|
Post by hocestbellum on Jan 11, 2019 13:16:00 GMT
I did notice that you had more Primal Terrors lists than players at the WTC, and something like 70% of that was Anamag. A few Kallus, some Fyanna...
Which warlock can run PT well? Is there scope to switch it up with some slightly more unusual Warlock choices? Do you have to run a Blightbringer?
In Khador pretty much everyone jumped on Vlad2 for Armoured Corps (Possibly because of Chris Davies mentioning it on MoM and then piloting it to victory), but there's strong arguments for at least 10 different casters running it well.
Or is it more that Anamag is so much better than the rest of the field?
|
|
|
Post by voidbender on Jan 11, 2019 13:36:12 GMT
I did notice that you had more Primal Terrors lists than players at the WTC, and something like 70% of that was Anamag. A few Kallus, some Fyanna... Which warlock can run PT well? Is there scope to switch it up with some slightly more unusual Warlock choices? Do you have to run a Blightbringer? In Khador pretty much everyone jumped on Vlad2 for Armoured Corps (Possibly because of Chris Davies mentioning it on MoM and then piloting it to victory), but there's strong arguments for at least 10 different casters running it well. Or is it more that Anamag is so much better than the rest of the field? It's not that Anamag is so much better, but she's solvably better. The differences are such that people are able to confidently assess them and generally come to the same conclusion regardless of preferred playstyle.
|
|
gordo
Junior Strategist
My star is green?
Posts: 548
|
Post by gordo on Jan 11, 2019 16:59:05 GMT
In my meta, we see pretty much PT only, and the differences are really what caster you dropped into it. Like the pairing will be "Kallus PT" and "Anamag PT", or "Thagrosh PT" and "Fyanna PT"
Occasionally you will see someone play a beast focused list as their "off list", but those get played only like 1 out of 5 games.
PT lists all look the same and are kinda boring and themselves thematically uninteresting (if I wanted heavy infantry, Legion is the last faction I would look to). The rest of the themes are mediocre at best unless I run a build that requires 2-3 huge based 100+ dollar kits... So... Skorne it is.
Aside: I find it amusing/ironic/depressing that my Skorne lists are mostly better served to run our huge bases, but even if I don't they are still better than their Legion equivalents. Except, of course, heavy infantry, which is even more ironic because Skorne is an army that (to me) thematically screams heavy infantry.
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Jan 11, 2019 20:22:13 GMT
Our local legion player is currently trialing a ravens list. Its got some good punch to it but needs to engineer the alpha strike or it starts to fall flat. conflictchamber.com/#ca201b_-0lg-kOaMaMfIebcocobdb9aYaYfTLegion Army - 75 / 75 points [Theme] Ravens of War [Kallus 2] Kallus, Devastation of Everblight [+28] - Archangel [35] - Raek [8] - Raek [8] Bog Trog Mist Speaker [4] Fyanna the Lash [0(5)] Spell Martyr [1] Spell Martyr [1] Strider Deathstalker [0(4)] The Forsaken [4] Blighted Nyss Raptors (max) [18] Blighted Nyss Raptors (max) [18] Hellmouth [6]
|
|
|
Post by albertairish on Jan 12, 2019 5:34:16 GMT
I've been trying to sell my Legion at 20% of retail. So 1/5 of what it would cost new.
Not a single bite or even inquiry. If it's not Primal Terrors, it's worthless right now.
Grymkin beast bricks do exactly what I remember Legion doing so well in MKII. Legion beast bricks don't do anything well right now.
|
|
|
Post by fanbloodytastic on Jan 12, 2019 16:18:29 GMT
I understand the complaints in this thread, but I still think Oracles is in a good spot as a theme force and I have been using a double oracles pairing. The changes to the archangel and the points decrease on land sharks opened up quite a few more options.
I still haven’t settled on the second list but Abby1 is my main list. I am aiming to try Lylyth3 as the paired list next but I haven’t taken that one out for a game at this point.
