Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Qrow

Members
  • Content Count

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

66 Celestant-Prime

About Qrow

  • Rank
    Protector

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. How have people found meeting engagements? I'm not interested in the balance and summon issues that have already been discussed, but can you see them becoming a competetive format and what tactics seem to work? I have found planning lists for it to be pretty difficult. There are so many ideas I have seen posted for new units that it really suprises me they didn't add more, especially during the recent 2.0 release. I would love a gore-gruntas style unit, just a middle ground unit between the infantry and the magmadroths.
  2. Mate, I 100% feel this point here. Nerf HGB, then what do FS have? Even with a point reduction vulkites damage output is nothing great; auric hearthguard maybe, FS become a range spam army? Alright, the they can use... oh, nothing. Because they have 3 units. 1 of them is great, one is alright and the other is a wet noodle. This next part is in no way aimed at you @Vextol, just wanted to add that so you know I'm saying this at you. Out of funsies I have fixed AoS balance issues by adopting the same suggested balancing baseline for HGB to other troubling units. I chose an extremely conservative basline set; HBG being increased to 140 and the horde bonus removed (instead of the max suggested 180 and horde bonus removed). This would mean and increase from 600 to 840 point; or a 40% total increase in cost. Additionally, using the win percentage of FS as a baseline, i have factored in army win percentage as an additional variable. For example; skaven vs FS is 58.4 - 51.8 = 6.6 or 6.6%. Together with our baseline of 40%, the equation for skaven units will be base (1.4) plus army difference (0.066) for a total of 1.466 or a 46.6% increase in cost. Remember, as per a base example of HGB, all horde bonuses will be removed. As such, here is how to fix the balance of AoS: SKAVEN: 1.4 + .066 = 1.466 verminlord warpseer: 380 Plague monks: 100/400 FeC: 1.4 + .123 = 1.523 Ghoul king on terror ghiest: 610 Slaanesh: 1.4 + .103 = 1.503 Keeper of Secrets: 540 IDK: 1.4 + .067 = 1.467 Akhelian morrsarr guard: 230/920 (based on pre-GHB2019 point costs) DoK: 1.4 + .124 = 1.524 Witch aelves: 150/450 (based on pre-GHB2019 costs to show how wrong GW got their point changes) There we are mates, all fixed. Feel free to use the formula on all overperforming units you see. And in case it isn't obvious, I'm being outrageously sarcastic. But, it is worth knowing, for comparison sake, that I was genuinely conservative in the baseline. People are asking for a 40-60 point increase for HGB AND the removal of the horde bonus, I did all this stupid working out on an only 20 point increase and removal of horde bonus.
  3. Grimghast reapers? Yeah, they can still be taken in LoN, but they now cost 160/420.
  4. The table is from the start of this year, not the start of AoS, I have attached an additional table that compares 2018 results to 2019 results. FS have gone from a 45.5% to a 51.8% win rate for a total increase of +6.3%; comparatively HoS have gone from a 51.7% to a 62.1% win rate (total increase of 10.5%) while being out for less time and FeC have gone from a 47.5% to a 64.1% win rate total increase of 16.6%). As shown, even when taking into account the new battletome, FS are not overperforming to the degree of other top armies. I actually do agree with you that the power should be shared between the other units, all of which do see play, but the battletome seem to be built around a HGB core and no amount of point changes will stop people taking it. My main problem stems from: A. People refusing to adapt; take chaff, bring a wall, snipe the heroes, play the objective, a brisk walking pace would do the trick. It is literally one 600 point blob of 4" mov, that must stay fully within 12" of several heroes to get to the level of power everyone complains about. B. The massive overnerfing people call for; 360 points is massive, change the rules of the lords of the lodge to something else, limit the double attack ability. Seriously, it would be like if I suggested a 360+ point increase to verminlord warpseer and GKoTG lists. Are they overperforming? Yes, do they need to be made redundant? No.
  5. It is, pretty much all their buffs are completely within 12-18".
  6. The attached statistical breakdown (retrieved from https://thehonestwargamer.com/aos-2-2-final-stats-13th-june-2019/) is accurate as of the 13th of june. If we are going to discuss balance based on win rate then lets actually provide the data. On the FS side, they have a 51.8% win rate, even with "the best melee unit in the game". I can see why people are calling for a nerf, but I am beginning to suspect that this super unit build is exactly what GW designed them for. You have one massive, unkillable unit. It can move 4", hit like a truck, absorb damage like a tank, but costs almost a third of your entire army and loses a massive amount of power if the squishy squishy heroes that buff it die. It is literally FSs gimmick, like HoS forcing you to attack last. Now say it gets nerfed, I think it will go up around 20 points, not the 40+lose horde bonus that everyone suggests. Ok, cool. How will you compensate FS for that hit? FS have exactly 3 units, they can't simply adapt the builds like other armies can. If the 360 point increase in the cost of a full unit of HGB goes through, then a 51.8% win rate army will have taken the hardest nerf any AoS army has seen so far. 51.8% win rate is not offensive, HoS have been out for less time but you can still see how they immediately started became one of the top 5 with a 62.1% win rate. FS are clearly designed for synergistic buffing, they have terrible board control and one good unit. This is why I was concerned about the idea of 3 month or less changes to armies, instead of adapting their own lists to beat this new enemy, people want every new thing adapted to be beaten by their current builds. Take chaff units, use the movement decreasing endless spells or even just summon the prismatic palisade and block off a portion of the map. The that terrifying 600 point unit with 4" move will have to, very slowly, plod around it.
  7. And shoot the fireborn; they have terrible bravery and are faster than most of our heroes, so it can be difficult to keep them in range for inspiring presence. Even just one dead fireborn can cause another 4 wound model to disappear from a bravery role of 6. However, if they get into combat they will hurt you.
