RegisterDonateLogin

You want this...don't you?

Welcome Guest Active Topics | Members

At it's core - "What defines a piece in Star Wars miniatures?" Options
DarkDracul
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:43:13 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/18/2008
Posts: 1,097
Location: Kokomo
Lord_Ball wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:
Designers oppose “equipments” in Star Wars Miniatures for multiple reasons. For one the purpose of the V-Sets is to continue the game, not change its fundamental structure.


Confused That kind of went out the window with DotF and ABM... CEs were/are a part of the fundamental structure, so boardwide cancellation of enemy CEs absolutely changed the fundamental structure.

Not looking to start an argument or anything, just saying that the structure has already been changed multiple times to varying degrees.

Edit: Full Disclaimer: I personally am not interested in seeing equipment as it wouldn't be balanced very well, especially if a piece of equipment could be used to end up mitigating a strong characters weakness.


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game. I agree that some abilities go too far, like how Booming Voice changed the game. However, creating rules exceptions and changing how the game plays is the role of Abilities/ CEs. A returning player should recognize our ridiculous and broken abilities but might not recognize some new and foreign concept like “equip cards.”


The miniature games I've played (Mage Knight) who tried to introduce "equitment cards" were a huge failure.
Let's not ever go down that road.
DarkDracul
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:44:39 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/18/2008
Posts: 1,097
Location: Kokomo
Naarkon wrote:
I agree with what you are saying here. Personally, I like the concept of equipment, but once you add it you run the risk of becoming like Heroclix, which a large part of is "find the most broken figure to use the batbelt/infinity gauntlet/power battery/hammer" instead of running an interesting team. There will always be that one figure that was tested without a certain ability, and adding it onto him makes him crazy, so you have to cost the equipment for him, even though it's not broken on anyone else.

I do think the holocrons get pretty close to becoming equipment, but the fact that you have to make decisions about how to play them instead of just whether to include them makes it better.
Someone gets it! ThumbsUp
Lord_Ball
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:46:45 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,029
DarkDracul wrote:


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game.


That's just absurd.
TimmerB123
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:50:19 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
Lord_Ball wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game.


That's just absurd.


There will always be something that can be abused. We don't live in a magical world where everything would be perfectly balanced.
atmsalad
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:52:41 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/26/2011
Posts: 951
Deaths_Baine wrote:
that being said... I am against equipment being added to the game for so many of the reason I have complained against other pieces:


1. playtesting
2. wordiness
3. costing would be incredibly hard
4. the effect on future pieces would always have to be considered
5. what is the counter to a SA gained by equipment--- checks and balances- checks and balances.
6. ehh--- I just think its more work then what it is worth personally.


Agreed, +1
Lord_Ball
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:53:44 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,029
TimmerB123 wrote:
Lord_Ball wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game.


That's just absurd.


There will always be something that can be abused. We don't live in a magical world where everything would be perfectly balanced.


Yes, abuse is going to be done in practice where possible, but suggesting that abusive abilities are fundamental would mean that the abuse is intentional and not just an oversight.
TimmerB123
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:59:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
Lord_Ball wrote:
TimmerB123 wrote:
Lord_Ball wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game.


That's just absurd.


There will always be something that can be abused. We don't live in a magical world where everything would be perfectly balanced.


Yes, abuse is going to be done in practice where possible, but suggesting that abusive abilities are fundamental would mean that the abuse is intentional and not just an oversight.


Ah, well I agree that it should never be intentional by design. BUT - by design there are varying power levels, and abuse is subjective anyway. So just because something smashes something else - does that make it abusive?
shmi15
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:01:06 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
TimmerB123 wrote:
Lord_Ball wrote:
TimmerB123 wrote:
Lord_Ball wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:


Incorrect, abusive abilities are apart of the fundamental structure of the game.


That's just absurd.


There will always be something that can be abused. We don't live in a magical world where everything would be perfectly balanced.


Yes, abuse is going to be done in practice where possible, but suggesting that abusive abilities are fundamental would mean that the abuse is intentional and not just an oversight.


Ah, well I agree that it should never be intentional by design. BUT - by design there are varying power levels, and abuse is subjective anyway. So just because something smashes something else - does that make it abusive?



