Historyscape Playtesting/Feedback Thread

[LoganTO]

That was kinda my point :P for the time being, it's not an overly useful power. Perhaps it's a note that this class is underdeveloped and could use with some expansion from us.

Otherwise, I don't really see the point in it when it only actually applies to one special ability

[Sir Yeshua]

Hey, McHotcakes? I hate to say it, but The Tsarina's Gratitude only works on small/medium figures, so it can't be used on Krug, and it doesn't work on Undead, so Marcu is safe too.

LoganTO, let me give you a couple pieces of advice about playtesting:

PROXY what you don't have. I've proxied Knights of Weston, Braxas, Cathar Spearmen, Romans, and many others.

When you're building an army for playtesting, there is absolutely no reason why you should only have one copy of a common squad. Especially when they are the primary source of a synergy.

And some general guidelines:

Units should be priced according to their optimal conditions. This means testing Rasputin against Hero-heavy armies. Testing him on a water-heavy map against an army with only one Filler Hero in it will not help us at all. (No offense, McHotcakes)

You should build the Army of the playtest unit first, then build the other army, giving the advantage to the test unit. That doesn't mean run Jim Bridger against Nagrubs without a Hivelord, but at the same time, don't run Rasputin against a 'Trons army.

Finally, try to limit the use of filler units in the army with the unit you're testing.

[LoganTO]

Sir Yeshua, could you tell that was my 2nd play test ever? XD

I have proxied mostly just doing online Scape matches for playtests. However, my background in RotV... I forgot that "common" squads existed :P It was a mistake on my part, and I will ensure that I don't screw up again in the future

[LoganTO]

All the same though, I stand by my statement that we should have more tribesmen synergy

[McHotcakes]

Originally Posted by Sir Yeshua

Hey, McHotcakes? I hate to say it, but The Tsarina's Gratitude only works on small/medium figures, so it can't be used on Krug, and it doesn't work on Undead, so Marcu is safe too.

True I forgot about that when I was writing my report. The scenario actually didn't come up when I was playtesting though. I was just listing potential ways for The Tsarina's Gratitude to be used effectively. Guess that's one less strategy for him out the window

Originally Posted by Sir Yeshua

Units should be priced according to their optimal conditions. This means testing Rasputin against Hero-heavy armies. Testing him on a water-heavy map against an army with only one Filler Hero in it will not help us at all. (No offense, McHotcakes)

As per this, that wasn't the only playtest I ran with Rasputin. I did run him against more hero based armies and less water prominent maps which he did slightly better on. The purpose of posting the one I did was to show how ineffective he would be against a squad based army on a water map. This was his lowest showing, and one that showed the most that he is an extremely situational figure.

I always try and playtest a figure in both their best conditions, for Rasputin it would be a water free map against an army of unique heroes with high life totals, and their worst, which was the playtest I posted.

[bobinchese]

Originally Posted by Sir Yeshua

You should build the Army of the playtest unit first, then build the other army, giving the advantage to the test unit. That doesn't mean run Jim Bridger against Nagrubs without a Hivelord, but at the same time, don't run Rasputin against a 'Trons army.

I disagree with this. I would try to balance the two armies as closely as I could given the test unit's point value. Then if the battle seems one-sided I can tell if the unit is over or underprices (assuming no luck die rolls or other factors).

Also, I don't see why the Russian guy can't mind control large figures, isn't the whole point of a mind control unit to take control of giant monsters?

[LoganTO]

I think it's more historic accuracy, but I wouldn't be opposed to changing it if it would help balance him out a bit

[Sir Yeshua]

Originally Posted by bobinchese

I disagree with this. I would try to balance the two armies as closely as I could given the test unit's point value. Then if the battle seems one-sided I can tell if the unit is over or underprices (assuming no luck die rolls or other factors).

Sorry, that didn't come out right. You are correct, you should try to balance the two armies.

Also, I don't see why the Russian guy can't mind control large figures, isn't the whole point of a mind control unit to take control of giant monsters?

