|
Post by cainuslupus on Jan 7, 2018 17:11:11 GMT
So I was wrong. And so are you. Most warjacks are balanced around being focus efficent, with solos giving focus, junior warcasters and spellists supporting shooting. Conveniently ignoring this skews this a little, don't you thing?
Saying that NBT is guaranteed 3 fury generation like it is advantage is really bad joke. Either you don't know thing called frenzy check or you're not being honest.
So at one side we have NBT, Ravagore and Lylyth2/3, on the other Kara Sloan or Caine 3 with Hunters and Chargers, or maybe Gorten with his Chickens - and somehow we have advantage. I get it, it's not sarcasm. Morbid humor?
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Jan 7, 2018 17:15:12 GMT
I think it's just accumulated poisoning from the awful curry in Britain that's given him brain damage.
No argument about random ROF shooters though, there beasts are way better, obviously.
-und_ed
|
|
|
Post by welshhoppo on Jan 7, 2018 17:27:08 GMT
Don't you dare disrespect the Vindaloo!
And I'll stick buy Fury being better, but we've been having this arguement since hordes was release.
I'll drop it if you all admit that Fury was definitely better in MKI and mkII.
|
|
|
Post by maximumhippo on Jan 8, 2018 2:47:36 GMT
I'll drop it if you all admit that Fury was definitely better in MKI and mkII. I can't speak for everyone else but I absolutely agree that FURY was better than FOCUS in MkI and MkII. The main reason that FURY was better in the past was basically what you were saying, that there was no effective cost, no loss to the warlock like there was with FOCUS. Nowadays though, there's so much focus to go around. Power up, Induction, the monstrosity rule that give them focus. Empower solos are everywhere. In short, FURY had the advantage of there always being more available to use. Now that gap is so much closer that it is almost gone.
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Jan 8, 2018 5:48:02 GMT
I'll drop it if you all admit that Fury was definitely better in MKI and mkII. I can't speak for everyone else but I absolutely agree that FURY was better than FOCUS in MkI and MkII. The main reason that FURY was better in the past was basically what you were saying, that there was no effective cost, no loss to the warlock like there was with FOCUS. Nowadays though, there's so much focus to go around. Power up, Induction, the monstrosity rule that give them focus. Empower solos are everywhere. In short, FURY had the advantage of there always being more available to use. Now that gap is so much closer that it is almost gone. I didn't play Mk1, but is really Fury being better or just Focus being bad?
|
|
|
Post by maximumhippo on Jan 8, 2018 6:44:49 GMT
I can't speak for everyone else but I absolutely agree that FURY was better than FOCUS in MkI and MkII. The main reason that FURY was better in the past was basically what you were saying, that there was no effective cost, no loss to the warlock like there was with FOCUS. Nowadays though, there's so much focus to go around. Power up, Induction, the monstrosity rule that give them focus. Empower solos are everywhere. In short, FURY had the advantage of there always being more available to use. Now that gap is so much closer that it is almost gone. I didn't play Mk1, but is really Fury being better or just Focus being bad? FURY points and FOCUS points are equivalent. You can do exactly the same amount of work with one FOCUS as one FURY. In MkI and MkII, there was an extremely limited amount of Focus in any given list. Because of the way that the FOCUS system works, you had a very hard cap on the amount of work that could be done by those limited FOCUS. This issue was made worse because your warcaster and *every single warjack* shared this pool. A List with 2 'Jacks and a FOCUS 6 warcaster has 6 focus. Add in two more 'Jacks, still 6 focus. Hordes never had this problem. You have as many FURY points as you need to or want to, to a certain point of course. With warbeasts, the more you add, the more FURY you have available, and by extension, the more work it's possible to do with that FURY. Now, in MkIII More Jacks, more focus. There's a much larger pool of FOCUS to work with. I don't think that FOCUS is Bad, or was ever bad, There was just never enough to work with.
|
|
izrian
Junior Strategist
Posts: 107
|
Post by izrian on Jan 8, 2018 17:40:17 GMT
In mk1 and 2, focus and jacks. With most factions in mk2 you would see usually maybe up to 4 jacks max, there were some lists here and there that may run more. But not many.
How war machine over came the jack deficits was with their infantry, they were heads and shoulders above most hordes infantry. And they allowed most war machine factions to have a veriered play style and make use if most of casters.
That being said fury was ALOT more useful and most factions had great ways to deal with fury management. Espically legion. So beast heavy was very much a thing in MK2.
Now it seems the tables have turned, our fury management is no longer as powerful as it once was, this makes us want to look towards infantry to fill the holes that beasts used to fill.
Now that being said our infantry does not have the staying power that a lot of beasts used to have or currently have. Add the themes on top of that, which reduce our options for infantry. And we are left with the delima of, taking infantry that cannot get the job done as well, or taking beasts to fill those rolls and running hot on fury.
Also with being said, most beasts, cannot get the work done that a jack can, with regards to legion, on 1 fury.
The reason for this, these are my observations, is because legion does not have a tool kit that supports beasts like other factions have. Our tool kit is based on debuffing enemy models not buffing our own models, thus forcing our beasts to be fury hungry.
I don't think that should change however. That is kind are idea behind legion, what should change however is our fury management models, the Shepard should be able to remove more fury like it did in mk2.
The chef is not a good answer to legion because sacrificing some of the most expensive infantry in the game for fury management is not a good option.
The forsaken are just good, no changes to that model, it's Just good.
But in a beasts heavy faction we need more options.
Now as far as comparing mk2 hordes to mk2 warmachine with infantry filling the gaps of beasts/jacks respectively. Most of our infantry is really good!! But we don't have the support structure for infantry that we deapratly need in order to make that change successful. There are a few There a currently active about this very issue, Kallus 1 with unyielding, vayl1 with incite, fyanna2 with iron flesh etc.
The issue with armor buffs and legion is it does not typically really matter. Swordsman at arm +2 who cares? Orgran at arm 18 is cool and all but 8f you take them with the casters that give them the arm buff either don't like ogran or their offisive spells have better targets than our infantry.
Ling story short, I see and understand what PP intended to happen basically switching spots with warmachine and hordes for jacks/beasts respectively but our tool kits didn't change with it. Putting us in a very tight spot.
|
|