Reckoning Spoilers: Zerkova2 + Cygnar1 (Ace, Trench Buster)

Round 3 is gonna be Zerkova2 with a smattering of Cygnar! So let's start off with her.




Gone are the days of the ice cream cone - enter the baddest bitch on the block for Khador, complete with faceless muscle men. First, her stat line. She has middling stats across the board, with the only notable strength being 15/15 (when you play Protectorate, those stats feel above average). The back of her card is a bit better. Inspiration [Greylord] really strengthens Outriders and Ternion units, as CMD 9 is a lot worse than auto-passing. Sacred Ward and Self-Sacrifice help those mediocre defensive stats, creating more complications for killing the squishy Obavnik. The Blessed Orgoth Blade means almost next to nothing. If she's gotta shank someone to win you the game, I suggest you contemplate the decisions that made you reach that point and address them in your future games.

So let's get into the part that really matters: her spell list. Banishing Ward, a solid B spell, may as well be a solid A+ in Khador as it frees your other list to take Eiryss2. Dissolution Bolt may as well say FOC 2 RNG 8 POW 12, so just your below average nuke. Hoarfrost is a surprisingly decent nuke, especially when you get to cast it for free of her Feat. Crit stationary also provides some decent desperation runs. Occult Whispers is the true money maker on her card, providing an insane amount of pseudo-focus once the spray 8s start flying. Of course, there are more than Greylords that can benefit from this. Having a boosted Kiss of Lyliss off of Aiyana and Holt w/attached Valachev opens up the things you can realistically target. It also means that firing off a Hoarfrost or Dissolution Bolt isn't an absurd proposition, especially if you take Sylyss for extra focus. Unfortunately, the "next spell cast" clause on Arcane Secrets means that you can't cast Occult Secrets before tossing your Hoarfrost if you want to benefit from the additional die. That isn't to say you can't still do it, but the order of activations and order of spell cast becomes difficult to manage. Sacrificial Lamb is a really weird spell to find in Khador, though I suppose there might be some Khador players itching to run tons of jacks. Nope, not seeing it. Don't fall for the trap. On the other hand, Telgesh Mark should help Zerkova2 players that really want to maximize the most out of their focus. You'll definitely need Sylyss to get the most out of your spellcasts, as you'll likely be casting Occult Whispers and upkeeping Telgash Mark every turn (4 focus, leaving her with 3 for a Hoarfrost, whereas the free upkeep from Sylyss would give her the additional focus to let her boost the damage).

So on to her feat: Arcane Convergence. The potential in this feat is pretty obviously tied to Occult Whispers, though the order of operations are a slight problem. Unless your spray guys were previously in range of their targets (quick hint, your Outriders probably aren't), then activating her first to cast Occult Whispers and feating is going to be a less aggressive play than you'd probably hoped. Rather, the more likely hope is to have the enemy attempt to run and pin your ponies (or perhaps you sacrifice one or two in the front lines as bait for the rest of your sprays next turn), leaving them in range for a feat to clear movement lanes, then activate the ponies and move up to spray down more infantry. Another play line for the feat is to simply run your Outriders 18'' and threat your 8'' sprays to a total of 26'' for boosted (I know it's additional die) Magic Ability 6 POW 12s. The threat of getting that assassination is a strong pressure on some warcasters, and it's a valuable mid game assassination run to keep in your back pocket. Combine that with the likely ability for Zerkova2 to fire off her Hoarfrost and you have an additional boosted Magic Ability 7 boosted POW 13 finishing it up. On the less obvious side, you get some pretty cool interactions with Valachev and Aiyana and Holt. Firing off double Kisses of Lyliss (at different targets of course) and being able to Zephyr twice create before unseen possibilities. With Ternions, the ability to double up on Ice Cages with the consistency of boosted Magic Ability 7's means you now have a really consistent stationary threat. Being able to lock down key solos or unit leaders (stationary unit leaders can't give orders) can really throw your opponent's game plan. Though Arcane Convergence's raw power is obvious in terms of just infantry attrition, I'm definitely excited to see the situational value that comes from the Ternion.

Now let's talk about Fabio and Sven. Their stat lines are slightly improved at +2 ARM over the OG Reavers, though they suffer -1 POW because they put down their swords and picked up axes. The back of their card kept the best of all worlds, with the addition of Counter Charge. Though Counter Charge is pretty decent with MAT 7 POW 12 Weapon Masters, be careful with getting overzealous and moving them out of Self-Sacrifice range of the Obavnik if your opponent still has a ranged assassination threat. While not particularly exciting, the bros are decent roadblocks.

Overall, I think she's a great addition to Khador. She has excitingly complex interactions that push the boundaries of Khador's norms. Best of all, you can say "thanks Obavnik" when you win or lose your games. On a scale of Zerkova1 to Butcher3, I'd give her a Vlad3.



So let's start the Swans off with Caine's character jack: Ace. With the same base statline as a Hunter at the steeper points cost of 7, Ace has a lot of 'splainin to do, especially in a faction that already has tons of decent quality guns. With RAT 7 and True Sight, Ace's ability to hit is on the higher end of the faction (after accounting for a boost). At RNG 14 POW 12 and magical, Ace's Rune Shot Cannon is decent, but not unique or even particularly impressive in Cygnar. His Affinity [Caine] grants three different ammo types: Shadow Fire, Thunderbolt, and Trick Shot. Shadow Fire is good, but easily accessible through Taryn at 5 points cheaper. Thunderbolt is non-unique (Gun Mages), but can create unique opportunities at a 20'' threat (SPD 6 + RNG 14). Trick Shot is the real money maker on the list - essentially a Magic Bullet at POW 10. Solo sniping and Choir killing have never been easier. But is that worth 7 points? Infiltrate, the final rule on his card, gives Ace and its B2B controlling warcaster stealth for one round once per game. While that's helpful in keeping warcasters alive, I'm feel like I'm missing something with Ace. He lost Parry, Armor Piercing, and requires Caine to make use of his Rune Shot abilities. Without Caine, Ace is a glorified Charger. Overall, the overwhelming sense of mediocrity in every ability makes me feel a bit disappointed. Just another mediocre Cygnaran gun with more mediocre tricks. On a scale of Deliverer to a Knight Errant, I'd give him a Temple Flameguard.



