Jump to content
Wild Rose

Idea for Thresher Change

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, ForestRambo said:

(I think the only solo captain roster of worlds?). [...] I don't think any captain should be so good to say - Here's what I bring. I don't care what you draft against it, I'm good enough to win anyway. 

This isn't meant as an argument for or against Thresher's power level, but 8 models with a single captain is literally the maximum extent of diversity for the minor guilds. We haven't seen them yet, but if SFG is being serious about them being competitively viable (and I'm sure they are) then you're going to see 10 or 11 captains where you have to say what I quoted above. Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Slothrop said:

This isn't meant as an argument for or against Thresher's power level, but 8 models with a single captain is literally the maximum extent of diversity for the minor guilds. We haven't seen them yet, but if SFG is being serious about them being competitively viable (and I'm sure they are) then you're going to see 10 or 11 captains where you have to say what I quoted above. Just a thought.

Not to derail too far, but this is dependent on what the OPD says for building a roster and if it will change when minor guilds exist. I could easily see a future where the roster size goes to 12, so a minor guild roster could then potentially be the 6 players in the minor, the 2 crossover players, and then a captain and 3 players from their major guild, allowing for 2 valid rosters of 6. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow this has changed topic a lot from my initial post. hoping to bring it back onto topic, with the longshanks showing a 68% win rate I think a change will be happening sooner or later. what changes do you think will be made to thresher and what do you think will stay? what makes thresher, thresher? as I don't think what the essence of the model should disappear and I hope steamforge will be able to keep that ( they did with Midas and shark in the recent errata).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Edek said:

One of my fav idea for a Tresher change was giving him 3" melee zone only while within X" of a harvest marker.

If Thresher ever gets adjusted, this is the kind of change I'd like to see first... I also like how that would interacts with Don't Fear the...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see:

Thresher go to a 2/6" KICK and lose scything march. Crow Scarer keeps range but must consume a harvest marker if used.

Millstone's take one for the team becomes a heroic ability or become a cost 0 character play with a 3" aura rather than 6".

Shrinking the bubble or forcing Millstone to go first (or both) helps bring Tater back in line. I think much more than that is probably being cruel. Many have said it but it is just the triangle of doom. Removing some of it makes it much less silly but the three together are terrorists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Edek said:

One of my fav idea for a Tresher change was giving him 3" melee zone only while within X" of a harvest marker.

yeah thats what this post started as basically around that whole idea, It makes postioning more import and you can't send him in like a missile unless its set up and even if you wanted to do that it allows for more counter play as the markers would have to be set up in front of your line. 

5 minutes ago, Spinsane said:

I also like how that would interacts with Don't Fear the...

this forces you to move closer in if your wanting to hit more people/ just prevents you from hitting as many people unless you've placed 2 harvest markers with in X" it would make him feel much less point and shoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pending Forum Suspension said:

I'd like to see:

Thresher go to a 2/6" KICK and lose scything march. Crow Scarer keeps range but must consume a harvest marker if used.

Millstone's take one for the team becomes a heroic ability or become a cost 0 character play with a 3" aura rather than 6".

Shrinking the bubble or forcing Millstone to go first (or both) helps bring Tater back in line. I think much more than that is probably being cruel. Many have said it but it is just the triangle of doom. Removing some of it makes it much less silly but the three together are terrorists.

the team doesn't have that many 3/X models or any 4/X models though. at the moment its 5. 2 at 3/8 bushel and thresher and 3 at 3/6 Tater, Fallow and Grange. while grange can increase this with for the family I think the issue your talking about is threshers goal threat. I think if his kick does change I would put it at 3/6, lowering his goal threat but still allowing him to easily pass to other members of his team.

3" is rough, especially for a 30mm base 4" is better and more in line with other support abilities, snow for example. if its not passive then it should stay at 6" and be a character play for 0, farmers don't really do heroics. (caveat: I don't think it needs changing but this is my opinion on if it had to change)

Poised is once per turn any way, eating the harvest marker seems over kill to me

not convinced on the triangle of doom thing I mean hammer with brick and marbles is pretty similar with all that counter charge defending a superstar player 

also his scything march is his only position result on his play book out side of a non momentous <. if you got rid of that he would have next to none positioning results on his playbook. scything much is basically a limited number of < and you can't spam it as they have to suffer the KD ( sorry if that doesn't make much sense)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wild Rose said:

not convinced on the triangle of doom thing I mean hammer with brick and marbles is pretty similar with all that counter charge defending a superstar player 

I mean there is counter charge and Hammer can move when he hits someone.

