The cygnar forums.

[Joasht]

That really makes sense to you? Really?

What point is there for the infantry to be inherently weaker if you are just going to sub them out for more powerful Merc units anyway? Shouldnt they be on par with those Merc units? If our units were on par, balance wouldnt change in the slightest. So the only conclusion is improper balance, not intentional imbalance. They accidentally made the mercs too good, or cygnar units too bad. To think they made them bad on purpose, because we have good warcasters...I cant even fathom what kind of logic it takes to get to where you think that makes any sense.

Our combat infantry aren't "as" good - I never said they are bad. Plus as I already mentioned our best infantry are utility, like Rangers and ATGM, which are irreplacable in their roles.

I think you are biased in your opinion, and dead-set on seeing Cygnar's infantry as just "bad and replacable with Mercs". I see them as additional tools, which was part of my main initial message - they "round off" the entirety of Cygnar's infantry selection.

[Dashwood]

What point is there for the infantry to be inherently weaker if you are just going to sub them out for more powerful Merc units anyway? Shouldnt they be on par with those Merc units? If our units were on par, balance wouldnt change in the slightest. So the only conclusion is improper balance, not intentional imbalance. They accidentally made the mercs too good, or cygnar units too bad. To think they made them bad on purpose, because we have good warcasters...I cant even fathom what kind of logic it takes to get to where you think that makes any sense.

@Joasht: I'm agreeing with Varius here that your argument on this matter isn't sound from a systems or designer perspective.

We aren't asking for Cygnar infantry to perform the roles the Mercenaries play for us. I don't want our own tarpit to invalidate Boomhowler, nor do I want crazy weaponmaster Nyss clones in Cygnar uniforms. What I do want is for the Cygnar infantry we do have to be worth the high(er) cost of fielding them. Most people take mercenaries not because they are necessarily better, but because they are more points efficient to take. The ATGMs are thankfully not in this category, but others, like our 1:1 Trencher Infantrymen, are. (Perhaps because they were made as generalists, and thus good for nothing great, unlike their specialist brothers, the Trencher Commandos.) To say that our infantry is more expensive than they are worth because we have good warcasters doesn't make much sense even if you count the synergies since we can use those same synergies on the mercenaries with greater results.

Also, I'm glad you made a full reply. I believe Leo's frustration (and long string of stupidstupidstupid) is not so much directed towards the units and the stat lines, but more towards having received one too many canned responses on the matter from others who won't go further than saying "Cygnar is balanced around mercs." I, for one, find that argument full of fallacy, so seeing it bandied about in so pithy a manner also upsets me when I see it. That you took the time to write out your position speaks well of you, so cheers for that.

[Dashwood]

Our combat infantry aren't "as" good - I never said they are bad. Plus as I already mentioned our best infantry are utility, like Rangers and ATGM, which are irreplacable in their roles.

I agree with this. We are utility and range, but should not be given strong tarpit or Khador-level melee. That would be wrong. The problem is that our combat infantry are expensive.

[MagnustheJust]

That really makes sense to you? Really?

What point is there for the infantry to be inherently weaker if you are just going to sub them out for more powerful Merc units anyway? Shouldnt they be on par with those Merc units? If our units were on par, balance wouldnt change in the slightest. So the only conclusion is improper balance, not intentional imbalance. They accidentally made the mercs too good, or cygnar units too bad. To think they made them bad on purpose, because we have good warcasters...I cant even fathom what kind of logic it takes to get to where you think that makes any sense.

I have to severely disagree with one of your points here. Calling the Mercenary units units "more powerful" is inaccurate. Self-sufficient would be a better term to use...

Most of the Mercenary warcasters have little in the way of infantry support. So by default, the Mercenary units have to be more self-sufficient. Also from a fluff point of view, and I am well aware that fluff does not equal rules, it makes more sense that the gruff sell swords would be more adaptable on the battle field because they get to do as they feel necessary to win the fight. They are not restricted to what an endless chain of inane commanders for the most part. The Steelheads being the main exception in this case.

[Varius]

I have to severely disagree with one of your points here. Calling the Mercenary units units "more powerful" is inaccurate. Self-sufficient would be a better term to use...

More self sufficient means more powerful to me. It means without support, they can achieve more...

Our combat infantry aren't "as" good - I never said they are bad. Plus as I already mentioned our best infantry are utility, like Rangers and ATGM, which are irreplacable in their roles.

I think you are biased in your opinion, and dead-set on seeing Cygnar's infantry as just "bad and replacable with Mercs". I see them as additional tools, which was part of my main initial message - they "round off" the entirety of Cygnar's infantry selection.