Though it pains me to argue against Jason Flanzer, best Warmachine player in the world, I believe the Trench Buster is another mediocre Trencher release. First, let's discuss the problems inherent to 3 point solos. 3 point solos demand an extraordinary amount on a list for two primary reasons; first, the list is constructed out of the larger blocks of points based on units and warjacks/beasts, leaving a low number of points capable of being allocated to generalist solos. In most cases, those solos come in even blocks, filling out the ten-or-so points that normal lists leave open. This means that lists often don't naturally create room for a 3 point solo unless they are essential to the operation of other models in the list, i.e. Journeyman Warcasters and Dartan Vilmon. Generalist combat solos like the Trench Buster largely don't fit into the schema of those archetypes, neither supporting another unit well nor outputting enough damage output to make up for his points block. This will be fleshed out later. Second, 3 point solos cannot compete with the statlines of 4 point light warjacks/beasts. This point is specific towards combat solos that do not serve as support, i.e. Nicia, Trench Buster, and Yuri the Axe. Looking to their statlines and laundry list of abilities on the back of their cards, these solos are often forsaken for other choices. The difference lies in the efficiency of points cost. At 2 points, a solo represents a marginal investment in comparison to a unit or warjack/beast. Compare the output of a utility solo (say, Vassal or Hierophant) to half a unit of basic 4/6 infantry (3 TFG or 3 Zealots), and you'll find that in many cases there's a reasonable argument for the strength of the utility solo over said infantry. Now compare the output of a 2 point combat solo (say, Paladin or Errant Seneschal [even in this case the Seneschal provides support abilities, but bear with me]) to the same 3 TFG or 3 Zealots. In terms of raw output, a Paladin has the combined advantages of higher potential damage against single targets while restricting the types of attacks that can hurt him. On the other hand, the TFG require more attacks to actually kill, while also providing more swings in general. To a large extent, I'd argue those trade offs are largely balanced, making both choices relatively equivalent in the larger strategy of the game.

Unfortunately, the 1 point bump from 2 to 3 points creates a radically different comparison in value. That's because the difference of 1 point from 3 to 4 drastically increases the number of possible models and boxes a purchase creates. For example, the Trench Buster at 3 points is an 8 box, ARM 17 model. That means that a damage roll equaling 25 kills the solo, which is quite achievable by many models in the game (including the aforementioned Paladin). Simply put, the extra point you spent on the model's resiliency (boxes, ARM, tough, etc) is largely irrelevant in game terms. Now let's bump up the points cost to 4 and see what Cygnar has access to: a Charger or a min unit of Sword Knights. For one more point (or a third of the cost of the Trench Buster's value), you can get a Charger with +14 boxes. Similarly, the min unit of Sword Knights reduces the amount of boxes by -2, but creates 6 bodies that will (in most cases) require more attacks to destroy than the Trench Buster. Then you have to assess the Trencher Buster's actual combat efficacy. With a POW 13, POW 11, and a ranged POW 14 off of Assault, the Trench Buster's actual combat output isn't too shabby. But in comparison to the six swings of the Sword Knights or even the output of a focus-fueled Charger, the latter seem to hold more value than the former. Even when you have Flank [Trencher] (which now includes another 6+ points of models [or another Trencher Solo at +3]), the overall damage fails to be unique in comparison to higher damage infantry. Though I know the analogies aren't perfectly congruous or equivalent, I believe the point still stands: 3 point combat solos usually don't return their points in comparison to more expensive options.

If you buy that the damage output of the Trench Buster doens't make up for its points cost (or the potential points cost of having to bring more Trenchers for Flank), then the only area that can save it is in utility (Impervious Wall ala Vilmon, a Journeyman Warcaster's Focus efficiency and spell list, etc.). To that, the Trench Buster has two relevant rules: Girded and Smoke on the Cinder Bomb. The first truly provides value: not suffering blast damage is pretty relevant to the squishier side of the Cygnaran caster line up (Caine, Kara, Sturgis, Haley[ish]). It's also valuable when dealing with Cygnar's squishier infantry, such as Gun Mages and Trenchers that haven't Dug In or Smoke Walled (what?). Yet even being B2B for Girded also has a high opportunity cost, such as Fire, Electro Leap, slams, throws, and even Influence. Overall, Girded is a situationally beneficial rule. Smoke on the Cinder Bomb can be a blessing and a curse. A blessing in attempting to complete a cloud wall at the cost of a friendly model or Storm Pod. A curse in that it alters your order of activations when trying to shoot an enemy target to death (giving concealment to something you want to kill at a range generally isn't a good idea - though Cygnar does have many ranged options that ignore concealment).

But the real issue is that both the Trench Buster's damage output and utility are largely situational. The inability to know for certain what the role of a 3 point solo in every game is something that I'd personally be uncomfortable with during list design. When you buy Vilmon, you know for sure that he's providing your Paladins of the Wall Impervious Wall. When you buy a Knight Exemplar Seneschal, you know for sure that he will contest a zone for at least one turn. When you buy a Journeyman Warcaster, you know that he or she will consistently provide 3 extra focus to a 'jack every turn. It is that consistency in utility that dictates the cost and value of those models. When you look at a Trench Buster, Nicia, or even Yuri the Axe, you lose that certainty of value because they have to kill something to earn it back. That, in my mind, is automatically worse than a model that provides consistent value with lower over potential. So overall, on a scale of a Trencher Master Gunner to a Stormblade Captain, I'd give the Trench Buster a Gun Mage Captain Adept.

Seriously, I'd rather take Finn in most Trencher lists than a Trench Buster. That's saying something.

That was a long ramble. Next time we'll cover the REAL Swan releases: Hurricane and Haley3. Peace.

Reckoning Spoilers: Khador

Round two! Red threat this time.



So let's start with the bad news. The Mad Dog is essentially a Berserker 2.0 - and the Berserker was a pile of garbage. Usually, sprucing up a pile of garbage with a little pink ribbon and some perfume doesn't do anything but make the pile of garbage more expensive. In the Mad Dog's case, that pile of garbage got cheaper and remained a pile of garbage. So let's look at the base stats. SPD 4: garbage. MAT 5: garbage. DEF 11: garbage. Two non-reach POW 14s: garbage. STR 11: relatively poor (we'll discuss this later). ARM 18 and 31 boxes: meh. At a points cost of 5, you're allowed to have some below average stats. Unfortunately the Mad Dog is not a C student - he's a straight up flunker. But he's a flunker that tries REALLY hard.

Aggressive's free runs and charges is a fantastic rule. Crusher is also a fantastic rule - except this thing's got garbage stats. Boosted MAT 5's hit 15's on average, sure, but STR 11 is pretty low these days. Iron Zealed or Shield Walled Iron Fangs are the standard of competitive infantry these days, and even my Temple Flameguard are ARM 17 under Iron Zeal. Needing 8's or 7's to crack armor against infantry is nothing to write home about. Combine this with the low SPD 4 and the lack of immunity to free strikes and you're looking at a pretty fat 5 point dude that still struggles to kill the infantry he was designed to kill. Furthermore, think of all of the small-based infantry in the game that this guy wants to trample. There are very few that are slow enough or low damaging enough to allow the Mad Dog to consistently engage in optimal tramples. If anything, even the faster infantry that would get in range of him have probably finished their jobs, as this guy is definitely not fast enough to be your front line.

So now let's talk about the two rules that make this guy go from tryhard flunker to a true failure. Unstable is the epitome of bad as far as a warjack goes. I already abhor random elements in any of my lists, and this random element restrains this jack's output further than anything of his any other stats. Combine this with Jury-Rigged [SPD], and you have a jack that risks blowing up even when he tries to go from a terrible SPD to a mediocre one. So we've established that the jack is already poor at his intended role, and now we've established that he punishes his owner with a random negative effect whenever he tries to get better at it. Truly just garbage.

