Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 44
  1. #1

    Default The problem with Unstable

    With the new errata my assumption is that PP wanted to remove the Berserker chassis from the meta until they figured out
    a solution that made them viable without being broken. To me that solution is to rework the Unstable rule.

    Unstable as it is seems like a very black and white ability that either does nothing or results in the total removal of a
    potentially full health jack, all decided by a single D6. A rework to this legacy rule seams to be called for in order
    to give it an active benefit while reducing the penalty to something less that the total destruction of the jack. My proposition is
    to essentially take the controlled warping ability, add a self damage effect to it and apply it to the Berserker chassis.

    Here it is,

    At the beginning of the model's activation, this model can choose one of the following Unstable effects
    Unstable effects last for one round. At the end of this model's activation if an Unstable effect
    was choosen this model take 3D6 damage


    Mad Dog,
    * +2" movement and Pathfinder, Note: remove fleet from card
    * Can trample over bases that are of equal or smaller base size
    * center 5" blaster template over this model, all models under the template
    except this suffer a pow 14 blast damage role. After resolving remove this
    model from play


    Beserker
    * Boosted melee attack roles against warrior models
    * Sidestep, Most unshure about this one, probably too much with Butcher 1 and Full Throttle
    * center 5" blaster template over this model, all models under the template
    except this suffer a pow 14 blast damage role. After resolving remove this
    model from play


    Rager,
    * Counterslam
    * Reposition 3
    * center 5" blaster template over this model, all models under the template
    except this suffer a pow 14 blast damage role. After resolving remove this
    model from play


    Drago, [Vlad affinity] Drago does not take damage from Unstable
    * Additional die to all attack and damage roles, drop lowest die
    * Overtake, again probably too much with Butcher 1 and Full Throttle
    * center 5" blaster template over this model, all models under the template
    except this suffer a pow 14 blast damage role. After resolving remove this
    model from play


    Along with the above the point values would probably need to be adjusted. What does everyone here think,
    what do you think of general idea of reworking Unstable into a controlled warping style ability and the self
    damage effect? Are the abilities too much and the penalty too little once battle mechanics are considered?

  2. #2
    Destroyer of Worlds squee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia!
    Posts
    2,810

    Default

    Actually Unstable is fine; powerful in the right circumstances.

    Really all it needs is Aggressive back.
    Quote Originally Posted by Talhe View Post
    Squee, it is no exaggeration to say that you have single-handedly restored my faith in Khadoran 'jacks. Thank you.
    ai ar riter for webkomiks an ar gud at spelings en gremar. u can find mai komiks HEER (fantusee advenchur) an HEER (ackshun an cheezcaek!)

  3. #3
    Conqueror Tenzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    451

    Default

    Here is a thred all about this....
    http://privateerpressforums.com/show...-to-be-REBUILT

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squee View Post
    Actually Unstable is fine; powerful in the right circumstances.

    Really all it needs is Aggressive back.
    I guess I am a bit biased against Unstable as is it since it feels similar to a strong crit effect.

  5. #5

    Default

    The Berserker Chassis are currently in line with point costs imposed on jacks without being Unstable.
    9 pts is what you would normally pay for 5 mat, 16 pow, arm 18, spd 4, berserk. Same for Mad dog or Rager.

    Unstable should go.
    Last edited by Smooth Criminal; 01-06-2017 at 01:18 PM.

  6. #6

    Default

    The problem with Unstable is that you're investing too much into a piece that will never trade well and cost you valuable field presence if you actually want it to do something. The spammability of the Mad Dog was its main point of viability. Having a niche is fine, but MAT 5 and Berserk on a "squishy" jack is niche aplenty. Unstable is a bad old dicey rule that shouldn't have outlived command checks; really the chassis would be fine if not for the rule's presence. Also compounding the issue is the Marauder being about 1.5 points too cheap, which I'd also expect to get fixed eventually.

  7. #7
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smooth Criminal View Post
    The Berserker Chassis are currently in line with point costs imposed on jacks without being Unstable.
    9 pts if what you would normally pay for 5 mat, 16 pow, arm 18, spd 4, Berserk. Same for Mad dog or Rager.

    Unstable should go.
    Alternatively Unstable acts as a -1 point cost

    Honestly though the largest problematic part of Mad Dog is allready resolved, Jury-Rigged became Fleet, Karchev's Feat doesn't boost MAT.

