|
Post by jediguru on Mar 15, 2018 13:06:35 GMT
Edit: I'm being a douche because I'm annoyed with people acting like playing out of theme isn't an option. Sorry, Lanz You Are Not Wrong. (maybe about the attitude or choice of words, but not the basis of the argument) Playing out of theme is perfectly acceptable and functional. I only have about half or less of my current, set in stone, lists in theme. I've never been walked over in any game against any opponent. It's quite often the other way around. Why? Because not every single player is a pro-level international tournament winner. There are people out there that only play in-theme and they still loose. It's a GAME. People have dismissed me, called me dishonest, devalued my experience, used skewed personal definitions of "competitive" and "casual", and set a lucrative goal post for what makes me credible... But I, and anyone else who wants, can continue to play this game with non-theme lists and find success. (It just takes more work.)Personal preference is still possible in this game. The player can still control how they build lists and play them. PP had yet to lay down a law of "Theme or GTFO" [/rant] This ^ x1000 I've experienced similar sentiments from those mostly on the Internet who have never played me.
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Mar 15, 2018 13:55:27 GMT
I'd rather play without theme than in Children of Dragon
|
|
bward
Junior Strategist
Posts: 184
|
Post by bward on Mar 15, 2018 14:03:24 GMT
You Are Not Wrong. (maybe about the attitude or choice of words, but not the basis of the argument) Playing out of theme is perfectly acceptable and functional. I only have about half or less of my current, set in stone, lists in theme. I've never been walked over in any game against any opponent. It's quite often the other way around. Why? Because not every single player is a pro-level international tournament winner. There are people out there that only play in-theme and they still loose. It's a GAME. People have dismissed me, called me dishonest, devalued my experience, used skewed personal definitions of "competitive" and "casual", and set a lucrative goal post for what makes me credible... But I, and anyone else who wants, can continue to play this game with non-theme lists and find success. (It just takes more work.)Personal preference is still possible in this game. The player can still control how they build lists and play them. PP had yet to lay down a law of "Theme or GTFO" [/rant] This ^ x1000 I've experienced similar sentiments from those mostly on the Internet who have never played me. Here’s how I see it.. and I’ll try and choose my words carefully because the absolute last thing I want to do is make anybody feel like they are disvalued, discredited, or personally attacked. WMH is an interesting game in terms of developing any factions meta. Since the time sink to get a couple games in is so high, every faction basically relies on a sort-of crowdsourcing approach to unlock the best synergies in their respective factions. When it comes to this approach though, there are layers... and they go something like this in my opinion *** This is only for the viewpoint of unlocking the strongest (i.e. most competetive) options in your faction, this has nothing to do with what is the “right” or “correct” or “most fun” way to play*** 1. Results at high level events (Cons, WTC, etc.) 2. Anecdotal evidence (battle reports) of players at high level events 3. Local steamroller results (not verifiable but its the best we can work with.. requires individual reporting) 4. Anecdotal evidence (battle reports) of players at steamrollers 5. Results of casual (game night) games... same limitations as SR reporting 6. Anecdotal evidence of casual (game night) games 7. General feedback - “I play this list and I win and its good because of ”xyz” Now for those that feel like their input is devalued or dismissed... my personal view is that most of those statements (that I have seen) only fall into point 7 and sometimes 6... and almost never supported by points 1-4. So its not that it is being dismissed per say, but to me it’s is seen as less tangible because it does not support anything in the higher points. So this is where the crowdsourcing comes together— For people who want to champion more uncommon list, I would love to atleast see point 6 more developed. Tell us about some games.. what was the match up, what was the scenario, how did the game play out, etc. If it is convincing, then there will be somebody who will take that list and go to a steamroller, and develop points 3-4. And if they come back and relay their success or feedback, then that can convince someone to go take it to a big event and develop points 1-2. And so on, we successfully develop ways to make Legion the best faction it can be... together. But if you are just going to rely on saying “I like this list it’s good” (not that you or OP are)... you can’t blame people for not listening. Help us prove it.
|
|
|
Post by althor on Mar 15, 2018 14:11:53 GMT
with my gaming friends, we get a victory point every 2 profiles we did not use in the last game. I can tell you we rarely play with themes, or with the same list every time
|
|
twity
Junior Strategist
Posts: 179
|
Post by twity on Mar 15, 2018 14:44:25 GMT
I am very much against people disparaging peoples positive opinion on something. We can all come to a consensus on what the most popular opinion is, but that does not make dissenting opinions invalid. More ideas are (almost) always positive, you can pick and choose what you like and go from there. I personally like seeing the posts about Kryssa out of theme, even though I don't think I would ever play it (nor am I willing to buy a battlebox to get her). It gives me ideas on how to build up other lists or potentially beneficial interactions.
