|
Post by far2casual on Mar 20, 2017 9:59:26 GMT
So I understand that MK3 Bane Officer & Standard was very average when MK3 came out. But now that we got the Granted: Tough ability (admittedly on the wrong model), I don't really understand why people are hating it anymore.
Compared to MK2. + : 1. New minifeat: it isn't game breaking, but just creating one or two Banes in the middle of the ennemy lines is a pretty big deal for such a hard hitting infantry that is hard to deliver. 2. Granted: Rise > Tactics: Rise, so you never lose it. 3. CMD extension even if the Officer dies
- : 1. Granted: Tough on Standard > Granted: Tough on Officer. 2. Rise does not shake Stationary anymore
So yes, I understand that the new Granted Tough is slightly worse than before (on top of Tough being worse overall), but isn't that balanced out by the new abilities ?
This was the global consensus on Bane UA in Mk2 (copy/paste from Battlecollege MK2) : Isn't that perfectly valid now as well ?
|
|
|
Post by Morganstern on Mar 20, 2017 12:17:00 GMT
I think the biggest problem is that tough is on the officer rather than the standard bearer. This coupled with the lack of stealth means you have an expensive UA that is just to easy to snipe out. You can't even hold the officer back like you could with the standard bearer. The second problem is that the mini feat doesn't fit well with Bane Warriors due to the fact it forces you to target infantry coupled with the fact that Bane Warriors are only MAT 6 means that you are paying for an ability that is situational at best. Since MK3 dropped I have only managed to create 3 Bane Warriors with the mini feat.
|
|
|
Post by far2casual on Mar 20, 2017 12:39:11 GMT
Oops I thought I posted that in the Cryx forum, but didn't apparently. Would a mod be kind enough to move this thread in the Cryx subforum ?
Thanks !
|
|
Nyxu
Overseer
NaCl Elemental
Posts: 119
|
Post by Nyxu on Mar 20, 2017 13:03:50 GMT
A lot of the hate is from when it did not give tough but still had rise The minifeat feels confused. I think that it is meant to discourage jamming them with infantry, since they can just chew up a jam and spit out more models. If you don't kill enough, they can potentially recoup their losses entirely or net a positive. This works great when the answer isn't just "shoot them off the table" The unit is pricy and we don't have nearly as much wide infantry support as we used to, which is what made banes so broken- they were a force multilplier that turned a few key (de)buffs (scything touch, parasite, carnage, dark guidance, curse, denny1) into a dead [insert thing here]. Tough was more valuable because of stealth (fewer attacks could reach them to begin with). Now we have fewer of those leverage options and bane warriors need a delivery mechanism (tough, terrain, occultation or ashen veil)- at six points it's easy to feel that the ua needs to do more to make up for the premium (though three weaponmaster attacks with dark shroud AND tough AND rise AND a minifeat for six is a lot for anything less than six points )
|
|
|
Post by dragash on Mar 20, 2017 13:04:10 GMT
A few points: - First off, as you've already alluded to, Tough is vastly worse on an officer than on the standard bearer. As soon as that officer dies, goodbye Tough. - The next point is that the Officer & Standard are insanely expensive. 6 points for just 2 models is a hell of a lot - especially given that the officer is easily sniped and once he's gone the standard bearer's ability is all but worthless. - The ability to make more banes is situational at best. You need the enemy to be using a lot of infantry (which is relatively rare, given that warjacks have become much better and you're required to field more of them). You need banes to be the optimal unit for taking out said infantry (which is very unlikely, given that they're geared to take out high-armour units like warjacks/warbeasts). You need a decent number to actually survive and reach combat, and then for all those attacks to connect. - Finally, the problem is that banes in general got vastly less useful - losing Stealth, Tough (on the standard bearer) and support like the extra movement from Curse. This is nowhere near enough to get them back on track. This was the global consensus on Bane UA in Mk2 (copy/paste from Battlecollege MK2) : Isn't that perfectly valid now as well ? No. Again, Tough on the officer instead of the standard bearer makes a huge difference in terms of survivability - as the officer can easily be sniped out, removing Tough from the squad. There's also the aforementioned cost issue - in that the Officer/Standard have gone up in price considerably, making them a much worse investment overall (especially given the nerfs). Then there's the matter of whether you'd want banes at all. When you look at the cost of a full unit plus UA (and maybe Tata too), you're looking at a lot of points for a pretty mediocre and fragile unit.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Mar 20, 2017 13:36:00 GMT
- The next point is that the Officer & Standard are insanely expensive. 6 points for just 2 models is a hell of a lot - especially given that the officer is easily sniped and once he's gone the standard bearer's ability is all but worthless. [sic] No. Again, Tough on the officer instead of the standard bearer makes a huge difference in terms of survivability - as the officer can easily be sniped out, removing Tough from the squad. There's also the aforementioned cost issue - in that the Officer/Standard have gone up in price considerably, making them a much worse investment overall (especially given the nerfs). Then there's the matter of whether you'd want banes at all. When you look at the cost of a full unit plus UA (and maybe Tata too), you're looking at a lot of points for a pretty mediocre and fragile unit. I agree on your first point, but your second one is simply not true; they were 3 points in MK2 and are 6 points now, that is exactly the equivalent. Relatively speaking though, they have become less useful for their cost, because infantry as a whole has. It's also not true that the Standard becomes useless without the Officer, in fact it is exactly the same in both situations, it gives +2 CMD to the unit which brings it up to 9. I think the main point against it, is that, as soon as you snipe out the officer, the basically paid 6 points for a regular Bane, with all the same weaknesses and problems as those Banes (mainly low threat range and weak defensive stats) I do like one or two (min) Bane Warrior modules in a lot of lists, but then 6 points is pretty expensive to tack on. I would go full + UA in some lists that can protect them, mostly Occultation casters, but for the rest I will most likely stick with minimum units for cleanup/debuff duty.
