Save stacking - Menace or necessary?

[Phasteon]

7 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Well @JackStreicher does have some good points, factions lime nighthaunt, gloomspite and beasts of chaos are currently struggling a lot when it comes down to putting out damage or having the possibility to keep themself alive with save stacking (since they are pretty much already starting the game with a literally bad or not so great save characteristics)

And it is not like these mentioned armies have a ton of stuff, that can go around the save stacking abilities of other faction.

Nighthaunt for example don’t have much rend on their army roster, and while there are some units that are able to do mortal wounds, they output is currently more laughable then anything else.

yet I do believe that a small rule change to the most taken artifact of the current third edition could make at least some different in the game, and keeps it fresh, since the meta would chance.

as for nighthaunt, I really have a feeling that the only saving grace for this faction would be a new tome or a points decrease so generous that one would be able to field up to 300models and/or more (yet not even that would be a grace considering their current price)

Yeah you pick the worst 3 factions in the game right now and say a general rule/mechanic is problematic because they struggle.

They did before and neither of us has any representative data if it got better or worse for them because literally nobody plays them.

As for Nighthaunt - i strongly disagree with you here. They definately need a new tome because of how old their current rules are, but they are in no spot where they need to field 300+ models to compete. 

They have 4+ unrendeble saves in combination with 6+ (or even 5+) wards pretty much across the board. 

They can tarpit really well, I‘d just make things like Bladegheists a bit cheaper (150 for 10) which should be enough until a new tome comes out. 

If you really think Nighthaunt needs 300+ models then go ahead and play against someone with nighthaunt and let him field like 2k more points than you. 

Make a batrep (pictures & write up) and show us how fun it would be to play against 300+ wounds that ignore rend and 1/6 of damage. 

[JackStreicher]

19 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Well @JackStreicher does have some good points, factions lime nighthaunt, gloomspite and beasts of chaos are currently struggling a lot when it comes down to putting out damage or having the possibility to keep themself alive with save stacking (since they are pretty much already starting the game with a literally bad or not so great save characteristics)

And it is not like these mentioned armies have a ton of stuff, that can go around the save stacking abilities of other faction.

Nighthaunt for example don’t have much rend on their army roster, and while there are some units that are able to do mortal wounds, they output is currently more laughable then anything else.

yet I do believe that a small rule change to the most taken artifact of the current third edition could make at least some different in the game, and keeps it fresh, since the meta would chance.

as for nighthaunt, I really have a feeling that the only saving grace for this faction would be a new tome or a points decrease so generous that one would be able to field up to 300models and/or more (yet not even that would be a grace considering their current price)

I agree that NH might be better if the points of their non heroes would drop by ~ 40%

[Beliman]

44 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

It showed that even a model supposed to stick around FOREVER gets killed in a single round of shooting. 

I disagree.

When I kill him 10 out of 20 games with my -1/-2 rend weapons, I will completely change my mind. Until then, it's just an anecdote.

[Skreech Verminking]

17 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

If you really think Nighthaunt needs 300+ models then go ahead and play against someone with nighthaunt and let him field like 2k more points than you. 

Well, If I’ll ever find a person, who has such a vast amount of overpriced (in a money perspective) nighthaunt models, I’ll happily try it out😉.

Just wondering, I’m more of a skaven player (don’t own much else), you wouldn’t mind me playing that faction, right?

ps: just wondering, but how exactly can a nighthaunt army get a 5+ ward (except heroes taking the amulet)?

Edited November 6, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Nos]

It's a hilariously bad implementation of a system 

But then it's within the context of a game where throwing like TWENTY DICE is routine 

[Phasteon]

18 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Well, If I’ll ever find a person, who has such a vast amount of overpriced (in a money perspective) nighthaunt models, I’ll happily try it out😉.

Just wondering, I’m more of a skaven player (don’t own much else), you wouldn’t mind me playing that faction, right?

ps: just wondering, but how exactly can a nighthaunt army get a 5+ ward (except heroes taking the amulet)?

Kruciator can hand out a 5+ ward bubble. 

But look, my SCE list has 105 wounds at 2k points. 

Basically all my lists have between 100 - 140 wounds. 

And you want to tell us that bringing at least 300 wounds (not regarding heroes or multiwound models) is reasonable?

[Skreech Verminking]

3 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

Kruciator can hand out a 5+ ward bubble. 

But look, my SCE list has 105 wounds at 2k points. 

Basically all my lists have between 100 - 140 wounds. 

