Howdy ladies and gentlemen. As you may have heard on the Booted Dudes podcast, PBE is looking to product alt art, updated versions of the cards in the most recent errata. As we aim to provide the best work we can and prioritize these new shiny things, we wanted to reach out to the community regarding one specific card that was too highfalutin’ it got hit pretty hard last go around.
I am of course referring to that ole Hot Lead Flyin.’ So we have to ask you all, post errata, has this card seen any play, casual or otherwise, or was the errata essentially a ban, and it’s just been binder fodder ever since. Any and all feedback is much appreciated pardners!
It’s been trash since then for us. I wish the card, and its main concept, just didnt exist. I think it could be more like fanning the hammer with a requirement.
I never used it before the ban, and I haven’t used it since. I agree with @crx3800, the card and the ‘win when you lose’ concept aren’t good things for the game.
It was! 6C cost 1GR, react to winning a round of a shootout to increase the opposing casualties by 2 (in the days when each casualty = aceing!).
I’d much rather see a Fanning the Hammer style effect than old “Lose to Win” - I agree with the two posters above. It would need to be differentiated from Outgunned however.
The original Hot Lead Flyin’ was strong, a negative play experience and constrained design’s ability print new high value dudes.
The new version is weak and seldom (never?) sees play, but mercifully so. The new Paralysis Marks sees a bit of play and has showed up in a few decks that did well.
I think the change necessary, but a little excessive.
Before the change a dude like Darragh Meng was only seen as “on value with Hot Lead Flyin’”, which does a disservice to him. On top of that the ability to “cheat death” by reducing casualties, and then punish your opponent for winning is a pretty broken playstyle.
With that said, I really don’t like the new version at all. It basically becomes “Takin’ Ya With Me on 6s” but with more restrictions. You can’t use tokens, it is a headline, and Kung Fu dudes are at a huge disadvantage (they go back to printed value after being discarded).
The only card I want to try in a HLF deck is Mario Crane (Exp.1) because his ability seems pretty great with it… except harrowed dudes can’t be used to trigger HLF now…
Honestly, we started referring to “New HLF” as “One Fer The Road” and treating it as a new card. Then we just house ruled HLF to end with “…the winner takes 1 casualty up to the number of dudes you discarded or aced”. Still problematic, but at least now you have to actually lose a dude or 2.
Love that design team is seeking community input! You guys rock.
I wrote a whole post on this awhile back (which I would link if I knew how).
My opinion is that the original Hot Lead was far too strong, and the errata far too excessive. I am of the opinion that Lose-to-Win is a play strategy that deserves to be a part of the Doomtown experience, somewhere between the old version and the new version in terms of power. That strategic diversity, properly calibrated, is good for the game as a whole.
I think we should look at cards like Takin’ Ya With Me and Force Field, and can’t see if we can explore design space for Hot Lead Flyin’ to occupy it’s own niche on a similar power curve.
There were two fundamental flaws with the errata. First, it didn’t tweak how the card operated, it made effectively an entirely new card. You can’t even get the gist of what it’s doing form the text, so you needed to remember. And be able to explain to everyone. Second, the new card that was made was… bad. maybe not quite auction levels of bad. But, it doesn’t need to be auction levels of bad to be a coaster.
My personal opinion: Players saw the errata, and (even if they were happy about it) knew that the errata was a de facto ban, while still allowing AEG to claim there were no banned cards. If it is still believed that hot lead flyin was a problem, then either actual ban it or give it an errata that still maintains some semblance of the original functionality but tones it down.
I’d like to push back a little on some of the folks who feel strongly about the original Hot Lead Flyin’.
For those that “hate” it, and/or “hate” Lose-to-Win as a general strategy, is that the same as thinking it doesn’t belong in Doomtown?
I personally had some bad play experiences with the original (the cake being losing an entire 6-dude posse including the Original Sloane in a Texas Outlaw Tournament in a shootout I has otherwise “won”) - but even though my negative experiences stay with me, I can objectively still say that I think the Lose-to-Win strategy as embodied by HLF could be brought to a healthy level with some clever design.
It is a ban. One of the many reasons I feel it is a fair card when restricted to a minimum number in a deck. When it’s a four of you will always see it. When it’s less I think it becomes more fair. Though I would like to see more hand attack as well and those types of cards would also level the playing field a bit.
I’m fine with lose-to-win, so long as it offers easier counterplay. Pr0digy’s Flyin’ Zombies deck is a pretty clear example of lose to win, but it takes a while to get set up and can be beaten by stifling its economy. Hot Lead Flying offered no such counterplay and could be played on turn 1, provided they pack enough dudes of correct value.
As a player I was concerned when it became the standard for decks that control town square. Facing Oddities, Eagle Wardens, 108 WD, and some Sloane, it became the norm. To compare to L5R, it was like in 20F, when most decks were just a different flavor of how to play Standing Fast. Unfortunately the kind of decks that had the tools to stop it (Blessed), weren’t so good against other deck types.
I’d like to add, since it appears that this thread has the eyes/ears of PBE, I still think unprepared is a massively oppressive card on the environment. It could easily have been printed as two separate cards with the boot a dude and all his stuff, and -1 bullet and all the dude’s stuff is blank on the separate cards.
Both cards would have been strong enough to be viable. Both cards would come at the “single tower dude” issue in a different way, but still address it. Neither is so oppressive that it overwrites every other on value card for shootout decks.
Was it “broken” – I dunno, probably not. But I don’t think hot lead flyin was broken either. Unprepared was certainly just as oppressive on the environment and deck building as hot lead flying was.
One more question about the possibility that the Hot Lead errata be changed. Is consideration of it’s “original theme” going to be maintained?
I always imagined Takin’ Ya With Me to be sort of a skirmish card - dude vs dude mostly - whereas Hot Lead Flyin’ always struck me as a showdown card - posse vs posse.
To quote Classic: “The scary thing about Blackjack’s crew is, they really can shoot their way free.” -CL