I dunno, it's just part of what we started with.

[flameslayer93]

Great Armies that I've found for playtesting (regardless of unit):
Einar Imperium x2, Tagawa Samurai Archers x2, Empress Kiova (500)
High cost squads who can dish out damage, range, and a buuffer unit who isn't Raelin.

Taelord, Minions of Utgar x2 (400)
Small, but definately powerful. Add in Krav if you need to bring this up to 500.

Warriors of Ashra x4, Aubrien Archers x4 (480)
A full 24 hex army that gives your unit the challenge of a screening army that isn't obligerantly OP.

Sacred Band x5, Parmenio, Valguard, Marcus Decmus Gallas (550)
Another very tough army that utilizes heroes quite a bit.

~~Needs to get on the ball with some testing.

[Hammerfortress]

Name of the Unit Being tested: Jim Bridger

Name of the Sub-Project it is a part of (era/army): Old West

Historic Accuracy: Does the test unit's stats and abilities make sense for the time period, geographical region, and army that it was a part of? Do any of its abilities, weapons, card details, etc. seem out of place for that time/place in history?
PASS

Enjoyability: Was the unit fun to play?
PASS

Annoyance: Was there anything that made the character unnaturally unbalanced and caused strife to play against?
No, but he really can have an impact on the game when allowed to do so.

Thought-out: Does this Unit display signs of some sort of historic research, or does it too easily fit into stereotypes and fallacies?
PASS

Usability: Did you get an opportunity to use/see all of the abilities of the unit? (Whether or not they were used is inconsequential: it is a matter of whether or not you COULD use them).
PASS

Strategy: Are you able to incorporate this unit into effective strategic or tactical manoeuvres? Does it give rise to any new strategies that might not be common or possible without this unit.
Yes, I feel that Bridger really pulls his weight and brings strategy to a fun army that just didn't have many options.

Bonding: Do any bonding loops occur between this unit and others with bonding abilities that might "break" the game, should this not be rectified?
NO

Synergy: Could any synergy strategies currently in the game be used to incorporate this card? If so, would this card alter the strategy to make any unit too powerful or too weak?
He is very useful to the MRT in keeping their War Cry bonding active by moving up more MRT, but this costs them a more aggressive turn with Brave Arrow or an allied lawman.

Power: When taking into account the all other existing units (custom or otherwise) and all glyphs, is there any power that becomes too great that the game is no longer fair? All instances of this should be documented separately, along with where the pairing unit exists (custom or classic, etc).
NO

Drafting: Could a player see value in drafting this unit into their army?
I stand by my opinion that he would be usable in a draft situation, but he will only ever shine in a MRT build

UNIT SUM-UP
Damage: Bridger lived to the end of the game and personally killed one Phantom Knight in melee during cleanup.
Power Usage/Effectiveness:Bringer absolutely pulled his weight in this game, with only one order marker in the first round he was still activated 7 times throughout the game (all but two of which he used mountain guide rather than attacking). In addition to Bridger's turns I used Brave Arrow twice and James Murphy once before they were destroyed.

Seeing Double: If the unit would face itself, would it cause any feedback loops that would stop the game's playability? NO

ARMY TEST

Did the unit play well? Do you agree with the given point value? Would you suggest a new point value? Give a brief summary.
As I stated above, Bridger shined in this game. His point value is just right at 70. I still think that he could stand a bump in attack to 3, but I am not sure it is necessary or thematic with the powers we have already given him.
Map: The same small map I described in my previous battle report.
Units: Army 1: Jim Bridger, Brave Arrow, James Murphy, MRT x4 (475 Points) VS Army 2: Phantom Knights x5, Torin (470 Points)

Result:Army one wins with 4 MRT and Bridger with two wounds remaining.

[LoganTO]

The Revised Rasputin Is Up For Playtesting

[LoganTO]

NOTE: His card currently does not match the changes (we'll do that bit later)