Were Jabberslythes considered too powerful?

[themortalgod]

6 minutes ago, Domowoj said:

Yeah, the chimerae are great. They were already hard-hitting with a +2 to charge rolls, a variety of rending attacks, and a reliable MW-dealing shooting attack. Their warscroll got a big boost: ALL of the melee weapons get more attacks than they did before the BoC release.

Yeah, bummer I'm not really a fan of the GW model. I wonder if any other companies make a good chimera that would work. I will have to look around. 

Edit: Mierce has a really nice one but I think the scale is too big. Also that price.... http://mierce-miniatures.com/index.php?act=pro&pre=mrm_dkl_ysn_kys_mbs_901_000

[kenshin620]

Speaking of the triple headed beast if one was really concerned about the power of Jabbers, maybe one could add two heads and slightly change up the body, then I think the Jabber could be a nurgle inspired (or just plain ol mutated) Chimera.

[Aelfric]

4 hours ago, Kramer said:

because you must attack if within range

This is a big difference.  Under the old system you could tie up a Jabberslythe with a small unit and simply not attack it, as most of it's damage output was dependant on it being wounded.  Although it deals less damage now, half of a lot is still better than nothing.

[themortalgod]

1 minute ago, Aelfric said:

This is a big difference.  Under the old system you could tie up a Jabberslythe with a small unit and simply not attack it, as most of it's damage output was dependant on it being wounded.  Although it deals less damage now, half of a lot is still better than nothing.

Only if you compare against nothing.  But in reality, your are comparing against 160pts of alternative choices. 

That said, I preferred the old mechanism. There was counter play as you describe above. Plenty of it so it came down to "how" you used it to determine its effectiveness. 

[Aelfric]

2 minutes ago, themortalgod said:

Only if you compare against nothing.  But in reality, your are comparing against 160pts of alternative choices. 

That said, I preferred the old mechanism. There was counter play as you describe above. Plenty of it so it came down to "how" you used it to determine its effectiveness. 

That's true, it's competing with a lot of alternatives for that 160 pts now.  But, still, the fact that your opponent has to attack does put more onus on them now when deciding how to deal with it.   It may not be the best option, but it's far from useless.

[themortalgod]

30 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

That's true, it's competing with a lot of alternatives for that 160 pts now.  But, still, the fact that your opponent has to attack does put more onus on them now when deciding how to deal with it.   It may not be the best option, but it's far from useless.

To a degree but I'd only agree with that if said choice was pretty bad. Mortal Wounds your opponent "can" choose to accept are far less powerful than mortal wounds you choose. Before the Jabber could put potentially put out more MWs than anything similar costs could but the downside that your opponent chose when those mortal wounds would manifest.

Now it doesn't even out MW similarily costed units that have agency on when and where their mortal wounds are applied. For example, for 20 more pts I can bring an Ogroid. That Ogroid is tougher, on average (Thanks to its healing). It also does more damage in close combat and it has far higher mortal wound output if you roll average when you take into account its spell and its charge. On top of that, it can unbind. (And lets be honest, the Ogroid isn't very good either)

I feel a clever general "can" make use of a Jabby in an effective way, but that same clever general would make better use of so many stronger things that cost similar pts. 

The way I see it is that the Jabby's identity USED to be its Bile Blood, it was a kamikaze that has counterplay but had a psychological impact on the board. It doesn't anymore, the Bile Blood is just a side perk. The identity of the Jabby is now more the Aura (which is also weaker), unfortunately, my 2¢ with 1/6 chance abilities is that they are never enough to actually bring a unit for unless you are rolling a lot of dice. Sometimes they will be great, most of the time they won't do anything. 

 

[ledha]

they were completely busted but in a ****** army, which balanced them.

Old jabber with the new battletome would have been stupid

[themortalgod]

2 minutes ago, ledha said:

they were completely busted but in a ****** army, which balanced them.

Old jabber with the new battletome would have been stupid

They were/are Monsters of Chaos so almost any chaos army could ally them in. Yet you still didn't see them being tossed in to top tier lists. I think they "seemed" super powerful, but when push came to shove most people would still leave them at home. There were a ton of ways to counter them. 

[ledha]

3 minutes ago, themortalgod said:

They were/are Monsters of Chaos so almost any chaos army could ally them in. Yet you still didn't see them being tossed in to top tier lists. I think they "seemed" super powerful, but when push came to shove most people would still leave them at home. There were a ton of ways to counter them. 

it's because top tier chaos list were things like changehost and all which didn't had any place to put the jabber in it, not because there were just "ok"

[themortalgod]

2 hours ago, ledha said:

it's because top tier chaos list were things like changehost and all which didn't had any place to put the jabber in it, not because there were just "ok"

Thats not true. But even such, if it was truly as powerful as you suggest, people would have found space for it. I think we are probably talking about a model that was 20-40pts undercosted in the old rules, and now it is 40-60pts overcosted. Why couldn't there have been a middle ground?

[Greyshadow]

On the plus side how awesome would two fully painted Jabberslyth look together. I tip my hat to you Sir @themortalgod!

[themortalgod]

12 minutes ago, Greyshadow said:

On the plus side how awesome would two fully painted Jabberslyth look together. I tip my hat to you Sir @themortalgod!

