AoS 2 - Gutbusters Discussion

[Mincemeat]

Seen some pretty cool pictures recently of a Tyrant converted from a megaboss, has anyone else tried this? 

From what I saw it just looks like Megaboss body+ ogor head (Ironblaster gunner helmet looks like the one) and a gut plate with some greenstuff. 

Keen to make my own for a possible Ironjawz/gutbuster army whose whole shtick Is that no one's sure whether the leaders an ogor or an orruk, but he's dead 'ard and can eat lots so the troops just go with it. 

[Antonio Rodrigues]

Yup! Actually I just finished mine, just need some touch-ups...

I added a second dragon skull, put some pelts, a gutgouger and a shield, and choose a very badass looking head...

actually he has a “second version” of him, riding a stonehorn, but this one is a more complex conversion, because you need to reposition the legs for him to sit on the saddle...

hope you enjoy!

cheers

AJ

[Baron Wastelands]

So, with the ghb 19 callout for points adjustments, I don’t personally feel Gutbusters are in a bad place at the moment, pointswise. I mean, we would all fast for a week for a new battletome, or even just some allegiance abilities, but I’m happy with most of the costs. So my only question to the faithful is really: at what points cost would you play an ironblaster (or several)?

[kenshin620]

If theres one thing I wonder would be beneficial its should Ironguts be taken in packs of 2? Thus you can fully utilize a box of 4. Seems weird that the ironguts box breaks the "cant build straight out of the box into game mode" mentality that gw really loves. I mean Skaven Rat Ogres are taken in units of 2 (well their box only comes with 2 in the first place...)

 

Or is it better to have the current 3 man increments so you can field a minimum of champion, bellower, standard bearer?

Edited November 15, 2018 by kenshin620

[James S]

2 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

So, with the ghb 19 callout for points adjustments, I don’t personally feel Gutbusters are in a bad place at the moment, pointswise. I mean, we would all fast for a week for a new battletome, or even just some allegiance abilities, but I’m happy with most of the costs. So my only question to the faithful is really: at what points cost would you play an ironblaster (or several)?

80pts per. I wouldn't even be bothered to put in a list at 100pts. Would take 20 Grots over it all day. But at 80pts it becomes something to think about. Just my thoughts on that.

1 hour ago, kenshin620 said:

If theres one thing I wonder would be beneficial its should Ironguts be taken in packs of 2? Thus you can fully utilize a box of 4. Seems weird that the ironguts box breaks the "cant build straight out of the box into game mode" mentality that gw really loves. I mean Skaven Rat Ogres are taken in units of 2 (well their box only comes with 2 in the first place...)

 

Or is it better to have the current 3 man increments so you can field a minimum of champion, bellower, standard bearer?

Guts come in increments of 3. The minimum unit is full command and I would suggest always talking that. If you go up in quantity, there are plenty around here that take units of six or nine.

The odd packaging is from a long gone era of Warhammer. 

[PlasticCraic]

2 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

at what points cost would you play an ironblaster (or several)?

I've thought about this a fair bit, and IMO the current warscroll is almost impossible to point fairly.  A single, incredibly swingy attach can only be so cheap.

I mean, as James said above, I wouldn't take one at 100, no way.  Compare the output (and durability) to a Ballista and it's a bit of a joke.  I would consider them at 80 but really they'd have to be 60 points before I'd take multiples.

It won't happen, because there's no way GW can be bothered to type out a sentence on our behalf, but I think a better solution would be to issue an Erratum in the January FAQ that changes the number of attacks on their weapon profile upwards.  

[PlasticCraic]

1 hour ago, kenshin620 said:

If theres one thing I wonder would be beneficial its should Ironguts be taken in packs of 2? Thus you can fully utilize a box of 4. Seems weird that the ironguts box breaks the "cant build straight out of the box into game mode" mentality that gw really loves. I mean Skaven Rat Ogres are taken in units of 2 (well their box only comes with 2 in the first place...)

