|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 3, 2018 17:11:50 GMT
There are certainly things to be fixed in Exalted (Ancestral Guardians stand out to me as decidedly meh for being paragons of skorne martial virtue, and I hope that both Mordikaar and Makeda3 (and maybe Zaal2? he seems underwhelming) get buffs and/or a rework)...but the core of the theme (Immortals) is largely fine. Immortals are not a bad unit, they just suffer from being the only unit in the theme, which leads to inflexible list building, and a small pool of viable casters. Really, what the theme needs more than anything is to get access to a faster (or ranged) infantry option. Similarly, with a few exceptions (the Cannoneer, the Aradus Sentinel, potentially the Bronzeback), Skorne beasts are seeing play (and seeing success) at the highest levels of play. While I fundamentally agree with you that Skorne, particularly Exalted, doesn't have tremendous issues, your reasoning of "war beasts see play and therefore are fine" is flawed. Apart from the fact that 25+ war beast points per caster basically guarantees you will always be playing war beasts, Imperial War Host, one of the only themes to allow turtles, allows nothing BUT war beasts. Taking "the best of what is offered after maximizing the best model available" does not mean "they are just fine". It means they had 65ish other points to fill out and nothing else to spend them on. Are Skorne's themes all viable and functional and intuitive? Absolutely. But it is also true that all their tournament wins are carried by the turtles. Which isn't happening anymore anyway, as they didn't even break a 40% win rate in the last WTC. I don't agree. If a subset of models aren't performing well, they simply don't see play in anything more than the lowest possible quantity. Skorne has plenty of access to beasts that no is disputing the strength or utility of - Basilisks, Archidons, Agonizers, Cyclops Raiders/Shamans, etc. It's not like you couldn't just fill your BG with those models and call it done. Heck, even the gladiator isn't a necessity in a list that doesn't crutch on melee beasts. Similarly, if a theme contains predominantly bad models (and doesn't give an absolutely stellar bonus to balance it out, cough, BI), it won't see serious play (and Imperial Warhost certainly isn't a theme whose benefits would incentivize you to play it notwithstanding it being full of bad models). What the data is showing isn't consistent with that. Imperial Warhost was the most played Skorne theme at the WTC, and has a solid presence on the DGI page. In fact, the most common list on DGI, last time I checked, wasn't Rasheth, it was Zaadesh2 in IW, with 1-2 Turtles (yes, they are in fact extremely strong, this does not mean the rest of the models in question are bad) and a good selection of beasts, including titans and aradus soldiers. And it's not like Skorne doesn't have options, either - Rasheth in Winds is very strong (though it does have it's counters, and Skorne players as a whole seem to crutch harder on that list than they reasonably should.) Mak2 Cats hasn't stopped existing (though it's a bit less of a meta appropriate answer given the prevalance of no-KD tough), and Exalted (even pre-CID) is a very reasonable theme, albeit largely limited to a small selection of casters. If beasts REALLY were that bad, I would not expect to see them played to the extent that they currently are (especially given that they are finding success). As for a 40% win rate at the WTC...eh. It's a team tournament, and none of the numbers this year were egregiously outside the bounds of what I'd expect to see from a balanced game (though Skarre3 is a bit concerning, particularly as paired with BI). There wasn't any factions at a 22% win rate, and there wasn't any factions at a 70+% winrate, so I would be cautious about drawing any conclusions for those results. If pressed to explain them, though, I'd likely say that the likely causes are more likely: 1. The Skorne community is not particularly creative or willing to experiment. There's a lot of untapped potential in the faction, IMO (Mak2 with 40 Swordsmen is a terrifying list, for instance), but the standard Skorne response is 'but turtles.' Which are powerful pieces, but not strong into every meta or matchup. In particular, they're probably not going to be as strong into a team tournament meta that is prepared for Skorne as 'the turtle faction'. 2. Cryx craps on Turtles hard. And there was a whooooole lot of Cryx at the WTC.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Oct 3, 2018 17:17:24 GMT
