Is shooting overpowered?

[Nico]

The problem is that it's countering Gunline with more Gunline e.g. Khorne taking Skullcannons to shoot off the Boss. Not a great direction for the short term.

[Nico]

The only FEC answer is 12 Crypt Horrors plus mystic shield plus the Ward save spell plus the 5+ Ward - for 48 wounds of 4+, 5+, 5+ with models coming back.

[Vespan]

Kunin' Ruk seems very strong but if you look at the cost it would be Minimum 560+ cost of the wizzard= 660-700.  This is a cost of 4 units of judicators.

So you invest more than third of your points to pull that silly shooting off. And 2 volleys of shooting mean 180 shots, 60 hits and 30 wounds. That is potentially a dead Archaon. But vs Lord on Dracoth who is not a monster might not be enough. Especially if he's hiding in terrain. 

Now the 4 units of Judicators will deal ~20 wounds (thank to leader's bows), but they will always have a rend of -1 and they are not dependant on 2 heroes buffign them nor on their numbers.

And they are some combo-breakers. Like luminark of hysh that can one shot him with 10" move and 30" range. Or one unit of cameleon skinks which appear from nowhere and dart him to death.

 

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

Just to add weight to my point above I've done some maths on the stats of the arrowboys.

Essentially the kunnin ruk and a +1 to hit buff triples the offensive output of the unit, without it they're fairly middling compared to other ranged units for their points and under 20 models they're particularly sub par.

A hard counter I imagine is any unit with multiple decent saves like death faction with allegiance ability or Fyreslayer units. Alongside killing the buffing heroes with solid tactics of course.

Math:

Unbuffed under 20 models

2x0.33x0.5x1 = 0.33

Unbuffed

3x0.33x0.5x1 = 0.495

Buffed under 20 models

6x0.5x0.5x1 = 1

Buffed

6x0.5x0.5x1 = 1.5

[daedalus81]

6 hours ago, Nico said:

People keep saying it falls apart when you lose the Warboss. Yes - this does take out the exploding attacks and the double shoot. However it's still 120 attacks at 4+, 4+ (-1 rend vs monsters) (with the +1 to hit Brutal Beast Spirits spell). So it's doing 15 wounds to a 4+ save unit. Also it's 40 bodies and 80 wounds to get rid of! This for a mere 400 points.

400 + 100 (big boss) + 100 (hand of gork caster) + 100 (brutal beasts caster) + 60 (kunnin ruk).

Like it was mentioned earlier - kunnin ruk isn't the biggest problem.  It affects one unit only just like the spells.  They also have a very piddly 6+ - not modifiable, but still just a 6+.  A large volume of low rend attacks would be a suitable counter.

Armies like pure bloodbound has a bit of an issue, because they lack debuffs to hit and anti-horde abilities.  Unfortunately they'll have to branch out a little to deal with this sort of thing more easily.

[Oppenheimer]

I didn't read all the other posts so apologies if this is a repeat. But what makes shooting the biggest problem is hero sniping. The games needs either a look out sir or line of sight to be more restrictive. If LoS was at least needing to see more than 50% of the model then on foot heroes could hide at least.

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

I didn't read all the other posts so apologies if this is a repeat. But what makes shooting the biggest problem is hero sniping. The games needs either a look out sir or line of sight to be more restrictive. If LoS was at least needing to see more than 50% of the model then on foot heroes could hide at least.

From what I've seen, if this is your issue with shooting then you need more terrain on your table!

Or you are playing with a primarily combat army rather than a mixed force and expect to be able to counter your hard counter.

[daedalus81]

Heroes also doubled in wounds and cannons don't hit quite as often nor do they typically negate all armor.  A 4+ LOS on a 3 wound hero is about the same as a 6 wound hero without it.  They only other loss is totally shielding a hero in a unit, which caused lots of issues in the past anyway.

[Dave Fraser]

1 hour ago, Oppenheimer said:

I didn't read all the other posts so apologies if this is a repeat. But what makes shooting the biggest problem is hero sniping. The games needs either a look out sir or line of sight to be more restrictive. If LoS was at least needing to see more than 50% of the model then on foot heroes could hide at least.

This would actually make the Bonesplitters list being talked about that much better rather than balancing it out.  The biggest weakness of the list is the importance of that 6w character on foot who does the buffing, if he was safer the list would be even nastier.

[chord]

Is shooting overpowered?  Yes of course it is.  Is shooting a cruise missile from afar overpowered in the real world?  yes. 

Throughout history ranged attacks are "overpowered"  so I'm ok with that in AOS as well.

[Oppenheimer]

2 hours ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

From what I've seen, if this is your issue with shooting then you need more terrain on your table!

