View Full Version : Discussion: Do we even need the Unique ring anymore?
Hesster56
02/27/2011, 18:31
A discussion on the main page about the Skrulls got me thinking about the status of a Unique figure in the current game environment.
Originally, a figure was made Unique based on a few different factors. Whether WK wanted to produce an REV, or whether the character was better served by making one specific instance over a more traditional appearance, the power level of the character, and even the rarity of the figure went into assigning the coveted silver ring.
With the advent of the 60 figure CUR/SR sets as opposed to REV/U, we still see the Unique ring, but do we really need to?
From a design standpoint, WK is likely making 60 unique sculpts anyway-let's just table the re-used sculpts we've seen recently for now. The SR level replaces the Unique as the "hard to get" figure. With special powers popping up all over, throwing the "really good figure" label on anyone is possible.
What we're left with for the Uniques then is "You can't field multiples." Oddly enough, WK keeps tossing the Unique label on figures that don't need it, especially at 300 points, and ignoring figures that can be devastating with a few copies out there.
Look at the Justice League set for instance. Three of the Uniques in that set are Emperor Joker, Flash, and Power Ring. You can only field one Joker in a 300 point game, Flash is decent but can't break invulnerable, and no one wants to play Power Ring, let alone multiples of him. On the other hand, there is Batman. I've seen teams with two or more of him just destroy teams.
Want to go more recent? The only two Uniques in DC 75 are Larfleeze and the Wonder Twins. WoS put the ring around Nightcrawler, but it also put the ring on Mary Jane and Jameson, who are pretty easy to ignore.
So after all that, I ask you: Do we still need the Unique label? Or should we just let the pieces show up without that?
Milo Garret
02/27/2011, 18:32
Until there is some sort of highlander rule for non generics, yes we still need the unique ring.
With the advent of the 60 figure CUR/SR sets as opposed to REV/U, we still see the Unique ring, but do we really need to?
...
What we're left with for the Uniques then is "You can't field multiples." Oddly enough, WK keeps tossing the Unique label on figures that don't need it, especially at 300 points, and ignoring figures that can be devastating with a few copies out there.
So, what, the argument here is, "More figures should have it, so we don't need it"? I'm not getting it.
Want to go more recent? The only two Uniques in DC 75 are Larfleeze and the Wonder Twins. WoS put the ring around Nightcrawler, but it also put the ring on Mary Jane and Jameson, who are pretty easy to ignore.
I can't really explain Jameson, but Mary Jane fully deserves it. She's ignorable as an individual, but in large groups, cheap wildcards can become quite broken, as anyone who remembers the old Mary Jane bystander in it's heyday can attest to.
***
Until there is some sort of highlander rule for non generics, yes we still need the unique ring.
Highlander rules have had enough discussion, let's keep to the issue.
Mary Jane's Willpower makes her even better. Use her as a battery for a SHIELD team. If you want to keep it in set, use the Common Iron Man as an example. Simply brutal.
I'm not even sure we needed U's in the first place. They were the original SRs (kind of) and even then it didn't necessarily make sense. (Looking at you Bat Sentry)
Avengers gave us:
Iron Man
Taskmaster
Red Skull
Molecule Man
Namor
Ares
Hulk
Hawkeye
Cap and Bucky
Mandarin
The Heralds
Of those I agree with Mandarin, Cap and Bucky, and the Heralds. Those are definitive characters. Most people wouldn't field one let alone two of the first four or five listed. If anything Scarlet Witch should be a U to decrease her abuse as a support piece. I field 2 and sometimes 3 of her when I can.
Justice League:
Joker
Parasite
Flash
Deadman
Granny Goodness
Batman and Robin
Mr. Mxyzptlk
Power Ring
Lobo
Amazo
Big Barda and Mister Miracle
Doomsday
Phantom Stranger
Again, half aren't worth fielding or putting more than one. BB and MM, Doomsday, Phantom Stranger, B&R, and Amazo. I feel those are the most UNIQUE there. Very specific.
Unless there is a trend to really make a difference between Batman and this is Batman from Detective Comics #132 where he did this specific thing, U's can go away.
Or just put it on broken pieces. :P
Question: Do we need Uniques?
Answer: (Or at least my answer....)