Right, you mentioned our 2 best infantry. We have a lot of infantry. The problem is our other infantry is overcosted for what they do, so the Mercs become more valuable. There is quite a bit of overlap, or specialists who dont do their jobs well enough to warrant their cost.

[Defenstrator]

I have to severely disagree with one of your points here. Calling the Mercenary units units "more powerful" is inaccurate. Self-sufficient would be a better term to use...

I would agree with this. I think that merc has far less weak infantry slots than Cygnar, but it isn't becuase their infantry is that powerful. It's more becuase you aren't overpaying for what you get, and it doesn't normally have a lot of limitations.

Steelheads aren't the best ever, but I generally like them better than Swordknights becuase they don't depend on an outside unit to make them work. Steelhead Cavalry do, but their Flankers are the regular Steelheads, which unlike jacks you have a whole bunch of and can run into position for free. And most other mercs work just fine with no support, and can really shine when they get some. And above all you aren't paying elite infantry prices for stuff that isn't elite infantry.

[Joasht]

Right, you mentioned our 2 best infantry. We have a lot of infantry. The problem is our other infantry is overcosted for what they do, so the Mercs become more valuable. There is quite a bit of overlap, or specialists who dont do their jobs well enough to warrant their cost.

To be fair, I said that "our best infantry are utility, like Rangers and ATGM" implying that utility is where our infantry is good at, and in a way that cannot be replicated outside of Cygnar (barring Highborn or Bad Seeds) and the Rangers and ATGM happen to be good examples of our, well, good utility infantry.

The thing is, our combat infantry should never be nearly as good as Khador's infantry. We do better than them in some categories, and if we did have comparable combat infantry, it would be every other forum whining about Cygnar. Theres too many variables, and I am very much against people comparing the infantry between the two factions as if it is justified for them to be "on equal standing" simply because Khador has almost similar Merc availability as Cygnar.

As for "Merc units being more powerful", that is really inaccurate, and is worth mentioning again. Many of the Merc units are good because they are simply efficient (which is good, don't get me wrong) but aren't truly as "powerful" as say, the WG Deathstar, or Banes with Tartarus.

I think its fair that I should also mention my stance on Cygnar's "other infantry";
1) Trenchers - This has been brought up several times this thread as the justification for some people saying that Cygnar's infantry sucks, etc. Sorry to remind you, but every single faction has at least one stinker (AKs, Drudges, etc.) and this just happens to be ours. Well, to be fair I don't like the normal Trencher Infantry too much, but they are certainly playable by keeping the unit simple (min Trenchers + 3 WA makes for a decently priced unit with some ranged offensive ability and capable of holding ground). Great? Not really. But certainly playable without being suicidal.

Commando's can work as a small ranged unit with multiple AoE's and sprays (great with Deadeye) and I doubt anyone would say they are bad. The weapon teams on the other hand are "meh", but thats true for almost every weapon team in the game.

2) Precursor Knights - I like these guys in certain lists, and even some of the more competitive players (e.g. Rolling_Thunder) consider them legit in the right lists (e.g. Constance Blaize's tier). I've never complained about these guys, and anyone who comes arguing that Shield Wall makes them too slow has clearly never tried "not upkeeping" Shield Wall. Heck, even when I play ST's and IFP's I don't always Shield Wall.

3) Sword Knights - I'm pretty sure I've mentioned in the past in some other threads that I consider these guys legit, again, in the right lists. That is, you have ideally two WJs with Reach (could work with one with Reach, and one without). They provide good bodycount for low points, and are actually fairly survivable and potentially decently killy for their points.

4) Stormblades - Kinda hit-or-miss. I used to play these guys all the time until I realized that you can't splash them in every list and expect them to work brilliantly. They do, however, work, and I'd still take the SB Deathstar with eStryker. Just don't use them as your frontliners.

5) Long Gunners - Legit, in the right lists. The main issue is you want something to prevent your enemy from squishing them, and you'd really like Snipe with them. And ideally something to shutdown Stealth.

I've never played with Stormguard or Storm Lances, so I really can't comment on those. But then again the only Cavalry unit thats rated highly would be the Rough Riders (the others usually vary between "meh" and "decent") and some people do love their Stormguard. And of course, for the "absolutely good stuff no one would argue with" we have the ATGMs, Rangers, and, well, the Black 13th, all of which are very well respected by all players of all factions.

As far as I'm concerned, part of the issue is that Cygnar is extremely list/caster-specific. Notice how, at least in my opinion, that different units need specific list/casters to work at their best, and this "requirement" is far more pronounced in Cygnar than in other factions.

