|
Post by Cheesebeard on Aug 18, 2017 20:00:58 GMT
Zuriel is almost auto include in CotD and work great there. He is also very good with Twins. I think is good for character warbeast. Not staple but far from niche IMO. Only being used in one theme, or with its bond, doesn't really speak highly for its versatility, imo
|
|
|
Post by Korianneder on Aug 18, 2017 20:22:39 GMT
Zuriel is almost auto include in CotD and work great there. He is also very good with Twins. I think is good for character warbeast. Not staple but far from niche IMO. Only being used in one theme, or with its bond, doesn't really speak highly for its versatility, imo With themes being the main way to play now those are the only two ways you'll ever see any character beast. Typhon and Proteus don't even have a theme they fit into.
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Aug 18, 2017 20:24:09 GMT
Zuriel is almost auto include in CotD and work great there. He is also very good with Twins. I think is good for character warbeast. Not staple but far from niche IMO. Only being used in one theme, or with its bond, doesn't really speak highly for its versatility, imo Yeah Zuriel is pretty bad, like many things in Legion he needs a rework. Honestly it'd probably be easier to find consensus on the models that are actually good. I'll start with one from each category: Warlock: Abby2 Warbeast: Seraph Unit: Raptors Solo: Forsaken KoriannederExcept that Thagrosh1 and Abby2 are actually strong Warlocks unlike Saeryn and Rhyas. The Twins together are okay though, just not in the meta.
|
|
|
Post by DanX on Aug 18, 2017 23:22:05 GMT
Sorry if I was unclear before.
Units are only.good if you like their themes in this brave new world.
Some.of our units are good.
Raptors, swordsmen, grotesques and hex hunters are my favourite.
But if you only play Oracle's (a 5 star theme) you can only.use bfs, hex and spawning vessel.
Ravens and CoTD are 3 star theme lists imo,. So their troupes are a lot less good, even when they have strong abilities. Raptors being the best because they go in both.
Avoid the units that you don't fit in a theme you want to play is good advice I think.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Aug 19, 2017 6:12:48 GMT
Units are in a hard place for legion I think That's why they are really good on the paper, I think. As a non-Legion gamer I am always envy Legion's high quality units, but in the POV of Legion they are just the sour grapes and you will wonder why the others are likes your subpar options. Unless the faction's structure have a complete overhaul, I don't think that units are have a solid place in Legion. After all Legion is supporsed to be a beast heavy faction, and their units are good on the paper because they expect to be self sufficient. Anyway, I suspect that Legion's units are discarded because beasts are simply better option and they enjoy less support, but is it right? I am not a Legion gamer so I don't fully understand your faction well.
|
|
whydak
Junior Strategist
Posts: 288
|
Post by whydak on Aug 19, 2017 6:34:48 GMT
Units are in a hard place for legion I think That's why they are really good on the paper, I think. As a non-Legion gamer I am always envy Legion's high quality units, but in the POV of Legion they are just the sour grapes and you will wonder why the others are likes your subpar options. Unless the faction's structure have a complete overhaul, I don't think that units are have a solid place in Legion. After all Legion is supporsed to be a beast heavy faction, and their units are good on the paper because they expect to be self sufficient. Anyway, I suspect that Legion's units are discarded because beasts are simply better option and they enjoy less support, but is it right? I am not a Legion gamer so I don't fully understand your faction well. I'm playing with 3 units in each list of my current pairing and I like them. I don't understand legion to I suspect. I had to leave my scheme and experiment with attitude. At begining I tried to use infantry as a screen, like most people I've seen and they died horribly. But if you keep them alive for later its great, especially in SR2017. It won't suit every player and every meta but I won't agree its crapy option. For reference: List im mentioing Twins: Ravens Zuriel, Angelius, Protector, Seraph Max raptors, max riders, blightblades 2x deathstalker pThags CotD Typhon Azrael Zuriel Beast mistress: shredder x3 Min swordies + ua, min hex hunters + ua, vessel 2x sheperd, spell martyr
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Aug 19, 2017 8:28:55 GMT
Units are in a hard place for legion I think That's why they are really good on the paper, I think. As a non-Legion gamer I am always envy Legion's high quality units, but in the POV of Legion they are just the sour grapes and you will wonder why the others are likes your subpar options. Unless the faction's structure have a complete overhaul, I don't think that units are have a solid place in Legion. After all Legion is supporsed to be a beast heavy faction, and their units are good on the paper because they expect to be self sufficient. Anyway, I suspect that Legion's units are discarded because beasts are simply better option and they enjoy less support, but is it right? I am not a Legion gamer so I don't fully understand your faction well. There are three problems that you're grouping into one: - we have great infantry in bad Themes or no themes at all (thus rarely played): Swordsmen, Scouts, Raptors, Hellmouths (!!!) - we have weak infantry in Oracles: Hex Hunters - we have terrible infantry that will not be played ever in competitive list: Legionaires, Ogruns, Archers. We also have very situational stuff that may work if you built for it (but usually won't) like every other faction: Spawning Vessel, Weapon Crew, Blight Blades, Black Frost Shard. So some of Legion problems comes from terrible list design, some from terrible units design, overall it's a mess... I guarantee if we had good infantry in good themes you would see it more. I would love to play Swordsmen without being limited to subpar beasts options like Nephilims...
