|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 5, 2017 23:16:38 GMT
The thane is garbage, there is no arguing that. Anything that involves unyielding is right out.
As for the lance rule, see above. You can either complain about how much better it could be, or play within the rules as they currently lie. Would they be better without the lance rule? Undoubtedly. But having it is not nearly as bad if you are smart about assaulting/impacting.
Edit: Also, I absolutely do not want the complaining about the Destors to abate. We need it to get some buffs in the CID.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Dec 5, 2017 23:26:30 GMT
The thane is garbage, there is no arguing that. Anything that involves unyielding is right out. As for the lance rule, see above. You can either complain about how much better it could be, or play within the rules as they currently lie. Would they be better without the lance rule? Undoubtedly. But having it is not nearly as bad if you are smart about assaulting/impacting. Edit: Also, I absolutely do not want the complaining about the Destors to abate. We need it to get some buffs in the CID. If you're not assaulting and not taking the Thane...you are playing (in effect) strictly worse Storm Lances. And not just a little worse, worse by a significant margin, in a faction that does much less to support them than Cygnar does Storm Lances.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 5, 2017 23:43:07 GMT
The thane is garbage, there is no arguing that. Anything that involves unyielding is right out. As for the lance rule, see above. You can either complain about how much better it could be, or play within the rules as they currently lie. Would they be better without the lance rule? Undoubtedly. But having it is not nearly as bad if you are smart about assaulting/impacting. Edit: Also, I absolutely do not want the complaining about the Destors to abate. We need it to get some buffs in the CID. If you're not assaulting and not taking the Thane...you are playing (in effect) strictly worse Storm Lances. And not just a little worse, worse by a significant margin, in a faction that does much less to support them than Cygnar does Storm Lances.
Ok, but if you are assaulting they are even worse. I'm not really sure what your deal is with assaulting? It's a corner case rule, trying to apply it broadly is not going to work.
|
|
|
Post by Kallas on Dec 6, 2017 1:20:09 GMT
Assault is one rule I'd like to see CID'd away. It's just bad for them to ever use, except against things where the gun basically useless...
OS, I get what you're saying, mostly, about them being worse Storm Lances (they are, mostly) and having less support (they do, mostly), but they're not terrible.
As elladan's said, the Lance rule is pretty bad (particularly for current Unyielding purposes) but it does allow more freedom with follow up Quick Work shots, and that's honestly not to be sniffed at! Lance actually lets you impact into a dude without worrying about accidentally tying up his mate. And Quick Working to shoot support models is pretty damn excellent - I've used it to gut Choir, or threaten Junior Warcasters (who've either died; been forced backwards, keeping their jacks somewhat curtailed; or had to camp more Focus, meaning less for their jacks), or put shots into more important solos...
Simply, they aren't bad. They're not an A-tier unit, but they're a good C+/B-. Considering that there's plenty of infantry in the meta, they have natural targets to hunt; and due to their size, speed and (enough) resilience they can body block enemy heavies enough let position aggressively.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Dec 6, 2017 4:11:47 GMT
Assault is one rule I'd like to see CID'd away. It's just bad for them to ever use, except against things where the gun basically useless... OS, I get what you're saying, mostly, about them being worse Storm Lances (they are, mostly) and having less support (they do, mostly), but they're not terrible. As elladan's said, the Lance rule is pretty bad (particularly for current Unyielding purposes) but it does allow more freedom with follow up Quick Work shots, and that's honestly not to be sniffed at! Lance actually lets you impact into a dude without worrying about accidentally tying up his mate. And Quick Working to shoot support models is pretty damn excellent - I've used it to gut Choir, or threaten Junior Warcasters (who've either died; been forced backwards, keeping their jacks somewhat curtailed; or had to camp more Focus, meaning less for their jacks), or put shots into more important solos... Simply, they aren't bad. They're not an A-tier unit, but they're a good C+/B-. Considering that there's plenty of infantry in the meta, they have natural targets to hunt; and due to their size, speed and (enough) resilience they can body block enemy heavies enough let position aggressively. I don't agree. I think they're a C-tier unit you can get to perform like a B-tier unit if you put enough resources and dedication into them. Like...storm lances aren't particularly over the top any more. They're good, solid cavalry, but they're not top of the pack (that's Bane Riders or Ferox). But they're better than Destors by a significant margin into most ways. They charge at 2 higher POW. They can hit hard targets while still killing infantry. Their secondary attack doesn't roll to hit, doesn't require killing every enemy in your melee range to go off, and ignores almost every piece of defensive tech in the game (incidentally, I hate electro-leaps...can you tell?) If they charge infantry, each storm lance can fairly reliably kill 3-4 infantry models, between impact attacks, assault, and electro leaps. And on top of that, they have access to spells like Fury and Arcane shield, Feats like Stryker3's (yes, I'm aware he's not very good), and Stryker1's and gain access to Cygnar's generally solid support solos and mercenary options. There is not one thing about Destors that makes me want to take them. They are in the running for worst cavalry in the game, and they (probably) win the WMH skornergy award by a country mile. Give them Dual attack, Unyielding, and remove the god-damn lance rule that nobody anywhere actually likes. Give the Destor Thane a different buff, ideally one that doesn't allow him to be scalpeled out before he can do anything. Then we'd be in business. That unit could go through infantry like nobody's business, and would still struggle against hard targets (P+S 14 ain't exactly stellar). Basically inverse Storm Lances, but...they would at least have a niche. Right now they just don't.
