|
Post by macdaddy on Jun 28, 2017 22:58:24 GMT
They don't actually have to be. The Battle engine can only advance 5 inches, which means that if he's all the way in the stones, he can't advance out of them completely. Fair point and thanks. Definitely something to try. Dang it now I want to try another fulcrum. Can someone walk me through how a tannith list works? I understand w reeves for cra and pureblood for spray, but I don't understand how wyrds or fulcrum work w her Bc target has to be engaged to apply scything touch. I guess you could debuff defense first, but seems like a lot tovdocw 6 fury. Side note, admonition for a huge based shooting platform seems pretty cool. Use her gun to Debuff defense. Use a moonhound to increase Rat. 2 fulcrums buff each other right there is +6 Rat effectiveley (so with scy touch and aiming you ignore the firing into Melee and Debuff them. Tanith has a spectacular toolbox to increase Rat and Mat it takes work to get off though. Moonhounds seem pretty important to ignore stealth and purebloods/Wyrds just round out the list. You really only need Shifting stones and gallows Groves for support.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Jun 29, 2017 4:46:26 GMT
Apply affliction for an additional -2 def
|
|
|
Post by Bomma on Jun 29, 2017 11:58:36 GMT
Is the fulcrum a 37 point package?
While a much better piece than it was, do the lists already built to drop into the ranged matchup reduce its usefulness?
Just throwing some questions out there to ponder, I intend to pick one up when I can.
B.
ps Just read about putting in a moonhound, which seems like a good option? But is in then a 43 point package?
|
|
|
Post by gordaunikus1 on Jun 29, 2017 13:51:11 GMT
I don't know that it is a 37 point package since they changed its fury collection zone to command. That being said, fulcrum and 2 wyrds will explode most heavies and units. For heavies it seems u need a debuff tocarmor tho.
Jaden or someone had some post going through options of Melee constructs before the official cards were posted. It didn't look all that promising, but 10" is pretty nice.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Jun 29, 2017 15:10:05 GMT
That full kit with 3 boosts on the fulcrum against a 12/18 staline:
unbuffed, 29 dmg -2 ARM debuff, about 40 dmg -2 DEF debuff, 37 dmg
Not bad...
|
|
|
Post by gordaunikus1 on Jun 29, 2017 15:32:32 GMT
Yah that's is aw some damage!
How do ppl feel about having a guardian positioned in front the fulcrum. Could feed it 3 fury and shield guard until it launches itself at whatever comes close.
I secretly love the guardians and want to fit a fulcrum into my Baldur 1 list that has 2 guardians in it. I haven't tried it but could be fun.
Parallel question, does the fulcrum need protection against shooting now? I played cid fulcrum against a ret gunline w that stupid grasshopper and it smoked the fulcrum top of 2.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Jun 29, 2017 15:42:58 GMT
Yah that's is aw some damage! How do ppl feel about having a guardian positioned in front the fulcrum. Could feed it 3 fury and shield guard until it launches itself at whatever comes close. I secretly love the guardians and want to fit a fulcrum into my Baldur 1 list that has 2 guardians in it. I haven't tried it but could be fun. Parallel question, does the fulcrum need protection against shooting now? I played cid fulcrum against a ret gunline w that stupid grasshopper and it smoked the fulcrum top of 2. Guardians could help protect it for sure but I really wish they hit harder for their points, at 17 I feel like the investment to return ratio is juts not enough to justify it over something else. But if you have them working with someone other than baldur 2 than Go for it and share your findings with me Yeah...the ret BE is frustrating. Watching ret payers whine it to the ridiculousness that it is at now was obnoxious. I still think it should be 19 points or 20 for what it does. Too easy to buff it and its damage output and accuracy is obscene....ugh sorry needed to get that off my chest.
|
|
|
Post by gordaunikus1 on Jun 29, 2017 16:17:45 GMT
Guardians could help protect it for sure but I really wish they hit harder for their points, at 17 I feel like the investment to return ratio is juts not enough to justify it over something else. But if you have them working with someone other than baldur 2 than Go for it and share your findings with me I have been running Baldur 1 with a battle group of woldwrath, megalith, and 2 guardians in bones. The shield guards both protect Baldur who I play way up and spread shooting damage out. I pretty much lead w the more mobile woldwrath, using baldur1 to avoid him getting charged. The wayfarers are somewhat important to extend charge range, especially when stone skin is up. That being said, I've played against sevy 2 where he feated to smoke all my solos so I just ran in his face and feated. Obviously not great against flying or anything that ignores forests for line of sight (while also having pathfinder), but seems pretty good against a lot of the game.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Jun 29, 2017 17:00:07 GMT
I think double fulcrum is a legit strategy with Tanith and perhaps Baldur 2, I also don't think it's absolutely necessary to run them in bones. The extra solos aren't necessarily worth losing out on the Pureblood and the Moonhound Argus. Using the Shifting Stones in conjunction with the Fulcrum is also important. We are in a unique place as a faction because our battle engine can advance, shoot, and then get ported back out of harms way - this is a big deal and allows us to play for attrition with guns over many turns.