 

Or is it better to have the current 3 man increments so you can field a minimum of champion, bellower, standard bearer?

Well if we're wishlisting...Maybe just change their Pitch Battle profile in the next GH to give us 4 models for the current cost of 3?  

[Mincemeat]

On 11/14/2018 at 12:04 PM, Antonio Rodrigues said:

Yup! Actually I just finished mine, just need some touch-ups...

I added a second dragon skull, put some pelts, a gutgouger and a shield, and choose a very badass looking head...

actually he has a “second version” of him, riding a stonehorn, but this one is a more complex conversion, because you need to reposition the legs for him to sit on the saddle...



hope you enjoy!

cheers

AJ

He's a beauty alright! Some great use of BCR bits there, consider me inspired! Thanks for sharing. 

[Kramer]

17 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

So, with the ghb 19 callout for points adjustments, I don’t personally feel Gutbusters are in a bad place at the moment, pointswise. I mean, we would all fast for a week for a new battletome, or even just some allegiance abilities, but I’m happy with most of the costs. So my only question to the faithful is really: at what points cost would you play an ironblaster (or several)?

I agree, most costs seem alright. Untilllll you add allegiance abilities. So there’s not much sensible to be said about that   maybe  if we KNOW nothing is coming maybe drop everything  

Regarding the ironblaster, it’s a bit weird it’s one of the few things that can threaten your opponents backfield (together with gorgers), that should make it so worthwhile but it’s so wiffy everything else is better at their respective jobs  

but then again... I really like the model 😂

[sorokyl]

Nice Tyrant! 

I still need a gutgouger tyrant.   I do have this maneater:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Ogre-Kingdoms-Paymaster-Maneater

and I would call his weapon a "gutgouger" excpet that a gutgouger has 3" range so obviously is not a fist weapon.   I could put a gargant hacker strapped to his back... or extend the chain and have a gutgouger hanging from it on the floor. 

I would do the basic ogor body with gutgouger but I kind of want something with a more dynamic pose. I like the Tyrants wide pose, he is definitely not rank-and-file. Any other ideas?  The orc is cool but it is $34

 

[CaptainSoup]

21 minutes ago, Kramer said:

I agree, most costs seem alright. Untilllll you add allegiance abilities. So there’s not much sensible to be said about that   maybe  if we KNOW nothing is coming maybe drop everything  

Totally agree with this. If Gutbusters aren't getting any help in the form of a battletome or allegiance abilities then they totally should get a points decrease to help compensate. 

[Kramer]

33 minutes ago, CaptainSoup said:

Totally agree with this. If Gutbusters aren't getting any help in the form of a battletome or allegiance abilities then they totally should get a points decrease to help compensate. 

Buttt do give us allegiance abilities 😂

[Baron Wastelands]

I think 80 points makes the ironblaster a very attractive option. Part of the issue is that we want it to be a cannon. It isn’t really, it might do a tiny bit of ranged damage occasionally in a battle. But as an 80 point chariot that can just occasionally add something at range - take a monster off top wounds, or chip away at a horde - it starts to look really tanky, and a bit objective-holdy.

It’s never going to do the job it used to. But with a bit of a rethink about what I should expect it to do, and an accompanying points drop, I could be convinced to take them again. I want to be convinced to take them again.

[sorokyl]

 

22 minutes ago, Baron Wastelands said:

It’s never going to do the job it used to. But with a bit of a rethink about what I should expect it to do, and an accompanying points drop, I could be convinced to take them again. I want to be convinced to take them again.

 

I mean, is it out of the realm of possibility for them to redo the warscroll? That would only happen with a battletome, I think, but it's possible.   (Saying this as i just got my 3rd scraplauncher/ironblaster in the mail today...)

[Baron Wastelands]

3 minutes ago, sorokyl said:

 

I mean, is it out of the realm of possibility for them to redo the warscroll? That would only happen with a battletome, I think, but it's possible.   (Saying this as i just got my 3rd scraplauncher/ironblaster in the mail today...)

