Jump to content
Emmel Eitch

Changes introduced with Data Cards 1.2

Recommended Posts

I'd need time to weigh the pros and cons of it, but I'm ALWAYS open to any idea.

 

 

I am cool with that. ^_^

 

Wild Bill :blues:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm not a fan of the idea of 'temporary' datacards. I'd prefer to see brand new stats for some kind of 'lesser' warrior, and have the current warriors be used as official proxies until the new models come out with the faction book. I mean, it's likely that at least one of these factions would get some sort of lesser warrior anyway.

I also see this being needed only for Reptus and Darkspawn. Overlords will have their book next month, and Dwarves don't need any fixin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're on the topic, let me ask a question, what do you, the players, think of the idea of designating models that change status (adept to grunt, unique to non-unique when fielded in a sublist, etc.) in some manner (like an "*") on the card? so Bull Orc Warriors would get "Adept*" on their cards - indicating that in a sublist, or under conditions otherwise determined in a rulebook, they change this status to something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds good to me, Bryan. And Rich, that's actually a better fix than I could have thought of.

 

On the subject of saving the ailing factions, why did the Crusaders get another bleeding model? Pretty soon we'll be seeing the Reptus White Flag Bearers and the Crusaders Bard and Scribe models to tell in soul crushing detail how they kicked our butts again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we're on the topic, let me ask a question, what do you, the players, think of the idea of designating models that change status (adept to grunt, unique to non-unique when fielded in a sublist, etc.) in some manner (like an "*") on the card? so Bull Orc Warriors would get "Adept*" on their cards - indicating that in a sublist, or under conditions otherwise determined in a rulebook, they change this status to something else.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly would be the point of that? The way I read what you are saying, the '*' wouldn't change anything, it would just indicate to people who buy the mini that there are times when it can be used as a grunt? If that's the case, my personal opinion would be that I don't think it's worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually even if its just for the person buying minis out there it gives them the info without going shopping with their rule/faction book that here is a model that they can safely buy multiples of and field even if that may be in a sublist. I think it is a good idea and will help a lot of people who may be getting rattled at trying to figure out which minis to buy without ending up with 'spares'. I'm not sure about a temporary card as much as a new 'lesser' unit. Whether its darkspawn, dwarves, or reptus there are plenty of ways to designate a proxy model standing in for the new guys until the new sculpts come out. The darkspawn and reptus both could use a bolstering to their selection anyway and these are likely additions to happen to both factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As should be obvious by now, I find the grunt to adept changes unacceptable and am ready to leave the game. I now can only field 9-10 of my Reptus warriors in a typical game unless I bend over backwards to meet the harsh requirements to add another 11. Even then, I still can't use all of my warrior models unless I play a game that I never intended to play (2000+ points unrestricted). Reaper has done this before (archers); there is no reason to believe that they won't do it again. I feel ripped off and can't bring myself to spend another dime on their models.

 

The sad part is that this change was done as an across the board "rebalancing" of DV 11 models, not something specifically targeted at Reptus warriors. The same rebalancing could have been achieved by dropping them to DV 10 and adjusting their points accordingly. (Same for Broken Fodder which could have been changed from Beast to Bloodlust/2 if that was the issue.) Maybe the logic was that a newbie with a few of the models would think their warriors had been nerfed if the stats were lowered, but a change to adept would be harmless due to their still small collection of models; players with large numbers of models are "invested" (or fanatics) and will therefore stick with the system even if some of their models are forcibly retired. I don't know. I can only guess.

 

The fact that other businesses in the hobby give their customers even crappier treatment is not an excuse. Perhaps I am not blinded by this because I did not come to Warlord from one of those other crappy game systems.

 

Rich

Consider instead that perhaps you are blinded because of your perceptions. You've decided you've been wronged personally, and it isn't acceptable.

 

Would it have been better to have left things alone, leave the game unbalanced, and let those people who identified problems with the older system feel slighted instead? That would undermine Reaper's entire support system.

 

Would it have been better to change other stats on the models, and let people who invested in them because of those stats feel slighted instead? That would impact every person who purchased the models.

 

Instead, they changed the status on some models. That fixes some of the percieved problems, and only impacts people that have several of those models. From that group, it only causes significant problems for people who do not wish to look for alternatives.

