AG

[Enochpowell]

On the Ancestral guardian. I do not think a 15 pow weapon is the way to go with him. PP does not seem to see him as a heavy damage dealer able to dent beasts and jacks and the 1 point raise in pow on his weapon seems more like a consession to apease the waves of feedback asking for pow 14 or weaponmaster i am sure they have been getting.

I think something like this is more what they envision for the guy instead of weapon master or pow 15.


I don't quite understand the issue with allowing the Skorne players to decide what the Ancestrial Guardian should be like as long as it's competitive. Surely the point of this play test is that players have direct input whilst the designers ensure fairness. So, when you take into account it's generally accepted that they aren't worth the points and the majority of Skorne players would prefer a power boost, why can't we just have it?

[Pantheon]

look if PP doesn't want the AG to be a heavy damage dealer....fine ok.


I would rather see it go up to 4 points and have wep master so its a threat again...but if that is the way pp sees it.....no problem lets make a new concept.




GIVE THE AG WEIGHT OF STONE


The krea no longer gives us great def debuffing. However, the ag can boost mat 8 to hit a high def target like a warp wolf. This would make it of use against priority targets, without making it a damage dealer.

It is made of stone...so the fluff works.


Also, it makes it so that heavies can't just ignore it like they do now, a free strike with a debuff is enough to make them have to deal with him. They will kill him, but the retaliatory strike with weight of stone makes them pay for it.


Giving the AG this ability would change his role....but make him well worth three points, and also make him fun and give him a unique role in the army!



please PP pretty Please!

[MarloweFaustus]

Given that Weight of Stone is on one warlock and a character warbeast you are smoking some gooooood stuff if you think they will give it to an FA: 2 solo.

[Pantheon]

Maybe so....

but they did say they don't want him super killy.

Now he is durable, but durability without killyness is a bit meh...because you can just ignore him.

Now slap a debuff on his attack and that all changes.

Does it have to be weight of stone...no...but it's an existing rule that would be fluffy and help a lot.

Hopefully if we can't get it...it might move the discussion away from killyness and wep master (which PP said is a no go) to a new niche for the AG

[Enochpowell]

I think you missed the point of the post if i'm honest, nevermind though :)

[Pantheon]

No I see what you are saying.


I like the idea of a debuff...and weight of stone has a fluffy name and is an already created rule. Do i expect us to get it as is.....not exactly....but I thought the idea of a debuff on hit is an interesting idea for the model

[DarkWonderer]

I realy like it either way. I would prefer to have P+S 14 (or 15 but that's probably impossible, even if we give up retaliation strike), but Weight of Stone idea is realy neat. I would love to see it. Simple, yet creative.

P.S.
It looks funny that we are on the Skorne boards, but all people speaking in this tread have a Cygnar icon under their nickname ;) .

[Earthcrosser599]

Ancestral Guardians are not supposed to do anything. They're there to give Immortals a tiny speed bump, nothing more.

[apollosun]

Knowing we aren't getting a beatstick...I've been hoping to take him further and have our ancesters guide our necromancy with this model becoming an ampliphier for our spells. Using gathered souls to enhance our magic. Could be an arc-node, could reduce casting costs, could increase power. Our warriors' souls have to mean more than a better swing.

This is obviously a different direction then they've ever gone for our faction so I know it's more then likely a stretch. But I'm not going to be one settling for this model gathering dust and being dismissed by more suitable 3 point hitters like the Totem Hunter. I want something tricky that my armies can use and I want this model to go beyond beatstick and be as interesting in use as the Tyrant Commander (with its respective 3 pts). If POW isn't the option then he needs to be creative with the souls he's gathering and receive more effectiveness from them.

[Pantheon]

Yeah and that is exactly what I meant with the weight of stone argument.


Does it have to be my idea...no of course not.

But since he clearly is not going to get the offensive buffs we want him to have.....some thng tricky, fluffy, and skornish..(I like that word btw) is a good alternative.


He was a beatstick in mki.....in mkII he's a durable nothing. He is durable...but to no real prupose. He needs a role...be t buffer, or arch node, or debuffer to make him worth 3 points.

Lets be honest here.....for 3 AG's you could have a full arcurai unit.....

[Deathraven]

Just a thought here but soul gathering has become a lot harder in mk2 with hollow spread around more and being unable to kill our own for souls. Apart from Zaal what casters would we even take the AG with? Makeda1's feat stops souls for a turn, Hexeris and Mordikaar will often have hollow going on a large chunk of the souls supply. The Morghouls generally play faster armies than the AG could keep up with. Makeda2, Zaal and maybe Xerxis would probably be the only viable option for the AG anyway, wether he's worth 3pt or not.

