|
Post by davycannonhound on Nov 30, 2017 23:26:43 GMT
Also, while we are at it let's fix Vayl1 and Morhvanna2 (please please please and thank you). I have a close friend who plays Circle, and Morhvanna2 seems extremely powerful. He loves her to death and has a lot of fun playing her. I haven't won a match when he's played her. Her spell list and feat are all extremely powerful.
|
|
demonic
Junior Strategist
Posts: 649
|
Post by demonic on Nov 30, 2017 23:59:33 GMT
Morhvanna is not the issue as much as it is Circle's infantry. Use AoEs and keep your models separated a bit to watch Morhvanna2 fall. She's awesome at clearing buffs and using her carnivore spell in tandom with her scales of fate spell can be a really nasty combo. Both morhvannas are built around making sub-par models into above average models. When you consider what she can do in a tharn list combined with cavalry and skin walkers you can really see how dominant she can be. The issue is that circle already has Kreuger, who can be both an attrition caster, like morhvanna, and also a power house in his own right. If you are getting pummeled by Morhvanna herself, it's because your models are too clustered and she's taking advantage of Death Knell getting +1 for every model under the 4 inch AoE
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Dec 1, 2017 0:04:52 GMT
Morhvanna is not the issue as much as it is Circle's infantry. Use AoEs and keep your models separated a bit to watch Morhvanna2 fall. She's awesome at clearing buffs and using her carnivore spell in tandom with her scales of fate spell can be a really nasty combo. Both morhvannas are built around making sub-par models into above average models. When you consider what she can do in a tharn list combined with cavalry and skin walkers you can really see how dominant she can be. The issue is that circle already has Kreuger, who can be both an attrition caster, like morhvanna, and also a power house in his own right. If you are getting pummeled by Morhvanna herself, it's because your models are too clustered and she's taking advantage of Death Knell getting +1 for every model under the 4 inch AoE Well, I'm jealous of almost all of Circle's infantry, so that's kinda falling on deaf ears, so to speak (don't mean that offensively or argumentatively, just more "the grass is greener" coming in). Sunder Spirit is also good, imo.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Dec 1, 2017 9:32:46 GMT
Morhvanna is not the issue as much as it is Circle's infantry. Use AoEs and keep your models separated a bit to watch Morhvanna2 fall. She's awesome at clearing buffs and using her carnivore spell in tandom with her scales of fate spell can be a really nasty combo. Both morhvannas are built around making sub-par models into above average models. When you consider what she can do in a tharn list combined with cavalry and skin walkers you can really see how dominant she can be. The issue is that circle already has Kreuger, who can be both an attrition caster, like morhvanna, and also a power house in his own right. If you are getting pummeled by Morhvanna herself, it's because your models are too clustered and she's taking advantage of Death Knell getting +1 for every model under the 4 inch AoE Well, I'm jealous of almost all of Circle's infantry, so that's kinda falling on deaf ears, so to speak (don't mean that offensively or argumentatively, just more "the grass is greener" coming in). Sunder Spirit is also good, imo. I'm so with you here, davey. One of the biggest joys I felt switching from Legion to Circle was having really good infantry. Hell, even the often maligned Wolves of Orborous would be hailed as fantastic in Legion. -und_ed
|
|
|
Post by forthehorde on Dec 1, 2017 15:56:33 GMT
Your infantry buff casters! Would love more casters with infantry conceal or any buff that makes our infantry hit harder. A +3 str feat would make our tharns sooo good.
For as good as circle infantry can be, that's their Max. No one really makes them better. And they're hard as hell to get up the field without getting shot off the table.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Dec 1, 2017 18:42:04 GMT
Your infantry buff casters! Would love more casters with infantry conceal or any buff that makes our infantry hit harder. A +3 str feat would make our tharns sooo good. For as good as circle infantry can be, that's their Max. No one really makes them better. And they're hard as hell to get up the field without getting shot off the table. So, better base infantry but little support from your warlocks, basically.
