...Again did they do anything of significance that an equivalent amount of skinks couldn't have done? The fact that it's technically a different unit doesn't really matter if both spend the entire game simply sitting on an objective looking pretty until they were killed. And come on, it shouldn't be this hard to show that they did something of significance. Did they kill several units which the skinks never would've been able to? Did a bastiladon hold a flank for 3 turns where the skinks would've just evaporated instantly? Did it force an opponent to split up his forces to try and grab an objective, making things easier for Kroak & friends? If they achieved something significantly different with the bastiladons how can you not give an example that anwsers my question?
I already told you. They are tougher and do mortals and help with securing extra battle tactic points. I didn't play the games I don't know how darren used them specifically which is a ridiculous question in and of itself. I just know what their profile is and can imagine scenarios where it's more useful than 10 skinks. I imagine you could do the same if we weren't reducing the game down to its most basic, basic tenets of damage and objective holding. Every army is made up of those pieces but they don't play the same. It's the nuances that make the difference. Arks have a distinct profile and can leverage that for distinct advantages. Edit: I will say i don't think the arks are some secret tech. But being a good, cheap, monster objective holder is unit that has different strengths than skinks and plays that "I'm gonna look pretty on objectives" game differently.
Sure, I can imagine. I can also imagine plenty of scenarios where that difference doesn't actually matter in the end. For example, yes they do more damage than the skinks, but they only do like 2 mortal wounds/turn. Which may not be enough to actually hold the objective (or to do whatever it is they're being used for), making the difference in damage output not all that important in the end in that scenario. And since i haven't seen the games I asked if they were used in an interesting way and @Erta Wanderer responded no, they didn't do anything of interest. So based on all available information, the only difference between this list and the usual lists is that it contains a different unit but the playstyle, gameflow & overall tactics remain the same.
I guess I just feel like it minimizes the choices and nuances of decisions made. At some point, every playstyle/overall tactics is the same if you are broad enough in how you're talking about it. Is the overall strategy of protect your damage dealers with "screens" of some shape or form? Yes. I don't feel like that conversation is particularly additive to what was accomplished here by this specific list. The mortal damage could be advantageous in a world of sce. Maybe it was just style points. Just don't feel like "so it's basically the same as always" accurately represents the situation. Just my opinion, I understand where you are coming from.
Probably this? Harder to kill compared to even 20 skinks depending on what is thrown at you? Unless its mortals then its really tough and those mortals would normally be done to other units so even then it tanks some important damage. Guess it depends if yoid plan on buffing a unit of 20 skinks to do damage or if they're designed to flank or be bodies on objectives?
The thing is that nowadays we're dealing with stuff like the stormdrakes spam lists. And I'm honestly not all that sure 1 bastiladon will hold longer than 2 units of skinks, properly staggered, against something like them. Plus, since it's just a mono-list with 1 unit it's not like they could send a weaker unit if all they had to kill was skinks, so it's not really soaking important damage either. In AoS 1 I wouldn't have been so sceptical as to how it's different from a normal lists with skinks as none of this was really an issue back then.
well yes. A mellee bastiladon is MUCH more resilient than 20 skinks. You pick a unit based on the role you want it to fullfill. If i need something that can stay still and protects a site, i pick a bastiladon, not 20 skinks.
That extra resillience isnt' necesarly usefull given some of the currently powerfull and populair lists. For example, someone with a mono stormdrake guard list will still kill the bastiladon in two turns anyway, every so often in only 1 turn if they happen to get lucky. At which point the difference with 2xMSU of skinks isn't exactly great, since those would also only last 2 turns. Shame there apparently aren't any battlereports. Would be interesting to see.
On average yes the Stormdrake gaurd will kill an Ark in 1 turn with some good MW rolling prior to charging it. Same for skinks I guess? I can't see an Ark surviving more than 2 turns vs a dragon unit but what would for 165 points? Thays one specific unit aswell, lots of other units will struggle to kill ot easily, your opponent needs to make a concerted effort to get it and its a good monster to throw in front of more valuable units. Of course, each to their own and we can choose not to like the Ark if we don't want to.
I do agree that I wish the Ark Bastiladon was a little more interesting unit choice. But, to be fair, I've fielded blocks of Warriors with the knowledge that they are going to do almost nothing but sit on an objective. So I guess it's similar from a strategy view-point. Since this season of 3.0 benefits Monsters, the Bastiladon squeaks out more VPs. This is something best left for theorycrafting, but I wish the Ark either dealt more MWs or did some kind of battlefield control like slowing non-flying movement in a radius.
remember you can use a CP for feral roar to keep a basti at full 1+ save. if you mystic shield it and have heal support from a priest or EotG is will live 2-3 combat phases with 2 dragon guard. not bad for something half the price.
i love this idea. in fact it's how i solved the problem of arks back when i first theory crafted our book
Snap! I had forgotten about Feral Roar for this purpose.* That would give the Bastiadon more resilience regardless of wounds. Now I just wish it counted as more than 1 model. *Man, our group has to get back to playing AoS. Ha ha ha.
it does. all monsters count as 5 18.1.2 CONTESTING OBJECTIVES A model must be within 6" of an objective in order to contest it. If a friendly unit has models within 6" of two or more objectives, you must pick 1 of those objectives for the models from that unit to contest. Unless noted otherwise, each MONSTER counts as 5 models for the purposes of contesting objectives, and each model with a Wounds characteristic of 5 or more that is not a MONSTER counts as 2 models for the purposes of contesting objectives.
Sigh... see what I mean. Not enough AoS (seriously, we haven't played in many months). I forgot that too... and kind of want to edit that post so I don't sound so foolish.
You can also Stomp which gives you more MW on top of your snakes so you're looking at 4-5 MW excluding the tail damage. It's not exactly amazing but I think that's solid for a giant turtle thats hard to kill. It also counts as 5 models being a monster.
Got back from Nova, seraphon still holding it down as always. lost 1 game against nurgle on realmstone cache and Gavin running a similarish list (kroak, engine, bastis, the nuances were different) and made top 4 losing to the eventually winner. game feels great right now, especially for seraphon.
That's cool. Would you mind sharing your list(s)? Plus, how was NashCon? I'm pretty sure I saw your name on a site recapping it, but I can't remember if you ran Seraphon there. Apparently Ridge Hanna crushed it with Seraphon FoS and TL lists. Vince (SCE), Tyler (Nurgle) & Tom (Sylvaneth edit: Nighthaunt) from Warhammer Weekly were all in the top tables.