Does this bother anyone else?

[bouncymischa]

I'll freely admit, I'm only a casual Hordes player, at best. But the Hordes Field Test has managed to spark my interest, with the new Baldur (for all his weaknesses) getting me eager to make a swamp-themed army again, Legion piquing my curiosity about new "little monsters" lists, and even the extensive discussion of what the theme and feel of a Skorne army should be is getting me curious about those regimented and brutal disciplinarians.

On the other hand, my heart has always been in Warmachine. I've found that I really love the hardened WWI grunts theme that I can put together with units like Trenchers and the High Shield Gun Corps to. But since the "final version" rules came out, I'll have to admit I've shared the fairly common sentiment that Cygnar came out as being one of the weakest factions in Mk II. Certainly, they've got their overpowered and undercosted models -- Haley2 is probably still one of the top warcasters, the B13th are undercosted and obsolete a fair amount of stuff even in-faction, and the Squire is still the best warcaster attachment. But on the other hand, we've got a huge number of overcosted and underperforming models. I suspect Cygnar is in the same position Mk I Trollbloods were -- you can make a competitive Cygnar army, but you only have a limited model pool to draw upon.

I understand that the Hordes Field Test rules are the ones that are going to be used for tournament events like Templecon, and so a lot of attention needs to be paid to ensure that things are fair and competitive. But I look at the weekly buffs that Hordes models are getting, and an extension for a whole extra month for Hordes field testing, and then look at how imbalanced things are within my own faction, I really wonder why Privateer couldn't have lavished this much attention to making a fun and balanced game experience upon the Warmachine factions as well...

[brotherscott]

I am going to go out on a limb and say the Warmachine MK II field test was a trial run. They were also setting the core rules as well as trying to get the factions in line and balanced within themselves. Not an easy project to pull off in a month. The Hordes Field Test was given to the community seven weeks earlier than scheduled, and apparently both the folks at Privateer and the community at large learned from the Warmachine field test. The feedback is seemingly better and working (most of the time), and the designers are able to 'fix' things and get them out for more play testing. Not a bad deal, really.
I am five factions deep in Warmachine (no Cryx, yet), and have a small Circle and Trollblood force. Casual Hordes at best, and more interested in themed armies. I was happy to see Cygnar get toned down since a good number of new players, power gamers and net-deckers gravitated to the Swans, and every list included the Black 13th, Squire, Rowdy, Thorn.... basically a list of auto-includes. Pretty disheartening (and NO fun) to face half a dozen Cygnar players and all the same list every time.

I do not think that Cygnar is the weakest faction, or that such a thing exists. Any army in the hands of a capable player is a force to be reckoned with. Everybody has their strengths and weak spots, we all just have to step back, look at what we have, and learn to play our armies again. The combinations will come, the tiered lists will be presented, and new models will hit the tables. The game is better for all the pain we have gone through.
I am glad that the field tests happened. A lot better than an announcement and having no say as the "new" stuff gets shoved down our throats.

[PPS_Matt]

The extension on the Hordes field test is not because we are 'lavishing attention' on Hordes. (This is hilarious, because normally it's Hordes exclusive players who are railing us because Hordes doesn't get enough attention!) The reason for the extension is that the field test fell over a very busy holiday season where we're also in the process internally of producing a new WARMACHINE book for each month next year. In other words, the amount of activity going on behind the scenes is exponentially higher now than it was during the WARMACHINE field test, and because we had the ability to extend the field test right now, we thought it would be in the best interest of Hordes, not because there's some sort of ridiculous favoritism.

Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play. But take two steps back and look at this objectively and you will see the complete and utter ridiculousness of the idea that we would favor one game or faction over another. From a business perspective, we want all of our products to do well. We're not working our ***** off just so we can promote the agenda of one faction over another, we're doing our absolute best to make everything as balanced and attractive to players across the board. Try a little objectiveness instead of imagining that there's some sort of agenda to discriminate against what you like the most, and maybe things will become clear. If you're interested in trying something new because it looks like fun, then roll with that too. It's OKAY to play both HORDES and WARMACHINE, so try it out. Borrow some figs and take a spin. But PLEASE don't think for a moment that we're shorting any part of our development in any preferential way. We love all our babies equally (as long as they're good earners, but if they don't perform, they're dead to us... :p )

[Avecrien]

I wasn't around for the field test and I regret that. I feel that, overall, I have fewer models I can justify fielding than before. And my faction has lost a good chunk of it's feel and flavor due to streamlining combined with fewer models to field. I fret over our competitiveness though I do have faith in the spirit of our players.

