|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 9, 2018 0:38:47 GMT
Blech, cid needs to drop and wmw needs to be over so I can talk about the tech Bret and I are testing >< whatcha all excited to explore when things go live? I've got Morvahna1 lists in 4 different themes that I want to start testing (won't start till she goes live, as Mortality seems a bit dicey) I want to play Wurmwood, Baldur1, and Una2 in Devourer's Host, and Kromac2, Kromac1, and Kaya3 in CoTW. Very excited to get my Warpwolves on the table again! I'm not at all excited about Iona...I'm sure she'll be very strong, and she might even be the best option for Tharn...but if I wanted to play 'big numbers, no tricks: the faction' I would not be playing Circle.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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 oncomingstorm on Oct 3, 2018 0:36:30 GMT
(Ok something weird is going on with quotes here, hang on..)
I'm not even bothering here. You were one of the the biggest pains in the ass during that CID. I'll pretend you don't exist, you pretend I don't exist, and we'll go about our lives, okay? As long as you keep spreading blatant misinformation on a public forum, nope. Not gonna happen. I don't give a shit if you feel the need to ignore me, rather than actually engaging with my arguments (as I recall, you relied heavily on strawmen and ad hominems during the Khador CID too), but I'm gonna continue to call out your bad logic as and where I see it.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 2, 2018 23:50:21 GMT
I can deal with advanced move and desperate pace on man o wars, although I dislike advance move on the chariots immensely. I don't understand how you think PT got its weakness to guns patched. Currently gun lining is one of the only successful strategies against PT. Same with exemplars. This is like the 3rd time I've agreed with you this month, and it's making me deeply uncomfortable.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 2, 2018 23:48:10 GMT
You seem to be showing your biases here. You don't like it when models and themes patch over weaknesses for no cost but like advanced move and desperate pace making man o wars faster than a huge amount of lists in the game. Wasn't being slow and clunky a weakness of man o war? Why is 12" tactician and so many speed boosts justified?
Armored Corps would cease to be a viable theme without Advance Move. It's basically an auto-loss on a number of scenarios. Play it without Advance Move -- you'll see.
There's a difference between "fixing fatal weakness of legacy model type that was never designed to be run 100% by itself" and "patching over just about any counters to an army just because you can."
What did Blighted Ogrun lack pre-CID? They lacked accuracy and they were vulnerable to guns. Shoot down enough on approach, and they were manageable. What did their CID give them? An astounding amount of accuracy fixing, plus extra survivability, plus a massive fix to the "weak to guns" problem. (Good luck shooting any of their stuff with Chosen in your face.)
Exemplars? Ranged attacks, pathfinder, deliverability. What did they get in spades? Quality ranged attacks, survivability, deliverability, terrain mitigation, with recursion on top to boot.
And so on, and so forth...
But, anyway, I'm tired of going around in circles on this.
Slow models in slow faction going faster than fast models in fast faction is okay, because MOW need to be nearly halfway across the board and in shield wall top of 1 (or much further for the chariots), but fixing weaknesses of other factions (while still leaving some weaknesses) is not okay. Got it. Honestly, I wasn't impressed by your logic in the Khador CID (as I recall, you argued from the Week 1 suppression tanker being okay right up until the bitter end), and I'm not impressed by it now (when all available data shows good, flexible khador players doing quite well at events, while khador players who refuse to adapt to the meta continue to lose). PT is very shootable. It loses hard to Nemo3 (as in, it is not even a dogganm game, everything just dies), and to average CG gunlines. I consider Krueger2 (which is, after a fashion, a gunline) a moderately advantaged matchup into it, depending on the precise build (if they take warspears, krueger2's stock goes way up). Many gunlines need a hard hitting melee element to stop the chosen from just running into you lines and engaging everything, but that's not exactly a novel proposition for gunlines. It also struggles into high volume, low-to-moderate stat infantry, because an intelligent opponent won't just let warmongers berserk everything, and the attack volume of the list is actually rather low when you get down to it. Skarre3 40 trolls is a tough matchup for it, for instance, and I imagine it wouldn't fare too well into that Terminus 60+ McThrall list, either. Anamag excels at demolishing pretty much any list that relies on high stats to compensate for a low model count. So don't play that game against her - either kill her stuff before it can get your high value targets, a la Nemo3, or don't feed her a bunch of high value targets. No one cares if you're Mat 12, P+S 20 when you're attacking a Mechanithrall (or <insert faction-appropriate low-cost infantry>). She's strong into a meta that is tending more towards low numbers of high value targets than infantry swarms, but she has weaknesses. Exemplars (with the possible exception of the Judicator, which seems to be at least somewhat overtuned) do indeed have access to a lot of solutions to their (many) problems, but they often have a hard time fitting them all into a list. That's good for variety, not bad. I also don't recall them actually getting any more terrain mitgation than they already had access to in theme. Also, it's misleading to say that Exemplar 'got access' to deliverability/survivability/etc. Yes, certain units became more survivable. One character model got a speed buff. one unit got more deliverable (albeit on the back of a UA). But those aren't 'theme-wide buffs', they're specific characteristics of individual units. If you want to deliver a whole list, you either need to lean heavily on those models in list building, or (as before) take a caster who delivers your army for you.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 2, 2018 22:15:40 GMT
Sorscha3 being locked into AK is not unusual for casters released in this CID cycle. Siege2 isn't played outside of GD. Iona won't be played outside of Tharn. Anamag isn't played outside of PT. It's honestly more common than not for casters to be released with rules that force them into a single theme than it is for them to fit into two or more themes. Sorscha3 certainly isn't the worst off in that regard.