[DeathnGlory]

I keep trying the AG. He gets given rush and deals out 4 attacks and that should seem good.
Played him against Seaforge the other week. Fully loaded, he charges in and kills 4 Gun corps. I think that's ok, he more or less made his points back. In my opponents turn the AG died. The next round I charge the BRMT into a unit of B2B Horgenforge Dwarfies, and thresher and auto plink and 7 dwarves dead and I have safely vanished behind a wall. So as an infantry killer he is not even close to our best.

A few days later I am playing against Everblight and my opponent has an ARM 20 Nephilim Protector sat there. The spell Fury on 4 Praet Swordsmen and they combo strike the nephilim, some hitting some missing and it's badly wounded. I send in a fully loaded AG to finish it off. Can't. The dice on the charge attack was poor and then he simply can't hurt it.

He's fallen in a gap between the BRMT and the Savage and he isn't defined enough.

[Hasten]

He's fallen in a gap between the BRMT and the Savage and he isn't defined enough.

Well, he's plenty defined. That's not the problem. It's just that he's defined as something that isn't all that useful -- a durable (for a solo), but light-hitting and slow melee beat-stick. I certainly agree that we have better ways of dealing with infantry, and better ways of getting medium-power attacks.

Regarding the original point of the thread, I think it's fair to say that the folks at Privateer Press are probably better at game design, and are more interested in keeping factions balanced, than a lot of the players. So, no, I personally don't think the fact that everyone wants the AG to be a better beat-stick obligates PP to make it so.

That said, I do hope they pay attention to the concerns about durable but light-hitting and slow melee beat-sticks, and give him a secondary ability that will give me a reason to take him besides the obligatory one in Zaal lists.

-H

[Darque]

Knowing we aren't getting a beatstick...I've been hoping to take him further and have our ancesters guide our necromancy with this model becoming an ampliphier for our spells. Using gathered souls to enhance our magic. Could be an arc-node, could reduce casting costs, could increase power. Our warriors' souls have to mean more than a better swing.

This is obviously a different direction then they've ever gone for our faction so I know it's more then likely a stretch. But I'm not going to be one settling for this model gathering dust and being dismissed by more suitable 3 point hitters like the Totem Hunter. I want something tricky that my armies can use and I want this model to go beyond beatstick and be as interesting in use as the Tyrant Commander (with its respective 3 pts). If POW isn't the option then he needs to be creative with the souls he's gathering and receive more effectiveness from them.

This is an interesting premise. Would this also increase our control range for our Fury-lite Locks?

I'm intrigued.

[Earthcrosser599]

At this point I'd rather drop any reference to these soul tokens from the Guardian and possibly from Skorne altogether. I think that's the reason why the Guardian sucks. It's okay for things like Mage Hunter Assassins and Vilmon to be running around smiting things with ridiculous single attacks, so why not make the Guardian into that? Turn him back into a Weapon Master and drop all soul token nonsense. He can keep his durability and his Retaliatory Strike to help set him apart from some of the other solos, making him something like a non-marshal Man-O-War Kovnik.

[alexandyr]

Hmm, I think that the soul gathering mechanic is a Skorne signature and unique among Hordes - I'd hate to see it go. I do think that there has been some underestimation of the limitation that soul gathering puts on an AG (and he has largely been pointed as if he always had 3 souls available)...

But having said that the current version performs solidly if not as flamboyantly as our other solos or the TC.

[Earthcrosser599]

I like the mechanic, but if that's the reason why he's not allowed to hit as hard as other solos, why keep it?

Out of curiosity, what are you doing with yours to make them perform solidly?

[Solarhaphaeriom]

Weight of Stone, buff to infantry, tool for casters... Even making him more of a denial piece with Defensive Strike or something. Just give him a unique role where he doesn't need Mk1 over-the-top power to be great.

[Skeenip]

Out of curiosity, what are you doing with yours to make them perform solidly?

A semantic suggestion but wouldn't a better question be what are doing with yours to make him pivotal?

Given enough setup quite a few models perform solidly, my issue with the AG is that in my experience he's easily replaceable. In mk II I've never been presented with a situation where I've comtemplated "I really wish I brought an AG this time". It's case building for AG inclusion.

Edit: Not giving up on the AG my next experiment with him will be him infront of cetrati, with defenders ward being a stone road block. As a 2nd waver he's not cutting it for me so lets see if he can damage sponge.

[Earthcrosser599]

A semantic suggestion but wouldn't a better question be what are doing with yours to make him pivotal?


