|
|
Post by killroundears on Mar 23, 2018 21:19:10 GMT
So i was just wondering how often people automatically went for three free models in list building, or if you scaled back and went with a 2 free model build that's a bit more balanced, even though it effectively "costs" you points that you could have had
Personally i feel a bit stifled in list building if i go for three, but sometimes it genuinely is the most powerful option.
|
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Mar 23, 2018 21:56:42 GMT
I feel like both 2 and 3 are viable and 2 is the minimum amount for a competitive list unless you have a really-really good reason (you probably don't).
Sometimes caster kit has great synergy with that off-bonus model that outweighs the freebie or you just need some mercs for some particular matchup.
|
|
Choco
Junior Strategist
Gorten, best feet in the game.
Posts: 571 
|
Post by Choco on Mar 23, 2018 21:57:37 GMT
I tend to build my lists and am happy with however many free stuff I get. The only time I will think about optimizing like this is when I play Irregulars.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenjello on Mar 23, 2018 22:08:13 GMT
I think this depends on the theme and faction in question. All themes are balanced, some are more balanced than others.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Mar 26, 2018 7:03:55 GMT
It depends on the purpose of the theme list, combined arms vs skew, and how easy/hard it is to get freebies. For instance, in themes that require 30 points of jacks/beasts, I will go between 2 or 3 freebies, depending on how much support I want. Pure infantry themes will almost always have the full 3 freebies, unless I have a good reason to go heavy battle group or support. Combined arms themes, such as the ones that give good bonuses to jacks but free stuff for taking infantry, will usually only see 2 freebies while I flesh out my battle group more. Very rarely there will be a list with 0-1 freebies because a particular caster really likes a theme benefit but doesn't synergise well with the stuff that counts towards free points.
It also somewhat depends on how far off I am from acquiring a bonus, for instance if I am at 56 points in a 20-step theme, then not including 4 extra points costs me about an extra 5. But if those extra points don't fill a particular purpose, then don't feel forced.
|
|
|
|
Post by deathbymelancholy on Mar 26, 2018 11:38:44 GMT
I have never attempted to go all in on three freebies. This might be my factions, Ret and Trolls. Both are pretty hamstrung if you really go hard at the full boat freebies in list building. Ret because their themes are pretty, let's call them lower tier, to be gin with; and Trolls because they want a nice mix of support and actual army, which doesn't allow maximization as well.
Since coming back in mkiii I have yet to find a case personally where going all in on free models is a better choice than army optimization and less freebies.
|
|
Choco
Junior Strategist
Gorten, best feet in the game.
Posts: 571
|
Post by Choco on Mar 26, 2018 15:39:14 GMT
The more I think about it, the more I think Irregulars is the only theme where you can get 4 freebies without trying. It's the most flexible and inclusive theme out there that gets you freebies for just building a list, a balanced list at that! It's a weird situation compared to all the other themes out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 26, 2018 16:32:15 GMT
The more I think about it, the more I think Irregulars is the only theme where you can get 4 freebies without trying. It's the most flexible and inclusive theme out there that gets you freebies for just building a list, a balanced list at that! It's a weird situation compared to all the other themes out there. And that is one of the reasons why it is so often suggested as an option for everyone else. It is easy to build what you want, and how you want it. Admittedly, the point value to allow it to provide the freebies is a little low when compared to other Themes, especially when 'Jacks are allowed to affect it. The benefits aren't huge unless you like Jack Marshalls, but helpful. My Skorne collection doesn't currently fit with any Theme because most of it comes from the Clearance shelf. I have a Cetrati unit I got before Mk 3, and I just got a Reavers unit for a pittance (LGS is clearing out all their product with only Mk 2 cards). The problem is I cannot use them together in any theme (and probably wouldn't outside of theme, Slingers work better with Cetrati). |
|
boozy
Junior Strategist
Posts: 429
|
Post by boozy on Mar 28, 2018 11:53:48 GMT
The core arguments have already been mentioned, in that it mostly comes down to the particulars of a given theme and warlock. I can get four free solos without really trying in WWFF (I imagine it's the same in Irregulars). With my Rask list of choice, I only get three.
In Skorne, I can get three free solos in Immortals easily in Immortals with the Zaals, but since I prefer to run them with Makeda2 (focusing on keeping the Advocates alive and actually using her spellkit) or Zaadesh2, I usually only get two, because of heavier beast loadout in the latter.
|
|
|
|
Post by redcathal on Mar 28, 2018 15:45:16 GMT
The more I think about it, the more I think Irregulars is the only theme where you can get 4 freebies without trying. It's the most flexible and inclusive theme out there that gets you freebies for just building a list, a balanced list at that! It's a weird situation compared to all the other themes out there. Kaya1 or 3 COTW lists is pretty easy as well, particularly prime with her 32 beast points |
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Mar 29, 2018 9:36:41 GMT
I think that a lot of people don't go for the more balanced version because there's a perceived risk or opportunity cost - working your list to get a free solo is an immediate benefit that you can quantify.
"I spent X points and got three free Y"
Compared to the statement:
"I got two free Y, but then spent X points on a unit/solo/jack for this idea I have that I have to justify over a free Y".
An example of one I often contend with is in exemplar interdiction. Don't analyse the numbers too hard as this is just an example.