 

Problems have been identified in the way Warlord was. If Reaper did not change things, the game would not survive.

 

They had to make choices based on the feedback they recieved. They did, and have worked to give that information freely to as many people as possible, and to cause problems for the smallest group of people.

 

This is not about whether Reaper has given better 'crappy' service than other game companies.

 

Reaper found holes in the Warlord ship, and had to patch them, or watch the ship sink. They cut off the fewest passenger compartments they could to stop the leak, and you happened to be in them.

 

The ship will continue to float due to those changes, though other leaks may be identified and need further fixes in the future.

 

Computer games need patches most of the time once they are released. So do other games, like Warlord. Sometimes those patches stop players from being able to do certain things, or at least limit them. Sometimes those patches don't fix all the issues, or bring out more.

 

If someone is going to stop playing because they don't like the patch to fix the game, there is nothing stopping them. Likewise, there is nothing stopping people from playing without the patch if they so desire.

 

Make your choice, and play or not, but forgive me if I prefer the method Reaper used to try and fix things.

 

I may not agree with everything they did, but they acted with decisiveness and maturity while trying to cause problems for the fewest people in making their game patch. I find that laudable, rather than criminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alternate data cards

 

I'm just a painter grunt, but this concept is very similar to the various Goblins in the Reven faction book. It'd need a bit of playtesting to confirm the mix... but the concept seems sound

 

From a background perspective, they come from a part of the swamp that is affected by an <insert calamity here> that affects their overall health. Or they are younger warriors that must pass a test in battle to get to the adept status... Or they are younger warriors because almost none of them live past a certain point... so they never quite get as experienced as the adepts in other groups.... yada yada yada...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternate data cards

 

I'm just a painter grunt, but this concept is very similar to the various Goblins in the Reven faction book. It'd need a bit of playtesting to confirm the mix... but the concept seems sound

 

From a background perspective, they come from a part of the swamp that is affected by an <insert calamity here> that affects their overall health. Or they are younger warriors that must pass a test in battle to get to the adept status... Or they are younger warriors because almost none of them live past a certain point... so they never quite get as experienced as the adepts in other groups.... yada yada yada...

 

That's kind how the fluff for the Bull Orcs go, they have to go through a ritual and kill a Hunting Beast.

 

 

The Reptus who aren't strong enough get eatten. . .Feed the Young!!!!!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's easy for some of you to say "well, it hurt the least amount of people, and it's in our best interest," but I don't really think you guys are looking at the full picture here. I do think the changes will help and that updating will allow us to thrive, but check out our data cards. Really look at them. I believe the Darkspawn have a total of 16 unique models, 1 of which is a grunt. 2 if you count the pain tenders, but that's if you have a pure faction. Our big strategy was to use broken fodder in tandem with pain tenders. We no longer have that. Our only choice now is to use warriors or pain tenders as our primary force (the warriors were actually said to be the worst grunts available for an evil faction by Gus). Pain Tenders will cost us 3 tokens to keep alive as opposed to the 2 that fodder / warriors would cost us. Our faction ability is meant almost exclusively for grunt models, not expensive ones. As such, our only real "strategy", as predictable as it was, is thrown out the window. I may not be taking it as hard as Rich is, but that's a serious blow to my entire faction. So much so that I bought a boat load of Necropolis just so I could play something until this whole thing gets sorted out. I know that I could still use the warriors, but there's only so much I can do. If I have to face the Nefsokar, I might as well just throw in the towel before we even start.

This is for the better, I understand that. But some of us are facing some tough times and until you really take a look at the issues our factions are up against, you couldn't possibly understand why someone like Rich would be so upset. I plan on sticking it out, but we can't cannibalize our community here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you see a new hole that cam out from the patch, then point out the hole and give Reaper evidence they can use to correct it. Your post is a start, but you also need to really look at the options available instead of giving up.

 

Simply bemoaning how Reaper has treated people does nothing when Reaper was trying to patch a broken game. They had to make a patch. If the patch doesn't work, they need real and functional data to help them form a better one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've missed some stuff and want to chime in on a few things.

