Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

WUWU wrote:
Yaaay, good news. Malifaux need a new edition update about two years ago hah. Lets hope they hire some quality editors/rule lawyers.

+1.

Whereabouts did that Rasputina picture come from? Any more like that floating about?

Are avatars going to be part of the main rulebook now?

what's the quality on malifaux plastic.

They seem absolutely terrified of showing any actual mini on theyr website, so I guess it's not too good

Oh it's quite good, actually. detail can be somewhat shallow but not due to tooling quality; the mini's are just a bit more understated than you might have come to expect from GW&co.
What you see in the renders is faithfully replicated in plastic.

@Fenrir hidden away in the BoLS link earlier in the thread; took an account there to view it (which I why I rehosted it here; was annoyed enough at having to make an acc myself ).
Some folks already hinted at that pic which is why I went looking for it.

I'm looking forward to this. In spite of the bad experience I had with the company at Gencon I really love this game, and can't wait for a cleaner set of rules and better balance. With any luck, Wyrd will take a note from Battlefront and have a 'trade in' program that gets you a small-format rulebook if you already have the old one. I thought that was pure class that Battlefront did that with the release of the most recent addition.

streetsamurai wrote:
what's the quality on malifaux plastic.

They seem absolutely terrified of showing any actual mini on theyr website, so I guess it's not too good

Lol, Wyrd can't please anyone . They used to just show unpainted minis, and then people were like, "give us painted minis!" and so they did. And then people were like, "you're covering up flaws with painted minis, we want to see unpainted." So when they switched over to plastic, they gave you the 3d renders of the models, with are about 90% representative of the detail and quality.

They're very similar to GW plastics, and extremely similar to Wargames Factory products (since I believe that is who is doing their casting).

I've heard from my local shop that the cards will be available through retail as faction packs/decks for anyone who was worried about that so it's all good news!!!!!

The Plastics are great - the new crews are just as good as the old ones in terms of miniature quality and I always use metal base inserts to add that bit of weight so you just can't go wrong with malifaux at the moment

Probably will give it another try when the new edition will come out. Was playing it when it first was released, but lost interest quickly. The renders of some of theyr new plastic are great, and since it seem the quality is good,at worst it will give me a couple of cool mini.

Someone mentionned a campaign system for the setting. I doubt it would be really elaborated, since most miniature are so specialised that any advance would seriously unbalance the whole game.

streetsamurai wrote:
Probably will give it another try when the new edition will come out. Was playing it when it first was released, but lost interest quickly. The renders of some of theyr new plastic are great, and since it seem the quality is good,at worst it will give me a couple of cool mini.

Someone mentionned a campaign system for the setting. I doubt it would be really elaborated, since most miniature are so specialised that any advance would seriously unbalance the whole game.

Wyrd actually just released Campaign rules in their latest issue of Wyrd Chronicles, a free magazine that comes out once every other month. They're pretty solid rules, and have advancement on the characters, what happens when they die, equipment you can purchase. They're pretty solid rules, we're in the middle of a campaign at my store right now.

Edit: And with Mack writing the rules (from what I hear), it wouldn't be too hard to do something like that anyways, they're already looking at incorporating rules to convert your Through the Breach characters into Malifaux models for the wargame.

 Bolognesus wrote:
Oh it's quite good, actually. detail can be somewhat shallow but not due to tooling quality; the mini's are just a bit more understated than you might have come to expect from GW&co.
What you see in the renders is faithfully replicated in plastic.

IMO the plastics are a mixed bag, but this is due to the inexperience of the digital sculptors, rather than the material itself. They dont understand that something might look good when blown up to 50 times the size on a computer monitor looks terrible on the tabletop. The facial features on some are just nonexistant on pieces I have (Hanging tree corpses, Jacob Lynch, Beckoners) compared to the older models. Its also lead to differing proportions of some minis, and bits that are simply too thin (hanging tree rope, beckoner pony tail) to be practical. One of the tree ropes was snapped in the package, and two of the others didnt survive assembly/painting. Others look great IMO, particularly Tannin and Graves and the illuminated.

