One of the most common things I have read is that the Predatory Fighter rule essentially provides saurus with 1/6 extra attack per model. I think this is an over simplification of the outcome of the rule, and I think it will be much better during play. The reason for this is its potential to produce large positive spikes in combat resolution, which cause our enemies to break. Deep units of saurus are very good at holding, especially when the BSB is nearby, and therefore they can afford to wait for this to occur. One of the hardest lessons I learnt when I moved from 40K to Fantasy, was that the majority of models die in combat resolution, not through attacks, and I think this rule will provide a significant boost to this area. Do you guys agree/disagree? Ray
Disagree. 1/6 is simply not worth staking anything on. There's a reason most people don't bother upgrading things like High Elf Archers to light armour for 1ppm - its because that single 6+ save is rarely going to come in to play, and when it does, its rarely going to make an impact. You're better off just bringing more models. With Saurus, its not going to come into play a lot. If you're going deep with 5 models per rank, its less than two bonus attacks. Even if you go wider, or a FAQ says that supporting models benefit, the additional problem is that they then need to hit as well, which is always asking a lot on WS3, and then to see the real benefit you need them to wound. Yes, they are S4; but there is a lot of stuff out there with T4 or higher, or good armour, and against them its simply not going to produce the sort of spike damage you're looking for, or might expect from, say, Dark Elves' Hatred. Against weaker things, you have to ask yourself if those 2 additional bonus attacks are really going to swing a combat that you are probably going to win anyway. The problem is, with only 1/6 chance its not really worth investing in magicaklly, and there's few options to do that now without Timewarp/Speed of Light. Don't get me wrong; its a nice little perk that hasn't been costed (probably because the downside is a pain in the ass), but I don't think its going to change much. Saurus will still be better at tanking without support, and Temple Guard will still need augments to really shine. Its a real shame, and another missed trick, that the Trogolodon doesn't boost this better. If the 5+ was always one, maybe with a one-time increase to 4+ or 3+, I could see it being really viable. Then again, the so-called Orcale on top has the stats of a basic Skink, so I doubt the designer ever intended for it to be more than some eye candy. Its actually better for things like Kroxigor which have a low number of attacks but high quality ones; the more they generate counts for more.
First play test this weekend found that the extra attacks do matter, especially when you combat reform a TG unit to horde formation and run the Suarus unit six wide or more. It translates into a 1/6 increase in attacks and wounds (if gained by supporting attacks) caused which is actually more significant than you think at the margin. How much would you pay for a War Banner taht gives you +1 to your combat resolution.?
I agree. In prolonged engagements the saurus units will see damage spikes lending to improved CR. Tactical use of jungle swarms and the troglodon will cause even greater spikes too.
I plan on running my Saurus 6x4 with spears and the guys I play with have thusfar reached the consensus that PF works with supporting attacks. This means on average my block is making an extra 4 attacks... Based on averages and hitting on a 4+: 24 attacks - 12 hits - 4 bonus attacks from PF - 2 more hits total: 14 hits from technically a 24 attack unit (if a jungle swarm was in the combat your also looking at 4.666 of those hits being poisoned) The question then I think, is does trying to get more attacks/ re-rolls to hit from spells and support become more viable? For an example of the extreme, Birona's Time warp + Buff's/ de-buff's to Initiative to get re-rolls nets you: based on hitting on a 4+: 30 attacks - 15 hits - 5 bonus attacks from PF - 2.5 more hits re-roll the 15 misses - 7.5 more hits - 2.5 more bonus attacks - 1.25 more hits total: 26.25 hits from 30 attacks (if a jungle swarm is in the same combat then 8.75 of that would be poison hits) Alternately, a Simple Harmonic Convergence gets you: based on hitting on a 4+: 24 attacks - 12 hits - 4 bonus attacks from PF - 2 more hits re-roll the 4 1's - 2 more hits - 0.666 PF - 0.333 more hits total: 16.333 hits from 24 attacks (and 5.444 poison with a swarm respectively) More food-for-thought than anything, I can see it being viable with the poison from the swarms, but I think our poor Initiative really kills our best option for this (Birona's) requiring you to get at least 2 spells off in support of the 1 combat.
Yesterday I played with a horde formation of 50 saurus warriors and every round of combat I had from 5 till 15 extra attacks! It's definately a usefull ability! even if it wasn't each extra attack is one more then last edition!
