AoS Saurus underpowered?

[LizardWizard]

Since both FEC and Skaven battletomes seems all about overbuffed cheap infantry blobs (according to my fellow players), I expect saurus to be same level of power with tons of attacks, easy access to reroll hits and wounds and increased damage. Not that I'm liking it, though.

Yep, I wouldn't be surprised if Sunbloods and Old bloods(infantry version) have strong command abilities to add attacks or +'s to hits, wounds, charges, ect to support them.

 

[Canas]

Since both FEC and Skaven battletomes seems all about overbuffed cheap infantry blobs (according to my fellow players), I expect saurus to be same level of power with tons of attacks, easy access to reroll hits and wounds and increased damage. Not that I'm liking it, though.

In fairness, both of those armies are only really supposed consist of units that are either huge disposable cannonfodder units or small units of hulking monsters. I don't think there's a whole lot of other options for playing skaven or FEC without completly going against their fluff. Saurus are at least supposed to be halfway capable in a fight without outnumbering their opponent 20 to 1 and ambushing unlike clanrats...

 

[Aginor]

Maybe they should make Warriors a bit stronger but give them a certain danger of going rampage, like in the Total War game (and I guess that is based on 8th edition).

 

[Canas]

Maybe they should make Warriors a bit stronger but give them a certain danger of going rampage, like in the Total War game (and I guess that is based on 8th edition).

The one in the TW game is only losely inspired by the rule in warhammer fantasy from what I've seen on the various TW fora.

Besides, that one is as much a drawback as it is an advantage, they lose a bunch of defense, and the loss of control is problematic, especially in a turn-based objective focused game.

 

[Aginor]

Besides, that one is as much a drawback as it is an advantage, they lose a bunch of defense, and the loss of control is problematic, especially in a turn-based objective focused game.

Sure, that's the idea. It would be a unique thing in AoS.
If Saurus Warriors were to be stronger (two wounds and a better save or something) and still get their horde bonus, making them very badass in big units, but together with the horde bonus receiving the possible rage, that would make for some interesting gameplay choices IMO.
You would choose between "good" and "badass but risk of rage" and adjust your tactics accordingly.

 

[LizardWizard]

Maybe they should make Warriors a bit stronger but give them a certain danger of going rampage, like in the Total War game (and I guess that is based on 8th edition).

Sure, that's the idea. It would be a unique thing in AoS.
If Saurus Warriors were to be stronger (two wounds and a better save or something) and still get their horde bonus, making them very badass in big units, but together with the horde bonus receiving the possible rage, that would make for some interesting gameplay choices IMO.
You would choose between "good" and "badass but risk of rage" and adjust your tactics accordingly.

Yes please. Make this a thing GW!

Skinks could give a calming aura and Kroigor could give an agrivating aura to allow a bit of control over the rage of the saurus.

 

[Crowsfoot]

Sure, that's the idea. It would be a unique thing in AoS.
If Saurus Warriors were to be stronger (two wounds and a better save or something) and still get their horde bonus, making them very badass in big units, but together with the horde bonus receiving the possible rage, that would make for some interesting gameplay choices IMO.
You would choose between "good" and "badass but risk of rage" and adjust your tactics accordingly.

You would have to scrap off guards then as you would never use them, I can see guards getting 2 wounds and warriors getting a better save.

 

[Aginor]

You would have to scrap off guards then as you would never use them, I can see guards getting 2 wounds and warriors getting a better save.

Yeah they would obviously need a few changes as well to make them viable.

 

[Asamu]

To be honest I'd just like both a horde and minimum sized units to be valid. The unit being completly defanged when it loses its horde bonusses is just kind of lame.

This.
I'd like to see Saurus warriors either drop 20 points base and lose the horde discount (puts them more in line with chainrasps, which have a stronger base profile, but weaker horde bonus), or get one of their horde bonuses rolled into the profile and the other at 20+ models. Maybe cap the size at 30 if the latter, since they're on 32mm bases.

