Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Mar 8, 2018 6:29:13 GMT
Not worried about the change, honestly. There are only a handful of instances where models ever really relied on immunities to function. The vast majority of the time they're side-rules that are handy-but-not-essential outside of inner-list sillyness, like attacking your own models without penalty. I can't think of any interactions offhand that would cause this change to break anything. It might make some units like Cleansers worse, but even in that case I can't think of any other examples of spray units meant to shoot through each other who were hinging on an immunity for that to work other than cleansers. And with a protectorate CID around the corner, there's a chance they'll get some improvements if that is indeed the case. Or, if nothing else, ask about it in regards to cleansers specifically in the dev talks thread, and see what, if any, are PP's thoughts on that. Their thoughts were to ignore my comment. *let me double check Yep still ignored. So its likely not an issue for them. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. The thread is a mess. They should have probably focused on the immunities change in regards to specific factions at a time (or even several, just not the whole game).
|
|
|
Post by charlzheimer on Mar 8, 2018 11:37:32 GMT
i still think this change makes it so your immmune to the continues effect associated to the immunity.
ie. immunity to fire models are still immune to the continues fire effect and so on.
I do approve of the idea of changing this For the entire game How ever i would love to see a CID focused Purely on models that have said immunity and perhaps give some of them Super immunity or something akin to that.
would also love to see malekus his feat saying you suffer the fire continues effect regardless of immunity but thats wishfull thinking.
|
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Mar 8, 2018 12:42:55 GMT
Copy pasting this from the general discussion thread:
There are some really drastic positives and negatives on both sides to this change.
Malekus would receive a massive buff with this change, into armies that are currently fire immune. Suddenly an attack that would do zero damage is back onto a normal 2d6 dice roll thanks to his feat.
Out of the Feoras, only Feora 3 is helped by this. The other two have abilities that are centered around causing and moving continuous fire effects around rather than actually doing fire damage, and the models that are still "immune" to fire are still immune to continuous effects from it. Feora 3 is all about pushing up damage, so the +2 to damage from incite on a 1D6 damage roll is interesting and likely significant against lower arm targets. HoJ is also linked into this as he has fuel for the flames.
Cleansers will probably spend all game spraying each other to death. I feel this change is a negative to them, and all other single wound fire immune infantry, as their armour tends to be so weak that even a single dice roll at pow 12 will easily kill them.
Overall it's a really deep change. I think it's a good one for the health of the game, but it's a really complex one with a lot of moving parts to it.
|
|
|
Post by bskhacker on Mar 8, 2018 14:19:30 GMT
I feel that this makes it a fair coast to attack your own guys, presenting an interesting meaningful choice for the player.
For the cleanser they have a 13.889% to hit themselves with rat 5 vs def 11 with ashen Vail. If they do hit then they have a 66.67% to kill one.
Food for thought.
|
|
Hashmal
Junior Strategist
Posts: 557
|
Post by Hashmal on Mar 8, 2018 14:23:59 GMT
Mmm no, it's more like they have a ~60% chance to hit each other. And that's not assuming back arc shots, which until now were common. It's a big change.
|
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Mar 8, 2018 14:26:22 GMT
I feel that this makes it a fair coast to attack your own guys, presenting an interesting meaningful choice for the player. For the cleanser they have a 13.889% to hit themselves with rat 5 vs def 11 with ashen Vail. If they do hit then they have a 66.67% to kill one. Food for thought. Funnily enough, ashen veil doesn't provide them with the defence buff, because they are immune to fire, so it doesnt affect the attack rolls. Amazingly, in the front, they have a 72% chance to hit, ignoring ashen veil thanks to immunity fire. Overall, there's a 48% chance they kill each other with their own sprays.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 8, 2018 14:47:45 GMT
I feel that this makes it a fair coast to attack your own guys, presenting an interesting meaningful choice for the player. For the cleanser they have a 13.889% to hit themselves with rat 5 vs def 11 with ashen Vail. If they do hit then they have a 66.67% to kill one. Food for thought. Funnily enough, ashen veil doesn't provide them with the defence buff, because they are immune to fire, so it doesnt affect the attack rolls. Amazingly, in the front, they have a 72% chance to hit, ignoring ashen veil thanks to immunity fire. Overall, there's a 48% chance they kill each other with their own sprays. Also sprays ignore concealment that's granted by ashen veil. You need to roll a 6 or a 4 if in back arc
|
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Mar 8, 2018 14:54:15 GMT
Funnily enough, ashen veil doesn't provide them with the defence buff, because they are immune to fire, so it doesnt affect the attack rolls. Amazingly, in the front, they have a 72% chance to hit, ignoring ashen veil thanks to immunity fire. Overall, there's a 48% chance they kill each other with their own sprays. Also sprays ignore concealment that's granted by ashen veil. You need to roll a 6 or a 4 if in back arc Basically you're good to go if you're up against cleaners with cleansers
|
|
|
Post by bskhacker on Mar 8, 2018 15:09:52 GMT
Funnily enough, ashen veil doesn't provide them with the defence buff, because they are immune to fire, so it doesnt affect the attack rolls. Amazingly, in the front, they have a 72% chance to hit, ignoring ashen veil thanks to immunity fire. Overall, there's a 48% chance they kill each other with their own sprays. Also sprays ignore concealment that's granted by ashen veil. You need to roll a 6 or a 4 if in back arc Ah dang you're right. I completely forgot. :-\ Even so it can't hurt to test to see how it plays on the table. Maybe it is too much of a coast for particular models/units.