I hope that last minute changes, tier lists, and the unforeseen will make more of the available models become desirable models to field.

It'd be fantastic if there were an impromptu field review or some such, but on the other hand it'd be a tad disastrous in terms of logistics on PP's side-I think.

[Gargathor]

But since the "final version" rules came out, I'll have to admit I've shared the fairly common sentiment that Cygnar came out as being one of the weakest factions in Mk II.
Fairly common sentiment >where<? On the Cryx forums it's a 'fairly common' sentiment that Cygnar OWNS Cryx in Mk II, and we're all going to get our faces shot off by the mighty Swans, boo hoo hoo.

Please, try for some broader perspective.

So I guess the answer to the post thread in my case is "No." All the best.

PS Thanks for taking time out of your busy day to post Mr. Wilson!

[thesavage]

Oh no, look what you've done now. You've gone and made Matt mad.

Well, I for one am very excited about the MK II book coming out. Now I've only played one MK I game, so I don't have much of a basis for comparison, but it will be nice to actually be able to read the rules (I hate reading on a computer, and I don't feel like printing out 500 pages).

Also, I agree with what Matt said. Why on earth would they make stuff unbalanced on purpose? It doesn't make sense from a business perspective. Sure, there are some models which may be underpowered or overcosted, but at least you can play them in a tournament. As opposed to a game such as Magic: The Gathering.

Wizards of the Coast: "Hey, you know that awesome card which you payed $20 for? Yeah, you can't play it in a tournament setting anymore. Oh, and you know all those cards that you have in boxes. You won't need most of them. Ever."

Good thing I don't play in tournaments.

[hauntingexperience]

I wasn't around for the field test and I regret that. I feel that, overall, I have fewer models I can justify fielding than before. And my faction has lost a good chunk of it's feel and flavor due to streamlining combined with fewer models to field. I fret over our competitiveness though I do have faith in the spirit of our players.

I hope that last minute changes, tier lists, and the unforeseen will make more of the available models become desirable models to field.

It'd be fantastic if there were an impromptu field review or some such, but on the other hand it'd be a tad disastrous in terms of logistics on PP's side-I think.

Khador has...... how many new mercs? Oh and 2 new EXTREME jacks.

However. One faction (not mercs) you may hear off in the distance moaning, groaning, and twitching in death throes. Maybe you've heard of them. They have:

No new mercs
No jack bonds
No jack marshals
Came in last overall 2009
Gets their faction book last
And has recieved "revisions" after the MK2 rules were final
;)

[Faultie]

Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play.
This is not true. I don't know of any of us Mercs that are less than enthused about MKII! :p

[Snarl]

Try a little objectiveness instead of imagining that there's some sort of agenda to discriminate against what you like the most, and maybe things will become clear.
Really? My imagination can come up with some pretty whacked out scenarios that might prove entertaining.

Tonight on TMZ: The REAL reason the Cephalyx don't work for a contract - Horrible B.O.

[Avecrien]

Haunting,

Mercs that work for factions should be considered to an extent, I'll concede, but they should not be used as representative of the pros/cons or strength of a faction in my mind. I know some good mercs aren't available to some factions. But the notion of 'needing' to use a merc in a faction army chafes me.

I'm also not saying my faction is stricken with woe or should be, not that they are the lowest or weakest of the bunch. Simply that I can come from another side of the table form the OP and still feel...unsatisfied. I am excited! Very excited with most of the rules changes and in playing the game in general. But I'm not currently satisfied.

I don't see any indication of bias or favoritism from the devs, just that the new soup seems to be missing something. I, having an obvious and admitted bias, am trying to speak from my side as fairly and open as I can.

[Snarl]

This is not true. I don't know of any of us Mercs that are less than enthused about MKII! :p
Testify brother!


But, just to keep us in character... cough *Merc WC art posters* cough

[megatron0]

Woah Woah Woah a faction stricken with grief and no one mentions Trollbloods, what is this world coming to! ;P

[Lee T]

That's because, WE, as emo-goth mustache twitching villains, are much more competitive in "moaning, groaning, and twitching in death throes" than trolls are. Have a pint and let us do what we do best! :p

[N0rdicNinja]

That's because, WE, as emo-goth mustache twitching villains, are much more competitive in "moaning, groaning, and twitching in death throes" than trolls are. Have a pint and let us do what we do best! :p


Hey now, we can moan and groan with the best of 'em!