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Dec 1, 2017 19:08:32 GMT
Also, while we are at it let's fix Vayl1 and Morhvanna2 (please please please and thank you). I have a close friend who plays Circle, and Morhvanna2 seems extremely powerful. He loves her to death and has a lot of fun playing her. I haven't won a match when he's played her. Her spell list and feat are all extremely powerful. I don't have huge complaints about Morv2, but the spell Censure is a literal freaking joke. It does less than 0 as it removes friendly upkeep spells as well. If they remove that spell and replace it with any of the pre-existing actual upkeep removal spells in the game I would be pretty happy. That spell being terrible is enough to kill my love for her Mk3 incarnation. I really loved her in MkII and I was ok with the nerfs she took, but that spell just seems a bridge too far IMO. Side note about Circle infantry vs Legion infantry, while I agree that Circle infantry tend to be better across the board let's not kid ourselves here. Circle infantry do 1 thing, and 1 thing only. That is kill enemy infantry. At least Legion infantry have some different roles to play (want to kill heavies, try our warspears or swordsmen. Want to kill infantry, try hex hunters). Circle infantry ONLY kills infantry. It is so ironic to me that the Mk3 transition was all about giving units a unique role and then they turned effectively all Circle infantry into the same thing. To be fair I am painting with a bit of a broad brush but why did Tharn Ravagers lose powerful charge? So they could kill the infantry that bloodweavers, bloodtrackers, blackclad goats, reeves, wolves, and any of the circle solos couldn't kill? My point in a nutshell is that Circle Infantry all has the same role which bugs the hell out of me. When I play Legion at least I have a few roles I can fill. The nice part about all of this is that the CID's seem to be doing a hell of an excellent job of fixing these types of gripes. Skorne was arguably the worst MkIII faction and after the CID they are one of the best. Grymkin was created post CID and they seem to be an excellent example of balance. We can all keep our fingers crossed as Circle and Legion players that we get a similar treatment.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Dec 1, 2017 19:19:02 GMT
I have a close friend who plays Circle, and Morhvanna2 seems extremely powerful. He loves her to death and has a lot of fun playing her. I haven't won a match when he's played her. Her spell list and feat are all extremely powerful. I don't have huge complaints about Morv2, but the spell Censure is a literal freaking joke. It does less than 0 as it removes friendly upkeep spells as well. If they remove that spell and replace it with any of the pre-existing actual upkeep removal spells in the game I would be pretty happy. That spell being terrible is enough to kill my love for her Mk3 incarnation. I really loved her in MkII and I was ok with the nerfs she took, but that spell just seems a bridge too far IMO. Side note about Circle infantry vs Legion infantry, while I agree that Circle infantry tend to be better across the board let's not kid ourselves here. Circle infantry do 1 thing, and 1 thing only. That is kill enemy infantry. At least Legion infantry have some different roles to play (want to kill heavies, try our warspears or swordsmen. Want to kill infantry, try hex hunters). Circle infantry ONLY kills infantry. It is so ironic to me that the Mk3 transition was all about giving units a unique role and then they turned effectively all Circle infantry into the same thing. To be fair I am painting with a bit of a broad brush but why did Tharn Ravagers lose powerful charge? So they could kill the infantry that bloodweavers, bloodtrackers, blackclad goats, reeves, wolves, and any of the circle solos couldn't kill? My point in a nutshell is that Circle Infantry all has the same role which bugs the hell out of me. When I play Legion at least I have a few roles I can fill. The nice part about all of this is that the CID's seem to be doing a hell of an excellent job of fixing these types of gripes. Skorne was arguably the worst MkIII faction and after the CID they are one of the best. Grymkin was created post CID and they seem to be an excellent example of balance. We can all keep our fingers crossed as Circle and Legion players that we get a similar treatment. I'd kill to have Censure. As large as her control range is, it makes sense that it would remove ALL upkeeps. Though, I could technically see it going down in cost.