    I'd gladly see the Berserker and Mad Dog to become 8 again and I think they both should cost 8 right now.

    Edit: Drago can remain aswell but he has no life at 14 points. Either GEIST becomes Infernal Machine or it should be somewhere between 12-13.
    Last edited by JDAntoine; 01-06-2017 at 12:53 PM. Reason: Drago

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHuntsman View Post
    The problem with Unstable is that you're investing too much into a piece that will never trade well and cost you valuable field presence if you actually want it to do something. The spammability of the Mad Dog was its main point of viability. Having a niche is fine, but MAT 5 and Berserk on a "squishy" jack is niche aplenty. Unstable is a bad old dicey rule that shouldn't have outlived command checks; really the chassis would be fine if not for the rule's presence. Also compounding the issue is the Marauder being about 1.5 points too cheap, which I'd also expect to get fixed eventually.
    Unstable seems similar to a strong crit effect with a massive downside. I am generally against strong crit effects because they
    are so difficult to balance around since they can make a model very boom or bust. Until the crit happens they are just a sub-par model.
    Since Unstable effectively lost its implied bonus of making the chassis cheaper the explosion seems more like a consolation prize for losing
    a potentially full health heavy jack.

    I agree to Marauder/Berserker comparision is a big part of the problem.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    Alternatively Unstable acts as a -1 point cost

    Honestly though the largest problematic part of Mad Dog is allready resolved, Jury-Rigged became Fleet, Karchev's Feat doesn't boost MAT.

    I'd gladly see the Berserker and Mad Dog to become 8 again and I think they both should cost 8 right now.

    Edit: Drago can remain aswell but he has no life at 14 points. Either GEIST becomes Infernal Machine or it should be somewhere between 12-13.
    I guess PP will be hesitant to reduce to points on the chassis since after a point the hit boxes to cost ratio becomes untenable. I would hope the chassis
    gets pushed in the direction specialized roles and not hit point spam.

  10. #10
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VorlonWarLord View Post
    I guess PP will be hesitant to reduce to points on the chassis since after a point the hit boxes to cost ratio becomes untenable. I would hope the chassis
    gets pushed in the direction specialized roles and not hit point spam.
    The only reason as to why it can currently become untenable is 30 WJP. I expect Karchev to be one of our Errata bro's, which is what happens if you cut corners.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    The only reason as to why it can currently become untenable is 30 WJP. I expect Karchev to be one of our Errata bro's, which is what happens if you cut corners.
    I see your point but I guess the question is how many boxes and models is the tipping point and if that point can be effectively reached with another caster. My hesitancy comes from when an
    list's points is almost entirely used for jacks then trimming WJPs won't seem to have enough of an effect.

  12. #12

    Default

    Keep in mind they did mention (I think it was PPS_Pagani) that there's a theme force which will have an impact on the berserker chassis. Could maybe hand out aggressive? Who knows.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenbay924 View Post
    Keep in mind they did mention (I think it was PPS_Pagani) that there's a theme force which will have an impact on the berserker chassis. Could maybe hand out aggressive? Who knows.
    I forgot about the upcoming theme forces, any future errata would need to keep that in mind although I am a bit bummed at the prospect of the chassis only being good in a theme force

  14. #14
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VorlonWarLord View Post
    I see your point but I guess the question is how many boxes and models is the tipping point and if that point can be effectively reached with another caster. My hesitancy comes from when an
    list's points is almost entirely used for jacks then trimming WJPs won't seem to have enough of an effect.
    Well the trimming does have the wished for effect.

    Currently the competative norm for heavies taken is the highest in Khador still, by large because of how effective our models are by themselves with the likes of Karchev and Harkevich.
    In that set up our heavies usually dont one-round others, this also applies for Berserker and Mad Dog.

    Karchev used to allow us to practially auto-hit with MAT 5 and MAT 7 thanks to boosted attacks. Since that part was removed MAT 5 still sucks and on top of that our chasis went to 9. So what your left with is something too impractical.

    Trimming of WJP can be as effective as adding costs elsewhere, you just have to accept or put a roof on the taken norm of heavies elsewhere. Fact of the matter to me seems PP didnt know how to handle the Bersekers/Mad Dogs right now, so they went the easy way.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    Well the trimming does have the wished for effect.