[legionaires]

We're not working our ***** off just so we can promote the agenda of one faction over another, we're doing our absolute best to make everything as balanced and attractive to players across the board. But can we at least get you to poke Doug to keep promoting Magnus and his Agenda over Cygnar, at least from the fluff end? I only ask because I'm dying to see what Magnus does next (and to find out if Caine's guns survived being in that fire). :D

As far as the extension to the Hordes field test, I was more worried about the community not having the time to get in enough games to give the volume of quality feedback that Hordes deserves, than Privateer showing "favoritism". Thank you to everyone at Privateer that agreed to extend the field test.

[Red5angel]

there goes PPS_Matt....trying to establish rationality in an insane world :P

[Galleon]

[QUOTE=PPS_Matt;63195]Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play. [QUOTE]

Wish I was a faction player so I could be included in this statement LOL..... just so we are clear that was a joke.

[bouncymischa]

I am going to go out on a limb and say the Warmachine MK II field test was a trial run. They were also setting the core rules as well as trying to get the factions in line and balanced within themselves. Not an easy project to pull off in a month. The Hordes Field Test was given to the community seven weeks earlier than scheduled, and apparently both the folks at Privateer and the community at large learned from the Warmachine field test. The feedback is seemingly better and working (most of the time), and the designers are able to 'fix' things and get them out for more play testing. Not a bad deal, really.

I do admit, the Hordes field test feels a lot more polished, and I think even the players are more focused. (For example, I recall endless threads about the issue of "loss of flavor" in the Warmachine Field Test, but I haven't seen one yet in the Hordes Field Test).


The extension on the Hordes field test is not because we are 'lavishing attention' on Hordes. (This is hilarious, because normally it's Hordes exclusive players who are railing us because Hordes doesn't get enough attention!) The reason for the extension is that the field test fell over a very busy holiday season where we're also in the process internally of producing a new WARMACHINE book for each month next year. In other words, the amount of activity going on behind the scenes is exponentially higher now than it was during the WARMACHINE field test, and because we had the ability to extend the field test right now, we thought it would be in the best interest of Hordes, not because there's some sort of ridiculous favoritism.

I'll confess, I hadn't considered this issue. Normally for me, the holiday period actually means a certain amount more free time, rather than less. But I will admit that doesn't really apply to a business, and this being a busy season would make it harder to keep up with things such as the Field Test -- which makes the regular updates and the like all the more impressive, in that regard.



Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play. But take two steps back and look at this objectively and you will see the complete and utter ridiculousness of the idea that we would favor one game or faction over another. From a business perspective, we want all of our products to do well. We're not working our ***** off just so we can promote the agenda of one faction over another, we're doing our absolute best to make everything as balanced and attractive to players across the board. Try a little objectiveness instead of imagining that there's some sort of agenda to discriminate against what you like the most, and maybe things will become clear. If you're interested in trying something new because it looks like fun, then roll with that too. It's OKAY to play both HORDES and WARMACHINE, so try it out. Borrow some figs and take a spin. But PLEASE don't think for a moment that we're shorting any part of our development in any preferential way. We love all our babies equally (as long as they're good earners, but if they don't perform, they're dead to us... :p )

I plan to try out my Baldur list tonight, although being a relatively novice Hordes player I rather doubt my feedback (if any) will be terribly productive.

I don't really think that there's a conspiracy against any particular faction, although sometimes when the atmosphere in certain areas gets to me I admit I yield to "popular consensus". I've seen in the Hordes Field Test how what the developers envision and what the players see can be two very different things. Maybe it's just that in this case we are getting a more in-depth view of the process, so it just looks like there's more effort being made.


Fairly common sentiment >where<? On the Cryx forums it's a 'fairly common' sentiment that Cygnar OWNS Cryx in Mk II, and we're all going to get our faces shot off by the mighty Swans, boo hoo hoo.

Please, try for some broader perspective.

So I guess the answer to the post thread in my case is "No." All the best.

I'll concede that -- I've rarely visited the Cryx forums, so I wasn't aware of that viewpoint.


Oh no, look what you've done now. You've gone and made Matt mad.

Also, I agree with what Matt said. Why on earth would they make stuff unbalanced on purpose? It doesn't make sense from a business perspective. Sure, there are some models which may be underpowered or overcosted, but at least you can play them in a tournament. As opposed to a game such as Magic: The Gathering.

Wizards of the Coast: "Hey, you know that awesome card which you payed $20 for? Yeah, you can't play it in a tournament setting anymore. Oh, and you know all those cards that you have in boxes. You won't need most of them. Ever."

Good thing I don't play in tournaments.