No condition absorbing, no 3" melee, no harvest markers to take the team to ridiculous levels of INF, no 0INF cost 3 damage in a 3" circle nonsense, and Hammer has to strip influence off of friendlies to hit his potential. You can also threaten a counter against Hammer to keep him honest and make him take that knockdown where Thresher doesn't care because he out reaches you and ignores your knock down.

Everyone is entitled to different opinions. If you aren't convinced at this point you probably won't be. The three together are above the curve. Botts is an outstanding player but with an 8 man roster he didn't just win he CRUSHED it at worlds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fair point, I haven't had a chance to watch his games yet so all I know is that he won. If they weren't above there curve we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. what I'm trying to say is that I think its more thresher than it is milestone or tater as if you put them in a grange list there not op, still good but not op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wild Rose said:

fair point, I haven't had a chance to watch his games yet so all I know is that he won. If they weren't above there curve we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. what I'm trying to say is that I think its more thresher than it is milestone or tater as if you put them in a grange list there not op, still good but not op.

Not sure how Game 1 vs JJ Layfield's Pinvice team went (it ended 12-10).

He crushed Metz's Hammer team to such an extent that the German representative forfeited at the top of round 2 or 3 (can't remember) when he lost the initiative. Game ended 5-0.

He then went on to win a decisive 12-4 in the Finals against Peter Williamson, the Australian Champion.

In the US Nationals, over 5 rounds he his opponents a meager total of 14 points.

In the LCQ, he lost to the LCQ winner in round 1, so was playing against other X-1 players for the rest of the tournament so I won't bother with it.

 

Note that his only loss all week-end is against Thresher*, although he faced the same player against (Shane Wattie) in the US Finals and won a resounding 12-0...

* Note that Shane also lost a single game off the 11 tournament games he played in the LCQ & US Nationals, and that was the Final game against Alex's Thresher...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks, now I don't have to sit through hours of video. while thats a good snap shoot, I find the statistics on the longshanks more telling as its a wider pool with more consistent date than a tournament which has to many on the day variables. not taking away from anyones victories, I'm talking more about a team/ captains level of strength. a captain that has a whole 10% better win ratio than the next highest is a much better indicator than a tournament win. for example if Alex did just as good at the tournament but the states said thresher was only 2% better than the next highest I would be saying that everything fine and there no need for a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Wild Rose said:

wow this has changed topic a lot from my initial post. hoping to bring it back onto topic, with the longshanks showing a 68% win rate I think a change will be happening sooner or later. what changes do you think will be made to thresher and what do you think will stay? what makes thresher, thresher? as I don't think what the essence of the model should disappear and I hope steamforge will be able to keep that ( they did with Midas and shark in the recent errata).

I don't actually think thresher alone is OP. Personally, the one undroppable farmer is millstone. I'd look at reducing her (and tater's) auras as Bott's says. I also think it would be worth exploring them & thresher having to eat harvest makers to activate counter charge, poised etc. That way they don't get the best of both worlds with those abilities and bucket loads of influence. I think it's probably tweaks rather than full nerf bat (IMO the midas nerf went slightly too far the other way). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would echo that on his own Thresher isn't too bad. He is definitely top tier bit it is the team synergies that do it for me.I haven't seen it mentioned yet but Fallow can, in the right circumstances, output as much as boar but has all kids of soft control options, better def, five influence cap and only one less health for instance.

It just seems to me that they could loose a few tools, still be flavorful and fulfill the role on the team without being quite so egregious. 

However I do think more playtime is needed before anyone starts waiving nerf bats about, I have beaten thresher. It's actually Grange that I find worse. The scrum of death just kills the ball and his aura plus gang ups rob you of your ability to get the ball back easily. You end up in a stand off waiting out the clock, which isn't that fun of a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, robertato said:

I would echo that on his own Thresher isn't too bad. He is definitely top tier bit it is the team synergies that do it for me.I haven't seen it mentioned yet but Fallow can, in the right circumstances, output as much as boar but has all kids of soft control options, better def, five influence cap and only one less health for instance.

It just seems to me that they could loose a few tools, still be flavorful and fulfill the role on the team without being quite so egregious. 

However I do think more playtime is needed before anyone starts waiving nerf bats about, I have beaten thresher. It's actually Grange that I find worse. The scrum of death just kills the ball and his aura plus gang ups rob you of your ability to get the ball back easily. You end up in a stand off waiting out the clock, which isn't that fun of a game.

That's the point when you say Fallow: in the right circumstances. 

This should be the farmers game. One that in the right circumstances they should be great. 