As for people who complain about all the Merc units being "so great" and stuff, honestly, what do people usually take? Simply;
1) Boomhowlers. Super tough (literally), but generally don't kill stuff, and still completely legit choices in every faction that can take them. I even take them in Khador, and I've seen the "more people should take Boomhowlers" statement a few times in the Khador forums. People just never got around to trying them I guess.

2) Nyss. Same thing - everyone who can take them rates them highly. pDenny likes them. Iron Flesh Khador casters like them.

3) Pirates and Steelheads. Funny thing is, when I posted my idea about using them in Cygnar several months back, I got almost no significant responses on them; mostly just statements about how Pirates cost "too much" due to their support network and Steelheads being "meh". Frankly, Steelheads aren't too great unless you take the whole package (and even then Halberdiers have horrible survivability against ranged combat) and I'd imagine the only reason why people might even talk about Pirates now is because I heard something about some podcaster playing them. Thing is, Pirates are great, and you can take them in Khador to great effect, and you can even take them in Cryx.

4) Forgeguard. I consider them on-par with Stormblades, the only real question is "does your caster have faction-specific buffs?". If yes then Stormblades are hands-down better, if no, then, well, you might want to reconsider if you even need either. For example, you don't really need SBs or FG with, say, Siege or eCaine.

So what am I saying here? The only really good units in Mercs are also well-loved in other factions, and theres no Khador or Cryx player that will tell you Nyss and Boomhowlers suck. They might not use them as much simply because their playstyle doesn't warrant it; both factions are more offensive in nature and can field numerous models to act as tarpits thus making Boomhowlers a little less popular. The Nyss see play in Khador, and perhaps the reason why Cryx doesn't need them outside of pDenny is because Cryx infantry is pretty good. But before anyone goes "AHA!" remember that Cryx is generally considered one of the most "well-off" factions, and their jacks aren't exactly hot.

Solos? All the good solos that a Cygnar player would take, everyone else would take too. eEiryss? Of course. A&H? Worth less in Cygnar than other factions. Gorman? Of course. Piper? Of course. List goes on, you get my point - its easy to complain about how Mercs are so much better etc., but in truth, there are only a few choices that are ever considered in the Cygnar army, and those are universally considered good but happen to mesh better with us because they fill in holes that we don't fill as easily with our units.

A little long, but I hope this makes sense. Now to get some sleep, its really late ><

EDIT:
Oh one last thing. If someone wanted to say "but its not just the infantry in Cygnar thats bad!" then....
Warjacks - If anyone says Cygnar has terrible warjacks, the jack-loving Khador and Cryx players would like a word with you. Does Cygnar have better jacks than Khador and Cryx? Again, apples and oranges, but seriously, I love my Hunter, Centurion and Ol'Rowdy, and I'm pretty sure many of you guys out there love your Defender. Hey, its not as if we have easy access to Merc jacks, do we :P

Warcasters - If you said Cygnar casters are bad, I need to punch you so bad :P Plus you kinda really have to take a Cygnar caster to count as a Cygnar army. Just saying.

Solos - If you said Cygnar solos are bad, I need to punch you so bad. No emoticon this time! Okay fine :P
Other factions would KILL for Jr. or the Squire (and Arlan is pretty sweet too), and I happen to rate Runewood and Stormsmiths rather highly in the right lists. And before someone points out that we have our fair share of stinkers in the solo category, please remember that every single faction has a bunch of them as well.

Oh and one last thing.
One of the reasons why you may see a greater number of Mercs in Cygnar lists, is because the more competitive Cygnar casters happen to also be less/not faction-specific. Namely, eHaley, p/eCaine and Siege. Some other good ones do exist that are faction specific, like eStryker, but you don't see an eStryker player loading up on Mercs.

And please, before someone says "they are better BECAUSE they are more Merc-friendly!", please go ahead and play a puritan Cygnar army with all the casters, and you'll realize that just by their sheer abilities, those aforementioned casters would still be near the top of the food chain regardless. Cygnar involves building an army around the warcaster, far more so than other factions, and this goes to further reinforce what I said earlier; our stuff is good in specific lists, and these specific lists generally come about because of specific casters.

Good night folks!
Need sleep....

[Varius]

EDIT:
Oh one last thing. If someone wanted to say "but its not just the infantry in Cygnar thats bad!" then....
Warjacks - If anyone says Cygnar has terrible warjacks, the jack-loving Khador and Cryx players would like a word with you. Does Cygnar have better jacks than Khador and Cryx? Again, apples and oranges, but seriously, I love my Hunter, Centurion and Ol'Rowdy, and I'm pretty sure many of you guys out there love your Defender. Hey, its not as if we have easy access to Merc jacks, do we :P

Warcasters - If you said Cygnar casters are bad, I need to punch you so bad :P Plus you kinda really have to take a Cygnar caster to count as a Cygnar army. Just saying.