What makes his design even worse is that his only attempt at viability is through spamming. At 5 points, there is a tier list(s?) that makes him 4 points: Karchev's Iron Curtain. At 4 points, maybe you can justify the ARM and boxes. But then again, you can just take 6 point Juggernauts that have 3 extra boxes, 2 extra ARM, +1 MAT, and +4/+1 POW. So on a scale of a Mechanithrall to a Bane Rider, I'd give him a Scrapthrall.



So if the Mad Dog is a Berserker gone wrong (still wrong?), then the Rager is the essence of a Berserker gone right. The Rager keeps the basic stats of the Mad Dog, but gains a couple of important rules for the measly cost of 1 point. These two rules are Shield and Shield Guard. The increase from ARM 18 to ARM 20 is extremely significant, increasing the Rager's average amount of hits till death a much larger number than the Mad Dog. Taking that into account, the Rager's Shield Guard becomes that much stronger.

As the first faction model (with the Bokur being the only other model available to Khador) with Shield Guard, Rager will single-handedly change the face of Khadoran list building. The ability to place an extremely durable Shield Guard next to the fairly robust defensive stats of the Khadoran warcaster lineup will push your opponents away from ranged assassination. It also serves as a decent means of protecting important solos from damage, ranging from Andrei to even protecting Uhlans/Drakhuns. On a similar note, most Khadoran lists try to spend very little points in jacks, and this guy definitely replaces the solo Juggernauts taken simply to fill in the free points. The Rager is a decently exciting release that I expect will see much use. On a scale of a Ogrun Bokur to Lucant's Corollary, I give the Rager an Aspis.



Though a lot of people are calling this Privateer Press' apology to Khador, I've always had a deep and affectionate love for my Conquest. I even painted him with a little freehand Black Dragon icon, named him Ares, and still own him despite having sold my Khador collection three times. But I digress. Regardless of whether or not Victor was an apology, he's an extremely important addition to the Khadoran armory. Having the same base stats as Conquest at 1 point cheaper, Victor remains one of the most durable colossals in the game. POW 22 Fists will never be bad, and it's hard to argue with ARM 20 and 64 boxes.

But the main strength that differentiates Victor from any of her fellow warjacks is the Siege Mortar. Coming in at a massive RNG 20, humongous AoE 5, an on-the-high-end of respectable POW 15, and the always decent benefit of Arcing Fire, it receives these stats at the cost of two negatives: Inaccurate and Minimum Range [6]. With an already poor RAT 4, Inaccurate reducing Victor to RAT 0 is a blow, but not a nail in the coffin. It restricts Victor's POW 15 damage to other Colossals and low DEF heavies, though the AoE 5 POW 8 still allows it to be fairly versatile. It's also important to remember Khador's access to Stationary, allowing for fairly long range POW 15 bombardments. Thumbs up in my book of jank assassination opportunities.

On the other hand, Minimum Range [6] is a much larger problem. The first colossals all shared one similarity in common: ranged weapons that could wipe away infantry in front of them. For example, Judicator's high POW 9 Rocket Pods and high RAT 7 Flamethrowers would protect itself from being surrounded. Similarly, Conquest's potential five AoE's would save it from both its relatively low MAT and against high DEF infantry.  But Victor lacks this. With Minimum Range [6] and non-AoE secondary weapons, cheap infantry pins become a very viable option. Common strategies with Conquest are to place it as aggressively as possible, counting on its high ARM and boxes to deter any attempts at one turning it (of course, if you know they have a high average attempt at one turning it, you wouldn't do that). Victor lacks that option. It remains a late game, back line piece. To say that makes it a much weaker piece would be hyperbole, but it's important to remember that distinction between the two colossals. Victor serves a very different purpose from its first generation brethren.

In a faction that's known for being straightforward, any utility pieces make a huge difference in list creation - it generally increases the amount of playable units and strengths already competitive choices. Victor fulfills that role. The three different ammo types on the Siege Mortar provide different kinds of utility, two of which are unique to Victor within faction. Crater (rough terrain control) is one that Khador has had access to in the Gun Carriage's cannons and Irusk2. Being able to plant a fat 5'' AoE on top of a heavy warjack can really slow your opponent's advance to a crawl. Next up is the biggest one: Flare. Anyone that's played a Reckoner or Convergence can understand the raw power of being able to give an army wide +2 to hit buff against a few targets. Just think of MAT 8 Iron Fangs. Magic Ability 8 Outriders. RAT 7 Winterguard and RAT 9 Widowmakers. MAT 10 Uhlans on the charge. MAT 8 warjacks in Khador. The possibilities should have you Khadoran players salivating (other factions' players can continue along thinking that those stats are normal). Even self-buffing Victor's 2d3 Autocannon shots to RAT 6 is damn decent. With the relatively few to-hit buffs Khador has, I expect to see Victor create new opportunities for list building options and play lines (especially assassinations). Last but not least, the AoE 5 Fire is a personal favorite. Lobbing fiery shells into your opponent's back line from 20'' away is something I've grown accustomed to from Judicator and Redeemers. Not only does it gain you random value over the course of a game, but it also affords you the ability to threaten Iron Zealed and Shield Walled infantry. Of course, there's also the fantastic option of just trying to set your opponent's caster on fire.Take the fire portion with a grain of salt - I'm particularly fond of fire.

Overall, Victor's awesome. I might buy two and just run them with Harkevich with support. Victor opens a lot of doors for Khador, and I like the idea of a more supportive colossal. For those of you wondering why I didn't talk about the Autocannons, that's because they're basic as bread and butter. Fire them at Angels and laugh at the inherent anti-Legion tech. Fuck Legion. Yeah, I said it. On a scale of Drizzy to Based God, I'd give Victor a Yung Yeezy.

--------------------------------------

So I'm not going to talk about Zerkova2 because there's already a decent wall of text above. Her review will probably come along with Cygnar, as most of that article will be Haley3 and me laughing at the other releases they got - the perfect opportunity to slip in a decently long review of Zerkova2 and all (some) of her possibilities. As always, if you made it this far, thanks and comment on what you think below. Peace.

Reckoning Spoiler Critique: Cryx

With the spoiler gates open and the info streaming out, it's time to play critic. Today, we're gonna focus on Cryx.

So let's ignore how long it's been since I've posted something here and just jump on in!

