|
Post by MacGuffin on Dec 20, 2018 15:19:43 GMT
Do you think 75 point armies is too much for Warmachine/Hordes? I saw some comments in the PP business plan thread which suggest that some people find it too much. For me it makes death clock the least enjoyable part of the game, and my army-buying strategy is to limit the number of models I put on the table. 50 or 35 would be much more fun for me, but I'm curious as to what others think.
Not a doom-and-gloom thread -- I otherwise enjoy the models and the ruleset and the community immensely.
|
|
|
Post by minmaximus on Dec 20, 2018 15:29:44 GMT
I feel the game works better at lower points levels (50 or so) with the caveat that support models are generally overcosted at that point.
Basically I feel taking 1-1.5 units/2 lower cost heavies off the board plays better, but that 50 points leaves you with too few points for all the cool support/solos that you want to bring.
|
|
|
Post by NephMakes on Dec 20, 2018 16:20:14 GMT
I'd love a smaller format (35-50 pts) that people would actually want play. To make it work you'd probably need to restrict the casters and units that are allowed, but I'm okay with that. Even an all-battlegroup format would be fine. Something that has tactical depth but doesn't require two 75 pt lists for balance. I think it'd go a long way toward reducing the barrier to entry. A smaller format would also provide a natural focus for stores not wanting to stock thousands of models.
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Dec 20, 2018 16:52:19 GMT
Going to be awkward and not reply to the poll. 50 points can be too small - some models are overpowering even at that level, or at least the game is more swingy as you may not be able to tech for everything. But 75 points can be quite bloated with some lists (with others it still feels about right).
I do wonder what 60 or 65 points would be like. Every theme would be able to 2 free slots, but the only ones with 3 would jack/beast themes which can use WJPs (and Sons of the Tempest, which is odd). Would take lots of games to get a feel for it I think.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Dec 20, 2018 16:58:47 GMT
I think there is something to the idea. It could even help just to push 50 point Champions tourneys after Lock & Load when the power roster rotates out. If the roster after that were designed to make that work then I think it could, and yes, a big part of that is making it more friendly to new and returning players. Since that timing coincides with the next Steamroller packet, I think that's when to do it.
FWIW, I also still struggle with high model counts.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 20, 2018 17:08:22 GMT
There is no option for 225+ points, so I cannot vote.
Unbound for life!
|
|
matsif
BattleBox Champ
Posts: 54
|
Post by matsif on Dec 20, 2018 19:50:17 GMT
ultimately I'd need to play more at 50 points to form a more educated opinion, but I can see a potential issue with themes and free stuff. jack/beast heavy themes depend on those free things for support models, and at 50 points with even an above-average caster in WJP/WBP those themes are never getting a 3rd free thing. the 20-25pt per free thing themes that focus on infantry and such are often only taken with 2 free things, or there's at least an argument that you don't often need the 3rd free thing, so they don't feel the change quite as hard.
60-65 points is probably a better compromise as such. but, as stated above, I haven't played enough games at below 75 points to matter because most people only play at 75 points, as that is what the competitive scene pushes at you as soon as you start looking up discussion into the game. there would have to be some reason to push a lower point total outside of a JML other than "hey let's just play at 50 points." something along the lines of PP pushing a lower point tournament for L&L or the organizers of WTC pushing a lower point format as a side-tourney out there or something to drum up interest.
|
|
|
Post by novaspike on Dec 22, 2018 1:09:36 GMT
The meta I've moved into is growing, sp we're playing a lot of 50 and 75 point games. I still enjoy 75 more, I feel like I can take the stuff I want to make a better TAC list.
My old meta felt like 75 was missing a few things when converting mk2 to mk3 lists. Usually a couple solos or support elements. But with the addition of themes that basically made what was the missing the free stuff.
|
|
|
Post by hocestbellum on Dec 23, 2018 10:57:49 GMT
I lean towards 50, which is inconvenient as my mates rarely want to play at that level.
Mostly I just like the way it trims spam lists, and makes your decisions more important. Less points increases the proportion of the list that is warbeasts/jacks, so even in infantry lists you're looking at >35% warnouns.
You won't be able to afford all your units and support, so you have to make important decisions on what to take as opposed to Legion of Steel lists which are basically "2x IFP, 1x IFU, Markov, 3 free solos choices are the only three I can choose, go."
It helps make theme forces with non-scaling benefits (One unit of X may do such and such) more impactful, and I also like that if you don't want to play in theme it feels like less of a massive disadvantage.
Also, the games take about half as long, so I can play more.
50 4 lyfe
|
|
|
Post by Soul Samurai on Dec 23, 2018 11:36:39 GMT
Locally we've been playing 50 points themeless lately. We're very casual and quite slow (no deathclock), and we were finding that 75 point games went on too long.
|
|
|
Post by tiberius on Dec 26, 2018 9:33:41 GMT
I only get to play about once a week and we dont play with a clock so the more stuff I use, the better it is for me. 100+ points goes best for my situation, but 75 points does work fine.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Dec 26, 2018 11:10:03 GMT
Getting to learn the game and gradually increasing pointsize, I often felt that the game fundamentally changes ones you get past that 50pt mark. Maybe that's because of my history in warhammer where I build around a certain core that was present in all my lists. In a 35-50 pt game you can add flavour to a core, but getting to that 75pt mark there's just so much (synergie) you can add the bag of tricks people can throw at grows in size exponentially. PP tried to softly counter that with themes, but I think reducing the pointsize achieves similar results whilst remaining out of theme and avoiding the spamfest in many 75pt lists.
Does change the nature/depth of the game, but I prefer 35-50pt out of theme over the current steamroller standard.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Dec 26, 2018 14:04:14 GMT
There is a 50-point tourney nearby Saturday and I plan to go.
|
|
|
Post by Havock on Dec 26, 2018 14:11:13 GMT
I don't have enough data to back this up but I have the feeling that 75 points is either too much or not enough, for newer players it is most definitely too much; 50 points or even 35 makes for perfectly fine and playable games. Less dumb spamk3.
Likewise, 100 points might mitigate that as well by allowing balanced lists to bring their full toolset out without skimping on something that causes spam lists to have a leg up (it's more complex than that but there is a reason why people are doubling down on X-choices beyond just theme benefits; more points also dilute the advantage of freebies.)
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Dec 26, 2018 15:31:25 GMT
Would you guys like a format where you play 50-point games but you have +10 warjack/warbeast points?
|
|