C3G Playtesting FAQs

[IAmBatman]

I honestly don't know all together. I think it would take an exploratory committee and hours of cross-game playtesting to really determine what all needed to be done.
Death Knights stick out like a sore thumb, as do auto destroy powers on cheap units like Deadeye Dan and Runa, and Treasure Glyphs on high costed units, but that's just the stuff that sticks out. I haven't played the two games together enough to have a familiarity for any other compatibility issues that might exist.
I'm much more worried about the potential issues with our point system than trying to figure out what all it would take to make the two games compatible, though.

[quozl]

Easy fixes:

Insta-kill powers and Death Knights' Ruthless Bonding don't work on figures with Superstrength. Treasure glyphs are treated like C3G Equipment glyphs.

Done! Next?

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by johnny139

I don't think anyone is expecting 1:1 balance. There is no such thing. Some armies are just better than others, even in the official game. 180 points of Q9 is better than 225 points of Jotun. Raelin at 80 is a better draft than most higher prices figures.

The Death Knights are a good example. I don't expect anyone to extensively test all C3G units to make sure that there will be NO PROBLEMS whatsoever with compatability. I accept that fact that, generally, C3G units can't beat their points in Stingers and Linesmen. That's just how it goes.

But what I am concerned about is dropping it altogether. For example, let's say someone designs Ares as a Relentless Warlord. I would hope he's tested in mind with bonding, be it with the Romans or with the Death Knights. If not, he might be WAY unbalanced. As someone interested in mixing, that would really put a damper on things for me.

I know that C3G is "it's own game," but the fact is, it uses HeroScape mechanics and works with HeroScape units and plays on HeroScape maps. I don't mind a bit of wonkiness when I mix, but I don't want the entire system to break down.

But Wolverine and Doomsday weren't tested with Death Knights in mind and I think you could readily argue that they're WAY unbalanced. So hasn't this already occurred?
If I help create a Relentless Warlord, I'll want to make sure he's tested with and compatible with C3G stuff, just like with any other C3G unit I help work on. There are a lot of more subtle synergies/counters than the Death Knights that haven't been tested with Valhalla and are surely unbalanced as well.
I think you guys seem to be asking us to go back to square one and undo a couple of years worth of work here. Or you're under the illusion that things are more compatible with Valhalla in their current state than they really are (since most of them see very little to no testing against Valhalla already!).
I feel like these are different conversations though. Johnny, you're talking about unit-to-unit compatibility here.
With quozl, we were beginning to discuss the consistency of a point value and upholding its meaning.
We really can't have these two conversations at once, or overlapping points will cause tons of confusion.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by quozl

Easy fixes:

Insta-kill powers and Death Knights' Ruthless Bonding don't work on figures with Superstrength. Treasure glyphs are treated like C3G Equipment glyphs.

Done! Next?

Doesn't that highly devalue those figures costed for their D20 effects though?
Also, where are you going to put these updates? Are you going to have a whole booklet full of "rules to create compatibility"?
As far as Treasure glyphs being treated like C3G Equipment glyphs, you'd be rewriting the actual rules for an official release, then. Would you want this change to apply just when the two are being mixed, or all the time? How would you sell those who just want to use Valhalla on this change? Or would you be using the same Treasure Glyphs in completely different situational ways?
Also, wouldn't each Treasure Glyph need to be retested and rebalanced on the basis of this change to the fundamental rules behind Treasure Glyphs?
I think you're being a bit naive, honestly, if you think there are quick fixes here.

[johnny139]

See, I don't really mind stuff like that, though. They're imbalances, but they're not game breaking.

When you play with Deadeye Dan and Ne-Gok-Sa and other D20-reliant figures, you are by nature taking a chance. Sometimes they'll take down an entire army single-handedly, sometimes they'll be dead weight. It's not something that bothers me.

Is Death Knights + Wolverine a cheap combo? Sure. But so is Raelin and Q9 and Deathreavers. It's unfortunate that "unbeatable" combos like that exist, but it's not something that really bothers me. When Wolverine was designed, you guys couldn't have predicted the Death Knights. I wouldn't expect you to take that into account, and I don't expect you to go back and mess with things like that.

But if Wolverine was designed NOW, I would hope you would take into account that the Death Knights bond with him and either cost accordingly or change his personality. Is that restrictive? Yeah, I guess, to an extent. But as a sometimes-mixer, well, I'd like to see things go that way.

And the point split - that doesn't really worry me. I'm comfortable with the compatability level now, so as long as you don't deviate from the power level of points as-is, I'm completely good.

