Thoughts on V3

Moderators: KevinC, mattbird

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby mattbird » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:00 pm

Larry, the new trial Annihilator (blunderbuss) rules make them significantly better against single targets (units), hence the points change.
jer732 wrote:Birdoff makes me want to rage quit life
mattbird
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Larro » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:18 pm

I understand that, but they're still 12 pts. as it is and only have a 5+ save and no other use outside of shooting. What other dedicated shooting unit of 15 guys costs you 13 or 14 pts. per model? They're only 12" range, let's not forget that.

- Larry
"Just being born means you've lost to Larro. Or haven't you gotten the memo yet?" - Nidal

"Larry was right. I know he never gets tired of hearing that." - Canterman
User avatar
Larro
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Larro » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:20 pm

Besides, how good are S3 shots when shooting at a single target anyways? You're upping them based on that crappy addition? I'd prefer cheaper to more expensive w/ added relatively-useless ability.

- Larry
"Just being born means you've lost to Larro. Or haven't you gotten the memo yet?" - Nidal

"Larry was right. I know he never gets tired of hearing that." - Canterman
User avatar
Larro
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby mattbird » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:31 pm

What other dedicated shooting unit of 15 guys costs you 13 or 14 pts. per model?


Dwarf crossbows, dwarf handgunners...

Besides, how good are S3 shots when shooting at a single target anyways? You're upping them based on that crappy addition? I'd prefer cheaper to more expensive w/ added relatively-useless ability.


I realized my above post was easily misconstrued- I meant single targets as in "single target units", not sinlge models.

It's not that part that's better, it's the ability to target units without turning to directly face them, shoot through gaps that you'd not normally be able to with the old template rules, and the virtual extended range of the Concentrated Volley. To clarify the 'extended range' thing- As long as the front rank of the blunderbuss unit is within 12" of even a single model in the target unit, the entire target unit still gets hit on a 4+ at up to str 5.
jer732 wrote:Birdoff makes me want to rage quit life
mattbird
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Larro » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:44 pm

Dwarf Xbows aren't 14 pts., and Thunderers are overpriced which is why no one takes them and everyone takes Xbows instead (plus the extra range doesn't hurt either). Moreover, you're forgetting that Dwarven Xbows typically come with shields and therefore have a 4+ SAVE in HTH. Blunderbusses do not.

If you bumped these guys up to 13 pts., give them a shield as mandatory. This way, you get what you want - a points increase, which is mandatory, and at least you give a little something back to the CD players after upping the points-cost for a still unjustified (in my mind) reason.

Also - what's the reasoning on this Demoneater still having 3 wounds, even at the now-outrageous 150 pts.? You can make this thing 120 as-is, or go to 135-140 with a 4th wound. Where did 150 come from? Have you even bothered looking at the litany of comparable units and their points-costs? Why is your/Kevin's position on this so inflexible?

- Larry
"Just being born means you've lost to Larro. Or haven't you gotten the memo yet?" - Nidal

"Larry was right. I know he never gets tired of hearing that." - Canterman
User avatar
Larro
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby mattbird » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:57 pm

Larro wrote:Dwarf Xbows aren't 14 pts., and Thunderers are overpriced which is why no one takes them and everyone takes Xbows instead (plus the extra range doesn't hurt either). Moreover, you're forgetting that Dwarven Xbows typically come with shields and therefore have a 4+ SAVE in HTH. Blunderbusses do not.



hey man, you asked! What are Dwarf Xbows w/ shields then, 13?

Larro wrote:If you bumped these guys up to 13 pts., give them a shield as mandatory. This way, you get what you want - a points increase, which is mandatory, and at least you give a little something back to the CD players after upping the points-cost for a still unjustified (in my mind) reason.


they would be way too good with a 3+ save. In V3 they are 12 pts, so let's keep testing them that way for now.

Larro wrote:Also - what's the reasoning on this Demoneater still having 3 wounds, even at the now-outrageous 150 pts.? You can make this thing 120 as-is, or go to 135-140 with a 4th wound. Where did 150 come from? Have you even bothered looking at the litany of comparable units and their points-costs? Why is your/Kevin's position on this so inflexible?

- Larry


:lol: you and I have gone round and round on this one already. You know the reasoning behind the high cost, I've posted it many times before
jer732 wrote:Birdoff makes me want to rage quit life
mattbird
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Border Reiver » Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:00 pm

Dwarf Quarrellers and Thunderers for that cost have a S4 shooting all the time, a much greater range and the option for shields, whcih makes them a decent CC unit.

Blunderbusses are S3, until you get an extra rank or more. The cost of the unit is presently 120 pts for missile unit that has a 100mm frontage to achieve S4 shots at a maximum range of 12". Getting that extra point of S costs you 60 pts at minimum, and can be easily stripped away with the loss of one model.