If you achieve the right circumstances, as I learn from playing against Mechmage - your opponent is playing wrong. 

It's like chess. Sometimes you offer a player to be beaten just to take a stronger from the field. 

 

As I was saying: farmers need some fine tuning 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna say a couple things I said over the weekend while at SCUS, because obviously this is a super hot topic right now. 

1. If the rules for Obulus or Corsair or Ballista or insert-good-captain here were released 6 months ago and one of the best players in the world picked them up and played 50-60 games with them while most other people had only played 2-3 games against them, yeah, that person would probably do pretty well with that captain too.

2. Thresher requires players to modify the way they play against him. Playing the usual way you're used to playing the game will probably net you a lot of losses against him. I believe as players get more experience against him in the next few months, this will start showing. 

3. It's much, much too early to nerf anything right now. Obviously, we'd be fools to ignore the high win rate, but we'd also be fools to hastily nerf something in a panic. Please bear in mind that we have to look at the health of the game across the next year, two years, five years, not just the next three months. If there is a problem, taking the time to get the correct fix to the problem is just as important, arguably more important, than fixing it in the first place. A fix that we then have to fix again in three months time is not a fix. 

4. None of this is denying there is a problem, or us being blind to anything. When I used to play other games, I'll admit, I was frequently in the 'omg nerf this now' faction, and the fact that I've changed my opinion is basically a result of seeing the inner workings and considering the issue from another point of view. It's actually sort of amusing for me to be sitting here typing this when three-years-ago-me would likely have been howling for blood. But hey, we grow as people, and sometimes the biggest thing you can do is acknowledging that there are other perspectives and that your opinion is just that; an opinion. This is something I genuinely strive to be better at in my personal life a lot. I'm not necessarily saying anyone on this thread is wrong, like, just that there are a wealth of opinions out there. And we read all of them! 


And finally,  hey, guys, I ran events at SCUS. I was there. We see the same tournament data as you, we talk to players about the game probably more than you do. We read these forums, we read social media, and we spend (amazingly!) a hell of a lot of time thinking about GB. It's not like we have some evil master plan here; we want the game to be as well balanced as we can make it. That's good for us just like it's good for you guys.

So in summary: we're aware there might be an issue and we're watching very carefully but we're not going to jump the gun on anything. Cheers! 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Spinsane said:

He crushed Metz's Hammer team to such an extent that the German representative forfeited at the top of round 2 or 3 (can't remember) when he lost the initiative. Game ended 5-0.

The game was functionally 11-0, since Alex's first activation of the turn was going to take out three players. 

Also on a related note, being the receiving team vs Hammer is pretty much the dream situation to be in for a large percentage of captains. His threat ranges without the ball are both short and linear, and none of the rest of the team have much chance of doing any playmaking on turn one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StevekCole said:

I don't actually think thresher alone is OP. Personally, the one undroppable farmer is millstone. I'd look at reducing her (and tater's) auras as Bott's says. I also think it would be worth exploring them & thresher having to eat harvest makers to activate counter charge, poised etc. That way they don't get the best of both worlds with those abilities and bucket loads of influence. I think it's probably tweaks rather than full nerf bat (IMO the midas nerf went slightly too far the other way). 

I must play the farmers wrong if anybody else has "bucket loads of influence" with a Thresher team. Most of the time I do not produce and keep enough harvest markers to enable and the benefits linked to a harvest marker such as Tater's counter and to remove those harvest markers at the same time to gain influence. When I read the article on http://midwestwargaming.com/statistical-analysis-guildball-season-3-updates-farmers/ the same patterns that I witness during my games regarding harvest markers are explained with a more statistical background, but apparently I'm overlooking something. :) But I'm eager to learn so please how do you maximize on harvest markers?

The quotation "but from talking to other top players and listening to other podcasts I knew that most people were not regularly proxying them to the extent that I was" in the interview is in my opinion spot on. Farmers are not well known by a lot of players and they are becoming a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, "Abandon all hope, ye all who encounter the Thresher". :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Edek said:

In my experience a Tresher teams has about 14/15 inf per turn :P Just place the markers in a spot your opponent doesn't want to sprint/charge into and you should be good :P 

