|
C3G Legacy Library This is the archive for all the designs released in the original era of C3G. Feel free to post any figure specific questions in their individual books. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#121
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
I agree with your assessment of moving the coin flip. That didn't occur to me.
I'm not sure where I stand on the 200 vs 160 though. I thought 180 sounded about right thematically but I will need to sleep on it. Would I want it to be everything I love...sure...but that's just not realistic so I'm going to focus on finding things that will make me unhappy and work on fixing those. |
#122
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Public Testing could prove otherwise, but I figured starting at 200 would work, and hopefully that remains the max and potentially go down from there. At 180-190 he felt strong but not unbeatable.
|
#123
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
I was wondering about the timing of the coin flip before and trying to figure out just how it would impact a game flipping between the two turns. I'm glad it came up during the initial and I'm okay with your suggested change. I'm with Japes on not sure how I feel about him coming in at the 190-200 point range. My initial though is that I would like to see him come in a little lower than that. Leadership type powers often raise a figures cost up beyond where they should fall from a physical threat stand point so I expect him to come in much higher than his previous card, but 200 seems like a big jump.
The +1 to attack for the bonded criminal giving you 6 att. of 4 when bonding with Doc Ock is a bit of a concern as it relates to the Lex Corp. Security. I feel he could overshadow them quite a bit and potentially make them fade away as a criminal faction hub. What did you think about the defense side of things? Was it easy to keep an ally around so that Two-face could not be targeted? Did you find yourself wanting to target Two-Face but not allowed to? |
#124
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
200 is the max I could possibly see him settling at. I feel 180, but more likely 190, could be his final cost as-is. It really will depend on the public tests, as others will likely come up with better strategies with and against him to better define his true value. The fact that he is in the thick of it, with 4 life and 4 defense and used as an OM hub, I can certainly see him being exposed as a less costly unit as testing continues.
I feel drafting Led Corp Security is still a fine option. In fact, drafting them as a backup for Two-Face isn't a bad plan. Roll with Two-Face on the front lines until you get the Good Side up, which will give the +1 defense bonus to those around him, then start using the Lex Corp for the attack bonus. The defense side of things is certainly useful. For his allies, it's always nice to have added defense to roll. For Two-Face, it's essential to his long term survival. So you'll certainly feel more relaxed when it's Good Side up. It's a nice trade off for sure. I wouldn't be disappointed to drop the attack from Two-Face while it's on Good Side up to shed a little bit of points, as I feel Good Side offers enough value just keeping him and his allies alive, so the loss of a single attack of 4 wouldn't be a huge bummer. It'd also likely feel a bit more thematic if he forgoes his attack. I'd say it was relatively easy to keep an ally around to keep him safe. The ones with range such as Black Tarantula, certainly make it easier(as well as the nice healing bonus once per round for Two-Face). Though, there were definitely times Two-Face had to retreat to get back to another ally if his current one was about to die. In the last game I definitely put more of a focus on trying to eliminate Two-Face sooner rather than later, even giving up an attack with Gamora to wait out Two-Face's flips to eventually be able to attack. It's a mind game really. As the opponent, you want to take out the leader as quickly as possible, but with Two-Face's flips you have to wait for an opening. So you have to pick your spots and decide where to put your focus and try not to let the other offensive threats Two-Face is throwing at you distract you for too long thus being able to get to Two-Face for an attack if it lands Scarred Side up. On Two-Face's end, Good Side is definitely nice, and a result of Scarred Side when you know the threat is coming on the opponent's next turn, you're doing everything you can to use your additional offensive power to take out that threat. |
#125
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Great summary Ark. At first I was thinking I wouldn't like the no attack version but after your explanation I think I'd be OK dropping his attack on the good side to lower his points without it feeling like I'm losing something. It actually feels a little thematic in that he doesn't attack but that doesn't mean his cohorts are just going to sit around and respect his coin...especially guys like Black Tarantula.
Would I want it to be everything I love...sure...but that's just not realistic so I'm going to focus on finding things that will make me unhappy and work on fixing those. |
#126
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Either option going forward works for me. I agree that 200 is the highest his cost should go.
C3G: Taking Superheroes to a Whole New Level! C3V: The Legacy of Classic 'Scape! Viegon & Family's Classic Customs, Maps, and Battlefield Videos. Enjoy App Games? Try A Day in the Life of Atlas! |
#127
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Thanks for the in depth look Arkham.
|
#128
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
We'll add in:
Quote:
With that being the case, the wording above clarifies it only applies when taking a turn with Chaotic Leadership. Points wise, I'm thinking 170 is a good place to start Public Testing with that change. SP updated. |
#129
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Vote for Public Playtesting)
Umm, there is a 24 hour breathing period before you can propose to move to public testing.
Plus how often would that change have effected your games? 'cause to me it doesn't look like it would have affected it much, so I not really see the 170 points. C3G: Books & Online Figure Request
--------------------------------------- Family: Classic Customs & Maps -------------------------------- My SuperScape Maps |
#130
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Thanks for kindly pointing that out. I'm always forgetting those.
I was actually about to pull it because I'd like to run a vote and see what the general consensus is on adding in the no attack clause for lower points vs. going with 190-200 and keeping it as it were, and letting playtesting decide the final cost. As for what affect it would have had on the respective games, these were the Good Side attack wounds caused: Game 1: (loss) R1T3: 3 wounds on Star-Lord(rolled 5 skulls). (height) Game 2: (win) R3T3: 1 wound on Star-Lord. (height) Game 3: (win) R4T3: 2 wounds on Gamora. Game 4: (loss) R2T1: 1 wound on Deadpool. R2T3: 3 wounds on Deadpool(botched defense), kills him. Let me know what everyone's preferred route to take is. @TrollBrute @johnny139 @Viegon @Yodaking @japes @Zettian Juggernaut @Tornado Last edited by Arkham; September 26th, 2016 at 03:28 PM. |
#131
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
Quote:
From a balance perspective, I think dropping his attack from the scarred side would be the better option. Then when Doc Ock is attacking with 4 att. at +1, you don't also get two more att. of 4 from him. When boosting defense though, he lays downs some 'cover fire' and unloads his double att. of 4. I'm starting to think he might be better with the range of his bonding being clear sight, but then he does not take a turn in addition to the bonding. That gives you OM flex for a criminal faction, while boosting the att. by 1 50% of the time and def. by 1 (or 2?) 50% of the time. Maybe have the coin flip after taking a bonded turn, so that using Two-face's double att. would allow you to keep the def. bonus going for a while if you needed it and taking advantage of the +1 bonus can lead to the bonus going away. |
#132
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Book of Two-Face (II) (Initial Playtesting)
I may be overestimating his cost a bit. He went 1-1 at 180. Won 1 at 185. Lost 1 at 190. We could probably go into Public Playtesting at 180 without any changes, and judge from there. He's a swingy design at his core due to the 50/50 chance factor throughout the game. So big wins and big losses are to be expected, and that's what we've gotten 3 out of 4 games, and then a somewhat closer loss.
So the 200 may be a bit premature. We should probably stick to 180 going into Public, then let those 6-8 games better dictate where he falls. It's also give us a bigger picture on how much his Good Side attacks really matter. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Book of Two-Face | Hahma | C3G Legacy Library | 42 | February 10th, 2022 12:21 PM |
Face book seller. | edilsonm | Sales and Trades | 0 | June 6th, 2016 11:04 AM |
I'll rok ur face!!!! | frenchfriedfarts | General | 0 | November 2nd, 2007 11:42 PM |