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Aug 19, 2017 9:06:31 GMT
Then there is the mixed reasons.... I think that Swordsmen would be good even without a support. If they are march with subpar beasts then it seems worthwhile to using both of them. Else give the subpar beasts Flank[Friendly Faction Unit] on the theme with Nephilims&Swordsmen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2017 23:37:14 GMT
swordsmen are pretty good offensively, however lack of pathfinder is a big roadblock to them being played more. or even a caster that wants to take them and can give them pathfinder.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Aug 21, 2017 0:34:44 GMT
I don't want to run way off topic. But our infantry is not terrible. I personally have grown very attached to infantry and only run 2-3 beasts in any given list that's not Abby 2 or Thagrosh 2.
It's the fact that they have little support, relatively high costs, and not much utility. Which if you read that you would immediately think our infantry is garbage. But it's how you play them. We can't trot infantry onto the field like Warmachine factions and expect them to win more than their points back on the front line. Our infantry has to be played safe and extra carefully.
As for infantry I now stack my lists on - Swordsmen (min) + UA, Strider scouts + UA, Hex hunters (min) + UA, Warspears (min) + UA, Incubi, Legionnaires (max) + UA, Baclk frost shard, Warlords, Deathstalkers, and Anyssa. There even a place for the spawning vessel and beast mistress.
But again, I play legion in an entirely odd way (Or so others have told me) so I don't expect others to believe the same as me. But, for the sake of argument; Or infantry is not bad. Just technical.
|
|
|
Post by Falcen on Aug 21, 2017 1:46:55 GMT
But our infantry is not terrible. Nobody made such a statement. Seems like you're projecting here. The "most" that was said was about a select few choices, without generalizing all of our infantry. Also you appear to understand "niche" as "garbage", judging by your answers repeating the same core opinion. "The pieces listed as "niche" just aren't taken in every list or top tournament lists", this is what niche means, so you're not darkhorsing that much. If you want to show other players how good Legion's less favoured choice are, why don't you show instead of tell? As far as possible on a forum of course. Something like "Our infantry has to be played safe and extra carefully" is way to general and not convincing. Tell us about the synergies you build into your lists with them, what you plan to drop it into, what your pairings with those are, maybe write some battle reports to show how you play them. At least I would be very interested to read it.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Aug 21, 2017 2:47:15 GMT
But our infantry is not terrible. Nobody made such a statement. Seems like you're projecting here. The "most" that was said was about a select few choices, without generalizing all of our infantry. Also you appear to understand "niche" as "garbage", judging by your answers repeating the same core opinion. "The pieces listed as "niche" just aren't taken in every list or top tournament lists", this is what niche means, so you're not darkhorsing that much. If you want to show other players how good Legion's less favoured choice are, why don't you show instead of tell? As far as possible on a forum of course. Something like "Our infantry has to be played safe and extra carefully" is way to general and not convincing. Tell us about the synergies you build into your lists with them, what you plan to drop it into, what your pairings with those are, maybe write some battle reports to show how you play them. At least I would be very interested to read it. Pardon me for making a generalization of the negative view of the community about our infantry. It's not just thread I'm pulling my generalization from. "Niche" to me means that the model/unit in question only has one small job that's not present it a majority of the game. In THIS thread the use of "niche" is more akin to unpopular. Just because something doesn't show up in every single list or in every tournament lists does not make it "niche", to me. So I made said assumption. I wrote and article on Kryssa. If you would like to start there about my view on the infantry I listed that's a good place to start. I've also written battle reports for Bethayne in CotD and a off-meta Abby2 list. Again, good places to start. If you would like I can dig through and posts links. I also tried to start a more in depth discussion about how to deal with Karchev but it didn't go as well as I would have hoped. But on a regular basis I do not throw out long articles or reports as I do not play the common Legion lists nor do I play in a way that seems to align with the desires of the audience. I do not play meta. I do not go to tournaments as I just do not have that kind of time. So by those metrics I do not garner enough sway with the community... When trying to convince people on the internet, I alone am not enough it would seem. I'm not JVM. His name tag is what convinces people. For example: Throne CiD went 9 pages about how the throne was not good enough. 9 pages I tried to point out the many positives and synergies. Nothing. JVM posted once about using double throne with Thagrosh 1 and Saeryn 1 and sudden the whole community changed from sour to excited and engaged. But this is going off topic If you would like I will try to catalogue some things and from now on I'll try and get some photos of my games and do a little more to share my experience.