If I try to harvest three free slots, I need to put in a minimum of something like three units of Knights exemplar and then two units of errants, and then be really strict with my jack points. If I was to put in a unit of idrians however, to take advantage of prey, reposition, all the good stuff, I lose out on a free card and suddenly have to lose a solo or ua somewhere which might be implicit to how other models function.
Quite often the list with idrians is REALLY good, but that initial look in warroom to see 2/2 Vs 3/3 can be off-putting.
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on Mar 31, 2018 21:56:56 GMT
I personally go for 2 free as a goal, and anything above it a bonus. It probably isn't quite optimal due to playing 3-7 points down, but I want to play the guys I like playing and it gets quite restrictive at maxed out free. With my mercs I am lucky with irregulars, however even then if I want a lesser warlock, it'll cost me a free solo (which I find a very tough choice in mercs), making the actual cost of a lesser around 20 points instead of their normal price. To be honest, if they capped out all of the freebies to 1 or 2, I wouldn't mind at all. Any given match-up being able to differ by up to 20 odd points in a 75+WJ game is a bit silly imo. Taking the mercs as an example the current ranges versus a hard limit: Ranges of Merc Freebies
| No Theme
| Irregulars Max
| | Now | 0 | 25 | 3 Max
| 0 | 19 | 2 Max
| 0 | 13
| 1 Max
| 0 | 7 |
Of course, everyone has themes so the differences aren't the full 25, but someone taking only two free is still potentially getting half as much as someone playing a full 4 theme, at about 10% difference on total points. However, by tightening the range with a hard limit at an fairly achievable level (like 2), it should also decrease the variation of free points in list building, thus bringing the different themes more in line with each other (as well as making theme-less slightly more viable). Playing 5 down because you took two 4 points freebies to someone else's 7+6 combo feels a lot better in my mind than playing up to 19 down from absent guys because your theme gives out freebies less easily (all this assuming points being of equal value between themes and factions of course). It could very well be that the variation of free points is a sort of balancing mechanism between factions (Merc tax? Theme force with give you tons of freebies!) but it causes disparity within the faction as a side effect (Eg is a rubble terrain, two special units and pathfinder (Llael) worth 1 or 2 solos + flank on marshal'd jacks + advanced move on some heavies + much more choice when list building).
The current system just feels like it punishes people for playing what they like even more so than the focus on themes (which are almost mandatory because of the freebies on top of the other bonuses) already does. Even if the one or two solos/UAs might not actually matter that much in the actual game, I'm sure that just the feeling that you are being forced to build a certain way is detrimental to some players.
|
|
gordo
Junior Strategist
My star is green?
Posts: 548
|
Post by gordo on Apr 1, 2018 18:06:29 GMT
I think most people miss "the point" on "why themes". It has little to do with fluff or "restricting choices": it's how PP strives to balance things now because of the enormity of the "base factions". That's how it is "good for players". The idea of trying to make every model meaningful, much less delivering "army balance" would be basically impossible without them. It's already pretty daunting as is. But they couldn't just say "sorry player base, all your armies are illegal", so they made "themeless armies" still legal, but the power differential between in-theme and out-of-theme that PP can mostly just ignore balancing a model across an entire faction because the "broken combo" would have to be so wildly egregious it has to make up for roughly 15-20 points + powerful special rules.
Summarized: we should all be grateful and embrace themes because without them we would be back in Mk2-land, where there is almost no reason to play over half the models in your faction because they are out-classed by your other choices. Yes, they are less fun from a list building perspective, but the alternative is so much worse it doesn't really matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by dogganmguest on Apr 1, 2018 21:19:30 GMT
I would like to see any evidence that themes are providing this at all. In legion, there are four themes. If PP releases a new flying or nephilim beast, it has to be balanced for three themes. If it's both, four themes. If they add a new character beast, it needs to be tested in all themes with the bonded caster(s), and potentially with every caster in a native theme. They've divided up the infantry in a stunningly poor way, with most themes having almost no options, and one theme having damn near everything. From a legion perspective, this idea that themes are about reducing the test surface to provide better balance just sounds like a load of shit, or wishful thinking at best.
|
|
|
|
Post by tapecrawler on Apr 1, 2018 22:56:40 GMT
Themes feel like a push to get people to buy lots of models they wouldn’t otherwise. Instead of having a balanced list that is more of an all comers list, now you have to take more than one list to cover the glaring holes produced by a theme list. I’m viewing this through a Khador red colored lens and so when I look at themes like Legion of Steel it seems like an unabashed push to sell as many Iron Fang models to the exclusion of everything else. But because it has no ranged presence and is made up mainly of squishy single wound infantry, I have to buy into another to cover the weaknesses that won’t use a single model from the LegoS list. And PP saying that it’s too hard to balance a new model/unit in with the entirety of the faction is bullshit. For one that’s their job, and for another that’s why they created the CID process was to beta test and further refine the rules. Maybe it’s a bit of sour grapes on my part but Khador was designed (or at least played like it was designed) to be a combined arms army where there was a synergy between the models that is lacking in this edition. Now if it has a Keyword on it’s card then it is probably only available in one theme, examples: Iron Fang, Kayazy, Doom Reavers, Man-O-War, Assault Kommando, and Winter Guard. That’s just lazy and smacks of GW’s Keywords style of design.
|
|
