|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Jun 27, 2017 1:56:35 GMT
But you can discuss and make changes to a single aspect of the game without changing every single possibly simialr aspect. By grouping them all together you're making it out to be impossible or unfair as it would change everything. which it would not. Spine burst can be changed in the way of "enemy only, roll to hit the jumps" but e-leaps can stay the same and vice versa. Because they are TWO separate mechanics. I'm not whinging that everything should be changed at once. It's really very simple: IF e-leaps are bad BECAUSE they can bounce from friendlies and auto-hit THEN those features are the bad parts. Right? And if that's the case, then shouldn't all mechanics which have those features also be up for discussion? Well, AOEs have those exact traits. You can shoot friendlies to damage enemies regardless of their defense/stealth/positioning/terrain. My point is that anyone who wants e-leaps changed to not have these traits, but is fine with AOEs, has a logically inconsistent view. Once again they are not the same thing. You're breaking down a problem it to bare basics that are not the problem. Again how many complaints have you heard about Spine Burst? They function the same way. But Spine requires resources (fury on the caster, the attack to kill on the new Throne). AoEs are accepted as part of the game because every faction has some access to them E-leaps are almost entirely a Cygnar only ability. When it comes to shooting your own model Cygnar is the only faction to have that ability and NOT HAVE THE TARGET DIE. That is something that AoEs do not share. That part sets e-leaps apart. Why didn't you mention that when you broke down all the basics to throw it in with all those other rules? Dishonesty. You are willingly disregarding points of the argument to illegitimatize the counter argument. You're going to now pull in blast immune. but again a spread of factions have access to that. I'm done trying explain how construing facts to better your position is dishonest.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 27, 2017 2:05:05 GMT
So the problem is not E-leap, but the fact that Cygnar has easy access to that. I may partially agree, and that is why I'm glad Lances lost it on the ranged attack. Without Lances around, you are already A LOT less likely to see E-leap abused.
That said, casting an AOE fire or corrosion on a model immune to Fire or Corrosion isn't impossible (less common, but totally possible), and even killing your own dude isn't THAT much the point of the issue when there are factions that have models worth less than one point...
Sure, Cygnar does this more easily, but if you agree that everyone is able to get some forms of defense ignoring, is that really that issue? It continues to be even if the main source of ranged E-Leaps is gone?
Because I don't really remember that much complains for E-Leap in MK2, aside from people that whined because it was a counter to OP feats that were nerfed in MK3.
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on Jun 27, 2017 2:11:53 GMT
to my knowledge, in mk2 if you had another electric immune guy near the target the eleap would bounce to them. that is a fairly significant change, though less-so with the proposed change to assault.
But yeah, e-leaps (and the like) are issues because they are not attacks. This means that they ignore many defensive techs, don't proc things like vengeance and battle driven, and don't create corpses or souls for most factions after they kill a model.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 27, 2017 2:18:34 GMT
I'm not whinging that everything should be changed at once. It's really very simple: IF e-leaps are bad BECAUSE they can bounce from friendlies and auto-hit THEN those features are the bad parts. Right? And if that's the case, then shouldn't all mechanics which have those features also be up for discussion? Well, AOEs have those exact traits. You can shoot friendlies to damage enemies regardless of their defense/stealth/positioning/terrain. My point is that anyone who wants e-leaps changed to not have these traits, but is fine with AOEs, has a logically inconsistent view. Once again they are not the same thing. You're breaking down a problem it to bare basics that are not the problem. Again how many complaints have you heard about Spine Burst? They function the same way. But Spine requires resources (fury on the caster, the attack to kill on the new Throne). AoEs are accepted as part of the game because every faction has some access to them E-leaps are almost entirely a Cygnar only ability. When it comes to shooting your own model Cygnar is the only faction to have that ability and NOT HAVE THE TARGET DIE. That is something that AoEs do not share. That part sets e-leaps apart. Why didn't you mention that when you broke down all the basics to throw it in with all those other rules? Dishonesty. You are willingly disregarding points of the argument to illegitimatize the counter argument. You're going to now pull in blast immune. but again a spread of factions have access to that. I'm done trying explain how construing facts to better your position is dishonest. I don't appreciate being assigned motive. Calling me dishonest is more than a little rude. Okay, so the part that makes e-leaps bad is that they can bounce off of models that don't die because of it? Okay. As you say there are models that are immune to fire, corrosion, cold, and blast. Such models can be shot with AOE effects to get very similar interactions to e-leaps. So, that interaction is not particular to e-leaps as well.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 27, 2017 2:19:02 GMT
to my knowledge, in mk2 if you had another electric immune guy near the target the eleap would bounce to them. that is a fairly significant change, though less-so with the proposed change to assault. But yeah, e-leaps (and the like) are issues because they are not attacks. This means that they ignore many defensive techs, don't proc things like vengeance and battle driven, and don't create corpses or souls for most factions after they kill a model. I would be fine with models killed by e-leap to count as killed by an attack (or to remove "by an attack" in the relevant abilities if that is easier).
