• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Big changes to summoning in the upcoming edition

Nefertem said:
I don't know if Seraphon will really profit from it, as they also removed one of our main advantages: dispelling across the board.
Click to expand...

Where was this stated? Or is this just in reference to the fact that now everyone can dispel from 30"?
 
PabloTho said:
If that's true, how are they going to balance it? EotG warscroll doesn't specify the type or size of the unit that is summoned, and being able to throw down Bastiladons, maxed out units of Saurus or (as has already been mentioned in this thread) Dread Saurians is hilariously overpowered. Especially seeing as the odds of rolling 14-17 aren't that slim when you have a Slann nearby.
Click to expand...
Isn't the current interpretation that you do the "normal" variant of each spell. So if you'd choose saurus warriors you get 10 of the guys, if you pick a bastiladon you get a bastiladon? I'd assume that'd stay.

As for dumping a ton of bastiladons or dread saurians on top of your opponent, even with a slann the likelyhood of succeeding is somewhere along the lines of 1 in 5. I doubt it'd be reliable enough to be overpowered as you're usually going to be limited to 1 succesfull summon per game with an EoTG. Yeah, you could just field say 4 EoTG's and you'l have the occasional hilarious game where you end up summoning 10 bastiladons, but I doubt that'l happen enough to rely on.

I'd still expect more changes to the EoTG though, the bonusses are all over the place, making it more consistent would be a huge boon even if it'd stop you from summoning multiple bastiladons or dread saurians. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd change it to be that it's only effect is summoning, the better the roll the more powerfull stuff you can summon. It'd make the thing a lot more reliable.
 
Love summoning aspects to the game (always played undead for this reason, so happy that the lizards are getting a go at it)

As said above it’s most likely a cash generating tactic by GW but hey I’m happy, looking at the taster numbers for summoning units - the dread and basti units will likely be very high cost (so a good 3+ turns to summon - the slaan will be a bigger target than ever now so keeping him alive to be able to pull off a big summon could be hard)
As to the EOG mostly likely there would be a cap or some tweak to the rules so that you can’t spam giant destroyers every round - and again as said above it’s not a guarantee that it’ll work and although engines are great figures it generally isnt worth having more than 2 of them.
 
Deed525 said:
the slaan will be a bigger target than ever now so keeping him alive to be able to pull off a big summon could be hard
Click to expand...

Worth mentioning that 'Look out sir' + Starlight results in a -2 to hit the Slann. He's more of a target now, but in theory it should be pretty easy to to keep him alive if he's kept in cover.

If only Saurus Guard had two wounds, they would be looking pretty good as a defensive screen against units trying to flank the Slann. I'm hoping GH2 throws them a bone and allows them to do what they're meant to (guard).

As it is I'm finding it difficult to justify spending 100 points on 5 wounds.
 
@PabloTho

Yeah I am in the same boat, my list runs 10 guards - I’d love 20 but the points cost is savage, combat wise they are pretty sturdy - it’s just all those mortal wounds and monsters stompin around that worry me. (They can be an easy point score) and for more points than a dread Saurian...why would you? Those things can be army killers when used right!
 
Deed525 said:
@PabloTho

Yeah I am in the same boat, my list runs 10 guards - I’d love 20 but the points cost is savage, combat wise they are pretty sturdy - it’s just all those mortal wounds and monsters stompin around that worry me. (They can be an easy point score) and for more points than a dread Saurian...why would you? Those things can be army killers when used right!
Click to expand...

I still need to get a Dread Saurian, if only to watch the horror unfold on the faces of my friends when I deploy that bad boy.

The problem with Saurus Guard is that they are admittedly a really hard unit to balance. 100 for 5 seems like too much, but at the same time I feel like any lower than that is too little.

If it were up to me, I would change their profile to two wounds and raise their cost to 160/180. Then they'd feel like the elite units they're supposed to be.
 
PabloTho said:
I still need to get a Dread Saurian, if only to watch the horror unfold on the faces of my friends when I deploy that bad boy.

