|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 24, 2017 8:26:05 GMT
I hear you, and it's Coven so very little is genuinely bad, but if I'm playing Dark Host I'd rather bring someone who does more for banes. I really like what Gaspy3 does for Banes, and I've been having a blast with Scaverous, both of whom do far more for the dark host than the Coven does, bringing both great defensive options and both having a MAT-fixer which banes really want unless you're doubling up on cavalry. -und_ed A mat fixer is not vital for Dark Host, most lists I see are double cav who fix their own mat with boosted charge attack rolls, and mat 7 with veteran leader for the warriors is adequate. Occultation is amazing on Bane Riders that are arm 20 against ranged attacks, also if you thought stealth incorporeal Gremlin Swarms were bad, how about a stealth incorporeal Wraith Engine when b2b with the Egregore. But the real reason Coven is so good with Banes is the feat, yeah other casters are good with Dark Host (I have played against a particularly nasty Shade 2 Dark Host) but it is not an anomaly that the most popular caster for dark Host at the WTC was Coven.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Oct 24, 2017 12:22:42 GMT
I hear you, and it's Coven so very little is genuinely bad, but if I'm playing Dark Host I'd rather bring someone who does more for banes. I really like what Gaspy3 does for Banes, and I've been having a blast with Scaverous, both of whom do far more for the dark host than the Coven does, bringing both great defensive options and both having a MAT-fixer which banes really want unless you're doubling up on cavalry. -und_ed A mat fixer is not vital for Dark Host, most lists I see are double cav who fix their own mat with boosted charge attack rolls, and mat 7 with veteran leader for the warriors is adequate. Occultation is amazing on Bane Riders that are arm 20 against ranged attacks, also if you thought stealth incorporeal Gremlin Swarms were bad, how about a stealth incorporeal Wraith Engine when b2b with the Egregore. But the real reason Coven is so good with Banes is the feat, yeah other casters are good with Dark Host (I have played against a particularly nasty Shade 2 Dark Host) but it is not an anomaly that the most popular caster for dark Host at the WTC was Coven. So what you're saying is you want to nerf an entire theme and caster because you don't like the interactions of one list. How is this differnet from heavy metal?
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 24, 2017 12:25:36 GMT
A mat fixer is not vital for Dark Host, most lists I see are double cav who fix their own mat with boosted charge attack rolls, and mat 7 with veteran leader for the warriors is adequate. Occultation is amazing on Bane Riders that are arm 20 against ranged attacks, also if you thought stealth incorporeal Gremlin Swarms were bad, how about a stealth incorporeal Wraith Engine when b2b with the Egregore. But the real reason Coven is so good with Banes is the feat, yeah other casters are good with Dark Host (I have played against a particularly nasty Shade 2 Dark Host) but it is not an anomaly that the most popular caster for dark Host at the WTC was Coven. So what you're saying is you want to nerf an entire theme and caster because you don't like the interactions of one list. How is this differnet from heavy metal? I was not calling for anything to be nerfed, I was disagreeing with Unded's staement that Coven did not do the most for Dank Host
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on Oct 24, 2017 18:12:28 GMT
Personally, I think it would be best for PP to do what they did with Haley2 in the trencher CID. My guess is they knew that putting Haley2 adjustments into CID would end up causing tons of internet drama which would overshadow the rest of the CID. So, instead, they did their testing internally and included it as a surprise in the release. I suspect they might do the same thing for Coven and/or Denny1
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 25, 2017 1:15:07 GMT
The only parts of Coven that need changing are giving them a rule that they can only score 1 zone/flag a turn OR that when Egregore transfers damage to a witch, it must transfer ALL damage to that which OR Egregore cannot run. Any of those will take just enough of the edge off that it's not soo overwhelming to play against. Either they're scenario power drops, or they're more fragile to spiking damage, or they can't run to feat deep into your lines.