I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. If you mean what about my suggestion makes him 'pivotal,' I'd much rather have a solo that does damage than one that does nothing, and from what I understand, the reason he's not allowed to do damage is because he has the potential for multiple swings. Remove the potential for those extra attacks and there shouldn't be a problem with letting him do damage.

[alexandyr]

In response to how I get the AG to perform solidly...

Keeping him back as a second wave attacker to hit targets of opportunity seems to work well enough. By then he has souls and the ability to boost pow 13s he can put decent hurt on anything but the heaviest heavies - but only when he has 3 souls.

I have used him variously to clean up Champions and Warmongers, halve even the highest DEF and ARM infantry units, kill high DEF retribution solos... he's even finished off a Carnivean after it survived fisticuffs with a Molik.

These don't include games with Zaal where I have used him with Last Stand to wipe out heavies and assist in assassination (not much can withstand 4d6+13 4 times over), but that is a pretty ideal scenario that arguably puts him on par with his Mk1 incarnation until he dies from it.

I am not saying that I take him every game or that I would consider him pivotal, but the bump to pow 13 has made a difference (ironically I killed 2 different models to the box in my first game right after the bump, and would have failed at POW 12, so I might have become biased by early success ;) )

I can accept him as a 3 point solo now, and I think what you are really paying for is the versatility of choosing when and where you want to boost (even SPD) combined with his durability.

[Pickles]

These don't include games with Zaal where I have used him with Last Stand to wipe out heavies and assist in assassination (not much can withstand 4d6+13 4 times over), but that is a pretty ideal scenario that arguably puts him on par with his Mk1 incarnation until he dies from it.


In Mk1 he would have 6 4d6+12s & would not die & would not need any outside help. That was pretty busted though.

[Commissar Cmar]

I don't know if anybody remembers how slow the MKI AG was, I often found it unable to keep up or get into the fight too late to influence it or it's lack of speed would see it killed just as it was reaching strike range.

Personally I like the new changes as it allows it to keep up, you can put it in the front line against certain enemies otherwise it can be held just behind the line to strike after first few casaulties. My initial feedback was that it needed POW 13 or 14 with 14 possibly being a little much so it seems PP has been willing to listen. Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to play with the latest updates yet though.

[Earthcrosser599]

Guardians weren't slow in mk1. You could pick off a single Praetorian to move it quicker and keep up with the Praetorians.

[gaminguy]

Knowing we aren't getting a beatstick...I've been hoping to take him further and have our ancesters guide our necromancy with this model becoming an ampliphier for our spells. Using gathered souls to enhance our magic. Could be an arc-node, could reduce casting costs, could increase power. Our warriors' souls have to mean more than a better swing.

Even though I happen to be in the camp that thinks the AG is OK, one of the other threads got me thinking; what if our casters could leach souls from the AG for Fury? No other beast-like rules, just let it act as an emergency Fury battery for when we start losing beasts. If that was too much he could trade Ret Strike for it, although opinions on that rule seem to be mixed.

(I posted that same thought in the other thread, but it's actually on-topic here.)

[Draekon Darkstorm]

Guardians weren't slow in mk1. You could pick off a single Praetorian to move it quicker and keep up with the Praetorians.
Wrong. They were slow. Look what is required to make it keep up. You NEED to kill your own model to keep up with those in front of it. Now, your opponent did that for you most of the time granted but it was still slow unless you helped out your opponent and killed your own guy. They could be fast, only if you spent 2 souls to gain 4" and a charge. Now you have 4 attacks total, but you have a good threat range. Zaal made them great for the free charge. So when you were starved for souls, you would save them for attacks, as opposed to the speed.

They were slow, but they were a strong counter-attack model. Now, they are slow-ish (not as slow thanks to being able to run/charge/ like a solo), but they lost their strong counter-attack threat.

Draekon

[Commissar Cmar]

Speed was a huge issue for me, I found in some games I had to leave it so far behind i could get any souls onto it and even if I did it was just way too far back to even help my lock at the end of the game.

I can now justify it moving faster and the low soul number means it is even more justifiable to send it into combat earlier to use those souls up to then restock. The trick is going to be relearning the support role it plays and what targets it is viable to attack. I believe he should be a threat to light warbeasts/jacks but heavies shouldn't suffer more than light damage, unless really lucky, from him which I think he manages at the moment. Boosting should make him still be able to reliably damage heavies though and at the moment that is the case.