    Currently the competative norm for heavies taken is the highest in Khador still, by large because of how effective our models are by themselves with the likes of Karchev and Harkevich.
    In that set up our heavies usually dont one-round others, this also applies for Berserker and Mad Dog.

    Karchev used to allow us to practially auto-hit with MAT 5 and MAT 7 thanks to boosted attacks. Since that part was removed MAT 5 still sucks and on top of that our chasis went to 9. So what your left with is something too impractical.

    Trimming of WJP can be as effective as adding costs elsewhere, you just have to accept or put a roof on the taken norm of heavies elsewhere. Fact of the matter to me seems PP didnt know how to handle the Bersekers/Mad Dogs right now, so they went the easy way.
    I Agree 100%, PP didn't could figure out how immediately resolve the problem and went for just pushing them of to the side where they weren't going to cause problems. The chassis core concept seemed to just be that it was impractical and mediocre in exchange for it being dirt cheap which turned out to be a dead end design wise. They were a cheap ineffective filler to be used as a sacrifice to start piece trades and turned out to be able to be made good enough that it could just flood the table and win.

    Here hoping that the theme list for them is interesting.

  16. #16
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Walden, NY
    Posts
    4,225

    Default

    It makes the chassis unplayable. Just make it simple like the model can't gain focus next turn.

  17. #17
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,830

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenbay924 View Post
    Keep in mind they did mention (I think it was PPS_Pagani) that there's a theme force which will have an impact on the berserker chassis. Could maybe hand out aggressive? Who knows.
    If that's true, than I will lose a little faith in PP. Making a model only useful in a single theme is already a horrible balancing decision. Making a whole chassis sucky because of a theme is ridiculous.

  18. #18
    Destroyer of Worlds Big Fat Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lawrence, Kansas
    Posts
    1,854

    Default

    I still like the idea of making them frenzy like a warbeast instead of exploding, and Vlad's bond would be that you choose the Frenzy target and activate Drago anyway. Arkadius's feat is broken because it basically means activating your entire army twice, but on one model it's strong but fine, especially since Vlad has to keep pouring focus into something less than a sure thing.
    Last edited by Big Fat Troll; 01-07-2017 at 03:15 AM.
    "It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood."
    -Karl Popper



  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisBatson View Post
    It makes the chassis unplayable. Just make it simple like the model can't gain focus next turn.
    I quite like that idea. Gain disrupted?

  20. #20
    Conqueror
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    233

    Default

    What I like about the OP is that I feel each of the options increase the playability of the jack, without lowering it in to that low point zone that makes it either too powerful for pieces of equal, without fiddling with their other stats, and that the explosion could be controlled, but not heavily abused because it happened at the beginning of its activation. Might be even more toned down by making it chosen in the control phase, or something. People would want to commit to taking it out entirely, instead of leaving it crippled. Kind of another method of controlling your opponent. Spam would be a possible problem, but I'm inclined to think it wouldn't be so bad.

    i feel it also goes with the fluff. These antique warjacks have developed quirks that led them to their role, or because of their role.

    maybe even add aggressive as one of their unstable options? So they can't have aggressive, boosted to hit against warriors and explode in the same turn, for instance. Kind of toolbox-ish.
    Last edited by theironking; 01-07-2017 at 05:59 AM. Reason: Clarity

  21. #21
    Annihilator Terminal_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Duxbury, VT
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Might be a case of fluff trumping rules a little too much. Seems like there are better ways to do it than this
    Quote Originally Posted by Ragesmith:
    "Internet" of course coming from the ancient Babylonian word for "complaining loudly and constantly about a minor grievance."

  22. #22
    Destroyer of Worlds tutenkharnage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Crawling through the Undercity with the BRI
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Making it gain Disruption seems simple and minimizes the all-or-nothing aspect of the die roll.