As far as Denny goes, that's a harder call. I think I'd alter her feat to be -2 in control but no charge/run/*action in command, which should be 10. Then there's better counter play to it, and how much you want to use it is up to you. Maybe bump Denny's survivability a tad in that case though.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Oct 25, 2017 1:44:43 GMT
The only parts of Coven that need changing are giving them a rule that they can only score 1 zone/flag a turn OR that when Egregore transfers damage to a witch, it must transfer ALL damage to that which OR Egregore cannot run. Any of those will take just enough of the edge off that it's not soo overwhelming to play against. Either they're scenario power drops, or they're more fragile to spiking damage, or they can't run to feat deep into your lines. As far as Denny goes, that's a harder call. I think I'd alter her feat to be -2 in control but no charge/run/*action in command, which should be 10. Then there's better counter play to it, and how much you want to use it is up to you. Maybe bump Denny's survivability a tad in that case though. Unless I missed something Egregore shouldn't be able to feat and run because of the rules behind feats? He is still the point of origin even if he's just a solo?
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 25, 2017 1:47:32 GMT
The only parts of Coven that need changing are giving them a rule that they can only score 1 zone/flag a turn OR that when Egregore transfers damage to a witch, it must transfer ALL damage to that which OR Egregore cannot run. Any of those will take just enough of the edge off that it's not soo overwhelming to play against. Either they're scenario power drops, or they're more fragile to spiking damage, or they can't run to feat deep into your lines. As far as Denny goes, that's a harder call. I think I'd alter her feat to be -2 in control but no charge/run/*action in command, which should be 10. Then there's better counter play to it, and how much you want to use it is up to you. Maybe bump Denny's survivability a tad in that case though. Unless I missed something Egregore shouldn't be able to feat and run because of the rules behind feats? He is still the point of origin even if he's just a solo? Because he's a solo he doesn't feat. He's just the point of origin for the control area associated with the feat. One of the witches does it.
|
|
|
Post by djgibraltar on Oct 25, 2017 3:27:05 GMT
skormedlover87are you joking with your proposals. cryx is by far the most dominant faction at this time as proven by previous tournaments and driven home by the wtc. yet your 2 proposals are 2 do a slight and in most games irrelevant nerf to the coven. as others have said. the fact they can score multiple zones is not what makes them opressive. the damage thing while a better proposal still wont be relevant in most games. your proposed changes are situational nerfs that rarely affect the outcome of most games. and to denny do a slight irrelevant nerf and on top propose that her survivability be buffed to compensate. in other words keep her power lvl the same but shift it. kk you obviously are a fair minded individual in your assessments. well played good sir. well played. you should work for the design team with ideas like that. ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Oct 25, 2017 3:34:53 GMT
skormedlover87are you joking with your proposals. cryx is by far the most dominant faction at this time as proven by previous tournaments and driven home by the wtc. yet your 2 proposals are 2 do a slight and in most games irrelevant nerf to the coven. as others have said. the fact they can score multiple zones is not what makes them opressive. the damage thing while a better proposal still wont be relevant in most games. your proposed changes are situational nerfs that rarely affect the outcome of most games. and to denny do a slight irrelevant nerf and on top propose that her survivability be buffed to compensate. in other words keep her power lvl the same but shift it. kk you obviously are a fair minded individual in your assessments. well played good sir. well played. you should work for the design team with ideas like that. ridiculous. I'm still here. You're toeing the line between discussion and insults.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Oct 25, 2017 4:32:44 GMT
