|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 12, 2017 19:04:41 GMT
I've always loved the model and while the rules are interesting, this light beast seems not quite good enough. That said, I'm not the most experienced player and perhaps I'm not seeing its true value. Is there some interaction or caster combo that I'm missing that really makes this beast shine? For those of you out there running this beast, why? What makes it work for you?
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Jun 12, 2017 19:20:07 GMT
I've always loved the model and while the rules are interesting, this light beast seems not quite good enough. That said, I'm not the most experienced player and perhaps I'm not seeing its true value. Is there some interaction or caster combo that I'm missing that really makes this beast shine? For those of you out there running this beast, why? What makes it work for you? He is decent light. I would consider him with Lylyth2 for sure, especially in Ravens of War theme. 2*4" AoE with critical fire is good stuff. He can be decent in meelee and his AD makes gives you interesting choices. Dig in makes him tougher to shoot out of the table. For 10 points you can't really expect much more. One thing he need is Mat/Rat fixer, but it's one thing we have abundance of. He is good, cheap toolset.
|
|
|
Post by snotling on Jun 12, 2017 19:31:03 GMT
If bethayne would work better, teraphs would be goid beasts for her.
They deploy quite far up the field, have reach and a gun that just loves cont corrosion.
Wouldashouldacoulda
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 12, 2017 19:51:00 GMT
If bethayne would work better, teraphs would be good beasts for her. They deploy quite far up the field, have reach and a gun that just loves cont corrosion. Wouldashouldacoulda Continuous corrosion of an AoE 4 does sound really nice for some dedicated high arm, single wound infantry hate (Looking at you, Ret). Do any of our casters care about Counter Blast? It seems expensive for what it does, but again, maybe I'm missing something.
|
|
Whiskie
Junior Strategist
Posts: 288
|
Post by Whiskie on Jun 12, 2017 20:20:24 GMT
I've used a couple of Teraphs with Lylyth2. They're alright and can replace the third Ravagore that's been popular with Lylyth2 in Oracles. Being able to make more attacks per turn is pretty nice for a list that otherwise struggles to deal with lots of lower value targets compared to fewer higher value ones. I can't say I've ever wanted to take a Teraph with any other Warlock though.
|
|
|
Post by snotling on Jun 12, 2017 20:37:31 GMT
The problem is, pow6 is to low pow on its own. A competent opponent will spread his inf enough, that hitting more than three wont gappen enough. And even against arm11 stuff you need a 6 to kill. so chances are good only two or so die. Thats just not cutting it for me.
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 12, 2017 21:20:41 GMT
Yeah.. not super encouraging, and the Lylith 2 ADR thread doesn't sound super promising either...
So fringe benefit from Bethayne in the form of continuous corrosion? Maybe?
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Jun 12, 2017 21:38:59 GMT
The problem is, pow6 is to low pow on its own. A competent opponent will spread his inf enough, that hitting more than three wont gappen enough. And even against arm11 stuff you need a 6 to kill. so chances are good only two or so die. Thats just not cutting it for me. Terraph shot is Pow13, so his blast damage is 7. It's one less than Ravagore and usually ok for most infantry. Also - critical fire. I believe Terraph can be valuable for all three Lylyths. Counterblast is terrible animus.
|
|
|
Post by Cheesebeard on Jun 12, 2017 22:09:32 GMT
The Teraph suffers from trying to do too many cute (but highly circumstantial) things at once, and is lacking in general power for its points class; a lot of its special rules end up tripping over each other, leading the beast to suffer in its points and functional efficiency.
A Ravagore being functionally replaced with two Teraphs is less a praise, in my opinion, and more a demonstration of both beasts lacking a strong role, causing them to become interchangeable. Both the Ravagore and Teraph could use some quality of life improvements, with their animi being an obvious starting point, but by no means the root of their problems.
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 12, 2017 23:30:26 GMT
I only half agree concerning the Ravagore. It's clearly the heavy shooting option, but it has a ton of melee attacks which drive the point cost up when ideally it will not be in melee at all. Also the scather, while nice, does mean that you have to choose between using it to control infantry and hitting a single, heavy target. On the one hand, you're right that it seems to be trying to fill 3 roles at once which increases its cost and takes up design space that could be filled by other beasts. On the other hand, you could argue that it's a jack-of-all-trades beast and the flexibility is a bonus inherent to its design (see the triple ravagore Abby 2 build).
|
|
|
Post by DanX on Jun 14, 2017 21:07:58 GMT
It is very fury efficinet compared to a bolt thrower. 12 range, AD and dig in, usually means it can walk 5 then dig in turn one, then start shooting. It has poor mat, but critical poison, so boosting can work very well sometimes Vs heavy infantry or even beasts. I think it's our 3rd best melee light? Soldier and Raek being only little better once melee is engaged?