Personally the hardest thing I find to swallow and what I believe has created the biggest debate is that he used to be a very cheap beatstick that killed (or severely crippled) everything he came into contact with and now he can't do that anywhere near the same level and it was one thing I know I loved to see, my opponent realises the back field has an AG and goes crap, must kill before it contacts me, now they can take it in their stride.

Leeching fury from him is an interesting idea but would make him a multi-role model only one of which you could perform a turn. Would make a low or nill warbeast list an option though, especially for Zaal.

[gaminguy]

In theory, being able to leach souls from him would be really useful against armies that can mess with your fury generation. Circle and Menoth can do that, Trolls can do it with snacking, I'm pretty sure Cryx has some similar remove-from-game Fury shenanegans in there too. Our 'locks are supposed to be necromancers, having a(nother) way to use the souls of our casualties would fit the fluff nicely. I wouldn't want to rely on it as a primary means of fury generation though.

It's a pretty big repurposing of the model.

[Solarhaphaeriom]

After more testing, I still don't see why he's too strong at 5 souls.
Currently he's just really bad. Really doesn't do anything that wouldn't be done far better by a Totem Hunter, Savage, BRMT or Void Spirit. Can't kill a caster, can't catch solos, can't hurt beasts. In ideal circumstances he can do an OK job against expensive single-wound troops, if he can get to them. Even the TC has comparable damage output and survivability, while also providing buffs.
As is I would never take the AG with anyone but Zaal, and even then it'd depend on the list.

[Amon]

After more testing, I still don't see why he's too strong at 5 souls.
Currently he's just really bad. Really doesn't do anything that wouldn't be done far better by a Totem Hunter, Savage, BRMT or Void Spirit. Can't kill a caster, can't catch solos, can't hurt beasts. In ideal circumstances he can do an OK job against expensive single-wound troops, if he can get to them. Even the TC has comparable damage output and survivability, while also providing buffs.
As is I would never take the AG with anyone but Zaal, and even then it'd depend on the list.
This is exactly what my experience has been. I haven't gotten much testing in since the holiday update, but the AG still seems to sit in some limbo where it doesn't quite do anything as well as other solos or options available to us. It's gotten better with Zaal, but that's due mainly to changes with him (cornerstone, getting kovaas on any AG death) as opposed to changes to it. With other casters though, I just find myself turning to other options.

[Mnkylord]

My experience thus far has been that, with Zaal, the AG is worth 3 his points. With other casters, well, not so much.

Honestly, with the exception of Zaal, I'd rather spend those 3 points on a TyCom.

[rasputindarksyde]

I have a question with the rules for constructs. I do not see where constructs can't run anymore. Does that mean the AG can run now without spening a soul token? If that isn't the case then he is way to slow. Especially because you can"t get any souls anymore from your attacks. I also have a problem with his weapon, he has a halberd all other halberds that I have noticed have set defense. I think that would be a nice addition to him but wouldn't make him to powerful if you ask me. Lets face it defensive strike is ok but really not the greatest. Would like it to be more then the first time.

[tensteam]

Yes they can run.

Ancestral Guardian doesn't have use for Set Defence anymore. DEF10 is so low that bumping it to DEF12 doesn't make much difference. I'm really much against the change of giving AG Steady, because that's a rule you don't need in most games if you don't have Tough too. Higher DEF on the other hand would help against ranged attacks, especially with Krea's animus. DEF14 isn't easy to hit.

I fear that these changes are pretty final and that'll leavy my guardians shelved outside Zaal lists. Of all models why it had to be AG that got hardest over nerf I'll just ask :(

[Yertle4]

I think it's for the best that the AG went from near auto include (outside super fast lists) to situational solo.

[Scalpel]

The problem with the AG was he took a double hit to his Damage output.

He lost Weapon Master & and reduce from 5 to 3 souls.

He gained +1 POW and gained a free charge, and the ability to use Souls to boost attack/damage rolls, and can now Run.

Now, PP don't want him killing Heavies ... ok that's fine. But just removing the Weapon master does that, without having to limit the mount of souls he can use per turn.

Before on average on 3D6 he was 22-23 damager per hit, 26 on a Charge.

Now, making him PAY for Weapon master with Souls means less attacks, which means less damage to a heavy.

Therefore I'd say lose the -1 POW he gained (I mean it's never making that much of a difference) and gain the ability back to use 5 souls per turn.

This also fixes the problem that he feels like a 5pt solo, because you need an extoller to gather up the souls he can't carry ... rather than the extoller being there because you want it.

When I see what other solo's for 3pts can do without all the restrictions and army requirements the AG has, I do cry a little inside.