Abby1 is in a really good place and is heaps of fun. I would highly recommend her for anyone who is looking to run a more classic legion list.
|
|
|
Post by zotz204 on Jan 12, 2019 17:39:54 GMT
I understand the complaints in this thread, but I still think Oracles is in a good spot as a theme force and I have been using a double oracles pairing. The changes to the archangel and the points decrease on land sharks opened up quite a few more options. I still haven’t settled on the second list but Abby1 is my main list. I am aiming to try Lylyth3 as the paired list next but I haven’t taken that one out for a game at this point. Abby1 is in a really good place and is heaps of fun. I would highly recommend her for anyone who is looking to run a more classic legion list. While I agree that Oracles definitely feels like classic Legion, and I definitely feel that it functions, especially with the Abbys, I have some issues with it. My big problem with it is that it doesn’t provide any boost to our beasts (compare to stuff like Black Industries or the two Circle beast themes). Plus the point threshold for free models is crazy high and feels like it was a knee-jerk change, especially now that PT has become so dominant (Everyone in 2017 is only playing Oracles? Let’s nerf it rather than buff the other stuff so that everyone will still just play mostly it, only without as much stuff). The other issue is the intended role of the theme. If you look st the fluff for it, it wants to be the “magic and spawning vessel” theme. Whenever I make an Oracles list, it feels like I am building it wrong to force it to feel like old Legion. It feels less like the beast theme and more like the theme that just happens to let me run beasts. These are all personal issues that I have with the theme, though. I definitely prefer it to the cookie-cutter nature of PT or the...unpleasantness of trying to make CotD/Ravens lists.
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Jan 13, 2019 21:33:08 GMT
We definitely needs a Beast theme, and a Nyss theme with access to all heavy warbeasts.
It's not normal that we have to spend 3+ years without any way to build beasts-heavy lists with buffs to the battlegroups, or any way to play 2/3 of our units choice with no restrictions on battle group. Especially now that playing in theme is the given de-facto standard.
I can't understand why PP is not even able to fix this. Maybe it's difficult to re-design pVayl, pSaeryn, Betty and the like to be fun and fair to play in mk3. But is it that hard to just setup 2 themes that allow us to build theme without crying blood, in 3 fracking years ?
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Jan 13, 2019 21:36:54 GMT
We definitely needs a Beast theme, and a Nyss theme with access to all heavy warbeasts. It's not normal that we have to spend 3+ years without any way to build beasts-heavy lists with buffs to the battlegroups, or any way to play 2/3 of our units choice with no restrictions on battle group. Especially now that playing in theme is the given de-facto standard. I can't understand why PP is not even able to fix this. Maybe it's difficult to re-design pVayl, pSaeryn, Betty and the like to be fun and fair to play in mk3. But is it that hard to just setup 2 themes that allow us to build theme without crying blood, in 3 fracking years ? I believe they don't give a damn since models for those themes were already sold. Clearly we are not priority for them.
|
|
|
Post by jansuza on Jan 14, 2019 17:07:35 GMT
I dunno, I still feel as if we have a quite a few viable builds that I'm constantly switching between. Other than Ravens, I like a few of them. Currently I'm oscillating between all of the below:
Fyanna Flying Circus Oracles Abby2 Oracles Lylyth 3 Oracles Thagrosh1 CotD Lylyth 1 Raptors CotD Fyanna PT Anamag PT
I personally feel as if that's quite a lot of variation in play style. Sure some of the lists are probably a bit out of the meta now, but they still work just fine most of the time, and there's enough variation to keep me interested still.
We've recently also started playing a 50pt league at my LGC, and that's actually gotten quite a bit of interest, as it means we are starting fresh with list building. Lots of interesting ideas to try out, and it's nice to play with less toys and focus more on the minutiae.