Nope your absolutely right
atmsalad
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:05:05 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/26/2011
Posts: 951
I am very pro change when it comes to SWM. From nerfing act control, changing Gambit, mouse droids and blast bugs to so many other things about this game I would be fine with changing. I personally don't like the idea of equipments on so many levels.

Honestly I don't understand why people aren't content with using the boosts we have in the game. Camaraderie, CE's that give boosts, Force Bonds and what not. It seams unnecessary to create an additional dimension to SWM when we have the tools to give the desired effect in the game already.

Whether or not you like it is more of a question of personal preference than to equip or not equip. Force Bonds, Camaraderie and Light Saber Trainer already do what Equipments would, at least to me they do.
Lord_Ball
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:10:33 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,029
TimmerB123 wrote:
So just because something smashes something else - does that make it abusive?

No those are merely called counters. Even in Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock everything had a counter or 2.
Deaths_Baine
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:20:06 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/31/2010
Posts: 1,628
Lord_Ball wrote:
TimmerB123 wrote:
So just because something smashes something else - does that make it abusive?

No those are merely called counters. Even in Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock everything had a counter or 2.



you sir are my hero lol lizard spock lol.
CorellianComedian
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:55:56 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/30/2014
Posts: 1,055
Deaths_Baine wrote:
that being said... I am against equipment being added to the game for so many of the reason I have complained against other pieces:

1. playtesting
2. wordiness
3. costing would be incredibly hard
4. the effect on future pieces would always have to be considered
5. what is the counter to a SA gained by equipment--- checks and balances- checks and balances.
6. ehh--- I just think its more work then what it is worth personally.


Huge +1 (wow, I think this is the first time we've agreed on something like this. I'm excited Woot )

Especially the effect on future pieces. When handing out abilities, pieces usually (A) hand it out to an individual or easily-defined subfaction, (B) hand it out to everyone, or (C) just check for a certain ability that probably denotes the intended subfaction. If you try and sort recipients out by what abilities they have (in order to prevent broken combos), you almost immediately run into weird stuff like Yaddle's CE, which targets "Unique Republic allies with a lightsaber and without Double, Triple, Quadruple, or Twin Attack."

I despise it when pieces limit the game significantly. I was excited for the new Jagged Fel (who gives Twin to Jaina Solo), until the next EPIC set came out and I realized that every Jaina from now on has to have a handicap in order to hit that 'just-right' power level when she gets Twin from Fel. Equipment would be far and away worse than even situations like this.
Deaths_Baine
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:07:26 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/31/2010
Posts: 1,628
CorellianComedian wrote:
Deaths_Baine wrote:
that being said... I am against equipment being added to the game for so many of the reason I have complained against other pieces:

1. playtesting
2. wordiness
3. costing would be incredibly hard
4. the effect on future pieces would always have to be considered
5. what is the counter to a SA gained by equipment--- checks and balances- checks and balances.
6. ehh--- I just think its more work then what it is worth personally.


Huge +1 (wow, I think this is the first time we've agreed on something like this. I'm excited Woot )

Especially the effect on future pieces. When handing out abilities, pieces usually (A) hand it out to an individual or easily-defined subfaction, (B) hand it out to everyone, or (C) just check for a certain ability that probably denotes the intended subfaction. If you try and sort recipients out by what abilities they have (in order to prevent broken combos), you almost immediately run into weird stuff like Yaddle's CE, which targets "Unique Republic allies with a lightsaber and without Double, Triple, Quadruple, or Twin Attack."

I despise it when pieces limit the game significantly. I was excited for the new Jagged Fel (who gives Twin to Jaina Solo), until the next EPIC set came out and I realized that every Jaina from now on has to have a handicap in order to hit that 'just-right' power level when she gets Twin from Fel. Equipment would be far and away worse than even situations like this.




first time for everything my good sir lol.
DarkDracul
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:08:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/18/2008
Posts: 1,097
Location: Kokomo
Lord_Ball wrote:
Yes, abuse is going to be done in practice where possible, but suggesting that abusive abilities are fundamental would mean that the abuse is intentional and not just an oversight.

