|
Post by Cryptix on Jun 8, 2017 16:47:53 GMT
Wait, I just thought of something. Hammersmiths slam, move up to slam distance, then bulldoze the target back further. Too niche?
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 8, 2017 16:53:58 GMT
A reminder that a Reroll in it of itself is an increase by about 1 on a 2D6. So 2 Man CRAs with Longunners is about POW 14s. Nope. You don't get the higher of the 2 rolls, you just have the option to reroll the dice and take the second result. On 2 dice, that translates to: If below 7, reroll If 7 or greater, do not reroll The chances that your roll will improve become less than average if you get 7 or better. So for the following rolls on 2 dice, here is the probablity that your second roll will be better: 2:35/36 3:33/36 4:30/36 5:26/36 6:21/36 7:15/36 8:10/36 9:6/36 10:3/36 11:1/36 12: 0 So the reroll doesn't translate to +1 damage. It just pushes your result towards average. Honestly it doesn't seem overpowered. It's 22 points of dudes. They should be able to get fairly reliable damage.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 8, 2017 16:56:58 GMT
Heh, I just remembered that not only are Marauders ARM 20 and dirt cheap, they are also weapon masters against all huge based models. Like the blockhouse. Id be fine with them having their cost raised back up to 12 if they got Grand slam. They are Siege weapons in one of the most literal senses. I think it makes perfect sense for them to be "Wall Breakers"
|
|
|
Post by tesoe on Jun 8, 2017 17:00:22 GMT
Heh, I just remembered that not only are Marauders ARM 20 and dirt cheap, they are also weapon masters against all huge based models. Like the blockhouse. Id be fine with them having their cost raised back up to 12 if they got Grand slam. They are Siege weapons in one of the most literal senses. I think it makes perfect sense for them to be "Wall Breakers" I'd be fine with them staying right where they are. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 8, 2017 17:05:18 GMT
I mean if people hate them being spammed so much, I wouldn't mind them being less spam able but more quality.
|
|
|
Post by tesoe on Jun 8, 2017 17:38:26 GMT
I mean if people hate them being spammed so much, I wouldn't mind them being less spam able but more quality. Ah, that is a strong argument. The biggest problem I see with it is they'd be in serious competition with the Juggernaut if they were the same points. I'm not sure if two PS 16s with grand slam and WM against huge models is better or worse than just having one PS 19 axe with crit stationary and a PS 15 open fist. My instinct leans towards just always taking the Juggernaut though. Since it's more consistently useful.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 8, 2017 17:42:33 GMT
]The biggest problem I see with it is they'd be in serious competition with the Juggernaut if they were the same points. And they would be fine (In my opinion). A Maurader with Grand Slam would have so much Utility, capable of slamming Models at least 3 Inches every time (With a lucky maximum of 8 Inches). Maybe Grand Slam and Followup. The idea isn't to compete on a points cost basis, but a "Utility VS Damage". Of course the jugger would be better, but the maurader would have that utility, and ultimatly just a BIT better (+0.5) vs Structures. Would reduce spam, would give Serkers a Niche (Once Buffed or changed) and would add utility. I see nothing but win.
|
|
|
Post by tesoe on Jun 8, 2017 17:45:22 GMT
I see what you're saying, but I have the feeling most player would shrug and just always go with the one that has the better ARM cracking in the majority of situations.