I'd like to see Knights and Guard drop another 10 points, and for guard to get a different bonus from the battalion or for being near a hero instead of the +1 save; maybe a 5+ invul save. 2+ saves are not good for the game, especially if the saves can be re-rolled and ignore rend.

 

[ILKAIN]

I say give warriors a load out option. keep them at 1 wound, keep them at horde bonuses (maybe switch the 20 with the 30) keep them at 5+ save. but make our weapon choices matter more than just range. allow them to mix and match weapons like the skinks can. you could even keep the stat line foe the weapons the same, just allow for each individual weapon to be an attack (example two clubs, 1 attack with each, club and spear, 1 attack with each). equipped with: two clubs? +1 to wound. spear and club? both weapons count as having 2" range (fluff you stab them with a barbed spear and kind of pull them into range of the club) weapon and shield? save goes to 4+. two spears? too unwieldy and not allowed. remove the shield from the Jaws stat line description, so you always have the jaws attack no matter your load out.

this would give us options, make us either slightly more durable or slightly more aggressive (at the players discretion not GW's!). (4+ save is better than ignore 1 rend all day every day)

 

[ILKAIN]

Further more, the basis for something like this already exists with Fyreslayer Vulkite berzerkers, which can re roll 1's with they are double weapons ( we don't need any more re rolls so I put my suggestion as +1 to wound, seeing as our horde bonus is +1 to hit) and get a 4+ save if they have shields, (tradable for a decent amount of mortal wounds on the charge at the cost of the save going from 4+ to 5+)

 

[Canas]

I say give warriors a load out option. keep them at 1 wound, keep them at horde bonuses (maybe switch the 20 with the 30) keep them at 5+ save. but make our weapon choices matter more than just range. allow them to mix and match weapons like the skinks can. you could even keep the stat line foe the weapons the same, just allow for each individual weapon to be an attack (example two clubs, 1 attack with each, club and spear, 1 attack with each). equipped with: two clubs? +1 to wound. spear and club? both weapons count as having 2" range (fluff you stab them with a barbed spear and kind of pull them into range of the club) weapon and shield? save goes to 4+. two spears? too unwieldy and not allowed. remove the shield from the Jaws stat line description, so you always have the jaws attack no matter your load out.

this would give us options, make us either slightly more durable or slightly more aggressive (at the players discretion not GW's!). (4+ save is better than ignore 1 rend all day every day)

meh, that wouldn't do much to solve the issues they're facing.

They'd still be rather squishy unless you take the shield
They'd still lack offense if they take the shield
They'd still be useless at minimum size.
They'd still be far to expensive to field more than 1, maybe 2 "usefull" units at max size.

Also, in this particular case the amount of combinations and effects might make things a tad complex. Skinks work because the various options don't interact. Having the weapons interact in different ways depending on the loadout might end up being too complicated to balance.

Though that does give me a halfway decent idea. Why not just make spear & club saurus effectivly 2 different units.
Give spears a 3" range, making them the preferred option for hordes as the 2nd and 3th line are near guaranteed to be able to reach their target as well. The fluff being that equiped with spears they fight in a very organized phalanx, the backlines supporting the frontlines. Hell, give us new models with proper sarissa's to make it nicely visible.

With clubs they get 2 bite attacks, and the clubs get -1 rend. Making them worthwhile in minimum sized units. The fluff explenation being sauri with club can fight much more viciously taking greater advantage of their primal nature and superiour strength with clubs while spears require them to form up neatly and fight in a more orderly fashion.

This way you have seperate setups for both minimum sized sauri as well as large hordes. The options are also different enough in terms of strengths that they shouldn't really see use in the "wrong" case making it relativly easy to balance. Plus it feels appropriate fluff wise.

 

[Putzfrau]

IMO give them a 4+ save and it goes a looooong way to making them competitive. Having their horde bonuses be static or at 10-20 would be a huge help as well.

The biggest problems is that they are relatively easy to kill for a unit that gets all it's power from buffs that are command abilities, horde bonuses that are easy to lose, or battalions that are relatively expensive or need a deep investment.