Hopefully he won't hold it against me. Although I don't think I have a warning yet, so I may be lucky. <.<

I think my feelings were largely more, because we can see a lot of Hordes models getting buffed and otherwise balanced out, not that things were being unbalance on purpose, but that Warmachine was somewhat "rushed", and thus perhaps didn't have the time or effort spent to achieve what we can see being done with Hordes.

Matt's response did indicate that this was a rather unfair viewpoint to take, though. Even if I can't see or understand the decisions of the development team, it's not fair of me to say that they didn't work hard on it. -__-;

As for Magic, I don't play tournaments either, so I've never felt all those cards I bought were useless. :3


there goes PPS_Matt....trying to establish rationality in an insane world :P

Pfft. I try to be rational. I think that the forums just get the better of me, sometimes. XD

(Honestly, I probably would be a happier Warmachine player if I never read a single forum thread. It's kind of sad...)

[Red5angel]

Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play.

They say a successful compromise is one where all involved parties walk away unsatisfied.

[Gargathor]

(Honestly, I probably would be a happier Warmachine player if I never read a single forum thread. It's kind of sad...)
Too true, brother, too true. I've learned a lot reading these forums, but on occasion the signal-to-noise ratio can be disspiriting.

My hats off to you for your measured response to criticism. Happy holidays!

[CMikeHardy]

Try a little objectiveness instead of imagining that there's some sort of agenda to discriminate against what you like the most, and maybe things will become clear.

You know what, Matt?

The only agenda here is you guys at PP extracting dollar after dollar from my poor, begotten wallet on these fantastic minis.
Every time there's a new preview or a new release, you can practically hear my wallet cry in anguish. It's cruel and I know you people are behind it.

How can you live with yourself making me spend countless lunch hours gazing longingly at all the WarMachine and Hordes miniatures that I still need to collect?!
How can you sleep at night tempting me with Retribution and Protectorate when I still have mountains of Cygnar, Khador, Dwarves, Trolls and Skorne left to paint??
How can you justify compelling me to gleefully bleed my forlorned and abused wallet every time I walk into a game store?!

This is your agenda, Matt! Your insidious conspiracy to emerse and captivate me with your rich game world... to tantilize and tempt me with your lovely miniatures.

This is your agenda, Matt... and oh how I love it!:D

[bouncymischa]

Too true, brother, too true. I've learned a lot reading these forums, but on occasion the signal-to-noise ratio can be disspiriting.

My hats off to you for your measured response to criticism. Happy holidays!

I'll admit, I've made some threads about things like this that ended up teaching me a lot -- whether it was new ways to look at models that I hadn't thought of, to new strategies or list ideas, or just informing me that I hadn't really thought things out fully.

I may look stupid in the process, but at least I learn from it. :3

A happy holidays to everyone else as well!

[Brandubh]

I do admit, the Hordes field test feels a lot more polished, and I think even the players are more focused. (For example, I recall endless threads about the issue of "loss of flavor" in the Warmachine Field Test, but I haven't seen one yet in the Hordes Field Test).

Most likely due to the experience gleaned during the WM Field Test than due to anything else. Hordes casters did, to some extent, get some flavor taken away. But I think that most Hordes players are either crossover players or they followed the WM Field Test and knew what to expect. So rather than complain that eKrueger got the generic spell Gallows...we've been focusing on how to make the models more playable as they stand now.

I would imagine that should a WM Field Test happen next July, it would go even more smoothly than the Hordes one is going now.

______________________________

Also, with the extension, I really don't think its fair to cry that Hordes players are getting special treatment. We're dealing with Core Rules that are already largely locked in. Major components of the core rules were decided by WM players - without Hordes players' input. I'm not complaining, it's simply a fact. So there isn't a pro-Hordes bias.

That said, Hordes players have devoted their time to picking apart units - and there's been a lot of picking apart. I think it's a good balance, though. WM players who, according to DC, have better model rules had more input in the core rules changes. Hordes players who have stronger core rules have had more input in their models' rules. That sounds balanced to me.

A field test like this is never going to be perfect. But I think the idea has been expertly executed by PP. It's amazing to see how input from the boards makes its way into updates. It's incredible to think that PP has opened up their game to the opinions of rabid fan-geeks and that we all haven't been banned yet.

[AxeHappy!!]

Well the playtesting over the holidays sounds like a slight hiccup in their planning. I really don't think that it was intentional or showing favoritism.

[admanb]

Hordes also needs a lot more work because Warmachine only had to be balanced against itself. The expectation was that the Hordes field test would then deal with balancing against Warmachine, which -- surprise! -- takes a lot longer.