Solos - If you said Cygnar solos are bad, I need to punch you so bad. No emoticon this time! Okay fine :P
Other factions would KILL for Jr. or the Squire (and Arlan is pretty sweet too), and I happen to rate Runewood and Stormsmiths rather highly in the right lists. And before someone points out that we have our fair share of stinkers in the solo category, please remember that every single faction has a bunch of them as well.

Oh and one last thing.
One of the reasons why you may see a greater number of Mercs in Cygnar lists, is because the more competitive Cygnar casters happen to also be less/not faction-specific. Namely, eHaley, p/eCaine and Siege. Some other good ones do exist that are faction specific, like eStryker, but you don't see an eStryker player loading up on Mercs.

And please, before someone says "they are better BECAUSE they are more Merc-friendly!", please go ahead and play a puritan Cygnar army with all the casters, and you'll realize that just by their sheer abilities, those aforementioned casters would still be near the top of the food chain regardless. Cygnar involves building an army around the warcaster, far more so than other factions, and this goes to further reinforce what I said earlier; our stuff is good in specific lists, and these specific lists generally come about because of specific casters.

Good night folks!
Need sleep....

I wont bother arguing the first points, I think it will just come down to semantics. I define "more powerful" in a different way then you do, because a warcaster can only do so much to support its troops, and when you look at a unit as a whole, the less resources needed to get it to work the better for me. If I can apply my buffs elsewhere, the unit is more powerful to me, because that extra unit wouldnt be receiving support in the first place.

I love our casters. There isnt a single one I really dislike (except pStryker, but Ive expressed my views on him in other threads)

Our jacks are fine, I think jacks just suffer from the more efficient troops problem, with a lack of support to make them more powerful. They are trying to balance it out with swathes of infantry clearing things like the colossals, but we will see how that does. I love Kraye and eNemo though, so I tend to run more jack heavy than the normal lists. If they could add some units that add better jack support without needing to marshall them, I would be very happy.

And Ive never had a problem with our solos. I really wish the GMCA was better though, he was one of my favorite units, and always was a superstar in my army in MK1. I used him for a long time before finally shelving him in MK2, and it made me sad to do. Again, we have no killer power solos, each just adds a utility, which is all I really want out of a solo.

And for the last point you made, Murdoch is another reason. Even if you have faction specific buffs, he does so much for the merc units that its hard to find a reason not to use him.

[eKraye]

You guys are hurting my seeing orbs, let this thread drop... Someone should really write up some helpful tips for people versus this constant **** storm of wow we suck so much as a faction without mercs.

Honestly, you're getting trolled start a new thread, I just got a full unit of forge guard - go.

[The Sentinel]

To be fair, I said that "our best infantry are utility, like Rangers and ATGM" implying that utility is where our infantry is good at, and in a way that cannot be replicated outside of Cygnar (barring Highborn or Bad Seeds) and the Rangers and ATGM happen to be good examples of our, well, good utility infantry.

The thing is, our combat infantry should never be nearly as good as Khador's infantry. We do better than them in some categories, and if we did have comparable combat infantry, it would be every other forum whining about Cygnar. Theres too many variables, and I am very much against people comparing the infantry between the two factions as if it is justified for them to be "on equal standing" simply because Khador has almost similar Merc availability as Cygnar.

As for "Merc units being more powerful", that is really inaccurate, and is worth mentioning again. Many of the Merc units are good because they are simply efficient (which is good, don't get me wrong) but aren't truly as "powerful" as say, the WG Deathstar, or Banes with Tartarus.

I think its fair that I should also mention my stance on Cygnar's "other infantry";
1) Trenchers - This has been brought up several times this thread as the justification for some people saying that Cygnar's infantry sucks, etc. Sorry to remind you, but every single faction has at least one stinker (AKs, Drudges, etc.) and this just happens to be ours. Well, to be fair I don't like the normal Trencher Infantry too much, but they are certainly playable by keeping the unit simple (min Trenchers + 3 WA makes for a decently priced unit with some ranged offensive ability and capable of holding ground). Great? Not really. But certainly playable without being suicidal.

Commando's can work as a small ranged unit with multiple AoE's and sprays (great with Deadeye) and I doubt anyone would say they are bad. The weapon teams on the other hand are "meh", but thats true for almost every weapon team in the game.

2) Precursor Knights - I like these guys in certain lists, and even some of the more competitive players (e.g. Rolling_Thunder) consider them legit in the right lists (e.g. Constance Blaize's tier). I've never complained about these guys, and anyone who comes arguing that Shield Wall makes them too slow has clearly never tried "not upkeeping" Shield Wall. Heck, even when I play ST's and IFP's I don't always Shield Wall.