That was a bit tongue in cheek on my part.
"Abuse" shouldn't be intentional and is not an intent for the game's fundamental structure.
However, even in Rebel Storm, I remember Override being kind of a big deal.
Returning players will remember Special Abilities in SWM but they wouldn't recognize "equip cards."
atmsalad
Posted: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 8:59:43 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/26/2011
Posts: 951
donnyrides wrote:
Equipment = Versatility. Versatility is equipment only it cheats and lets you see the other squad before you decide to swap out. You can Equip/Versatile twin onto a luke for instance.

If equipment were in the game, you gain the ability to simply take a current figure and tweek it to what you want to do, without having to make Vader #17.

I'm just sad that the idea is dismissed but nobody minds a little cube holding a door open for Cade or Mara to shoot through.

Vehicle/Versatility/Armament all = Equipment.

Warhammer 40K is one of if not THE most successful miniatures game uses equipment seamlessly and it works great for them and they don't have to produce new pewter characters just to give it grenades.

The game belongs to you guys, I don't play regionals or Gencon so it doesn't really matter anyway. If my play group wants to allow stuff like protective-vest, then we will use it and it will never make a difference to anybody.


Your wanting to play a different minis game than star wars minis. Blink Your asking for an RPG mechanic in a game that definitely is not. People have said, "why not make an equipment to make old WotC characters not suck" and my response is, why would you want an equipment to make a character better as upposed to just remaking it? Confused 17nth Vader being an exception, but I would no more want to see that then a equipment that boosts a shit Vader.

I completely agree that all of the things listed are equipments or are our representation of equipments in the game. With them present I see no reason why we have to create a more literal representation of equipments on top of those we already have.

This is one of the many topics that comes down to the gaming preference of different people in the community. I can say I don't like it because it adds an additional complexity to squad building, but you can find a reason to null and void that. If play groups want to come up with their own equipments and include them then by all means do it!! Whatever keeps the game going!! ThumbsUp
Gizmotronx
Posted: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 4:50:25 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/4/2017
Posts: 84
Location: Indy
atmsalad wrote:
my response is, why would you want an equipment to make a character better as opposed to just remaking it? Confused 17nth Vader being an exception, but I would no more want to see that then a equipment that boosts a shit Vader.


+2 to remaking characters that don't work.

The problem with doing it by equipment, is that equipment just gets used on better characters. It doesn't help the bottom, it helps the top! The 1%! The rich get richer!

Bernietronx 2016
Boris
Posted: Sunday, July 30, 2017 2:43:44 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 12/18/2008
Posts: 153
Lord_Ball wrote:
TimmerB123 wrote:
In the other thread people simply started listing things they don't like. However, not liking something is very different than changing the fundamental core of the game. We were talking about equipment, and people started listing abilities. Of course abilities change the game. That is literally their purpose. Every single time we make a new ability, it changes the game - sometimes in very small ways, other times in larger ways.

So what shouldn't change? What, if it were changed, would be fundamentally different than our game at it's core?


In the other Thread the only ability I brought up was Advanced Battle Meditation, as I feel this "ability" does in fact mess with the core fundamentals of the game.

Ever since Rebel Storm Commander Effects have been a part of the game, CEs have been the means to make the other pieces more effective. When you keep that KEY feature for yourself and deny your opponent it, to me it's almost like cheating (certainly at least giving yourself a big helping hand). Disruptive and Distraction while annoying are far more limited and therefore do not flat out destroy this core mechanic to the game.

Look at the prevalence of Camaraderie and Synergy on pieces today, obviously that is a side effect how common place CE cancellation has become, to me that is a core fundamental of the game that has been changed forever, and certainly NOT for the better.


Realistically how I would see equipment cards working, it would fill the same role as Camaraderie/Synergy.

i.e.
Aiming Scope cost 2
(Only useable on a character without Melee Attack. This character gains +2 attack)

Stealth Field Generator Cost 3
(This Character gains Stealth)

It would be easy to translate those to an ability another character grants to the target, so fundamentally not much would really change in the grand scheme of things. I'm more against equipment due do them likely being nearly impossible to balance.