The problem with Saurus Guard is that they are admittedly a really hard unit to balance. 100 for 5 seems like too much, but at the same time I feel like any lower than that is too little.

If it were up to me, I would change their profile to two wounds and raise their cost to 160/180. Then they'd feel like the elite units they're supposed to be.
Click to expand...
To be honest the biggest problem to balancing them is that they have rather absurd damage potential in the battalion. They could easily gain 2 wounds without needing a point increase if it weren't for the damage output.
 
I think they are pretty much meant to be accompanied by an eternity warden (for the extra attack) - but obviously at a higher cost...then you look at other elite troops like stormvermin who are cheap - have two attacks with many ways of getting more - amazing shields and various other abilities. Seems unfair to make us pay for a little more. But hey ho we do have dread saurian’s ;D really really got to get one of them.
 
I think they should give them two wounds each and a 6+ ward save against mortal wounds, and make them 120 points per five models.

The bataillon making them strong should just be taken into account by having the point value of the bataillon reflect that.

In turn I think that inefficient bataillons should be a bit cheaper. The Firelance for example. I also think the Knights should get a wound more and 2" range. If they don't get 2" range they should drop a few points.
 
Yeah the armies elite and cav units are a bit meh, I like them but not enough to take them over more ‘sturdy or hard hitting’ units...like a basti or rippers + who doesn’t want big scary dinosaurs marching off to war.
 
Aginor said:
The bataillon making them strong should just be taken into account by having the point value of the bataillon reflect that.
Click to expand...
That'd make the battalion expensive to the point of unuseable. With the battalion consisting of 3 unit that potentially have what, 30 guys in em the added firepower is tremendous. A "fair" prize for the battalion with 90 guards would be far too expensive for a battalion with onky 15.

Aginor said:
In turn I think that inefficient bataillons should be a bit cheaper. The Firelance for example. I also think the Knights should get a wound more and 2" range. If they don't get 2" range they should drop a few points.
Click to expand...

To be honest, knights are the only ones we have who have actual decent stats of our battleline. They're not too squishy, have enough attacks with good enough stats to reliably deal some damage to most targets each turn without needing (external) buffs. They're decently fast. They synergize well with our various buffs. The only thing that's lacking is their mortal wound-mechanic is a tad too unreliable in between the various requirements for it. Overall they're fairly great though.
 
Canas said:
They're decently fast.
Click to expand...
I disagree there. They are the slowest cavalry in the game. Skinks are faster. Kroxigor are faster. Fat Gore-Gruntas are faster!

I still think they are too bad to be competitive. They are glass cannons so if you have more than one unit, then the second unit will very likely die before they can use their great charge bonus.

Also: yes. The mortal wound should be on 6+ hit, not wound.

As for the Firelance: I think the Bataillon should be balanced in way so it is worth it for 3x 5 Knights. It is just too unreliable to be worth it and putting more Knights in there won't solve anything since they won't get in range.


About the Eternal Starhost: I think it should stay cheap enough to be viable for the minimum size. It's not like there are full Guard armies running around dominating the tournament scene. They are just not that great. There has to be a points range for it where it is worth its immense bonus but not too expensive for what it does.
 
Aginor said:
I disagree there. They are the slowest cavalry in the game. Skinks are faster. Kroxigor are faster. Fat Gore-Gruntas are faster!

I still think they are too bad to be competitive. They are glass cannons so if you have more than one unit, then the second unit will very likely die before they can use their great charge bonus.

Also: yes. The mortal wound should be on 6+ hit, not wound.

As for the Firelance: I think the Bataillon should be balanced in way so it is worth it for 3x 5 Knights. It is just too unreliable to be worth it and putting more Knights in there won't solve anything since they won't get in range.