IMO, it's only the lynch crew, lazarus and the hanging tree that were weaker sculpts. Everything else I've seen was really solid. The other sculpts are not perfect, but they're very well done from what I've seen.

Wow....

War-gear? Pre-measuring, casting duels are now just opposed duels....?

Sounds like sweeping changes that still aren't focused on the inherent imbalances of asymetrical objectives.

I LOVE Malifaux 1.5 and don't look to it to be balanced, just fun.... but it sounds like they're making an unrecognizable game.

My crew and I (6 players, been in for the last year and a half, 4 half were heavily into WH years ago) have had mixed reactions, from "cautiously optimistic" to "the end is nigh".

Apparently there's a lot of info floating around in podcasts (I may be showing my age here, but I kind of dislike those as a primary info source, prefer written text I can plow through in 5-15 minutes, rather than listen to 5 hours of podcasts to get the same info, oh well people are transcribing as we speak), and at the end of the month we'll all get a glut of new info and stats and some fears will be quenched while others are given full form.

I think what I'm most interested in will be the comparison between the 'beta' and what goes 'live' in August. As in, how much feedback can they take, and what changes can they make in the couple of months they'll have (at most) before the printers need to start shotgunning out giant piles of books and cards for transport in August and wider distribution shortly thereafter.

 Forar wrote:
My crew and I (6 players, been in for the last year and a half, 4 half were heavily into WH years ago) have had mixed reactions, from "cautiously optimistic" to "the end is nigh".

Apparently there's a lot of info floating around in podcasts (I may be showing my age here, but I kind of dislike those as a primary info source, prefer written text I can plow through in 5-15 minutes, rather than listen to 5 hours of podcasts to get the same info, oh well people are transcribing as we speak), and at the end of the month we'll all get a glut of new info and stats and some fears will be quenched while others are given full form.

I think what I'm most interested in will be the comparison between the 'beta' and what goes 'live' in August. As in, how much feedback can they take, and what changes can they make in the couple of months they'll have (at most) before the printers need to start shotgunning out giant piles of books and cards for transport in August and wider distribution shortly thereafter.

Well, the problem is, in said Podcast, the designers coyly suggest that they've already locked down 90% of the rules, and won't really take TOO much feedback from players.

More disappointingly, the really interesting asymmetrical aspect to the game, which was so narratively interesting, won't be fixed, it'll be shelved... There are only FIVE strategies now, and they're ALWAYS shared.

Also, you're forced to pick from a pool of five random schemes per game now.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 Forar wrote:
My crew and I (6 players, been in for the last year and a half, 4 half were heavily into WH years ago) have had mixed reactions, from "cautiously optimistic" to "the end is nigh".

Apparently there's a lot of info floating around in podcasts (I may be showing my age here, but I kind of dislike those as a primary info source, prefer written text I can plow through in 5-15 minutes, rather than listen to 5 hours of podcasts to get the same info, oh well people are transcribing as we speak), and at the end of the month we'll all get a glut of new info and stats and some fears will be quenched while others are given full form.

I think what I'm most interested in will be the comparison between the 'beta' and what goes 'live' in August. As in, how much feedback can they take, and what changes can they make in the couple of months they'll have (at most) before the printers need to start shotgunning out giant piles of books and cards for transport in August and wider distribution shortly thereafter.

Well, the problem is, in said Podcast, the designers coyly suggest that they've already locked down 90% of the rules, and won't really take TOO much feedback from players.

More disappointingly, the really interesting asymmetrical aspect to the game, which was so narratively interesting, won't be fixed, it'll be shelved... There are only FIVE strategies now, and they're ALWAYS shared.

Also, you're forced to pick from a pool of five random schemes per game now.

Please say this isn't true :(

 Alfndrate wrote:


Please say this isn't true :(

http://throughthebreach.com/blog/?p=167

Its all right there.