  23. #23

    Default

    I hope no one is advocating nerfing Karchev further.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theironking View Post
    What I like about the OP is that I feel each of the options increase the playability of the jack, without lowering it in to that low point zone that makes it either too powerful for pieces of equal, without fiddling with their other stats, and that the explosion could be controlled, but not heavily abused because it happened at the beginning of its activation. Might be even more toned down by making it chosen in the control phase, or something. People would want to commit to taking it out entirely, instead of leaving it crippled. Kind of another method of controlling your opponent. Spam would be a possible problem, but I'm inclined to think it wouldn't be so bad.

    i feel it also goes with the fluff. These antique warjacks have developed quirks that led them to their role, or because of their role.

    maybe even add aggressive as one of their unstable options? So they can't have aggressive, boosted to hit against warriors and explode in the same turn, for instance. Kind of toolbox-ish.
    Thanks, The idea was to have a commonality between the jacks while avoiding homogenization. In a way I think the Marauder is a good example of how I think the general design philosophy of how Khador's cheap jacks should go, being very good at doing a very specific thing or being very effective against a specific target type. Cheap and specialized trump cheap and general purpose.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Terminal_C View Post
    Might be a case of fluff trumping rules a little too much. Seems like there are better ways to do it than this
    I agree that my examples of benefits, penalties, and point costs would need balancing but I think the general idea is sound. All I did was take controlled warping and added self damage, overall a relatively simple thing. I think that using focus spent as the basis for applying a penalty is a dead end since it penalizes without adding a benefit. Previously the only benefit to the focus penalty was an implied lowered point cost.

    Just changing the penalty of Unstable to something less than the total destruction of the jack, causing disruption for example, still leave the chassis as a kind of bland jack with a bad stat line.

  26. #26
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    VorlonWarLord I think your design alterations are not bad but also too different from what PP had planned for them.

    Mr. Human, no, but I would have nerfed him differently.

    The problem that currently excists with cheap chasis in Khador is not solely thanks to the cost vs boxes but also very much thanks to how Karchev continues to have 30 WJP and is a Warjack himself. The outcome wouldn't be that different if Butcher 3 had 30 WJP aswell. By comparison both are very potent by themselves and far supercede the regular survivability and damage output of a Warcaster by themselves.

    So as discussed a few months ago I'd personally only would have changed Karchev to 24-26 WJP, keep Berserker at 8, Mad Dog at 8 and it's likely that Fleet would have replaced Jury Rigged (that part does keep it at a regular leash). As said before cost 9 kills it for everybody.

  27. #27
    Destroyer of Worlds Tekanan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    1,570

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squee View Post
    Actually Unstable is fine; powerful in the right circumstances.

    Really all it needs is Aggressive back.
    I am with squee on this. Aggressive +1
    Do check out https://instagram.com/tekanan165/ for pics of my adventures in the Iron Kingdoms!

  28. #28
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tekanan View Post
    I am with squee on this. Aggressive +1
    Well, with just Aggressive I'm still not going to get a Berserker or Mad Dog for 9 points.

    The other oddity is that if the chasis as a whole would be deemed to cheap you'd think that Rager would have gotten influenced aswell... but he didn't...
    In the next update I hope to expect them to be cost 8, Karchev to have his old feat but less WJP. However in order to archieve this we'd have to win a couple of tournaments with Karchev and a bucketload of Marauders.

    The cost of pieces can only be evaluated in faction and if you have in faction options to 'abuse it' your also currently talking about WJP.

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    In the next update I hope to expect them to be cost 8, Karchev to have his old feat but less WJP.
    I'm concerned by your obsession with Karchev's WJP. Is everything okay?

  30. #30
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHuntsman View Post
    I'm concerned by your obsession with Karchev's WJP. Is everything okay?
    Depends on if you want Berserker or Mad Dog.

  31. #31
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Darkest Canberra
    Posts
    4,353

    Default

    Well, with just Aggressive I'm still not going to get a Berserker or Mad Dog for 9 points.
    Aggressive, and you roll a d3 for unstable. That's worth 8-9 points, IMO.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    Depends on if you want Berserker or Mad Dog.
    Then fix Berserker and Mad Dog. No more roundabout WJP nonsense. Those jacks would be playable at 9 points without Unstable. We'll ever see an 8 point heavy again.

  33. #33
    Destroyer of Worlds Evil Necromancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,439

    Default

    I woulf be fine with less wjp for karchev if the feat roll back to the previous version. It was overcorrected.

  34. #34
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHuntsman View Post
    Then fix Berserker and Mad Dog. No more roundabout WJP nonsense. Those jacks would be playable at 9 points without Unstable. We'll ever see an 8 point heavy again.
    Because you dont understand it it doesnt mean is nonsence. Unfortunatly called the outcome of what happens when you put them on 9.