Advanced Battle Meditation may seem a little off track for the game, but this really has more to do with a lack of unique flavor in development during the WotC era than anything else. The ability works largely for her as it did in the video game upon which she is based.

I haven't played the game in a few years, due mostly to the fact that I've moved twice since it was discontinued and don't know anyone who plays now. X-wing is all the rage these days. That said, I think the most important thing to think about with any piece is "What role does this piece contribute to the desired outcome?" In this case, that means active engagement to reach the Gambit point total before your opponent. Many of the pieces I designed in the first 3 or 4 years were made with that in mind. Yes some of them didn't live up to the goal and some overshot a bit too much. But we were a great team and no matter how much debate, I always considered what the other designers and playtesters had to say. Too often, a figure during the WotC era couldn't kill its value in points or discouraged engagement by attacking and running away.

Near the end of my time with the game, I tinkered with a change in the rules that allowed each player to designate a "gambit area" in addition to the middle of the map. I loved it. It really pushed the opponent to move into a gambit zone (or 2) and eliminated the choke point control that we had/have now. Not really sure where I was going with all of that but those are my thoughts along this subject.
jen'ari
Posted: Sunday, July 30, 2017 6:53:03 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
I like the idea of equipment but with it comes a lot of rules. How many characters can you give stealth while super stealth is in the game? Or the black sun's that will get super stealth and+4 +10....
Etc. Etc.

Equipment is kind of in place already on peeves like czerka scientist, squib trader, etc.

If the equipment is limited and very little apron I think it could be fun.

Any squad can only have up to four points of equipment. Equipment can only be given to uniques

Cost 3 upgraded sight. Nonmelee gains +2 attack
Cost 3 stealth generator. Gains stealth
Cost 2 armor gains +2 defense
Cost 2 regenerative implants gains regeneration 10
Cost 4 shields. Gains shields 1


Cost 1 camo gains +6 defense while in cover instead of +4.


Etc.

I think it could be fun and should be something to look into. If Magic the Gathering can change everything all the time. I think it is worth looking into.
But with the ability of ce's, and special abilities like blaster upgrade there might not be a reason for it.
I also think that individual pieces should have abilities that are equipment. We see that all the time. Lightsaber, armor, gauntlet knife, grenades, etc.
A few pieces like squib trader that grant others a special ability could be really fun.
Lord_Ball
Posted: Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:12:46 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,029
Boris wrote:

Advanced Battle Meditation may seem a little off track for the game, but this really has more to do with a lack of unique flavor in development during the WotC era than anything else. The ability works largely for her as it did in the video game upon which she is based.

Problem is, this isn't a video game, it worked just fine that way in KOTOR because it was merely for story effect and nothing else. In SWM it had/has a much larger (and I will personally add "negative") impact.
CorellianComedian
Posted: Sunday, July 30, 2017 9:19:49 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/30/2014
Posts: 1,055
I would say that "Fundamental structure" has not been changed since the end of WotC. The one potential candidate: Force abilities. Force abilities were never part of WotC as an official term, but they do exist. Check out the original Battle Meditation, Force Valor, or Control Minds. The Force powers replace attacks and grant the user a Commander Effect for the rest of the skirmish. Slightly different execution - the effect is killed by Disruptive instead of Force Immunity - but identical outcomes otherwise.

The "structure" that Advanced Battle Meditation follows dates back to Champions of the Force. Updated and refined, yes, but it's been there.

Equipment, as a card that you assign to a character, would be a change to "fundamental structure." That involves something entirely unseen before in Star Wars Minis, as has already been detailed.

I think the best thing to do for handing out equipment would be what jen'ari says at the end of his post: more pieces like the Squib Trader that hand out SAs. The Squib is a useful piece without bending the game at all.

One last thought. This does not magically "fix" the intense power of Advanced Battle Meditation, but I'm curious: did anyone expect the v-sets to go beyond Destiny of the Force? I wasn't around here then, so I don't know, but if you look at the comments on the DotF pieces, everyone seemed pretty surprised to see it. Point being: if the v-sets were supposed to be a one-hit wonder, Bastila pretty much single-handedly put the OR on the map (from what I understand).
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Bloo Milk Theme Created by shinja
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net.
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.