|
|
|
Post by Falcen on Aug 21, 2017 3:57:25 GMT
Pardon me for making a generalization of the negative view of the community about our infantry. It's not just thread I'm pulling my generalization from. Let me say it another way: the view isn't as negative as you might think. There will always be a certain amount of whining present - it's the Internet. While I certainly get your overall feeling, it helps not taking everything at face value. Just speaking for myself: I've listed 9/16 units as present in high ranking tournament lists, that's more than half of it. Sure, could always be better, but could be much worse! Just because something doesn't show up in every single list or in every tournament lists does not make it "niche", to me. With that, I agree. "Niche" to me means that the model/unit in question only has one small job that's not present it a majority of the game. In THIS thread the use of "niche" is more akin to unpopular. Why can't those be connected? Not being of good use in a majority of the game is likely to be quite detrimental to some models popularity. Usually models become popular because they are useful in some way - but I agree that's not the only factor, though still an important one. I wrote and article on Kryssa. If you would like to start there about my view on the infantry I listed that's a good place to start. I've also written battle reports for Bethayne in CotD and a off-meta Abby2 list. Again, good places to start. If you would like I can dig through and posts links. Ah, the Kryssa guide is yours. Wasn't aware of that right now, I try to ignore the author when reading such guides to be more open minded for the actual content. I liked the guide. Four pages of discussion also show a certain level of interest from other people. I didn't know you had battle reports, for those two casters I always have an eye out, so I'll look into them now that I know about them. When trying to convince people on the internet, I alone am not enough it would seem. I'm not JVM. His name tag is what convinces people. For example: Throne CiD went 9 pages about how the throne was not good enough. 9 pages I tried to point out the many positives and synergies. Nothing. JVM posted once about using double throne with Thagrosh 1 and Saeryn 1 and sudden the whole community changed from sour to excited and engaged. Sure, being known means more people give credit. But it should be noted that he went to and also won/placed well on big tournaments, so it's not like it's a unjustified gift but he actually proofed himself in the eyes of other players. I get you're surely just want to share some of your experiences with best intentions. I also get that it can be frustrating if it seems to not be heard. Had something similar with eFyanna Angelius/Neraph list which was regarded (afaik) as gimmicky at best when I posted it on the international forum but became all the rage later. But that's okay. The list came back in a much more refined form. It's also not the fault of more well known player, people have to decide for themself which advice they take and which they don't. Many also do it without being vocal about it. What I'm trying to say with this is: don't let such emotions sour your mood, there's no reason to.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Aug 21, 2017 4:27:48 GMT
Can someone explain why Blightblades are considered bad? In my experience, they're one of the best units in Legion. They require absolutely 0 support, and can really just slot in wherever. Sure, they're only available in Ravens and out of theme, but to be honest I'm okay with that. They've never failed to perform, for me. Though, maybe I'm the exception and just mesh well with them.
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Aug 21, 2017 7:45:10 GMT
Can someone explain why Blightblades are considered bad? In my experience, they're one of the best units in Legion. They require absolutely 0 support, and can really just slot in wherever. Sure, they're only available in Ravens and out of theme, but to be honest I'm okay with that. They've never failed to perform, for me. Though, maybe I'm the exception and just mesh well with them. They're not bad, but they're only in Ravens. You've answered yourself. Right now Ravens can be built mostly as hard anti infantry skew that don't answers Ghost Fleet nor Cygnar well. We don't need such lists much. Our themes are one dimensional and pidgeonhole you into playstyle. It's not Blades fault, they're OK. Ravens not so much right now.
|
|