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Necromancer View Post
    I woulf be fine with less wjp for karchev if the feat roll back to the previous version. It was overcorrected.
    I agree, he's playable for sure now but the Errata closed more doors then it opened. Oddly.

  35. #35

    Default

    Pre-errata I think the general method for list construction was 14 mad dogs + 7 points of support or another mad dog. I never ran into the Mad Dog spam in my local meta since no one was willing to fork out that kind of cash. Dropping Karchev's WJPs to 25 and making mad dogs 8 points allows for 12 mad dogs with 4 points for support. Would a difference of 2 or 3 mad dogs make a big enough difference if Karchev's feat remained the same? If not, how many mad dogs do you think a player should be able to take with Karchev's old feat to make a competitive list.

    If PP is to be taken at face value about sticking to a 6 month errata cycle and not doing rapid fire erratas then I can see them just giving up and intentionally making the mad dog and berserker 1 point less than the Marauder and making sure Karchev wants jacks that don't need massive assistance to hit. I don't think its odd what they did, it was a calculated move. They wanted to invalidate a specific list, their goal was to only close doors without giving a new if possibly totally different option as consolation.

    Also, I guess anything more than 10 Marauders with access to battle group wide accuracy and movement buffs at the same time is more than PP wants Khador's jack spam to go.
    Last edited by VorlonWarLord; 01-08-2017 at 07:16 PM. Reason: Marauders

  36. #36
    Annihilator Talamare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    955

    Default

    Couldn't Unstable just be like

    Each time this model spends a focus it suffers d6 damage?

  37. #37
    Destroyer of Worlds
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,802

    Default

    VWL 14 was not really the significant standard. 10 plus two Kodiak and or Juggernaut caused much bigger problems.

    Interestingly if they wanted to mess with FA Berserker chasis wouldnt even be a bad choice for that. But I still stand by what I said before on the subject:

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    An 8 point Mad Dog is something that a real heavy Warjack would like, it's designed to Trample but like Kodiak it vastly prefers being jammed into a bunch of Infantry. Khador has the tools to increase it's POW if we want to, be it trough spells or Feat.

    Globally we agree though, Mad Dog is slightly to cheap for what it it does. But what it would do at 8 points would still be incredibly relevant, an anti-small based support Heavy.

    I fully believe that Theme forces are also the reason as to why we went to double digit cost design. The difference in 0.5 point can now be applied. A Mad Dog at cost 7 is slightly too good, A Mad Dog at cost 9 would never be taken. Cost 8 is exactly where it's cost should be. The only thing that seems to disturb players is that 8 also happens to be the cost of the Berserker, which really has nothing to do with the wonderful design of the Mad Dog.
    My hopes for errata 3
    Karchev 1.3
    - goes to 26 WJP
    - Feat becomes boosted melee attacks again and boosted damage
    Berserker 1.2
    - costs 8 again
    Mad Dog 1.2
    - costs 8 again
    - Fleet continious to replace Jury Rigged

    As said by others it could be a rather silly thing to reverse this again but I'd like to note that Karchev has been part of every errata so far. Meaning from all Warcasters we have I'm about 90% certain he wasn't tested.
    Karchev 1.0 had a 0.5" arm.
    Karchev 1.1 had a regular 1" arm.
    Karchev 1.2 feels his age catching up on him and can't see that well while Feating :P

    Karchev can still thake 12 Mad Dogs if truely wished for in the above set up but with the boosted Colossals and non-12" running Mad Dogs (unless explosions) I'm willing to bet it's possible to do without completely thaking over the metagame.
    Last edited by JDAntoine; 01-09-2017 at 02:43 AM.

  38. #38

    Default

    Hi there. As a faction ADD player I've always had a soft spot for Khador in general (it was my first faction after all, and I still own Khador), and for the Berserker chassis specifically. I get the price increase but I do agree that unstable needs to be redone and the variants needs to be overhauled to be worth 9 points. Here's a couple thoughts:

    Unstable
    This model may run or charge without using focus. At the end of its activation, if this model spends more than 1 focus it takes a d3 damage per focus spent.
    - The old rules were just too costly at no advantage as well as being too wordy. This makes it simpler and provides a benefit as well.