My primary opponent these days has been playing Skorne and only Skorne since they released and is terrifying with everything you put in front of him at this point. What solos does Skorne have access to that are 4+ points? I don't feel that my Troll solos are really game breaking generally, but they have a synergistic faction to help them. Something I do think Skorne sometimes struggles with. We have exactly 0 solos worth more than 4 pts. The TyComm occupies a similar purpose and is 6 pts. We have 1 6 pt command attachment. Every other warrior model we can take for free is 4 points or less. The only synergistic effect any of them have (aside from paingiver task masters) is veteran leader and the Dakars abilities. Though fairly often it's just better for the Dakar to shoot. Edit, I'm totally forgetting Exalted. But they're going into CiD so who knows how they'll end up. P.S. right now, they're not worth not free... except Hakaar, he's fine. Anyway, I don't think Skorne is totally busted bad. They haven't been since the Great Skorne Errata. What they are is lots of little non-optimized parts that lead the whole to be a little clunky and a little weak. The Turtles and how they interact with themes are very optimized. It's why they feel so much stronger than everything else we have. Radheim = 9pts. Circle struggles with a similar problem in finding solos that maximize the free points but that just got fixed in DH CID. The other themes still struggle to get good value out of the free point game though. So that means everybody is on board with Morraig being free in Wild Hunt right?
|
|
|
Post by deathbymelancholy on Oct 3, 2018 17:27:22 GMT
*clip So that means everybody is on board with Morraig being free in Wild Hunt right? I'm fine with that.
|
|
gordo
Junior Strategist
My star is green?
Posts: 548
|
Post by gordo on Oct 3, 2018 17:34:23 GMT
While I fundamentally agree with you that Skorne, particularly Exalted, doesn't have tremendous issues, your reasoning of "war beasts see play and therefore are fine" is flawed. Apart from the fact that 25+ war beast points per caster basically guarantees you will always be playing war beasts, Imperial War Host, one of the only themes to allow turtles, allows nothing BUT war beasts. Taking "the best of what is offered after maximizing the best model available" does not mean "they are just fine". It means they had 65ish other points to fill out and nothing else to spend them on. Are Skorne's themes all viable and functional and intuitive? Absolutely. But it is also true that all their tournament wins are carried by the turtles. Which isn't happening anymore anyway, as they didn't even break a 40% win rate in the last WTC. I don't agree. If a subset of models aren't performing well, they simply don't see play in anything more than the lowest possible quantity. Skorne has plenty of access to beasts that no is disputing the strength or utility of - Basilisks, Archidons, Agonizers, Cyclops Raiders/Shamans, etc. It's not like you couldn't just fill your BG with those models and call it done. Heck, even the gladiator isn't a necessity in a list that doesn't crutch on melee beasts. Similarly, if a theme contains predominantly bad models (and doesn't give an absolutely stellar bonus to balance it out, cough, BI), it won't see serious play (and Imperial Warhost certainly isn't a theme whose benefits would incentivize you to play it notwithstanding it being full of bad models). What the data is showing isn't consistent with that. Imperial Warhost was the most played Skorne theme at the WTC, and has a solid presence on the DGI page. In fact, the most common list on DGI, last time I checked, wasn't Rasheth, it was Zaadesh2 in IW, with 1-2 Turtles (yes, they are in fact extremely strong, this does not mean the rest of the models in question are bad) and a good selection of beasts, including titans and aradus soldiers. And it's not like Skorne doesn't have options, either - Rasheth in Winds is very strong (though it does have it's counters, and Skorne players as a whole seem to crutch harder on that list than they reasonably should.) Mak2 Cats hasn't stopped existing (though it's a bit less of a meta appropriate answer given the prevalance of no-KD tough), and Exalted (even pre-CID) is a very reasonable theme, albeit largely limited to a small selection of casters. If beasts REALLY were that bad, I would not expect to see them played to the extent that they currently are (especially given that they are finding success). As for a 40% win rate at the WTC...eh. It's a team tournament, and none of the numbers this year were egregiously outside the bounds of what I'd expect to see from a balanced game (though Skarre3 is a bit concerning, particularly as paired with BI). There wasn't any factions at a 22% win rate, and there wasn't any factions at a 70+% winrate, so I would be cautious about drawing any conclusions for those results. If pressed to explain them, though, I'd likely say that the likely causes are more likely: 1. The Skorne community is not particularly creative or willing to experiment. There's a lot of untapped potential in the faction, IMO (Mak2 with 40 Swordsmen is a terrifying list, for instance), but the standard Skorne response is 'but turtles.' Which are powerful pieces, but not strong into every meta or matchup. In particular, they're probably not going to be as strong into a team tournament meta that is prepared for Skorne as 'the turtle faction'. 