Or you are playing with a primarily combat army rather than a mixed force and expect to be able to counter your hard counter.

I play Death so unless I use TK I have no access to (non-scream) shooting. The only thing that keeps my slowly trudging infantry from being wiped by a gunline is the death allegiance save and I like to use named characters which hurts it's effectiveness.

 

I tried to put a vampire on foot surrounded by hexwraths and still got picked off because little bits of my hero could be seen between the legs of the horses.

I find that all the AoS scenery has holes in it since it's ruins and the forests don't block anything. But, I suppose that's a better idea than nothing.

[Nico]

Quote

I play Death so unless I use TK I have no access to (non-scream) shooting. The only thing that keeps my slowly trudging infantry from being wiped by a gunline is the death allegiance save and I like to use named characters which hurts it's effectiveness.

It's sad when it has got to the point where if someone mentions using infantry (without deep striking or speed buffs) to cross the board and fight (as opposed to being the bunker wall for a Gunline), I am actually a little bit shocked.

[Vespan]

This discussion is very funny for me anyway. Bonesplitterz aside, I belive that shooting in this game actualy sucks :-) My destruction army thx to allegiance bonus and bonus run or charge form musitians, van engage the enemy on second turn (or even first if enemy starts and rushes for an objective in the middle). So far ony problem I had was against tzeench daemons due to nice mobility, flying and shooting.

[nuttyknatty]

What about terrain? I was surprised at the low amount of terrain on the top table at Warlords - was this the same on the other tables?

Also, did I here that they'd slightly comped LoS? 

Would more terrain hinder a very shooty army? Or would this just provide more places for those buffing heroes to hide?

[MOMUS]

I think the OP was mentioning shooting in as a general concept rather than shooting-centric lists.

Shooting in general is more powerful, has more applications and has no drawback in the game mechanics.

Example:

if you had the choice between a troop with two CC attacks at 4+/4+ or a troop with one CC attack 4+ and one shooting attack at 4+, the choice is plainly obvious.

This combined with the 360 arc of visibility and the extended freedom of movement means terrain really doesn't hamper it too much.

 

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

I think the OP was mentioning shooting in as a general concept rather than shooting-centric lists.

Shooting in general is more powerful, has more applications and has no drawback in the game mechanics.

Example:

if you had the choice between a troop with two CC attacks at 4+/4+ or a troop with one CC attack 4+ and one shooting attack at 4+, the choice is plainly obvious.

This combined with the 360 arc of visibility and the extended freedom of movement means terrain really doesn't hamper it too much.

 

This is almost the complete opposite in reality.

Bearing in mind you only shoot in your own turn, over the course of a game you're likely to get in close to double the amount of combat attacks than you are shooting attacks, especially with fast units.

With a few exceptions (kurnoth hunters and Arrowboys for example) ranged units will get obliterated by most half decent combat units. They just don't have the stats or abilities to last it out.

Shooting is only powerful if it is well managed, well buffed or both.

[daedalus81]

14 minutes ago, MOMUS said:

I think the OP was mentioning shooting in as a general concept rather than shooting-centric lists.

Shooting in general is more powerful, has more applications and has no drawback in the game mechanics.

Example:

if you had the choice between a troop with two CC attacks at 4+/4+ or a troop with one CC attack 4+ and one shooting attack at 4+, the choice is plainly obvious.

This combined with the 360 arc of visibility and the extended freedom of movement means terrain really doesn't hamper it too much.

But it doesn't work that way and there are drawbacks and flaws in your logic.

1) Ranged attacks do not occur every turn.  Combat attacks do, so your 2 v 2 analogy is not complete.
2) Armor is almost universally less on ranged units.
3) Points are almost universally more.

Liberators - 1 3+/3+ -1 shooting attacks and 1 3+/4+ melee attack.
Judicators - 2 3+/4+ melee attacks.

Certainly at first glance you could say there is no reason for liberators, except that they are 38% cheaper and come with a better save.
 

I would say arrowboys being less points than morboys indicates to me that GW made a goof on their points.

[MOMUS]

3 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

This is almost the complete opposite in reality.

Bearing in mind you only shoot in your own turn, over the course of a game you're likely to get in close to double the amount of combat attacks than you are shooting attacks, especially with fast units.

With a few exceptions (kurnoth hunters and Arrowboys for example) ranged units will get obliterated by most half decent combat units. They just don't have the stats or abilities to last it out.

Shooting is only powerful if it is well managed, well buffed or both.

I disagree.

I'm not talking about 8th ed hangover units of archers with one shooting attack at 6+/6+.