|
|
|
Post by dragash on Mar 20, 2017 14:16:27 GMT
I agree on your first point, but your second one is simply not true; they were 3 points in MK2 and are 6 points now, that is exactly the equivalent. Relatively speaking though, they have become less useful for their cost, because infantry as a whole has. It's also not true that the Standard becomes useless without the Officer, in fact it is exactly the same in both situations, it gives +2 CMD to the unit which brings it up to 9. With regard to your first point, the issue is that they aren't even close to being worth what they were in Mk2. So them costing an equivalent number of points means that their cost is excessive for what you actually get. Also, something we haven't touched on yet is that morale was removed from Mk2 - eliminating one of the main advantages undead had over normal units (which, again, wasn't reflected in their cost). In terms of the Standard's ability being useless, I was referring to 'Dead Rise', not the bonus to CMD. Although saying that, I'll just point out that I'd never take a standard bearer if all it did was give a bonus to CMD.
|
|
Nyxu
Overseer
NaCl Elemental
Posts: 119
|
Post by Nyxu on Mar 20, 2017 14:45:38 GMT
The bearer doesn't have anything other than standard, take up
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on Mar 20, 2017 14:56:20 GMT
Though, unlike almost every other unit with a standard on the ua, the banes standard has a pow13 WM weapon (instead of no weapon)
|
|
|
Post by schostoppa1 on Mar 20, 2017 15:35:58 GMT
agreed to all of the above. You cant convince me that the ua should have stayed the same cost across edition changes. They lost too much.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Mar 20, 2017 15:37:25 GMT
So I despise the Bane Warrior CA, I think it's a waste of points. Yes the Mark2 UA was good, but the Mark3 CA we have now is worse.
1) The unit lost Stealth. This is still huge, especially concerning the more expensive CA's survivability. It's a lot easier to snipe out the 12/15 5 box officer when you don't need special guns to do so.
2) Tough is now on the Officer & not the Standard. Keeping the Standard alive is easy thanks to take up. Keeping the Officer alive is not. He's now an even higher priority target than he was in Mark2 because he's easily worth 5/6 of the points you're playing for the CA. If he dies you're losing an extra attack since he's the only one with 2 axes, the mini feat, & Tough.
3) Dead Rise is now Rise. Mark2 Banes didn't just shake Knockdown, they also shook Stationary. This was huge in matchups like Sorscha1, Goreshade3, or Legion using the Blackfrost Shard where they were unable to just Stationary your front most unit to completely screw your movement over. Now in these matchups if you have a Bane unit up front Sorscha can Freezing Grip the unit and your second line is now trapped behind a Stationary unit of Banes that can't get out of the way.
4) The Mini Feat is a trap. It only works against living warriors. This is a mini feat that better suits Bane Knights. The Warriors are heavy hunters. They excel at killing heavy targets. If you're taking advantage of the mini feat you're using the Banes for a purpose they aren't really suited for.
5) Cost. For 6 points you get a host of mediocre-good abilities tied to one 5 point models and an extra 1 point Bane. 6 points gets you 3 attacks. For just 4 more points you can double the amount of attack you get by just taking another min unit of Bane Warriors instead of the CA, and you won't have two of your attacks tied to one easy to snipe model.
|
|
ware86
BattleBox Champ
Posts: 51
|
Post by ware86 on Mar 20, 2017 16:53:26 GMT
All what the others said + somehow it seems people forget that tough is also a lot worse now. + Again the strange interaction having to kill infantry with my banes, that want to kill heavies (with mat 6!) + they lost also the +2 threat thanks to tartarus nerf. (who is also alittle expensive) investing 23 points for a really below average unit, is just bad. we just have to sometimes because it is our only real hard hitting Infantry.
|
|
walden
Junior Strategist
Posts: 136
|
Post by walden on Mar 21, 2017 16:29:26 GMT
I agree with what everyone's said.
Give the officer Tactics: Mirage, granted stealth. Maybe they don't even need a mini feat
Make a bane knight officer. Give him voidbringer, Tactics: Shieldwall, and granted: Rise.
|
|