels just about right for this. Granted, that would mean no more power rosters like the one they made for IG at L&L this year, but IMO that's a good thing. There's not much point in limiting us to the casters we're playing anyway. Expand ADR to 5 casters plus battle box if need be but I really do think that's the way to go. And, before anybody dogpiles on me saying "I told you so," hear me out on this. Just make it 35 points with no themes allowed. This would remove two more layers of complication, especially since you're marketing this toward new players, and we wouldn't have to worry about altering the themes to fit the needs of a very different format. This is not hypocrisy, it's practicality. Themes are badly needed in 75-point competitive play because otherwise, the full factions are far too big to balance. That is much less of a concern with only 35 points plus a battlegroup that is about half the list. The permutations of possibly broken combos are much smaller, especially with battle engines out of the picture. And yes, this instantly attracts a whole other segment of the player base, who despite my personal frustrations, are still paying customers who should be indulged when this opportunity to do so is right here. Terrain, though... fewer pieces? Hell no. More pieces. Terrain needs to matter and players need to learn that. It's not a nuisance to be ignored as much as possible, it's a fundamental part of any wargame at any level. With no huge bases other than casters (if that) there is no reason why we can't have a dozen pieces 3 inches from each other on a 4x4 board. Lastly, if this format still needs a name I suggest "Vanguard" as it fits the intent and feel and sounds very different from "Champions" or "Steamroller."
|
|
whydak
Junior Strategist
Posts: 288
|
Post by whydak on Jan 25, 2019 12:01:06 GMT
@big Fat Troll
Skarre is not so scary without feat
And noone said about 4x4 feat board
|
|
snoozer
Junior Strategist
Posts: 467
|
Post by snoozer on Jan 25, 2019 12:05:10 GMT
Ever notice how the best Warmachine batrep videos on Youtube, channels like Arcane Assist, play the game back in fast forward or a slideshow with the players giving play-by-play commentary, while no Warhammer channel has to do that at all? You can sit and watch the entire game in real time, with minimal edits. Its very boring if you do not speed up the video and going faster is easier than editing. And that costs a lot of time! I don't want to watch a 1+ hours long video and these games are not too slow for me to watch and understand. Warhammer easily takes hours (plural) to play. 8th edition made it even worse with all the re rolls. So these videos either take 2 hours or more to watch, or they are edited. Or you have Winters SEO who edits and the video still takes forever. Warmachine takes 2 hours max, if you play deathclock. Warhammer is also not sufficiently deep for players to really get into their mindset: "it's 40k so I shot as much of the table as I could, I got the first turn and therefore I won" BFT I do not know what Warmachine did to you in the last weeks, but the salt is real!
|
|