I have calculated that once locked in combat you you have approximately a 60% chance of spiking to double the number of expected hits one or more times over 4 rounds of combat. This is the equivalent of gaining an additional 8 extra attacks from a block of 6 wide, 3 deep saurus with spears. I suppose what i am saying is that you can't rely on it happening, but it is likely to happen at least once during a battle, probably where the fighting is thickest, and your opponent will probably not see it coming. Ray
And you know for all the winnging that is going on over on warseer about the "you don't get PF from supporting attacks!" (which I think is BS it specifically says "if you roll a 6 to hit" with no mention of who is doing the hit (ie. front rank, second rank, third rank) So ALL to hit 6's generate an extra attack. But beyond that people are also all bunched up about "This extra rule sucks!, blah, blah!" - regardless of if it is just the front rank or all ranks it is potential free attacks that we did not have before so it is a win-win in my eyes.
just played a game with a friend an hour ago...and we actually concluded something else. PF extra attacks feels more as a lesser form of re-rolls I know it isnt the same, but what I really did was going like this "hmm... 7 misses, 3 sixes.....* re-rolls 3 of the 7 missed hits*
I like the rule. It stretches out the bell curve. Yeah, you can throw out 10 attacks and get 3 hits. You can also throw out 10 attacks and get 13 hits. In a unit that is good at staying put and slugging it out, having the giant variation in hits can mean you grind for a few turns and then crush your opponent on the one lucky round.
It also means that your opponent will have to consider this variation when making decisions on what they can do to him. If you just play it safe and dont count on it, it can never be anything else than a sudden nasty surprise your opponnent
In the few games I have played with the new rules I have found PF has made a big difference, but I use the term "big" in a relative way. I have always used Saurus as my mainstay units and excellent excellent anvils. This rules gives this anvil more teeth (see what I did there) and where before I might lose a combat by a point or fail to kill a monster by a couple wounds, more often than not I am now generating extra attacks to do more damage. To be frank, I love it so much haha
We must have two threads on this subject. We play-tested this Saturday nigth and I have a combat simulation program I wrote. This is not like a 6+ armour save that might nothappen or benefit sometimes, it is between a 6+ armour save and a 6+ parrry save or a 6+ ward (like from the Luminark or ironcurse icon when hit by war machines). It is not nearly as valuable as a re-roll to hit, but it is like a partial re-roll to hit. The right way to look at it is at the margin. It just gives you a bit more ability to ultimately win in a grinding match involving saurus, TG, saurus characters, CoC, or Krox with other large stubborn/steadfast units. If you have six wide ranks of TG in a big unit with a Slann, it is only another two attacks on average fromt the fronk ranks, but with buffs and S5 that can average an extra wound per turn. With the oldblood and scar vet kitted to survive combat and take few wounds and dish out wounds to higher T and AS models, the 6+ roll to hit extra attack really starts to add up in terms of killing stuff just that little bit faster. It may not sound like much, but it ends up mattering a lot over two and three rounds of combat. and that often can be the difference between winning, drawing or losing combat. If the war banner is worth signifcant points in the BRB and we see some ranked tournament players take it occasionally (maybe worth a bit less), then the ability to average +1 to ACR and also kill 1 model on average or put a fraction of a wound on a character or monster on aveage, then it is a valuable abiltiy. I have a simulation program and it looks to be worth maybe .5 to 1.0 points per model with saurus and a bit more on TG and more than that on Krox (50% chance of rolling a 6 and getting an extra attack and 50% chance of hitting and hit probability of wounding times average point per wound value ranging from 5 to 50 with an average of 8 to 10, then the value is about 1 to 2 points per model per combat phase). It becomes really valuable for Krox when fighting something with a high cost per wound like ironguts or monsters or cav models with high armour saves but lower T; then it becomes a huge benefit in combat. The same kind of value is realized by the kitted oldblood that can hit really hard in challenges and in fights with monsters and chariots and similar high T or high AS models that have high cost per wound. In order to illustrate the value of PF on an oldblood, I ran some simple math analyses of an oldblood fighting a unit of empire models. and targetting characters or cav models with a great weapon. He hits on 3+ and wounds on 2+ and the armour save is only 5+. (This does not fully onsider the possibility of getting mutiple hits on multile 6+ rolls to hit). Five attacks means 5/6 of an extra attack (it is a bit more complex due to combinations), hitting 66.67% of the time times wounding 83% of