|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 13, 2017 17:18:00 GMT
Well 3 free solos and advance move on an already fast unit are quite compelling. It's not the next Ghost Fleet, but it's out there. Um...Alright. Not really seeing it. I mean even as spam its pretty weak at that.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 13, 2017 19:08:23 GMT
Well 3 free solos and advance move on an already fast unit are quite compelling. It's not the next Ghost Fleet, but it's out there. Um...Alright. Not really seeing it. I mean even as spam its pretty weak at that. Agreed. As a Ret player who has tested the Halberdier spam jank, it's not particularly powerful - it's fast, but that's all it has going for it. Defenders is a powerful theme, and advance moving Halberdiers is part of that, but I'd rarely run more than 2 units of them. The spam list is a stupid skew that probably won't see serious play.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Jun 13, 2017 20:23:46 GMT
people who can't see the big picture. There is a group of people who are stuck in an echo chamber called "The Internet" that cannot mentally take a step back and see what Privateer Press tried to do and is in the process of trying to do. This group is a subset of the group of people stuck in the same echo chamber called "The Internet" that all like to play the same units and the same army lists. I'd draw a Venn diagram showing this relationship, but I am just too damn lazy to do this. This is pretty rude of you. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a short-sighted idiot. But to remain on topic: What is the big picture? To give you a bit of context, I like playing balanced armies that contain a bit of everything. In my case some beasts, some Praetoreans, some Reivers and some Paingivers. But themes in their current incarnation massively discourage this kind of list, which is my favorite kind. What is the bigger picture here and why should I be optimistic about it? I like being optimistic so please make me. Yes, it was pretty rude. The idea was to shock the reader out of complacency and/or be humorous. Apparently my writing style shocked you into not reading the rest of my post - I'm sorry it had that effect. I encourage you to read the rest of my post to get an idea of what I think PP's strategy is. If my writing style is not clear please let me know and I will be happy to have another go at it. I'm glad to hear that you like to play balanced armies, it's nice to know that I'm not the only person who has an appreciation for a combined arms approach to combat. Since the only theme army that I know of for the Skorne is the Winds of Death that is/was in CID, and it is primarily a ranged attack list, I don't have much good news for you. Realistically, I doubt there ever will be good news for Skorne combined arms players until a greater depth of models is created. Let's face it - theme armies are armies where you accept certain restrictions to get certain benefits. By their nature a majority of them are skewed and lopsided. Unless (Until?) PP recreates Makeda1's theme army from Mk2 you probably won't see a theme army that gives bonuses for a basic Praetorian/Reiver/Paingiver - no specialties force.
|
|
|
Post by Korianneder on Jun 13, 2017 20:27:36 GMT
Jack heavy theme lists are fine.
- A convergence player.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Jun 13, 2017 23:47:48 GMT
Yes, it was pretty rude. The idea was to shock the reader out of complacency and/or be humorous. Apparently my writing style shocked you into not reading the rest of my post - I'm sorry it had that effect. Thing is, if you're being rude for a reason, you're still indistinguishable from people who are being rude for no reason. I don't read either long enough to see if there's a difference.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Jun 14, 2017 1:21:42 GMT
The only problem with Jack & Beast themes is that not everyone has one. Heavy Metal, Jaws of the Wolf, Creator's Might, Forges of War, & Bones of Orboros don't invalidate other faction builds, and there's plenty of other things that are seeing play. They're options, but I still see plenty of lists in those factions that don't play these themes. The only themes that have come close to completely taking over their respective factions competitive lists are Ghost Fleet, Oracles of Annihilation, Destruction Initiative, and Power of Dhunia. Yes 3 of those 4 are Jack/Beast themes, but what they all really have in common is that they all belong to factions that were precieved to be underpowered or crutching on 1-2 models before theme forces were released. The problem isn't with the theme forces, the problem is that most nontheme lists in those specific factions suck, and have sucked for most of mark3. Oracles took over Legion not because it's OP, but because before it Legion was crutching super hard on Thphon & Hellmouths with very little list variety. Before Ghost Fleet Cryx was by and large crutching on Satyxis Raiders, Stalkers, & Coven. These themes are the best, or only in Convergence's case, themes in their factions, are competitive, and exist in factions that had very few competitive lists before the release of Themes. The problem isn't the theme forces, it's the lack of competitive options available to specific factions.
