|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on May 16, 2017 1:35:02 GMT
Just a reminder tge maurader is already mat 7, and at 12 points and just siege weapon it competes with tge jugger. So, maybe drop it down to mat 6? That would make it less multi purpose.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 16, 2017 1:43:39 GMT
So, maybe drop it down to mat 6? That would make it less multi purpose. PP stays consistent for stats across 1 Jack Body Type unless character jack so unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 16, 2017 3:46:20 GMT
Just a reminder tge maurader is already mat 7, and at 12 points and just siege weapon it competes with tge jugger. Oh duh. Sorry not sure why I keep thinking it's a mighty Mat 6.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 16, 2017 3:53:47 GMT
Honestly, if you wanted to give it another role, taking away siege weapon and giving it GRAND SLAM would be a worthwhile endeavor. Maybe then raise points by 1 or 2.
|
|
Ryilan
Guild Master
Fighting heretics with vindaloo curry. Taste my spicy wrath!
Posts: 74
|
Post by Ryilan on May 16, 2017 10:34:11 GMT
This is a friendly reminder for everyone to keep things on-topic. While discussions are always good to have, for the past 4+ pages i have seen little to no posts pertaining to the actual topic. If you want to continue the current discussion, please make a new thread for that purpose.
Ryilan
|
|
|
Post by BarbeChenue on May 17, 2017 17:19:25 GMT
Yeah, the Marauder is already MAT 7. At 11 points, it could be tested with "no" upgrade. At 12, the Marauder is not worth buying, because a POW 16 jack' that deal an average of 3,5 more damage to Colossals cannot compete with the POW 19 Juggernaut at 12 pts as well.
I'd firmly drop the cost of the Rager to 10 and see if this creates an interest. He's lower POW, lower MAT, lower ARM, and has 31 boxes instead of 34, a.k.a. not a contender for the role of "spammable" but a cost drop would be interesting.
I'd go something like Mad Dog/Berserker -1 pt. each (nerfing Karchev's feat has done its damage on them).
I'd go 10 for Ragers, 11 for Marauders, 12 for Juggers, 13 for Destroyers (-1 from 14), 14 for Decimators (-2 from 16), and see what that gets us.
Edit: (After seeing the mod post.) I don't think it's off topic. I intentionally pulled the topic in that direction -- nerfing some Khador 'jacks -- out of disagreement with the idea of restricting all Power Up. I do think this is a legitimate part of the "power up" debate. Some people argue the general rule is to blame, others like me argue it's the particulars.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on May 17, 2017 17:28:29 GMT
o_0?
We're arguing Khador jacks are too cheap, too healthy, and too powerful. You're asking to make them cheaper. Do we play the same game? I'm not trying to be offensive but holy cow. I'd love to have a 10pt Neraph, a 13pt Angelius, and a 14pt Scythean/Ravagor/Carnivean.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on May 17, 2017 17:33:11 GMT
I'd say the Marauder stays the same and goes to PC 11 and the rager becomes the 10 point jack.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 17, 2017 17:39:08 GMT
Since Haley 2 Exists therefore no other caster in Cygnar Needs Touchups. One option being made better doesn't doesn't necessarily make the whole faction better since they replace another in points. Khador has plenty of jacks that nobody touches because they are overpriced, or don't do anything worthwhile. And Heck Maybe the Legion Deserves some Points decreases on some of its stuff. Or at least space out its beatsticks costs so its not Carnivean or nothing.
|
|
|
Post by BarbeChenue on May 17, 2017 17:46:38 GMT
o_0? We're arguing Khador jacks are too cheap, too healthy, and too powerful. You're asking to make them cheaper. Do we play the same game? I'm not trying to be offensive but holy cow. I'd love to have a 10pt Neraph, a 13pt Angelius, and a 14pt Scythean/Ravagor/Carnivean. If you make some of the never-played ranged jack's more appealing to play, these RAT 4 models are not going to be that much of a problem in terms of spam, but will temps players away from spamming only one type of model. Nerfing is also the art of both punishment and reward. 100 pts / 10 pts: 10 jacks 100 pts / 13 pts: 7,7 jacks 100 pts / 15 pts: 6,6 jacks See? If you make some jacks more attractive, this disincentivizes spamming Marauders (and the total number of boxes to punch through becomes much more manageable). And it helps fix the potential aforementioned problem.
|
|
|
Post by Scrub_of_Menoth on May 17, 2017 17:58:14 GMT
Edit: (After seeing the mod post.) I don't think it's off topic. I intentionally pulled the topic in that direction -- nerfing some Khador 'jacks -- out of disagreement with the idea of restricting all Power Up. I do think this is a legitimate part of the "power up" debate. Some people argue the general rule is to blame, others like me argue it's the particulars. I see your point, but I'm with Rylian on this one. The topic pertains to all Warmachine factions in general, and pushing the discussion to focus on a specific faction A) singles out a specific population and B) may stifle discussion by restricting people who don't care about Khador from participating.
