An Idea to put a stop to Revising Stat cards

[shakhak]

I know that the stopper has been placed on making changes to Stat cards for this year. The next time it can be done will be 2008. I think I speak for us all when I say, I'd like to see it completed forever.

 

I know that there were a few questions about models missing certain abilities or stats that seemed like they fit the sculpt or fluff. ie Pain Tenders seem a perfect fit for disable given their fluff.(I'm going to continue to use this model as an example)

 

I'm kind of sick of telling my players which stats are the correct ones, so unless there is a huge balance fix changing the points of several models, I propose introducing alternate stat profiles. By that I mean 2 cards for a single model.

 

A few reasons I think this would be prefered by everyone:

• It doesn't affect those who like the model as is.
  
• It helps align the model with what is more accurate in fluff/sculpt.
  
• It adds a small amount of diversity to the game.
  
• Given WarlordHQ and already having online only game resources(Razig), it doesn't require printed material, and can be completed cheaply.
  
• It could breath new life into old models, and that always gets players excited.
  • This excitement is always an advantage to Reaper and Warlord, gets people talking and creates positive buzz.
    

  [*]Being something new, instead of a revision, this is something that could be done outside of the yearly Chronicles.

I have one concern with this, what happens with Adept models?

I propose that the player be forced to choose either the new profile, or the old profile. That way they cannot have models that are very similar adepts in two different troops, or two unique heros that are only slightly different.

 

 

So, thoughts? Opinions?

[vejlin]

I vote no

[shakhak]

I vote no

Wait a second this isn't a poll :P

 

After the hurricane of topics, polls, and debate brought on by Gus this last week, I'm not going to jump into debating, but I'd like to hear why you say no.

[Deguello]

I know that the stopper has been placed on making changes to Stat cards for this year. The next time it can be done will be 2008. I think I speak for us all when I say, I'd like to see it completed forever.

 

I know that there were a few questions about models missing certain abilities or stats that seemed like they fit the sculpt or fluff. ie Pain Tenders seem a perfect fit for disable given their fluff.(I'm going to continue to use this model as an example)

 

I'm kind of sick of telling my players which stats are the correct ones, so unless there is a huge balance fix changing the points of several models, I propose introducing alternate stat profiles. By that I mean 2 cards for a single model.

 

A few reasons I think this would be prefered by everyone:

• It doesn't affect those who like the model as is.
  
• It helps align the model with what is more accurate in fluff/sculpt.
  
• It adds a small amount of diversity to the game.
  
• Given WarlordHQ and already having online only game resources(Razig), it doesn't require printed material, and can be completed cheaply.
  
• It could breath new life into old models, and that always gets players excited.
  • This excitement is always an advantage to Reaper and Warlord, gets people talking and creates positive buzz.
    

  [*]Being something new, instead of a revision, this is something that could be done outside of the yearly Chronicles.

I have one concern with this, what happens with Adept models?

I propose that the player be forced to choose either the new profile, or the old profile. That way they cannot have models that are very similar adepts in two different troops, or two unique heros that are only slightly different.

 

 

So, thoughts? Opinions?

 

Hmm how to respond without sounding belligerent: I don't prefer your analysis. I think your experiences do not mirror my own. I would/could understand your plea if it cost anyone anything to get the new cards. Also I like dynamic games. I think the quickest way to stall this game is to make the personaes portrayed static. My harshest statement follows: I would re analyze your list of reasonings. Think of the game as a whole and not individual factions/players.

[vejlin]

I said no because I don't like the added complexity (is the a merc xbowman or is it one of the other models represented by the same model). And I don't see the problems you describe. They're not issues to me

[shakhak]

Hmm how to respond without sounding belligerent: I don't prefer your analysis. I think your experiences do not mirror my own. I would/could understand your plea if it cost anyone anything to get the new cards. Also I like dynamic games. I think the quickest way to stall this game is to make the personaes portrayed static. My harshest statement follows: I would re analyze your list of reasonings. Think of the game as a whole and not individual factions/players.

You tried so hard not to sound belligerent, that for some reason I'm not seeing how you disagree with my analysis :)

 

I am not addressing any current changes. I am assuming that in the future cards will be changed to fit current fluff(not new fluff).

 

I was actually hoping that if alternate profiles came into play, it would a way to prevent static portraits. As of now, I think Reapers plan is to create everything and never touch it again, unless they missed something.

ie: Duke Gerard's will never be edited again, but if they had alternate profiles, it would be possible to have stats for the Duke before his return to Denelspire(weaker), or after his triumph over a large portion of Darkspawn(stronger).