2. Cryx craps on Turtles hard. And there was a whooooole lot of Cryx at the WTC. "Filling those points with light war beasts" is not an option. It never was an option. Because you need things to crack armor spam, and two turtles simply will never be enough. Just because a model MUST be in your list doesn't mean that model is effective at its intended role. It just means there aren't any other better options. Aaand while I don't intend to say that "Skorne has a 38% win rate and therefore needs help", I mean to say that "no matter how broken you think the turtle is, a 38% win rate means that doesn't matter"
|
|
|
Post by hocestbellum on Oct 3, 2018 17:42:06 GMT
There is the possibility that since people were expecting multiple turtles from every Skorne player, they made sure that someone on their team had a good answer to them. Having your main threat frequently countered would drop the win rate a fair amount
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 3, 2018 17:50:02 GMT
I don't agree. If a subset of models aren't performing well, they simply don't see play in anything more than the lowest possible quantity. Skorne has plenty of access to beasts that no is disputing the strength or utility of - Basilisks, Archidons, Agonizers, Cyclops Raiders/Shamans, etc. It's not like you couldn't just fill your BG with those models and call it done. Heck, even the gladiator isn't a necessity in a list that doesn't crutch on melee beasts. Similarly, if a theme contains predominantly bad models (and doesn't give an absolutely stellar bonus to balance it out, cough, BI), it won't see serious play (and Imperial Warhost certainly isn't a theme whose benefits would incentivize you to play it notwithstanding it being full of bad models). What the data is showing isn't consistent with that. Imperial Warhost was the most played Skorne theme at the WTC, and has a solid presence on the DGI page. In fact, the most common list on DGI, last time I checked, wasn't Rasheth, it was Zaadesh2 in IW, with 1-2 Turtles (yes, they are in fact extremely strong, this does not mean the rest of the models in question are bad) and a good selection of beasts, including titans and aradus soldiers. And it's not like Skorne doesn't have options, either - Rasheth in Winds is very strong (though it does have it's counters, and Skorne players as a whole seem to crutch harder on that list than they reasonably should.) Mak2 Cats hasn't stopped existing (though it's a bit less of a meta appropriate answer given the prevalance of no-KD tough), and Exalted (even pre-CID) is a very reasonable theme, albeit largely limited to a small selection of casters. If beasts REALLY were that bad, I would not expect to see them played to the extent that they currently are (especially given that they are finding success). As for a 40% win rate at the WTC...eh. It's a team tournament, and none of the numbers this year were egregiously outside the bounds of what I'd expect to see from a balanced game (though Skarre3 is a bit concerning, particularly as paired with BI). There wasn't any factions at a 22% win rate, and there wasn't any factions at a 70+% winrate, so I would be cautious about drawing any conclusions for those results. If pressed to explain them, though, I'd likely say that the likely causes are more likely: 1. The Skorne community is not particularly creative or willing to experiment. There's a lot of untapped potential in the faction, IMO (Mak2 with 40 Swordsmen is a terrifying list, for instance), but the standard Skorne response is 'but turtles.' Which are powerful pieces, but not strong into every meta or matchup. In particular, they're probably not going to be as strong into a team tournament meta that is prepared for Skorne as 'the turtle faction'. 2. Cryx craps on Turtles hard. And there was a whooooole lot of Cryx at the WTC. "Filling those points with light war beasts" is not an option. It never was an option. Because you need things to crack armor spam, and two turtles simply will never be enough. Just because a model MUST be in your list doesn't mean that model is effective at its intended role. It just means there aren't any other better options. Aaand while I don't intend to say that "Skorne has a 38% win rate and therefore needs help", I mean to say that "no matter how broken you think the turtle is, a 38% win rate means that doesn't matter" See...the whole 'BG models will be taken even if bad because armor cracking' holds weight in, say...Circle. or (pre PT) Legion. Because they don't have strong armor-cracking infantry that they can take to fit