And you want to tell us that bringing at least 300 wounds (not regarding heroes or multiwound models) is reasonable?

Yes!

[Phasteon]

31 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

I agree that NH might be better if the points of their non heroes would drop by ~ 40%

I just want to point out that this guy wants to make a 10-man bladegheist unit that can still dish out up to 40 attacks at -1 with a 4+ unrendeble save 100 points. 

All while capping saves at 3+/4+ and giving +1 rend CA. 

I‘d imagine how fun it would be facing 30 Bladegheists with ~60 Attacks -2 rend that cost 300 points slicing through my (now thx to rend) 4+ Save Fulminators that come at 480 points, while they do ~halve damage because their -2 rend gets ignored. 🤔 

 

Doesnt matter if you are competitive minded or casual player, it‘s good that GW has professionals / play testers for the job and that we (as the loud minority) have no real impact in the design process.

[Skreech Verminking]

3 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

I just want to point out that this guy wants to make a 10-man bladegheist unit that can still dish out up to 40 attacks at -1 with a 4+ unrendeble save 100 points. 

Right I forgot those guys existed, I mostly meant, points reduction for chain-rasp, but forgot to add that, my fault, I guess.

meathsield units are currently pretty overpriced

Edited November 6, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Phasteon]

7 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Yes!

I have to admit,

I have 0 idea how the „standard“ skaven list looks like, but I just built a random list with Thanquol, some Stormfiends, Clanrats, and 2 Doomwheels / Warp Lightning Cannons and some little Heroes a friend of mine plays.

~140 wounds of RATS. 

And you STILL want to tell me that fielding 300+ wounds of rend ignoring / 1/6 damage ignoring ghosts is reasonable? 

[Skreech Verminking]

6 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

I have to admit,

I have 0 idea how the „standard“ skaven list looks like, but I just built a random list with Thanquol, some Stormfiends, Clanrats, and 2 Doomwheels / Warp Lightning Cannons and some little Heroes a friend of mine plays.

~140 wounds of RATS. 

And you STILL want to tell me that fielding 300+ wounds of rend ignoring / 1/6 damage ignoring ghosts is reasonable? 

yes

[Phasteon]

6 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Right I forgot those guys existed, I mostly meant, points reduction for chain-rasp, but forgot to add that, my fault, I guess.

meathsield units are currently pretty overpriced

How are 95p for 10 Chainrasps overpriced? 

You get 10 Wounds with a 5+/6+. 

Arkanauts are 100p for 10 wounds with a 4+ Save that pretty much fill the same roll, but their save is rendable, so you either put ressources into them to maybe make them stay or they die to -1 or better as fast as chain rasps. 

Hobgrots are 80p but on a 6+ Save. 

NH are good against everything that relies on high rend - high damage to kill stuff. 

I could imagine 30 Chainrasps with proper support can tarpit Nagash, Archaon or Kragnos for at least 2-3 rounds of combat, while outnumbering them at an objective.

And at this point you pretty much won the game on points.

[Phasteon]

2 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

yes

So basically you are trolling?

[Skreech Verminking]

14 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

How are 95p for 10 Chainrasps overpriced? 

You get 10 Wounds with a 5+/6+. 

Arkanauts are 100p for 10 wounds with a 4+ Save that pretty much fill the same roll, but their save is rendable, so you either put ressources into them to maybe make them stay or they die to -1 or better as fast as chain rasps. 

Hobgrots are 80p but on a 6+ Save. 

NH are good against everything that relies on high rend - high damage to kill stuff. 

I could imagine 30 Chainrasps with proper support can tarpit Nagash, Archaon or Kragnos for at least 2-3 rounds of combat, while outnumbering them at an objective.

And at this point you pretty much won the game on points.

Meh they could go down.

I can’t say for stormcast, since I haven’t played against them yet, but having seen the damage output on the currently biffed Ironjawz, being able to wield up to 200 or more meatshields, seems like a fair trait.

12 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

So basically you are trolling?

Well that depends, considering that my knowledge of nighthaunt is pretty restricted, I guess you could say that, now if we were talking abou the skaven (who are currently also struggling pretty hard) I could give you a few good examples, Why I believe clanrats need to go down a few points (20 in particularly), that could be considered a more professional statement from me-me.

Yet consider that I am just a human, and in that case can make some mistakes, like all man-things in some way or form can, even if some deny it.