It’s very unlikely, and doesn’t happen often without a new book. Think the only one in ghbs past is the grundstok thunderers, and that was a nerf, not a buff. Possible with a book of course - BoC made some changes to rules and options in quite a few units.

[Mincemeat]

If they just upped the damage to 2d6 and points to 160 again I think it would be a decent little horde killer for a reasonable price. Hopefully we do get a book but there's no reason they can't update the pdf scrolls like when they removed the min range. 

It really is criminal to have a model that awesome that has so little impact on the tabletop. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Mincemeat
I can't make word propa

[kenshin620]

I think they should reintroduce Grapeshot options for cannons so you can get a more guarantee on a number of hits, rather than a single cannon shot that could easily wiff and do 1 damage. (khorne skullcannons also suffer from this problem)

So you can have like maybe 3D6 4+ to hit 5+ to wound no rend at a super short range (like 8-12") rerolling one or more shot dice if theres 10+ models

[James S]

 

22 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

I think 80 points makes the ironblaster a very attractive option. Part of the issue is that we want it to be a cannon. It isn’t really, it might do a tiny bit of ranged damage occasionally in a battle. But as an 80 point chariot that can just occasionally add something at range - take a monster off top wounds, or chip away at a horde - it starts to look really tanky, and a bit objective-holdy.

It’s never going to do the job it used to. But with a bit of a rethink about what I should expect it to do, and an accompanying points drop, I could be convinced to take them again. I want to be convinced to take them again.

Great little write up dude. You were able to put my thoughts into words! It really does become an attractive option at 80pts. Can't cry about a big cannon with 1 shot if it's cheap. And also it's role can change considerably. Would definitely freshen up some list building.

Downside is this is GW, so don't hold your breathe on any changes.

[Mayple]

11 hours ago, James S said:

 

Great little write up dude. You were able to put my thoughts into words! It really does become an attractive option at 80pts. Can't cry about a big cannon with 1 shot if it's cheap. And also it's role can change considerably. Would definitely freshen up some list building.

Downside is this is GW, so don't hold your breathe on any changes.

Imagine if it had D6 shots for whatever reason, but remained the same price I could get behind that.

[Baron Wastelands]

While it would be nice (and fit the model!) if the cannon was more useful, all the suggestions about increasing shots or damage start to make it both a tanky chariot and artillery, in which case its points should probably increase ... and we’re into a big rewrite for it. Think that is likely when we get the Gutbusters battletome (😉) but in the meantime, I think @James S suggestion of 80 pts is probably the best shout. Compare it with chariots in e.g. greenskins, BoC, even StD rather than with large artillery pieces, and it starts to look better value for the role. Now, the fact that we need a long range artillery piece more than we need a chariot makes it maybe harder to swallow, but that shouldn’t affect an objective costing, particularly when you think about a mixed destruction list (I.e. at what point cost would you take the ironblaster over say a greenskins chariot? At 80 pts each, every time).

[Mayple]

@Baron Wastelands

Compare it's current iteration to the moonclan grots Squig Gobba (combat capable artillery) for the same cost, Stormcast ballista (more tanky, better damage potential) for less cost, or the Ironweld arsenal cannon (double the amount of shots, identical hit/wound/rend/damage profile, greater range I think?) for same cost.

It would not be unreasonable to double the number of shots on the gutbuster cannon, or even make it a random shot value. It would simply make it worth it's current points. 

It being slightly survivable does not make it too cheap if that were to happen. It is still garbage in close combat, and too slow and unreliable to serve as a mobile artillery piece. 

[Baron Wastelands]

57 minutes ago, Mayple said:

@Baron Wastelands

Compare it's current iteration to the moonclan grots Squig Gobba (combat capable artillery) for the same cost, Stormcast ballista (more tanky, better damage potential) for less cost, or the Ironweld arsenal cannon (double the amount of shots, identical hit/wound/rend/damage profile, greater range I think?) for same cost.