About the Eternal Starhost: I think it should stay cheap enough to be viable for the minimum size. It's not like there are full Guard armies running around dominating the tournament scene. They are just not that great. There has to be a points range for it where it is worth its immense bonus but not too expensive for what it does.
Click to expand...
Our saurus also need the capacity to stand without their respective battalions. Not only are guard and knights not that great they're pretty much never used without their respective battalions. Even saurus warriors, who have some promise in the sunclaw, really struggle on their own especially in small units. I just don't like how my army lists are almost always built entirely around battalions. It cripples creative list building and makes it difficult to play in low point games. 2 wounds on guard would go a long way to making them more durable and useful outside their starhost, the knights need more reliable mortal wound output and faster movement, and I wouldn't be upset if our saurus got better armor saves and damage output all around. I just don't want a bunch of point drops, I didn't get my lizards to run a horde I got them for their elite infantry and big dinos.
 
Aginor said:
I disagree there. They are the slowest cavalry in the game. Skinks are faster. Kroxigor are faster. Fat Gore-Gruntas are faster!

I still think they are too bad to be competitive. They are glass cannons so if you have more than one unit, then the second unit will very likely die before they can use their great charge bonus.

Also: yes. The mortal wound should be on 6+ hit, not wound.

As for the Firelance: I think the Bataillon should be balanced in way so it is worth it for 3x 5 Knights. It is just too unreliable to be worth it and putting more Knights in there won't solve anything since they won't get in range.


About the Eternal Starhost: I think it should stay cheap enough to be viable for the minimum size. It's not like there are full Guard armies running around dominating the tournament scene. They are just not that great. There has to be a points range for it where it is worth its immense bonus but not too expensive for what it does.
Click to expand...

I find the trick with knights is to not even think of them as cavalry, for the most part they are not costed like most cavalry in the game and they do not move like most cavalry in the game. Point for point they compare quite well with Saurus Warriors and while the warriors are better in big blobs the knights are more mobile in smaller units.
 
Tokek said:
I find the trick with knights is to not even think of them as cavalry, for the most part they are not costed like most cavalry in the game and they do not move like most cavalry in the game. Point for point they compare quite well with Saurus Warriors and while the warriors are better in big blobs the knights are more mobile in smaller units.
Click to expand...
Good thinking.
I play them occasionally but struggle with their true role it seems. Perhaps I have to think of them differently...
 
claymore36 said:
Our saurus also need the capacity to stand without their respective battalions. Not only are guard and knights not that great they're pretty much never used without their respective battalions. Even saurus warriors, who have some promise in the sunclaw, really struggle on their own especially in small units. I just don't like how my army lists are almost always built entirely around battalions. It cripples creative list building and makes it difficult to play in low point games. 2 wounds on guard would go a long way to making them more durable and useful outside their starhost, the knights need more reliable mortal wound output and faster movement, and I wouldn't be upset if our saurus got better armor saves and damage output all around. I just don't want a bunch of point drops, I didn't get my lizards to run a horde I got them for their elite infantry and big dinos.
Click to expand...

We are a synergy army. For me mandatory bataillons are something we have to expect.
A bit more versatility would be nice though...
 
Aginor said:
I disagree there. They are the slowest cavalry in the game. Skinks are faster. Kroxigor are faster. Fat Gore-Gruntas are faster!
Click to expand...
When I said they had decent speed I meant they're not slow as snails and are thus useable. They are indeed rather slow for cavalry which is why I wouldn't really use em as cavalry. I basicly just use em as infantry. Like @Tokek pointed out. The only real issue with this is that you can't send a blob of 20 knights around as it just becomes unwieldy and with only 5 knights a single unit can fairly easily be wiped out with concentrated firepower.


Aginor said:
About the Eternal Starhost: I think it should stay cheap enough to be viable for the minimum size. It's not like there are full Guard armies running around dominating the tournament scene. They are just not that great. There has to be a points range for it where it is worth its immense bonus but not too expensive for what it does.
Click to expand...
To be honest I'd love for battalions to become dynamicly prized. A minimum sized battalion adds a very different amount of power than a full sized with several hordes does. I'm not sure how complicated i'd be but it should be viable to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top