Does anyone want to face multiple nightcrawler's? :ermm:
Question: Do we need Uniques?
Answer: (Or at least my answer....)
Does anyone want to face multiple nightcrawler's? :ermm:
Does anyone want to face 4 OotS Batman? Before the ATA change, have 4 Scarlet Witches ATA to Mystics or Batman Ally or something else. Maybe Ultimates. I think it was a BRILLIANT idea to make Nightcrawler U. Did they make him that way since he had that power set or was it because that was the champion decided figure from a while back?
I could almost say that Spider-Man from SI should be U. Put a couple of him and a Mr. Fantastic with Brilliant Tactician and you have a monster team.
If nothing else, use the silver ring as a game balancer. Or just balance the game. :P
m0rpheus
02/27/2011, 19:48
I'd rather see MORE Uniques. Basically all non-generics should be Unique from now on in my opinion.
Grumpygoat
02/27/2011, 20:05
Yes we still need the unique ring, and more to the point, more figures should have the unique ring. As in, most of them. That's unlikely to happen, but there still should be a degree of highlander enforcement in the game.
I think more U's would actually put more strategy INTO the game. Taking away the ability to make teams like the last Heroclix tourney winner (Shazam and all that PC) would force people to REALLY look at pieces and make teams. I think it would also make themes stronger too. If I can only play ONE OotS Batman, then I can play him with the following Gotham City characters.
I enjoy running multiples of the same figure, I've stated it a few times now. The worst was running a couple of Dr. Stranges in a 400 point game.
I definitely think the LEs should have the gold ring. Those are an exact representation of that character. Edward Nigma......
EDIT: Adding one more thought
I remember seeing several discussions about the U just coming from Mage Knight. Here is a quote from the Mage Knight Wikipedia page:
Mage Knight figures were sold in Starter Packs (which historically contained eight or nine figures along with rules and dice) and Booster Packs (four or five figures). Figures were sold in base sets, as well as expansion sets, and distributed with seven rarity levels. Levels 1 through 5 were assigned to the standard "infantry" figures, each of which was available in 3 power levels: Weak, Standard and Tough. Low power and cost figure were of 1-2-3 rarity, middle range figures were 2-3-4, and stronger army figures were 3-4-5. Level 6 figures were Uniques, which carried the stipulation that only one of any individual Unique could appear in a player's army.
Uniques were used in a way to show a SPECIFIC soldier, warrior, mage, etc. That then just transferred over into Heroclix as the ORIGINAL (IMHO) super rares. It didn't really make any sense, but there they were. Then they switched to the new format and KEPT the U's, but made them "different" and gave us the actual SR category.
It almost seems like was no real gameplan for U's in Heroclix.
IMHO, of course.
thanosstar
02/27/2011, 20:24
I'd rather see MORE Uniques. Basically all non-generics should be Unique from now on in my opinion.
rep to you. very much agree with this statement
insafarline
02/27/2011, 20:35
In the "point formula" unique status could give some sort of discount that allows for better stats. No way to really know but it may be some sort of balancing issue.
Just to be clear, I'm in support of the Unique rings - my point was that I would hate to see multiple nightcrawlers out there.
I like the idea of more uniques. Other than generics, I'm not a big fan of seeing multiples.
They should just have three colored rings on dials, with one being Silver for Uniques, and go back to Gold for LE's. That way, you would know you could not use more than one of any of these kind in a team build, which I think is still a Core Rule. I also think they should add the Highlander Rule to the Heroclix Rules, but only as an Optional Rule, so that people are not forced to use it, and then from now on, put next to the Real Name on the back of the Character Card, the word "Generic" for those that are considered Generic to where you can use more than one using the Optional Highlander Rule.
JoeGualtieri
02/27/2011, 22:24
\
I can't really explain Jameson, but Mary Jane fully deserves it. She's ignorable as an individual, but in large groups, cheap wildcards can become quite broken, as anyone who remembers the old Mary Jane bystander in it's heyday can attest to.
Because he's 26 points with two upfront clicks of Perplex. If he wasn't unique, he'd be the Modern Age version of a Con Artist. Lilah (from Jonah Hex) was likely made unique for similar reasons.
