AoS Nearly invincible Saurus Guard, Maybe?(just for fun)

would only going to 2 wounds make them more reasonable?

 

the thing is pague monks are stuped broken they are twice as killy as the next best unit by cost and every one hates playing against them i don't wan't that for seraphon

 

it would be 1.16... points per wound still almost twice as good if they only had a 3+ 3++ saves and 3 wounds it would be 1.55 witch is much closer to fair if they where 180 for 5 i think that would be good

 

Honestly, it is going to be hard to find the right balance for guard. I think 2 wounds, and 180ish points is closer if we have the built in battalion buffs and look to tweak the battalion.

I think the bigger issue is that with mortal wounds being so prolific, it makes balancing saves, wounds and points kind of a nightmare. Really, I think mortal wounds should be FAR rarer than they currently are, with more attacks having various rend values. If you look at a mortal wound as a rend 5 attack, it'd probably seem weird how many things would have rend -5, and so few have rend 2, 3 or 4.

 

thats fair my suggestion makes them still tankeyer then berserkers wich was the original point but only by .24 points a wound so much better i agree an your mortal wound asesment

 

I still think it would just be cool if they had an additional 6+ save against MW but I digress(

 

I think if they are kept as they currently are (1W, 2+ in battalion, 80pts/5, etc.), I think a 6+ save against MW would be fine to toss on top. It doesn't do much most of the time, but is a nice little perk that makes them slightly tankier.

 

I really don't like this rule. It's awkward in use due to the whole "stand still" bit while at the same time the pay-off when you do manage to actually stand still for once is ridiculously massive.10 3+/3+/-1/D3 attacks is obscene. And that's just a minimum sized squad with no other buffs.

If I got to rework them I'd make them as follows:

5" move, 3 wounds, 10 bravery 4+ save

jaws: 1/4+/4+/-/1
Polearms: 2/3+/3+/-1/1

- Shields: reduce rend of incoming attacks by 1.
- Banner & drums as they are now.
- Eternal guardians: 6+ FNP

- Sworn protectors: Whenever an enemy unit targets a friendly seraphon hero with any ability, spell or attack, roll a dice for every guard unit within 5" of the seraphon hero. On a 4+ it must target that guard unit instead. Any target restrictions that would normally prevent the guards from being affected do not apply.
- Vengefull guardians: Whenever an enemy unit wounds a friendly seraphon hero with any ability, spell or attack, roll a dice for every guard model within 3" of this enemy. On a 5+ the guard attacks this enemy as if it were the combat phase.​

Eternal starhost:
- +1 to the FNP
- Duty eternal: A mortally wounded guard will fullfill his duty till his dying breath. Do not remove a guard who's slain until the start of the battleshock phase. The guard can be used as normal, however no new wounds can be assigned to it (and it can't be healed).

pointcost: 120-150-ish per 5 models. No discounts. Max size 15

It makes em the single best protective units in the game. Allowing them to actually be guards. They'd be extremely difficult to kill. But they'd also draw an absurd amount of firepower to them which should balance it out.

Now add in some decent synergies with the warden and it'd be briljant.​

 

Also, don't place so much value on cost efficiency and things like average points/wounds. It's a very one-dimensional measure and thanks to how statistics work can lead to some peculiar false equivalencies. Not to mention it gets thrown completly out of the window when taking into account synergies, or worse how the meta has developed and what the meta ends up valueing..

 

never balance for the meta... that's how games fail. make the meta evolve to your balancing. its why STARCRAFT one did so well and is considered one of the best balanced multiplayer games of all time.

 

I'm not saying balance to keep the meta happy, I'm saying take into account the effects that your changes will have on the meta and try to predict how the meta will evolve. LoL is a great example of this where they frequently seem to balance things in a vacuum. Where they'l nerf the regen of a champion cuz he heals to much, ignoring the fact that his healing comes from the fact that he half of the items he has contain lifesteal so that nerf is utterly meaningless 2 minutes into the game. Hence, don't just balance around statistics like cost-efficiency and how it measures up against other similar units/champions/items/whatever, look at how stuff is actually used and what it has to interact with.

 

I don't i use it as a inishal starting place if it is horably broken in this stage very little can fix it. if points per wounds are of by 3 times synergies don't matter and that's if you don't account for them in the first place. you are right it's not the end all be all but it's a quick and dirty way to gage power.
in this case its relevant because we where comparing a fully buffed unit to a barely buffed unit and the difference was so huge as to be untenable.