Edit: unless structures are so awesome that having at least one huge based model in every list becomes the norm.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Jun 8, 2017 17:57:14 GMT
I see what you're saying, but I have the feeling most player would shrug and just always go with the one that has the better ARM cracking in the majority of situations. Edit: unless structures are so awesome that having at least one huge based model in every list becomes the norm. I strongly suspect that to be the goal. if not a structure, then a battle engine or colossal. It sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 8, 2017 17:58:45 GMT
I see what you're saying, but I have the feeling most player would shrug and just always go with the one that has the better ARM cracking in the majority of situations. I call this a "Strategic Realignment". A change early on so its not instead: Maurader: 11 Points because enough people complained. Im not gonna have another case of the Mad Dogs! (I purchased 3 Kits, and just hopped to use 2 or so as delaying jacks)
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Jun 8, 2017 18:01:20 GMT
I mean if people hate them being spammed so much, I wouldn't mind them being less spam able but more quality. Ah, that is a strong argument. The biggest problem I see with it is they'd be in serious competition with the Juggernaut if they were the same points. I'm not sure if two PS 16s with grand slam and WM against huge models is better or worse than just having one PS 19 axe with crit stationary and a PS 15 open fist. My instinct leans towards just always taking the Juggernaut though. Since it's more consistently useful. Isn't this type of situation ideal? Where there aren't clear cut choices. Also, on the topic of the prevalence of huge based models, I recall reading during the BE CID, that PP has a target prevalence they are shooting for in regards to huge based models and the majority of them(BEs) weren't reaching that level so that's why the decided to revamp them.
|
|
|
Post by tesoe on Jun 8, 2017 18:02:56 GMT
I see what you're saying, but I have the feeling most player would shrug and just always go with the one that has the better ARM cracking in the majority of situations. Edit: unless structures are so awesome that having at least one huge based model in every list becomes the norm. I strongly suspect that to be the goal. if not a structure, then a battle engine or colossal. It sucks. Right, I should have added that factor in myself. Of course PP wants to push the meta in a direction where everyone has multiple of their most expensive models. With that taken into account they might push it to 12 points without changing a thing. I could see myself fielding one in a world where everyone has at least one huge model on the board.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 8, 2017 18:42:54 GMT
-------------------------------Khador talk--------------------------------------------------------------------- The Marauder's design concept is supposed to be specialist. It's a huge-base hunter. The fact that it is operating as a cheap generalist should say something about where it is in relation to its concept. Compared to the Juggernaut, I don't see how it is 2 points cheaper. They seem about equal. Their stat line is the same. The only difference is that the Marauder does more damage than the Juggernaut against huge bases, and less against non-huge bases. It's a specialist, you're supposed to take it as a special answer to a special question. Along with that, the base stats of that chassis are awesome anyway. Mat7, Arm 20, and 34 boxes are great. The only reason it gets spammed is because it doesn't NEED to be fighting huge bases to be well worth the points spent on it. Against huge bases, it does more work than a Juggernaut. Against anything else its still easily worth 10 points just for the stats it has. The force multiplier of having a damage buff on Marauders makes up for any damage discrepancy between it and the juggernaut, because you can bring more of them.
Now, with all of that said, I am not advocating a straight nerf to the Marauder. I do think it needs a redesign to make it match its design concept. ----------------------------End Khador Talk------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------Cygnar Talk------------------------------------------------------------------ On the topic of huge base models: The new focus on huge based stuff likely stems from a few reasons: 1. Yes, bigger models can make more money. 2. Bigger models can make the table look better and maybe draw in more players 3. PP has already made lots of medium and large based jacks/beasts. There's only so much that can be explored with that size. But there's a lot of unused #designspace in this base size that they can capitalize on.
I'm largely okay with them improving battle engines, making new colossals/gargantuans, and even introducing new model types. I just hope that they don't power bloat them too severely. The blockhouse will need to be closely looked at during this CID. I recommend that as many people include it in their armies as possible, because it needs the testing. ----------------------------------------End Cygnar talk------------------------------------
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 8, 2017 18:49:56 GMT
The Marauder's design concept is supposed to be specialist. It's a huge-base hunter. No, it isn't and it never was supposed too.Its primarily a Slambot. "Hunting Huge Bases" is such a tiny niche, and the damage it does to a Huge Base (+0.5 Over a Ice Axe, and +4 for the initial extra arm) would make it a bad choice at 12 points for anybody who comprehends the math. The "+1d6 Vs Huge Bases" is more like a sweetener when it can't do its primary job. Since it usually slams stuff out of the way, when it can't at least it can smash some tail.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Jun 8, 2017 19:23:40 GMT
Can we please return talking about Trencher CID and not about speculations on possible Marauder changes? It is an interesting topic, but probably should be done in his proper faction sub-forum.
|
|