It would not be unreasonable to double the number of shots on the gutbuster cannon, or even make it a random shot value. It would simply make it worth it's current points. 

It being slightly survivable does not make it too cheap if that were to happen. It is still garbage in close combat, and too slow and unreliable to serve as a mobile artillery piece. 

But the ironblaster has a 7” move, everything else you cite has 3-4”. I agree they are better at being artillery, I’m suggesting that the ironblaster is more of an ogor chariot, really, and since GW have asked for points adjustments (only), I’m trying to define it and cost it on its current profile. Would I take more shorty but slower, for current cost, if that was on offer? Absolutely!

From your examples, I also think the SC ballista is under-costed currently. The squig gobba is an interesting example, though; as it’s first warscroll was so bad, the joke at the time was that it should cost minus points in order to take it. It got fixed, and it’s one of a small number of warscrolls that got fixed without a new book. So maybe we should be comparing the two as much as possible!

[Mayple]

1 hour ago, Baron Wastelands said:

But the ironblaster has a 7” move, everything else you cite has 3-4”. I agree they are better at being artillery, I’m suggesting that the ironblaster is more of an ogor chariot, really, and since GW have asked for points adjustments (only), I’m trying to define it and cost it on its current profile. Would I take more shorty but slower, for current cost, if that was on offer? Absolutely!

From your examples, I also think the SC ballista is under-costed currently. The squig gobba is an interesting example, though; as it’s first warscroll was so bad, the joke at the time was that it should cost minus points in order to take it. It got fixed, and it’s one of a small number of warscrolls that got fixed without a new book. So maybe we should be comparing the two as much as possible!

Also gonna mention the Khorne Skull Cannon as a very solid comparison. 10 points cheaper, two wounds lighter, but faster, more range, and doesn't take up a "Warmachine" slot Comparable combat effectiveness. Also super strong when taken in one of the battalions available to Khorne (Where they then get to shoot in the hero phase as well)

I agree with the squig gobba as probably the closest comparison as a "Warmachine"  As a chariot, it'd be the Khorne Skull Cannon

 

Edit: I'm actually a bit unsure about whether the skull cannon takes up a war machine slot, but even if it does; you can take it in units of up to 3, so still a work around available.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Mayple

[Baron Wastelands]

3 hours ago, Mayple said:

Also gonna mention the Khorne Skull Cannon as a very solid comparison. 10 points cheaper, two wounds lighter, but faster, more range, and doesn't take up a "Warmachine" slot Comparable combat effectiveness. Also super strong when taken in one of the battalions available to Khorne (Where they then get to shoot in the hero phase as well)

I agree with the squig gobba as probably the closest comparison as a "Warmachine"  As a chariot, it'd be the Khorne Skull Cannon

 

Edit: I'm actually a bit unsure about whether the skull cannon takes up a war machine slot, but even if it does; you can take it in units of up to 3, so still a work around available.

Yep, the skull cannon is an interesting example. Agree that the move/wounds trade off is roughly equivalent. And it has a better cannon - easier to hit, and with a chance to fire in the combat phase too. (It does take an artillery slot, but as you say, can take multiples). 

So the skull cannon is currently 150 points.  If the ironblaster were 100 pts, you could take 3 for 2 skull cannons ... if 80 pts, then almost 2 for 1. Hmmm, coupled with the fact that the ironblaster has something most chariots don’t (an occasional cannon shot), maybe 80 is a bit low then; but then we’re back to: how many people would realistically include an ironblaster at 100 pts, even in pure Gutbusters?

Of course, we could suggest dropping the skull cannon a bit too ☺️

[Pitloze]

The warscroll builder had an really nasty tease. It let you put Ironblasters in units. Which made them much better as it would reduce drops, lets you buff an entire unit with spells or butcher ability. It also made them much better allies for BCR.