I am a little upset -- I think a couple more weeks and one or two updates for the Warmachine fieldtest would've brought a few issues into contrast, which the money I spent on Stormguard, Trenchers, and the Centurion were begging for. I do think the Warmachine factions are well-balanced, and that each one still has plenty of effective variety, but it seems everyone -- Cygnar and Cryx in particular -- have a decent chunk of "don't even bother" models.

[Destroyer123]

Khador has...... 2 new EXTREME jacks.
;)

Extreme Jacks are not an upgrade to a faction. Personally I would never play one But I will buy and paint as many as I can. For game play I feel that they distort the scale of the game to much. Just my opinion any way.

[Aries37]

Extreme Jacks are not an upgrade to a faction. Personally I would never play one But I will buy and paint as many as I can. For game play I feel that they distort the scale of the game to much. Just my opinion any way.
They are gorgeous but indeed too big. More suited to a loving paintjob and put on the shelf for display purposes.

The new plastic sculpts on the other hand...both amazing and to scale :D

[Fryerdan]

I love playing the underdog. Cygnar however is not an underdog. Your tactics are really what makes the difference even if facing superior models so long as the difference isn't too extreme (and it isn't)

[PPS_Matt]

I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but it seems poignant to point out where the big discrepancy exists between the perspective of players and the perspective of Privateer's development staff (and why we may appear unsympathetic to the individual laments of players, or even the collective cries of a faction's constituents):

As a player, you are probably most focused on one or two factions, and possibly, one game (WARMACHINE or HORDES) over another. When you observe a change to models in your faction, or rules that affect the models in your faction, then you [quite understandably] feel slighted/concerned/worried/hated/scorned/cheated/manipulated/[and otherwise kicked in the twig and berries].

As developers, we're looking at the game as a whole, trying to achieve balance between all factions. Even harder, we're trying to achieve balance between two different games with most of the same mechanics, but also some significant differences.

Because you have invested financially, mentally and emotionally in a particular faction that you identify with, you (mind you, I'm saying 'you' collectively, not to any one individual here) are much less likely to be able to look at the overall situation with the objectivity that we are at Privateer. We don't have a bias. It doesn't serve our ends (depriving your wallet of every last penny, as CMikeHardy would have it ;)) to intentionally disadvantage something arbitrarily. We are, in all factual truth, trying to make the best, most even, most balanced play environment possible.

So, when you think something is no longer viable to take on the tabletop, most likely, we think you're wrong. And though it might sound conceited to say so, I think we're also most likely right, because:

a) We are looking at this objectively, not through a personal bias.
b) We are the ones pouring over the data from all sources and meticulously trying to find the balance points.
c) Let's not forget, we're the ones that make the game! And you can bet your sweet *** that we know what we're doing, or you wouldn't be playing the game in the first place.

Does this mean we're always right? Of course not. It just means that you (collective you, remember, and really, only the collective 'complaining' you's) are probably wrong.

[Aries37]

And yet you let us field test :D

[PPS_Matt]

And yet you let us field test :D

Well, when we're wrong, we're REALLY wrong. ;)

[Emperor's_Spork]

I sleep well at night. Khador has been, is now and will always be the best faction. As yet, I have seen nor heard nothing to the contrary. I would suggest all sub-factions join my faction and taste the great rainbow of better-than-anyone-else-ness, but then who would I have to measure against my faction's superiority?

We're red. Is there anything Privateer can do, short of changing the fluff to give Cygnar red pantsuits and bonnets, that could possibly balance the game? Look in your heart. I think you know the answer.;)

[SoulReclaimer]

I totally disagree that Cygnar is the weakest faction and any faction in the right situation, some poor dice rolls, and a badly formed list will end up being the weakest faction of the tournament, day, etc.

Keep in mind there are some major convetions early next year and a LOT of people are looking forward to get into the fold of things once again, since, as every game that goes through an overhaul, things have been a bit on hold the last 4 months or so.

This is a field test and something we as consumers should be ecstatic to be a part of. Right now Hordes should be the most played system since their Field Test is still running. People are trying desperately to get their feedback in before the cut off date.

As most posts suggest WM being more overpowered I think WM will actually have a larger following in the next few months but this community is so embraced with helping PP iron out the Field Test wrinkles that right now our focus is on Hordes. As it should be.

Privateer has done a stellar job in letting its customers help build the games we love.

Patience OP< things will level out and be awesome in 2010.

