• 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 General's Handbook finally announced !!

Canas said:
Nah they'd need the following:

In general for hordes:
  1. Make them have a scaling cost for the horde bonus. E.g. the first 10 cost 40 points, then a unit of 20 cost a 100 in total, a unit of 30 a 180, and a unit of 40 280. This makes them much more accuratly priced and should be applied to everything that has a horde mechanic.
  2. Make the horde bonusses easier to get and maintain. 20 is a high for a cut-off point & because it's all or nothing it's annoying to maintain. This is double bad because horde units are weak to begin with, so once the horde bonus is removed you're just left with fodder.
Specificly for skinks:
  1. Make the melee variant not useless.
  2. Improve their numbers a bit, a bit more range, a bit more reliability in their hits/wounds and preferably even poisoned wounds on 6+ hit/wounds. Nothing amazing, but just enough to make them stand on their own as battleline instead of being purely supportive.
  3. Alternativly give them more supporting power. More mechanics like their interactions with kroxigor or how skink handlers benefit salamders and razordons. If interweaving skinks with other seraphon results in increadible synergies they'd feel much better as a "battleline". Despite them still being supportive it'd make it logical to field vast amounts of them and interweave them through every formation.
Click to expand...

Don't really agree on this one I 'm afraid. 40 p is just too low and people wound end up almost not using battleline units.
I believe that the cost is made in such a way that :

1. You really need to think about the battleline as it takes enough points and can't ignore their tax.
2. The cost is made in such a way that you pay for the bonuses when they stack up in my opinion, rather than just add up points. As : the 30 man cost 240p exactly because they are stronger for some wounds etc.

I couldn't agree more with @Aginor . Their real problem is the range. Although fragile etc, you are getting outranged by everything. Over 20" they would be op as they have Wary Fighter and are also one of the quickest units in game but I honestly thing that 20" would give a little more sense to this unit to be used in larger numbers.
Then again, although skink army is my aim, haven't tried yet so it might just be my inexperience :p
 
Seraphage said:
I couldn't agree more with @Aginor . Their real problem is the range. Although fragile etc, you are getting outranged by everything.
Click to expand...

To justify a superior range you should have skinks with bows (WHFB 6th edition?)

In AoS, even muskets have range 16" (see dwarfs thunderers and Empire handgunners), and only bows and crossbows shoot at 20"
 
Killer Angel said:
To justify a superior range you should have skinks with bows (WHFB 6th edition?)

In AoS, even muskets have range 16" (see dwarfs thunderers and Empire handgunners), and only bows and crossbows shoot at 20"
Click to expand...
...or at 22". Or at 24". Or at 30" And that's where the real problem lies I guess. People saying "Shooting is OP *CRY*" don't mean Skinks, they mean Judicators and such. (hmmmm such a coincidence that the first OP shooting unit which came to mind is SCE. again.)
 
Now that I think about it:
They should maybe just go the D&D way and impose penalties with range. It would be simple and not disturb gameplay since you measure the distance anyway. For each increment of 12" (max charge distance) you take a penalty of one point to the hit value. So Judicators shooting at full range would get a penalty of two.
Well, if you don't like it move closer.
 
Seraphage said:
Don't really agree on this one I 'm afraid. 40 p is just too low and people wound end up almost not using battleline units.
I believe that the cost is made in such a way that :

1. You really need to think about the battleline as it takes enough points and can't ignore their tax.
2. The cost is made in such a way that you pay for the bonuses when they stack up in my opinion, rather than just add up points. As : the 30 man cost 240p exactly because they are stronger for some wounds etc.

I couldn't agree more with @Aginor . Their real problem is the range. Although fragile etc, you are getting outranged by everything. Over 20" they would be op as they have Wary Fighter and are also one of the quickest units in game but I honestly thing that 20" would give a little more sense to this unit to be used in larger numbers.
Then again, although skink army is my aim, haven't tried yet so it might just be my inexperience :p
Click to expand...