In CC it is fairly vulnerable, having T4 is good, but it only has heavy armour and no option for shields. Anything likely to wound it is also going to likely get through the armour.

It is slow. 3" a turn if it wants to shoot.

The S3 shooting is still no great shakes against multiwound models. Your min sized unit is about the cost of 3 ogres with two hand weapons. At 12" the ogres with either take 5 S3 shots that hit on a 4+ (hitting 2.5 times, and wounding 0.83 times) - then the ogres charge, and do the same amount of damage - ie. diddley/squat. If they choose to do a concentrated volley they will do 0.75 wounds (three potential hits - most likely 1.5, of which half the hits will wound). The ogres will get their bull charge (D3 S4 impact hits), and 12 CC attacks (6 S4 hits - 3 wounds, of which one will likely be saved - so lets say 3 Annihilators are dead, and two will fight back - and the odds are not in their favour of even doing a wound. Annihilators will lose combat - autobreak and be run down.

The annihilators are not overpowered - the new concentrated fire system has the potential to make them seem so, but they are not overpowered.
Border Reiver
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 11:55 am

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Murdock » Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:04 pm

mattbird wrote:Seeing as how you have direct authority on the legality of the list, do you feel that we must just switch back to "normal", end of story? Or should we test this new V3 magic system first and then see?


I'm willing to see the playtesting out on this one, I like the new system, I think it could be very TombKing-esq. I'm somewhat concerned about the potential of having 3 to 4 movement or movement reducing spells cast per turn, but we'll see. As a player, I like different and interesting takes on gameplay, but as a TO, familiarity for the uninitiated participants of the tournament has to be a key concern for me as well. Let's see how the playtesting goes, but I'm leaning toward the side of caution.

mattbird wrote:It's not that part that's better, it's the ability to target units without turning to directly face them, shoot through gaps that you'd not normally be able to with the old template rules, and the virtual extended range of the Concentrated Volley. To clarify the 'extended range' thing- As long as the front rank of the blunderbuss unit is within 12" of even a single model in the target unit, the entire target unit still gets hit on a 4+ at up to str 5.


Larry, this is the big thing in my mind as well, the increased flexibility of these guys. I can now screen for these guys with redirectors and shoot through gaps without exposing them to danger. I no longer have to face the unit I'm shooting directly and can hold my facing towards an oncoming threat. The stand-and-shoot now hits the entire unit as it charges in. And T4 5+ armor isn't great, it is more than most missile units, and you will likely have 2 ranks, potentially outnumber and/or banner, which is more than enough to see off standard light hunting units, especially after the S&S.
Murdock
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 4:50 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby Larro » Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:48 pm

See Border Reiver's post, because it says everything I wanted to say in comparison to other missile troops and the rationale as to why BBs should not go above 12 pts. Lose 1 model, you're down to S4 12" range, you're unable to impact the game early on due to very short range, and vs. some foes (most foes these days it seems) your weapon is as good or worse than a unit of Xbows.

AND Dwarven Xbows I do believe are 12 pts. per model WITH Shield. Not 100% on that one, but I think someone could verify if need be. Regardless, they're fairly priced, and I think given the lack of save in HTH compared to Xbows, and the fact BBs are shorter ranged and thus more likely to BE in HTH to begin with, this makes up for their price. 30" range, consistently S4, with a 4+ HTH save for the same price as the BB, and you're going to try to tell me a BB is somehow under-costed? Sure, they're good vs. RnF, but they're not nearly as good vs. most the armies out there today that seriously lack viable RnF targets. No one is asking for a pts. decrease, just that you leave well enough alone here.

Also, I just noticed the Golems got WS4, but no 3+ save. What's up with this? Remind me why I'm supposed to want to pay 65 pts. for these guys. They're not even close to Treekin and whoever said that is out of their mind. Without the upgrade in armor, they're never going to be worth it unless they go down in price significantly.

- Larry
"Just being born means you've lost to Larro. Or haven't you gotten the memo yet?" - Nidal

"Larry was right. I know he never gets tired of hearing that." - Canterman
User avatar
Larro
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: Thoughts on V3

Postby mattbird » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:10 pm

Larry, please read mine and Murdock's replies re: blunderbusses above. Nothing else to really say on the matter beyond that, except that in batreps the annihilators have been gold. Players rave about blunderbusses. Nobody raves about handgunners or crossbowmen. They are not equivalent. ;)

You (and Border Reiver) have been heard! No need to keep rehashing the same statements. It's irrelevant anyway at the moment, please test them as they are written in V3.




As I stated at the top, I support a points drop for Golems.
jer732 wrote:Birdoff makes me want to rage quit life
mattbird
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron