|
Post by scarecrow on Sept 27, 2017 15:44:55 GMT
Or release a unit option like the Silver Line. A trencher backpack kit would be enough without needing a whole new sculpt. They could even still release the Trencher Long Gunner Command Attachment as a completely new/separate model.
|
|
|
Post by scarecrow on Sept 27, 2017 14:53:24 GMT
I have a nicely painted squad of Long Gunners that saw the halcyon days of Mark I where they were good and Gun Mages were horrible. Then Mark II came along and Gun Mages outshone their mundane, double-tapping brethren so I bought a squad of them. Now we have Mark III and both squads just stay in the bag. It is a little frustrating. I played Khador in MkI and the Gun Mages were amazing. Cortex damage shots made my heavies paperweights on the table. The most frustrating part to me is the release of an "identical" unit that is simply superior in every way. Clearly there is a way to design them to be in a good spot on the power curve. Whatever niche Long Gunners previously might have fit into, Trencher Long Gunners simply do it better and expand the role at the same time. Hell, if TLG get engaged they can still potentially even hold their own at Mat 7 with P+S 9 trench knives. I don't want to be so negative about it, but it's simply astounding the disparity that exists between the two units.
|
|
|
Post by scarecrow on Sept 27, 2017 14:02:23 GMT
I expect the win rate will normalize once people get used to playing against them. Pretty much. I think a lot of it is arcana causing "Gotcha" moments that cost players the game. Once people adjust to arcana they will start taking down grymkin a lot more often. Besides avoiding triggering Sacrifice, there are some Arcana that are simply powerful no matter what. Labyrinth, Ruin, and Pandemonium aren't really ones that can be avoided and can have huge implications on the outcome of your turn. Additionally, being a limited release faction actually helps their power level I think. Since PP was obligated to give them tools to deal with a variety of problems and by virtue of having less models to choose from, those tools are more often than not found together. Lists can be made that ask a variety of questions and/or provide a variety of answers, which is powerful in a tournament list pair. Are there glaring holes in my thinking that I'm missing? This is admittedly all anecdotal.
|
|
|
Post by scarecrow on Sept 27, 2017 13:15:33 GMT
Barring some Long Gunner theme force that helps them significantly, is there any reason to ever take Long Gunner Infantry over Trencher Long Gunners? Comparing the two units is awfully lopsided.
For a mere two points in difference you get +2 MAT, +1 RAT, +1 DEF, +2 ARM, +2 P+S and tough right out of the gate.
They are in a good theme force and count towards points that get can you free solos that make them even better with Veteran Leader (Finn) and/or Tactician with a variety of other abilities as well (Hitch). Hitch and Finn for free essentially replaces the regular Long Gunner CA since aiming paired CRAs at RAT 11 don't really need boosted attack rolls and Hitch provides tactician anyways. Then the Trencher Long Gunner CA adds rerolled damage rolls and column placement on top of that for the same 4 point cost.
When I think that Advance Deployment on the Hunter was apparently worth 1 point, the Trencher Long Gunners get better in every conceivable way for only 2 points.
Is there something I'm missing in some weird niche where Long Gunner Infantry would possibly be the better choice, or at least a reasonable alternative? I'd rather not leave my unit in the case for several more years.
|
|
|
Post by scarecrow on Sept 27, 2017 13:06:01 GMT
The surprising thing to me is that Grymkin did second best looking at faction win rate next to Cryx and they didn't even have all their models released yet. How powerful will they be when they can run both theme forces equally well?
|
|