that role. This is not the case in Skorne. You have Cataphracts, Swordsmen with P+S 12 'weaponmaster', fairly cheap immortals with P+S 13 swords, and numerous casters with infantry damage buffs. There are options for armor cracking, if your beasts are truly subpar. The fact that you're fixating on themes that have access to Turtles is kind of emblematic of the attitude problem I see in the Skorne community. At Lock and Load, for instance, I saw a truly savage Makeda2 list with 40 (or more?) Swordsmen, which did quite well, and looked like it would go through any but the most extreme armor skews relatively easily. The same list under Xerxis1 (or hell, almost anything under Xerxis1) provides a hard counter to armor which is not dependent on beasts. Hell, DOA provides trivial answers to armor with Brigands + Morg2, or just with the Rage/Enrage/Abuse package (on minion beasts, which - as a minion player - are not bad beasts) If beasts were actually that bad, and if armor cracking was an issue that needed solving (in skorne, which seems dubious), these are options I would expect to see explored more thoroughly. Instead, I see Skorne players crutching on a list and a model which the meta has had more than a year to adapt to.
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 3, 2018 18:14:00 GMT
"Filling those points with light war beasts" is not an option. It never was an option. Because you need things to crack armor spam, and two turtles simply will never be enough. Just because a model MUST be in your list doesn't mean that model is effective at its intended role. It just means there aren't any other better options. Aaand while I don't intend to say that "Skorne has a 38% win rate and therefore needs help", I mean to say that "no matter how broken you think the turtle is, a 38% win rate means that doesn't matter" See...the whole 'BG models will be taken even if bad because armor cracking' holds weight in, say...Circle. or (pre PT) Legion. Because they don't have strong armor-cracking infantry that they can take to fit that role. This is not the case in Skorne. You have Cataphracts, Swordsmen with P+S 12 'weaponmaster', fairly cheap immortals with P+S 13 swords, and numerous casters with infantry damage buffs. There are options for armor cracking, if your beasts are truly subpar. The fact that you're fixating on themes that have access to Turtles is kind of emblematic of the attitude problem I see in the Skorne community. At Lock and Load, for instance, I saw a truly savage Makeda2 list with 40 (or more?) Swordsmen, which did quite well, and looked like it would go through any but the most extreme armor skews relatively easily. The same list under Xerxis1 (or hell, almost anything under Xerxis1) provides a hard counter to armor which is not dependent on beasts. Hell, DOA provides trivial answers to armor with Brigands + Morg2, or just with the Rage/Enrage/Abuse package (on minion beasts, which - as a minion player - are not bad beasts) If beasts were actually that bad, and if armor cracking was an issue that needed solving (in skorne, which seems dubious), these are options I would expect to see explored more thoroughly. Instead, I see Skorne players crutching on a list and a model which the meta has had more than a year to adapt to. Skorne's issue never has been armor under all but the most specific circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 3, 2018 18:28:40 GMT
Skorne does not suck. Rashet is great. Morghul 2 laughs in the face of PT and GD. Makeda 1 is disgusting. Makeda3 blends infantry lists as well. Molik is great. The Mammoth is great. The BB and the gladiator are great... need i go on? Perhaps they are overshadowed by the turtle and can use a points tweak here and there but they are good. The best player in my country runs skorne and he gets consistent results. I'm sorry, you just refrenced Makeda3 and the Mammoth. You're credibility is...real low. Those are exactly some of the models we're looking to get fixed. Do you also think Sword Knights are great? And individuals can get great work out of things that click with them. JVM uses some really weird stuff sometimes and still hands out assbeatings. That doesn't make all his lists objectively good. Just good for him. While I dont really need to i'll go on record by saying that my credibility is that of someone that has gone to 5 wtcs and has won the country masters. I know i'm no jvm or pat dunford or aaron wale but i wouldnt consider myself someone with no credibility. As for the "jvm makes things click" argument that proves exactlly my point... that sometimes things are good and people just dont know/ want/ play with them. If they win against good competition why and how are things not good? It seems to me that people want quick solutions instead of putting in the hard work that top players put into creating and repeating game after game.
