|
Post by challenger on Aug 31, 2018 9:48:36 GMT
Thats cool and i do feel pow 14 is really low for a main gun. Infact to my mind i can not think of any other huge base with as low a main gun. Let me present to you the Archangel then... the AA has ROF d3+1 instead of Reload[1] and its still bad too
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Aug 31, 2018 9:51:54 GMT
I'm fine with being told "because we don't want to" but I'm not okay with bullshit. Yeah it annoys me too when they say stuff that is patently not true.
When they made the e-leap change they said 'it was interacting with models in a way that was unforeseen'... Really? for 15 years the way e-leaps worked was unforeseen?!!!
I would respect them more if they just said 'We don't want it to work like that anymore'
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Aug 31, 2018 9:52:50 GMT
Let me present to you the Archangel then... the AA has ROF d3+1 instead of Reload[1] and its still bad too Exactly my point.
|
|
chuggyg
Junior Strategist
Posts: 474
|
Post by chuggyg on Aug 31, 2018 12:41:35 GMT
Long story short, its a "we're too lazy to try and balance across themes and while we made exception with the casters released for other factions before this CID this is where we're drawing the line," response. What do you mean by this? Khador, Protectorate, and Legion all introduced new casters requiring model types to unlock their kit. Whats wrong with that in Circle? All 3 of those casters are very playable outside of their designated themes. I've made arguments elsewhere on the board that Khador's and Menoth's casters are actually much better outside their designated theme than they are within it. Iona loses the vast majority of what she does by playing outside of theme, rather than a single ability.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Aug 31, 2018 12:58:13 GMT
Thats cool and i do feel pow 14 is really low for a main gun. Infact to my mind i can not think of any other huge base with as low a main gun. Let me present to you the Archangel then... That's the comparison everyone is making and including the point that the AA just isn't played so lets please not let the raptor share the same fate. Biggest shame is that they're both two of the coolest models in the entire game from a aesthetic perspective.
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Aug 31, 2018 13:16:17 GMT
The issue withe the archangel is also a not-minor one...10" range ( vs 12" of the raptor) on the gun meaning that whatever you shoot and has at least 13" threat range (vs 15" for the bird), it will charge the archangel in return and probably kill it. 13" is somewhat trivial...15" is reserved for tge fastest heavys...probably under some form of feat as well. Food for thought...
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Aug 31, 2018 13:39:55 GMT
While I hate it in theory, in practice I sort of like the results. There is no way Iona would be half as solid as she is if she was available to the whole faction, the same with Bradigus. With this in mind, I would rather have a powerful caster in his / her niche than a washed out caster who can play in everything. They have stated that Iona has to be tharn only on her feat because she would be OP with wolves of orboros. Can you get a link to this? I feel it is total BS. POW 12 WM for one turn with a feat AND a mini-feat break the game?
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Aug 31, 2018 13:50:41 GMT
While I hate it in theory, in practice I sort of like the results. There is no way Iona would be half as solid as she is if she was available to the whole faction, the same with Bradigus. With this in mind, I would rather have a powerful caster in his / her niche than a washed out caster who can play in everything. They have stated that Iona has to be tharn only on her feat because she would be OP with wolves of orboros. I don't really see how she would be OP with Wolves. Yeah they become pow 12 weaponmasters, but that is not out of the ordinary, and as it is only for a single turn I don't see it being an issue.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Aug 31, 2018 14:58:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by leotherat on Aug 31, 2018 15:20:33 GMT
You're going to have to cut and paste the statement for those of use without access to the CID boards, please.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Aug 31, 2018 15:24:27 GMT
Lol, when was the last time anyone saw Wolves on the table? I can understand they want her to be a Tharn focused caster, but using the rationale that she would make WOO too good as an excuse is pathetic tbh.
A +6 damage swing for Ogryn War Spears with 2 attacks each is fine, but +3 for WOO is too much! what a flippin joke!
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Aug 31, 2018 16:14:34 GMT
Lol, when was the last time anyone saw Wolves on the table? I can understand they want her to be a Tharn focused caster, but using the rationale that she would make WOO too good as an excuse is pathetic tbh.
A +6 damage swing for Ogryn War Spears with 2 attacks each is fine, but +3 for WOO is too much! what a flippin joke!
They only had to make that statement because “no” is met with “why noy?” Just saying “we want her to play with tharn and designed her for that theme” should be enough to get people to stop whining but it doesnt. Does it matter if theres a rules interraction that breaks it or not if PP only wants Iona to be played with Tharn?
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Aug 31, 2018 16:26:05 GMT
Lol, when was the last time anyone saw Wolves on the table? I can understand they want her to be a Tharn focused caster, but using the rationale that she would make WOO too good as an excuse is pathetic tbh.
A +6 damage swing for Ogryn War Spears with 2 attacks each is fine, but +3 for WOO is too much! what a flippin joke!
They only had to make that statement because “no” is met with “why noy?” Just saying “we want her to play with tharn and designed her for that theme” should be enough to get people to stop whining but it doesnt. Does it matter if theres a rules interraction that breaks it or not if PP only wants Iona to be played with Tharn? People are not complaining about being told no, they are complaining about the response treating us like unthinking infants. PP does this quite often. There have been countless rules interactions (knocked over models and gang for example) where PP says "working as intended" and then a month later changes everything. In a similar situation, they are just feeding crap to us as a reason for why they don't want to make a change to Iona's feat. To reiterate, I have no problem with her feat being locked at this point, but I do think the excuse of the Wolves of orboros is laughable.
IMO, PP should simply say "we don't want to change this" end of story. I would respect them a lot more for that type of answer, than an answer which isn't possibly true. Not to mentioned, if it was true then I fear for the future of warma/hordes as they are out of touch with their own game.
|
|
|
Post by bloodhawk on Aug 31, 2018 16:27:14 GMT
Back on topic, I am very happy with the direction they are taking the faction overall. While I have some minor gripes I do think that we are well on our way to having a solid theme in both COTW and Dev Host.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Aug 31, 2018 16:37:09 GMT
Well they have changed too much in the past not to change her now without good reason. I have yet to see a reason on the virtues of this mini-mini-faction BS.
|
|