So from a daemon to what I awesome to be a gentleman, would you like to continue this discussion, over the skaventide faction instead of the nighthaunt?

Edited November 6, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Phasteon]

7 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Meh they could go down.

I can’t say for stormcast, since I haven’t played against them yet, but having seen the damage output on the currently biffed Ironjawz, being able to wield up to 200 or more meatshields, seems like a fair trait.

Well that depends, considering that my knowledge of nighthaunt is pretty restricted, I guess you could say that, now if we were talking abou the skaven (who are currently also struggling pretty hard) I could give you a few good examples, Why I believe clanrats need to go down a few points (20 in particularly), that could be considered a more professional statement from me-me.

Yet consider that I am just a human, and in that case can make some mistakes, like all man-things in some way or form can, even if some deny it.

So from a daemon to what I awesome to be a gentleman, would you like to continue this discussion, over the skaventide faction instead of the nighthaunt?

Its the same point though. 

Clanrats pay 65p for 10 wounds, what I consider VERY cheap. 

Chaff like that is not supposed to stick around for very long, nor should it be too useful from a utility perspective.

GW finally implemented a mechanic that makes chaff durable enough against other chaff / chip damage if needs to be and elite the dominating force they should be. 

I can happily agree to disagree on this matter, but there is literally nothing to gain for me in discussing what should be „even cheaper“ or not. 

 

To @JackStreicher‘s point about the small minority of competitive players: 

(Sorry mate, its nothing personal, your points are just so ridiculously easy to attack) 

Someone using multiple layers of + save to reinforce his ranks (eg making full use of the mechanic) is not considered a „casual“ player for me. 

When using all the combos and tricks your army offers to win the game you are „competitive“ as per definition. 

Now you tell us, that after 40 matches against those players the game is no fun to you, which seriously makes you

a) a bad loser

b) unable to adapt to core mechanics (= a bad player)

c) unwilling to adapt to core mechanics (= both) 

Again, just ask your opponents to go easy on you - when they are just playing casually as you claim there should be no problem in doing so. 

 

[Skreech Verminking]

1 minute ago, Phasteon said:

Its the same point though. 

Clanrats pay 65p for 10 wounds, what I consider VERY cheap. 

Chaff like that is not supposed to stick around for very long, nor should it be too useful from a utility perspective.

GW finally implemented a mechanic that makes chaff durable enough against other chaff / chip damage if needs to be and elite the dominating force they should be. 

I can happily agree to disagree on this matter, but there is literally nothing to gain for me in discussing what should be „even cheaper“ or not. 

 

Mate it is true that clanrats are just meant as a tarpit, yet if that tarpit can be killed of pretty easily by units that cost less or exactly the same as a unit of clanrats, while it is also a lot more durable then the fellow ratties in total (through saves or wounds), a reduction for that said unit would be more then justified.

And I do agree that elite units should be a more dominating factor then the basic meatshield, yet having a unit of elites that cost the same or less then a unit of meatshields, and can kill them easily of in single phase, would mean, that those meatshields were basically useless, especially when those elites can be taken as a battleline option, making them the far superior unit in any shape or form. And that can clearly not be right!
 

[Phasteon]

14 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Mate it is true that clanrats are just meant as a tarpit, yet if that tarpit can be killed of pretty easily by units that cost less or exactly the same as a unit of clanrats, while it is also a lot more durable then the fellow ratties in total (through saves or wounds), a reduction for that said unit would be more then justified.

And I do agree that elite units should be a more dominating factor then the basic meatshield, yet having a unit of elites that cost the same or less then a unit of meatshields, and can kill them easily of in single phase, would mean, that those meatshields were basically useless, especially when those elites can be taken as a battleline option, making them the far superior unit in any shape or form. And that can clearly not be right!
 

Name 1 example of a unit that pays less points (6,5) per wound and dominates clanrats.

[Skreech Verminking]

27 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

Name 1 example of a unit that pays less points (6,5) per wound and dominates clanrats.

Maybe not per model, and definitely not per wound, yet if we indicate the armour save of certain units and the average damage composition, there are definitely a good amount of units that can be considered far superior then clanrats:

for example: deadwalker zombies, dire wolf (although costing 5points more) their speed and bravery characteristic makes them far more superior then five points difference  should every allow for,

Orruk ardboys, Ironbreakers, Akhelian Allopex,

Vanari bladelords, Liberators, Vanquishers, Vindictors, Pink horrors (if we consider their wounds per point, while being able to get a 5+ ward in the faction of the first prince), and so on
 

and to answer your question, 

pink Horrors.