Yes we still need the unique ring, and more to the point, more figures should have the unique ring. As in, most of them. That's unlikely to happen, but there still should be a degree of highlander enforcement in the game.
That's a personal preference, Grumpygoat. That statement should end in "IMO". I get sick of people foisting their idea of 'reality' on my game.
Anyway, we still need unique rings, but not to enforce a no dupes rule.
brevard321
02/27/2011, 22:28
I think there should be more pieces designated as Unique, but not every named figure should be Unique.
I would save the Unique status for obviously broken dials, or for characters that you will only generally see one of, such as Thanos or the Beyonder for instance. There have been many comics with multiple Spider-Mans or Batmans, for instance.
Of course, I also believe that all non-generic LE's should also be Unique, so that people don't hoard the prizes or FCBD pieces. It's great that FCBD War Machine was Unique because it meant there were a lot more to go around, since you can truly only PLAY one at a time.
And of course, generics should never be Unique, but that's obvious. :)
It's a discussion. Almost every statement here is a personal preference. In my opinion, it's a waste of time to specify every single opinion statement with "In my opinion". We don't want to fill up the Internet, man!
It's a discussion. Almost every statement here is a personal preference. In my opinion, it's a waste of time to specify every single opinion statement with "In my opinion". We don't want to fill up the Internet, man!
At least you said "in my opinion". lol.
And true, it's a discussion, but as a fellow geek-grammar guy you can detect the nuance of somebody just saying 'this is x' rather than 'this is the way i see x'.
danielfelts
02/27/2011, 22:42
Each figure represents a period in the character's career. If the reasoning behind the Highlander rule not being standard is because sometimes Superman teams up with his future self from next week, then I think that Unique's should be reserved for those figures that represent a single moment or a very brief period of time.
Bombastic Bag-man only lasted the amount of time it took Peter to get from the roof of the Baxter Building to his place.
Kid Zoom lasted about an hour before the Rogues finished him off.
I would love to see more figs with the Unique ring, but maybe ignore the unique ring for sealed games?
Hesster56
02/28/2011, 06:25
So, what, the argument here is, "More figures should have it, so we don't need it"? I'm not getting it.
I guess the really concise version I was going for of the rambling original post is:
The only real effect to the game that the silver ring still has is the limit of that figure to one per team, and WK isn't doing that good a job managing it. Therefore I feel it is kind of obsolete.
Clixkilla
02/28/2011, 07:27
YES!
Why? The possibility of going against a team of 2 cosmic spidermen, and a bunch of nightcrawlers.
necrodog
02/28/2011, 10:27
First some history...
In MageKnight the unique figures were the faction leaders, and without question the most potent figures within the faction. The same was true of MechWarrior. How that translated to HeroClix is a little fuzzy, however.
We do have this, though: just before LOSH/Avengers, Seth posted an article on the topic of REVU vs CURSR. One of the points he made was that the unique designation was intended for game balance: to prevent multiples of the most potent dials on a single force. He lamented that it was being twisted into use for characters who were not particularly potent but who didn't warrant REV representation: his example was Guardian from CD. So a benefit from his POV of leaving REVU as a structure was that the unique designation could be used as intended, to limit multiples of the more potent dials.
We all know (or should) that the unique tag was never intended to support any kind of Highlander rule: we can debate the pros and cons of that in another thread if you choose, but the reality is that Wizkids has never supported that concept. If you're lobbying for them to continue sporadic use of the designation because you're a Highlander rule fan you're pretty much grasping at straws.
I think the designation, used as intended, is a good one. The game is not enhanced by playing multiple Nightcrawlers. The designation isn't always going where it needs to, and sometimes it goes somewhere that doesn't really make sense (Avengers Ironman). so execution may need some work, but the concept is a good one and needs to continue.
Thrumble Funk
02/28/2011, 10:42
I'm all for certain figures maintaining their U status.
Hero_guy
02/28/2011, 11:18
What is needed is more people play-testing the figures. We need a sample from the actual consumer group and not just the guys who are already involved with the creation process already. Its been proven time and again that it really takes the player base to find the most exploitable loop-holes.
