AoS Saurus underpowered?

I have never been disappointed by any of our units when it comes to attacking. I hate how everything is a glass cannon. I’d like a tougher save on the warriors 4+ with immunity to rend 1 would be cool and I’d like temple guard to be 2+ save naturally, with a warscroll buff that gives them a mortal wound save when hero is nearby. Buff the toughness on the carno would raise the points but since they are shoving the slann down our throats, wth lets go for broke and make it 14 wounds and 3+ save for like 400-450 pts. You’d only take 1 now anyway.

 

I agree with most of the things you said but a 2+ natural save is a little extreme

 

Sadly I do not believe it would prove to be that strong even then. They are expensive for what they bring. They only have 1 wound, arent that great in combat for an elite unit, are slow, and skinks do their job better than they do when it comes to protecting heroes and blocking charges. With the amount of mortal wound spam in the game, they have to be pretty overpowered to justify taking them. I wish this wasn't the case, but its how the game has grown.

 

1 wound models just don't work in the role of heavy elite infantry. It gives them no buffer to absorb a wound or two before getting killed. Doubly so when also taking into account mortal wounds and that most mortal wound mechanics do D3 damage and thus are liable to wipe out half a unit.

 

good point but i think it would just be better to give it the extra wound

 

Temple guard need an extra wound, a mortal wound save, OR a penalty to wound rolls against them (I mean, okay, AoS needs a Strength/Toughness mechanic, but besides that this would be the next best thing).

Regular Saurus need to get the extra attack before the bonus to hit. I think it would also be fitting if they had easier access to Rend -1 on their main weapon than taking three units of them.

Our shields need to do something more consistent, maybe straight up lower incoming Rend by 1 instead of only ignoring -1 and leaving everything else at full effect. Skaven and Skeletons have stupid good shields by comparison, and they're meant to be fragile endless-horde units.

Cavalry work okay right now, but I'd say they need a bit of a speed boost (and new Cold Ones models) or a 4+ save eto emphasise that they're heavy cavalry on stubborn mounts.

Ultimately I feel like our weakness as an army is a high reliance on expensive battalions that only do one thing, and Saurus are hurt by that more than Monsters or Skinks because that's where GW put the things that make them do their job well, instead of just better.

 

is there any way to make saurus usable? it seems that all my favored units are unusable.

 

yes, they are good anti low tier infantry killers, and they are useful for tying down enemies while the more bashy units kill the enemy unit. if you summon them whenever you need you can have a good supply of warriors which can hold objectives very well. They are pretty fast too with their march giving them a lot of flexibility.

 

I didn't get into warhammer until AoS. I never understood the appeal of Strength/Toughness until I started playing 40k. Is it more
complicated, Yes but Not drastically, and now that I have been playing 40k Strength and Toughness is like the biggest thing to me I would live see get moved to AoS.

To bad that would require an entire new edition to be implemented

 

Strength/thoughness + wounds not carrying over to another model are briljant for balancing as it allows for dedicated anti-tank and anti-fodder attacks (and by extention dedicated tank/fodder-units) without them also immeadiatly being super effective against the other option.

And it also allows for less frustrating dice rolls. Dealing with 4+/4+ against a 4+ save is a lot less annoying than when you're stuck with a 2+/2+ against a 2+ save due to the first not having as much Lucky/unlucky streaks where one roll is the crucial point of failure (with the 4+ scenario more will fail to hit or wound, but less will be saved). Even if both average out to fairly similar numbers (0.125 vs ~0.11)

 

absolutely not. one of the things I love about AoS is the wounds carry over. in 40k it makes sense. one bullet isn't passing through two space marines in power armor. but an 8 foot bolt from a ballista on a Stegadon could absolutely pass through more than one guy in medieval armor as it crashes into the formation.

str/tough I could get behind, as from what I'm told ( I also didn't play fantasy) it was a mechanic that existed in this game prior.

 

I definetly think there could be a balance of wound carry over and not. I don't think even a Scar Vet is taking out 2 guys with his sword but his carnosaur could defiently take out a bunch of guys in 1 hit. I'd bee down for troops and small heros not being able to have wounds carry over and then having cavalry and monsters being able to make wounds carry out. Would definitely enhance the this unit is definetly for taking out single targets and this unit is definetly for taking out swarms.