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Jun 14, 2017 4:15:19 GMT
There are some interesting, but perhaps unfortunate, differences between jack themes. Heavy Metal and Jaws of the Wolf, for example, both encourage you to take jacks by giving you free points. So in that sense they have a similar design approach. I'll take those two as the examples. This isn't meant to be a discussion of the two themes, but rather a wider point about themes not necessarily being equal.
Heavy Metal enables the free points to be spent on models which: (i) would probably be taken anyway; and (ii) are particularly good at benefiting jacks (Squire and Journeymen).
By contrast, Jaws does give some solos which benefit jacks (Forge Seer) but in a more complex way (marshal or not, magic weapons vs battlegroup buffs). The other free options aren't ones which are close to auto-includes in the same way as in Heavy Metal.
Similarly, both themes give reposition 3" to Mechaniks. Heavy Metal also gives that to solos, which can be helpful (as an aside, that would be amazing in Jaws, which is probably why it isn't a theme benefit - repositioning Manhunters could hit and retreat into forests and the Widowmaker Marksman could combo with Swift Hunter to be moving around all over the place).
That perhaps suggests that not all jack themes are created equally, even when they use the same basic mechanics in the theme design.
The other theme buffs then also differ markedly. Khador themes have spread some of the jack benefits around their themes. Advance Move for jacks is in Winter Guard Kommand, but free points for taking jacks is in Jaws. By contrast Heavy Metal gives an effective, but smaller, speed buff for jacks by increasing the deployment zone for the whole army and free points for taking jacks. So the jack benefits are more concentrated in the Cygnar themes as a whole than is the case for Khador.
This isn't to say that Jaws is a bad theme - I really like it in fact. But it is less of a pure jack theme than Heavy Metal. The benefits are more diverse. This might be the more complex reality. We see something like Jaws with 'free points for jacks' and think 'Jack theme!', when in fact PP's design intent might be more complex than that.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Jun 14, 2017 4:55:35 GMT
Yes, it was pretty rude. The idea was to shock the reader out of complacency and/or be humorous. Apparently my writing style shocked you into not reading the rest of my post - I'm sorry it had that effect. Thing is, if you're being rude for a reason, you're still indistinguishable from people who are being rude for no reason. I don't read either long enough to see if there's a difference. I'm sorry I triggered you, please enjoy the rest of the conversation without me from the comfort of your safe zone.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 14, 2017 5:06:23 GMT
There are some interesting, but perhaps unfortunate, differences between jack themes. Heavy Metal and Jaws of the Wolf, for example, both encourage you to take jacks by giving you free points. So in that sense they have a similar design approach. I'll take those two as the examples. This isn't meant to be a discussion of the two themes, but rather a wider point about themes not necessarily being equal. Heavy Metal enables the free points to be spent on models which: (i) would probably be taken anyway; and (ii) are particularly good at benefiting jacks (Squire and Journeymen). By contrast, Jaws does give some solos which benefit jacks (Forge Seer) but in a more complex way (marshal or not, magic weapons vs battlegroup buffs). The other free options aren't ones which are close to auto-includes in the same way as in Heavy Metal. Similarly, both themes give reposition 3" to Mechaniks. Heavy Metal also gives that to solos, which can be helpful (as an aside, that would be amazing in Jaws, which is probably why it isn't a theme benefit - repositioning Manhunters could hit and retreat into forests and the Widowmaker Marksman could combo with Swift Hunter to be moving around all over the place). That perhaps suggests that not all jack themes are created equally, even when they use the same basic mechanics in the theme design. The other theme buffs then also differ markedly. Khador themes have spread some of the jack benefits around their themes. Advance Move for jacks is in Winter Guard Kommand, but free points for taking jacks is in Jaws. By contrast Heavy Metal gives an effective, but smaller, speed buff for jacks by increasing the deployment zone for the whole army and free points for taking jacks. So the jack benefits are more concentrated in the Cygnar themes as a whole than is the case for Khador. This isn't to say that Jaws is a bad theme - I really like it in fact. But it is less of a pure jack theme than Heavy Metal. The benefits are more diverse. This might be the more complex reality. We see something like Jaws with 'free points for jacks' and think 'Jack theme!', when in fact PP's design intent might be more complex than that. Problem is, when a theme gives free stuff based on taking jacks, and doesn't restrict the kinds of jacks you can take, it'll end up being a jack theme, unless it excludes truly essential support pieces.