How can you keep them both fueled while having Fury and transfer targets? They need to be fully fueled or, IMO, they dip into uselessness...
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 29, 2017 18:41:10 GMT
Yah that's is aw some damage! How do ppl feel about having a guardian positioned in front the fulcrum. Could feed it 3 fury and shield guard until it launches itself at whatever comes close. I secretly love the guardians and want to fit a fulcrum into my Baldur 1 list that has 2 guardians in it. I haven't tried it but could be fun. Parallel question, does the fulcrum need protection against shooting now? I played cid fulcrum against a ret gunline w that stupid grasshopper and it smoked the fulcrum top of 2. Guardians could help protect it for sure but I really wish they hit harder for their points, at 17 I feel like the investment to return ratio is juts not enough to justify it over something else. But if you have them working with someone other than baldur 2 than Go for it and share your findings with me Yeah...the ret BE is frustrating. Watching ret payers whine it to the ridiculousness that it is at now was obnoxious. I still think it should be 19 points or 20 for what it does. Too easy to buff it and its damage output and accuracy is obscene....ugh sorry needed to get that off my chest. As one of the Ret players who 'whined it to the state it's at now,' I take exception to that, and I'm extremely glad that PP didn't listen to you on the CID. The Fulcrum is by far the stronger BE, and I'm not - for instance - seeing anyone intending to (competitively) play double AFG the way I'm seeing people contemplating double Fulcrum. The Ret BE shooting into the Fulcrum should deal, on average, 14 points of damage in a turn to it (21 under Ossyan's feat) and the only way it can one-round it is to aim and roll triple 6s on both it's shots. That doesn't seem OP to me. The break point here is that unlike, say, the Storm Strider, the AFG can actually damage the fulcrum. Against any model that's not lightning immune, though, the Strider hits very nearly as hard as an aiming AFG, while generating 2d3+eleaps, and providing a buff to the army, and synergizing with Cygnar's electricity tech (whereas the AFG only gets buffs from Warcasters, if at all.) The AFG balances out those disadvantages with added flexibility and control potential, but it's not some absurd shooting powerhouse. I could go on, but if you were following the CID, you've seen this 'whining' before. Suffice to say, the AFG will now see play with perhaps 4 or 5 warcasters, and be a virtual auto-include with Ossyan. The Fulcrum, on the other hand, is good (as a package with Woldwyrds) with every Circle blackclad warlock, and may even be seen in duplicates in some lists.
|
|
|
Post by LoS Jaden on Jun 29, 2017 18:42:36 GMT
I think double fulcrum is a legit strategy with Tanith and perhaps Baldur 2, I also don't think it's absolutely necessary to run them in bones. The extra solos aren't necessarily worth losing out on the Pureblood and the Moonhound Argus. Using the Shifting Stones in conjunction with the Fulcrum is also important. We are in a unique place as a faction because our battle engine can advance, shoot, and then get ported back out of harms way - this is a big deal and allows us to play for attrition with guns over many turns.
How can you keep them both fueled while having Fury and transfer targets? They need to be fully fueled or, IMO, they dip into uselessness...
They've got Fury Vault remember? You can easily fuel them with your Warlock if you don't have enough beasts kicking around. This is an entirely different style of list than Circle is used to playing - it's more like a Cygnar gunline than anything. Your Warlocks job is to fuel the two Engines, occasionally cast and upkeep a spell, and not die. I've got a battle report coming out today with two of them in the list and it worked pretty darn well.
|
|
|
Post by gordaunikus1 on Jun 29, 2017 19:48:16 GMT
Lol sorry to offend ret player. Whenever I say "stupid model x" I'm usually joking bc that particular piece owned me at the time. I don't really care how strong the cricket is. The fulcrum is obviously awesome so we both came out w good pieces.