  
Sepulcher follows the standard statline of the Kraken (including boxes) at 1 point cheaper, so it'll take some Dark Shroud and one of the many damage buffs (or ARM debuffs) Cryx casters have to bring it to true colossal levels of melee threat. As for its "tech," an extremely robust necrosurgeon isn't too bad, though the 5'' collection range on Body Snatcher is an order-of-activations issue if you're keeping the McThralls close by. The potential of creating Brute Thralls is currently unquantifiable in my head, as the ability for the Sepulcher to place them aggressively will be a game state situation more than anything else. Finally, the main focus of the Sepulcher is definitely in its firepower. With an AoE 5, Arcing Fire, Critical Paralysis unicorn stub, the Desolator creates a whole slew of ranged assassination potential that makes me nauseous. This is a faction with access to Puppet Strings. Privateer Press please. That, compounded with the obscenely strong Spiker guns, represent a truly dangerous ranged threat to nearly anything on the table. Some quick napkin math will show you what it does to a Angelius. Assume three focus and Puppet Strings to have a reasonable chance of garnering a crit on the Desolator. First, boost to hit Desolator, hitting with a crit. POW 13 + 2d6 = 3. Each Spiker then hits on a 3+, so assume all hit. Spending the two remaining focus for the extra ROF on each Spiker, you then get POW 13 + 2 (burst fire) + 2d6 = 5 x 4 shots = 20 average damage. 23 points of damage at range 11, and that's assuming the only buff you've given the Sepulcher is Puppet Strings. Everything else on the Sepulcher is just gravy after that. A great addition to Denny123 (debuffs galore), Skarre2 (Black Spot), and Goreshade3 (feat Siphon Bolt assassinations). On a scale of Conquest to Stormwall, I'd give it a Judicator.


Coming in at the standard turkey cost of 4 points, the Shrike is the Razorwing Griffon of Warmachine. I'm not sure how many Cryx players have ever felt they need more non-AoE infantry removal, so I'm gonna place this into the "playable but questionably so" territory of models. Though I will point out that at MAT 7, it performs it's job reasonably well - though the POW 11 might not be enough in the age of Iron Zeal Iron Fangs. A relatively uninteresting addition to Cryx IMO. On a scale of an Argus to a Gorax, I'd give it a Razor Worm.



With the straightforward purpose of being a front line soul collector, this 1 point cutie wish it had five boxes. That's not to say it's bad in its current form, but I see this solo being a fill in for lists with an extra point. Basically, build a cryx list. Does it have an extra point? Yes. Do you even McThrall? Yes? Scarlock Commander. No? Do you have anything that collects souls? No? You're playing Cryx, remember? Yes? This guy. You just took a ride on my stream of consciousness. But I digress. Fantastic (sometimes) as a filler, mediocre as a support solo, I probably would've given it ghost shield. This would've been fantastic for a Testament3 unit where you would have 5-9 of these dudes in a CMD 10 unit with him. On a scale of a Accretion Servitors to a Vassal Mechanik, I'd give it a Feralgeist.



Barruuuuum, baruuuuum, the ents march to war. I'm not entirely sure what shovels is supposed to be. He feels like an aggressive heavy, as Soul Drive, Counter Charge, and double POW 17's seem to indicate. With POW 17 and feedback on the Talons, the plethora of damage buffs in faction makes him one of the most potent non-colossal cryxian warjacks. Yet on the other hand, he has Dig In and Drag Below, making him a mobile, high DEF melee platform that wants to skirt the edges of zones, serving as a hard-to-remove contesting piece. Perhaps the most questionable part of his entire rules set is Special Issue [Terminus]. If anyone can draw connections between the two, let me know, because I'm baffled as to how this guy is Terminus' jack. Anyways, on a scale of Scourge of Heresy to the Avatar of Menoth, I'd give him a Fire of Salvation.



So let's get down to business. To destroy the Huns. Or not.

So let's start with her base stats. As as SPD 9 cavalry battle engine with flight, her ability to maneuver around the battlefield in order to dominate, fight, or just cast spells is one of the best in the game. The only way it could've been better is if she were on a large base - but the rule of cool for skeleton dragon things is 3good5me. At MAT 6 and a reach POW 13, her melee potential needs help in order to get anywhere. On the same note, her RAT 4 Spray 8 POW 10 with cont. corrosion also needs help. Her 15/16 statline leaves a lot to be desired, as she has no other real defensive mechanic on her card other than cull soul (if you can call that defensive). This is a caster that definitely waits on baited breath for the Inflictor's inevitable arrival. If we weren't playing Cryx, I'd discuss the CMD.

Her feat is elegantly simple: here's seven soul tokens. Soul Mastery multiplies each soul by 3 focus, whether it be in battlegroup allocation or spell casting. If you ever needed a 28 focus turn to help your self-esteem problems, Denny3's your girl. But on a more serious line, the most likely application of her feat is creating a turn where your army gains Battle. Assassination potential abounds with Scourge and 9 focus to a slew of Cryxian ranged jacks (*cough* Sepulcher). Another interesting part of Hell Gate is that the souls are converted into focus next turn via Cull Soul, affording you two back to back turns of enhanced focus output if you don't need all of it in one turn. It makes my heart happy to see powerful feats have different playlines, lines that require careful thought in order to maximize your resources to the fullest. Soul Weaver seems pretty circumstantial, and I very much doubt that it'll be essential to her play. It's definitely nice to have, but I wouldn't build a list around it.

Now for her spell list. Ghost Walk is always nice to have, allowing you to save Saxon for another list. Grave Wind will likely always be on her, though placing it on Nightmare could be pretty interesting if they don't have any upkeep removal and you have an Inflictor (or two). Mortality is the obvious money maker of her spell list, and I'm happy to see it on another caster other than Hunter's Grim. It's important to emphasize the Mortality isn't an upkeep, allowing her to debuff numerous units. Scourge allows for a lot of assassination plays, and I'm always fond of have those options on the table.

In comparison to other Cryxian casters (especially her other iterations), Denny3 definitely doesn't have the same feeling of raw, overwhelming power. What she brings is a more controlled and careful game, one of ranged control and attrition. Potential lists in my mind usually have a Sepulcher, Inflictor, Nyss, and McThrall packages for screening and melee threat. Granted, I'm not a Cryx player, but the playstyle seems to function much in the same line as Protectorate gun lines: you carefully peel the layers of your opponent's army while maintaining your lines better than they can, followed by a burst of power via your feat in order to bury them completely. Though she appeals to me, I'm doubtful she'll dethrone the more popular staples of Cryxian play. Overall, on a scale of Venethrax to Denny2, I'd give her a Skarre2.






BUT WE AIN'T DONE YET. I actually really like this tier list. Soulhunters are obviously powerful with Mortality, and they were one of my favorite cav units in the game already. Here's a sample list that I'd play:

Denny3 (+4)
- Sepulcher (18)
- Leviathan (9)
- Nightwretch (4)
Soulhunters [max] (9)
Soulhunters [max] (9)
Withershadow Combine (5)
= 54

Thanks for reading. As always, let me know what y'all think in the comments. Peace out, nerds.

X-Wing: The Phantom Menace

Look, it's mirrored!

One of the most frequent discussions I've had with X-Wing players is about Phantoms: are they balanced; will the meta ever move past their influence? So I've decided to take a stab at the debate.