Also, I don't understand all of the panic about Siege2 being the best caster for GD, when that is manifestly not the case. Haley3 is far and away the best caster for that theme. Siege2 is certainly a strong contender for Master's pairs (and I think there's an argument to be made that Haley3 GD/Siege2 GD are one of the strongest pairs in Cygnar), but he's not exactly the caster who springs to mind when I see shit.
As for the Skorne CID, I fully expect it to be a shitshow. Since we're unlikely to see the Turtle nerfed, that's going to be a point of fixation for a lot of players, while the Skorne community as a whole is (with a few exceptions) laboring under a misapprehension that their faction is fundamentally broken, and only propped up by the turtle.
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.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 2, 2018 7:48:46 GMT
Anamag is very strong, and may or may not be above the acceptable power curve (we can't really say, because there's not really been any meta-defining lists in Legion from before PT), but it definitely has counters. It's very strong into low-middle model count lists that rely on any kind of stat to stay alive, but it's very shootable, isn't terribly resilient (Chosen possibly excepted, though they're kind of like CID Ghetorix in that there are many potential counters to at least some of their defensive tech), and really doesn't like hard control or being out-threatened. She also struggles into some of the very hard armor skews out there, funnily enough, since most Anamag lists don't take a Naga for...some reason.
PT is played with a number of other casters, too. Kallus1, obviously, but I've seen it run to great effect with Kallus2, Thagrosh1, and Fyanna2 as well. Anamag is the obvious choice (not least because she's braindead easy to play most of the time).
As for other CIDs I've been involved in:
Retribution made at least 3 of the factions 4 themes viable, and created expanded options in each and every theme it touched. It was an amazingly comprehensive CID, and I'll be very interested to see how the Ret meta shakes up. I see viable lists with at least 5-6 casters in every theme but Forges.
Circle has yet to drop, but while Iona is obviously powerful, Morvahna1 and 2 are likely to be the real meta-shakers of that CID. The theme itself, provided the models don't change substantially, is likely to be viable with both Kruegers, Baldur1, both Morvhanas, Wurmwood, Grayle, Kormac2, Una2, Mohsar, and Tanith. Furthermore, COTW might actually have a place in the meta after the changes drop.
