AoS Let's talk about nerfs and buffs from 3.0

Oh it definitely helps. The thing about Warriors is they have all of the above not just one or two of the benefits they have more bodies than our dinosaurs they have more durability than everything except knights and knights don't play well in large units.

 

Kroak's already busy casting other stuff though. It's the same issue the EoTG has when used for healing, you're sacrificing the role it normally is trying to fullfill in order to be able to heal.

The priest heal is indeed good, but its too new so I simply forgot it existed But it definitly opens up possibilities as it's actually reliable and doesn't go against the priests' normal role.

Compared to skinks, yes. Not compared to knights, guards, most of our heroes, most of our behemoths, kroxigor, salamanders, Kroxigor. We got quite a lot of stuff that starts with a 4+ save, and since none of our defense buffs are saurus warrior specific you can simply swap them out for any of the others and achieve comparable results in terms of survivability.

 

if you ignore cav not functioning well in units bigger than 5(we have known this forever) and model count Knights ARE just as good an anvil /s (credit where its due this is the best option you put forward)
well sure if you ignore bravery, wounds, and model count salamanders are just the same /s
if you ignore model count, damage potential and cost guard are the same /s
if you ignore model count, charge bonus(in order to actually get in combat looking at you basti), sustainability, wound count our non hero monsters ARE just the same /s
if you ignore cost, max unit size, much bigger coherency problems and model count then krox ARE just the same( granted they do have 2 more wounds but for a almost 50% cost increas they had better) /s
if you ignore wounds, model count, hero limits(we need our hero slots) and foot print heros are just as good at being anvils. /s
don't know why you mentioned krox twice

huh considering most of the options you put forward are at a wounds defisit(one of the main components of a durable anvil) and all of the ones you mentioned are at a model defisit and other problems beyond that im going to say no. just having a 4+ save does not make everything in our army just as good at being a anvil.
now this is not to say warriors are better then all the above. most have a speed advantage some have range attacks and our heroes are heroes. they all do very well at their jobs but that does not make them a good anvil. good anvils need high wound count on top of good defence and they really like high model count forcing your opponent to fight them instead of just standing on the same objective. it also helps if they can hit back hard if needed this is the main problem with bastiladons they just get tar pitted

 

Sure, but if you really need to heal bastiladon, you can forego other stuff. In fact, I rarely needed to heal bastiladon, because good opponents try to foucs on other stuff. If bastiladon dies, it is usually because no one left to heal one for me. Or he is one-shot but super-strong stuff. Loss of reroll 1's will hurt quite a bit though.

 

Question. Let say I am bring Gotrek in my seraphon army. Can I bring other units , say Cities of Sigmar, as my allies ?

 

Doesn't Gotrek's scroll say "if you take gotrek you cannot take any other allies?"

 

On the subject of Gotrek, I've seen various theory-crafted lists using him floating around ye olde webs, and I could have sworn one of them listed him as being 430 points. I'm aware that not everybody plays with the Pitched Battles Battlepack, but the maximum ally points for a 2,000 point game is 400 (and there are no rules for games larger than that). Are people jus talking about him in terms of Narrative or Open play?

 

You can take a megagargant or a dread saurian as an ally and both of us are over 500 points

 

"You can include Gotrek Gurnisson as an allied unit in any army that is a faction front the Order Grand Alliance. If you do so, you cannot include any other allied units in the army. You can include Gotrek Gurnisson in a Pitched Battle or Meeting Engagement army even if his points cost exceeds the amount allowed for allied units."

 

So now I'm curious with all the talk of allies, is it going to be objectively better to be using Cities units in our armies now than just going pure Seraphon? Or will lizards only still be the best army?

 

yes us taking cities heroes is going to very much be the best way to run seraphon. they give us the good spells we lack and a lot of suport and roll filling we just can't do any more

 

Well, that's rather unfortunate on the one hand, that we'll need units from other armies to function at the best possible level. But on the other hand a lot of people like running armies with allies so I guess it's a give and take

 

this is nothing new. allies have always been the best way to run most armies, they plug holes that your army has. the only reason we havent been doing that so far is that our allies where the worst armies in order. now we have a good ally in cities and we can join every one else at the table.

 

While allies from Cities are a strong addition, they are by no means mandatory. After about 10 games I feel very comfortable.

 

Well with hordes being gimped it seems monster mash lists are on the up I still don't see a reason not to at least grab the frostheart for that sweet sweet -1 to wound

 

I don't necessarily agree or disagree. Seraphon are still extremely efficient and don't need a ton of spellcasting help. I think they certainly add more benefit than sylvaneth did, but i don't think it's super definitive if the best builds will always have them.


Regardless, it is pretty awesome to have allies that do actually have some use to them.

 

not many of our options have built in fly though. thats the big draw for me. fly is a big deal for monsters this edition.