The Base Chassis and Upgrades

Before we discuss anything regarding meta and the way Phantoms shape it, let's take a look at their base stats.


I will say, she is quite pretty.

The main feature is obvious: dat phat 4 attack dice. That's an immediate red flag with the Phantom's design - it shoved the standard of attack dice in the game by one. The 2 evade is fairly deceptive - with cloak it bumps to 4, also breaking the law of averages held by the game's other ships. The only issue with the base 2 evade stat is that without cloak, it leaves the 2 hull and 2 shields with much to desire - especially at the high base cost of 25 for the PS 3 Sigma. Everything revolves around being cloaked while shot, and without it the chassis folds up.

Overall, the Phantom chassis is a high risk, high reward ship. It emphasis raw offensive output while relying on outmaneuvering opponents in order to keep itself flying. That might've been the case, but there are still upgrades to take into account. We'll leave the EPT slot alone for now - you can always assume that a Phantom will take Veteran Instincts (VI) to win the Pilot Skill (PS) bid, and I'm going to discuss Veteran Instincts in depth to discuss my gripes with it. Let's move to the system upgrade slot. With Fire-Control System (FCS), the Phantom gains a substantial boost to its already impressive firepower.


Pew-pew.

Following that is the Crew upgrade slot, another extremely powerful slot with a wealth of options. Popular Whisper builds include Gunner in order to ensure she triggers her Pilot Trait, and the upgrade has great synergy with FCS. It also allows for other tech options, such as Tactician for control and Recon Specialist for defensive builds on Echo. Speaking of defensive builds...


Zoom-zoom.

...this is where most people believe Phantoms went all wrong. The common argument is that the upgrade provides too much in terms of action economy - and let me explain what I mean by that.

Action Economy, ACD, and its Outcomes

Disclaimer!: Before I start this section, I want to link Theorist's post on Phantoms. I in no way intend to manipulate or mismanage his ideas, so read this before I comment on it below. My main goal is have a foil for me to write against (luckily, it does differ from my own opinion). He's probably a better pilot than me, so I'd take my writings with more salt than his.

http://teamcovenant.com/theorist/2015/01/01/wave-after-wave-does-phantom-haunt-the-game/comment-page-1/#comments

When I use the term "action economy," I refer to the number of actions or action-like effects generated by a ship during a turn. Examples: a base line Gold Squadron Y-Wing with no upgrades has an action economy of 1, as it can take no more than 1 action per turn.



Autothrusters pls.

On the other hand, Soontir Fel with Push the Limit has an action economy of 3(-), as Soontir will perform two actions using his base action + PTL and is assigned a focus and a stress (hence the -). In Soontir's case, the (-) stress is largely mitigated by the strong green maneuvers on the dial. For other ships, a (-) would restrict far more mobility. The better the action economy, the better the ship. So now let's take a look at the action economy of a standard Whisper build.

Whisper (32) + VI (1) + ACD (4) + FCS (2) = 39

This build, assuming optimal conditions, has an action economy of 4(+) or 5(+). 1. Base action. 2. FCS target lock. 3. Cloak from ACD. 4. Whisper's pilot ability. 5. If Whisper decloaked, consider the movement as a barrel roll or a boost action. The (+) is in recognition of the cloak's additional benefit of adding evade dice, as well as its additional benefit for next turn's movement. In optimal circumstances, Whisper is the most action efficient ship in the game, and ACD has a large hand in this laudable title. Admittedly, ACD essentially grants 2(+) actions with no downside other than its moderately expensive points cost. Theorist of Team Covenant largely believes the combination of high maneuverability, high damage, and high evasion combines to create "an almost broken ship."

My issue with Theorist's critique is that the meta is currently dominated by ships that have high maneuverability, high damage, and high evasion: the large ship brigade with Fat Han, RAC City (Rear Admiral Chiraneau), and Super Dash. To say that those ships don't also create frustrating decisions for small ship squadrons would be hypocrisy. If anything else has helped in pushing out swarms and 4 ship rebel squadrons out of the meta, the release of the YT-2400 and the Decimator must be taken into account as well. In fact, the listed ships play into PS bidding better than Phantoms can, sacrificing a small portion of damage to increase their hull, shields, and a turret - increasing ease of play by great margins. They can largely be considered the natural counter to Phantoms while still being largely playable against a majority of the squadrons in the game. At the very least, the Phantom requires continuous thought and effort in its play - a good Phantom pilot is thinking at least a turn ahead for the purposes of decloaking and facing.

So while I'm inclined to agree that the Phantom undoubtedly shattered the metas previous to it while currently molding the meta into high PS turrets for safety against its predations, I definitely disagree with Theorist's belief that the Phantom is the most "severely predatory." I also disagree that ACD needs to be changed or attacked directly by some new modification or upgrade. Phantoms already have a natural counter that is rapidly gaining (or regaining, in Fat Han's case) traction in the meta: high PS large ships with turrets. If I were to change the Phantom, I would look to two areas: the Cloak mechanic and PS bidding. I believe Fantasy Flight Games took the idea of "PS matters" and executed it quite poorly, resulting in the large ship dominated meta we're currently experiencing. The Cloak mechanic was designed with this mission in mind, and it suffers on whole because of it.

Cloak



Still better than Star Trek: Attack Wing.


Way better than the Proximity Mine/Proton bomb pack.

The cloak mechanic is defunct in two ways. First, the in-game cloak mechanic creates negative player experiences (NPEs) for both players. The ability for a seasoned Phantom player to outmaneuver and destroy a low PS squadron leaves little room for meaningful interaction for an opponent. And even if the opponent manages to take down the Phantom while it's cloaked and has focus/evade tokens, the Phantom player receives the short stick of poor evade dice rolls. The mechanic cheapens the decision making on both sides. The Phantom player should easily outmaneuver the other ships, and just needs to focus fire. The other player is forced to make sub-optimal movement decisions in order to get shots, which will largely be ineffective against the raw power of 4 evade dice.

Now let's look at the other side of this - what happens when the Phantom player doesn't have the higher PS. Let's take two common examples of high PS ships that the Phantom traditionally has trouble against: PS 11 Fat Han and PS 10 RAC, both of which have VI, engine upgrades, and Luke Skywalker/Gunner (respectively). A Phantom player running Whisper at PS 9 and ACD must move before the two ships and fire after them. On average, the Phantom takes 1-2 damage a turn, granting that the Phantom took an evade action. There's also no guarantee of a shot, as the large ships may have been able to dodge the arc of the Phantom. This means that almost every upgrade the Phantom player purchased is rendered useless by lower PS. And without cloak to supplement its defense, the Phantom falls woefully short of expectations. Even when the Phantom gets a shot, the high shield and hull (not to mention defensive upgrades like C3P0 and Ysanne Isard) renders the overall impact of the shot to a minimum. Overall, the Phantom player receives few meaningful choices in the game - probability dictates that the Phantom dies in 2-3 turns of shooting, with 2 being on the more likely end of the spectrum.