skormedlover87 are you joking with your proposals. cryx is by far the most dominant faction at this time as proven by previous tournaments and driven home by the wtc. yet your 2 proposals are 2 do a slight and in most games irrelevant nerf to the coven. as others have said. the fact they can score multiple zones is not what makes them opressive. the damage thing while a better proposal still wont be relevant in most games. your proposed changes are situational nerfs that rarely affect the outcome of most games. and to denny do a slight irrelevant nerf and on top propose that her survivability be buffed to compensate. in other words keep her power lvl the same but shift it. kk you obviously are a fair minded individual in your assessments. well played good sir. well played. you should work for the design team with ideas like that. ridiculous. skormedlover87 - hostility aside, your suggestions go nowhere near far enough, and I say that as someone who played Cryx until quite recently. Both Coven and Denny1 are hard control casters with hard control timewalk feats in a game that no longer has an abundance of those anymore. I'd expect something along the lines of the following in terms of changes: Denny1: 1+ of the following 1. lose the second sentence of her feat (no longer stops running, charging, special attacks.) Still a crippling debuff, but no longer an effective timewalk against melee lists. 2. lose scourge. keeps all of the attrition and control potential, but removes the pop-n-drop assassination, potentially opening up list-building options into her. 3. lose stealth. becomes waaay more fragile, and easier to counter-assassinate. Coven: lose the ability to score scenario elements unless all witches are in the element in question. damage to the egregore must be assigned to a witch until that witch is dead, remainder spills over onto the next witch, and so on. These changes literally just clean up what are almost certainly unintended interactions with SR2017 and focus overboosting in Mk3. - Feat changes. One of the following: 1. Feat no longer reduces LOS to 5", instead gives stealth to FF models in control, -2 MAT and RAT to enemy models. 2. Feat goes from Area: CTRL to Area: CMD of each Witch. Increase CMD of the Witches to 10. Much less crippling, option 2 still keys off of the Coven's unique mechanics, but requires more active participation from the Witches than hiding in the back while the Egrogore throws itself upfield. Ideally, I'd like to see the following nerfs as well: Revenant pirates: Deathbound reads: returned models must forfeit their movement or action the turn they are returned to play. No more aiming ghost shot riflemen being returned turn after turn, which cuts down on the stupid assassination potential (and actually incentivizes removing the riflemen, even with non-RFP attacks) but doesn't touch the attrition aspect. Puts it in line with the 'good' attrition that exists elsewhere in the game at the moment. Dark Host: Third benefit becomes: small-based Bane model/units in the army gain prowl. Puts it more in line with other theme benefits, which don't tend to apply to every. single. infantry. model. in the theme. Especially when the benefit is as strong as prowl. Bonus: Bane Riders: possibly the above change to Dark Host is enough to knock them down a peg, but if not...I firmly believe they came out of CID overtuned. Vengeancing, Ghostly Cavalry is quite frankly too much, especially given the way it interacts with terrain and impact attacks. Not entirely sure what would be an appropriate and judicious nerf, but as they stand they're probably stronger than new Storm Lances...which is stronger than a unit should be, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by maximumhippo on Oct 25, 2017 7:49:03 GMT
skormedlover87 are you joking with your proposals. cryx is by far the most dominant faction at this time as proven by previous tournaments and driven home by the wtc. yet your 2 proposals are 2 do a slight and in most games irrelevant nerf to the coven. as others have said. the fact they can score multiple zones is not what makes them opressive. the damage thing while a better proposal still wont be relevant in most games. your proposed changes are situational nerfs that rarely affect the outcome of most games. and to denny do a slight irrelevant nerf and on top propose that her survivability be buffed to compensate. in other words keep her power lvl the same but shift it. kk you obviously are a fair minded individual in your assessments. well played good sir. well played. you should work for the design team with ideas like that. ridiculous. skormedlover87 - hostility aside, your suggestions go nowhere near far enough, and I say that as someone who played Cryx until quite recently. Both Coven and Denny1 are hard control casters with hard control timewalk feats in a game that no longer has an abundance of those anymore. I'd expect something along the lines of the following in terms of changes: Denny1: 1+ of the following 1. lose the second sentence of her feat (no longer stops running, charging, special attacks.) Still a crippling debuff, but no longer an effective timewalk against melee lists. 2. lose scourge. keeps all of the attrition and control potential, but removes the pop-n-drop assassination, potentially opening up list-building options into her. 3. lose stealth. becomes waaay more fragile, and easier to counter-assassinate. Coven: lose the ability to score scenario elements unless all witches are in the element in question. damage to the egregore must be assigned to a witch until that witch is dead, remainder spills over onto the next witch, and so on. These changes literally just clean up what are almost certainly unintended interactions with SR2017 and focus overboosting in Mk3. - Feat changes. One of the following: 1. Feat no longer reduces LOS to 5", instead gives stealth to FF models in control, -2 MAT and RAT to enemy models. 