Feel free to start a new discussion topic focusing on Khador and power-up however!
|
|
|
Post by jest on May 19, 2017 18:30:00 GMT
Well one argument I would make is that if you look at top tournament lists, Marauder spam isn't very popular, and it isn't in the most popular Khador lists. Here's my source (http://www.discountgamesinc.com/tournaments/tournaments/search/s:Khador) Going back to October I found 1 Marauder spam list (4 Marauders) and 1 Jack spam list that included 3 Marauders. I didn't go back further since that would be pre-Mad Dog nerf. I believe this means: 1) It's OP but winning high level players don't use it (unlikely) 2) It's OP but doesn't win at the high-level because it's a must-counter - high-level players have to devote a counter to the list (armor-cracking lists are a thing but they aren't just for Marauders so not a "Marauder OP" problem) 3) It's OP but not at the high-level (Tier 2+ players don't have the skill/lists to counter) 4) It's OP against your experience (either your lists are bad against it, or you/your meta hasn't figured it out) 5) It's OP against your faction but since it's bad in high-level play against other factions my data doesn't show it. I believe #3 or #4 are most likely because I have heard high-level players say they don't run it because it is very predictable to a good player. Would you be willing to entertain the fact that since this isn't an issue at the highest level it might be and issue with whatever level you are playing at, or an issue with your lists/skill? It could be your faction, but I will say that Circle has a decent showing in tournament placing (but maybe they didn't run into jack spam). I just want to help get to the root of the problem so we aren't screaming to nerf things that won't solve the problem for you (e.g. "I can beat Khador because of power up + jack spam" but the actual reason Khador is winning a lot is troop spam, for example, and we nerf jack spam and you still end up not having fun matchups).
|
|
|
Post by jest on May 19, 2017 18:35:55 GMT
Edit: (After seeing the mod post.) I don't think it's off topic. I intentionally pulled the topic in that direction -- nerfing some Khador 'jacks -- out of disagreement with the idea of restricting all Power Up. I do think this is a legitimate part of the "power up" debate. Some people argue the general rule is to blame, others like me argue it's the particulars. I see your point, but I'm with Rylian on this one. The topic pertains to all Warmachine factions in general, and pushing the discussion to focus on a specific faction A) singles out a specific population and B) may stifle discussion by restricting people who don't care about Khador from participating.
Feel free to start a new discussion topic focusing on Khador and power-up however! I actually agree with this. "Is power-up OP?" immediately sends people to the argument that "Yes it is! Khador can jack spam and get 10 free focus!" but I actually don't think jack spam needs to be restricted, because I don't see it played/winning all that much. So I think the Khador jack spam line of reasoning is bad for this discussion. I think "Restricting Power Up" is a bad topic. The OP went right to "there are alot of benefits in putting limitations to Power Up" without proving that it is. It's easier to prove that Warmachine is stronger than Hordes right now, then ask "why? is it power up or something else?". If we restrict power up and power up isn't the issue then we didn't solve the problem Trolls, Minions, and Skorne are having placing in tournaments.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on May 19, 2017 18:36:37 GMT
I will say as a primarily circle player I think #5 fits best for us. We just don't have the tolls to deal with more than 7 or 8 jacks at a time, those extra 2 jacks really push it over the edge for us as a faction. Its always going to be a rough one when I see harky with 10 jacks staring me down.
My menites tend to not have the same issue but I'm still convinced the maurader is slightly under costed.
I will say that at the higher level there way worse boogeymen than jack spam though. That and I think players at that level can really abuse the predicatability of the jack list which is something I am still working on developing myself.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on May 19, 2017 18:40:09 GMT
PP sure can do an FA cap. It would annoy me a hell of a lot less than Premeasuring changes because I know its for the good of the game Nobody likes having their purchases Invalidated. I don't even have 3 Mauraders (I have 4 Maurader Limbs and 2 heads) and players would hate on PP for that reason forever. Not that I don't think it could be a good idea just...Like not killing all the Wolves that Hunted Dears would have been a great idea. They already do this indirectly so why not do it directly when it's actually a good idea? My 8 Scarsfell Griffons are invalidated now. If you owned 5 Journeyman Warcasters for Siege's theme in MKII then 4 of them are invalidated now. There's plenty of precedent for it, so it's not an excuse.
|
|