So you play with Millstone, Harrow and Jackstraw all the time? Do you rarely use harvest markers with Tater or Thresher (or Buckwheat when he is the mascot)? Do you rarely leave harvest markers on the pitch to keep Tater and/or Thresher armed the next turn or to keep some scoring potential for Jackstraw? I do all those things and hardly get more than 1 extra influence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tater rarely uses the harvest marker, the donkey doesn't need to use a marker every turn, so it's mainly Tresher using the markers. You generate 12 and most of the time can afford to exchange 2 markers for 2 inf (5inf on Tresher, often 4 on Tater, 3 on Jackstraw, 1 on Harrow and the depends on your plan for the turn). And yes, right now I don't see why you would use Millstone, Harrow and Jackstraw all the time. 2 great auras with a 6" radius, 2 free harvest markers and 2 that come with an 3" AOE and 2dmg which you can setup for a Tresher activation. I think Ploughman is good but I don't know when I would pick him over any other planter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheLieutenant said:

 

4. None of this is denying there is a problem, or us being blind to anything. When I used to play other games, I'll admit, I was frequently in the 'omg nerf this now' faction, and the fact that I've changed my opinion is basically a result of seeing the inner workings and considering the issue from another point of view. It's actually sort of amusing for me to be sitting here typing this when three-years-ago-me would likely have been howling for blood. But hey, we grow as people, and sometimes the biggest thing you can do is acknowledging that there are other perspectives and that your opinion is just that; an opinion. This is something I genuinely strive to be better at in my personal life a lot. I'm not necessarily saying anyone on this thread is wrong, like, just that there are a wealth of opinions out there. And we read all of them! 


And finally,  hey, guys, I ran events at SCUS. I was there. We see the same tournament data as you, we talk to players about the game probably more than you do. We read these forums, we read social media, and we spend (amazingly!) a hell of a lot of time thinking about GB. It's not like we have some evil master plan here; we want the game to be as well balanced as we can make it. That's good for us just like it's good for you guys.

So in summary: we're aware there might be an issue and we're watching very carefully but we're not going to jump the gun on anything. Cheers! 
 

Hmmmm this is very interesting B-rice... And do you listen to podcasts and if you had to choose one to be "Singled out" as your favourite what would it be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, EpicChris said:

You know I sometimes wonder if SFG don't just do actions like Thresher to entertain themselves on these boards...

I think we've reached a natural conclusion with Thresher, partly because many players still don't have him in their meta and partly because many players haven't practiced enough with him (I know I fell apart owing to lack of practice at Steamcon) so any conclusion is bound to appear a little knee-jerky.

I think we all agree that SFG need to look at him again, if only to say 'working as intended' or to make a slight change. Noone wants Farmers crippled. Thresher and his team represent a difficult and fascinating problem to balance. I think I can see where they might start but we'll see. As long as we don't have to wait too long then everything is roses.

Agreed on they need to at least look at him again. I hate to always go back, but when you look at the Shark and Midas nerfs from S3, a lot of it (I think) had to do with unenjoyable games  and the fact that you HAD to play one of the very few counters to the opponent. This is where I am with Farmers, Thresher, Tater and Millstone most notably. It is disheartening to see top players drop at 5-0 because they don't see an out, and then know that I will have to play that and not be a top player. I understand that not every person with Thresher is a top player, but I don't know if the strategy behind it is really a secret anymore, which means people can probably figure out the basic mechanics of what the terrible three need to be doing and run them somewhat efficiently. *Note this is not me saying they are easy, or that you don't need to be skilled or taking anything away from Alex. But the forums, youtube, etc.. the info is out there to figure it out. 

That discourages players like me who play well, not top tier, but can hold my own in a tournament from even going to a tournament because I know I will face the same Thresher team multiple times, or be forced to play Thresher in order to have a chance, which I've already been through when I played Obulus (by choice from the beginning, not because he was OPAF) So yes, I think he is worth a look for sure, and I don't think it is knee jerk. I'd rather have Steamforged do something maybe unofficial sooner with play testers than later and possibly hurt the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DeathlyDrew said:

 It is disheartening to see top players drop at 5-0 because they don't see an out, and then know that I will have to play that and not be a top player. I understand that not every person with Thresher is a top player, but I don't know if the strategy behind it is really a secret anymore, which means people can probably figure out the basic mechanics of what the terrible three need to be doing and run them somewhat efficiently. *Note this is not me saying they are easy, or that you don't need to be skilled or taking anything away from Alex. But the forums, youtube, etc.. the info is out there to figure it out. 

From what I've read the games was going to be 11-0 after the imitative roll was lost due to 3 players ripe to be taken out. So that's a very different picture to look at than the one you paint.

I expect to see thresher a lot over the next few months because he is the new hotness. That was likely to happen even if he was rubbish. Most of my opponents aren't Alex Botts level, so I'm hoping to have a game. Certainly the first time I faced Honest Land I got slaughtered, but the last time I faced it I was able to smash it using the same team as I had  in the first before, but understanding its weaknesses..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×