2. Feat goes from Area: CTRL to Area: CMD of each Witch. Increase CMD of the Witches to 10. Much less crippling, option 2 still keys off of the Coven's unique mechanics, but requires more active participation from the Witches than hiding in the back while the Egrogore throws itself upfield. Ideally, I'd like to see the following nerfs as well: Revenant pirates: Deathbound reads: returned models must forfeit their movement or action the turn they are returned to play. No more aiming ghost shot riflemen being returned turn after turn, which cuts down on the stupid assassination potential (and actually incentivizes removing the riflemen, even with non-RFP attacks) but doesn't touch the attrition aspect. Puts it in line with the 'good' attrition that exists elsewhere in the game at the moment. Dark Host: Third benefit becomes: small-based Bane model/units in the army gain prowl. Puts it more in line with other theme benefits, which don't tend to apply to every. single. infantry. model. in the theme. Especially when the benefit is as strong as prowl. Bonus: Bane Riders: possibly the above change to Dark Host is enough to knock them down a peg, but if not...I firmly believe they came out of CID overtuned. Vengeancing, Ghostly Cavalry is quite frankly too much, especially given the way it interacts with terrain and impact attacks. Not entirely sure what would be an appropriate and judicious nerf, but as they stand they're probably stronger than new Storm Lances...which is stronger than a unit should be, IMO. I like the ideas for Dark Host. I like the ideas for Coven. I would like to offer a slightly different suggestion for Ghost Fleet/Deneghra1. I agree that the revenant crew returning with no consequences is kinda BS. I think that the lightest touch should be used though, I don't want to see another mad dog incident. My suggestion is simply this: Limit the casters available to ghost fleet to Undead casters. One, I feel that caster limits are not used frequently enough in themes overall; Two, this brings the power of the list down without actually changing any of the models involved.
|
|
|
Post by far2casual on Oct 25, 2017 7:54:22 GMT
Denny1 : one of those super heavy nerfs is more than enough. Just allowing charges and power attacks under her feat makes her insanely vulnerable already.
Coven : the real problematic part of the Coven is how they interact with SR2017 at the moment as scoring with three casters is ridiculous on some scenarios, and maybe the unintended overboosting particularity. The rest of their kit isn't even that strong.
That Deathbound nerf would make the entire unit unplayable trash for the current price then. Revenants have the worst stats in the game for 1.5pt models, they pay an heavy price for that recursion. Weird rule interactions are the problem with the Revenants, with a combination of bringing back 2pt WA models for free, the "safe model" abuse, or getting countered by a tool that is actually too difficult to find (RFP on Undead Leaders). My suggestions : make the Leaders Officers with 5 boxes and Call to Sacrifice. Just wiping enough of them is a good answer then.
You have to be pretty desperate for finding a problem with Bane Riders as they are now, especially compared to 2016 Storm Lances. That being said, the idea of not giving them Stealth with the theme is a good one.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Oct 25, 2017 7:59:07 GMT
Coven: lose the ability to score scenario elements unless all witches are in the element in question. damage to the egregore must be assigned to a witch until that witch is dead, remainder spills over onto the next witch, and so on. These changes literally just clean up what are almost certainly unintended interactions with SR2017 and focus overboosting in Mk3. - Feat changes. One of the following: 1. Feat no longer reduces LOS to 5", instead gives stealth to FF models in control, -2 MAT and RAT to enemy models. 2. Feat goes from Area: CTRL to Area: CMD of each Witch. Increase CMD of the Witches to 10. I don't think these changes are very reasonable. Having to assign damage to a single witch would guaranteed kill a witch every time you deal 11 damage to an ARM 17 model, which is quite doable. Even killing one witch basically cripples the Coven, if you deal 8 damage to any other caster except Twins (who can fully transfer the hit), they just don't care. I would be more in favour of having to overboost before transferring, the whole Coven rules are already exceptions, might as well add one more. And limiting them to scoring 1 element at a time, as it always has been. - They already have a lot of Stealth tech, a Stealth feat would be redundant.