Right? Though my motivation to paint them is pretty low now... They are sitting on my hobby table all built and ready to be painted. 

[Greyshadow]

Sorry if you thought I was being sarcastic. I genuinely think it is great when people use a bit of creativity when making their list and I do love the Jabberslyth kit. With a General’s Handbook every year I guess we all need to be aware that what is powerful one year might be less so in another.

Perhaps sell one of the Jabberslyth?

[Killax]

I still see it as one of the things that might eventually phase out, perhaps because of that they altered it allready so eventually nobody will care about it  

[the_prophecy]

On 9/24/2018 at 5:27 AM, themortalgod said:

I recently picked up a pair of Jabberslythes for my Tzeentch army as I thought they were pretty cool models and also seemed interesting on the battlefield. I didn't particularly feel they were super powerful, though they did offer some interesting tactical options which I kinda liked. I just read the new Beasts of Chaos book and GW smacked em with the double nerf bat by cutting their MW output from Bile Blood in half while also making them more expensive. Kinda feeling frustrated as it sort of feels like I just burned $150 as they are starting to feel less worth taking at all now... 

 

yeah thats what happens when you buy Minis for their temporarily "powerful rules" especially expensive ones. You say you like the models, then why do you buy two of them if not for their super duper rules ? If you like the mini then that should not bother you as much because that will not change.

We all know that the rules and meta will change now and then so it is no surprise. Its funny when people buy like 9 Obliterators in W40k and 2 Demon Princes and nothing else and a month later the netlist is not strong anymore so they stuck on the "nice miniatures" which they will never field anymore. the same with 3 Mournghuls etc.

No offense though because i dont think you had the same intention just saying that i saw those things alot and heard "i like the minis" was just an excuse to buy redundant Minis that had "temporarily powerful rules"

[hughwyeth]

Gotta say I'm surprised they got nerfed. I've only ever seen my one at any games in my local store- didn't realise people thought they were overpowered! Averag 5 d3 mortal wounds is powerful, but the chance of getting into combat with no wounds is unlikely and even then you were basically paying 120pts  for 5 d3 mortal wounds. Tzeentch can pump that out in a load of their spells pretty easy in my experience!

[svnvaldez]

On 9/23/2018 at 8:34 PM, kenshin620 said:

Either that or its once again the unfounded Conspiracy that they're trying to ween people off finecast purchases.

100% believe that theory.

[themortalgod]

3 minutes ago, svnvaldez said:

Either that or its once again the unfounded Conspiracy that they're trying to ween people off finecast purchases.

100% believe that theory.

How would you account for them heavily buffing the Chimera then?

[Johann]

I brought him for the model and as a part of my army. i‘m also annoyed, that he cost more points for less rules, because now this handsome guy will see signifant less playtime.

I think, not only „Powergamers“ are slightly indignant about this double nerf (points+rules)

[kenshin620]

19 minutes ago, themortalgod said:

How would you account for them heavily buffing the Chimera then?

Well the chimera is plastic!

 

The finecast conspiracy may have some merit in some cases....other times it falls apart. The nurgle Harbinger of Decay for example is a great hero in many nurgle lists. Icefall Yhetees were a hidden gem for BCR.

[decker_cky]

Nurgle players dodged a bullet - I think that was the last battletome before GW started making all auras "wholly within" and made exploding 6's on unmodified values rather than on 6+ (though GW minimizd that issue on blightkings by making it impossible for them to get +1 to hit in nurgle allegiance). 

Harbringer with a wholly within condition will be MUCH weaker, as it currently functions as a fulcrum around which you have a huge area of resilience. 

[Nico]

Wholly within is generally bad for the game. It adds a lot of micromanagement and scope for gotcha moments when you pile in one model out of wholly within etc..

The alleged problem of congaing has led to the worse solution of the split units rule, which results in certain kill one model abilities wiping out half a unit. Law of unintended consequences striking again.

[Myzyrael]

32 minutes ago, Nico said:

Wholly within is generally bad for the game. It adds a lot of micromanagement and scope for gotcha moments when you pile in one model out of wholly within etc..

The alleged problem of congaing has led to the worse solution of the split units rule, which results in certain kill one model abilities wiping out half a unit. Law of unintended consequences striking again.

Ive never seen the micromanagement as a problem, but we play not tournament level hard. My personal experience with wholly within is that it reduced crazy “I buff my whole army with this dude you cannot see/kill/...” thing. 

On the downside I dislike that some armies have it already and some still have just whitin. Oh how I would love to see that seraphon get that cure for their annoying standard bearer ?.

[decker_cky]

Yeah, having abused Harbringer with a unit of 20 blightkings and other similar buffs, I fully agree with the wholly within approach (and the unmodified 6's approach).  A true conga line was rarely necessary - a short tail from wherever the unit really is was sufficient to cover basically anywhere on the table. 

[kenshin620]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

 

The alleged problem of congaing has led to the worse solution of the split units rule, which results in certain kill one model abilities wiping out half a unit. Law of unintended consequences striking again.

Other than large base MSUs like monstrous cavalry or big base infantry, how many times has this actually happened? Outside of a few abilities that specifically targets a particular model, is it really that hard to not have 3-6 model buffer to make sure half a unit doesn't disappear?