They are currently paying 4.3 points per wound

Edited November 6, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Orbei]

Save stacking is a decent mechanic as a concept but its implementation is very problematic. Capping it at +1 to your base save might sound reasonable at first, as people don't want to see 2+ saving skeletons or something. Unfortunately what this does is favor high native save units too much. Anything with a native 3+ can hit the magic number 2+ and double it's survivability. For the same effort something on a 6+ can reach a 5+, which is only a 25% increase to survivability. Armies with good base saves can take advantage of this much easier than those with poor saves. 

I think the situation would be improved with either no cap, letting you go crazy on any unit, or (preferably) no improving at all above the base save. There also desperately needs to be an equivalent way to stack rend if we can stack saves. There's little counterplay beyond mortal wounds at present, which is also a haves and have-nots situation.

[Phasteon]

1 hour ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Maybe not per model, and definitely not per wound, yet if we indicate the armour save of certain units and the average damage composition, there are definitely a good amount of units that can be considered far superior then clanrats:

for example: deadwalker zombies, dire wolf (although costing 5points more) their speed and bravery characteristic makes them far more superior then five points difference  should every allow for,

Orruk ardboys, Ironbreakers, Akhelian Allopex,

Vanari bladelords, Liberators, Vanquishers, Vindictors, Pink horrors (if we consider their wounds per point, while being able to get a 5+ ward in the faction of the first prince), and so on
 

and to answer your question, 

pink Horrors.

They are currently paying 4.3 points per wound

I don‘t think 20 Zombies „dominate“ 20 clanrats. 

I‘d say its a wet noodle fight that the Zombies eventually win after 2-3 rounds of uneventful combat. 

Your other examples (Ironbreakers, Allopexes, Bladelords) can‘t really hold their own, as those units are a) more expensive and b) more fitting in the elite category of the game. 

Everyone knows that Pink Horrors are/were one of the most efficient tarpits in the game, but I wouldnt say they „dominate clanrats“ as well. 

I‘d say if you look at each of those 3 units (Zombies, Clanrats, Horrors) they all have a pretty similar task within their army, the are all accordingly prized for it (in comparison of INTERNAL not EXTERNAL balance, which is far more important), neither of those is obviously over- or undercosted. 

You could make clanrats 110 points for 20, but I could find the same arguments to make 2 Fulminators 180 points. 

Thats just not how external balance works at all. 

Edited November 6, 2021 by Phasteon

[Skreech Verminking]

35 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

I don‘t think 20 Zombies „dominate“ 20 clanrats. 

I‘d say its a wet noodle fight that the Zombies eventually win after 2-3 rounds of uneventful combat. 

Your other examples (Ironbreakers, Allopexes, Bladelords) can‘t really hold their own, as those units are a) more expensive and b) more fitting in the elite category of the game. 

Everyone knows that Pink Horrors are/were one of the most efficient tarpits in the game, but I wouldnt say they „dominate clanrats“ as well. 

I‘d say if you look at each of those 3 units (Zombies, Clanrats, Horrors) they all have a pretty similar task within their army, the are all accordingly prized for it (in comparison of INTERNAL not EXTERNAL balance, which is far more important), neither of those is obviously over- oder undercosted. 

You could make clanrats 110 points for 20, but I could find the same arguments to make 2 Fulminators 180 points. 

Thats just not how external balance works at all. 

Is it fair though, when certain meatshield units, that are somewhat superior then clanrats, have a similar amount of wounds (or more), cost less, as much or just barely 5points more then them?

And then theres the skaven faction in total struggling a lot in the current meta (as well as others (gloomspite could use a reduction and so on….) of course we could just call it a day, wait 1-4years till a new battletome comes out to repair the mistakes, yet this seems pretty stupid, and if gw isn’t willing to update warscroll via a faq, or through the generals handbooks, points seems the next best way.

at this point for the ratties, making clanrats cheaper, would allow them to maybe be able to take an additional weapon team, or maybe be able to take another warplightning cannon into their army, it isn’t that gamebreaking.

I have no idea how stormcast are currently performing in the meta, nor do I currently know which units has been given the name Fulminators

[Phasteon]

59 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Is it fair though, when certain meatshield units, that are somewhat superior then clanrats, have a similar amount of wounds (or more), cost less, as much or just barely 5points more then them?