This is also the internet, sometimes you need to ignore people. It is a tad harder to do with a more limited community though.
|
|
|
Post by jediguru on Mar 15, 2018 15:15:13 GMT
This ^ x1000 I've experienced similar sentiments from those mostly on the Internet who have never played me. Here’s how I see it.. and I’ll try and choose my words carefully because the absolute last thing I want to do is make anybody feel like they are disvalued, discredited, or personally attacked. WMH is an interesting game in terms of developing any factions meta. Since the time sink to get a couple games in is so high, every faction basically relies on a sort-of crowdsourcing approach to unlock the best synergies in their respective factions. When it comes to this approach though, there are layers... and they go something like this in my opinion *** This is only for the viewpoint of unlocking the strongest (i.e. most competetive) options in your faction, this has nothing to do with what is the “right” or “correct” or “most fun” way to play*** 1. Results at high level events (Cons, WTC, etc.) 2. Anecdotal evidence (battle reports) of players at high level events 3. Local steamroller results (not verifiable but its the best we can work with.. requires individual reporting) 4. Anecdotal evidence (battle reports) of players at steamrollers 5. Results of casual (game night) games... same limitations as SR reporting 6. Anecdotal evidence of casual (game night) games 7. General feedback - “I play this list and I win and its good because of ”xyz” Now for those that feel like their input is devalued or dismissed... my personal view is that most of those statements (that I have seen) only fall into point 7 and sometimes 6... and almost never supported by points 1-4. So its not that it is being dismissed per say, but to me it’s is seen as less tangible because it does not support anything in the higher points. So this is where the crowdsourcing comes together— For people who want to champion more uncommon list, I would love to atleast see point 6 more developed. Tell us about some games.. what was the match up, what was the scenario, how did the game play out, etc. If it is convincing, then there will be somebody who will take that list and go to a steamroller, and develop points 3-4. And if they come back and relay their success or feedback, then that can convince someone to go take it to a big event and develop points 1-2. And so on, we successfully develop ways to make Legion the best faction it can be... together. But if you are just going to rely on saying “I like this list it’s good” (not that you or OP are)... you can’t blame people for not listening. Help us prove it. This is pretty spot on and true. The thing I get most tired of is the "Internet group think" where so many have "drank the koolaid" and have no compelling experience of their own to support what is considered good or bad based solely on what looks good on paper or what list won the last con. This is what I see as the flip side of your points above in which I pretty much agree with where people put too much stock in your point 1.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Mar 15, 2018 18:57:09 GMT
bward Completely understandable. I have posted a handful of battle reports and they did get a bit of attention and discussion. I should probably keep them around in my signature or something... I really wish I could do more (haven't even gotten a non-CID game in the last 2 months). As you said it really is the best way to confer information and really "show instead of tell". I would be bonkers to try and force my opinion as more important than tournament results and such. I don't feel I've done that but I apologize if I have sounded that way [/disclaimer] [edit] Though I have on many occasion tried to use my experience/position to combat "tournament results are king" philosophy. I do tend to personally attribute more weight to my own posts/opinions not because I go to steamrollers but I consistently play against those who do in the exact setting they compete in. But even explaining that and other things (like my personal definition of "casual" being "any non-national tournament") things still go down hill quite quickly. Especially with players who main other factions when balance is part of the topic. But I digress. The topic of group think might need a different thread. But it is very, very, prevalent. May threads that opened with a question early on had an immediate reply of "Fyanna is our best answer to [blank]" and "blank" could be practically anything. No reason, no qualification, no modification, no real thought put in. It just was to them. It's hard to combat that when, in my case, you have written an article on the caster in question. Yet people still hold onto a belief. Not to be in anyway malicious, Twity just said he would never want to play an out-of-theme Kryssa list. My article is specifically tailored around my experience with that. Where as Twity will go along that line and accept the idea and respect the opinion. Which is appreciated and a welcome perspective. But most never make that concession
|
|
|
Post by fdf86 on Mar 16, 2018 13:06:05 GMT
I'd rather play without theme than in Children of Dragon Why?