[Kaptain Von]

The extension on the Hordes field test is not because we are 'lavishing attention' on Hordes. (This is hilarious, because normally it's Hordes exclusive players who are railing us because Hordes doesn't get enough attention!) The reason for the extension is that the field test fell over a very busy holiday season where we're also in the process internally of producing a new WARMACHINE book for each month next year. In other words, the amount of activity going on behind the scenes is exponentially higher now than it was during the WARMACHINE field test, and because we had the ability to extend the field test right now, we thought it would be in the best interest of Hordes, not because there's some sort of ridiculous favoritism.

Wait, what? People are saying that now?

I looked at the Field Test and thought 'yeah, given the nature of some changes it makes sense to extend the testing time'. Things like the Whelp and Krielstone changes potentially unspring an entire faction's playstyle and you're going to need more than a week to know if you've gone too far or not. It's just good sense, damn it! And then there's everything Matt just said as well.

[PuppetRebel]

c) Let's not forget, we're the ones that make the game! And you can bet your sweet *** that we know what we're doing, or you wouldn't be playing the game in the first place.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This, ten million times over. I really have invested a lot into this game, money, time, it's been the catalyst for many great times with my brothers, I've named every model I've owned, even gone so far with some to make back stories...the point is, I am very attached and I really do care about how the models will work. I would have loved to have been a bigger part of the field test for Warmachine, but a newborn kinda makes it hard, but I was never worried, because Privateer Press has never done anything but prove that they know what they are doing and they are the very damn best at it!

[phreaker187]

I for one think Cygnar is better in MK2 than it was in MK1. We still can't hold an objective in steamroller worth beans, but we have the Thunderhead, Strangeways, and a Defender that can hit the DZ with 2 POW 15's turn 1. It limits the use of our normal trenchers (I have a full unit of and never field now) and our Long Gunners (see trenchers), but this is more due to the fact that the game has been totally redone, not because PP hates us.

Cygnar has always been very strong as long as we know what army we are facing beforehand. This seems to be mostly true now, but I feel we are stronger over all.

[bouncymischa]

Wait, what? People are saying that now?

I looked at the Field Test and thought 'yeah, given the nature of some changes it makes sense to extend the testing time'. Things like the Whelp and Krielstone changes potentially unspring an entire faction's playstyle and you're going to need more than a week to know if you've gone too far or not. It's just good sense, damn it! And then there's everything Matt just said as well.

Yeah, I was saying that. XD

On the other hand, I do have to look at some of the more sweeping changes that have been made post-Warmachine Field Test, and wonder if an extra week or two to test those changes would've been nice. While it's hard not to point at the Trenchers and cry foul, the changes in the smoke rules are fairly significant.

Still, I believe it's mostly just sour grapes on my part. <.<


I for one think Cygnar is better in MK2 than it was in MK1. We still can't hold an objective in steamroller worth beans, but we have the Thunderhead, Strangeways, and a Defender that can hit the DZ with 2 POW 15's turn 1. It limits the use of our normal trenchers (I have a full unit of and never field now) and our Long Gunners (see trenchers), but this is more due to the fact that the game has been totally redone, not because PP hates us.

Cygnar has always been very strong as long as we know what army we are facing beforehand. This seems to be mostly true now, but I feel we are stronger over all.

I agree that, in general, Cygnar Mk 2 is stronger than it's previous version. On the other hand, I still can't help but look at the primarily-competitive focus in the Cygnar forum, and see general dismissal of a large number of our warcasters and units. I seriously doubt I'll be seeing any of our current Trenchers and artillery in a competitive list at Templecon or Gencon, unless some sub-partisan takes them. :(

On the other hand, my Trenchers and Long Gunners do tend to chew up models in casual games at my LGS. Maybe it's just the competitive focus of the forum, rather than any fault of the faction itself...

[Jyggdrasil]

Dear PPS_Matt

I hate your avatar (stupid swans), but thanks for everything else. In return I will continue to invest my child's education fund in your fine products.


Happy Holidays
J.

[CT GAMER]

Oh no, look what you've done now. You've gone and made Matt mad.



No, he's not mad,not enough four letter words...

[Broken_shards]

people will always complain about changes particulary if it affects their 'perfected' list or play style, look at 40k for an example - when rhino rushing was changed, its the one trick armies/ players that suffer most and tend to be the most vociferous when whining about being forced to change

edited for slightly better grammar

[Emperor's_Spork]

.... On the other hand, I still can't help but look at the primarily-competitive focus in the Cygnar forum, and see general dismissal of a large number of our warcasters and units.....


On the other hand, my Trenchers and Long Gunners do tend to chew up models in casual games at my LGS. Maybe it's just the competitive focus of the forum, rather than any fault of the faction itself...