  8. Yeah, I originally wanted to run hermdar (I forget the objective way to much, it would force me to play it), but now I'm going to go Vorstag with Bael-grimnir and the lords of vorstag battalion. I think this situation is the risk that is taken when an army that relies a lot on buffs is made. If all those buffs are layered on one decent unit, it become overwhelming.
  9. My local scene is smallish, maybe a dozen people on the best of days. If I got to a bigger city there are heaps more, but that would require an around 4 hour round trip. So my actual local scene is fairly split, but the main AoS players are the type to by whatever the newest, most OP army is (and complain everytime that they have to by new models to stay competative, instead of just playing what they like). I don't want my armies to dominate, both of my main armies are in the lower ranks and I haven't even played the FS army because I want to play it painted. I do, however, want to be able play whichever army I want and not get demolished before we even get models on the table. If I take nighthaunt against skaven, then my 200+ point heroes will be blown off the table before I get a chance to even use them, if it isnt them it is whatever heroes I do take. It isn't fun. So I totally get where you are coming from, I don't want to dominate others, I just want to know I had a chance to begin with.
  10. If the cost of the lords of the lodge battalion also increased to 160, then I would be 100% ok with this; that would be a ~80 point hit to the more popular lists. I just take umbrage to the idea of HGB going up to 150/900 when there are clearly far stronger armies out there that are getting signficantly less sever nerfs. Edit: me not math good. So yeah, gonna leave that shame out for people to see. That would actually change nothing sadly. The drop in vulkites and RFoMD would lead to an overall net change of 0 in most of the competative lists. Increase lords of the lodge to 160, remove horde bonus, lower the others just as you said. Boom, 80 point increase in list cost. Problem is though, most people complaining are mainly complaining about the lords of the lodge battalion. Unless the battalion ability itself is changed then no amount of point changes will stop it from happening. People will simply trim their lists of the 240ish spare points that you have left over after the cornerstone units and keep on playing the same way. If you jump the points up to 900 it will still be the same, they may lose at most 5 HGB models in their big unit at the expense of punishing everyone that doesn't abuse the LotL battalion and the rest of the army, with a total of 3 units to choose from FS is extremely hard to balance if you want all units to see the table. Same as FeC and to an extent HoS, no amount of point changing can fix a broken ability.
  11. Or just take a couple chaff units and block them off with it. Stretch 10 chainrasps in front of it, they can MOV4 around it or charge an 80 point unit, mulch it, then bam, another 10 man chainrasp unit. Two turns and 160 point killed, similar to how to deal with Old witch aelves spam except it is literally one unit that can only move 4" and cost a good third of their army points. They do need a nerf, I'm just surprised to see people advocating a bigger nerf to them than to the actual top tier armies. The average DoK list went up what, 120-130ish points? And people want to see a 300+ increase in the average FS lists.
  12. To be honest, I can see the reason some people are calling for a nerf. It is the people calling for a 40 point nerf that I disagree with, especially in conjunction with removing the horde bonus. It is also frustrating when they act like a 300+ point jump on a list is not a big deal, especially on an army that is not considered to be one of the most broken or dominating tournaments. Try telling a skaven or FeC player that you want to see there competative lists go up 300 or more points and see how popular the idea will be. Even DoK didn't jump up 300 points, and they are way more dominating than FS. Add in that the unit is one of only three in the entire army and it is a delicate balance. Do they need a nerf? Probably, but no matter how much you say "adapt and play another way" it is difficult with such an extremely small number of units to choose from. Hell, most of the people complain about them getting to attack twice, so just up the cost of the battalion and remove horde discount, done.
  13. I think you touched on a part of the problem, without the hearthguard being OP, what else do FS have? If they do increase the hearthguard then what else do FS have? They aren't touching the level of the top 4 armies and if you take away the one gimmick they have then it may just tank them completely. I would be more inclined to massively increase the cost of the battalion and then remove the horde bonus. If they increase the battalion by say... 60ish, then that alone would be a 180 point increase in the points of that build, which is higher than most other OP armies received. If they did increase them by 40, then a max unit will cost 960 points. FS main weakness is board control at the moment, very few units and it relies solely on one unit to carry weight. I think part of the problem is that, with so few units, it become hard to balance them. If one unit is terrible, then the others must be good to make up for it. All in all, fyreslayer need a bridging unit like gore-gruntas or something. More variety so that the entire roster isn't tanked if they nerf one unit. So come on GW, dwarfs riding smaller dragons or something.
  14. So what about the upcoming fyreslayers nerf? I have seen people calling for/expecting to see hearthguard beserkers go up 20 points AND lose their horde bonus, but if they did that it would be the single biggest nerf to a unit in all AoS, it would be a 240 point increase in the cost of the unit. While I understand it is overperforming, I can't imagine FS remaining competetative with such a big nerf. I could see the horde bonus going or an increase in cost, but both together would be overkill.
  15. I hope they don't go up in price and lose the horde bonus, I feel that would be overkill. They didn't even nerf DoK witch aelves that hard, are hearthguard that much worse? Also, are any of the lodges considered cheesy? I'm planning on using Hermdar because I like the objective focused buffs (I forget the objectives to much, this will force me to stick to them), but I would prefer to avoid being 'that guy' if possible.
×
×
  • Create New...