3) Sword Knights - I'm pretty sure I've mentioned in the past in some other threads that I consider these guys legit, again, in the right lists. That is, you have ideally two WJs with Reach (could work with one with Reach, and one without). They provide good bodycount for low points, and are actually fairly survivable and potentially decently killy for their points.

4) Stormblades - Kinda hit-or-miss. I used to play these guys all the time until I realized that you can't splash them in every list and expect them to work brilliantly. They do, however, work, and I'd still take the SB Deathstar with eStryker. Just don't use them as your frontliners.

5) Long Gunners - Legit, in the right lists. The main issue is you want something to prevent your enemy from squishing them, and you'd really like Snipe with them. And ideally something to shutdown Stealth.

I've never played with Stormguard or Storm Lances, so I really can't comment on those. But then again the only Cavalry unit thats rated highly would be the Rough Riders (the others usually vary between "meh" and "decent") and some people do love their Stormguard. And of course, for the "absolutely good stuff no one would argue with" we have the ATGMs, Rangers, and, well, the Black 13th, all of which are very well respected by all players of all factions.

As far as I'm concerned, part of the issue is that Cygnar is extremely list/caster-specific. Notice how, at least in my opinion, that different units need specific list/casters to work at their best, and this "requirement" is far more pronounced in Cygnar than in other factions.

As for people who complain about all the Merc units being "so great" and stuff, honestly, what do people usually take? Simply;
1) Boomhowlers. Super tough (literally), but generally don't kill stuff, and still completely legit choices in every faction that can take them. I even take them in Khador, and I've seen the "more people should take Boomhowlers" statement a few times in the Khador forums. People just never got around to trying them I guess.

2) Nyss. Same thing - everyone who can take them rates them highly. pDenny likes them. Iron Flesh Khador casters like them.

3) Pirates and Steelheads. Funny thing is, when I posted my idea about using them in Cygnar several months back, I got almost no significant responses on them; mostly just statements about how Pirates cost "too much" due to their support network and Steelheads being "meh". Frankly, Steelheads aren't too great unless you take the whole package (and even then Halberdiers have horrible survivability against ranged combat) and I'd imagine the only reason why people might even talk about Pirates now is because I heard something about some podcaster playing them. Thing is, Pirates are great, and you can take them in Khador to great effect, and you can even take them in Cryx.

4) Forgeguard. I consider them on-par with Stormblades, the only real question is "does your caster have faction-specific buffs?". If yes then Stormblades are hands-down better, if no, then, well, you might want to reconsider if you even need either. For example, you don't really need SBs or FG with, say, Siege or eCaine.

So what am I saying here? The only really good units in Mercs are also well-loved in other factions, and theres no Khador or Cryx player that will tell you Nyss and Boomhowlers suck. They might not use them as much simply because their playstyle doesn't warrant it; both factions are more offensive in nature and can field numerous models to act as tarpits thus making Boomhowlers a little less popular. The Nyss see play in Khador, and perhaps the reason why Cryx doesn't need them outside of pDenny is because Cryx infantry is pretty good. But before anyone goes "AHA!" remember that Cryx is generally considered one of the most "well-off" factions, and their jacks aren't exactly hot.

Solos? All the good solos that a Cygnar player would take, everyone else would take too. eEiryss? Of course. A&H? Worth less in Cygnar than other factions. Gorman? Of course. Piper? Of course. List goes on, you get my point - its easy to complain about how Mercs are so much better etc., but in truth, there are only a few choices that are ever considered in the Cygnar army, and those are universally considered good but happen to mesh better with us because they fill in holes that we don't fill as easily with our units.

A little long, but I hope this makes sense. Now to get some sleep, its really late ><

EDIT:
Oh one last thing. If someone wanted to say "but its not just the infantry in Cygnar thats bad!" then....
Warjacks - If anyone says Cygnar has terrible warjacks, the jack-loving Khador and Cryx players would like a word with you. Does Cygnar have better jacks than Khador and Cryx? Again, apples and oranges, but seriously, I love my Hunter, Centurion and Ol'Rowdy, and I'm pretty sure many of you guys out there love your Defender. Hey, its not as if we have easy access to Merc jacks, do we :P

Warcasters - If you said Cygnar casters are bad, I need to punch you so bad :P Plus you kinda really have to take a Cygnar caster to count as a Cygnar army. Just saying.

Solos - If you said Cygnar solos are bad, I need to punch you so bad. No emoticon this time! Okay fine :P
Other factions would KILL for Jr. or the Squire (and Arlan is pretty sweet too), and I happen to rate Runewood and Stormsmiths rather highly in the right lists. And before someone points out that we have our fair share of stinkers in the solo category, please remember that every single faction has a bunch of them as well.

