What will it take?

[Sygerrik]

I am an optimist. I'm a fairly competitive player (at least I was in Mk 1, and I'm just getting back into the swing of things now), but I never write off units entirely. Still, as we all know, some units are just a little bit less competitive than others. Some casters make you sigh, some warbeasts and warjacks don't often see the light of day. Rather than ask PP to simply "fix" the model, we should look to the future. After all, PP isn't going to errata all of their books and send out new cards until Mk III, years from now. However, we are getting a new Warmachine book next year and a new Hordes book at some point in the future (one assumes). So rather than look at what needs to be changed on existing models, think about what could be added to them in later books-- UAs, solos, warcasters, anything-- to help fix what's broken.

I'll give an example of what I mean. I like Praetorian Karax, but I know that compared to Swordsmen, they're just not all there. What about a UA-- Praetorian Karax Officer and Standard Bearer-- with Tactics: Brutal (or Powerful) Charge, Granted: Combined Arms, and the minifeat Defensive Formation like the IFP UA? Karax are slower than Praets and having to Shieldwall slows them down further. They have a greater threat range on the charge, however, due to Reach, and Combined Arms would help fix some of their accuracy problems when doing two-man CMAs. A unit with Reach, CMA and Ranked Attacks would fulfill a role sort of halfway between Swordsmen and Cataphracts, hitting hard on the charge and soaking up damage admirably.

Don't just think in terms of UAs. Zerkova would love to have a decent target for some of her spells. Think of how great the Castigator would be with a 'jack marshal that could Drive it to use a *action after charging! Sky's the limit!

[Aetou]

Units without UAs/WAs can be relatively easily 'fixed' by adding one or both of them. Similarly, Solos with [Leadership] or [Elite Cadre] can also potentially 'fix' both units and also solos. Hopefully Wrath will see a fair few of those (Cygnar would love, for example, a Stormguard UA and then a solo to buff either GMCAs or Sword Knights.) Listing every possible fix for every unit that needs it would make the thread crazy and unwieldy - and most faction forums have at least one thread discussing their own hopes.

Jacks (especially Heavies - that make up most of the ones with issues) are much harder to fix, as I doubt they will release models which only buff one 'jack in a faction. While something like the Jack Marshal you mentioned able to drive a 'jack to make a *Action is novel it wouldn't really fix the Castigator because, generally, marshalling 8+ PC heavy 'jacks is a bad idea. Honestly, the only realistic hope for overpriced 'jacks like the Centurion, Guardian and Castigator is that a new theme list will discount them while remaining competitive (difficult in both Menoth and Cygnar, as both rely on support and mercs a fair amount.)

Similarly, improving 'casters or 'locks is also very hard - adding competitive new units and solos will normally benefit many 'casters in a faction and so it won't move people up the pecking order. This is particularly true as PP seem to have moved away from the idea of Affinities (a good character 'jack with a great affinity is one of the best ways to boost a 'caster) and while you could have character solos with a similar rule... I'll be very surprised if we see that.

[Sygerrik]

You raise some good points, but some casters (and other models, but I think casters really are the prime suspects here) suffer less from being simply "bad" as from existing in a faction that doesn't offer them what they need. For example, Dominar Rasheth would be a lot, lot better in an environment with arc nodes; a beast with a once-per-turn arcing ability would really go well with him, especially if it had an animus like Enliven, and help him fulfill his role as a spell-lobber.

Honestly, I know UAs and WAs are the first stop, but I'm trying to think a little bit more creatively with this. UAs, especially the near auto-include ones, often seem like they grant rules that players assume the model should have had in the first place, so they're almost like costly, retroactive erratas. Things like the Basilisk Krea, on the other hand (Skorne is my primary faction, so that's where I'm pulling my examples) would be significantly improved by the addition of, say, Snipe on a caster or other beast.

[Giygasfan]

Just because PP hasn't released a type of model yet, doesn't mean they won't (look at Calvary or Character Jacks.)

It would be easy to have character units/solos which have served with a certain Warcaster/Warlock for a long time, and thus have special abilities when taken with that caster/lock.

Like a character Greylord solo that has worked with Zerkova for a long time, and when taken with her can act as an arc node, because they have learned to "sync their magic" or something. I think stuff like that could be pretty cool.

[isawatsuke]

Id prefer just a quarterly or yearly errata. Requiring a ua as a "fix" just makes it an auto-include. I think the best types of UA or really the best type of any unit actually is one that makes you think wheter you want it in or not as opposed to just throwing it in cuz its too good.

[kaneblaise]

Just because PP hasn't released a type of model yet, doesn't mean they won't (look at Calvary or Character Jacks.)

It would be easy to have character units/solos which have served with a certain Warcaster/Warlock for a long time, and thus have special abilities when taken with that caster/lock.

Like a character Greylord solo that has worked with Zerkova for a long time, and when taken with her can act as an arc node, because they have learned to "sync their magic" or something. I think stuff like that could be pretty cool.

Character Warlock attachments with affinities would be very interesting, IMO.

[infamousd]

I would prefer Uas to change the unit. Like a sea dog Ua that gives +2 to ranged attack and damge rolls, -2 mat and +4 ranged. Just models that can reahape how you play a unit

[Sygerrik]

Id prefer just a quarterly or yearly errata. Requiring a ua as a "fix" just makes it an auto-include. I think the best types of UA or really the best type of any unit actually is one that makes you think wheter you want it in or not as opposed to just throwing it in cuz its too good.

Errata would be ideal, but it's difficult from a business standpoint (people buy cards, they can't really mail out fresh sets every time the rules change slightly) and it requires devoting a writing team to nothing but reviewing problems, testing new rules, and writing new rules. Even companies like Blizzard, which regularly patch their games, struggle with balance issues and only occasionally release new patches. And updating their game for everyone is (relatively) easy! It's much easier for PP to add new models.

[PG_thegreatblah]

Personally I think just because they revamped and did MKII doesn't mean they have any intentions at all of doing MKIII.

Secondly, it is simply impossible to get product out to us in a timely matter and make every single model perfectly balanced and competitive. That said, PP does a fantastic job at making everything pretty danged, MKII took away super broken and took away downright unusable. The average output is the same but the Floor and the ceiling are closer together.

[PG_Lurch]

I totally agree with you theummhmmguy.

[The_Bionic_Labrat]

If, like Strakhov, Khadoran assault kommandos had "brutal charge" - the +2 damage on charge attacks, courtesy of a UA, i think it would certainly sort out a huge number of their problems. Im on the fence though as to whether they should get a UA, or a UA+attachment. I just cant think of any kind of "fitting" attachment to come along with the officer.

[PG_joedj]

If, like Strakhov, Khadoran assault kommandos had "brutal charge" - the +2 damage on charge attacks, courtesy of a UA, i think it would certainly sort out a huge number of their problems. Im on the fence though as to whether they should get a UA, or a UA+attachment. I just cant think of any kind of "fitting" attachment to come along with the officer.

They already have something better than Brutal Charge, they have pIrusk's/eIrusk's Battle Lust or pButcher's Fury, or pVlad Signs and Portents. It's just often, it's even more brutal to play these using IFPs. Except when facing eFeora or Legion Seraphs/Typhon/Carnivean ranged of course

I certainly don't want errata to improve models on the fly, just correct oversights and blatant mistakes.
I do like UAs, especially ones that make it tough to chose between two close-costed units. Effective FA3-6 Weapon attachments have also made this particularly fun and 'customizable' (sells a lot of models too!). So far there's at most 1 unit each, in all 7 of my factions that I find I'm not buying or playing because there's something better or more fun.