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Jun 27, 2017 2:28:35 GMT
Once again they are not the same thing. You're breaking down a problem it to bare basics that are not the problem. Again how many complaints have you heard about Spine Burst? They function the same way. But Spine requires resources (fury on the caster, the attack to kill on the new Throne). AoEs are accepted as part of the game because every faction has some access to them E-leaps are almost entirely a Cygnar only ability. When it comes to shooting your own model Cygnar is the only faction to have that ability and NOT HAVE THE TARGET DIE. That is something that AoEs do not share. That part sets e-leaps apart. Why didn't you mention that when you broke down all the basics to throw it in with all those other rules? Dishonesty. You are willingly disregarding points of the argument to illegitimatize the counter argument. You're going to now pull in blast immune. but again a spread of factions have access to that. I'm done trying explain how construing facts to better your position is dishonest. I don't appreciate being assigned motive. Calling me dishonest is more than a little rude. Okay, so the part that makes e-leaps bad is that they can bounce off of models that don't die because of it? Okay. As you say there are models that are immune to fire, corrosion, cold, and blast. Such models can be shot with AOE effects to get very similar interactions to e-leaps. So, that interaction is not particular to e-leaps as well. I can apologize for that in person. But I cannot take your repeated attempt to defeat the comments of others by jumping to dozens of other conclusions. If you are actually trying to drive the discussion constructively it has absolutely not been conveyed. Maybe not making a laundry list of loaded questions... And again, immunity is not particular to e-leaps but electric immune is solely Cygnar where as blast immunity is not. Again it's a comment on 1 faction holding the power and the defense and no other faction having it. Menoth isn't the only one with fire attacks and fire immunity. Cryx isn't the only faction with corrosion and corrosion immunity. In fact there is very little fire immunity in Menoth and corrosion immunity in cryx.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Jun 27, 2017 2:58:08 GMT
My only problem with e-leap is that its not an attack, since its a sideways nerf to all recursion. "Hey, you thought you were going to benefit from those corpses? haha think again, now those mechanithralls are somehow evaporated by the static electricity from my attack!"
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jun 27, 2017 4:20:03 GMT
If e-leap counts as an attack that just autohit i guess I'd accept that. Its not what i would like but its something. I would also like to point out that Aoes are more limited on how far a thing can be affected. Like the thing being 4 " away being affected doesn't really occur with AOEs. E-leaps can go leap pretty far.
Also back to the force hammer example. I didn't actuality realize you can target a friendly and get the benefit so it took me a while to internalize it. I'd be ok with fixing that as well.
