|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 5, 2017 17:02:39 GMT
problem is that if you deploy 1st there are good chances that it may do nearly nothing the entire game. Maybe taking a shot, only later in the game. And the trenches end up behind further back than you actually need them. I hate that the didn't make it deploy always as 16 as it was proposed, are the devs even listening? I guess not? In fairness, SR17 makes going second more relevant than SR2016. I don't think it's a great piece, it's no storm strider. But you have to look and find value beyond its offensive abilities.
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on Oct 6, 2017 9:48:15 GMT
problem is that if you deploy 1st there are good chances that it may do nearly nothing the entire game. Maybe taking a shot, only later in the game. And the trenches end up behind further back than you actually need them. I hate that the didn't make it deploy always as 16 as it was proposed, are the devs even listening? I guess not? In fairness, SR17 makes going second more relevant than SR2016. I don't think it's a great piece, it's no storm strider. But you have to look and find value beyond its offensive abilities. It's not only the offensive abilities the problem, even the trenches end being up further back. It woul have been so simple leaving its deploy fixed at 16, instead they decided that a model is useful or not based on the starting roll to see who deploys first. Sometimes the devs do overly complicated stuff or unnecessary nerfs, just look at Caine2. Leaving the special shots was the easiest and most balanced solution, it went way over their head completely.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 6, 2017 9:57:23 GMT
I guess not? In fairness, SR17 makes going second more relevant than SR2016. I don't think it's a great piece, it's no storm strider. But you have to look and find value beyond its offensive abilities. It's not only the offensive abilities the problem, even the trenches end being up further back. It woul have been so simple leaving its deploy fixed at 16, instead they decided that a model is useful or not based on the starting roll to see who deploys first. Sometimes the devs do overly complicated stuff or unnecessary nerfs, just look at Caine2. Leaving the special shots was the easiest and most balanced solution, it went way over their head completely. The latest swathe of theme forces has pretty much killed any faith I had left in the devs
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Oct 6, 2017 13:07:09 GMT
... The latest swathe of theme forces has pretty much killed any faith I had left in the devs ... I have to disagree for 4 reasons: - Player took more than 1 year to find EE. - More than a few months to find The Denny2/Cephalyx theme - Ghost fleet was unplayable 6 months ago - I haven't disagreed with you in a few days Themes are not balanced, 3 Cryx pirate themes gives a lot of credebility that Johnny Depp invested heavily in PP and some stuff is just random and who ever designs Circle lists has a very odd fluff perspective on it. But I, for one, will wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on Oct 6, 2017 13:22:00 GMT
It's not only the offensive abilities the problem, even the trenches end being up further back. It woul have been so simple leaving its deploy fixed at 16, instead they decided that a model is useful or not based on the starting roll to see who deploys first. Sometimes the devs do overly complicated stuff or unnecessary nerfs, just look at Caine2. Leaving the special shots was the easiest and most balanced solution, it went way over their head completely. The latest swathe of theme forces has pretty much killed any faith I had left in the devs haven't read much into theme, are they so bad?
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 6, 2017 13:45:07 GMT
The latest swathe of theme forces has pretty much killed any faith I had left in the devs haven't read much into theme, are they so bad? My main gripe is the rather large disparity between the Cryx theme forces and the majority of the others, and the fact that in Heavy Metal and Oracles the threshold for free slots was increased to 30 points. They cited the reason to increase list diversity, but if you think about it for more than 2 seconds you realise the opposite will happen. Heavy Metal and Oracles need the 3 free slots in order to be competitive, so now the threshold is 90 rather than 75, you have even less space for potential units. At least when it was 75 you could fit in a unit of Swords Knights or Hex Hunters. Now you will probably see mechaniks and the Black Frost Shard at most.
Compounded by the fact that PP seem to have no intention of reigning in their problem child of Cryx anytime soon, but then I guess they would look even more like a bunch of clueless amateurs, after giving all the buffs to Cryx to have to turn and around and nerf them again.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Oct 6, 2017 14:19:41 GMT
Problem with your logic is that if you manage to hit 4 solos at 100 points you build lists like you have WJP-25 in points to acquire non BG stuff...
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on Oct 6, 2017 14:20:25 GMT
haven't read much into theme, are they so bad? My main gripe is the rather large disparity between the Cryx theme forces and the majority of the others, and the fact that in Heavy Metal and Oracles the threshold for free slots was increased to 30 points. They cited the reason to increase list diversity, but if you think about it for more than 2 seconds you realise the opposite will happen. Heavy Metal and Oracles need the 3 free slots in order to be competitive, so now the threshold is 90 rather than 75, you have even less space for potential units. At least when it was 75 you could fit in a unit of Swords Knights or Hex Hunters. Now you will probably see mechaniks and the Black Frost Shard at most.
