|
Post by josephkerr on Jun 23, 2017 21:59:00 GMT
I think this is a case of a Faction crutching on a powerful model and not thinking they can play without it. There's been free, unrestricted access to the squire forever, and it's been the first 5 points of every Cygnar list all edition. Some limited players don't know how to win without it and need better players to "unlock" Gravediggers, at which point theyll be happy playing a list that won something and it will be a revelation that makes them try othe casters/lists without squire. But every theme list has haters when they come out. Gravediggers is a great list and it will win something. Until then, for a large part of the Cygnar community, "no squire, no play".
edit: I think the same thing happened in legion where deathstalkers and hellmouths were required for list building. Now, with our themes, we get to explore other things, even Children of the Dragon!
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 23, 2017 22:05:08 GMT
And the Stormlances main advantage was doing everything better (Or at least good enough) then all the other options at the same time. It was that it was harder to kill, killed infantry and warjacks. Now it kills infantry slightly worse and kills warjacks slightly better. I don't see much of a change in the long run. Starting saying that it was a well deserved nerf and they needed it, I think you are heavily underestimating it. The changes were: -1 RAT and -2 POW on the guns (Laddermore) Lost E-Leap on guns. Gained 1 POW on melee attack. Losing E-Leap alone makes their ranged kill potential halve, and if you consider that with it they also lost their chance to deal with high def units (and the -1 RAT on the top of it makes it even more evident), and they lost a lot of power also against high ARM troops (-2 POW) their ranged potential is about 30% of what it was. All they got in change is a +1 POW on melee attack, that is nice but hardly crucial on a 5 man unit (the whole unit now does up to 5 more damage against a jack, if they all manage to arrive alive and charge it). If you also count that they are very expensive, and that now to do work they have to commit (and so trade) hoping to kill more than 20 points worth of models, the nerf is substantial. Again, well deserved and I wouldn't have minded a DEF 12 on the top of it, but saying that it was a sidegrade only supports my idea that most people discuss balance without knowing how the thing they are discussing works.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 23, 2017 22:09:11 GMT
I think this is a case of a Faction crutching on a powerful model and not thinking they can play without it. There's been free, unrestricted access to the squire forever, and it's been the first 5 points of every Cygnar list all edition. Some limited players don't know how to win without it and need better players to "unlock" Gravediggers, at which point theyll be happy playing a list that won something and it will be a revelation that makes them try othe casters/lists without squire. But every theme list has haters when they come out. Gravediggers is a great list and it will win something. Until then, for a large part of the Cygnar community, "no squire, no play". edit: I think the same thing happened in legion where deathstalkers and hellmouths were required for list building. Now, with our themes, we get to explore other things, even Children of the Dragon! I hate the whole "crutch" idea in this game because it adds a moral dimension to taking models which just shouldn't exist. People were taking the squire and they were allowed to do so. Not all Cygnar lists automatically included the squire and pre theme I was taking it out because sometimes it provided too few benefit for too high a cost. Stryker 1 didn't (and still doesn't) need it, Haley 3 doesn't, Haley 1 can actually live without it now, etc etc. If someone takes a powerful model then that's their prerogative. It's not a "crutch", it's an option.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 23, 2017 22:10:32 GMT
And the Stormlances main advantage was doing everything better (Or at least good enough) then all the other options at the same time. It was that it was harder to kill, killed infantry and warjacks. Now it kills infantry slightly worse and kills warjacks slightly better. I don't see much of a change in the long run. Starting saying that it was a well deserved nerf and they needed it, I think you are heavily underestimating it. The changes were: -1 RAT and -2 POW on the guns (Laddermore) Lost E-Leap on guns. Gained 1 POW on melee attack. Losing E-Leap alone makes their ranged kill potential halve, and if you consider that with it they also lost their chance to deal with high def units (and the -1 RAT on the top of it makes it even more evident), and they lost a lot of power also against high ARM troops (-2 POW) their ranged potential is about 30% of what it was. All they got in change is a +1 POW on melee attack, that is nice but hardly crucial on a 5 man unit (the whole unit now does up to 5 more damage against a jack, if they all manage to arrive alive and charge it). If you also count that they are very expensive, and that now to do work they have to commit (and so trade) hoping to kill more than 20 points worth of models, the nerf is substantial. Again, well deserved and I wouldn't have minded a DEF 12 on the top of it, but saying that it was a sidegrade only supports my idea that most people discuss balance without knowing how the thing they are discussing works. They actually do less damage vs heavies with arm 21 or less because the assault shot is 2 Pow less.