Essentially, cloak is unbalanced at its core when it comes to game play purposes. When a Phantom gets the PS advantage with Cloak and ACD, it becomes a ship more powerful than its points total. When a a Phantom doesn't get the PS advantage, it becomes a ship far less powerful than its points total. What mostly concerns me is that the biggest factor that dictates the Phantom's strength doesn't come from game play - it comes from list building.

Pilot Skill Bidding (or, why Veteran Instincts was a terrible mistake of a card)


It's always the simple things.

Having established the unbalanced qualities of the Phantom's base statline, and having established the unbalanced qualities of cloak, we've finally arrived at what is my biggest concern for the game: Pilot Skill. In the above examples, we've seen how much the PS dictates the efficacy of a Phantom. What the above examples fail to show are the ways Phantoms (and the collective concern over Pilot Skill) affects the choices players make before they even start playing. Actually, affects poorly reflects how I feel about this. Strangles. That's the word.

So before you say, "Brandon, k-dramas have made you a bit too melodramatic," let me explain it. Pre-Phantom era, the number of ships running VI was fairly low. The number of squadrons comprised of character ships was also low. But PS still mattered. The number of relevant PS "brackets" settled in around 4: PS 1-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9+. There would be Academy Pilot TIE Fighters at PS 1, Blue Squadron B-Wings at PS 2,  Dagger Squadron, Obsidian Squadron TIE Fighters meta'd against the former two at PS 3, B-Wings meta'd against other rebel squadrons and Obsidians at PS 4, Biggs sitting pretty with his moustache at PS 5, and so on and so forth. Then you had the special picks players wanted to fly out of personal preference sitting at PS 6-8, ranging from Luke Skywalker and Chewbacca to Howlrunner and Boba Fett. Finally, you had the biggest ballers on the block sitting at PS 9: Soontir Fel always arc dodging when moving last, and we all knew that Han shot first, in the movies or on the table.

Phantoms changed all of that. Today, there's only one bracket of pilot skills - 8, 9, and 10+. PS 8 only remains on that list because it beats out Super Dash builds without VI. PS 9 is the key number, as it's where Phantoms cap out on PS (Whisper + VI). This is the Eye of Terror, the hurricane's eyewall, the epicenter of the PS quake. Anything below this suffers huge disadvantages against Phantoms. Anything tied with this has to play an extremely difficult game of cat and mouse against or with the Phantom. Anything above this has a massive advantage over the Phantom, dictating the course of the game and forcing the Phantom player into a submissive position where they take evades and skirt the edge of engagement, waiting for the turn they need the 4 attack dice to make a difference.

So why is this massive shift towards the upper end of the PS bracket so pernicious to the health of the meta? The first thing it does is immediately restrict the number of playable ships. Lower PS ships like Garven Dreis, Tarn Mison, Nera Dantels, Dutch, Leebo (is my point made yet?), Blount, Colonel Vessery , and the whole slew of assorted TIE Intercepters go from marginal competitive play-ability to nearly zero. Then we look at the upper end of the spectrum. Baseline PS 7, 8, and 9 ships then have their options reduced greatly because of the existence of Veteran Instincts. When list building, looming threat of Phantoms encourages players to take the safe option of VI over most other EPTs. This means that ships that are on the periphery of playable (say, for example, Rexlar Brath at PS 8), whose Pilot Abilities require a little nudge from an upgrade (say, an offensive upgrade like predator so that Rexlar doesn't have to spend his focus to hit so that he can use it for his ability) become immediately unplayable because they can't operate without VI to jump the Phantom threat. It also pushes the meta towards high PS ships with built in offensive Pilot Abilities, such as RAC and Fat Han. RAC's inherent marksmanship at PS10 (w/VI) makes him a natural Phantom hunter. And though Han's ability doesn't technically increase the raw output of his attacks, it does allow a player to mitigate outliers or shoot for them, overall increasing the quality of attacks over the course of a game. The maneuverability of Phantoms also lends itself towards a more turret oriented meta, and I'll eventually post about that subject altogether.

This has even further repercussions. The EPT slot has a wide range of interesting and powerful choices. But because of Phantoms and the existence of VI, the list of playable EPTs also becomes limited. Players not only lose options in terms of playable ships, but lose many viable builds in the EPT. The issue emphasizes itself when strong X-Wing players in my meta have to ask whether or not taking Predator Fat Han is too greedy of a choice. Many times the discussion ends with a nod towards a VI Fat Han build, as the risk of losing initiative to a competent Whisper player would be too great. This creates a double bind for FFG's design teams. Either they have to make EPT options so strong as to be worth the risk over VI, or they lock themselves out of EPT's and are forced to look elsewhere for further design space.

But what makes this entire part of the article so frustrating is that every problem above lacks any direct strategy or tactics related to actual in game play. This is a problem that's largely decided and created during the squadron building process. This means that it's a mechanic that forcibly alters the list of things players should play for a competitive environment, while being a generally negative player experience when played optimally with and against.

Solutions


Yes, this article does end. 

So now that I've spent a decent amount of time ranting, here's what I would propose on how to fix the problem. I don't like the one-upsmanship of releasing cards to directly counter other cards, so I believe Errata should be the way to change Phantoms.

1. Remove Veteran instincts from the game. [greatly weakens Phantoms by expanding the roster of ships that can move after them and fire before them]

I believe this would create a massive change in the meta. First, it alleviates the current stranglehold Phantoms have on the upper half of the Pilots in the game by making their PS cap a hard 7. Second, it alleviates the current stranglehold VI has on the EPT slot, affording players a wider diversity of options in the squad building process. It also means that when you pay for a pilot's PS, you know exactly what you're getting, and how it'll match up against other pilots. It's also quite easy to do: ban the damn card and be done with it.

2. Change the Cloak mechanic by releasing an updated Reference Card. Remove the +2 evade dice. Bump down the base attack value of a Phantom to 3. Bump up the base agility value of a Phantom to 3. Alter points on ACD to reflect that it only establishes a movement bonus.

This would allow the Phantom to survive as a competitive choice without the extremely overbearing position it has on the meta right now. Granted, this is the least likely of any Phantom fix to ever occur, as this would require either the reprinting of numerous cards or the largest non-card printed errata block I've ever seen in a game.

So here we are at the end of a massive block of text. For those who journeyed through it, thanks for reading. For those who TL;DR'd, I don't blame you. But please, let me know what you think on the topic by commenting.

Till next time,

Brandon

Warmachine/Hordes - Masters 2015 and Active Duty Roster

A Summary of Change

So before I get into the nitty-gritty and start the contentious bits, here's a quick rundown of what really changed in Masters from 2014-15:

1. Reduction of the number of total scenarios from 12 to 8.

2. Two list format instead of three (AMEN).

3. 50% of all possible scenarios now have Killbox, an increase from previous editions. [edit: actually, 3/6 scenarios had killbox in 2014, so the percentage remains the same. Thanks to Trevor.]