Honestly if they mess around with the weapons after just finishing 90 of them i'm going to cry.

 

[LizardWizard]

4+ save and I will bring Fangs of Sotek to half my matches.

 

[Canas]

IMO give them a 4+ save and it goes a looooong way to making them competitive. Having their horde bonuses be static or at 10-20 would be a huge help as well.

The biggest problems is that they are relatively easy to kill for a unit that gets all it's power from buffs that are command abilities, horde bonuses that are easy to lose, or battalions that are relatively expensive or need a deep investment.

Honestly if they mess around with the weapons after just finishing 90 of them i'm going to cry.

just say they count as

A 4+ save would go a long way, but even then they're still increadibly Reliant on external mechanics to achieve anything (horde bonusses, command abilties, battalions etc.). I'd just want some of those bonusses to be moved to being baseline and easier to maintain. For example as I mentioned earlier we could swap the horde and battalion bonus. So any saurus warrior has -1 rend, 2 bite attacks and the bonus damage against demons, but if you put them in the battalion you'd get what are currently the horde bonusses as long as the battalion remains above X saurus as a whole. It'd improve their base-power and it'd make it easier to maintain their horde bonus, while at the same time leaving their maximum potential the exact same so they're unlikely to end up overpowered.

 

[Lizerd]

I wouldn’t say Saurus are underpowered, just not as powerful as we could be or used to be. In comparison to Skaven or some FEC as well as a few others we do have better stats. Arguably all Gw needs to do is give them a 4+ save or 2 wounds and they would be set.

 

[Torxhol Drakescale]

Better yet, activate Blazing Lances on unmodified 5s and 6s to hit when the Knights are fielded en masse. Hike up their points to balance them out - maybe even lock them out of being battleline unless you take a mounted Saurus as general.

Maybe not when fielded en masse, maybe something akin to gore gruntas, when they charge a certain longer distance they get the 5/6 bonus.

 

[Putzfrau]

just say they count as

A 4+ save would go a long way, but even then they're still increadibly Reliant on external mechanics to achieve anything (horde bonusses, command abilties, battalions etc.). I'd just want some of those bonusses to be moved to being baseline and easier to maintain. For example as I mentioned earlier we could swap the horde and battalion bonus. So any saurus warrior has -1 rend, 2 bite attacks and the bonus damage against demons, but if you put them in the battalion you'd get what are currently the horde bonusses as long as the battalion remains above X saurus as a whole. It'd improve their base-power and it'd make it easier to maintain their horde bonus, while at the same time leaving their maximum potential the exact same so they're unlikely to end up overpowered.

Maybe let saurus have 2 club/spear attacks and make the +1 to hit the only horde bonus at 20 models?

I think that would help a lot, losing the extra attack as soon as you drop below 30 really neuters that unit.

 

[PabloTho]

Maybe not when fielded en masse, maybe something akin to gore gruntas, when they charge a certain longer distance they get the 5/6 bonus.

Thematically this actually makes way more sense. Perhaps a charge roll of 10+ activates the 5/6 bonus? This would have the added benefit of making the Firelance Starhost much better value due to its +3 to charge rolls.

 

[Galen]

Consider that Chaos warrios are 90 Matched Play Points for 4+ save, 10 wounds,10 attacks, and 5+ ignore MW. For the same points you get almost the same out or Saurus Warriors. Saurus are just worse on their saves and suffer more from diminished returns. So fixing the save would put them on par.

Saurus Warriors are sitting on 3 attacks each at 30 models and above, and get +1 to hit on all attacks at 20 and above. 2 attacks at 3+/3+ plus one attack at 4+/4+ beats anything Chaos Warriors can output. Sure Chaos Warriors are more survivable but Saurus have way more offensive output. Also Chaos Warriors are sitting at Bravery 6 whilst Saurus are Bravery 10, plus horde bonus to Bravery. Because failing morale leads to models, not wounds, being lost, multiple wound models are more vulnerable with low Bravery. You can reliably expect your Saurus to stay in place when Chaos Warriors will be heading for the hills.