I will say... I'm torn. I LOVE Mack Martin, who is co-designing Malifaux 2.0. I think Dust Warfare is grossly under-appreciated and he's a talented designer.

That said, EVERY Malifaux 2.0 change so far, inherently seems to be reducing the specific areas that make Malifaux something OTHER than a me-to skirmish game.

Huh.

Strats I'm not too broken up about. Shared starts means that the crews are pretty much guaranteed to have to interact (as opposed to the rare occurrence where you could mostly just ignore your opponent and they might even ignore you, at least until one of you decided that an 8/8 tie wasn't acceptable).

5 schemes, and randomized? Look, there are a ton of imbalanced schemes (Kidnap, I'm looking very pointedly at you) and some are harder than they need to be or boarderine useless (far too difficult compared to others), but that's drastic alright.

Well, and schemes are being exaggerated in importance, now being worth a total of eight potential points.

This means schemes are actually the majority of points and thus a focus for winning the game, but you're forced into pulling your two from that random pool of five, so you might legitimately have a game that feels miserable from the moment you've sat down at the table.

 Forar wrote:
Huh.

Strats I'm not too broken up about. Shared starts means that the crews are pretty much guaranteed to have to interact (as opposed to the rare occurrence where you could mostly just ignore your opponent and they might even ignore you, at least until one of you decided that an 8/8 tie wasn't acceptable).

5 schemes, and randomized? Look, there are a ton of imbalanced schemes (Kidnap, I'm looking very pointedly at you) and some are harder than they need to be or boarderine useless (far too difficult compared to others), but that's drastic alright.

+1

I really don't care much about the strategies, because they were random anyways, but the schemes were really fun: they did a lot of stuff to make the game more interesting (and were part of why Leveticus was catapulted from "why would anyone field this loser?" to "ooh, I get it now. I want to try something mechanically unconventional"). Really hope it isn't true, or they change their minds.

 Forar wrote:
5 schemes, and randomized? Look, there are a ton of imbalanced schemes (Kidnap, I'm looking very pointedly at you) and some are harder than they need to be or boarderine useless (far too difficult compared to others), but that's drastic alright.

Could that be 5 per faction, or 5 per master? The faction and master specific schemes were really characterful, when they weren't broken (Off the top of my head, Zoraida, Kirai, Pandora and Lady Justice all had ones that were "Just like Assassinate, only harder!")

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Well, and schemes are being exaggerated in importance, now being worth a total of eight potential points.

This means schemes are actually the majority of points and thus a focus for winning the game, but you're forced into pulling your two from that random pool of five, so you might legitimately have a game that feels miserable from the moment you've sat down at the table.

Well, if you have five of them and are required to take 2, it seems like they've got to make them less specific, I'd imagine, since there's a 40% chance you get any given scheme (meaning, say, if that cripples a master, that master would be competitively useless).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elemental wrote:

 Forar wrote:
5 schemes, and randomized? Look, there are a ton of imbalanced schemes (Kidnap, I'm looking very pointedly at you) and some are harder than they need to be or boarderine useless (far too difficult compared to others), but that's drastic alright.

Could that be 5 per faction, or 5 per master? The faction and master specific schemes were really characterful, when they weren't broken (Off the top of my head, Zoraida, Kirai, Pandora and Lady Justice all had ones that were "Just like Assassinate, only harder!")

Oh, 5 random per faction would much better. Don't like random, but that'd be way more acceptable...

It could even be 5 random per faction with a 6th master specific scheme, or something like that.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 Forar wrote:
My crew and I (6 players, been in for the last year and a half, 4 half were heavily into WH years ago) have had mixed reactions, from "cautiously optimistic" to "the end is nigh".

Apparently there's a lot of info floating around in podcasts (I may be showing my age here, but I kind of dislike those as a primary info source, prefer written text I can plow through in 5-15 minutes, rather than listen to 5 hours of podcasts to get the same info, oh well people are transcribing as we speak), and at the end of the month we'll all get a glut of new info and stats and some fears will be quenched while others are given full form.