[n00buaddib]

Well, Gravus also went from 5 tokens to 3 and Reclaimer went from..infinity (is this right?) to 5. All those things got toned down a bit so no surprise there. I do agree he looks a bit lackluster though.

[tensteam]

Limit at 3 souls is understandable, because otherwise AG would be even more powerful during Zaal feat turn. Changing Steady back to DEF12 and giving that one more point of strenght might be the thing to make AG usable. Not that it would even then make AG even close to autoinclude, but such a staple Skorne model deserves to have uses in Skorne lists outside Zaal.

[Valech]

How about the rumored "character Ancestral Guardian"? There should be a really nice buff or benefit to the non-character Ancestral Guardians for it to be worth spending points on a couple.

Until then the regular AGs would definitely not be auto-include, at least in my book.

[Rynth]

How about the rumored "character Ancestral Guardian"? There should be a really nice buff or benefit to the non-character Ancestral Guardians for it to be worth spending points on a couple.

Until then the regular AGs would definitely not be auto-include, at least in my book.

Old releases shouldn't have to be fixed w/ new ones.
Especially when the MK2 change gives a perfect opportunity to make the old release fieldable on its own merits.

My prediction for the character AG:
5 souls carry limit
Weapon Master
Improved Soul Driven(spending a soul gives +4" movement)
4-5 points

[kantoboy]

I always thought the AG was such a cool concept, and pretty much defined Primal skorne. I'll miss this guy.

[dboeren]

Limit at 3 souls is understandable, because otherwise AG would be even more powerful during Zaal feat turn.

He's supposed to be powerful during Zaal's feat turn. It's the "Lord of the Ancestral Guardians" popping his feat and then spending his feat tokens on an Ancestral Guardian. With the loss of Weaponmaster, it's still not that strong and you don't get any of those attacks or boosts for free either - it costs you tokens for both.

I don't mind a model going from a near autoinclude to a "sometimes", but it seems like he overshot that point and landed in "almost never, except maybe with one warlock".

I'm glad that PP sees that he needs a little something, but Steady wasn't it. Who needs to knock down a DEF 10 guy anyway? Nobody would spend effort to do it, it's only going to come into play with wide-area knockdowns like Kreoss's feat.

Maybe he could get something like the Senechal, when Skorne die near him he gets mad for a turn?

[rasputindarksyde]

I am not sure about any of you but killing heavys wasn't what I used the AG for. I used him as a deteraunt for units to charge my units. knowing there was two AG's to deal with with 3-4 fury on them each. it worked for the most part. I think 5 fury on it is a bit too much, thats why they made the extoller for us. But yes I do agree that 10 DEF is pretty stupid but it is a statue. I am not sure what would make it better. maybe 11 DEF plus set defense. it give him 13 on a charge or slam. I do miss weapon master on him too. From what I have seen from other solos in this game especially from the new retribution solos. I think are solos don't match up at all, especially the AG. good job PP...:confused:

[Hasten]

I am not sure about any of you but killing heavys wasn't what I used the AG for...

I dunno, I pretty frequently threw them at hard targets. They didn't generally kill things all by themselves, but they'd put a good hurting on a lot of things, particularly higher-def lower-arm warbeasts.


I am not sure what would make it better.

I think there were some pretty good suggestions during the FT for ways to improve the AG without turning him back into the homicidal terror that he was in Mk I, while setting him apart from our other solo choices. Weight of Stone, a unit-buffing ability, a self-buff when other models die near him, and heck, even limited channeling abilities all sounded like interesting avenues to explore. Unfortunately... :rolleyes:


I do miss weapon master on him too. From what I have seen from other solos in this game especially from the new retribution solos. I think are solos don't match up at all, especially the AG. good job PP...:confused:

Agreed, on all points. I haven't tried the latest version yet, but I'm not very enthusiastic about trading 2 DEF for Steady. Knockdown has never been much of an issue for him, at least for me, and is now even less so with the Tyrant Commander's Reveille ability. Defensive Strike is certainly an upgrade, so perhaps that'll make him more relevant? Time will tell.

-H

[gaminguy]

After more testing, I still don't see why he's too strong at 5 souls.
Currently he's just really bad. Really doesn't do anything that wouldn't be done far better by a Totem Hunter, Savage, BRMT or Void Spirit. Can't kill a caster, can't catch solos, can't hurt beasts. In ideal circumstances he can do an OK job against expensive single-wound troops, if he can get to them. Even the TC has comparable damage output and survivability, while also providing buffs.
As is I would never take the AG with anyone but Zaal, and even then it'd depend on the list.