The 40 point is merely an arbitrary number I put up. My point was simply that for horde units either the points need to scale if there are hard cut-off points for the bonus activating. Or the bonus need to scale and be present both when there is just 1 skink and when there's 40, but immensly more powerfull at 40 skinks. Having it be both a hard cut-off and fixed prize combines the worst of both worlds for horde units while not really giving anything in return.
 
Aginor said:
Now that I think about it:
They should maybe just go the D&D way and impose penalties with range. It would be simple and not disturb gameplay since you measure the distance anyway. For each increment of 12" (max charge distance) you take a penalty of one point to the hit value. So Judicators shooting at full range would get a penalty of two.
Well, if you don't like it move closer.
Click to expand...

Give a minimum range at which that doesn't trigger and that'd be rather nice. Now include a look-out-sir rule so you can protect some of the squishier stuff to some degree
 
If it helps take some of the edge off, path to glory goes on preorder this weekend I believe!
 
honestly i think saurus guard are over priced, in this meta with mortal wound spamm they are so bad. 100 points for 5 wounds free . i hope they make them cost less
 
Tizianolol said:
honestly i think saurus guard are over priced, in this meta with mortal wound spamm they are so bad. 100 points for 5 wounds free . i hope they make them cost less
Click to expand...

Meh, the issue with the guards is that they are either virtually immortal or horrificly squishy depending on if they face mortal wounds.

They should do the following really

  • Give them at least 2 wounds
  • Tone down their normal save slightly (especially in an eternal starhost)
  • Give them some protection to mortal wounds (e.g. the same kind of save a bastilidon or tzeentch arcanite has)
This way they'd not be as horrificly squishy or as immortal, while sitll fullfilling their intended role. And the point cost wouldn't be as bad either.
 
It is really funny how there are some people (met them on TGA) who have really different extreme opinions of guards, which really points at something being really wrong:
One person says they are too strong because they are almost invincible when buffed by the Warden and the Starhost, while others say they are laughable because they are getting shredded to bits every time.

The local meta having many mortal wounds available or not makes that difference. And that is bad. Because it is a hard counter that nothing can defeat. Mortal wounds are bad.
 
Canas said:
Meh, the issue with the guards is that they are either virtually immortal or horrificly squishy depending on if they face mortal wounds.

They should do the following really

  • Give them at least 2 wounds
  • Tone down their normal save slightly (especially in an eternal starhost)
  • Give them some protection to mortal wounds (e.g. the same kind of save a bastilidon or tzeentch arcanite has)
This way they'd not be as horrificly squishy or as immortal, while sitll fullfilling their intended role. And the point cost wouldn't be as bad either.
Click to expand...

My group play tested something similar to this to see what they would be like.

  • 3 wounds
    • This way arcane bolt kill max 1, instead a sizable piece of the unit.
  • 5+ normal save
    • This way you have to have to have the battalion with a the hero AND still have to use a spell to get the 2+
    • Being the same as warriors was a bit weird but at the same time you can buff these ridiculously as well as hit much harder than warriors so it works out
  • 6+ against mortal wounds
    • This seemed to work the best because they shouldn't be tanky like the bastili, but trying to keep away from making them entirely immortal this was they could be taken down but still had a chance to ignore them
 
Aginor said:
It is really funny how there are some people (met them on TGA) who have really different extreme opinions of guards, which really points at something being really wrong:
One person says they are too strong because they are almost invincible when buffed by the Warden and the Starhost, while others say they are laughable because they are getting shredded to bits every time.

The local meta having many mortal wounds available or not makes that difference. And that is bad. Because it is a hard counter that nothing can defeat. Mortal wounds are bad.
Click to expand...