Oh and one last thing.
One of the reasons why you may see a greater number of Mercs in Cygnar lists, is because the more competitive Cygnar casters happen to also be less/not faction-specific. Namely, eHaley, p/eCaine and Siege. Some other good ones do exist that are faction specific, like eStryker, but you don't see an eStryker player loading up on Mercs.

And please, before someone says "they are better BECAUSE they are more Merc-friendly!", please go ahead and play a puritan Cygnar army with all the casters, and you'll realize that just by their sheer abilities, those aforementioned casters would still be near the top of the food chain regardless. Cygnar involves building an army around the warcaster, far more so than other factions, and this goes to further reinforce what I said earlier; our stuff is good in specific lists, and these specific lists generally come about because of specific casters.

Good night folks!
Need sleep....

excellent post

/thread

[MagnustheJust]

You guys are hurting my seeing orbs, let this thread drop... Someone should really write up some helpful tips for people versus this constant **** storm of wow we suck so much as a faction without mercs.

Honestly, you're getting trolled start a new thread, I just got a full unit of forge guard - go.

But I sill have ICEE and popcorn left...

[King-of-Storms]

I agree with this.

Glad you've chosen Cygnar despite all the everything going on. We're a good faction with very effective tools and a couple of problems I wish weren't there, but that's true of all factions. I worry constantly about the good folks, old and new, who get turned off by this sort of ugliness. To that end, however, I'd like to ask that you not add to it, as much as you like to argue. Combat bad logic with good logic, by all means, but hold off on the name calling. We're not going to solve the issues on this board by calling one another 'little girls,' which is both sexist and rude and not at all related to flawed argumentation.

The biggest problem on this board right now isn't the derailment in every thread, though that is a terrible issue, but that we are slowly no longer treating one another with even the veneer of civility.

You know it's hard to be civil when every modicum of optimism is torn down by drama queens and people who just need to quit Cygnar altogether because my patience has officially ran out on these persistent whiners and pessimistic malcontents. I'm with Sardonic Artery with his signature that the Cygnar forums just need to be locked for a while until the "trash" find themselves another outlet to spew their negativity elsewhere.

Unless people start taking up the use of the ignore button to clear out the clutter which might be a dangerous trend but I've had it up to here with some people.

[Garath]

Here's my 2 cent on the whole thing.

Regardless of the facts presented here(with such strong feelings backing them up) - Cygnar as a faction is balanced. With mercs. I just realized that PP had it planned all along. Since the start of MK2,they planned the whole thing,and what has happened in MK1 (see below) is going on right now .

And that is an old GW rule: "shiny new model,shiny new rules"

We can argue all day long, but PP did the same thing in MK1, first they released prime (waay back) ,then the rest of the books and as new models hit the shelves,there was little reason not to buy them for they where(by a slight margin) better then old models, filling similar roles for less points.
So by the time of Legends, there was little logic in fielding a Charger which shot twice with POW 12 for 75 pts or say B13 who at the time had like 7 shots starting at pow 10 ,adding +1 to POW with each hit....and that bonus applied to mage storm as well (which was in fact a combo attack if Ryan hits with both initials).
This is an extreme example , just to give all the folks that started in MK2 a preview of what the game was like back then. I'll just add the fact that pHaleys feat added yet MORE shots to B13 ,pumping that final Mage storm attack to POW 22(?) -can't remember

Following that logic, newer models do tend to be a bit better then the old ones(there are exceptions to this) , either they have slightly better stats or reduced cost or a single ability which gives you the reason to buy them for your favorite caster - example: Minuteman gives soo much more to a Kraye list for a single point more then s Charger or sentinel or grenadier(same point cost).

The same applies to older models(as trenchers where mentioned) - they where nerfed for a very,very good reason- and you're guessing it right I won't say game balance...

Trenchers where in every list back in MK1, ok not every list,but in many lists. That means player already had the models(and paid for them) so not to throw people off the game by the time of MK2 they where slightly nerfed to a level where they're still useful - that way we kept on playing.
Now how are they going to sell us new units if we already have the great trenchers (and they where ****ing awsome with some casters!!) ?

Simple ,get us Cygnar players to go and buy Mercs. Mercs where always there for us, but we didn't need them as much ,we had our in faction units.
From PP point of view Mercs are something everyone can buy- so let's give them a reason too. I already wrote about this some time ago and several people here agree that you don't NEED mercs to play- but PP gives you a reason to buy them since in some lists ,with some casters they do better the Cygnar infantry .

To make my point- trenchers are never going to get their points reduced outside of a major (gamewise) reset button across all factions,since that would mean that all the players that already have them and don't use them ,would start to use them and would be less then eager to buy newer units.

