Power creep anyone?

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:56 pm

I finally read some of the profiles from DoS. I have one word, power-creep. Thorin cost the same as isildur and possesses 15 extra pts worth of m/w/f. The trade off, 5" dwarf movement as opposed to 6" man movement (i had no idea 1" of movement was worth 15 points). I try not to sound like a pesimist but the only rule adjustment I like is the elven blade rule. Everything else makes me think gw is trying to break their game, like decipher did to swccg and lotr tcg before ending those games (curse you hunter rule!).

Dezartfox · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:10 pm

That extra inch of movement means a fair bit I reckon...

Grungehog · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:33 pm

I don't think it is that bad, look at the Spiders for instance, if I read correctly they have 8"mvt, no special climbing bonuses, instead have woodland creature, larger bases, and F2. That and the web attack is dodgey at best to use.
To me these are nerfed versions of the normal spiders.
The Mirkwood rangers look good, but D3 is 4+ for all opponents bar hobbits to wound them.
The palace guards are stupidly expensive and bring nothing new to the meta.
Laketowners are pretty damn poor, what with low stats all round especially C2
Beorn is a beast as he should be!

Anyway going back to what you're saying, Isildur gets the ring for free! That shouldn't be underestimated, he also has access to a horse, which unlike a pony has 10"mvt, ponies only getting 8".

The game works really well, even if these days there seems to be an urge to use heroic strikes left right and center.

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

I don't think there's been any major power creep with the Hobbit releases, quite the opposite if anything. There was severe power creep with stuff released between the One Rulebook and The LOTR sourcebooks (2006-2012) with things like Watchers of Karna, Abrakan Guard, Sons of Eorl, Warg Marauders etc. but the Hobbit stuff is either very nicely balanced or over-costed IMO.

Thrain, Thror, Bard, Azog, Bolg, Gwaihir, Gloin and the Master are just a few heroes off the top of my head who are clearly overcosted by 10-40 points in comparison to similar LOTR profiles.

Grimhammers are commonly thought of as poor in comparison to Khazad Guard, Palace Guard are 2 points too expensive, the Mirkwood Spiders are just AWFUL and despite everyone thinking Mirkwood Rangers would break the game on release, experience has shown that they're actually a very well costed profile that is equally powerful and vulnerable.

There's certainly some bargains in there, Dwalin's incredible for his pints, Thorin's a brilliant and cost effective leader for any points value and Tauriel's a great profile that can be very effective but also has several weaknesses.

All in all I think the Hobbit releases have been great, really enhancing and mixing up the meta without breaking the game.

As for Isildur being underpowered, ha! Clearly you've never been charged by him on a horse wearing the ring! :shock:

I know who my money would be on in a Thorin v Isildur duel!

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:12 pm

Okay, The ring is a good point, I did forget about that. However, look at Azog. He wounds Heroes on a 3+ and costs less than 200 pts. Aragorn does a very similar thing but costs over 200 pts. Not to mention Azog possesses a very high str.

Thorin's company is very inexpensive (mini per mini) and every single one of those dwarves can manipulate their M/W/F in such a way that makes Gandalf look like a cheap parlor magician.

Honestly, I don't know why I am complaining, Hobbit SBG is clearly a different game than LOTR SBG. No biggie, I was just shocked by the obvious power creep. It happens to all games. At least every game I have played. I know why it happens too, the game makers are doing their best to prolong the life of a beloved game. It is usually done with the best of intents, but usually gets manipulated by clever players and optimized for play (with exception to LOTR TGC's hunter rule. That was just stupid and ruined one of the best games on the market!).

Please do not miss understand. I am not attacking anyone who likes the changes to the rules. It just looks like traditional power creep to me. I agree, that some nerfing took place (I'm looking at you shooting), but the new heroic actions and special weapon attacks are tell-tale signs of power-creep.

One of my favorite things about LOTR SBG was that there was no difference between an axe and a sword.

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

jdizzy001 wrote:

Thorin's company is very inexpensive (mini per mini)

Disagree, the vast majority of them are perfectly fairly costed (compared to a LOTR dwarf captain) and are arguably worse due to very situational rules they're paying for (Fili, Kili, Bofur, Bifur Dori etc.). Several of them are clearly worse than a standard dwarf captain too. They have good synergy rules with each other but they are broadly fairly costed and anyone who is a bargain (Dwalin) is balanced out by someone who pays over the odds (Gloin)

jdizzy001 wrote:

every single one of those dwarves can manipulate their M/W/F in such a way that makes Gandalf look like a cheap parlor magician.

Really don't understand what you mean here?

jdizzy001 wrote:

Hobbit SBG is clearly a different game than LOTR SBG. No biggie, I was just shocked by the obvious power creep.