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Dec 1, 2017 20:19:53 GMT
Are we talking about the same spell? My reason for not liking Censure is that it doesn't actually remove upkeeps when you need it to. It only removes them if the controlling caster chooses to not suffer D3 damage points. The way I look at it is as follows. If the enemy upkeep is actually important then they will suffer the D3 damage points and keep it in play (win for the opponent as I spend 2 fury to do effectively nothing). If the enemy upkeep spell is not important they will just let it drop off (potentially a win for my opponent as I spent 2 fury to drop a spell which they didn't really care about anyway). I can see it being of some use if the opponent relies on multiple upkeep spells to be up at all times, but this doesn't seem to happen often in the game. I suppose you could cast it every turn you could pile up some damage, but Morvh2 isn't necessarily an assassination caster anymore without the option to feat back gallows groves. With that in mind it seems you would be doing damage that won't matter in the grand scheme of the game.
What is your thought process for liking the spell?
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Dec 1, 2017 21:00:48 GMT
I don't have huge complaints about Morv2, but the spell Censure is a literal freaking joke. It does less than 0 as it removes friendly upkeep spells as well. If they remove that spell and replace it with any of the pre-existing actual upkeep removal spells in the game I would be pretty happy. That spell being terrible is enough to kill my love for her Mk3 incarnation. I really loved her in MkII and I was ok with the nerfs she took, but that spell just seems a bridge too far IMO. Side note about Circle infantry vs Legion infantry, while I agree that Circle infantry tend to be better across the board let's not kid ourselves here. Circle infantry do 1 thing, and 1 thing only. That is kill enemy infantry. At least Legion infantry have some different roles to play (want to kill heavies, try our warspears or swordsmen. Want to kill infantry, try hex hunters). Circle infantry ONLY kills infantry. It is so ironic to me that the Mk3 transition was all about giving units a unique role and then they turned effectively all Circle infantry into the same thing. To be fair I am painting with a bit of a broad brush but why did Tharn Ravagers lose powerful charge? So they could kill the infantry that bloodweavers, bloodtrackers, blackclad goats, reeves, wolves, and any of the circle solos couldn't kill? My point in a nutshell is that Circle Infantry all has the same role which bugs the hell out of me. When I play Legion at least I have a few roles I can fill. The nice part about all of this is that the CID's seem to be doing a hell of an excellent job of fixing these types of gripes. Skorne was arguably the worst MkIII faction and after the CID they are one of the best. Grymkin was created post CID and they seem to be an excellent example of balance. We can all keep our fingers crossed as Circle and Legion players that we get a similar treatment. I'd kill to have Censure. As large as her control range is, it makes sense that it would remove ALL upkeeps. Though, I could technically see it going down in cost. bloodhawk - Skorne never had a CID. They got a unilateral errata/buff/redo at the beginning of the year that never went through CID.
Censure is a terrible spell. It's in the running for 'worst spell in the game.' It removes your own upkeeps unless you take damage (which Morv2 REALLY can't afford, with how often she tends to cut herself), it gives your opponent a choice to keep their upkeeps up (and d3 damage isn't super impactful regardless). It might as well be a dead spell.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Dec 1, 2017 21:30:37 GMT
I'd kill to have Censure. As large as her control range is, it makes sense that it would remove ALL upkeeps. Though, I could technically see it going down in cost. bloodhawk - Skorne never had a CID. They got a unilateral errata/buff/redo at the beginning of the year that never went through CID.
Censure is a terrible spell. It's in the running for 'worst spell in the game.' It removes your own upkeeps unless you take damage (which Morv2 REALLY can't afford, with how often she tends to cut herself), it gives your opponent a choice to keep their upkeeps up (and d3 damage isn't super impactful regardless). It might as well be a dead spell.