 

I kind of think Guards should never have 3 wounds. 2 is fine, but it's Knights that should go up to 3.

The resilience of Guard should be depicted in their save or a FNP. I feel that 3 wounds might raise some eyebrows in terms of how small the model is comparison to its number of wounds.

On the other hand, if we got some new beefcake Guard sculpts on 40mm bases...

 

SCE paladins have 3, and they're only taller cuz they stand up straight instead of the saurus' hunched pose.

You'd be surprised how bad a gauge statistical comparisons like these can be. Even as a rough indication you should be carefull with them.

Admittadly I do agree that @ILKAIN 's initial suggestion was way over the top, though not cuz of point-efficiency. Any unit with 15 wounds and a 2+/3++, and acces to potential re-rolls is going to be stupidly difficult to kill. That's more than enough to realisticly survive the onslaught of an entire army for 5 turns and is going to be broken pretty much no matter what downsides it has.

 

yes when taken in a vakume it doesn't account for number of models, speed, acses to teleport, command ability, whether they fly, healing, coming back from the dead, bravery, spells, or general shenanigans. if you ignore all of these then terrorgists are middle of the rode. this is not the end this is a starting point. but if point comparisons didn't matter points would have little meaning as well. what this can tell you is don't stand next to that unit or don't charge that one they will kill you. and if at the start of it all you find out that you can bring 165 wounds worth of unkillable doom lizards it has done it's job.

 

Skink Starpriest has 4 wounds and is smaller than both guard knights and paladins... Just saying

 

In fairness heroes do follow a slightly different paradigm we should probably stick to similar types of units for this comparison to make any sense

 

Paladins might not he taller, but they're definitely larger in general, and are on 40mm bases to boot.

The Starpriest is also a hero. If heroes had the same amount of wounds as a model from an equivalent unit then the game wouldn't work very well.

You might say that if it's about game balance then why does Guard having three wounds matter? The same reason a Starpriest only has four wounds to most heroes' five: it makes sense as he's a skinny lizard who is decidedly smaller than most other heroes.

 

The size difference is actually rather minor. They appear a bit broader, but that's cuz they have stupidly big pauldrons that go up till their elbows when they stretch their arms out. They appear a bit taller, but that's cuz they stand up straight and saurus guard are hunched. However their limbs are of roughly the same thickness (and that includes the SCE's armour) their hands are the same size, their weapons & shields are of a similar scale. Their chests are about as thick. And saurus of course have a tail so they're a bit longer in that direction. And that's of course ignoring the fluff that the average saurus is literally a 2.5 meter tall giant lizard & guard are a bit taller still. Unless SCE are basicly Giants they're not gonna be taller by any significant measure

It also doesn't help that SCE stand in wide dynamic poses; back straight, arms stretched out, wide legs swinging weapons or blocking with their shield. While basicly all saurus models stand hunched over shield and weapon close to their bodies. There's two reasons for this. 1) Saurus models are old and from a time where ranking up models was important (WHFB). So they couldn't take too much space. Whereas in AoS ranking up is no longer an issue so models can have nice dynamic poses. and 2) Generally speaking new AoS models are larger than their WHFB counterparts as larger models allows for more details and, again, more dynamic poses. And newer production techniques allow GW to actually take advantage of this. It's especially noticeable with regular saurus. An average saurus is supposed to be 2.5m tall. But an auric runemaster (a dwarf) is a larger model. Now the runemaster does have a giant helmet, but I don't think the helmet supposed to be well over a meter tall….

A skink standing up straight is supposed to be similar in size and weight to a human. And being a magic space dinosaur has some inherent advantages in terms of strength/durability that negate the need for armour. So no, he isn't any more scrawny than the average hero.

Anyway, long story short, the reason our models are relativly small is cuz they're old and WHFB generally needed smaller models due to the ranking system. Also better techniques now allow them to take advantage of the bigger models (more details, easier to build etc.) In general the further you go back in time the smaller models were. The reason for our relative low wound count is simply because when our battletome was written we could freely summon anything and everything so to have some semblance of balance stuff's just low on wounds. And since we haven't had a complete rewrite yet, and only bandaid solutions to try and keep us in the game, that hasn't changed yet.

 

mmm a lot of game wide changes like that have really hurt us without meaning to paired with targeted nerfs it's a wounder we do as well as we do.