Another example of this trend is Stormwall- we have all noticed how that big thing outfights any of our heavies and outshoots multiple heavies as well. It's point cost reflects this ,but all and all it's rules are awesome. Simply the fact that you cannot AS multiple heavies to protect them better the way you can SW makes it great for say Darius. It makes Darius' feat great again(like it was back in MK1,then got nerfed- see trenchers example above) .

You can argue the fact that SW is pointwise expensive,but you cannot argue that it's shootier then any model in the game ever was(except B13 in -MK1) and tougher then any model we have- and that why people that field :
Defender
Cyclone
Will stop doing it because you have SW, which outfights and out shoots them both together.

Thanks for your time guys

[MagnustheJust]

... a whole lot of well thought out and very acute points...

{gives standing ovation with opera clap, lacking all snarkcasm}

Very well said!! I agree with your sentiments fully!!

[Garath]

If something I wrote inspires a standing ovation,then Thank you!!! (nods in agreement)

[Edwars]

Here's my 2 cent on the whole thing.

Regardless of the facts presented here(with such strong feelings backing them up) - Cygnar as a faction is balanced. With mercs. I just realized that PP had it planned all along. Since the start of MK2,they planned the whole thing,and what has happened in MK1 (see below) is going on right now .

And that is an old GW rule: "shiny new model,shiny new rules"

We can argue all day long, but PP did the same thing in MK1, first they released prime (waay back) ,then the rest of the books and as new models hit the shelves,there was little reason not to buy them for they where(by a slight margin) better then old models, filling similar roles for less points.
So by the time of Legends, there was little logic in fielding a Charger which shot twice with POW 12 for 75 pts or say B13 who at the time had like 7 shots starting at pow 10 ,adding +1 to POW with each hit....and that bonus applied to mage storm as well (which was in fact a combo attack if Ryan hits with both initials).
This is an extreme example , just to give all the folks that started in MK2 a preview of what the game was like back then. I'll just add the fact that pHaleys feat added yet MORE shots to B13 ,pumping that final Mage storm attack to POW 22(?) -can't remember

Following that logic, newer models do tend to be a bit better then the old ones(there are exceptions to this) , either they have slightly better stats or reduced cost or a single ability which gives you the reason to buy them for your favorite caster - example: Minuteman gives soo much more to a Kraye list for a single point more then s Charger or sentinel or grenadier(same point cost).

The same applies to older models(as trenchers where mentioned) - they where nerfed for a very,very good reason- and you're guessing it right I won't say game balance...

Trenchers where in every list back in MK1, ok not every list,but in many lists. That means player already had the models(and paid for them) so not to throw people off the game by the time of MK2 they where slightly nerfed to a level where they're still useful - that way we kept on playing.
Now how are they going to sell us new units if we already have the great trenchers (and they where ****ing awsome with some casters!!) ?

Simple ,get us Cygnar players to go and buy Mercs. Mercs where always there for us, but we didn't need them as much ,we had our in faction units.
From PP point of view Mercs are something everyone can buy- so let's give them a reason too. I already wrote about this some time ago and several people here agree that you don't NEED mercs to play- but PP gives you a reason to buy them since in some lists ,with some casters they do better the Cygnar infantry .

To make my point- trenchers are never going to get their points reduced outside of a major (gamewise) reset button across all factions,since that would mean that all the players that already have them and don't use them ,would start to use them and would be less then eager to buy newer units.

Another example of this trend is Stormwall- we have all noticed how that big thing outfights any of our heavies and outshoots multiple heavies as well. It's point cost reflects this ,but all and all it's rules are awesome. Simply the fact that you cannot AS multiple heavies to protect them better the way you can SW makes it great for say Darius. It makes Darius' feat great again(like it was back in MK1,then got nerfed- see trenchers example above) .

You can argue the fact that SW is pointwise expensive,but you cannot argue that it's shootier then any model in the game ever was(except B13 in -MK1) and tougher then any model we have- and that why people that field :
Defender
Cyclone
Will stop doing it because you have SW, which outfights and out shoots them both together.

Thanks for your time guys

While I agree that shiny new model syndrome does occur, I personally don't think it is as sever as you make out here.

Yes, trenchers got hit with the nerfbat. But this was in response to the legimate concern that the rolling smoke wall was a harsh tactic and needed addressing. Same goes for the B13th and Swordknights. Whether or not PP got the balance right is a matter of much (heated) debate.

Personally I think the new releases aren't made "super good" just so we'll buy them, but rather appear to be so very good because they address the issues of the day.

