whydak
Junior Strategist
Posts: 288
|
Post by whydak on Jul 6, 2018 12:35:31 GMT
Just FYI: Fire from Kallus 2 feat is not boosted by Oil from Croaks. Topis can be found on PP rules forum.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenblut on Jul 6, 2018 13:09:48 GMT
Just FYI: Fire from Kallus 2 feat is not boosted by Oil from Croaks. Topis can be found on PP rules forum. Link? I thought @always boosted@ beats @cannot be boosted@ in rules or something. Anyways, it does not diminish that combo.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenblut on Jul 6, 2018 13:36:59 GMT
I thought about Teraph for a bit.
Like I stated before, he is not a good igniter (lots of threat range and large AoE, but needs a Critical), and he is not a good direct damage firebreather (single shot POW 13 does not cut it), but his Animus just may be worth it.
Counterblast is now CMD range, and assuming the target is still Oiled and AAs animus is up, that is a potential boosted POW 15 on anything that gets close, also both Lylyth1 and 2 may have the animus up, they won't have anything better to cast anyway in this army build, and Lyl1 may add a Fury to her target.
Problem is Teraphs low RAT, but it cannot be perfect.
|
|
|
Post by systemdown on Jul 6, 2018 13:41:30 GMT
drakkenblut Just a quick point, Shield and buckler armor bonuses do apply to continuous fire - the wording is that the model "does not gain the bonus against damage originating in its back arc". As the continuous damage does not have a point of origin it cannot originate in the back arc and therefore the bonus still applies. I have been caught out by this myself in the past.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenblut on Jul 6, 2018 14:11:41 GMT
systemdown , noted. This autoboosting makes Feralgeist somewhat viable... A firebreather beast taken over by a Feralgeist can still shoot with boosted results because of Oil, no need to force it. This army build may want to include one (but a Mist Speaker is better at covering all basis).
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Jul 6, 2018 14:36:30 GMT
Is fury saving really necessary? I've never struggled with the fury load of shooting beasts. Typically an AA a pair of ravagores and a seraph for maybe 11 fury tops.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenblut on Jul 6, 2018 15:58:00 GMT
Is fury saving really necessary? I've never struggled with the fury load of shooting beasts. Typically an AA a pair of ravagores and a seraph for maybe 11 fury tops. Eliminates the need for Fury manipulation solos, warlock is all you need. Becomes easier to play out of Theme. AA, Seraph, Teraph are Fury-hungry, with them casting their Animi and boosting multiple shots (especially under Lyl2 feat). This gives them more firepower since they do not need to boost dmg. Beast not maxed out on Fury, more targets to transfer to. I'd say it is significant. Edit: Typhon could be also included on those same issues.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Jul 7, 2018 0:39:04 GMT
Is fury saving really necessary? I've never struggled with the fury load of shooting beasts. Typically an AA a pair of ravagores and a seraph for maybe 11 fury tops. Eliminates the need for Fury manipulation solos, warlock is all you need. Becomes easier to play out of Theme. AA, Seraph, Teraph are Fury-hungry, with them casting their Animi and boosting multiple shots (especially under Lyl2 feat). This gives them more firepower since they do not need to boost dmg. Beast not maxed out on Fury, more targets to transfer to. I'd say it is significant. Edit: Typhon could be also included on those same issues. But then you're even more pigeon-holed into shooting. I'd like to see how this kind of list performs on the table. Pure-shooting legion at the expense of legion's other strengths defies conventional wisdom for me.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenblut on Jul 7, 2018 12:26:59 GMT
Just by including AA in an army, you are not pigeon-holed into shooting, AA has a significant melee capacity, slightly better than Carnivean, but with greater threat range.
IMO, of course.
I believe the true test is to compare any lists we come up with with other shooty Legion lists (or some unique non-shooty solutions, like Kallus2 combo), and see if we created a good enough alternative.