What I'm saying is I don't really care about any official rulings on compatability here. There's glitches and I accept that. But I don't want us to make a full split from the game that brought us here. I don't care if it's compatable... I just don't want it to be INcompatable.

[quozl]

Lots of questions!

No, they weren't tested and costed for figures with Superstrength.

A booklet would be fine. Isn't that what we've done for Knockback rules and will be done for the new lava rules?

Whatever. They're optional rules. People could use them or not.

You think Treasure glyphs were tested? Ha! Now who's being naive?

Really, I think you're taking this way too seriously. It's a really cool game and we're making lots of really cool options for a really cool game. Some of these options will work together and some won't but that doesn't mean we should throw out the official rulebook when we design our optional rules.

[IAmBatman]

So, I'm confused ... D20 users in the Valhalla game weren't tested or costed for figures with Super Strength. You want them to be compatible with figures that have Super Strength. So you're happy to just slap a special rule on them with no regards for what it would mean to their cost when played against Super Scape?
This makes me seriously wonder how seriously you're taking any of this or how much you really care about game/point balance.
If this isn't an issue to you, then I'm not sure why you think playing against Valhalla or not would matter at all, because a seemingly "anything goes" attitude when it comes to balance between C3G and Valhalla would allow you to mix no mater whether mixed playtesting were allowed or not.
And Johnny, you're confusing me as well. You have no issues with the end result of Wolverine, but if he were made now, you'd want him to be tested differently. Why?

[quozl]

Seriously, this confuses you? Let's see we all want our high-cost superheroes to not get insta-killed by some low-cost unit. I point out that those low-cost units weren't costed or tested for being able to insta-kill high-cost superheroes so how about we just don't allow it and then everybody's happy. That confuses you?

Let's put it this way. It's sort of like making a new ruleset for Event Heroes that does almost exactly the same thing. Really, I'm not getting the confusion since C3G has already done very similar things!

[IAmBatman]

Anti-Monitor was tested against D20 power wielding C3G units to make sure it didn't affect their value, though, and the Event Hero rule also made it so the Event Hero would take four wounds in place of being auto-destroyed. It didn't just out-and-out negate a power that made up a large amount of the cost of the unit.
The Event Hero rule was not tested or balanced for how it would impact Valhalla D20 auto destroyers, who by and large seem to have higher value D20 auto destroy powers with fewer restrictions and more of the unit's overall point cost associated with them.
Runa already struggles in Valhalla. If we implemented a rule like you suggested and I drafted anyone with super strength against her, suddenly she's the most overcosted unit in the game and while the superhero is feeling more compatible with Valhalla, Valhalla is feeling less compatible with the superhero.
It's a two-way street.

[johnny139]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

And Johnny, you're confusing me as well. You have no issues with the end result of Wolverine, but if he were made now, you'd want him to be tested differently. Why?

Oh, I have issues with it - it's a bit overpowered for my tastes. But, hey, Darkseid's a bit underpriced, X-Ray Vision is too niche a power, Catwoman has no reason to have 9 Life... stuff like that happens. I accept that, retrospectively, there are problems with designs. There are problems with anything.

If you had knowledge of the Death Knights during the creation of Wolverine but simply ignored them because C3G and ClassicScape are "incompatable," I'd hold that against C3G as a whole. But you didn't, and couldn't have, so no harm no foul. That's one broken combo out of dozens and dozens of units. Unavoidable.

You can't be 100% compatable 100% of the time, and I accept that. But just because things don't fit perfectly doesn't mean you shouldn't bother trying at all and throw the concept of two games working as one out the window.

And you guys seem to be doing just fine with that. The Hand Ninja have synergy with Classic units. When creating them, you took this into account and costed them accordingly. That's all I ask for, really.

[quozl]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

Runa already struggles in Valhalla.

No, she doesn't. Not if you draft, which is the way to play in the rulebook. She should almost always be drafted last and she works really well in her niche. Having some conterdrafts to her doesn't hurt the game at all.

It's only when you look at Heroscape as a double-blind tournament format (which is why I hate the rankings thread) that things break down.

[IAmBatman]

Do you hold the lack of Marvel playtesting with Valhalla and lack of Valhalla playtesting with Marvel against the official game?
Will you hold it against C3V if they don't playtest with official Marvel?
Will you hold it against C3V if they don't playtest with C3G?
Will you hold it against C3G if they don't playtest with C3V?
Do you hold the extremely limited playtesting with Valhalla (and in the case of several units none at all) against C3G?