|
|
|
Post by Kallas on Dec 6, 2017 12:15:43 GMT
I don't agree. I think they're a C-tier unit you can get to perform like a B-tier unit if you put enough resources and dedication into them. Genuine question (and to clarify through internet tone damping, not an attack!) but have you actually put them on the table? I was of exactly the same opinion as you for ages, so I'm speaking from a experience that table time with them means a lot more than theory with Destors. Like...storm lances aren't particularly over the top any more. They're good, solid cavalry, but they're not top of the pack (that's Bane Riders or Ferox). But they're better than Destors by a significant margin into most ways. They charge at 2 higher POW. They can hit hard targets while still killing infantry. Their secondary attack doesn't roll to hit, doesn't require killing every enemy in your melee range to go off, and ignores almost every piece of defensive tech in the game (incidentally, I hate electro-leaps...can you tell?) If they charge infantry, each storm lance can fairly reliably kill 3-4 infantry models, between impact attacks, assault, and electro leaps. And on top of that, they have access to spells like Fury and Arcane shield, Feats like Stryker3's (yes, I'm aware he's not very good), and Stryker1's and gain access to Cygnar's generally solid support solos and mercenary options. Storm Lances are dumb. No idea why they buffed their melee (they're now basically just better than Uhlans, and still better than most cav). I totally agree about E-Leaps, but Quick Work has some significant advantages: - You get to choose who you go for. Sure E-Leaps auto hit and bypass ridiculous amounts of things, but if you jump to an ARM 21 model, they just won't give a shit. Destors get to point their gun at who they want. - Quick Work doesn't require you to kill everything nearby, though it does ask you to position with some forethought. With that forethought you get to snipe at what you want to (Choir, JRs, Arcanists, etc). - Lance, while generally speaking awful, is actually a blessing when it comes time to Quick Work. You don't need to kill everyone within 2" (unless they have reach, at which point you need factor that into your own positioning) because your melee shrinks down. That's actually really useful for squeezing out a little extra distance for your Quick Work shot. Simply, Quick Work is not to be underestimated which you appear to be doing. Yes Storm Lances blender infantry a little better, but Destors have a much better ability to reach out and touch the opponent's squishy vulnerable models. While Bane Riders and Ferox are certainly good, that doesn't make Destors bad. That's like saying Sentinels make Bane Warriors bad. There is not one thing about Destors that makes me want to take them. They are in the running for worst cavalry in the game, and they (probably) win the WMH skornergy award by a country mile. Their Skornergy isn't that bad. It's essentially just 'Don't use Assault', and while that's dumb and annoying it's hardly the end of the world. Again I'll say - put them on the table, they do much better in action that when you try hard to put them down in theory. I know, I used to think exactly like you do. Give them Dual attack, Unyielding, and remove the god-damn lance rule that nobody anywhere actually likes. Give the Destor Thane a different buff, ideally one that doesn't allow him to be scalpeled out before he can do anything. Then we'd be in business. That unit could go through infantry like nobody's business, and would still struggle against hard targets (P+S 14 ain't exactly stellar). Basically inverse Storm Lances, but...they would at least have a niche. Right now they just don't. I mean, I could definitely get behind that. The Thane's buff is awful, particularly with the current Unyielding wording. Dual Attack would sure be better than Quick Work, and I could get behind dropping Lance but PP have said that they won't be dropping it (or adding it to Storm Lances - pretty sure this was all said on the Ret Facebook page a few months back). Really, all they need to be excellent is: * Quick Work -> Dual Attack, as you said * Unyielding on to base unit and reworded like CID suggested * Rework the Thane because he's trash. The base unit of Destors doesn't actually need a lot, just a couple of tweaks.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 6, 2017 13:15:37 GMT