Compounded by the fact that PP seem to have no intention of reigning in their problem child of Cryx anytime soon, but then I guess they would look even more like a bunch of clueless amateurs, after giving all the buffs to Cryx to have to turn and around and nerf them again.
like double nerfing HM for no reason, or nerfing the blockhouse when it was working as intended in CID. Sometimes I don't understand them.
|
|
|
Post by shroomvolcano on Oct 6, 2017 15:20:59 GMT
My main gripe is the rather large disparity between the Cryx theme forces and the majority of the others, and the fact that in Heavy Metal and Oracles the threshold for free slots was increased to 30 points. They cited the reason to increase list diversity, but if you think about it for more than 2 seconds you realise the opposite will happen. Heavy Metal and Oracles need the 3 free slots in order to be competitive, so now the threshold is 90 rather than 75, you have even less space for potential units. At least when it was 75 you could fit in a unit of Swords Knights or Hex Hunters. Now you will probably see mechaniks and the Black Frost Shard at most. I think it increases list diversity because the two themes aren't as good-looking any more.. That said, awesome, because every other Legion list I played was basically the same Oracles list.
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 6, 2017 15:21:16 GMT
haven't read much into theme, are they so bad? My main gripe is the rather large disparity between the Cryx theme forces and the majority of the others, and the fact that in Heavy Metal and Oracles the threshold for free slots was increased to 30 points. They cited the reason to increase list diversity, but if you think about it for more than 2 seconds you realise the opposite will happen. Heavy Metal and Oracles need the 3 free slots in order to be competitive, so now the threshold is 90 rather than 75, you have even less space for potential units. At least when it was 75 you could fit in a unit of Swords Knights or Hex Hunters. Now you will probably see mechaniks and the Black Frost Shard at most.
Compounded by the fact that PP seem to have no intention of reigning in their problem child of Cryx anytime soon, but then I guess they would look even more like a bunch of clueless amateurs, after giving all the buffs to Cryx to have to turn and around and nerf them again.
I have to agree about the points. These changes don't increase list diversity, they hamper it more. Which is why I think the way the themes are structured in the first place is a problem. It's why I suggested the themes should just give a free points benefit right out of the gates and let you take whatever you want in theme. And maybe this okay, maybe PP is saying "People are just going to take jacks whatever we do, so let's just give them fewer free points. But that POV is just PP admitting that they don't want list diversity at all, which seems odd. I'd like a reason to take Sword Knights or Precursors in Heavy Metal but PP doesn't really give you one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2017 17:36:20 GMT
every time they rush anything it inevitably ends up with flaws. i think the community shares some blame here. people complain and complain and beg for changes, well be careful what you wish for. because they have shown they are capable of making decent changes when given time and they actually play test(skorne), and yet when we receive other changes its just flat out confusing. i don't know. they are still doing good stuff, but the more change that is involved the more opportunity there is for bad. I had hopes that at some point we could move past the re-balancing of mk3 and just focus CID on new stuff, but now im not so sure. I also think with the advent of CID we have lost sight of power spectrum across different models and now expect everything to be competitive level worthy. Which im not sure is a realistic goal or expectation. At some point they have to let the dust settle on old models to sell new ones?? Which can be frustrating, but if we want warmachine to be around for the long term I think the company needs to focus on a realistic long term development plan and the player base needs to come to grips with that. I think the extreme short-termism is shooting the game in the foot currently. It is great to have everything have a place, but maybe we need to temper our expectations of what that means. Not saying I am not frustrated with this batch of change (my factions are cygnar and legion) and I agree that HM and oracles changes do not improve list diveristy, and in fact hamper it. Honestly though, I am beginning to view more of their changes from a business standpoint. They don't nerf ghost fleet because its selling SKUs that weren't selling previously. They can nerf HM and oracles because those sold fine and will still continue to sell, if slightly less maybe. the blockhouse doesn't make sense to me at all, but i can try to justify by assuming there was something they saw that we didn't. I don't know. We are inherently biased and we all make seemingly irrational decisions from other's viewpoints.
|
|
nanocry
Baby's First Wargame
Posts: 1
|
Post by nanocry on Oct 7, 2017 18:14:19 GMT
I've just looked on the stats in warroom so I just went to PP and looked at it. $60? Or I could spend an hour or two and make one myself.. Just my opinion tho.
|
|
|
Post by Rork on Oct 13, 2017 17:23:54 GMT
I've just looked on the stats in warroom so I just went to PP and looked at it. $60? Or I could spend an hour or two and make one myself.. Just my opinion tho. I've got some yoghurt pots that I'm pretty sure are the perfect shape for a blockhouse. Will I get/build any, though? I don't think so. Harking back to my GW days, I've generally preferred armies that can stay mobile and apply pressure where they need to (#Kraye2017) rather than being tied to one part of the table and hoping the enemy puts the right things in the right place. The trenches are a pretty nice benefit (What's that? Repositioning out of your cloud wall into a trench? Ho ho ho), but probably not enough for the points you invest in it. (There could be a case for FFE on it, but I reckon Trencher Long Gunners or an Express Team are a better target for that)
|
|