I wasn't really thinking about all the other examples you pointed Phoenix cause i don't see them as often as i see e-leap shenanigans. I'd be down with fixing any abuses they may cause except for AOEs cause i don't even know where you'd begin to fix that without causing rules bloat.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 27, 2017 4:23:45 GMT
Cygnar is shown favoritism with certain things but its not overpowered.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Jun 27, 2017 4:50:28 GMT
Cygnar isn't even the strongest faction in the game. Obnoxious sure, but far from overpowered.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Jun 27, 2017 6:24:11 GMT
E-leaps and lightning generator are fine, just stop clustering your high def low arm models together like an utter chump. Spread them out, intersperse them with hardier models, stop playing the way you usually play and complaining when you lose, you have to adjust depending on what you face
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 27, 2017 7:01:28 GMT
E-leaps and lightning generator are fine, just stop clustering your high def low arm models together like an utter chump. Spread them out, intersperse them with hardier models, stop playing the way you usually play and complaining when you lose, you have to adjust depending on what you face Actually electroleap doesnt care about defense and its actually quite difficult to spread stuff out 5 inches or so. Shield walls need to be closer for instance. Its not as easy as you say. Its a pretty huge advantage. Stop downplaying your major edges.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on Jun 27, 2017 7:19:20 GMT
"Is faction X overpowered" is a very general and usually loaded question, so I don't want to address that. However, I will agree that Cygnar's junior does rub me the wrong way. IIRC, for all the other factions, the buffs on their juniors are limited to battlegroup only, which creates a bit of a check on their power level. It's only Cygnar which has a junior capable of putting his buff on any target, including models/units, which can make for some very powerful interactions. Was he the first junior that PP came out with? Because it kind of shows. He's been around since Mk 1. If you are determined to make Arcane Shield Battlegroup only: 1. You'll have to make Arcane Shield on casters battlegroup only, meaning that Cygnar Infantry will need more buffs to see play 2. You'll need to up his FOCUS from 3 to 4 to match the others. 3. You'll need to give him better defensive stats or a piece of defensive tech like the others. 4. You'll need to radically look at the faction and see what else needs to change. There is no reason that Juniors buffs are battlegroup only. Huh? Since when am I "determined to make Arcane Shield battlegroup only"? I made literally one post on the subject, saying that there is one model that I'm not a fan of. It's just one model that I'm not crazy about. I feel that the model lacks character, because right now it is the only journeyman warcaster that isn't a character. In a world where warcasters are such exceptional individuals, having one who isn't even important enough to have a name just doesn't feel right to me -- especially when he's the most popular one out there. Further, I feel that the concept for the journeyman warcaster is that they are little self-contained units, but having this guy around not for his ability to run warjacks but just to slap Arcane Shield on something -- be it a warjack in another battlegroup, a unit, or even your caster -- doesn't quite fit with the concept in my opinion. Also, the fact that it's the only one that has non-battlegroup effects, the only one without a name, and the only one with 3 focus makes me suspect that PP didn't quite get it right on the first try and knows they may have made a mistake on him, but they also didn't want to change him either because he's so estabilshed now that he's in every list and changing him would cause all kinds of issues.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 27, 2017 7:39:18 GMT
Cygnar having a non-character Journeyman was to reapresent the fact that Cygnar is the faction that has most active programs to find out potential warcasters and a structured way to instruct them (They even have their own section of the Strategic Accademy).
Other factions just happen to find a warcaster from time to time, but every story is different and they go trough pretty different trainings (So Character), while all JRs in Cygnar pass trough the same instruction schedule. Cygnar has also A LOT more journeyman warcasters around than any other faction for that reason (In MK2, Cygnar had a theme force that made JRs FA U to reapresent a class of Journeymans being deployed on the field as part of their trainings, a thing that could never happen in another faction due to the lack of simple numbers).
Also, from the fluff point of view, a Warcaster being restricted just on BG spells doesn't make much sense. Every caster can learn every spell, and Aura of Protection (aka Arcane Shield) is one of the basic spells for warcasters looking at IK RPG.
If you want to argue that having a JR that is more interesting because of the buff than for his role as BG controller is a bad way to make a support piece I agree (but that said, it doesn't make it OP, just a badly designed support piece that wants to do too many things at once), but if your point is that it doesn't make sense in the fluff I strongly disagree.
|
|
spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on Jun 27, 2017 7:39:46 GMT
I voted no in the end. It's not really the faction that's overpowered, it's one or two choices. Stormlances will be changed and that might be enough to reign them in. Although I'm sceptical whether it's enough, they shouldn't be quite such a dominant unit.
|
|