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Jun 23, 2017 22:19:51 GMT
I definitely don't mean morally . I chose "crutching" because I think some players have stunted their growth as players by overusing Squires (how many players in Cygnar have never played a focus 6 caster without a Squire and don't know how to do it) and reinforce narrow preferences because they havent found the counterplay that you experience with the Squire, but I think the Squire took a serious hit in power in SR 2017 with games lasting longer. U can eat three focus by turn 3 and be a focus 6 caster again for 3 more rounds, and being attritioned oriented, that sort of game in Heavy Metal should be the expectation. Some players who have mostly played these casters as basically focus 7 havent been trapped with only 6 focus and a dead junior or two for 3 rounds, and it makes for a very different game then the 100% healthy list. Id like to think that some players who are 'Squire-only' players are going to see it as optional more and more and consider both infantry spam and losing the Squire as a strong and still efficient play.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 23, 2017 22:21:48 GMT
Yeah, losing electrocharger ain't nothin'.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 23, 2017 22:29:21 GMT
They actually do less damage vs heavies with arm 21 or less because the assault shot is 2 Pow less. True, you are right. If we factore the assault shot, they now do 5 less damage to heavies too (+1 POW on the melee attack and -2 POW on the assault attack).
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 23, 2017 22:43:33 GMT
And the Lances can't shoot a firefly to arc pow 12s onto stuff, so that bit of synergy with N3mo's feat is gone. The Laddermore and Lance package lost ~5 damage and ~5 damage rolls, and gained a +1 to attacks.
And that's fine. Lances needed to be toned down. But let's leave it there for a bit.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Jun 23, 2017 22:49:44 GMT
Well, because unboosted POW 14 cause fewer damage, the end result is not so diffrent.
Hope this helps. Only with Firefly, the end result is only 0.5 points lower with now, and we need to bring both Firefly and Laddermore to make more damage.
Also their damage output without either of them is actually increased.
------------------------
And, don't envy for the sour grape on the other side for you can't get it at all. That's only suited for the owner, not the others. Also everyone's fruits are a sour grape for the others, because they are designed to be work well without the other's sour grape, but intended to be work well with their own grape.
Think about why a kind of model is only exists in a specific faction. Each faction has to be diffrent, or there is no reason to make a diffrent faction. It causes some balance issues, sure, but it is better than lackluster.
-------
Besides, I prefer Sylys over Squire because he is cheaper but can do the same purpose what I expect on the Attachment - one upkeep for free. After the removal of Haley1, Stryker1 only needs for upkeeping a spell for free, and Caine1 always need for Reinholdt, so I think that there is no place of Squire for me.
But I didn't used him because my friend was not add him on the shopping list accidently when our group is going to buy the models at Miniature Market.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 23, 2017 22:54:36 GMT
Well, because unboosted POW 14 cause fewer damage, the end result is not so diffrent. Hope this helps. Only with Firefly, the end result is only 0.5 points lower with now, and we need to bring both Firefly and Laddermore to make more damage. Also their damage output without either of them is actually increased. Yes, lances do 1 point more damage now if they don't take Laddermore although Laddermore now is mostly a no brainier because of her personal output and support. Post nerf it's a vastly different world.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Jun 23, 2017 23:17:23 GMT
Honestly, I have no reason to take Laddermore if CID result is applied. Only for the accuracy fixers, we have the warcasters. I don't think that I need to put 8 points only for that. For the same points we have Firefly to increase their ranged damage output for 1 turn as well.