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Jun 15, 2017 19:24:03 GMT
I want to use and love the Teraph so much more than I do today. I love the look of the model but outside of a weird janky Lylyth 2 list that spammed them in MK2... I haven't found many compelling reasons to take them.
I don't have Beth but I think that her synergy with the Teraph sounds awesome.
I hoped that they would update the Teraph's ranged weapon to straight up Cont' Fire for Kallus2 enablement. One can hope...
But on the note of its animus, I have a love/hate relationship with it. I love the concept - out of turn reaction sounds pure gold. In practice, the trigger range being so low that it is easily avoidable. Furthermore, most retaliatory attacks (Counterblast, Ornery, Saeren's feat) fall short of being effective due to low stats/no-boosting.
Now that I muse over this... one of the things that the Teraph is priced against is its critical effects (crit fire, crit poison). What if its animus was changed out for Zuriel's old animus? Eh - it was too powerful for poor Z, it would never happen.
|
|
|
Post by Cheesebeard on Jun 15, 2017 19:45:41 GMT
I want to use and love the Teraph so much more than I do today. I love the look of the model but outside of a weird janky Lylyth 2 list that spammed them in MK2... I haven't found many compelling reasons to take them. I don't have Beth but I think that her synergy with the Teraph sounds awesome. I hoped that they would update the Teraph's ranged weapon to straight up Cont' Fire for Kallus2 enablement. One can hope... But on the note of its animus, I have a love/hate relationship with it. I love the concept - out of turn reaction sounds pure gold. In practice, the trigger range being so low that it is easily avoidable. Furthermore, most retaliatory attacks (Counterblast, Ornery, Saeren's feat) fall short of being effective due to low stats/no-boosting. Now that I muse over this... one of the things that the Teraph is priced against is its critical effects (crit fire, crit poison). What if its animus was changed out for Zuriel's old animus? Eh - it was too powerful for poor Z, it would never happen. Legion actually has a surprising amount of Crit effects compared to any other faction in the game - check it out. You'd think with so much crit, we'd have more ways to introduce more dice into the equation, but maybe that's down the road, somewhere. Legion also has a fair amount of (crit) poison attacks, and that doesn't do us any favors in a jack-heavy meta. I'm personally not a fan of crit effects - you can't rely on them, and they usually end up contributing too much to a model's cost, it seems. Back to the Teraph, specifically, I'm of a similar mind that it contributes much less on the table than the beast in a vacuum would have you believe. I've always thought that counter-blast being 1 cost would resolve a lot of the issues - but, honestly, I'd rather it just had a more useful animus. Overall, the Teraph is an excellent representation of Legion's most common complaints of its models: Has a bunch of circumstantial rules that can be worked around (often accidentally), isn't particularly great at anything but has a few corner-case strengths, and needs to load up on fury to get any work done - with all of this contributing to a mildly inflated points cost. Thing kind of design is fine against balanced lists in a diverse meta, because you can kind of do a lot of things, and leverage buffs and circumstances to pull out the best options - however, in a meta dominated by spamming highly-efficient models, circumstantial strengths tend to have a hard time against raw power, and I think that's what we're seeing in the current meta. I've got two of the little buggers, and would love to use them, but on the table they have failed to prove their worth.
|
|
|
Post by DakRamsin on Jun 15, 2017 21:47:22 GMT
I think we might be on to something here. From a design perspective is Legion's strength supposed to be our adaptability, represented by our beast's ability to dynamically fill roles as needed in exchange for a slight increase in cost? From a fluff standpoint that makes a lot of sense given Everblight's style, and assuming I'm not totally off base, how well do we think this apparent adaptability has been realized in game?
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Jun 15, 2017 23:13:42 GMT
I think we might be on to something here. From a design perspective is Legion's strength supposed to be our adaptability, represented by our beast's ability to dynamically fill roles as needed in exchange for a slight increase in cost? From a fluff standpoint that makes a lot of sense given Everblight's style, and assuming I'm not totally off base, how well do we think this apparent adaptability has been realized in game? Traditionally Legion doesn't offer specialists but "jack of all trades" beasts. Many lists, notably L2 and T1, can have a Ravagore in their lists and rely on that heavy to act like a heavy late game, and we pay points for it. I don't think this makes Legion worse, more that some of the meat and potatoes factions pay too little for their heavies. Its hard to justify a ravaorgore when its almost 2 Marauders in price, but it looks better against 12 point juggernauts, ie 2 ravagores is probably worth 2 points more than 3 juggernauts. as for the Teraph, its only downside is mat 5 combined with pow 12, giving it severe melee deficiencies, however, ad and rng 2 melee and hand cannon+ is all nice. I just find 10 points to be a weird slot in legion list building for me.
|
|