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Jun 14, 2017 8:00:03 GMT
I don't agree with that. Jaws is a good example. Some Khador players are taking it with Irusk2 (not a jack caster) and running two units of Kayazy Assassins (who he supports well), taking about 50 points of jacks to give them the two Underbosses for free. That means that 'jack theme' under that caster and in this build is only about 50% jacks and otherwise infantry. My Zerkova1 build under Jaws is 62 points of jacks and 41 of paid for warrior models. By contrast, I've got a Butcher1 list I like in Winterguard Kommand (no free stuff from taking jacks) which is 75 points of jacks.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 14, 2017 8:05:00 GMT
I think jaws is really neat for that reason. Can't wait to play it against Gravediggers and slaughter them.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Jun 14, 2017 8:13:22 GMT
Problem is, when a theme gives free stuff based on taking jacks, and doesn't restrict the kinds of jacks you can take, it'll end up being a jack theme, unless it excludes truly essential support pieces. And one other problem with the themes so far is that "all non-character jacks" is very inclusive, broad and....well, non-thematic. Given that infantry is more marginal in Mk3, losing access to some of them is less of a hindrance than being limited to (say) Juggernaut-based jacks for Winterguard, electric jacks for Storm Division, etc. The machines are varied and built for different roles, but apart from Circle, there's no acknowledgement of that in the themes.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 14, 2017 8:19:26 GMT
And one other problem with the themes so far is that "all non-character jacks" is very inclusive, broad and....well, non-thematic. That's kinda arbitrary. All Jacks are just mass produced machines made for just about every scenario. They're not particularly, or visually distinct, or different from one another with base underlying mechanics. ALL of them are used for instance with Winter Guard (In fluff and imagery) depending on the area. In Jaws the idea is that the slower ones are moving up. But all of Khadors jacks are the slower ones. There is like 1 singular chassis in Cygnar that runs off Electricity, and again nothing about the Ironclad distances it from the Stormknights
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Jun 14, 2017 10:19:47 GMT
Problem is, when a theme gives free stuff based on taking jacks, and doesn't restrict the kinds of jacks you can take, it'll end up being a jack theme, unless it excludes truly essential support pieces. And one other problem with the themes so far is that "all non-character jacks" is very inclusive, broad and....well, non-thematic. Given that infantry is more marginal in Mk3, losing access to some of them is less of a hindrance than being limited to (say) Juggernaut-based jacks for Winterguard, electric jacks for Storm Division, etc. The machines are varied and built for different roles, but apart from Circle, there's no acknowledgement of that in the themes. Two out of three themes in Legion restrict the warbeasts available to them.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Jun 14, 2017 10:38:20 GMT
And one other problem with the themes so far is that "all non-character jacks" is very inclusive, broad and....well, non-thematic. That's kinda arbitrary. All Jacks are just mass produced machines made for just about every scenario. They're not particularly, or visually distinct, or different from one another with base underlying mechanics. ALL of them are used for instance with Winter Guard (In fluff and imagery) depending on the area. In Jaws the idea is that the slower ones are moving up. But all of Khadors jacks are the slower ones. There is like 1 singular chassis in Cygnar that runs off Electricity, and again nothing about the Ironclad distances it from the Stormknights Well, yes, it's arbitrary. That's what's frustrating. Themes adhere to the fluff (except when they handwave in new fluff to justify a random pairing like JotW), but the writers don't seem to notice that giving some factions unlimited jack / beast options because fluff, and harshly limiting what others have access to because fluff....is gonna create imbalance. (edit) As a Mercenary player, where two of the themes limit what sort of jacks / monstrosities can be taken, and they all limit warcasters....I really notice the difference when I'm playing against a Legion army with the theme of "Uh....sometimes warlocks bring lots of beasts, I guess?", and since I don't have an equivalent jackspam theme, I'm playing 75pts vs 95pts.
|
|