I’d argue she can afford to use it more than anyone else, due to how much she can heal herself. Taking D3 damage is dangerous for some casters, depending on how many upkeeps they have.
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Dec 1, 2017 21:31:43 GMT
I'd kill to have Censure. As large as her control range is, it makes sense that it would remove ALL upkeeps. Though, I could technically see it going down in cost. bloodhawk - Skorne never had a CID. They got a unilateral errata/buff/redo at the beginning of the year that never went through CID.
Censure is a terrible spell. It's in the running for 'worst spell in the game.' It removes your own upkeeps unless you take damage (which Morv2 REALLY can't afford, with how often she tends to cut herself), it gives your opponent a choice to keep their upkeeps up (and d3 damage isn't super impactful regardless). It might as well be a dead spell. Good point, you are correct that Skorne never went through CID. That being said, I think their adjustment was sort of a precursor to what CID became. If I recall Will Pagani and Jeff (can't remember his last name) were added to the balance team shortly before the Skorne changes. I personally believe their addition has helped PP's balance take a notable upturn in effectiveness. My point of mentioning all this is that I think CID performs a very similar function as the Skorne changes albeit on a more targeted basis, obviously they aren't looking at entire factions like the did with Skorne. So yeah, I spent an entire paragraph here splitting hairs with you oncomingstorm
|
|
|
Post by forthehorde on Dec 1, 2017 21:35:23 GMT
You are slightly selling our infantry short. Yes 90% of them are meant to shred infantry. But Ravagers in theme can take down a heavy pretty handily. With the free heart tokens you're hitting at 13+dice(7)+charge(3)+Hrttoken(4)=27. That's healthy enough to take down a heavy. You might lose 2-3 to the heavy later but it'll die. Just wish we had more ways to get them up field. Swamp gobber belows has been my go to, and he works alright.
Granted they're expensive. But it's not like legion has any better options. Both are extremely weak compared to my Ret dawn guards who are cheap reach weapon masters with 12 damage and 17 armor and vengeance.
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Dec 1, 2017 22:30:44 GMT
You are slightly selling our infantry short. Yes 90% of them are meant to shred infantry. But Ravagers in theme can take down a heavy pretty handily. With the free heart tokens you're hitting at 13+dice(7)+charge(3)+Hrttoken(4)=27. That's healthy enough to take down a heavy. You might lose 2-3 to the heavy later but it'll die. Just wish we had more ways to get them up field. Swamp gobber belows has been my go to, and he works alright. Granted they're expensive. But it's not like legion has any better options. Both are extremely weak compared to my Ret dawn guards who are cheap reach weapon masters with 12 damage and 17 armor and vengeance. I think you may be slightly off on how the heart token works. Please correct me if I am wrong but reading the wording on heart eater you can choose to boost a damage roll. In the cases of charges your charge attack is already boosted, and therefore cannot be boosted again. So the max you get is PS13 plus the 3d6. Now that's not bad per se, but when you think that last edition Ravagers had powerful charge (making them PS15) it starts getting annoying. Going back to my point earlier it feels like Circle infantry had roles removed rather than diversified. Powerful Charge would make Ravagers a legitimate threat to jacks and heavies. While PS13 is decent, it just isn't enough to justify them in that role in my experience. While we are talking about selling Circle infantry short I will note that Reeves, Wolves, and Wolf Riders all have some anti Jack capabilities. Reeves can get 2 PS19 CRAs, Wolves can get a big CMA with an additional dice of damage, and Wolf Riders are weapon masters. All that being said I just don't see those units as really wanting to perform an anti Jack role when they seem better positioned to be more anti infantry. I am going to hold out hope we get some tweaks to wolf riders and ravagers to make them more anti armour (Powerful charge on Ravagers and Prey added back to Wolf Riders would do the trick
|
|
|
Post by forthehorde on Dec 1, 2017 22:51:10 GMT
Oh good catch. You're completely right about boosting a charge attack. Well that definitely settles that.
|
|