Which of those two highlighted comments is the one on which you would rather base happily spending of your time and money and which is the online equivalent of hot air and attempts to get people in line turning opinions into facts?

IMO, forum discussions have nothing on actual game play.

[Skaramush]

What Darth Stryker is saying there i think is that they PP are extending this just because they want to get it "just" right rather because of some ulterior motive or favouritism.

[Annichka]

This is perfect! Matt, I'm printing out both of your responses and will be showing them to my whiny DOOMers right away!

[Fearless]

As developers, we're looking at the game as a whole, trying to achieve balance between all factions. Even harder, we're trying to achieve balance between two different games with most of the same mechanics, but also some significant differences.

Because you have invested financially, mentally and emotionally in a particular faction that you identify with, you (mind you, I'm saying 'you' collectively, not to any one individual here) are much less likely to be able to look at the overall situation with the objectivity that we are at Privateer. We don't have a bias. It doesn't serve our ends (depriving your wallet of every last penny, as CMikeHardy would have it ;)) to intentionally disadvantage something arbitrarily. We are, in all factual truth, trying to make the best, most even, most balanced play environment possible.

So, when you think something is no longer viable to take on the tabletop, most likely, we think you're wrong. And though it might sound conceited to say so, I think we're also most likely right, because:

a) We are looking at this objectively, not through a personal bias.
b) We are the ones pouring over the data from all sources and meticulously trying to find the balance points.
c) Let's not forget, we're the ones that make the game! And you can bet your sweet *** that we know what we're doing, or you wouldn't be playing the game in the first place.

Does this mean we're always right? Of course not. It just means that you (collective you, remember, and really, only the collective 'complaining' you's) are probably wrong.

Matt, as a lover of this game and of *all* of it, i truly want the factions to be balanced against each other. The best games are the ones that hinge on few key die rolls. Those games that are down to the wire until the very end.

You only get that if the models are balanced and if the players are of equal skill level.

So, i'm all for balance.

But, with regards to the two field tests I think that Warmachine players, of which i am one, have a legitimate reason to be vexed.

We got a field test, and then final rules, with a few over-all rules tweaks early on.

The Hordes test has constant updates and some models/units have changed and/or been overhauled dramatically as a result of the feedback.

And, hey in most cases i think the changes are excellent, but it bothers me that there are some models i bought in MKI that were interesting and fun to play with, not super-competitive just interesting, that are really blah in MKII, and that does bother me because I had a lot of fun with (for example) Egoreshade. Now i'm going to shelve him, not because he sucks, or because he can't win games, but because he's not interesting to me.

To be honest, i'm not *super* bothered by it, i got enough different shiny stuff to make up for it, but i do miss abyssal gate.....i do miss messing around with my opponent.

All this said i still welcome MKII, i can't wait to get my book, and my HC faction books etc etc etc, but the extended Hordes test, with the weekly changes contrasted to the seeming far lesser influence from the Warmachine FT does leave a bit of a foul taste in my mouth.

[WolfKahn]

lol well there was a book that came out a while ago that was called "who moved my chess"!

well this sort of just stuck out in my head right now and I think it’s quite appropriate.

Sure a lot of models got changed (my lovely b13's, the centurion—don’t care what everyone says your still my fav jack! ) but that just mean I need to rethink my lists and go find the new chess , or find cheeser ways to play my fav units ;)

The core rules are well worth the change and speak volumes to how PP has keep the game in my option just pure awesomeness.

love the game, love the company!

[Sobek]

I was happy to see Cygnar get toned down since a good number of new players, power gamers and net-deckers gravitated to the Swans, and every list included the Black 13th, Squire, Rowdy, Thorn.... basically a list of auto-includes. Pretty disheartening (and NO fun) to face half a dozen Cygnar players and all the same list every time.

Don't forget Long Gunners and Sword Knights. All run by pHaley. Every. Single. Time.

That's the main reason why I hate playing against Cygnar in MKI. It's always the same list. Every time. In the several years since the game came out, there have only ever been TWO Cygnar players, EVER, who I've played against who've fielded something other than Haley. I don't think she's bad or imbalanced, I'm just simply sick and tired of seeing her on the table. I'd love to see a little variation. I'm hoping that MKII can bring that.

[mrhuettel]

... I'm just simply sick and tired of seeing her on the table. I'd love to see a little variation. I'm hoping that MKII can bring that.

i second that and: i'm sure that mk.II will bring that.