Assault is one rule I'd like to see CID'd away. It's just bad for them to ever use, except against things where the gun basically useless... OS, I get what you're saying, mostly, about them being worse Storm Lances (they are, mostly) and having less support (they do, mostly), but they're not terrible. As elladan's said, the Lance rule is pretty bad (particularly for current Unyielding purposes) but it does allow more freedom with follow up Quick Work shots, and that's honestly not to be sniffed at! Lance actually lets you impact into a dude without worrying about accidentally tying up his mate. And Quick Working to shoot support models is pretty damn excellent - I've used it to gut Choir, or threaten Junior Warcasters (who've either died; been forced backwards, keeping their jacks somewhat curtailed; or had to camp more Focus, meaning less for their jacks), or put shots into more important solos... Simply, they aren't bad. They're not an A-tier unit, but they're a good C+/B-. Considering that there's plenty of infantry in the meta, they have natural targets to hunt; and due to their size, speed and (enough) resilience they can body block enemy heavies enough let position aggressively. I don't agree. I think they're a C-tier unit you can get to perform like a B-tier unit if you put enough resources and dedication into them. Like...storm lances aren't particularly over the top any more. They're good, solid cavalry, but they're not top of the pack (that's Bane Riders or Ferox). But they're better than Destors by a significant margin into most ways. They charge at 2 higher POW. They can hit hard targets while still killing infantry. Their secondary attack doesn't roll to hit, doesn't require killing every enemy in your melee range to go off, and ignores almost every piece of defensive tech in the game (incidentally, I hate electro-leaps...can you tell?) If they charge infantry, each storm lance can fairly reliably kill 3-4 infantry models, between impact attacks, assault, and electro leaps. And on top of that, they have access to spells like Fury and Arcane shield, Feats like Stryker3's (yes, I'm aware he's not very good), and Stryker1's and gain access to Cygnar's generally solid support solos and mercenary options. There is not one thing about Destors that makes me want to take them. They are in the running for worst cavalry in the game, and they (probably) win the WMH skornergy award by a country mile. Give them Dual attack, Unyielding, and remove the god-damn lance rule that nobody anywhere actually likes. Give the Destor Thane a different buff, ideally one that doesn't allow him to be scalpeled out before he can do anything. Then we'd be in business. That unit could go through infantry like nobody's business, and would still struggle against hard targets (P+S 14 ain't exactly stellar). Basically inverse Storm Lances, but...they would at least have a niche. Right now they just don't. I like the second half, not so much the first half. Could you maybe compare them to something in faction? Highlighting differences between stormlances and destors is fine for power between factions (and generating complaints), but isn't really relevant to how to get good use out of them on the table or what they are good/bad at in faction versus our other choices. Once we can take stormlances and have arcane shield let me know and I'll update the original post. Edit: I would also like you to go into great detail, step-by-step, on their skornergy. At first blush I absolutely agreed with you, but now I think their rules actually work together in a very elegant and subtle way. Not in the way stormlances work, mind you, but also not in a way that is skornergistic.