4. Players select an objective during army construction. Objectives give different buffs.

5. Many scenarios have changed. I'll discuss this in depth later in the article.

6. Active Duty Roster. Four warcasters/warlocks are selected from each faction for a time span running from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2015. If a player selects two of the four warcasters/warlocks on Active Duty when building army lists, that player receives the special rule "Vanguard." This rule allows the player to take 20 points of specialists for each army list. A current question that I have (which may or may not have already been answered on PP's main forums) is whether or not you can select another objective for your specialists. I'm going to have a section discussing this alone. So let's get to it.

The Good

Reducing the number of possible scenarios is a welcome change, alleviating numerous problems from previous SR packets. First, it lessens the burden of the already massive knowledge base that a competitive Warmachine player needs to know. Second, it makes practicing scenario packets easier, as there's just less scenarios to learn. Finally, it (hopefully) gives PP more time to playtest them all, diminishing the likelihood of unbalanced or odd scenarios (Fire Support 2014, I'm looking at you).

Another change I'm particularly fond of is the change from a three list format to a two list format. The three list Masters format always rubbed me as a bit like a pre-game "rock, paper scissors" match where someone could gain a large advantage by outguessing an opponent. It spread list building resources thin and placed more strain on character restrictions, moving players towards tailoring lists to beat certain match ups, rather than moving them towards more generalist list builds. Three list formats created a game exterior to gameplay, and I find in-game decision making to be far more valuable than exterior decisions. So a great deal of thanks to PP for that change.

The Meh

Though increasing the likelihood of Killbox makes me cringe as a Protectorate player, I don't find this change to be particularly good or bad. What I dislike is the continuous refusal to bend or bow to whether or not Killbox should be in the packet at all. My preference always leans towards less randomization - make it in every scenario or put it out to pasture. I'm tired of looking across the table at Tom Guan's Mortenebra list and having the scenario do a coin flip for me; i.e. "Is there a turn two assassination?: YES/NO."

As for the objectives, I'm fairly neutral to them except Arcane Wonder. Given that objectives may have granted benefits depending on the scenario, I find giving players a decision preferential. However, I'm unsure as to why these bonuses have to exist at all. To make the game more interesting? To increase list building complexity? I don't know the justification, and I won't waste my time trying to figure it out to attack or defend PP. At the end of the day, I'm just sad that they gave a buff to Deneghra1.

The Scenarios

Quick disclaimer - I view things from a Protectorate perspective (my army is slow and doesn't change its X axis position often).

1. Destruction: Still boring. Sure, the objectives changed, but I think they'll largely be irrelevant in this scenario.

2. Two Fronts: I dislike scenarios with Friendly Zone: Dominate = 1 CP, as it encourages castling and non-aggressive play (especially if terrain allows for a safe zone for the opposing warcaster/warlock), but I suppose this scenario is fine.

3. Close Quarters: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

4. Fire Support: The change to off center the flags and make the closer one friendly was a good change. It means that players can deploy with an offensive or defensive posture for controlling scenario elements. For example, if I were playing my Hierarch Severius list on this scenario, I would deploy judicator centered with a lean towards my friendly flag. Severius and the Reckoner would also deploy on that side to aid in contesting. My TFG would deploy on the right flank to contest the enemy flag and screen the Judicator as it moves up to help contest my friendly flag. Unlike the Friendly Zone: Dominate = 1 CP of Two Fronts, the flags are positioned too far up to safely dominate without aggressive play, encouraging engagement while giving players an important decision during deployment.

5. Incoming: See Two Fronts, then add a complaint that the zones are extremely far apart, granting advantages to faster factions that don't require close support elements.

6. Incursion: Now this is a weird one. While I like that the random element of removing a flag is gone, the inclusion of three flags means that its likely both players will be scoring points at the same time, and score those points early on. The likelihood of either force being capable of contesting or controlling all flags seems pretty low, even at 50 points. The ability for a player to secure the points needed to pressure a next turn win after scoring an early point off of one of the flags creates an artificial tempo to the game - and I don't think I like that.

7. Outflank: This is my favorite scenario out of the packet. Though easy to contest, the openness of the scenario allows players to make extremely meaningful decisions during deployment. Choosing to commit to a zone, backing out of a zone, ceding a zone - all of these are options that don't run the risk of an opponent physically blocking contesting models from running in, unlike many box zone scenarios. This classic holds true, and I'm glad PP kept it.

8. Recon: This scenario is busy. Much too busy. I'll devote a post to this later on, as this one bears a lot of play testing.

Active Duty Roster

Aight, we're going deep on this one boys. We've gotta rate the choices of who made the cut as Immoren's least desired (i.e. least played at events). So who gets to join the Vanguard?

Cygnarly

- Constance Blaize: Laughable. No amount of specialists can save her from sinful suckage.

- Captain Jeremiah Kraye: Viable, but I don't envision specialists actually helping him much.

- Commander Adept Nemo1: Also viable. Perhaps specialists allow him to swap a Stormwall (19) for a heavy and infantry of some kind? The real issue is that he wasn't much too viable in the first place.

- Commander Coleman Stryker1: Very viable. See the Nemo analysis.

Then the next question you have to ask is whether or not two of these four play nicely with each other. After that, you have to ask whether or not the benefit of Vanguard is enough to choose that pairing over other pairings of warcasters in the faction. Unfortunately for ya'll, I cheated and will continue to cheat in my analysis of the Active Duty Roster. I skipped step one because I didn't see Haley2 and moved on to the next faction.

The Best

- Reznik2, Wrath of Ages: Viable(?). Though this guy still makes me sad, he isn't in the Constance tier. Specialists might actually allow him to drop against Cryx and another infantry faction such as Khador, as you can take the optimal infantry package against the threat. Against Cryx you can take Steelhead Halberdiers and Attendant Priest (8) with Zealots and UA (8). Against Khador, you can run TFG and UA (8) with a Reckoner (8). The packages are quite flexible, especially if the mainboard runs the Avatar, standard 'jack support, and Tristan + Redeemer package. This is something I'm planning on testing with...

- Hierarch Severius2: I'll just leave this for another post.

- Testament of Menoth (awkward, adding a number doesn't make sense here): Viable, but I don't like him in this meta. Too many things RFP/steal souls these days. His defensive stats are rather lack luster for someone who wants to be 10'' away from the front lines. I don't think highly of him.

- Thyra1, Flame of Sorrow: Laughable. See Constance Blaize.

Altogether, the only pairing I find interesting is Reznik2 and Hierarch Severius. Both can benefit greatly from specialists, as Reznik2 can swap massive infantry packages and Severius2 can drop the Judicator for a heavy kit. My only worry is that they have a similar set of match ups, but I need more time to fully develop this idea.

Khador

I'm just gonna say it. The only list that interests me is Butcher1, and since I don't see a pair for him in Strakhov, Zerkova, or Harkevich, I'm just gonna let this one go.