The cricket didn't shoot down the fulcrum by itself btw. The extra range granted by the cricket and a cool gunline and stupid play on my part was what kilt it.
|
|
|
Post by LoS Jaden on Jun 29, 2017 20:02:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Jun 29, 2017 21:10:15 GMT
Guardians could help protect it for sure but I really wish they hit harder for their points, at 17 I feel like the investment to return ratio is juts not enough to justify it over something else. But if you have them working with someone other than baldur 2 than Go for it and share your findings with me Yeah...the ret BE is frustrating. Watching ret payers whine it to the ridiculousness that it is at now was obnoxious. I still think it should be 19 points or 20 for what it does. Too easy to buff it and its damage output and accuracy is obscene....ugh sorry needed to get that off my chest. As one of the Ret players who 'whined it to the state it's at now,' I take exception to that, and I'm extremely glad that PP didn't listen to you on the CID. The Fulcrum is by far the stronger BE, and I'm not - for instance - seeing anyone intending to (competitively) play double AFG the way I'm seeing people contemplating double Fulcrum. The Ret BE shooting into the Fulcrum should deal, on average, 14 points of damage in a turn to it (21 under Ossyan's feat) and the only way it can one-round it is to aim and roll triple 6s on both it's shots. That doesn't seem OP to me. The break point here is that unlike, say, the Storm Strider, the AFG can actually damage the fulcrum. Against any model that's not lightning immune, though, the Strider hits very nearly as hard as an aiming AFG, while generating 2d3+eleaps, and providing a buff to the army, and synergizing with Cygnar's electricity tech (whereas the AFG only gets buffs from Warcasters, if at all.) The AFG balances out those disadvantages with added flexibility and control potential, but it's not some absurd shooting powerhouse. I could go on, but if you were following the CID, you've seen this 'whining' before. Suffice to say, the AFG will now see play with perhaps 4 or 5 warcasters, and be a virtual auto-include with Ossyan. The Fulcrum, on the other hand, is good (as a package with Woldwyrds) with every Circle blackclad warlock, and may even be seen in duplicates in some lists. Alright well instead of arguing I'm just going to say a few things and we will leave it here to not derail the thread. My comment was made in passing and didn't warrant an entire response about why "it's good I wasn't listened to" The Fulcrum is amazing and I never said it wasn't. It doesn't work with every caster, it works with Krueger 2, Mohsar, Tanith, and possibly both Baldurs. That's 5 casters that will want to run it. There may be exceptions but I don't see it sybergizong well with too many other casters as they would prefer other options. The AFG is bonkers, that will show in time, just wait and watch a Arm 18 model with carapace that can't be charged AND has a really good turn by turn Damage output is going to cause problems for a lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 29, 2017 23:13:00 GMT
As one of the Ret players who 'whined it to the state it's at now,' I take exception to that, and I'm extremely glad that PP didn't listen to you on the CID. The Fulcrum is by far the stronger BE, and I'm not - for instance - seeing anyone intending to (competitively) play double AFG the way I'm seeing people contemplating double Fulcrum. The Ret BE shooting into the Fulcrum should deal, on average, 14 points of damage in a turn to it (21 under Ossyan's feat) and the only way it can one-round it is to aim and roll triple 6s on both it's shots. That doesn't seem OP to me. The break point here is that unlike, say, the Storm Strider, the AFG can actually damage the fulcrum. Against any model that's not lightning immune, though, the Strider hits very nearly as hard as an aiming AFG, while generating 2d3+eleaps, and providing a buff to the army, and synergizing with Cygnar's electricity tech (whereas the AFG only gets buffs from Warcasters, if at all.) The AFG balances out those disadvantages with added flexibility and control potential, but it's not some absurd shooting powerhouse. I could go on, but if you were following the CID, you've seen this 'whining' before. Suffice to say, the AFG will now see play with perhaps 4 or 5 warcasters, and be a virtual auto-include with Ossyan. The Fulcrum, on the other hand, is good (as a package with Woldwyrds) with every Circle blackclad warlock, and may even be seen in duplicates in some lists. Alright well instead of arguing I'm just going to say a few things and we will leave it here to not derail the thread. My comment was made in passing and didn't warrant an entire response about why "it's good I wasn't listened to" The Fulcrum is amazing and I never said it wasn't. It doesn't work with every caster, it works with Krueger 2, Mohsar, Tanith, and possibly both Baldurs. That's 5 casters that will want to run it. There may be exceptions but I don't see it sybergizong well with too many other casters as they would prefer other options. The AFG is bonkers, that will show in time, just wait and watch a Arm 18 model with carapace that can't be charged AND has a really good turn by turn Damage output is going to cause problems for a lot of people. Whether or not your comment was made in passing, a lot of ret players (including myself) devoted a lot of time to testing the AFG in order to get it where it is, and I don't appreciate that effort being characterized as 'whining.' The Fulcrum is amazing with Baldur2, Mohsar, Krueger 2, and Tanith, yes. It is a viable consideration with Baldur1, Una2 (HoF), Morv1, and Krueger1. It won't see play with Morv2 and Bradigus, necessarily, but both of those casters are consistently rated as being our worst. The fulcrum has broad potential to be played across the faction, because it (and the Wyrds) are effectively a self-contained package, in which each piece is individually good, but have further synergy when taken together. Any buffs on top of that just take it up to 11. The AFG is a piece that typically requires a specific plan to be taken in your army, and IMO requires at least some synergy with the caster's spell list and/or feat.
|
|