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 3, 2018 19:14:52 GMT
I'm sorry, you just refrenced Makeda3 and the Mammoth. You're credibility is...real low. Those are exactly some of the models we're looking to get fixed. Do you also think Sword Knights are great? And individuals can get great work out of things that click with them. JVM uses some really weird stuff sometimes and still hands out assbeatings. That doesn't make all his lists objectively good. Just good for him. While I dont really need to i'll go on record by saying that my credibility is that of someone that has gone to 5 wtcs and has won the country masters. I know i'm no jvm or pat dunford or aaron wale but i wouldnt consider myself someone with no credibility. As for the "jvm makes things click" argument that proves exactlly my point... that sometimes things are good and people just dont know/ want/ play with them. If they win against good competition why and how are things not good? It seems to me that people want quick solutions instead of putting in the hard work that top players put into creating and repeating game after game. Maybe there's a language barrier? Things can click with an individual. That person can get faaar more work out of a specific model or set of models than the overwhelming majority of other players. If you regularly face one of these players as your Skorne opposition, you probably have a warped sense of power level and functionality regarding many of our pieces. Or you play Ret, which I've typically seen as sort of the natural prey of Skorne. Which is wonderfully fluffy.
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 3, 2018 19:28:56 GMT
I actually play Legion. And since the skorne player is arguably the best player in our country i would say that he beats every faction represented in our country...from cygnar to circle to cryx to ret... you get the point.
And strangely enough he does this without any of the typical net lists...no cats, no double turtles... he even uses a mammoth of all things.
Players can indeed make a difference but people then tend to copy those players and then complain they cant make things work / faction is crap.
I agree that somethings may be improved but saying the faction is trash is factually incorrect.
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 3, 2018 20:49:43 GMT
I didn't say it was. At most I implied it was one of the least capable at the highest levels of play. Which is at least half that it simply hasn't seen a CiD yet. Largely that process tunes things quite well. Models, themes, synergistic effects. Right now, Skorne just isn't that tight.
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 3, 2018 21:20:50 GMT
Which factions would you consider tight?
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Oct 3, 2018 21:40:35 GMT
I do find a it a little concerning that over a year after the process has started, the CID process and its implementation is still a divisive issue. Has PP even given any indication that they would revise the process of CID itself, based on feedback? A CID of CID?
I think the problem with CID is, it's still very uncertain what the desired power level of the game as a whole is. So everyone ends up making their own guesses as to if a proposed model is too strong (over the desired gamewide power level) or too weak (under it).
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 3, 2018 22:42:14 GMT
Radheim = 9pts. Circle struggles with a similar problem in finding solos that maximize the free points but that just got fixed in DH CID. The other themes still struggle to get good value out of the free point game though. So that means everybody is on board with Morraig being free in Wild Hunt right? Radheim would not qualify. He is only allowed in one Theme and that one does not provide for any free solos, just for free Command Attachments and a certain 2-man unit. His points do go for it, but he doesn't qualify otherwise. Does any cavalry/Dragoon solo qualify to be free? The only other one I have familiarity with is Mercs, and Large Base solos do not qualify for being free there.
|
|
|
Post by catulle on Oct 3, 2018 22:55:15 GMT
Fane Knight Skeryth Issyen, rather infamously.
|
|