The unique ring is a good idea. Limit something that you think might be unbalanced in the game (if used in multiples) to just one copy per player. The problem isn't in the mechanic, its in the application. As others (including the OP) has said, figures that are over a certain point value, say 250+pts, don't really need it as you will not be seeing more than one at a standard tourney. Its the figures that are exceptionally good at what they do that need to be limited and under say 150pts or so, that need to be limited. Figures like Icons Cheetah and Justice League Batman.
Also, putting them on every figure that is not a generic will basically kill the b&m stores. After a certain amount of booster purchases, the chances of you getting a figure that you can still use drop to practically nothing. Generics help that a bit but that only goes so far. And you can really only add so many to an already small 60 figure set before you start hearing (even more) complaints about how the generics are taking away all the slots for more unique figs that we don't already have for character x or team z.
HH2011003
02/28/2011, 11:35
Question: Do we need Uniques?
Answer: (Or at least my answer....)
Does anyone want to face multiple nightcrawler's? :ermm:
I think this has sort of become what the Unique ring is for: reigning in characters like Nightcrawler or Mary Jane that could be terribly obnoxious as a swarm. Other than that, I do feel like it's a little outdated... but this one particular use keeps it important on a gameplay level.
SevenBlueSeven
02/28/2011, 11:41
Yes. I think we completely need the unique ring.
There will always be those pieces that are so powerful that using more than one of them on any team would be unbalancing.
Also, I can imagine in that mythical point value generator that unique dials get a slight reduction in point cost or allow the piece to be more powerful at the assigned point value.
Lofcutus
02/28/2011, 11:44
I will agree with others and say that not only does the Unique ring still have a place in HeroClix, it is not used enough.
The Unique form of a character was always meant to be a certain point in that character's career. Something that is special.
For example, ALL of the characters (save for Hal) in The Blackest Night set should have been Unique...
At least you said "in my opinion". lol.
: - )
And true, it's a discussion, but as a fellow geek-grammar guy you can detect the nuance of somebody just saying 'this is x' rather than 'this is the way i see x'.
I find nuances of tone very hard to accurately determine in online conversations. I didn't read anything in Grumpygoat's text that sounded like an absolute statement instead of expressing an opinion. You sounded like you were overreacting to me, but I prefer to read everything in the best possible light.
***
First some history...
In MageKnight the unique figures were the faction leaders, and without question the most potent figures within the faction. The same was true of MechWarrior. How that translated to HeroClix is a little fuzzy, however.
But Mage Knight and MechWarrior were explicitly "highlander" games. The unique figures were individuals, but every other figure was a type, a battlefield unit.
I suppose it is now doomed that this thread will become yet another Highlander discussion.
We do have this, though: just before LOSH/Avengers, Seth posted an article on the topic of REVU vs CURSR. One of the points he made was that the unique designation was intended for game balance: to prevent multiples of the most potent dials on a single force. He lamented that it was being twisted into use for characters who were not particularly potent but who didn't warrant REV representation: his example was Guardian from CD.
And, of course, nearly every LE was unique despite being not remotely "dangerous in multiples". It's been speculated that this (them being unique, that is) was to keep good players from hoarding them all, which made more sense when prizes were repeated throughout a season (and well into later seasons!).
So a benefit from his POV of leaving REVU as a structure was that the unique designation could be used as intended, to limit multiples of the more potent dials.
We all know (or should) that the unique tag was never intended to support any kind of Highlander rule: we can debate the pros and cons of that in another thread if you choose, but the reality is that Wizkids has never supported that concept.
The first sets were called "Infinity Challenge" and "Hypertime", and with examples of team builds with multiple copies of single characters in the rule book, explicitly to demonstrate that "Highlander" was not intended at all.
If you're lobbying for them to continue sporadic use of the designation because you're a Highlander rule fan you're pretty much grasping at straws.
I think the designation, used as intended, is a good one. The game is not enhanced by playing multiple Nightcrawlers. The designation isn't always going where it needs to, and sometimes it goes somewhere that doesn't really make sense (Avengers Ironman). so execution may need some work, but the concept is a good one and needs to continue.
I agree with this completely.
***
For example, ALL of the characters (save for Hal) in The Blackest Night set should have been Unique...
I agree with this, except for the except. My brother has done absolutely brutal things with that Hal. I'd hate to imagine what he could do with two of them, but he's too much of a theme player to ever do that.