|
|
kaernak
Junior Strategist
Either pray to Menoth or feel his fury. You'll burn either way.
Posts: 172
|
Post by kaernak on Mar 8, 2018 15:20:06 GMT
we were talking among my gaming group about how Nemo3s feat needs to have it's name changed to "The Nuclear Option" because if you are leaping off your own guys you are clearing the whole table.
|
|
|
Post by paradox on Mar 8, 2018 19:08:00 GMT
Their thoughts were to ignore my comment. *let me double check Yep still ignored. So its likely not an issue for them. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. The thread is a mess. They should have probably focused on the immunities change in regards to specific factions at a time (or even several, just not the whole game). They are. They are testing Crucible Guard, which has many models with immunities.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Mar 9, 2018 2:48:27 GMT
we were talking among my gaming group about how Nemo3s feat needs to have it's name changed to "The Nuclear Option" because if you are leaping off your own guys you are clearing the whole table. Yeah gotta love those stealth Cygnar buffs.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Mar 9, 2018 16:39:43 GMT
Over all to me this is a silly change that's really counter intuitive. Immunity should mean IMMUNITY not resistance. If they wanted to make it a resistance then resistance rule should be added to the game and models that they want to have resistance instead of immunity should be changed and re costed accordingly.
Instead PP is getting lazy and trying to shoe horn in a bad fix on top of already balanced and tested models without doing the leg work to properly re-cost and balance the models affected. All so that they can have their cake and eat it to with the new faction. In most cases its a non issue but single wound models are getting kicked in the nuts here and the value of spells like lightning tendrils and animi like acidic touch are being seriously devalued.
I could get behind this change or a similar one but the implementation is just lazy lazy lazy.
|
|
d3z
Junior Strategist
Posts: 129
|
Post by d3z on Mar 9, 2018 19:35:16 GMT
Over all to me this is a silly change that's really counter intuitive. Immunity should mean IMMUNITY not resistance. If they wanted to make it a resistance then resistance rule should be added to the game and models that they want to have resistance instead of immunity should be changed and re costed accordingly. ... I could get behind this change or a similar one but the implementation is just lazy lazy lazy. All good to dislike it, but I think you are being unfair in a couple of places here... RE first paragraph: I think getting hung up over a word is a bit of a waste of energy. Your interpretation of 'immunity' isn't the only one - for example people that work with vaccines probably don't associate the words 'immunity' and '100% effective'. RE second paragraph: On top of CID, we first had this flagged as a potential change for warmachine last year. How much data do you want them to get?
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 9, 2018 21:37:19 GMT
Over all to me this is a silly change that's really counter intuitive. Immunity should mean IMMUNITY not resistance. If they wanted to make it a resistance then resistance rule should be added to the game and models that they want to have resistance instead of immunity should be changed and re costed accordingly. ... I could get behind this change or a similar one but the implementation is just lazy lazy lazy. All good to dislike it, but I think you are being unfair in a couple of places here... RE first paragraph: I think getting hung up over a word is a bit of a waste of energy. Your interpretation of 'immunity' isn't the only one - for example people that work with vaccines probably don't associate the words 'immunity' and '100% effective'. RE second paragraph: On top of CID, we first had this flagged as a potential change for warmachine last year. How much data do you want them to get? Uhmmm you don't seem to understand how vaccines work. Simply put if you get a vaccine you are 100% immune to the thing you took the vaccine against. Effectiveness of a vaccine is how many people that got the vaccine did not suffer the disease. Reasons that a vaccine would not work are weak immune system, the virus evolving into new strain etc, other conditions etc. But if you get a vaccine so strain t6rh74c of flu and your body accepts the vaccine you are 100% immune to it. The effectiveness of the vaccine has nothing to do with you as an individual. You aren't like suddenly only 80% resistant to that specific flu. This not anchor man (60% it works every time) no it works 100% time. You can't argue away the definition of immunity
|
|