The should've just gone with two types of damage, say "physical" and "magical". It'd avoid the issue mortal wounds has because it's effective against literally everything. If you simply had two types of damage (instead of just guaranteed wounds) you could simply balance a unit by making it strong against one, but weak against the other. Instead of the situation we have now were certain units are borderline immune to "normal" damage, while mortal wounds wrecks virtually everything, regardless of how powerfull it's defenses.

Archkyrie11 said:
My group play tested something similar to this to see what they would be like.

  • 3 wounds
    • This way arcane bolt kill max 1, instead a sizable piece of the unit.
  • 5+ normal save
    • This way you have to have to have the battalion with a the hero AND still have to use a spell to get the 2+
    • Being the same as warriors was a bit weird but at the same time you can buff these ridiculously as well as hit much harder than warriors so it works out
  • 6+ against mortal wounds
    • This seemed to work the best because they shouldn't be tanky like the bastili, but trying to keep away from making them entirely immortal this was they could be taken down but still had a chance to ignore them
Click to expand...

This is pretty much what's needed for an "elite" unit. Though the mortal wounds save of 6+ might be a bit much, I would've suggested a 5+ as they are supposed to be quite sturdy, possibly even allowing this save to benefit from some bonusses. In exchange I'd lower their damage output a bit. Especially the bonus from an eternal starhost when standing still can result in silly amounts of damage. I want them to be though as nails but with relativly little offensive power. Basicly they should be the anvil in a formation, relying on others to be the hammer.
 
Aginor said:
It is really funny how there are some people (met them on TGA) who have really different extreme opinions of guards, which really points at something being really wrong:
One person says they are too strong because they are almost invincible when buffed by the Warden and the Starhost, while others say they are laughable because they are getting shredded to bits every time.

The local meta having many mortal wounds available or not makes that difference. And that is bad. Because it is a hard counter that nothing can defeat. Mortal wounds are bad.
Click to expand...

Pretty much anyone Ive spoken to that thinks theyre strong are people that got caught by suprise with the eternal starhost and didnt know how to deal with it. Being realistic they are objectively not good in the current meta. 100 points for 5 single wound models with no mortal wound save is terrible. In the eternal starhost (A huge points investment by itself) killing the eternity warden basically negates the durability of the guard. The warden is a model with no shield, no mortals save and a 4+ save. Setting aside mortal wounds, thats not a lot of regular damage required to neuter the formation. The starhost is only strong to people who dont know what it does and how it works.

Mortal wounds pretty much ruined the game for a lot of units, and the abundance of them currently make some matches unpleasant to play. Anyone whos come accross skyre at a tournament knows how terrible it feels to lose first turn and have 1.5 hours+ to kill.
 
Canas said:
This is pretty much what's needed for an "elite" unit. Though the mortal wounds save of 6+ might be a bit much, I would've suggested a 5+ as they are supposed to be quite sturdy, possibly even allowing this save to benefit from some bonusses. In exchange I'd lower their damage output a bit. Especially the bonus from an eternal starhost when standing still can result in silly amounts of damage. I want them to be though as nails but with relativly little offensive power. Basicly they should be the anvil in a formation, relying on others to be the hammer.
Click to expand...

Maybe we need something to be silly, heaven knows everyone else gets something haha
 
ye 2 wounds to guards would be amazing.. but u have to make them more expensive . maybe 120 points ?
 
Archkyrie11 said:
Maybe we need something to be silly, heaven knows everyone else gets something haha
Click to expand...

I'd rather have all of our stuff be decent/good than have 1 silly thing :p

In all seriousness though, 1 unit of 5 saurus guards with that buff can easily annihilate entire units in between the D3 damage, -1 rend, 3+/3+ to hit/wound and having 2 attacks per models. Its quite silly :p And multiple units of 5 just gets hilarious.
 
Tizianolol said:
ye 2 wounds to guards would be amazing.. but u have to make them more expensive . maybe 120 points ?
Click to expand...

Nah, they're currently overprized due to how common and reliable mortal wounds are. They can stand to be buffed fairly considerably before they actually need a prize hike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top