|
|
|
Post by adakai on Dec 6, 2017 19:08:03 GMT
I don't agree. I think they're a C-tier unit you can get to perform like a B-tier unit if you put enough resources and dedication into them. Like...storm lances aren't particularly over the top any more. They're good, solid cavalry, but they're not top of the pack (that's Bane Riders or Ferox). But they're better than Destors by a significant margin into most ways. They charge at 2 higher POW. They can hit hard targets while still killing infantry. Their secondary attack doesn't roll to hit, doesn't require killing every enemy in your melee range to go off, and ignores almost every piece of defensive tech in the game (incidentally, I hate electro-leaps...can you tell?) If they charge infantry, each storm lance can fairly reliably kill 3-4 infantry models, between impact attacks, assault, and electro leaps. And on top of that, they have access to spells like Fury and Arcane shield, Feats like Stryker3's (yes, I'm aware he's not very good), and Stryker1's and gain access to Cygnar's generally solid support solos and mercenary options. There is not one thing about Destors that makes me want to take them. They are in the running for worst cavalry in the game, and they (probably) win the WMH skornergy award by a country mile. Give them Dual attack, Unyielding, and remove the god-damn lance rule that nobody anywhere actually likes. Give the Destor Thane a different buff, ideally one that doesn't allow him to be scalpeled out before he can do anything. Then we'd be in business. That unit could go through infantry like nobody's business, and would still struggle against hard targets (P+S 14 ain't exactly stellar). Basically inverse Storm Lances, but...they would at least have a niche. Right now they just don't. I like the second half, not so much the first half. Could you maybe compare them to something in faction? Highlighting differences between stormlances and destors is fine for power between factions (and generating complaints), but isn't really relevant to how to get good use out of them on the table or what they are good/bad at in faction versus our other choices. Once we can take stormlances and have arcane shield let me know and I'll update the original post. Edit: I would also like you to go into great detail, step-by-step, on their skornergy. At first blush I absolutely agreed with you, but now I think their rules actually work together in a very elegant and subtle way. Not in the way stormlances work, mind you, but also not in a way that is skornergistic. I'm a believer. Lance Rule
- As mentioned by the previous contributors - this is actually beneficial in helping the Destors dig deep into getting shots at back line support or shoot and kill another model (since they wont be engaging anyone else - unless that model has reach) Legions of Dawn
- Pretty nice complementary piece to sentinels. Sentinels are slow and crack armor. Destors are fast and can mulch through infantry. Assault
- May seem like a backwards rule when you think about the lance rule. Like Elladan mentioned, just don't use it unless you are charging a model with a decent number of boxes (i.e. warjack/warbeast/8hp models). It's the nice cherry on top that helps Destors not only clear infantry but do some work into higher value targets. Overall, I think they could use some love (definitely) but after putting them on the table - I can see that they aren't out right garbage. I think @ellladan52 is definitely hitting the mark with their rules working together in an elegant and subtle way. Retribution is a very finesse faction that rewards thoughtful positioning and planning ahead. I think destors are a good example of that - I would say keep trying them out!
|
|
|
Post by psycomonky on Dec 6, 2017 20:17:13 GMT
Don't forget they also cannot use the gunfighter rule. Can't quick work off of that. So, compared to all other cav in the game when walking they have to kill with their 1st attack to make their 2nd attack. Unless your games are over when the fast models charge in this lack of consistent output is a death knell for them.
They need a lot. Changing quick work to dual attack doesn't do anything if you assume that you can trigger quick work and really just highlights how weak of a rule it can be if the dice go against you. They really need to just add quick work to the card which isn't 'a little tweak'.
This is a fairly weak argument given that the are no other similar units in the faction. The closest model would actually be a halbadier with thane given the equal threat ranges and equivalent mele output. Halbs of course have advance move, more bodies (requiring more attacks to kill them), value in charging a heavy (they don't lose the option of a quick work shot), and similar defensive stats.
And yes before you ask I have put destors on the table. They don't do enough work to justify their points and get mulched about as fast as models half their points. You can call them 'finesse' all you want but the reality is that destors are terrible for their points. Lackluster output, lackluster defense, and lackluster support. They have nothing going for them outside of 'i can charge in, possibly kill someone, and if that works shoot at something else. Buying any other unit with a gun accomplishes the same from a better board position with additional capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 7, 2017 12:48:28 GMT
A few points:
1. They can always use gunfighter, it's just not going to trigger quick work. Of course, what would the value be there? They have a mount attack at higher mat. But again, I would not say no to a second, non-charging melee attack, for sure.
2. I'm not really sure what your second response is saying, I think there is a typo in there somewhere. But again, I won't say no to buffs.
3. Realistically, you can't compare Halberdiers with Destors since they do not share a theme, they will never be competing for a spot in the same list. That's just how the game is played. You need to compare them to other Dawnguard units. If we look at sentinels, Destors have a more reliable 13" threat (don't need vengeance), are more resistant to snipers and auto damage, can get up to 3 or more attacks per turn, and can have guns. Would I take Destors before Sentinels? No, but that doesn't mean destors are garbage. They fit very well into that 3rd 20 point slot.