I will agree with others and say that not only does the Unique ring still have a place in HeroClix, it is not used enough.
The Unique form of a character was always meant to be a certain point in that character's career. Something that is special.
For example, ALL of the characters (save for Hal) in The Blackest Night set should have been Unique...
I agree on this. Do not understand why they did not make them Uniques.
d_knight7
02/28/2011, 17:34
Just from a pure collector's angle: yes.
Pieces with a hot dial shoot up in price as it is, making it difficult to collect sets. Just look at when you have the perfect storm of great dial and non-unique like with HoT Cap. $20-25 for a rare? Aiieee.
SurreptitiousOne
02/28/2011, 17:35
Unique should switch to minion. They should change the rules that only pieces flagged as multiple use can be used multiple times.
songwriterz
02/28/2011, 17:35
Yes. And Highlander rule should be banned for all eternity!
d_knight7
02/28/2011, 17:42
Yes. And Highlander rule should be banned for all eternity!
Ah, you speak of the Gathering.
When only a few house rules are left, they will feel an irresistible pull towards a far away land... to fight for the LE prize.
lensnart
03/02/2011, 16:44
I agree with the idea that we need more uniques. I do not understand why it is okay to field three Malekith's but only one Ultimate iron Man. If the figure is one that would be singular in the comics the same should hold true in the game.
With the current use of the Unique ring, wizKids is almost saying "we made this one really good so you can only use one" which is a bit too meta game. I would prefer a more comic accurate "there is only one of this guy in the comic" stance, then you can still have a whole team of Spider-man, like a collection of alternate universes, they would just have different set numbers and sculpts. Kind of a middle ground between Highlander and use what you will.
Unfortunately it is a bit late in the game to set this right, but the right way would have been instead of using a ring to denote unique, a ring that denoted generic characters.
Or to answer the OP's question more succinctly: Yes and there should be more of them.
The_Sound_Of_Animals
03/02/2011, 16:58
from a comic book accurate stance every figure should be unique unless it is generic, ie: moloid, multiplex, fire demon, S.H.E.I.L.D. Agent, Hand Ninja, etc.
From a min/max tourney standpoint nothing should be highlander, more of a cheese them all and let dice gods sort it out
EvilTwinSkippy
03/02/2011, 17:43
I'd rather see MORE Uniques. Basically all non-generics should be Unique from now on in my opinion.
This!
(filler)
Crazy Bee
03/02/2011, 18:32
Anyway, we still need unique rings, but not to enforce a no dupes rule.
This exactly.
99% of the time I play I follow the highlander rule, not out of venue enforcement, but just personal preference. But every once in a while I like to use multiples for my own personal theme or scenerio.
Almost everyone is aware of "Highlander Rules" and really it should be kept as an optional rule. There are too many nuances that come up. What about the same character from different sets? What about different heroes but with the same identity?
If I'm running a 1000pt Green Lantern Corps Team and I want to proxy in dupes for unclixed Lanterns then I really should have the right to use them.
Unique status should only be applied for game balance issues, not to enforce a preference.
But in all honesty "Highlander Rules" should be addressed at the venue level.
If I'm running a 1000pt Green Lantern Corps Team and I want to proxy in dupes that I paid for or otherwise acquired then I really should have the right to use them.
While I agree with all of that, here though, I want to modify something.
With the current use of the Unique ring, wizKids is almost saying "we made this one really good so you can only use one" which is a bit too meta game.
How is it meta-anything? The unique ring is a game effect. Putting it on pieces in response to other game effects is just... making a game. Is putting Earthbound on a figure with flight (or some other abilities to nullify) "meta" or just the only way it makes sense to do it?
I would prefer a more comic accurate "there is only one of this guy in the comic" stance, then you can still have a whole team of Spider-man, like a collection of alternate universes, they would just have different set numbers and sculpts. Kind of a middle ground between Highlander and use what you will.
And then I can't use a whole bunch of Hypertime Hawkmen to represent thanagarian soldiers (who have never been done as generic) because you'd have a unique ring on them.
We don't need a highlander rule. Any formulation just gets in the way of creativity while doing nothing serious to enforce comic accuracy and only slightly hindering cheese players.
dantheman5999
03/02/2011, 20:00
Unique should switch to minion. They should change the rules that only pieces flagged as multiple use can be used multiple times.
yes yes do this necakids please please!!!
necrodog
03/02/2011, 20:47
This exactly.