Obviously all 3 of these CIDs were more obvious buff fests than Armored Korps. Most of the models in Armored Korps were fine going into CID, and Khador as a faction was in a much state in terms of internal and external balance before CID. If PT had failed to bring substantial buffs to the faction, it would have failed. If the Tharn CID doesn't bring significant buffs to Tharn/Living Beasts, Circle players will just keep playing Bones of Orboros. The threshold for improvement is higher in those themes, because the models were significantly worse going into CID.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 1, 2018 4:00:49 GMT
mcdermott I get that you would want to keep the tokens, but us it really a good idea? When will you start making a significant number of attacks (and not cast as many roots)? If you have geomancers to cast roots, they are giving up an attack each for it. Their attacks are roughly as valuable as baldurs, so it has an opportunity cost to do so. Also, if we assume that you always heal for 2, i think you underestimate the danger, since you heal at the start of activation, but suffer damage at the end. At the end of your first turn, you will be at 16 points. At the end of your second turb, you will be at 15. On turn 3 you will be at 14. On turn 4 you will heal to 16 but go down to 12. On turn 5 you will heal to 14 but go down to 9. On turn 6 you will heal to 11 but go down to 5. On turn 7 you will heal to 7 and then die at the end hehe. Already at turn 4 you will be very suceptible to being killed, unless you spend fury to heal a lot (and he is very fury starved) or remove the tokens. I had assumed that going above one or two tokens was not really feasable in practice. Having a caster at pow 15 or so in melee is not bad, but unless you spend all your stack buying attacks it wont make much of an impression. I pretty much saw this as a dead rule that said "you better sacrifice your action at least every other turn or bad things will happen". Do ppl actually keep the tokens the whole game? And if so, is THAT why assassination is the prime loss condission as mentioned earlier? You use Baldur's melee output either on feat turn (when everything is going to be rooted anyways) or late game, once the game has ground down. Baldur very rarely sits at much below full health, between shifting stones, Megalith, and occasional healing with Fury. Personally, I tend to stack wurm tokens every game where there's more than one high arm target that he might need to nuke in the late game. I've used Baldur to kill Derp Turtles, Storm Striders, and heavies, and his personal input is a key piece in being able to play effectively into Mordikaar Birbs. He can also, as I've said, be used to clear off the front line of the brick to let the wold guardians keep pushing forwards (the turn he has to do this is also usually feat turn, however. The way I play Baldur2, there are at least 4 Rooted models on any given turn, and if you position well and use the wall correctly, you can typically ensure that your opponent has no choice but to engage the Rooted models if he wants to kill anything. Feat turn is the turn where models get to do things OTHER than cast roots and advance/make initials. (obviously, it's different in cases where the matchup is one baldur can roll over.) Wurm Tokens are definitely not just a disadvantage, though, and if you treat them as just being a liability, you are missing out on a key piece of Baldur2's kit IMO.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 30, 2018 17:41:06 GMT
You always bring Megalith with Baldur2. ALWAYS. He is not a negotiable piece of kit. Not only is the only geomancer available in theme (and thus, the only way you're realistically going to get more than 2 Roots of the Earth out in a given turn), he heals Baldur to offset his wurm tokens. While you CAN purge those off (and sometimes you have to, even with Megs), you really, really don't want to, because they let Baldur hit like a heavy in the endgame. I can...kind of...see the argument for Ghetorix, Riphorns, etc with Baldur2 (I think it's unlikely to catch on, though), but dropping Megalith isn't a viable option. What is it that you think makes him so nessecary? Sure, he is good but im not sure i see why he is an auto include. If your plan is to have lots of targets that need Roots, sure, he can provide that, but if you only plan on having roots on a couple of models, Baldur can take care of that himself. Is it the Geomancy crevasse that is the thing you value so highly?
As i still havent played Baldur 2 im genuinely curious, im not just looking to start an argument an argument It's not really crevasse per se (though crevasse is one reason why I think Bones is likely better - it's a spell he almost never casts himself, but which can swing matchups into infantry and (particularly) infantry that's vulnerable to RFP (Baldur2 Bones, for instance, can play into any non-Skarre1 Cryx, while if you take away the RFP option, he really struggles into Ghost Fleet, which has been seeing something of a resurgence. Really, the reasons why I find megalith so necessary (aside from his generally excellent statline, and the -5 potential DEF swing he brings for any caster) is, in roughly this order of importance: 1. The Healing. Baldur2 deals stacking damage to himself every round from the wurm tokens he accumulates. Megalith offsets that with his bond, and lets you safely stack tokens for ~4 turns (on average) before you really start having to worry about the damage. While you CAN purify the tokens, it's both often inconvenient from a positioning standpoint (SPD 5 means you often want Baldur to be charging something, while his reasonable combat stats mean that you often want him to be whacking something, and from a late-game attrition standpoint. Get 4 wurm tokens on Baldur, and he hits like a heavy (and hitting power is something the Baldur2 Bones list can struggle with a bit). Not something that's necessary in every matchups, but in about half of the games I play with Baldur, I find myself using him to clear something off my woldguardians, so that they can keep moving up the field. 2. The additional Roots of the Earth. Baldur2 is a fairly fury-starved caster, when it comes down to it. He's going to want to camp some fury most turns, he's going to want to drop a wall somewhere nearly every turn, and that means he's only getting off 1 Roots of the Earth (maybe 2). Considering that you typically want to have Baldur2 rooted on any given turn (assassination is almost always how you lose with Baldur2), that means you're going to have a hard time Rooting everything that needs it in a given turn. The Blood Shaman helps with that, but it's also a very fragile piece which your opponent is highly incentivized to remove (and if she's rooting frontline pieces, she's probably in range to BE killed), and again, it's only 1 more Roots of the Earth. Even if we're talking Ghetorix, Loki, Baldur2...that's 3 targets for Roots on most turns (to say nothing of, say, rooting the Tharn Ravager Chieftan to stop him getting sniped out, etc.) Of course, Megalith is also a model that wants Roots put on him, but he's also self-sufficient (unlike the others), and he can usually stand behind the frontlines and be relatively safe, even without Roots. 