[gaminguy]

A field test like this is never going to be perfect. But I think the idea has been expertly executed by PP. It's amazing to see how input from the boards makes its way into updates. It's incredible to think that PP has opened up their game to the opinions of rabid fan-geeks and that we all haven't been banned yet.

This is sig worthy. Hope you don't mind.

I've designed enough stuff to know there is almost always a disconnect between how you meant something to work and how it actually gets used. In my mind the most valuable part of the field test is having Matt and Mr. Soles and the other developers giving us insight into what the developers were thinking. Even if you played all nine factions and mercs (so you could not be accused of bias ;)) it would still be possible to miss how a faction is meant to work. Goodness knows there was enough of that on the Skorne board.

[Drillermaniac]

This is not true. I don't know of any of us Mercs that are less than enthused about MKII! :p

He was talking about factions. ;)

Edit: Dang, I should read the rest of the topic before commenting. Now someone stole my joke. :(

[PPS_DC]

...Here's the thing: if you think your faction is getting the short end of the stick, if you think your game is hated by Privateer staff and that we don't want to support it, well, you're in good company, because that seems to be what a lot of people think, no matter what faction, no matter what game they play. But take two steps back and look at this objectively and you will see the complete and utter ridiculousness of the idea that we would favor one game or faction over another...

Quoted for truth.

Based on mountains of feedback reports (as well as e-mails, PMs, and forum threads), every faction has players who believe that their faction got the short end of the stick. It's really just a matter of perspective.

For reference, our internal and external playtesters are expected to test things from a wide variety of angles to avoid getting locked into a single perspective. As Matt noted, the company goal is to make every faction something that people will want to play.

[bouncymischa]

Which of those two highlighted comments is the one on which you would rather base happily spending of your time and money and which is the online equivalent of hot air and attempts to get people in line turning opinions into facts?

IMO, forum discussions have nothing on actual game play.

It's kind of the great paradox of the forums, for me. I come here to hang out with a community of people to get ideas and build up some of my own enthusiasm. Except it usually turns out to be more discouraging than not. XD

Ah well, at least I can rely on the Privateer staff to provide a handy bucket of cold water to the face... :P

[Kaptain Von]

But, with regards to the two field tests I think that Warmachine players, of which i am one, have a legitimate reason to be vexed.

We got a field test, and then final rules, with a few over-all rules tweaks early on.

The Hordes test has constant updates and some models/units have changed and/or been overhauled dramatically as a result of the feedback.


Personally - and this is just a dirty casual's opinion, so take it or leave it - I felt Hordes had much more serious internal balance issues, from launch, than Warmachine is. I felt it would take longer to fix. I also feel that some of the fixes are so potentially game-changing that it was right to extend the testing time.

I would, however, have appreciated time to playtest things like Incorporeal Soulhunters, which appeared after the WM field test was over.

[tensteam]

It seems clear that Privateer has learned from WM Field Test. Updating model stats while the field test goes on is a great thing and helps to get the best possible result. In WM Field Test there was tons of feedback that this and this model works or doesn't work, but as also some core rules changed before the final version the feedback probably wasn't as usefull.

As screening rule disappeared it naturally gave some benefit for ranged weapons (well magic attacks too even though this hasn't been discussed even nearly as much). This might be one of the reasons why - despite masses of feedback - for example Sentinel stayed as it is. Of course it wasn't the Privateer's intention to get end result of what it became, but it happened. Hordes field test with final core rules and tweaks in the middle of the field test gives Privateer better tools to avoid weak models.

So while I think Cygnar ended up having too many weak models in MkII I wouldn't argue it is weaker as a faction than before. In MkI B13th was an autoinclude and while now weaker it still is. eHaley is one of the strongest casters there are and Cygnar has access to many strong mercenaries. Cygnar probably has more competitive options in MkII than there were in MkI, but compared to other factions the amount of 'suits for friendly games' models is somewhat larger. I do not hide that I'm still a bit dissappointed how WM Field Test ended up, but for sure I want Hordes as a whole to do better!

[Wishing]

I would, however, have appreciated time to playtest things like Incorporeal Soulhunters, which appeared after the WM field test was over.

It will be exciting to find out what changes will be made to Hordes between the end of the field test and the final version. :)

[Jyggdrasil]

I would, however, have appreciated time to playtest things like Incorporeal Soulhunters, which appeared after the WM field test was over.

*cough*Rebuke*cough*
:rolleyes:

[Oldgrue]

I already had a post of geeklove, so lets dig into it:

a) Second time around for an open playtest is much smoother purely from experience.
b) three holidays extends a field test a whole lot - more the merrier
c) A couple of their babies haven't been kicked to the curb and still get much love.