shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Oct 24, 2019 14:47:56 GMT
But I don't think anything has suggested mixing jacks/vectors when in different armies. The Partisan rule would mean he could only take vectors in Convergence (so no one else in the Convergence gets tainted with these thinking machines wandering around) and Cryx jacks in Cryx, then merc jacks when fielded in merc armies (or as a merc in other armies, if that is permitted).
You are correct on the Partisan rule, but we've seen a lot of characters have other rules that go beyond that, such as the Underchief Mire. The rule to consider is the "Limited Battlegroup" which would make those adjustments one way or the other. Mire doesn't really see use outside of Minions and maybe a bit of DoA(?), and he really doesn't have a huge impact on the other factions' identities, what with that pesky little FF clause. even then I think it'd be stupid. the limited factions should be just that - limited. if you look at Scyrah, they're a full faction, but they have practically zero merc options, almost entirely self contained. Cyriss getting Gaspy with 'jacks would be like Ret suddenly getting access to Crosse and his merc jacks. In terms of gameplay it'd be even worse, a large part of Cyriss' identity as a faction comes from their vectors, giving them (even limited) access to 'jacks will dilute their identity.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 24, 2019 15:47:22 GMT
You are correct on the Partisan rule, but we've seen a lot of characters have other rules that go beyond that, such as the Underchief Mire. The rule to consider is the "Limited Battlegroup" which would make those adjustments one way or the other. Mire doesn't really see use outside of Minions and maybe a bit of DoA(?), and he really doesn't have a huge impact on the other factions' identities, what with that pesky little FF clause. even then I think it'd be stupid. the limited factions should be just that - limited. if you look at Scyrah, they're a full faction, but they have practically zero merc options, almost entirely self contained. Cyriss getting Gaspy with 'jacks would be like Ret suddenly getting access to Crosse and his merc jacks. In terms of gameplay it'd be even worse, a large part of Cyriss' identity as a faction comes from their vectors, giving them (even limited) access to 'jacks will dilute their identity.
The amount of use wasn't in question, just the capacity of use. Partisan will primarily affect which Themes he can be taken in, not necessarily his Battlegroup (the real concern).
Oddly enough, the Retribution has more access to Mercs now then they used to since the transition to Mk 3. Even more so with the number of Partisans they have access to.
I honestly can't say how much of a difference it will make, as it is based on two factors: price point (Gaspy4 is ridiculously expensive even before you add any 'Jacks or Vectors) and Theme availability (out of Theme play was so rare before Oblivion and the Requisition points almost guarantee it to be less so).
Admittedly, since he is a unit, then you can take both him and Crosse (provided the right contract access) in a Theme these days and with Requisition being what it is, will not impact the list as much as pre-Oblivion.
Speaking of Oblivion, we have a Theme which allows Mercenary, Cygnar, and Khador Jacks to be taken in the same list. Wanted an Arc Node with Fiona or Zerkova without burning out your warriors? Here is a nice new Lancer. Need a really good brick for Stryker or Fiona? That Devastator could look really nice.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 24, 2019 16:14:41 GMT
I just hope the initial rules for this CID are more thought out than the Infernal stuff, it's only 2 weeks so not much time to sort out a big hot mess
|
|
|
Post by Korianneder on Oct 24, 2019 21:52:26 GMT
You are correct on the Partisan rule, but we've seen a lot of characters have other rules that go beyond that, such as the Underchief Mire. The rule to consider is the "Limited Battlegroup" which would make those adjustments one way or the other. Mire doesn't really see use outside of Minions and maybe a bit of DoA(?), and he really doesn't have a huge impact on the other factions' identities, what with that pesky little FF clause. even then I think it'd be stupid. the limited factions should be just that - limited. if you look at Scyrah, they're a full faction, but they have practically zero merc options, almost entirely self contained. Cyriss getting Gaspy with 'jacks would be like Ret suddenly getting access to Crosse and his merc jacks. In terms of gameplay it'd be even worse, a large part of Cyriss' identity as a faction comes from their vectors, giving them (even limited) access to 'jacks will dilute their identity. I've been playing convergence since the faction was released. Adding one or two merc/cryx jacks to a list doesn't dilute the faction identity any more than Retribution bringing dahlia and skarath or trolls bringing raluk and a warjack.
|
|
gupp
Junior Strategist
Posts: 134
|
Post by gupp on Oct 26, 2019 0:30:05 GMT
Sound good...
What the general opinion on the multi wound infantry?
In my limited experience, I found them to be occasionally almost as hard to beat as miserable meat mountain... the combo of high def vs charges and their repair revive and 8 hp was rough to me...
|
|
psyllus
Junior Strategist
Posts: 119
|
Post by psyllus on Oct 29, 2019 5:04:37 GMT
Outside of this, id rather that PP stopped all the faction hopping and faction blending. We are starting to get the 40K Soup lists that get complained about so much. Allowing cross-faction themes increases the number of individual models available to a given faction, increasing potential sales to existing customers. Also helps stores move older stock without having to recruit new players or convince existing players to buy a whole new faction.
|
|
|
Post by marxlives on Oct 31, 2019 20:11:23 GMT
Nemo has moved to Cyriss and is now a battle engine. That guy...hard core.
|
|
gupp
Junior Strategist
Posts: 134
|
Post by gupp on Oct 31, 2019 20:18:35 GMT
Just a quick rundown of what’s been spoiled- apparently this is everything coming.