It's not a different game at all, it's the same game with a few nice additions and modifications that are available to all armies equally. Power creep is when the latest army (or set of profiles for us) is vastly overpowered compared to the previous ones and that quite simply is not the case with SBG. I'm a regular on the UK tournament scene and, whilst there are a reasonable number of Hunter Orc, Erebor and Thranduil's Halls lists about they are far from broken and are very rarely seen in the podium positions.

jdizzy001 wrote:

but the new heroic actions and special weapon attacks are tell-tale signs of power-creep

Again, that's not power creep, those things (for better or worse) are available to all armies equally

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:44 pm

Having only read the new addition's profiles, I'm going to take your word for it. However, in regards to power creep, availability does not equal power creep. Widening the options available to those who use might does. A single point of might can effect many more aspects of the game (strengthen spells, adjust dice rolls, increase fight, improve movement and improve accuracy) This makes might more powerful, therefore (for good or bad) that is power creep.

SouthernDunedain · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:11 pm

Power creep? Ha! No way. If they were so powerful, they'd be winning all the events and I'd be top of the league :lol:

the new models have more weaknesses than strengths and rules are never as good on the table as you hope they may be when you first read them.

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:36 pm

Really? Interesting, because I hear that feints and heroic strikes are all the rage. Are you telling me that people aren't using them? I'm only asking because my group uses lotr sbg still.

If the current rules aren't as powerful as they seem, then great. I'm glad to hear it, because it looks like power creep to me.

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

jdizzy001 wrote:

Really? Interesting, because I hear that feints and heroic strikes are all the rage. Are you telling me that people aren't using them?

No I'm not saying that, everyone uses them, I'm saying that isn't power creep! Power creep is when newer releases for a game are demonstrably more powerful than older releases, normally in a rather cynical attempt to sell the new products (in this case the latest miniatures) and older products become invalidated/uncompetitive as a result.

Heroic Strikes and Special Strikes are not power creep, they're as equally useful to the models in the DOS sourcebook as they are to the original Moria Goblins and Numenorians.

A rules mechanic like those mentioned above can't be 'powerful' on its own, what makes them powerful is how players use combinations of profiles and tactics to use the rule to best effect. That is something that is equally possible with the old and new profiles.

NarsilReforged · **Joined:** Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:13 am **Posts:** 316

Mate there isn't any considerable power creep at all in the Hobbit range and rules. Nothing is vastly over powered. The new rules are great and quite balanced. Sure, in this game there are going to be models that are very effective for their points and some that aren't that effective. That's just how it is and how it has been, even before the Hobbit. They've released models that are sightly to vastly over priced such as Palace Guard, Mirkwood Spiders, Laketowners, Grimhammers, etc. And some that are effective but not over powered. This is the same as in the Lord of the Rings range.

JamesR · **Posted:** Thu Jul 10, 2014 4:49 am

As Dr Grant said Thorin's company are for the most part far less optimal than LOTR dwarves.
As a long time dwarf player I wrote up this review on them compared to other LOTR Dwarves and rated each of them.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=28339&hilit=+Thorin%27s+company

Please note I'm not rating the company against each other or as a pure hero force (which is where they are at their best) I'm comparing them to all other Dwarf options (so primarily LOTR Dwarves). If anything it's a power decline

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:24 am

i've only read the rules update, so i'll take your word(s) for it.

Fishlegs · **Posted:** Thu Jul 10, 2014 9:42 am

I always thought power creep was when new releases were more powerful than older ones. By that reasoning this game has zero power creep due to the total absence of releases.

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:57 pm

Lol, tuche

ScarpeIron · **Posted:** Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:17 pm

I understand what you mean, ya just used the wrong words to describe it.

I agree that Hobbit rules makes for a totally different game than the LoTR rules (beyond the army profiles). Also, I agree that there is a slight advantage to "evil." Yes, yes, the rules in Hobbit are available to all armies, but evil has cheaper and more monsters than good.
GW didn't break the game with the Hobbit, they just put their stamp on it. It went from low-fantasy Middle Earth to high-fantasy Middle Earth.

As with every game that has various rules editions - you choose which edition to play with.

NarsilReforged · **Joined:** Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:13 am **Posts:** 316

I just played against Isildur in a tourney today. Tbh I think he's better than Thorin. Firstly he has the option for a horse and secondly, now that the rules for the One Ring have been made so much better he is absolutely beast with it.

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:17 pm

The rules for the ring havebeen updated too? I havent seen those

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2014 5:13 pm

I know the rules have been updated and are in the big book, but are the rule updates also in the escape from goblin town soft book?

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

Yes the rules for the Ring have been updated and yes they're in the small EFGT rulebook.

ScarpeIron wrote:

I agree that Hobbit rules makes for a totally different game than the LoTR rules (beyond the army profiles).

GW didn't break the game with the Hobbit, they just put their stamp on it. It went from low-fantasy Middle Earth to high-fantasy Middle Earth.

There's certainly more argument for this idea than any form of power creep but a totally different game? I don't personally agree. Monsters sorely needed the boosts they received, the new Heroic Actions have added some interesting tactical options and, whilst not perfect, I like the special strikes when they're not abused.

I think it very much feels like the same game as it did previously just with slightly more depth thanks to the new additions.

Power creep anyone?

Who is online