Let me restate my position: Destors are pretty ok. They aren't the best, and I think they could use a buff to really get them played, but as it stands you can get work out of them. And their skornergy is way overstated. I also with that their rules didn't require some finesse and I could just bludgeon my opponent's with them like so many storm lances. But we have what we have, and I like them as our only multi-wound infantry.
Also the thane is hot garbage. He needs some serious reworking. Would I pay 30 points for a unit of destors? Heck no. So why would I pay for a 7 point one?
|
|
|
Post by psycomonky on Dec 8, 2017 1:46:40 GMT
That is just 'you cannot compare to stormlances' rephrased. You can compare models that will not appear in the same list to each other. You just have to take into account the options they would have available. Then you can theorize how they will perform at the same tasks given reasonable assumptions.
Otherwise you have no baseline against which to compare units. IE are battle mages good. Who knows, they have no similar unit to compare against. IE Destors are the fastest unit in their theme with the most attacks, obviously they are undercosted and need a nurf.
You have to compare them to a similar unit that performs the same tasks given both units standard available options.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 8, 2017 5:11:13 GMT
That is just 'you cannot compare to stormlances' rephrased. You can compare models that will not appear in the same list to each other. You just have to take into account the options they would have available. Then you can theorize how they will perform at the same tasks given reasonable assumptions. Otherwise you have no baseline against which to compare units. IE are battle mages good. Who knows, they have no similar unit to compare against. IE Destors are the fastest unit in their theme with the most attacks, obviously they are undercosted and need a nurf. You have to compare them to a similar unit that performs the same tasks given both units standard available options. Shoot, you're right, I guess there's no way to have any sort of comparison. Wait, what's that in my post right after the part you quoted? Is that a...comparison? Man, I just don't know what to believe anymore! (you can compare models that realistically compete for roles to determine if they should be put in a list, that's what I'm saying - I mean it's literally right after the part you quoted in my post) And if we make a comparison between Destors and other Dawnguard units (the actual relevant ones), we find they bring some unique strengths that are occasionally worth the opportunity cost of no unit of invictors (assuming you know how to play them properly, which is the point of this post).
|
|
|
Post by cyberkaiju on Dec 9, 2017 20:13:13 GMT
Personally I think this argument is silly. They aren’t the best, and they aren’t trash. They are somewhere in the middle. I find they may be a bit overcosted, but not so much as to make them unplayable. If you like them, play them, if not, don’t. Either way let’s hope they get a buff when cid hits to keep them competing for a slot in the list with whatever new toys we get.
|
|
|
Post by psycomonky on Dec 11, 2017 17:55:23 GMT
So, by the same logic you can increase their points to 25 for a unit and all of that holds true.
You have to compare them to similar units that perform a similar function, not speed 5 weapon masters or speed 5 CRA units. Then evaluate them against the cost of those units and see if they do the same job for the same points, a better job for more points, or a worse job for less points. Or, in the case of destors: a worse job for more points.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Dec 11, 2017 19:03:46 GMT
So, by the same logic you can increase their points to 25 for a unit and all of that holds true. You have to compare them to similar units that perform a similar function, not speed 5 weapon masters or speed 5 CRA units. Then evaluate them against the cost of those units and see if they do the same job for the same points, a better job for more points, or a worse job for less points. Or, in the case of destors: a worse job for more points. What? That makes no sense. Sure, you could increase the cost, but then their relative value takes a dive and you probably never bring them no matter what unique strengths they bring. I don't see your point here. So then how can you compare any units at all by your metric? How can you say Destors are bad if there is nothing to compare them to? Do you compare them to other faction models and then decide if they should be in your list? That's absurd. That's like saying you should never bring the Arcanist unit because they don't do as much work as paingivers. In order to have any sort of reasonable assessment of list-worthiness, you need to compare with other things that you could take in the list. You can get more specific than that in some cases, but in general this is how most (I would even say all) people do it. No one says they will never take something in a list because it's not as good as something they can't take anyway. Let me try and find some common ground, because I think we are talking about 2 different things: In the context of overall, general game value, Destors are worse than other cavalry options and should not be costed the same, or be given a couple buffs to be brought to their level. On this, you and I agree, and I would say this is where your method of comparison works the best. In the context of list-building, you need to compare Destors with the units around them, namely the other Dawnguard units. In this way, you can determine if they are worth including in your specific list. You can safely ignore all other units because they are not competing for space in your list (in a themeless existence destors are very bad because they compete against a lot more units). Does that make sense? Can we agree on those last two points?
|
|