Aurora 2- bonuses to models with flight
Riot quest solo- shooty electric thing
Angel character solo- buffs other angels (apparition)
New angel unit (melee)
Light melee flying jack- flank with others of its type
Electric shooting light- up to rof 4, pow 12, volume fire
Nemo 4- battle engine mini caster, attached mechanics, shoots things. Controls Cygnar, merc , convergence jacks
Aspyxious 4: has 5 focus def 15, creates clouds, bonus spd to constructs charging living models
Theme force- all of the above + Mortenebra & Cryx thralls.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Nov 1, 2019 20:52:20 GMT
Almost took this at face value until you said he'll be 14 points. All hail the Era of the Super Solos. It makes some logical sense (but boy I would want to see real data of the kind that PP doesn't seem well set up to generate). The more "average points per model" (or maybe more accurately something like average Points per model (f) average Points per attack) the faster the game SHOULD play (and likely some time savings in set up). Lets face it, one of the biggest issues with WM/H over time is the extent to which you are asking people to play a game with a VERY steap learning curve that takes a minimum of 2 hours (and realistically with set up and clean up closer to 3). That is a BIG time investment and one that is limiting. By briningin in super solos, WJ points and high value juniors you push closer to the idea of a game between say 10-15 models rather than 30 to 40. My guess is you can shave nearly 25-30 minutes off a game - if not more - keeping things moving along at a much faster clip. But I would want a stop watch on test games to see if that was working out.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Nov 1, 2019 21:22:47 GMT
All hail the Era of the Super Solos. It makes some logical sense (but boy I would want to see real data of the kind that PP doesn't seem well set up to generate). The more "average points per model" (or maybe more accurately something like average Points per model (f) average Points per attack) the faster the game SHOULD play (and likely some time savings in set up). Lets face it, one of the biggest issues with WM/H over time is the extent to which you are asking people to play a game with a VERY steap learning curve that takes a minimum of 2 hours (and realistically with set up and clean up closer to 3). That is a BIG time investment and one that is limiting. By briningin in super solos, WJ points and high value juniors you push closer to the idea of a game between say 10-15 models rather than 30 to 40. My guess is you can shave nearly 25-30 minutes off a game - if not more - keeping things moving along at a much faster clip. But I would want a stop watch on test games to see if that was working out. Medium warcasters might not be as bad as my kneejerk reaction thought. I just hope they won't come stupidly overpowered lime BEs, shifting from battleenginemachine to BEM (and minicasters (&knuckles)) would suck. It opens up some very interesting design space (which I am almost completely sure PP won't capitalize on by making everything else redundant). Gotta wait and see.
|
|
snoozer
Junior Strategist
Posts: 467
|
Post by snoozer on Nov 3, 2019 20:33:30 GMT
I think nemo4 is 16 points. Brings a unit and a 5 Point solo. Their own Calc would leave him then at a "realistic" 9 points. For a full health battle engine (no a structure that is tied in place) with 5 focus to play around with!!! You have to bring a jack, that is kind of the downside. But that still feels super strong.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Nov 4, 2019 7:26:12 GMT
I think nemo4 is 16 points. Brings a unit and a 5 Point solo. Their own Calc would leave him then at a "realistic" 9 points. For a full health battle engine (no a structure that is tied in place) with 5 focus to play around with!!! You have to bring a jack, that is kind of the downside. But that still feels super strong. They specifically said that they want to see if maybe he's not too impactful and/or too cheap during testing though.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Nov 4, 2019 9:57:55 GMT
I think nemo4 is 16 points. Brings a unit and a 5 Point solo. Their own Calc would leave him then at a "realistic" 9 points. For a full health battle engine (no a structure that is tied in place) with 5 focus to play around with!!! You have to bring a jack, that is kind of the downside. But that still feels super strong. They specifically said that they want to see if maybe he's not too impactful and/or too cheap during testing though. yea, a full battle engine caster for effectively 9 points is stupid strong. doesn't seem like the CiD power creep is going anywhere. personally I really, really dislike the 'summon a solo' mechanic, but it seems like it's here to stay.
|
|
|
Post by beardmonk on Nov 4, 2019 10:45:45 GMT
Again, until we see the "entry point" of the CiD stats and costs we are pretty much spitballing. But id be interested to the see the rationale if Nemo4 is significantly cheaper than Gapsy4. As I have said previously, I can understand Gaspy4 being about 24pts if he is really powerful. He becomes a powerful lynchpin to your army. Hug or large base, hard to hide, easier to hit. Potential quite vulnerable. if Nemo4 does all that stuff for 9pts, PP better have a rules rational other than "make it really good so it sells".
That said if Nemo4 is BAHI, most of Europe will prob just proxy it with a suitable Malifaux model.
|
|
privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Nov 4, 2019 19:51:09 GMT
Hug or large base, hard to hide, easier to hit. Potential quite vulnerable. If only this were true with Nemo4 at the moment. He could camp 8 focus with 30 boxes and ARM 18. Easy to hit, not even close to vulnerable.
|
|