99% of the time I play I follow the highlander rule, not out of venue enforcement, but just personal preference. But every once in a while I like to use multiples for my own personal theme or scenerio.
Almost everyone is aware of "Highlander Rules" and really it should be kept as an optional rule. There are too many nuances that come up. What about the same character from different sets? What about different heroes but with the same identity?
If I'm running a 1000pt Green Lantern Corps Team and I want to proxy in dupes for unclixed Lanterns then I really should have the right to use them.
Unique status should only be applied for game balance issues, not to enforce a preference.
But in all honesty "Highlander Rules" should be addressed at the venue level.
How is it meta-anything? The unique ring is a game effect. Putting it on pieces in response to other game effects is just... making a game. Is putting Earthbound on a figure with flight (or some other abilities to nullify) "meta" or just the only way it makes sense to do it?
And then I can't use a whole bunch of Hypertime Hawkmen to represent thanagarian soldiers (who have never been done as generic) because you'd have a unique ring on them.
We don't need a highlander rule. Any formulation just gets in the way of creativity while doing nothing serious to enforce comic accuracy and only slightly hindering cheese players.
Amen.
Keep in mind, too, that if WizKids mandates Highlander and only generic figures are allowed to be played in multipes, what does that do to the marketing of the product? There are (including WLs and LEs) 76 figures in the DC75 set, and 5 are generic. If you can't use more than one of the other 71, and neither can anyone else, what does that do to buyer interest? How does WizKids market a set of figures when roughly 94% are unique in use? Would anyone even buy blind boosters with that model, or are we pushing for a switch to blister packs only? Can the company survive making this product that way?
Well, I actually don't see how much effect that would have on player interest. I may oppose an enforced Highlander rule, but 98% of my games are Highlander compatible. Not making any great use of repeated figures hasn't seemed to slow my accumulation of figures down much at all.
clameire
03/09/2011, 04:38
no, we don't need REV-U since that as little to no signification in the game
WakandaMan
03/09/2011, 05:03
I'm in the 'Unique ring should go on all non-generic figure' camp and make no excuses about it. The game would be far better if that were the case.
At the very least though, I would prefer it if every powerful non-generic figure was a unique. We need more uniques!
mr_obvious
03/09/2011, 06:20
I'd rather see MORE Uniques. Basically all non-generics should be Unique from now on in my opinion.
Yes, it would have been nice to have a Highlander rule in the game from the start. Give a ring to generics or Multiple Man type figures denoting them as the figures that you can play multiples of ... everything else without a ring be "unique".
At the very least, I'm glad some of the "broken" figures like Nightcrawler are unique. I wish OotS Batman would have been. I've faced as many as 3 in a low point game. Not fun.
At the very least, I'm glad some of the "broken" figures like Nightcrawler are unique. I wish OotS Batman would have been. I've faced as many as 3 in a low point game. Not fun.
Looks at quote.
Looks at quote's username.
Yep, sounds about right! :laugh:
I'd rather see MORE Uniques. Basically all non-generics should be Unique from now on in my opinion.
Agreed. Filler
Keep it as it is. Highlander? In a collectible game with primarily named characters being the draw? Nope. If I pay for them I should be able to play them ALL as the rule, not the exception...just like it is now.
WakandaMan
03/09/2011, 19:16
And then I can't use a whole bunch of Hypertime Hawkmen to represent thanagarian soldiers (who have never been done as generic) because you'd have a unique ring on them.
You could still use one R,E and V HT Hawkman, one R and E Origins Hawkman (the V would be a bit much), one R, E and V Hawkgirl from Unleashed and the Starter Hawkgirl. How many Thanagarians do you need? There's LEs too.
But all this really says to me is that Wizkids needs to make Thanagarian generics. :)
We don't need a highlander rule. Any formulation just gets in the way of creativity while doing nothing serious to enforce comic accuracy and only slightly hindering cheese players.
And this is where the pro and anti highlander folks disagree. I think it would definitely help enforce comic accuracy, and even a slight hinderance to cheese players is worth pursuing.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.