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Mar 16, 2018 14:19:26 GMT
I'd rather play without theme than in Children of Dragon Why? Zuriel (okay, okay - he may not be as bad as I'm making him out to be but man could he be so much better for the cost) I know why we couldn't look at some models outside of PT during the CID, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't use a once over. I think the only part of the current changes that I think may have needed more may have been the Scythean - at 16points and his current functionality, the Throne is usually a wiser choice. Don't get me wrong, I like the throne right where it is at. I think the Scythean should have been used to answer a different question for Legion. I think this was brought up in the CID but maybe not enough? Or maybe there is some tech we are not seeing just yet. But the changes, even outside of the theme, were good. I hope the unreleased models keep their rules as well (read this as the Chosen keep their week 3 ruleset)
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 18, 2018 3:02:15 GMT
Zuriel (okay, okay - he may not be as bad as I'm making him out to be but man could he be so much better for the cost) I know why we couldn't look at some models outside of PT during the CID, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't use a once over. I think the only part of the current changes that I think may have needed more may have been the Scythean - at 16points and his current functionality, the Throne is usually a wiser choice. Don't get me wrong, I like the throne right where it is at. I think the Scythean should have been used to answer a different question for Legion. I think this was brought up in the CID but maybe not enough? Or maybe there is some tech we are not seeing just yet. But the changes, even outside of the theme, were good. I hope the unreleased models keep their rules as well (read this as the Chosen keep their week 3 ruleset) I think the Scythean is the best 'last heavy' in Legion. Reach, pow 17, and murderous enables a lot of assassination runs and its got a decent 10" threat if ur Seraph is dead or engaged. I dont take 2 of them, but itll probably make 4th heavy in a lot of my load outs.
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Mar 18, 2018 10:48:43 GMT
Zuriel (okay, okay - he may not be as bad as I'm making him out to be but man could he be so much better for the cost) I know why we couldn't look at some models outside of PT during the CID, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't use a once over. I think the only part of the current changes that I think may have needed more may have been the Scythean - at 16points and his current functionality, the Throne is usually a wiser choice. Don't get me wrong, I like the throne right where it is at. I think the Scythean should have been used to answer a different question for Legion. I think this was brought up in the CID but maybe not enough? Or maybe there is some tech we are not seeing just yet. But the changes, even outside of the theme, were good. I hope the unreleased models keep their rules as well (read this as the Chosen keep their week 3 ruleset) Scythean have few things differentiating him from Throne/Ravagore. When you can deliver him to enemy caster it's game over (Abby2, Abby1, Rhyas1, Kallus2, Fyanna2). He has Reach and useful animus. Fyanna2 giving him Overtake and Fury makes him really interesting threat. With Abby2 he can threaten 14" outside Feat turn. During Feat, with flight - I see dead casters. He has utility, I believe.
|
|
|
Post by yourmumrang on Mar 18, 2018 21:22:29 GMT
A Scythean or two into MOW under Fyanna would wreck them
|
|
gordo
Junior Strategist
My star is green?
Posts: 548
|
Post by gordo on Mar 19, 2018 13:18:57 GMT
The Scythean has a couple niche situations that it is amazing at, but it's also strong enough that it can take on enemy heavies as well.
My problem is that the Throne is basically almost as good in those niche situations and much better at general roles, buffs the rest of the army by debuffing the enemy, has longer threat range, is more survivable, and doesn't tax fury reserves... All while costing the same amount. So... Unless you are really counting on fighting Madrak, the Scythean has little reason to hit the table in Oracles. The only other theme it is allowed in is infantry based, has tons of anti infantry tech already, and whose beast points are all taken up by the Blightbringer.
Tldr: if you have the piece painted already, it's good enough at its roles you can play it and not regret it. But if you have the Throne as well, there's little reason for it.
I think if Legion gets more access to LoS blocking tech, it would become very worth it. Amusingly, our best (only?) LoS blocking tech is the Throne.
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Mar 19, 2018 13:47:50 GMT
The main thing the scythean has above the throne, is the ability to boost. When you don't need to boost, the throne is probably better. While the scythean is usually not as efficient as the throne, the thing is, it can do stuff the throne just can't when boosted rolls are needed.
It really depends on the list. The only main list where I play a scythe, I also have a throne. But I'd rather take the scythe for the animus and the boosted rolls, than a second throne in a list that already dispatch most infantry efficiently enough.
|
|
bward
Junior Strategist
Posts: 184
|
Post by bward on Mar 19, 2018 14:30:34 GMT
The main thing the scythean has above the throne, is the ability to boost. When you don't need to boost, the throne is probably better. While the scythean is usually not as efficient as the throne, the thing is, it can do stuff the throne just can't when boosted rolls are needed. It really depends on the list. The only main list where I play a scythe, I also have a throne. But I'd rather take the scythe for the animus and the boosted rolls, than a second throne in a list that already dispatch most infantry efficiently enough. Well boosting and just more high pow attacks for taking down a single model. And a huge base has advantages but is also a liability. Scytheans can atleast hide.
|
|