 

 

The idea steams from another game. They did Reincarnations. None of their heroes were immortal, but their gods would bring them back and so some models would have have 2-5 stat cards, but only 1 could be used at a time. I don't play the game much anymore, but it was a very cool feature and something I think would fit warlord nicely. Especially since there are already little "holes" that people found in a few models.

[Ranzadule]

In a game where you can already give your troops "invisible" upgrades, I don't see where this idea is horrible. I dont know that it's necessary or that I even like it, but to dismiss it because it would be difficult to keep track of, is not really a good reason. It's no harder to track that if I have three identical units except for some of the figs having +1 MAV or something, right?

[vejlin]

I can see it working for a few characters (like the example you give with gerard), but I really don't like it for most of the minis. That's my subjective view on it and I can't really give you any good arguments beyond "that's how I feel"

[shakhak]

@Vejlin

I agree that I would not want most miniatures. That doesn't make much bussiness since for reaper either, to allow all the minis to be duel purpose.

 

I would rather see 2 to 3 adepts done a year(with growth keeping the same pace) and perhaps a few unq. heroes/leaders.

If this were to ever happen, I think some strong canidates to try it on would be:

Ivy Crown Archers: I still hear complaints about how their considered the best human archers in Taltos, but suck. A stat line w/ sure shot might be a strong addition, if Reaper didn't want to release another archer sculpt for the Crusaders.

Pain Tenders: They do actually make sense with Disable, but I think unlike me, other players wouldn't want their reach units to be expensive.

[Deguello]

I don't really see it as Reaper keeping them static as much as maintaining Balance.

I see it as Reaper keeping the stat cards on a yearly cycle. Introducing new models and cards along the way. 24+ Months from now I see them changing it up a little bit and pulling some leader models Replacing them all together.. then revamping grunt and adept types to follow the new leader type. Of course, in my mind this depends on how successful the new incarnation of Warlords is.

 

I really dislike the idea of multiple incarnations of the same model.

 

Does it make more sense to make a different model all together?

 

The difference being is not the point cost. but actually what stats a model represents.

Even if you add X upgrades to a model it is always a base point cost

[spiritual_exorcist]

I'm willing to bet most models in 2008 will look the same in 2007. The exception will be those datacards or SA's that are unbalanced and have had an extra year of playtesting.

[Gus Landt]

I'm willing to bet most models in 2008 will look the same in 2007. The exception will be those datacards or SA's that are unbalanced and have had an extra year of playtesting.

*ding* *ding* We have a winner!

 

Yep, that's exactly the intent of the yearly Rage chronicles. When someone makes a suggested change (like adding disable to a model), I'll keep that in mind in case that model needs to be changed for balancing reasons, I can look at adding that on since the model is changing anyway. The yearly Rage Chronicles will not be a time for random changes just to change things. It's meant to collect all the new stuff from the previous year, and change anything that's broken.

[wrightjd]

I'm willing to bet most models in 2008 will look the same in 2007. The exception will be those datacards or SA's that are unbalanced and have had an extra year of playtesting.

*ding* *ding* We have a winner!

 

Yep, that's exactly the intent of the yearly Rage chronicles. When someone makes a suggested change (like adding disable to a model), I'll keep that in mind in case that model needs to be changed for balancing reasons, I can look at adding that on since the model is changing anyway. The yearly Rage Chronicles will not be a time for random changes just to change things. It's meant to collect all the new stuff from the previous year, and change anything that's broken.

 

Hmm, in this manner won't this lead to armies becoming bloated and somewhat stagnant? I mean if you had 5 models a year you're already talking about armies hitting up to 50 or so units in 3 years. At what point do the armies stop being fresh and models start being repeats of models in other armies? I've been playing the game since the beta was released and I've loved it all the way and one thing that kinda scares me on the horizon is the game running out of ideas on what to add. If you only add 5 models per year without clearing out old stuff, you're talking almost 80+ models per faction. Just a thought ahead to the future.

[vejlin]

well there is always the option of adding more factions.

 

I for one am happy with the prospect of all my minis still being usable in 3+ years. Unlike certain othe game systems where you have to start over with your army every 3-4 years

[kristof65]

Hmm. Well, for one thing, the damage track progressions, and the SAs leave a lot more room for differences between models than certain other popular game systems. <cough>Warhammer<cough> So even at 80+ models per Faction, there will still be a lot of differences in each armies feel.

 

Secondly, even now the factions and sub-factions give a lot more variety in army composition than that other system. I can only see this continuing. And there is plenty of room for new factions, sub-factions and even SAs to expand on that.

 

The problem I see in 3-4 years is that the game will have too many options for new players, and it will seem overwhelming. At that point, I think Reapers going to have to introduce some pre-packaged armies, complete with force list, models and fluff for them to keep from scaring off new players.