Lets look at wrath. Perhaps the greatest cygnarian gripe was "enemy infantry are too fast/durable/un hit able", "our jack tactics are too simple/slow" and "we need more infantry support" and what did we get?

In faction infantry support solo (who grants pathfinder, something we were sorely lacking)
Infantry caster with a strong emphasis on spell denial
A light jack with movement shenanigans and infantry killing ability
A heavy who causes ranged knockdown and has a significant AoE
A heavy sniper who may ignore stealth

These felt like the awesome responses we as a community perceived them to be because they filled our needs. However as time went on we mellowed on these new units as the meta and our tactics shifted. Since wrath new , as well as old, have dominated. Namely, "we lack damage output" and enemy infantry is still a problem"

Now we have the stormwall, which seems to address these concerns.

Will the stormwall meet everyone's hopes and expectations?
Probably not, but already new tactics are being developed so only time will tell till we find out what most concerns Cygnar players.

As to the replacement of models which have similar abilities, let's consider the stormall and the defender/cyclone combo mentioned in the quote.

In my opinion both have solid points for their use.
Stormwall: high dmg boxes, high dmg output, natural reach and pathfinder
Cyclone/Defender: cheap(ish), benefits from cover/concealment/stealth/etc, higher focus out load, greater positioning potential, can be marshaled.

But both also have cons
Stormwall: limited focus outload, can't hide, terrain will have a great effect on where it can be positioned, expensive, limited spell/feat utility
Cyclone/defender: moderate durability, limited dmg output


So, like all things it is a matter of taste. Both options are viable and the new one is not the must have.

[Varius]

So, like all things it is a matter of taste. Both options are viable and the new one is not the must have.

I was going to say much the same thing. They have moved away from the power creep of MK1. Many prime casters and units are still some of the strongest in the game.

In fact, new UAs (black dragons?) and casters (connie?) have shown the intent that they want you to consider the old units as well as the new, not that they want those old units left in the dust.

[Garath]

While I agree that shiny new model syndrome does occur, I personally don't think it is as sever as you make out here.

I'm in fact going to reply to Your whole post, and am quoting this since the rest of your reply focuses on elaborating the point stated.

I do think it's severe, and I think it's subtle too. More so then in MK1,that's for sure. We can discuss Cygnar units in Wrath and in general and compare those to mercs but that is somewhat beside the real point here.
New models (released so far) fix current "problems" the faction has,as you stated Yourself - concur

New models also serve as a motive for people to buy older ones that have special new synergies with them.
Connie and Duke being a prime example- in case you want to play those you might as well buy some sword knights and Percursors since they synergize (is that a word at all? )well . While we're at it might wanna get Gallant too, it get's a big sword and a free focus etc...
So player A that is a veteran and has a unit of SK and PK will buy Connie and/or Duke . Player B is a newbie and will buy the lot if he likes Connie as a model to start with.
See what I mean? Duke here is a model we have no reason not to buy if we field cc infantry lists

So if we look at models in the context of the list they fit into, newer models are better then old ones hands down . Your (and mine) example of Stormwall comes down to it being more attractive within specific lists then Cyclone and a Defender.

Some players will buy it for the fact that it's a BIG warjack. Others for the combos they will most likely read here on these boards.

New models are not a must have- no one is saying you can't win if you have older models ,but everyone agrees that more often then not it's easier to just buy the new shiny toy instead of going the extra mile to get the same results from older models.

Think about this: when eNemo was released several people here mentioned it would be downright dirty to have a 50 pt list made of 10 chargers and support solos and say B13.
And we all saw how a certain member of these forums has a HUGE collection of Cygnar ( respect !) and can field such a list.

Now the same list will be even more sick with 8 Minuteman instead of 10 chargers...and the feat turn is even more spectacular!!!


All he needs to do is buy them... ...and he probably will...

[2LiveIs2Die]

And that's all I have to say about that.

[Defenstrator]

I'm with Sardonic Artery with his signature that the Cygnar forums just need to be locked for a while until the "trash" find themselves another outlet to spew their negativity elsewhere.

Well it's good to know if that happens you won't be back. All this "Wah, Wah, Wah, People won't talk how I want them too!" drama something we can all live without.

[knight_actual]

Mweh

10 char

[Sardonic Artery]

I am also with Sardonic Artery.

[MagnustheJust]

Hey Sardonic Artery...

If your sig line becomes prophetic and that event comes to pass, where will forumites such as myself find their giggles???

[Dashwood]

Hey Sardonic Artery...

If your sig line becomes prophetic and that event comes to pass, where will forumites such as myself find their giggles???

Mercenary forum, of course. We're practically the same faction, :3

[MagnustheJust]

While that may be true, it's always more fun to act up at
someone else's home!!