- I'm honestly not sure if you're supposed to be serious with this one, this change would put every single witch in danger of being shot to death on feat turn if you want to affect anything at all (walk + 5 is usually 11), they're still only 16(18)/13 with 8 boxes.
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Oct 25, 2017 9:39:14 GMT
skormedlover87 are you joking with your proposals. cryx is by far the most dominant faction at this time as proven by previous tournaments and driven home by the wtc. yet your 2 proposals are 2 do a slight and in most games irrelevant nerf to the coven. as others have said. the fact they can score multiple zones is not what makes them opressive. the damage thing while a better proposal still wont be relevant in most games. your proposed changes are situational nerfs that rarely affect the outcome of most games. and to denny do a slight irrelevant nerf and on top propose that her survivability be buffed to compensate. in other words keep her power lvl the same but shift it. kk you obviously are a fair minded individual in your assessments. well played good sir. well played. you should work for the design team with ideas like that. ridiculous. I'll just go ahead and ignore the insulting part of that. As to the Coven, the fact that they can score 4 points conceivably without involving their army, thereby taking a HUGE scenario advantage without sacrificing any aspect of their combat prowess or attrition IS what's oppressive about them in the list they run. Double Cav lists have issues scoring, theirs doesn't. Meanwhile they mesh very well with those cav, in such a way as making them unjammable in most instances. My suggestions either 1) keep the scoring to the same lvl as other warnouns, thereby taking away their synergistic advantage with the list construction or 2) render the witches far less survivable, thereby forcing the controlling player to more carefully place Eggregore and thus rendering the witches and their feat less effective or 3) preventing Eggregore from moving with such speed that the feat effects your entire army. Long range guns are a counter to the feat if you aren't IN the feat. Coven with Bane cav isn't a great attrition list. It's a great scenario list that can attrition out what it needs to and coast to victory. Taking away scenario power or making them more vulnerable is an easy and effective way to address the issue. If it isn't enough, it can be addressed again at a later time. Concerning Denny, what do you mean by "slight irrelevant nerf"? I'm reducing the area you can't run, charge, or make power or * attacks by about 50%. The level of danger she needs to put herself in to cover something with her feat is so much greater in that case. It largely and practically removes it from the feat unless you were going to power attack at the end of a charge. Most charges will start outside her command range, and they'll still get somewhere with the possibility of killing something. For instance, my Titan Gladiator can only attack something a maximum of 5" away under current feat. Under proposed change, if farther than 10" away from Denny then his charge threat is 8". Much better. Also, anything that's got above average charge range isn't likely to be shut down as hard by the new feat as the old. It's a very large change, and my suggestion concerning increasing her survivability is of the 1pt of armor or def or a couple more boxes variety. Not massive. So what do you want to see out of changes to these casters? Because you wound like you want to burn them down so hard that they'll never be competitive again. Gaspy Mk2->Mk3 style. That's what it seems like you want and I can't really countenance that position.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 25, 2017 9:42:23 GMT
Personally, I think it would be best for PP to do what they did with Haley2 in the trencher CID. My guess is they knew that putting Haley2 adjustments into CID would end up causing tons of internet drama which would overshadow the rest of the CID. So, instead, they did their testing internally and included it as a surprise in the release. I suspect they might do the same thing for Coven and/or Denny1 Cannot agree more, it is such a contentious issue that it is better off not put to public opinion, PP should just make the changes and let people live with them, not everything needs to go through CID
|
|