And then theres the skaven faction in total struggling a lot in the current meta (as well as others (gloomspite could use a reduction and so on….) of course we could just call it a day, wait 1-4years till a new battletome comes out to repair the mistakes, yet this seems pretty stupid, and if gw isn’t willing to update warscroll via a faq, or through the generals handbooks, points seems the next best way.

at this point for the ratties, making clanrats cheaper, would allow them to maybe be able to take an additional weapon team, or maybe be able to take another warplightning cannon into their army, it isn’t that gamebreaking.

I have no idea how stormcast are currently performing in the meta, nor do I currently know which units has been given the name Fulminators

We are talking about 2 completely different views of balance here. 

 

You take the „simple“ comparison by putting 2 units in a vacuum. 

„Who would win? 1k points of Zombies or 1k points of Clanrats?“

Which couldnt be further away from what the game is about.

 

My view is about the far more „complex“ view by comparing units by how good they benifit their army as a whole. 

„What hammer do Zombies screen?“

VS

„What hammer do Clanrats screen?“

Maybe, and just maybe - the relatively fragile but strong ranged units of the skaven are more valuable to protect than Zombiedragons or other big stuff of the Gravelords. 

So naturally, Skaven should pay more points for their chaff. 

If I‘m not wrong here the Skaven also pay less points for their hammers than Gravelords do, which makes it even more reasonable. 

And we are talking about very little points here, its not that Zombies are 115 and Clanrats are 150. 

 

I 100% agree that many armies need a new tome, because they don’t fully fit into 3.0 yet. 

But, in this discussion about „save stacking as a big problem“ the only intelligent thing to say is „its far too early to tell“. 

I played like 25 games so far and there was not a single game where a stacked save felt oppressive (and I faced 10 protectors with mystic shield and lantern). 
 

It felt challenging at best and at the worst it was like „damn, I should have focused XY instead“

Edited November 6, 2021 by Phasteon

[Skreech Verminking]

3 hours ago, Phasteon said:

We are talking about 2 completely different views of balance here. 

 

You take the „simple“ comparison by putting 2 units in a vacuum. 

„Who would win? 1k points of Zombies or 1k points of Clanrats?“

Which couldnt be further away from what the game is about.

 

My view is about the far more „complex“ view by comparing units by how good they benifit their army as a whole. 

„What hammer do Zombies screen?“

VS

„What hammer do Clanrats screen?“

Maybe, and just maybe - the relatively fragile but strong ranged units of the skaven are more valuable to protect than Zombiedragons or other big stuff of the Gravelords. 

So naturally, Skaven should pay more points for their chaff. 

If I‘m not wrong here the Skaven also pay less points for their hammers than Gravelords do, which makes it even more reasonable. 

And we are talking about very little points here, its not that Zombies are 115 and Clanrats are 150. 

 

I 100% agree that many armies need a new tome, because they don’t fully fit into 3.0 yet. 

But, in this discussion about „save stacking as a big problem“ the only intelligent thing to say is „its far too early to tell“. 

I played like 25 games so far and there was not a single game where a stacked save felt oppressive (and I faced 10 protectors with mystic shield and lantern). 
 

It felt challenging at best and at the worst it was like „damn, I should have focused XY instead“

Well, currently most of our hammer units are either worse then that of the dead-things, and others who aren’t that bad, have a good chance of just blowing themself up without having done much.

not sure how that makes it fair in a comparison

[pnkdth]

3 hours ago, Phasteon said:

But, in this discussion about „save stacking as a big problem“ the only intelligent thing to say is „its far too early to tell“. 

I played like 25 games so far and there was not a single game where a stacked save felt oppressive (and I faced 10 protectors with mystic shield and lantern). 
 

It felt challenging at best and at the worst it was like „damn, I should have focused XY instead“

Depends how you define the problem. Under your definition and experience it is not but take other local metas and experience you might very well end up with a very different point of view. When people say they're having a miserable time versus some armies and that it severely limits their army's options (as in having to bend over backwards and create ridiculously game-y lists) you got to account their experiences as well.

 

 

 

[Phasteon]

2 hours ago, pnkdth said:

Depends how you define the problem. Under your definition and experience it is not but take other local metas and experience you might very well end up with a very different point of view. When people say they're having a miserable time versus some armies and that it severely limits their army's options (as in having to bend over backwards and create ridiculously game-y lists) you got to account their experiences as well.

 

 

 

I never disagreed with people having a problem with save stacking, I disagree that its a general problem that must be „fixed“ 😉