3. The Positioning flexibility. Roots of the Earth is a 6" Range spell, and Baldur can only be in one place at any given time. Typically, he wants to brick up, but more and more I'm finding that to be very difficult to manage while maintaining a scenario presence, especially since an opponent who knows how to play into Baldur will try to force you to break up the brick, rather than engaging you directly. Gallows Groves can help with this, but are fragile and don't do anything else for Baldur. Also, there are some matchups where Baldur just can't be that close to his front line without dying, and in those matchups, you want to be able to Roots the models that need Rooting. 4. Order of Activation flexibility: Roots is a spell that you want to cast after the target has activated. It can cause order of activation problems if Baldur is your sole/main source of Roots, because it stops him from casting animi/using his sword to apply weight of stone before Roots-ing the model you want Roots'd. Shifting Stones help with that, but again, anyone who has played Circle knows to identify when stones are key to a matchup and, if so, remove them. Also, often you'll want to use Baldur to hit things, then port him back with the shifting stones...and you can't do that if he casts roots on himself. Finally, one of the biggest challenges I have with Baldur2 is playing into opponents who just look at the brick and go 'thanks, but no thanks' and decide to just ignore the brick and win on scenario/engineer an assassination rather than bothering with attrition. The Bones list deals with that by being nearly impossible to jam effectively (thanks to bulldoze and crevasse), but a list without those tools? Eh. Honestly, I don't think I WANT a model that screams 'you can't kill me' like Rooted Ghetorix behind a wall does. All you're doing is encouraging your opponent not to play the game you want them to. I'd much rather have models that LOOK killable, but still can't be efficiently removed. Oh, and you also lose out on the 'stone missile' Bones tech, which is probably the most key piece of tech in that list, after Megalith. So many lists rely on a single source of +2 damage buff to break armor, being able to snipe that support swings matchups hard. While you can still stone missile models after top of 1, it becomes much harder to do so reliably, and some models become non-viable targets after turn 1 (Satyxis, Idrians, Krielstone etc) because they get to buff up.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 30, 2018 0:58:56 GMT
I think Baldur2 seems like a fun idea. With native arm 19 and the small box increase I kind of think Riphorns might have a place here. I'm not necessarily sold on Loki just hanging out in the brick for the sake of it, though. I always found him to be rather pillowfisted and with a heavy battle group and low model count many opponents I think will have a trivial time preventing your drag. Riphorns are almost as tough and a fair bit cheaper. They also hit harder and take buffs better (primal and Diving Inspiration are likely to be your only ones here) than Loki and it hurts a little bit less to throw one away when you primal it. Since you aren't too worried about outspeeding your opponent with your brick you don't necessarily need the extra threat provided by Loki. Primal + Divine Inspiration should let you trade into most things. I think the big question to ask is whether or not to bring Megalith and heavy/light on Tharn do you go? Ghetorix + Megalith + Riphorn + Riphorn + Gorax leaves 31 points for Tharn (one free card). Dropping Megalith leaves 51 points (two free cards). You always bring Megalith with Baldur2. ALWAYS. He is not a negotiable piece of kit. Not only is the only geomancer available in theme (and thus, the only way you're realistically going to get more than 2 Roots of the Earth out in a given turn), he heals Baldur to offset his wurm tokens. While you CAN purge those off (and sometimes you have to, even with Megs), you really, really don't want to, because they let Baldur hit like a heavy in the endgame. I can...kind of...see the argument for Ghetorix, Riphorns, etc with Baldur2 (I think it's unlikely to catch on, though), but dropping Megalith isn't a viable option.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 28, 2018 22:44:11 GMT
Trollock - I don't see Baldur2 outside of Bones in the foreseeable future. You lose so, SO much flexibility when you drop from being able to take 3 geomancers, to being able to take only 1 (expensive) geomancer. Add in the limited range of Baldur's effective presence (seriously, it can be hard to get roots on enough things, even in Bones), and how damn expensive each of the three beasts (Loki, Ghetorix, Megalith) are (especially since they don't contribute to free points in theme) and...I just don't see it happening. Baldur2 doesn't actually have a terribly strong personal toolkit. What he does have is a backbreaking tool kit, when force-multiplied via geomancy, IF your opponent doesn't have a strong answer to it. Roots of the Earth is an okay, but not amazing buff. Rock Wall is amazing, but it doesn't make a caster on it's own. And his feat is mediocre in many instances (My Baldur2 list puts roots on 4+ models a turn, every turn - feat turn is just a turn where I can spend my fury doing other things, with that list). Maybe someone else will break it wide open, but personally, I just don't see it happening.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 27, 2018 0:49:34 GMT
Oh yeah. I only remember Croak Trappers exist when I see them sitting all lonely on the shelf at the local game stores. But like I said, just bringing Rage to the table with pig Warlocks almost guarantees him a niche barring either a ridiculously high personal point cost (probably 6+), or some kind of crippling disadvantage. I mean, he'll probably be a free option in the themes he's allowed in, so a high point cost isn't really a huge issue. Maybe's he's speed 0 and has a special rule allowing him to be targeted by friendly power attacks, so you have to throw him upfield? That might be enough of a disadvantage, though I'd probably put him on the table just to play FrogBall...