 

that's a logistical nightmare from a game development point of view. it essentially has to be all one way or the other.

 

It could be as simple as take whatever the wording is in 40k about how to allocate wounds, and then make an execption for the monster keyword

 

The issue with wounds carrying over is that you're rewarding overkill which ends up meaning that any weapon (or mechanic) specificly designed for taking down big scary stuff is Always going to be just as effective against cannonfodder as well (unless you make up some really convoluted rules)

For example, let's take our carnosaur's bite attack when buffed with a starpriests venom, an attack designed to deal with other big monsters, we even can get a bonus on our rolls towards actually landing the attack on monsters. It now deals 6 damage. Based on its size it can fit roughly 1 skaven in it's mouth at a time, maybe 2 if they cooperate. What's causing the other 4-5 skaven to die in this situation? Seeing their "friend" eaten gives them spontanous heart attacks? And that's just one attack. A Lucky carnosaur with a starpriests venom can somehow eat 30! skaven but only hit 4 of em with his claws in one round of combat. He can wipe out entire horde units with ease, but has bonusses indicating he's supposed to be a monster hunting unit. That's kinda weird.

If you want to represent something like a balista potentially hitting multiple targets cause it can ricochet or just flat out passes through weakly armoured fodder, give it a higher volume of attacks.

In that way you can get the following ways of making dedicated weapons:

High volume of attacks + low strength + low damage = anti horde weapon, ineffective against powerfull single entity units
Low volume of attacks + high strength + high damage = anti single entity weapon, ineffective against hordes

It's probably going to be a disaster to balance if exceptions become common. Too prone for abuse. 40K again has a very good solution though, different modes of attack or ammo used. For example an armiger warglaive (a sort of mini-40K-knight, it's about the size of a carnosaur modelwise) can either make a normal attack or a sweeping attack with its chainsword. The sweeping mode has twice as many attacks but only hits at half the strength and does less damage per attack.

 

I don't have an issue with the str and tough rating. but your logic is flawed. the models are not built to scale.

 

It's pretty much that size in every single piece of artwork, model, videogame etc. that I can find. According to the WFB wiki the biggest grow to be about 2 stories high, which corresponds to this as well.

Skaven apparently are 6 feet tall if they'd stand straight up according to the internets. Which also corresponds to their rough modelling size (slightly smaller than a human but hunched)

So yeah… the scale seems to be surprisingly accurate and even the biggest of carnosaur is going to have trouble stuffing multiple uncooperative skaven into its mouth at once.

 

nothing says hes eating them... just that he's getting a couple of quick bites in on them. listen... honestly im the type of person that will argue till you quit... id like to avoid that today because im exhausted from a fire we had last night from 2330 to 0330. lets just say we disagree

 

that still involves putting them in his mouth, and unless the skaven nicely cooperate and all put just their heads in its mouths it's gonna be complicated to get more than 1, maybe 2 per bite if he's Lucky.

Anyways point being, wounds carrying over makes little sense, and big attacks hitting multiple enemies can be represented in other, better ways, which allow for a game-mechanical distinction between various specialised weaponry ultimatly resulting in a better and more balanced game without any loss of fluff/roleplaying elements. If you want to insist on wounds carrying over you'l have to come up with a different method of actually distinquishing various types of weapons, which I think is rather difficult if not outright impossible. And personally I'm not a fan of the current state of AoS where the only way to make that distinction is by making very specific rules that work based on keywords, or interacting with unit size (e.g. a judicator's explosive crossbow) which often leads to situations where it ends up being effective against targets it wasn't intended to, especially with edge cases (e.g. that crossbow is supposed to be the anti-horde option, but it outperforms their other option as long as you target 3+ models, which isn't exactly a horde..).

As for arguing till I quit, good luck. But don't worry, I'mma sleep in a bit anyway so you're safe for now .

 

Our biggest issue really is that at lower points we get absolutely bodied by other factions. For Saurus warriors to be effective you need at least 20. When you get 30 and run a sunclaw on them they do get fairly deadly, but it still is a large point sink.