|
Post by pangurban on May 9, 2017 6:00:15 GMT
Playing devils advocate here to the peeps who feel many changes are needed to bring back "balance" to the game. Why make so many changes when you can just change one rule and solve most if not all the problems? Pls don't get triggered. Why change so many models when you can just change a few and solve most problems? Because that's what mucking about with FA or Power Up does: change a crapload of models.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on May 9, 2017 8:20:07 GMT
Legion doesn't have support bloat because we have no good support. For beasts specifically. We have a ton of support bloat when it comes to our infantry; pricey UAs, standard bears with no weapon, solos with special rules that are near required to run the unit (Grotesque assassin), then the 38 points for the blight bringer if you want infantry to really do some work. Legion isn't meant to run that infantry heavy though...At least I'm pretty sure we're not. We didn't before. but things have changed. It's "all new war" after all. Legion does have support models for it's Beasts, namely the Shepherd, the Forsaken, and to some extent the Sorceress on Hellion, and it just so happens you have a Theme list that lets you get all your beast support for free.
Also with regards to UAs and solos for units being pricey, pretty much every theme force that is not jack/beast focused lets you get them for free, I guarantee Legion will get the same when more of its infantry forces are released.
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on May 9, 2017 8:43:33 GMT
Jeez the triggering is real. When I say that beasts have unlimited fury I consider that they can fully boost/do attacks and spend all their stacks in times of need and then risk the frenzy. But still, this game is about trading so often enough that beast will be killed before it can take said frenzy check. You also get the fury back trumping most assassination attempts if you kill one beast with fury on. I dunno, I really don't see why power up should be made worse, warbeasts should be a bit cheaper that's all. Let's make a comparison shalt we? A Devout vs a Cyclops Savage. I'm deliberately choosing an average choice here so you can't say I'm biased. You do not allocate any focus to the Dervish. You leave the Cyclops at full fury and subsequently frenzies. The Clops does nothing for a turn. The Devout can move up and attack twice, potentially thrice thanks to defensive strike. Lets say the Savage didn't frenzy. They cannot charge unless at least one beast handler is devoted to them, increasing its point cost by 1.25 for each fury taken off. Comparatively, a devout has a better defensive statline, more boxes, more attacks, a better MAT and STR, and better rules. And has easier access to empower, their version of fury manipulation. The only advantages a cyclops has is an extra SPD and having an animus that is competitively lackluster. In a jack spam vs beast spam list, you will see that the latter has far less beasts then Amon's 6 dervishes because we cannot manage that many. Our beasts are lower value and yet more expensive points wise and resource wise. Oh golly jee, you are making a biased comparison. You are comparing a jack with 2 initials against a beast with one, and also, as I said, the problem is that beasts are lackluster/overcosted. It isn't a problem with power up, it's a problem with beasts mate.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on May 9, 2017 13:47:19 GMT
Legion does have support models for it's Beasts, namely the Shepherd, the Forsaken, and to some extent the Sorceress on Hellion, and it just so happens you have a Theme list that lets you get all your beast support for free.
Also with regards to UAs and solos for units being pricey, pretty much every theme force that is not jack/beast focused lets you get them for free, I guarantee Legion will get the same when more of its infantry forces are released.
-.-" Anytime I mention "we have a bad support roster" people act like I have no idea what a shepherd is and what it does. Yes we have 2 models that are "support" in a sense. But my idea of a supporting model is that it gives something it already did not have. The Sorc & hellion is actually a support model in that respect. Shepherds and Forsaken really only manage fury. Therefore I see them as "fury management". (Yes forsaken can do stuff with the fury. that's nice.) Beast handlers though are fury mgmt AND support because of enrage and free charges. Fro more examples; blackclad stoneshaper, shifting stones, black clad wayfairer, Brennos, druid wilder, Feral/gorax, are all supports because they can do something for other models. So from MY PERSPECTIVE (which you don't have to agree with) we have hardly any support models for beasts in a beast-centric faction. Yes themes are giving free solos. But think of it this way; it's not a bonus, it's just a lateral shift in the point cost of the game. Instead of a 75pt game, it's a 90pt game. If you had the full 90pts and no theme restriction, would you spend the 15pts only the same solos? Probably not, you'd want to put in another Neraph, or a <insert desired model>, or upgrade a Carnivean to Typhon because there's no theme restriction. I don't want to start a storm on theme lists but it's really just a bad band-aid for the overcost of the rest of the models. So I don't see them as a benefit or advantage that allows you a support model or two. I'd rather see thing's points adjusted so that you can take a real list for 75pts instead of relying on getting 12-18 points "free" from a theme list.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on May 9, 2017 14:24:10 GMT
Legion does have support models for it's Beasts, namely the Shepherd, the Forsaken, and to some extent the Sorceress on Hellion, and it just so happens you have a Theme list that lets you get all your beast support for free.