I think what I'm most interested in will be the comparison between the 'beta' and what goes 'live' in August. As in, how much feedback can they take, and what changes can they make in the couple of months they'll have (at most) before the printers need to start shotgunning out giant piles of books and cards for transport in August and wider distribution shortly thereafter.

Well, the problem is, in said Podcast, the designers coyly suggest that they've already locked down 90% of the rules, and won't really take TOO much feedback from players.

More disappointingly, the really interesting asymmetrical aspect to the game, which was so narratively interesting, won't be fixed, it'll be shelved... There are only FIVE strategies now, and they're ALWAYS shared.

Also, you're forced to pick from a pool of five random schemes per game now.

Boo-urns! Sure, some didnt see use. But I liked that you could win through ways other than just simply marching across and smashing the other guy's face.

Hell, I've won at least one game after being wiped off the table.

Which, to be fair, may still be possible with the update.

 Forar wrote:
Hell, I've won at least one game after being wiped off the table.

Which, to be fair, may still be possible with the update.

That was a selling point

Don't like getting tabled and auto-losing? Try Malifaux, where you can get wiped off the board, and still win!

Some cool info here but more importantly:

Whats the story about the new puppet wars? i believe unstitched is due out this month right?

BTW, with the rules being 90% locked down, that's only sensible. Sounds like for the most part, the core mechanics are remaining. They've messed with the schemes, strategies and soulstones, and cleaned up a lot of the messy stuff (eg, roll all of the FAQs into the core mechanics through better written rules) but overall it's the same game. There's maybe potential to shift how the new things work, but in the timeline given, all there's really the potential to change is the details of strategies and schemes, and the details on particular cards which have become either dull or unbalanced.

The people in the current private beta may have a better shot at pushing things like bringing back individual strategies if the game feels lacking.

decker_cky wrote:
BTW, with the rules being 90% locked down, that's only sensible. Sounds like for the most part, the core mechanics are remaining. They've messed with the schemes, strategies and soulstones, and cleaned up a lot of the messy stuff (eg, roll all of the FAQs into the core mechanics through better written rules) but overall it's the same game. There's maybe potential to shift how the new things work, but in the timeline given, all there's really the potential to change is the details of strategies and schemes, and the details on particular cards which have become either dull or unbalanced.

The people in the current private beta may have a better shot at pushing things like bringing back individual strategies if the game feels lacking.

Too bad the people in the current private beta are buttoned down from talking about anything. Quickest way out of a private beta is to talk about said beta in a place that is watched by that company's employees... The second quickest way is to work for another game company (my woe)

 Alfndrate wrote:
Too bad the people in the current private beta are buttoned down from talking about anything. Quickest way out of a private beta is to talk about said beta in a place that is watched by that company's employees... The second quickest way is to work for another game company (my woe)

Talking to non-participants is disallowed, but I assume that there's lots of feedback that will get posted for devs and other playtesters in the beta forum. Non-participants are testing the rules, so would just be noise anyways.

decker_cky wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
Too bad the people in the current private beta are buttoned down from talking about anything. Quickest way out of a private beta is to talk about said beta in a place that is watched by that company's employees... The second quickest way is to work for another game company (my woe)

Talking to non-participants is disallowed, but I assume that there's lots of feedback that will get posted for devs and other playtesters in the beta forum. Non-participants are testing the rules, so would just be noise anyways.

Sorry, misread the last line in your post >_< This is what I get when I transition from SQL to real people words.

Hmm, so far the changes don't seem very, positive imo. Butm trying to stay optimistic, and well, if the changes suck, I'll happily keep on playing the old rules so only thing missing will be any new masters which to be honest isn't a big miss at the moment since there are plenty current masters unplayed in my small group of people.

Really trying to stay positive, but it's not very easy with what I hear so far :( But I guess time will tell. Maybe that's the problem with modern day wargaming, to many rumours going around to get worked up about before even knowing what it'll end up being like. Sort of coloring the perception to much to give something a chance.