I have to take exception to that. I've taken a third of a Warp Wolf with him when a Savage came up short. He's capable of hurting beasts, just not killing them by himself anymore. I thought replacing Retaliatory Strike with Defensive Strike was a good change; I don't care what you charge him with, he'll get at least one swing now. (It won't be boosted, but Mat 8 Pow 12 will make a lot of things think twice.) It also reinforces his role as a counter-threat/deterrent since he doesn't have to be the actual charge target.

The Totem hunter and TC* do as well or better against big targets, the BRMT and Void Spirit do better against small living targets. None of them are good if you're faced with the wrong type of target. The AG can take either of those things and a few others besides reasonably well.

Is he a great and wonderful auto-include? No. Duh, for that matter. What he has now is a solidly defined role, even if most of us don't think it is a role that needs filled. I just wish we had this version earlier in the FT so our feedback could have been aimed at making it good enough at that role to be worth taking with any caster that doesn't mess with our own soul generation.

* (TC is good for other things no matter what.)

[rasputindarksyde]

Is he a great and wonderful auto-include? No. Duh, for that matter. What he has now is a solidly defined role, even if most of us don't think it is a role that needs filled. I just wish we had this version earlier in the FT so our feedback could have been aimed at making it good enough at that role to be worth taking with any caster that doesn't mess with our own soul generation.

* (TC is good for other things no matter what.)

Ok well what is that role? I don't see it and I think others don't see it either. I personally don't like models that have a set role. Why should they ( PP, or whomever ) define how I use a model. Yes they have to make it fit a general idea of how that model/unit or whatever should be used, but it shouldn't be defined as this is the only thing it does live with it. From what I see that is what this models is and I don't even know what role it is to fill beside space in my bag or shelf. Am I wrong?

[gaminguy]

To quote myself; "counter-threat/deterrent". He's not the best against any target, but he's good against almost every target. (The exception being really high armor, and everything but our heavy warbeasts struggle with that.) That makes him a solid reserve, and you'll never throw him at whatever just hit your line and think "there's other things I should be doing with this guy right now". Defensive Strike lets him do it before your infantry even starts dying.

I won't argue that is a must-fill role in the army and for three points I'd like him to be a little better at the job, but that won't stop me from fielding him.

(To be honest, there is almost nothing in the faction that I consider an auto-include right now. Beast Handlers are the obvious exception, but after those first two points everything else is up for grabs and I think that's a good thing.)

[rasputindarksyde]

To quote myself; "counter-threat/deterrent". He's not the best against any target, but he's good against almost every target. (The exception being really high armor, and everything but our heavy warbeasts struggle with that.) That makes him a solid reserve, and you'll never throw him at whatever just hit your line and think "there's other things I should be doing with this guy right now". Defensive Strike lets him do it before your infantry even starts dying.

I won't argue that is a must-fill role in the army and for three points I'd like him to be a little better at the job, but that won't stop me from fielding him.

(To be honest, there is almost nothing in the faction that I consider an auto-include right now. Beast Handlers are the obvious exception, but after those first two points everything else is up for grabs and I think that's a good thing.)

Sorry didn't see that first time reading through. But thats how I used him before. Is that not really what I should have been using him for? I don't know I am the opposite, I don't like what he has become so I don't see me using him which sucks as I have two.

[gaminguy]

Sorry didn't see that first time reading through. But thats how I used him before. Is that not really what I should have been using him for? I don't know I am the opposite, I don't like what he has become so I don't see me using him which sucks as I have two.

That's how I used him too. He's a defensive piece, which doesn't fit so well into how Skorne tends to work now.

[Hasten]

Why should they ( PP, or whomever ) define how I use a model.

Not to be flippant, but they get to decide how we use a model because they're the game designers. That's what they get paid to do. We're all free to attempt to use any given model as we choose on the table-top, but some are going to excel in some roles more than others. For instance, I've discovered that Venators don't fill the 'melee attacker' role all that well when they get charged by Incubi, much to my chagrin =).

The AG fills the role of a robust, high-MAT, medium-high P+S, counter-attack model, as gaminguy pointed out. My complaint (and feedback, during the FT) is that we have other models that fill his role reasonably well while bringing other useful abilities to the table, such as the Tyrant Commander. Hopefully the more active Defensive Strike will make him more useful in this role, and I look forward to giving it a try, but I can't say I'm optimistic.

My shriveled Skorne heart weeps black tears to see such delicious souls squandered, but my conclusion so far has been that even in an infantry-rich setting, I'm usually better off bringing another model to the table.