And as I says all the times, if you just want the combat capability, then take the units. Even the most cheap solo missiles doesn't make more damage per points than the units. The solo's role is a surgical knife or utility tool, not rank and file. Arcane Tempest Rifleman will disagree with me, but they are the rare case.
---------------------------------
Anyway, isn't it a Gravedigger thread?
|
|
|
Post by tapecrawler on Jun 24, 2017 0:32:14 GMT
I think the real problem now is that the jacks have in essence been buffed in MKIII while the infantry and cavalry were not designed to deal with the numbers of jacks available now. In MKII there was a rock, paper, scissor design that has gotten a bit out of whack in the newest edition. The thing that bothers me the most is the iconic faction infantry units did not transition well like Gun Mages and Doom Reavers. These units are not taken that much because they are too expensive compared to other options. The character units like Black 13 and the Great Bears have lost all of their character and seem underwhelming in the new edition. The Gravedigger theme seems to be a step in the right direction to bring infantry back into a more mainstream role. They seem a bit overpowered viewing them through a Khador lens. The new models cover most of the weaknesses inherent in the Trencher models. I liked the old theme design where you had to sacrifice something significant whether it was ranged weapons, magic, etc. I think the newer design doesn't feel like you have to make the hard choices of the older themes. Between Dug In, smoke, and Trencher Long Gunners, it seems like the theme will be a very tough nut to crack. The Gravedigger theme is weird since it reads like an infantry focused list but still has Trencher mechanics in it.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 24, 2017 2:22:49 GMT
I think the real problem now is that the jacks have in essence been buffed in MKIII while the infantry and cavalry were not designed to deal with the numbers of jacks available now. In MKII there was a rock, paper, scissor design that has gotten a bit out of whack in the newest edition. The thing that bothers me the most is the iconic faction infantry units did not transition well like Gun Mages and Doom Reavers. These units are not taken that much because they are too expensive compared to other options. The character units like Black 13 and the Great Bears have lost all of their character and seem underwhelming in the new edition. The Gravedigger theme seems to be a step in the right direction to bring infantry back into a more mainstream role. They seem a bit overpowered viewing them through a Khador lens. The new models cover most of the weaknesses inherent in the Trencher models. I liked the old theme design where you had to sacrifice something significant whether it was ranged weapons, magic, etc. I think the newer design doesn't feel like you have to make the hard choices of the older themes. Between Dug In, smoke, and Trencher Long Gunners, it seems like the theme will be a very tough nut to crack. The Gravedigger theme is weird since it reads like an infantry focused list but still has Trencher mechanics in it. You have to have jacks in every list. Mechaniks should always be an option.
|
|
|
Post by tapecrawler on Jun 24, 2017 3:11:04 GMT
Nope, I disagree. Otherwise there is no reason to play out of theme. Cygnar and Khador have mechanics as an option in every theme. And I think that's moving in a direction that is not healthy for the game. I know that the MKIII points lists are figured with the theme "bonus" points already added in, but I think it will lead to large problems in the future with every theme offering the theme version of units, like Trencher Long Gunners and Trencher mechanics instead of fixing the issues with the original units. Long Gunners have been dropped in points but I still don't see them being used very much.
|
|
|
Post by danfromchicago on Jun 24, 2017 4:49:13 GMT
Nope, I disagree. Otherwise there is no reason to play out of theme. Cygnar and Khador have mechanics as an option in every theme. And I think that's moving in a direction that is not healthy for the game. I know that the MKIII points lists are figured with the theme "bonus" points already added in, but I think it will lead to large problems in the future with every theme offering the theme version of units, like Trencher Long Gunners and Trencher mechanics instead of fixing the issues with the original units. Long Gunners have been dropped in points but I still don't see them being used very much. Trencher Mechanics can be taken in any theme which allows generic mechanics. They're an addition, not a patch. Similarly if you wanted to run four min units of long Gunners, or max for that matter, now you can. I don't know it will be any good, but you can do it
|
|