The Book of Leatherhead - Page 11

quozl · #**121** November 21st, 2018, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkham

What cost was he tested at? Not seeing anything in the SP. And what were the overall results(how many wins vs losses)?

In addition to this, can you please link all the playtests?

Thank you!

Lazy Orang · #**122** November 21st, 2018, 05:02 PM

Sorry, struggling to keep track of everything right now.
Apart from the Initial, where his cost was listed for each game, he was tested at 220. Here are the tests:

Lazy Orang
shaolin
Ronin
Scapemage

Win/Loss Ratios:

Lazy Orang: 1 Win/1 Loss at 230, 1 Win at 215, all narrow.
shaolin: 2 Wins (thought cost might be a little high, nevertheless)
Ronin: 2 Losses
Scapemage: 1 Win/1 Loss
Total: 1 Win/1 Loss at 230, 1 Win at 215, 3 Wins/3 Losses at 220

japes · #**123** November 21st, 2018, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

Quote:

Originally Posted by quozl

Thanks for the explanation, Scape! That helps a lot.

I think we might be rushing to finish this one before it's ready. I think a couple of tweaks might have people more satisfied with the play. For example, would he play better if he only took off rage markers at the end of a round?

That would be unthematic and far less interesting to play. I think people seem to be mostly happy with the unit, it's just discussion over this final point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin

I think he would play substantially worse in that case, and we would need to drop the points quite a bit.

The 2 Rage Marker effect is 'Leatherhead flips out a little too much'. Or at least, that's how I've read it. It's not generally a positive and I don't think it should come up super-often. Once in my two games felt like enough.

You're quite correct - it is meant to be a largely negative effect to represent him completely losing control. It's not a positive, except in a few circumstances (basically only when you're surrounded by 3 or more enemy figures does it become better than 1 Marker), and it shouldn't be as common as 1 Marker. It came up often enough in my games for me to feel happy with how it played out.

I'll echo the thanks to @Scapemage . That clarifies things for me.

On a secondary note:
I don't really see the negative actually happening. The power only says he can't move if he's engaged. So the only time it's a negative is if he's engaged with an opponent while having a friendly next to him. If the power didn't let him move if a figure was adjacent...then it would be a negative. As is he can just about always move away from friendly figure before "flipping out". Is it too late to add that. I don't think it would change price but it feels more thematic.

Lazy Orang · #**124** November 21st, 2018, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by japes

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

Quote:

Originally Posted by quozl

Thanks for the explanation, Scape! That helps a lot.

I think we might be rushing to finish this one before it's ready. I think a couple of tweaks might have people more satisfied with the play. For example, would he play better if he only took off rage markers at the end of a round?

That would be unthematic and far less interesting to play. I think people seem to be mostly happy with the unit, it's just discussion over this final point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin

I think he would play substantially worse in that case, and we would need to drop the points quite a bit.

The 2 Rage Marker effect is 'Leatherhead flips out a little too much'. Or at least, that's how I've read it. It's not generally a positive and I don't think it should come up super-often. Once in my two games felt like enough.

You're quite correct - it is meant to be a largely negative effect to represent him completely losing control. It's not a positive, except in a few circumstances (basically only when you're surrounded by 3 or more enemy figures does it become better than 1 Marker), and it shouldn't be as common as 1 Marker. It came up often enough in my games for me to feel happy with how it played out.

I'll echo the thanks to @Scapemage . That clarifies things for me.

On a secondary note:
I don't really see the negative actually happening. The power only says he can't move if he's engaged. So the only time it's a negative is if he's engaged with an opponent while having a friendly next to him. If the power didn't let him move if a figure was adjacent...then it would be a negative. As is he can just about always move away from friendly figure before "flipping out". Is it too late to add that. I don't think it would change price but it feels more thematic.

I wouldn't be too opposed to adding that. I should note, though:
1) I've had times where he's next to both a friendly and an opponent, been unable to move and has to hit the friendly;

2) It means he can't hit a single target twice anymore, which can be frustrating and does weaken him; and;
3) It negates his ability to reposition, break engagement or 'engagement dance' - he's effectively Cyberclawed.

Really, the negatives are a number of subtle things rather than a simple 'might hit your own guys' (though that is part of it).

Ronin · #**125** November 21st, 2018, 09:01 PM

The negative did come into play the one time it triggered for me, and he ended up attacking a friendly.

He tends to be engaged at the starts of his turns. You're trying to get him engaged to bring Lockdown into play, and the counter-play for the opponent to get your intended victim away from him, is to throw another figure at him. He was engaged with at least one figure most of the time.

Whirlwind Attack is also generally worse than Double Attack. (Though that's only a negative relative to his 1-marker state, not his 0-marker state)

Lazy Orang · #**126** November 23rd, 2018, 01:45 PM

Could we please get a decision one way or another here? This design and I are just in stasis right now, and I feel like we're just going round in circles.

Arkham · #**127** November 23rd, 2018, 04:19 PM

I believe it’s your decision?

Lazy Orang · #**128** November 23rd, 2018, 04:25 PM

There's still debate, and I don't want to make a decision people aren't happy with. I've already said I'm happy to move him forwards, but we just seem to be running in circles right now.

Ronin · #**129** November 23rd, 2018, 04:59 PM

You're not always going to get everyone weighing in and forming a clear consensus, and this is one of those times. Happens every now and then that you'll be a little uncertain about whether or not it's time to call a vote. Up to you to make the call - nobody's coming down from on high to sort things out.

Worst case scenario, you call a vote to move forward and it gets voted down. At that point, you'll know where the design stands and what your next steps are. Progress no matter what.

Lazy Orang · #**130** November 23rd, 2018, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin

You're not always going to get everyone weighing in and forming a clear consensus, and this is one of those times. Happens every now and then that you'll be a little uncertain about whether or not it's time to call a vote. Up to you to make the call - nobody's coming down from on high to sort things out.

Worst case scenario, you call a vote to move forward and it gets voted down. At that point, you'll know where the design stands and what your next steps are. Progress no matter what.

Fair enough, then - didn't want to do even that without the okay, though.

I Propose moving to Final Editing with what's in the OP now.

Scapemage · #**131** November 23rd, 2018, 11:02 PM

Yea to advancing to Final Editing.

Ronin · #**132** November 24th, 2018, 03:01 PM

yea

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Book of Kessig Ravagers, The Book of Kessig Rangers	TREX	Official Units and Spell Cards	7	December 26th, 2017 05:51 PM
Book: Inheritance Trilogy by Christopher Paolini - Book 3	tmacdagreat	Books	132	May 15th, 2012 06:13 PM