A lot of damage potential in this approach is tied into igniting something, not killing it in your turn so that you do not lose out on the burning damage in opponents Maintenance turn, mathematically it would net you X*boosted POW 14 dmg where X is the number of targets left to burn, but of course the risk is a low roll on the burn and the unit is still there. It goes somewhat against general Warmahordes approach where you need to kill stuff completely before commiting to another target.
I like Lyl2 for this the most, as her Feat enables igniting a large portion of the enemies army, while she still has a spell to debuff a single target. Lyl1 has only that second option (although it is a better one).
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Jul 7, 2018 20:11:13 GMT
Just by including AA in an army, you are not pigeon-holed into shooting, AA has a significant melee capacity, slightly better than Carnivean, but with greater threat range. IMO, of course. I believe the true test is to compare any lists we come up with with other shooty Legion lists (or some unique non-shooty solutions, like Kallus2 combo), and see if we created a good enough alternative. A lot of damage potential in this approach is tied into igniting something, not killing it in your turn so that you do not lose out on the burning damage in opponents Maintenance turn, mathematically it would net you X*boosted POW 14 dmg where X is the number of targets left to burn, but of course the risk is a low roll on the burn and the unit is still there. It goes somewhat against general Warmahordes approach where you need to kill stuff completely before commiting to another target. I like Lyl2 for this the most, as her Feat enables igniting a large portion of the enemies army, while she still has a spell to debuff a single target. Lyl1 has only that second option (although it is a better one). I'm not talking about the AA. I'm talking about forgoing fury support for ranged boosting. That forces you to lean even harder on shooting because you now lack the fury management to handle full fury activations.
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Jul 9, 2018 15:50:43 GMT
As much as I tried to hedge giving the Teraph Cont'Fire (non-crit) in the last CID, there were more pressing issues at hand. I really feel that the Teraph is a little underused/overcosted frame. The lack of Cont'Fire for Kallus continues to be an issue for my lists. I thought the solution was simple and elegant. Maybe next time.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Jul 20, 2018 2:27:12 GMT
Idea: A lot of players seem really interested in playing Thagrosh2 super-aggressively because of how tanky he can be now. I generally dislike this without a good reason because it seems counter-productive to risk your most important model just because you can, even if he is buffed enough to pull it off. But one definite way to leverage T2's tankiness would be to have him on the frontlines playing the bloodseer role of moving the AA's animus around. This would save you some points and be far harder to deal with than a normal bloodseer, potentially allowing a shooting-heavy list to linger behind T2 hammering the opponent's list from behind a super-threat warlock that is all but guaranteed to murder anything that tries to get close.
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Jul 20, 2018 14:28:15 GMT
Huh... that is a crazy idea... but just crazy enough to work... I'm going to have to give that a spin.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Jul 20, 2018 14:56:32 GMT
[negativity] I can't say I think that's a good idea. It's just un-intuitive at best and at worst it gets T2 killed. If you walk up and use the animus with his spray you're not that "threatening". If you use T2's melee prowess you're way over extending.
The only way I would risk that is in Primal terrors with Golab for sprint access. Even then a 5 inch walk does not make him too safe.
So to me it's entirely upside down and backwards. You want the army to screen T2 but your purposefully running a gunline behind T2 just to take advantage of an animus. [/negativity]
I do believe T2 can run a gunline. Even without arcing fire Scourge can knock down key intervening models or high def targets. His spray is still good. He can handle most jam units himself. Then can really take care of secondary attackers after things have clashed. MD makes up for the pow 16s or so when your ravagores get into melee. T2 himself can now weather an enemy gunline better. So I think he can really sit and be the cagey beast caster.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Jul 20, 2018 18:38:07 GMT
Giving himself sprint defeats the purpose of using him to cast the AA animus.
If eThags is going to move aggressively forward so should a good portion of the army, especially if he is going to cast that animus leaving him at armour20 max.
I think under eThags, the AA can just sit behind the rest of the army jamming hard with the featmove, at which point he won't need someone else to cast it for him.
I liked the idea when jokingly suggested it earlier, but a list like that can't really use the feat defensively anymore, which I think is a big option for eThags to have.
|
|