 

Temporary Data Cards:

I can't help but feel like these are a bad idea. I dont want to give a player something, then take it away, and then have these discussions again about WHY they have to loose the model when it has been balanced to play with for over a year. It's just post poning the inevitable.

 

Alternate Cards for a Model:

I occasionally play a game called Confrontation, and they have Second Incarnations for expensive heros and leaders. This is were after a known leader dies he is resurected more powerful than before. It is a very cool to have multiple cards to represent a single model. It really does add to the game and it's almost like a thank you to the customers. I highly recommend this idea, be it for warriors or leaders.

 

@Gimp:

Computer games need patches most of the time once they are released. So do other games, like Warlord. Sometimes those patches stop players from being able to do certain things, or at least limit them. Sometimes those patches don't fix all the issues, or bring out more.

You said yourself that sometimes when something is released it can actually cause more problems than it actually fixes. That's what we're here for. We don't post on these forums because we hate this game, we're hear typing to the bitter end because we WANT this game to be the BEST War Game anyone has ever played. We're all just trying to help, sometimes that means being loud and making big long topics :)

 

@Reaperbryan:

I think just having a simple (*) next to the models name is more than enough to let us know that the model may have items that change on it. It is easy to explain to new gamers and it's an icon easily recognized by everyone. Great idea, a simple change and keeps everyone well informed.

 

@underling's post just above mine:

You described the situation perfectly. Darkspawn are an entirely new faction with this change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an idea. How about making 2 data cards for each of the models that were changed from grunt to adept? The "real" data card is the adept card that is already there and will stay there permanently. An "alternate" data card for the model is also added with the designated Model type of "Grunt*" or "Grunt (Sub)" or "Grunt (Alt)" and with the stats degraded to be a balanced grunt. The alternate card would be removed when the model's faction book were released. In the meantime, players could choose which of the data cards to use for games, the unmodified adept card or the downgraded grunt card. The alternate card would only be available on the Reaper web site - all print versions would be the adept card, etc. This allows Reaper to go ahead with its plans while keeping the affected factions fully playable in the meantime.

 

Rich

I like this idea. As a slight tweak, though, would it be possible to Reaper to release stats for the "decaf" versions for the Reptus, etc., (like the lesser orcs and the IC skirmishers), without releasing the models until they would have been released anyway. That would allow people to use their adept Warriors as perfectly legal proxies.

 

In this way the stats remain in the system, are perfectly legal forever, and use past precedent on why the current models are being used as proxies.

 

The major weakness with the idea is it may be confusing on the table. With a little bit of painting difference, or twist ties, the issue is solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we're on the topic, let me ask a question, what do you, the players, think of the idea of designating models that change status (adept to grunt, unique to non-unique when fielded in a sublist, etc.) in some manner (like an "*") on the card? so Bull Orc Warriors would get "Adept*" on their cards - indicating that in a sublist, or under conditions otherwise determined in a rulebook, they change this status to something else.

I'd thought about suggesting putting the units names in italics for those that lose their unique quality in a specific faction. That was 6 months ago and I figured there was no hope of changing all of them so I didn't suggest it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sorry, but I see a lot of little changes that I view as totally unnecessary. You invalidate data cards to add one or two discipline points to the tracks or only one or two points on or off the mini? I play the Necropolis and I realize a lot of other factions changed more drastically. However, for the piddly changes made to the Necropolis, I don't see any of them as "unbalancing" the game. I'd have been far happier with the stats being unchanged.

However, that being said, I'll live with having to update my faction book and cards because if anything you've made them even stronger and they were already pretty tough (along with having cool minis), which is why I chose that faction.

 

I also have to agree with Lawgiver's comment about the Crusader archers. They really suck and cost a fortune to field. I don't know why they weren't made cheaper if the idea is to balance the game.

 

Minor changes were made to be consistant, Reaper uses a system of points calculation, if they modify it in some way to bring several models in line it will affect a wide number of models, to varying degrees. The calculation might only affect a couple of Necropolis by a few points, but might affect a Darkspawn monster by 10 or 15 (just a fictional example).

 

Changing Discipline values is so that they follow a predetermined order. For example every 3 track model with starting Dis 9 degrades as follows 9:6:3. Every single model in the game follows these set patterns, and the corrections were to a few anomolies as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×