Cryx (or, the real best)

Since everything is pretty good in Cryx, you can do whatever you want and still win. Follow your heart. Just practice it.

Angry Angry Elves

I wouldn't play Retribution without Vyros2 or Issyria. Sorry I'm not sorry.

CoC

Lucant.

Mercenaries

I almost wrote a longer section for this, but halfway through I deleted it when I realized that mercs don't really need specialists. All of their army lists are essentially built for you by PP. Granted, you can swap out one unit for another, but the unit choices are largely irrelevant in my mind. Mercs are a Galleon or Earthbreaker/Cephalyx pair. Exulon isn't on that list, and neither list really needs specialists anyways.

Trollbloods

I can't write about these guys. I have little experience with Trolls, and they hold my worst win/loss record. Mostly thanks to JFlanz.

Circle of Bradigus (or, also the real best)

See title.

Skorne

Morghoul2 and Naaresh1 can go play with Thyra1 and Constance1, so I'm going to skip to the relevant portion.

Hexeris1 and Mordikaar1 can be a good pairing. Hexeris covers Khador, Cryx, Menoth (tenatively), and most other infantry drops. Mordikaar can be built to handle armor and Legion. Though I'm no expert in mortitheurgy, I'm tentatively excited to see a strong Skorne player try this pairing.

Legion (Basic)

No Vayl2. No Saeryn1. No Absylonia2. No Lylyth2 or 3. I'm all for creativity, but unless your name is Jason Flanzer, I'd just leave this alone.

Minions

PP should've put the whole faction here, because these dudes are definitely missing from tournament data.

On the whole, I think Active Duty Roster has a lot of potential for good and bad. It largely depends on how much you trust PP. Here's what they claim Active Duty Roster will do:

"To further distinguish the gameplay experience, we wanted Masters to promote and incentivize creative list building using as much of a faction’s roster as possible, but we didn’t want to penalize anyone who preferred to use their traditional lists.

"This new rule presents an exciting option for competitive players and list builders. You can stick with what you know and what has produced proven results in the past, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. If you are inclined to experiment with your faction, however, you now have a powerful tool to do so. Twenty points of specialists, over a third of your army list, is nothing to sneeze at. With that many points of flexibility, a player can cover a great many of an original list’s weaknesses or further augment that list’s strengths."

I think the above is largely true for individuals that will actively choose to go against the current meta. It will provide fun and interesting ways to create lists, and for that reason alone, I'm all aboard. Despite the somewhat tongue-in-cheek analysis above, the Active Duty Roster actually makes me quite happy with Masters 2015. PP created a system that opens the doors more innovation, and I think it will prove to be affect the game in a positive way.

This all comes with one caveat: PP has to be very careful as to what makes the Active Duty Roster at the same time. Some warcasters and warlocks must never be allowed to get on the roster - Haley2, Morvahna2, and Harbinger immediately come to mind. On a similar note, therein lies another danger: new releases being placed immediately on the roster can be very dangerous to the balance of the format. Play testing and design now have to think of how a new warcaster or warlock affects the current Active Duty Roster for the season.

In Closing

Overall, I'm satisfied with Masters 2015. Not happy. Not sad. Not even mad. Just satisfied. Nothing too crazy has happened (yet), and the Active Duty Roster actually worked out in my favor (for now). So now that you know how I feel about it, I'd like to know your opinions on anything and everything. Do you like Active Duty Roster? What pairings and lists do you believe are viable? How do you feel about the objectives? Scenarios? Let me know.

Brandon

Opening Remarks

Hello, World!

My name is Brandon Cating, a gamer with strong opinions on popular games ranging from  table top miniature games such as Star Wars: X-Wing and Warmachine/Hordes to video games like League of Legends and Hearthstone. I'm beginning this blog for three reasons. Firstly, typing ideas provides moments of more concentrated reflection, which I hope will lead to further insights and discoveries. Secondly, I hope to engage like-minded and similarly interested individuals in discourse through this blog. Lastly, I hope to rectify my lack of engagement with the competitive gaming communities on the internet. As a prominent player in the Warmachine/Hordes community (#humblebrag), I've remained silent on most issues. That ends now.

So why read this blog? What are my credentials as a competitive gamer? Why feed my burgeoning ego? Continuing the not-so-humble bragging, I've been a long-time competitive gamer. Like many other tabletop gamers, I began my road to nerd-dom as a wide-eyed child entering the doors of a Games Workshop. From there, I started playing Magic: The Gathering competitively at the age of 14, devoting a lot of time and energy to the game from the Timespiral-Lorwyn block till the rotation of Scars of Mirrodin. A lot of my competitive mentality arose from those days competing for cash prize FNMs. It wasn't long before my GW history caught up with me, and a close group of friends taught me how to play 7th edition Warhammer Fantasy. Those friends trained the young me to be (as they still fondly joke) a "cold-blooded killer" in gaming. With army choices like Daemons of Chaos, Vampire Counts, and Skaven, it wasn't long before I created a lineage of power-gaming that entailed many long hours of poring over rulebooks and army codices in order to understand list building strategies and abusing poorly written rules. It wasn't long before the golden days of 7th edition (rest in pepperonis) faded into the casual-catering abomination of 8th edition. With that, I needed a new outlet for my competitive spirit, and my good friend, Travis, was more than willing to teach me how to play Warmachine.

And the rest is history. I spent about a year playing Warmachine within my local meta before I decided to start travelling to large conventions to play in large tournaments. I've achieved some notable successes. During my first year of travel in 2013, I took second place in the Iron Gauntlet qualifier, losing to Keith Christianson in the first game Privateer Press live-streamed. I went on to place fourth in the Iron Gauntlet 2014 Invitational, losing to Jason Watt in the semi-finals.  I've taken two second place finishes at Warmachine qualifiers, including the Las Vegas Open 2014 and Store Wars 2014 - the latter of which qualified me for the Warmachine Weekend 2014 Invitational which would then become my first major tournament win. I recently started playing X-Wing in the summer of 2014 and have started playing in local tournaments fairly recently, and have yet to travel to any regional events.

As for the video game side, I've been playing video games since I was a wee-lad. My favorite game is Final Fantasy Tactics (PS1, now known as The Lion's War). A majority of my early gaming revolved around Starcraft and Warcraft III, the latter dealing with the early MOBAs such as Aeon of Strife and DoTA: Allstars. I primarily play FPS, MOBAs, RTS, and non-MMO RPGs. As for League of Legends, I've been playing since Season 2. My highest rank was Diamond 3 during the most recent season, and I'm hoping to rise to a high diamond this year. Most of my posts on video games will likely revolve around LoL and Hearthstone.

As the blog's name suggests, I'm a highly critical and unabashedly opinionated gamer that believes you can take little toy soldiers and space ships seriously while still enjoying the game. Though at times it may sound like I'm attacking or discrediting a game, please keep in mind I only do so because I truly love this hobby.

Sincerely,

Brandon Cating