Strong units with a shooting attack are infinitly more desirable than one dimensional combat units.

The degree at which shooting isn't hampered by combat/terrain/position gives it an edge.

Try this, if you had a combat unit with 4 attacks at 4+/4+ and you had the choice to change one into shooting attack would you take a point decrease or increase for the model?

[MOMUS]

10 minutes ago, daedalus81 said:

But it doesn't work that way and there are drawbacks and flaws in your logic.

1) Ranged attacks do not occur every turn.  Combat attacks do, so your 2 v 2 analogy is not complete.
2) Armor is almost universally less on ranged units.
3) Points are almost universally more.

Liberators - 1 3+/3+ -1 shooting attacks and 1 3+/4+ melee attack.
Judicators - 2 3+/4+ melee attacks.

Certainly at first glance you could say there is no reason for liberators, except that they are 38% cheaper and come with a better save.
 

I would say arrowboys being less points than morboys indicates to me that GW made a goof on their points.

I could be wrong but as I said in my original post, I believe the OP was talking about shooting as a concept in the rules mechanics, rather than name specific units in specific builds as you have.

My aim was to show that the rules as they stand allow shooting a lot of advantage in game and not many drawbacks (in game).

[daedalus81]

13 minutes ago, MOMUS said:

I could be wrong but as I said in my original post, I believe the OP was talking about shooting as a concept in the rules mechanics, rather than name specific units in specific builds as you have.

My aim was to show that the rules as they stand allow shooting a lot of advantage in game and not many drawbacks (in game).

That's not how it works.  You can't just equate one shooting attack to one melee attack and call it a day.  The specific units are for demonstration purposes only.

I guarantee you a full shooting army barring the outlier of arrowboyz is going to have a hard time coping with a variety of situations.

Additionally ranged units often come with fewer abilities and the ranged shots themselves have weaker stats.  The scenario you conjured doesn't exist. 

Ranged also means much less when teleporting and summoning is widely available.

[MOMUS]

14 minutes ago, daedalus81 said:

That's not how it works.  You can't just equate one shooting attack to one melee attack and call it a day.  The specific units are for demonstration purposes only.

I guarantee you a full shooting army barring the outlier of arrowboyz is going to have a hard time coping with a variety of situations.

The scenario you conjured doesn't exist. 

Ranged also means much less when teleporting and summoning is widely available.

Thats kinda my point, I'm asking YOU to equate the shooting attack with a combat attack. Or rather, I'm asking you to judge the value of one against the other, the perceived merit of one compared to the other.

The scenario I proposed doesn't exist as I'm trying to talk about the shooting mechanics in an abstract sense...

[daedalus81]

We could talk about the abstraction of every unit getting teleportation.  It's irrelevant, because you're not putting the differences in actual context of the actual types of attacks.

A ranged attack on paper is nice, but in the context of the rules it is less so - especially when faced with the prospect of a double turn where you don't get to shoot for two rounds of combat.   

Shooting provides earlier damage at the cost of durability, overall damage, and points. Full stop.

[Nico]

Quote

Shooting provides earlier damage at the cost of durability, overall damage, and points. Full stop.

 

Your analysis as to the trade offs is right, which is why Arrowboyz are so objectionable as they break every limb of this equation - they are wildly cheap for that level of durability; and do more damage than any virtually any other melee combo outside of Khorne, Tomb Kings, Skaven and Dark Aelves (with the old formation for Executioners).

 

[Thostos]

13 minutes ago, Nico said:

Your analysis as to the trade offs is right, which is why Arrowboyz are so objectionable as they break every limb of this equation - they are wildly cheap for that level of durability; and do more damage than any virtually any other melee combo outside of Khorne, Tomb Kings, Skaven and Dark Aelves (with the old formation for Executioners).

 

 /Agree...shooting on its own is not OPed in AoS.

 

  However in the case of the Bonesplitterz Arrowboyz its a bit over the top,especially with the larger units of them and the buffs.Im rather puzzled as to why they have a base 2 Arrow attacks,It just doesnt seem to fit with the fluff of the SA`s,sitting back and shooting when they should be all up in the face going apeshit on the enemy.

  Then to top off the very above board shooting stats they have 2 wounds each...

[daedalus81]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

Your analysis as to the trade offs is right, which is why Arrowboyz are so objectionable as they break every limb of this equation - they are wildly cheap for that level of durability; and do more damage than any virtually any other melee combo outside of Khorne, Tomb Kings, Skaven and Dark Aelves (with the old formation for Executioners).

 

The more I look at them the more I believe they should be more points - they are indeed the exception to the rule so far.  I still think they are manageable, but unprepared lists will suffer.