-H

[Mnkylord]

My shriveled Skorne heart weeps black tears to see such delicious souls squandered, but my conclusion so far has been that even in an infantry-rich setting, I'm usually better off bringing another model to the table.

Hah! Same here. Every time I see a Praetorian popped like the grape he is, I sadly shake my head thinking "man, there goes a soul that could have been used for something... What a waste!"

But then I look at my TyCom, and I'm all better again.

[rasputindarksyde]

Not to be flippant, but they get to decide how we use a model because they're the game designers. That's what they get paid to do. We're all free to attempt to use any given model as we choose on the table-top, but some are going to excel in some roles more than others. For instance, I've discovered that Venators don't fill the 'melee attacker' role all that well when they get charged by Incubi, much to my chagrin =).

The AG fills the role of a robust, high-MAT, medium-high P+S, counter-attack model, as gaminguy pointed out. My complaint (and feedback, during the FT) is that we have other models that fill his role reasonably well while bringing other useful abilities to the table, such as the Tyrant Commander. Hopefully the more active Defensive Strike will make him more useful in this role, and I look forward to giving it a try, but I can't say I'm optimistic.

My shriveled Skorne heart weeps black tears to see such delicious souls squandered, but my conclusion so far has been that even in an infantry-rich setting, I'm usually better off bringing another model to the table.

-H

No they don't, they design a model to work how they think it should. But if we the players find a why to use it differently then we should be able to do that. Unfortunetly the AG fall under one of those models that really doesn't fit anything or can be used for anything. Well I am almost at the point were I say forget this dum game and stick with the better game 40k.

[Hasten]

No they don't, they design a model to work how they think it should. But if we the players find a why to use it differently then we should be able to do that. Unfortunetly the AG fall under one of those models that really doesn't fit anything or can be used for anything. Well I am almost at the point were I say forget this dum game and stick with the better game 40k.

I think perhaps we're saying the same thing with different words. The Privateer Press folks design a model with certain strengths and weaknesses, and clearly they do so with a role in mind for that model. We're free as players to use that model in any way we see fit on the table, but of course these models will perform better in certain roles than in others.

To be specific, I'm free to stick my AG out in front of my lines, and try to use him in an alpha-strike capacity. Or put him on a flank and try to run him up and around an enemy's lines to attack some support models. But wait a second, he's only SPD 4, and he can't buy additional attacks or boost if he hasn't collected any souls, which he won't be doing if he's away from any infantry. So he's probably going to perform sub-optimally in each of these roles. I can still do it. It's not like Mr. Soles is going to drive down to Southern Cali, burst into my house with his crack squad of Gaming Police (oh that's right, Mr. Soles has the Elite Cadre [Gaming Police] special rule) and haul me off in handcuffs for thought crime. But by designing the model with its stats and special rules, they've told us "Hey, these guys are designed primarily to follow behind your faster infantry, and counter-attack well if your enemy has killed a handful of troopers."

As a sidebar, my poor haven't-been-updated-in-like-ten-years-and-we're-two-rules-editions-behind Daemonhunters have something to say about that OTHER game. I won't repeat it in polite conversation, though =P.

-H

[rasputindarksyde]

I guess we are at a stand still then. what you say i can agree with but you still don't get my veiw. MKII sucks...I guess is what I am trying to say. if its not broke don't fix it PP. and they broke it now....

Yes I do agree that the ( other game ) is a little behind but that has been the way they have done things for years, most of us are used to it. but I have never wanted to quit that game. I do this one...

[Hasten]

I guess we are at a stand still then. what you say i can agree with but you still don't get my veiw. MKII sucks...I guess is what I am trying to say. if its not broke don't fix it PP. and they broke it now....

That's fair enough. If you don't like Mk II, you don't like Mk II. I like a lot of it, myself (AG excluded). I know other folks do as well. I also know some folks don't. That's bound to happen with any game when you have a major overhaul. It sounds like you're less frustrated with the admittedly underwhelming AG than with Mk II as a whole.


Yes I do agree that the ( other game ) is a little behind but that has been the way they have done things for years, most of us are used to it. but I have never wanted to quit that game. I do this one...

Heh, and here our positions are reversed. I find it intolerable that entire factions go overlooked for long spans of years while other factions *cough gloryhoggingspacemarines cough* receive multiple new codices. That's what made me quit the game, and that's how I ended up over on the Hordes side of things. It's also why my Grey Knight Grand Master often proxies for a Bronzeback, but that's a story for another day =). One of my favorite things about Privateer Press games is their update scheme. Well, that and brutal, possibly even BRÜTAL, warbeasts/jacks power-attacking things around the board.

