|
Post by goodk4t on Jul 20, 2018 5:57:10 GMT
you mean irusk2, don't you? Irusk1 provides Tough and Pathfinder, though the tough is only on the Feat turn yeah.. but don't you take atanas mainly for the tactician? otherwise it's a weak source of pathfinder/tough, there is some value in the retstrike though
|
|
chuggyg
Junior Strategist
Posts: 474
|
Post by chuggyg on Jul 20, 2018 12:48:36 GMT
I personally have never felt I needed tactician when running Man-O-War/medium bases. Bombardiers generally hang back a bit and aren't part of the equation, so you're really just trying to find space for 2 melee units at most, where all the models have a 2" reach.
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Jul 20, 2018 13:32:51 GMT
Tactician I think varies a bit depending on your caster (ignoring Irusk2 for now). I've not found I need it with Kozlov, but I found it helpful (sometimes very helpful) with Irusk1. I think that is because Irusk1's battle plans and Battle Lust are quite short-ranged and I like to spread them around, so there is a bit more clumping than with Kozlov, at least as I play them.
My thinking with suggesting Atanas here is that with a newer player, Tactician is a nice thing to have available when learning - it solves one of the difficulties that can arise from playing with medium bases. Eventually you should learn to play without it, but it's a nice bit of support when still learning the ropes.
For Atanas specifically, Retailatory Strike has been my favourite ability with him, above tactician (a little) and definitely above pathfinder (I can get the latter more cheaply elsewhere if I need to). It really helps up the attack volume of a fairly low model-count list.
|
|