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 25, 2018 2:25:48 GMT
I'm less confident that there is any point to this circular discussion about Strike Tankers shooting Ghetorix in Theory Machine Land as a justification for PP's terrible CID design decisions. For one Strike Tankers can aim and be screened and for another Marauders exist. Even ignoring warcasters, somehow, Combo Smiting Ghetorix and then finishing him off in a barrage of guns is not that unrealistic and not exploiting the massive weakness Circle warbeasts have in that they are high defence but not sturdy seems silly. And if someone's going to mention Baldur 2 then congratulations, you've hit upon why this argument is incredibly dumb.
As an aside, the whole reason why all the rules are on the CA's of every unit is to stop an accidental remake of Fists of Halaak 2.0, not because PP hates you.
The argument is dumb because there isn't actually anything to argue about... Someone says: "Man that Ghetorix is going to be hard to kill with the CID changes." To which someone else posts the rules off some cards as proof the statement is false... But the CID changes will make Ghetroix hard to kill. That is the entire point of the CID changes. If all you care about is killing Ghetorix, then you can easily make a list that kills him dead. Doesn't change that he is hard to kill. Unfortunately forums aren't actually that great for discussions. The argument quickly devolves when people ignore most of a post and focus on how one sentence is wrong. People make big posts, it's difficult to respond to all of it any way. Eventually the plot is lost. The thing with CA's is they have been a lot less afraid to give rules to the base units of other factions in post AC CIDs. (The Circle CID is only the most recent offender with Tharn all gaining a bunch of abilities, none of which are tied to a CA) Looks at the various Tharn units: Ravagers: Gain Granted Vengeance and a Mini-feat from the CA. Both of which are arguably necessary for the unit's function. Gained...brutal charge and rapid healing. It's not nothing (brutal charge is huge), but I still don't expect to see many units of Ravagers without CA. Bloodtrackers: Gain Granted: Reposition, a Mini-feat, and a Tactics. They gained parry, I guess, but they're still highly dependent on the CA. (also, we'll see if Parry makes it through internal testing, as I suspect it may not). Bloodweavers: Granted Divine Inspiration, Granted AD, and Tactics Spell Ward. Base unit changed not at all in the CID. I guess Blood Pack gained a bunch of abilities, but they also didn't HAVE a CA to attach those abilities to. If there had been a blood pack CA, I would have expected to see at least Reposition 3" as a granted/tactics, rather than being on the base unit. Wolf Riders got a full-on redesign, and also do not have a CA. They're also, IMO, a design failure as of the last week of CID. Not really seeing an aggressive shifting of functionality towards the base units and away from using CAs to patch unit weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Sept 23, 2018 21:53:13 GMT
The gender swapping is still kind of lame. They had some origionally ideas in the article that were holiday themed (still kind of meh but at least something new) I would have loved a Gluttony themed LotF. A fat guy version with a Turky leg instead of a sword and a remote instead of a bird As it stands, at least with this model you can actually create an all female Tharn army, which is pretty cool. I don't hate this one, because it's at least on-concept and not needlessly sexy (compared to other female Tharn models). I do think it lacks the menace of the original sculpt, though.
|
|