Nevertheless, I do indeed understand over-arching frustration with a game system.

-H

[Tionas]

ah, see, but mark I was broke. (IMO) and mark II is a much better game. that other game only involves me rolling high, and having more men. this game involves me using men for their intended purpose, wisely, in order to secure victory.

I guess thats what it comes down to. you want to use the AG one way, and its not built for that. it was, before, but your not willing to look at it in a different way. It might not be GOOD in that different way, but thats how it should be used to best effect.

[rasputindarksyde]

ah, see, but mark I was broke. (IMO) and mark II is a much better game. that other game only involves me rolling high, and having more men. this game involves me using men for their intended purpose, wisely, in order to secure victory.

I guess thats what it comes down to. you want to use the AG one way, and its not built for that. it was, before, but your not willing to look at it in a different way. It might not be GOOD in that different way, but thats how it should be used to best effect.

Yes and that is my point. I want to use the AG as I feel fit. But PP has changed it so that it can only be used the way they want it to be used. thats my whole arguement. Thank You..by the way, I think the other game is more tactical. This game is about combos. Its magic the gathering with minitures. And units in that game are designed to do certain things too. And If I am wrong please tell me, but isn't rolling high in this game a good thing?

And Hasten what do you expect the marines are there bread and butter for one thing. But the way they release things which granted I have my problems with they just cant do it as fast as we would like. But get ready to bring them back the demon hunters are coming.

[Tionas]

I get your point, honestly. I just don't, really, understand how you hold that point, is more of whats going on.

Im not going to use a brick to feed my cat. its obviously not what its meant for. if i try to feed my cat bricks, she's not going to eat it, and even if she does, its a one time thing.

you can force your brick to be a weapon, and bash someones head in with it, but, it not all that likely to work, and its awkward and pretty easy to see coming.

However, if you use a brick to build a wall, its simple it looks half decent, and if you have any proficiency with it, it stays together.

and OT: yes, rolling High is good in every game, but thats all I had to do in 40k. Im pretty lucky, and while it helps on a bell curve, its insane when dealing with 40k. Roll 60 attacks, 5 are less than 3...ect... its just not a smart game, IMO. its a FUN game, but it dosen't take any guts in the game, its self driven.

[rasputindarksyde]

I get your point, honestly. I just don't, really, understand how you hold that point, is more of whats going on.

Im not going to use a brick to feed my cat. its obviously not what its meant for. if i try to feed my cat bricks, she's not going to eat it, and even if she does, its a one time thing.

you can force your brick to be a weapon, and bash someones head in with it, but, it not all that likely to work, and its awkward and pretty easy to see coming.

However, if you use a brick to build a wall, its simple it looks half decent, and if you have any proficiency with it, it stays together.

and OT: yes, rolling High is good in every game, but thats all I had to do in 40k. Im pretty lucky, and while it helps on a bell curve, its insane when dealing with 40k. Roll 60 attacks, 5 are less than 3...ect... its just not a smart game, IMO. its a FUN game, but it dosen't take any guts in the game, its self driven.

Ok the whole brick things is a bit drastic. but ok. but you made my point is that so hard to understand. Ok but do you want to play the same game as another person. If you play the AG the way it was intended and another person plays it the way it was intended then you are going to be ready for it same with the other person. there is no tactics to that. if everyone plays the model the same way then why play it? I like alittle diversity in all the models I play with. I used my krea in MKI as a heavy beast really, it was there to kill everything and it did, because of stud from the drake. Most everyone that I saw never did. I hardle saw people use the drake at all even. Doing something that people are not expecting throws them off there game and you win, at least most of the times.

[Tionas]

I guess thats the differences in though process. using something in an original way, that still works, is a good use of resources. forcing something to do something that it cannot do is wasting resources.

that said, if it works for you, keep rolling it. the Krea still can do some murder (had it eat an Axer last week), but your obviously having an issue with making the AG work for you.

As to things working the same way: Thats part of the game. thats where the strategy comes in. you know that beast X is used for Tactic Y, your goal it to do everything in your power to stop it: if its, say, An earthborn Dire troll, your minigame is to keep it tied up every round with a trooper or two, making sure it stays pined in place. Your opponents goal, however, Is to make sure That beast X gets to perform tactic Y as often as possible. this means that if your opponents slag troll pops two boosted to hit shots into the troopers you've lined up with the EBDT, and free's it up.
its a combat of wills, its a fight of who can use the resources at hand most effectively, to both get their job done while denying their opponent the use of their resources most efficiently. thats what I dont get in those "other games." that battle over how your going to use your army.