the time and it is not saved 66.7% of the time. That is a 30.05% probability of an extra unsaved wound. If it is the captain on a mount with a dawnstone or 5+ ward save, then that is worth on average 17.3 points per combat phase. If it iis a typical inner circle knight, it is worth 7.7 points per round of combat. If it is a fully kitted war priest with a 5+ ward and on foot, then it is 18.5 points per combat phase. Against a unit of Demigryph knights, the oldblood will realize on average .30 extra unsaved wounds worth an average of 6.0 points per combat phase. Another example is a hydra charging a TG unit with an oldblood or scar vet with great weapon. A total of 1 character and 3 TG will be in base contact (ignore the potential for supporting attacks getting extra attacks). The oldblood gets an average of 5/6 extra attacks and the TG get an average of 1 extra attack. The oldblood will cause on average .23 extra unsaved wounds and the TG will realize on average .104 extra wounds. The total wounds will, therefore, be .335 extra worth (even with the hydra under costed) 11.75 points. For comparison, typically the oldblood and 3 TG will cause 2.01 wounds on the hyrda without the extra attack, worth a value of 70.5 points, so the extra attacks increase the value by, not suprisingly, an extra 16.67% increase in value and wounds. The difference is more striking, however, when one considers two rounds of combat. Assuming the hydra wins or does not break in both rounds of combat (a likely result in the first round and somewhat likely in the second round of combat given that the hydra has a breath weapon (S5 given I2 TG and GW on oldblood), 7 cc attacks at S5, and a thunderstomp at S5 and 6 S3 AP attacks all at WS4.), then without PF the hydra ends up on average with 4.0 wounds after two rounds of combat and gets a third round in with a potential to do a lot more damage (decent probability the hydra gets the thunderfstomp in the second combat phase because the oldblood has an ASL GW) and holds up the TG through a third combat phase. On the other hand, with PF, the hydra suffers on average 4.67 wounds by the end of the second combat phase and more than half of the time is dead a the end of the second combat phase. You have a much greater probability of finishing off the hydra before the damaging thunderstomp in the second combat phase and a far greater probability of avoiding a third combat phase and the resulting damage and, if you do face a third phase of combat, you have a much better chance of killing the hydra before the third thunderstomp is resolved. Just to illustrate the damage a hydra does, after the first round of combat (no breath weapon and no more re-roll to hit), in each successive combat phase the beastmasters cause on average .67 wounds worth 9.33 points of TG, the hydra's combat attacks cause on averge 1.94 wounds worth 27.2 points of TG, and the thunderstomp causes another 1.94 average wounds worth antoher 27.2 poiints of TG. Thus, a full extra round of combat with the hydra kills on average 4.55 TG models. worth 63.8 points. The effective point savings on average attributable to having PF as opposed to not having PF is approximately 60 points equivalent to approximately 4 TG models saved. Remember that in the first round of combat, a hydra will killl a lot more with hatred and a breath weapon at S5, a total of 9.75 TG models worth a total of 136.5 points (not counting the champ which dies more than half the time in the first round when targetted with one attack from the beastmasters and then, if not killed, one attack from the hydra). The range of outcomes varies dramatically depending on the army faced and the deployment and matchups the oldblood ends up in combat but an oldblood should get into combat a lot and killing a lot and realize at least a few poitns extra per battle even against basic infantry. That value does not consider the benefit of potentially swinging combats, more likely winning combat and breaking the oppsing unit (ocassionally causing +1 or +2 wounds from the oldblood and another +1 or +2 wound by the saurus or TG with him) and also taking away steadfast. This is especially the case when fighting monsters and cav and chariots where their ACR can be more variable due to thunderstomp, breath weapons and impact hit rolls causing a wide range of potential outcomes. My son (top ranked LM GT player in US) and I agree that the extra attack is more like a re-roll to hit and the supporting attack limits do not apply since the attack is really only one and this is a bonus, not truly an extra attack like frenzy or +1 to attack always, and certainly should not apply with Krox in a skrox unit. We would expect an FAQ on this, since it is clearly the intent of the book author for this to aplly to all models in the unit.
All math aside, I play tested a bit this past weekend and I loved PF. Used in conjunction with swarms new rule, my saurus were kicking some HE tail! Also, my opponent and I didn't even question supporting attacks benefitting from PF because the rule says any roll of 6 to hit...well, my supporting attack saurus have PF and they rolled a 6 to hit...stop whining other players and let us have something in place of no MC or cheaper lord level caster!