|
|
|
Post by maneck on Jan 16, 2019 22:04:59 GMT
We definitely needs a Beast theme, and a Nyss theme with access to all heavy warbeasts. It's not normal that we have to spend 3+ years without any way to build beasts-heavy lists with buffs to the battlegroups, or any way to play 2/3 of our units choice with no restrictions on battle group. Especially now that playing in theme is the given de-facto standard. I can't understand why PP is not even able to fix this. Maybe it's difficult to re-design pVayl, pSaeryn, Betty and the like to be fun and fair to play in mk3. But is it that hard to just setup 2 themes that allow us to build theme without crying blood, in 3 fracking years ? I believe they don't give a damn since models for those themes were already sold. Clearly we are not priority for them. There are other factions in worse shape. conflictchamber.com/?event=651There's a big drop between Primal Terrors and Oracles, but they both see play at tournaments. CoD actually gets play too - largely thanks to how good Raptors are and that that they make an effective counter to PT. It's a case of everyone knowing that Legion's theme design is awful outside of PT, but it being possible to ignore the supposed theme benefits and thereby construct effective lists. Assuming Privateer survives as a business, they'll get back to Legion. Probably Ravens of War - but maybe, just maybe, they'll do a proper beasts theme.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Jan 17, 2019 8:34:44 GMT
I understand the complaints in this thread, but I still think Oracles is in a good spot as a theme force and I have been using a double oracles pairing. The changes to the archangel and the points decrease on land sharks opened up quite a few more options. I still haven’t settled on the second list but Abby1 is my main list. I am aiming to try Lylyth3 as the paired list next but I haven’t taken that one out for a game at this point. Abby1 is in a really good place and is heaps of fun. I would highly recommend her for anyone who is looking to run a more classic legion list. Oracles is only good because of its unrestricted beast access that gives you free points. Its got buffs for infantry (yeah, they work on Blight Wasps, but who wants to bring those every time). I would argue its only "good" because its the only "beast" theme Legion has. Personally, I hate Oracles with a passion. It does nothing for your beasts whatsoever. You could literally run the same list out of theme (assuming you don't try to go magic heavy) and you'll lose out on like, 3 support models.
|
|
|
Post by fanbloodytastic on Jan 17, 2019 13:52:57 GMT
I really don’t get the hate on oracles theme benefits. Starting with upkeep’s up is useful for multiple casters and the apparition benefit is really good for the 1 or 2 units of infantry that the scenario packs basically require you to take anyways. Black frost shard, ice witches and hex hunters are all good units that benefit from apparition.
I was trying to play out of theme for a while but you have to find an amazing synergy to overcome losing out on ~10+ points
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Jan 17, 2019 14:52:27 GMT
Probably. There are also other factions in better shape. Also, it's kinda hard to judge from this kind of data. I'll take one example with my other faction, Khador. Khador at least have all infantry available in at least one theme with zero restriction on BG. Legion can't play nyss (2/3rd of our infantry choices) without hard restrictions on BG (either all-flying or all-nephilims). The only infantry we can play without BG restriction are 1/ ogruns (okayish but maybe not what you like in Legion, and certainly not a lot of gameplay) and 2/ magical units (if you remove support units, you end up with 2 choices !). #designspace In the end Khador only play 3 themes with one dominating all the others (almost like Legion), but that just might be the proof of another problem, like maybe the whole Theme-oriented gameplay sucks and restrict game space too much. Or maybe it's okay. Anyway it's not the same problem as the one that bother me with Legion. I really don’t get the hate on oracles theme benefits As far as I'm concerned I find it's a good theme. The unit choices and bonus are good and fit the theme. Maybe free points should be granted only for magical units/BEs taken. The problem is more that currently it's our only warbeast-point-rewarding theme with no restriction, so it must assume another role altogether (our generic beast heavy build), in which case the bonus kinda suck yeah.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Jan 18, 2019 6:13:34 GMT
I really don’t get the hate on oracles theme benefits. Starting with upkeep’s up is useful for multiple casters and the apparition benefit is really good for the 1 or 2 units of infantry that the scenario packs basically require you to take anyways. Black frost shard, ice witches and hex hunters are all good units that benefit from apparition. I was trying to play out of theme for a while but you have to find an amazing synergy to overcome losing out on ~10+ points None of Legion's casters really have issues getting out their upkeeps. Yeah, its nice, but its nothing to bank on. Apparition is good, but it directly conflicts with the points generation. If Oracle's free points came from BEs and units, I wouldn't see a problem. Legion is more or less designed to work in harmony with one another, and arguably has the worst design space for Theme Forces. Legion doesn't really have "mini-factions", and all the units are supposed to be much more cohesive as a whole than other factions. I'm surprised you AREN'T finding worth-while synergy in the faction.
|
|