Also with regards to UAs and solos for units being pricey, pretty much every theme force that is not jack/beast focused lets you get them for free, I guarantee Legion will get the same when more of its infantry forces are released.
-.-" Anytime I mention "we have a bad support roster" people act like I have no idea what a shepherd is and what it does. Yes we have 2 models that are "support" in a sense. But my idea of a supporting model is that it gives something it already did not have. The Sorc & hellion is actually a support model in that respect. Shepherds and Forsaken really only manage fury. Therefore I see them as "fury management". (Yes forsaken can do stuff with the fury. that's nice.) Beast handlers though are fury mgmt AND support because of enrage and free charges. Fro more examples; blackclad stoneshaper, shifting stones, black clad wayfairer, Brennos, druid wilder, Feral/gorax, are all supports because they can do something for other models. So from MY PERSPECTIVE (which you don't have to agree with) we have hardly any support models for beasts in a beast-centric faction. Yes themes are giving free solos. But think of it this way; it's not a bonus, it's just a lateral shift in the point cost of the game. Instead of a 75pt game, it's a 90pt game. If you had the full 90pts and no theme restriction, would you spend the 15pts only the same solos? Probably not, you'd want to put in another Neraph, or a <insert desired model>, or upgrade a Carnivean to Typhon because there's no theme restriction. I don't want to start a storm on theme lists but it's really just a bad band-aid for the overcost of the rest of the models. So I don't see them as a benefit or advantage that allows you a support model or two. I'd rather see thing's points adjusted so that you can take a real list for 75pts instead of relying on getting 12-18 points "free" from a theme list. Not gonna take the Theme Force discussion further, like you said lets stay on topic
The Shepard does just more than remove fury, it also has Medicate and Beast Master, both of which give you more flexibility of when you have to activate your Warlock.
I think the Forsaken is just fine, it can put out a couple of fully boosted melee attacks, or can do a sometimes devastating blight bomb.
I would say they are both pretty good support
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on May 9, 2017 14:36:47 GMT
I would say they are both pretty good support Yep, they are good for what they do. What I'm saying is our support roster is small. 2 models for the entire roster of beasts we have is sad. I'd love to just see the tool box expanded.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on May 9, 2017 14:49:03 GMT
I would say they are both pretty good support Yep, they are good for what they do. What I'm saying is our support roster is small. 2 models for the entire roster of beasts we have is sad. I'd love to just see the tool box expanded. that's fair enough, more choices is never a bad thing. I think the Hellion is a great example of support done well, its fluffy and is actually a great benefit, maybe they should give a solo that just buffed Nephilim in some way, or the lesser
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 9, 2017 14:52:43 GMT
I don't agree that restricting power-up is necessary. Now, I may not be the most experienced player and I may be biased because I play Harkevich and have been playing her back in Mk.II before she was cool, but before I go into details about this specific proposal, I think we need to examine the basic premise of this argument.
When we get down to it, the basic premise seems to be that all-jack armies are somehow bad and should be discouraged.
However, I'm not sure that is the case. Some people, believe it or not, signed up to a game called warmachine where wizards control giant robots because they want to play a wizard controlling an army of robots.
I, for one, think that it is great that one can play anything from lots of infantry to lots of jacks and have a reasonably balanced game. I think that should be the goal -- a game where dudespam can fight jackspam and everything in between and be reasonably balanced -- rather than trying to push people into a certain jack/infantry ratio.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on May 9, 2017 14:54:09 GMT
I don't agree that restricting power-up is necessary. Now, I may not be the most experienced player and I may be biased because I play Harkevich and have been playing her back in Mk.II before she was cool, but before I go into details about this specific proposal, I think we need to examine the basic premise of this argument. What have you done to your harkevich.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 9, 2017 15:02:15 GMT
I don't agree that restricting power-up is necessary. Now, I may not be the most experienced player and I may be biased because I play Harkevich and have been playing her back in Mk.II before she was cool, but before I go into details about this specific proposal, I think we need to examine the basic premise of this argument. What have you done to your harkevich.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on May 9, 2017 15:03:46 GMT
What have you done to your harkevich. You are a monster the likes of which the world has never seen. And I like it.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on May 9, 2017 15:04:44 GMT
reminds me of Monty Python's Life of Brian, I love it
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 9, 2017 15:33:03 GMT
Just wait until I finish Kommander Lola Zoktavir...
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 9, 2017 15:40:01 GMT
Just wait until I finish Kommander Lola Zoktavir... With her WarAxe Orsus I presume?
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on May 9, 2017 15:48:42 GMT
Just wait until I finish Kommander Lola Zoktavir... [a href=" "] [/a]
|
|