    Berserker
    Cost: 9 points
    Gains Bloodthirsty: When this model charges a living model, it gains +2 movement.
    - Replace Berserk for Murderous: This model gains an additional die on melee attack roles against warrior models.
    - Gains Combo Strike.
    Notes: This changes fit the fiction on the Berserker much more. Berserk was pretty poor considering the low Matt of the chassis. Murderous actually makes it dangerous against warrior models and with power up, it can on average kill 3 infantry. Bloodthristy gives it extra speed against living models and a boosted combo strike gives it an opportunity to hurt larger models.

    Mad Dog
    Cost: 9 points
    - Gains Grand Slam:
    - Gains Follow Up
    Notes: With how unstable is changed, spending one focus for fleet isn't as dangerous and allows the Jack to get up the board quickly. Grand Slam gives the Mad Dog a role even if there isn't anything to trample.

    Rager
    Cost 10 points.
    Rules unchanged except for the new unstable rules.
    Notes: The Rager is a bit too expensive for what it does. The price drop and ability to run/charge for free with no fear of explosions hopefully makes it more appealing (Even with the price drop, its still just as expensive as the Marauder).

    Anyway, what do you think?

  39. #39

    Default

    TalamareYes but something else would need to be changed or added in order to counter balance Unstable since it is only serves as a penalty.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    VWL 14 was not really the significant standard. 10 plus two Kodiak and or Juggernaut caused much bigger problems.
    If that is the case then I doubt Karchev will get his old feat back unless those chassis get changed which I hope they don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDAntoine View Post
    Karchev 1.2 feels his age catching up on him and can't see that well while Feating :P
    Karchev is slowly becoming the Mr Magoo of the Iron Kingdoms

    zorrobard123 Over all I agree, to me the unsatisfactory parts of Unstable is how it lacks granularity in its possible outcomes and any kind of self damage as oppose to total destruction would likely help even things out. In game design there is a balance of granularity vs complexity and Unstable is a holdover from earlier editions which had more issues with that kind of balance.

    One aspect of the chassis that the Mad Dog has that I wish was carried over to other berserker chassis is using their low accuracy as a way to make them focused on a specific role. Rules like Murderous and Smasher on a low MAT jack work well to move toward that type of design.

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zorrobard123 View Post
    Hi there. As a faction ADD player I've always had a soft spot for Khador in general (it was my first faction after all, and I still own Khador), and for the Berserker chassis specifically. I get the price increase but I do agree that unstable needs to be redone and the variants needs to be overhauled to be worth 9 points. Here's a couple thoughts:

    Unstable
    This model may run or charge without using focus. At the end of its activation, if this model spends more than 1 focus it takes a d3 damage per focus spent.
    - The old rules were just too costly at no advantage as well as being too wordy. This makes it simpler and provides a benefit as well.

    Berserker
    Cost: 9 points
    Gains Bloodthirsty: When this model charges a living model, it gains +2 movement.
    - Replace Berserk for Murderous: This model gains an additional die on melee attack roles against warrior models.
    - Gains Combo Strike.
    Notes: This changes fit the fiction on the Berserker much more. Berserk was pretty poor considering the low Matt of the chassis. Murderous actually makes it dangerous against warrior models and with power up, it can on average kill 3 infantry. Bloodthristy gives it extra speed against living models and a boosted combo strike gives it an opportunity to hurt larger models.

    Mad Dog
    Cost: 9 points
    - Gains Grand Slam:
    - Gains Follow Up
    Notes: With how unstable is changed, spending one focus for fleet isn't as dangerous and allows the Jack to get up the board quickly. Grand Slam gives the Mad Dog a role even if there isn't anything to trample.

    Rager
    Cost 10 points.
    Rules unchanged except for the new unstable rules.
    Notes: The Rager is a bit too expensive for what it does. The price drop and ability to run/charge for free with no fear of explosions hopefully makes it more appealing (Even with the price drop, its still just as expensive as the Marauder).

    Anyway, what do you think?
    I like your unstable idea. I think the combo strike doesn't fit the zerker though. If it's made to fight infantry the combo smite can be aimed at heavys. I would suggest bringing the MK2 chain attack back (free headbutt). I think it's less strong than combo smite but gives more utility against the heavier stuff.

    The mad dog feels too close the the marauder. The difference being combo smite and grand slam. I think the mad dog should stay as the trample bot it is. Just because there are less infantry doesn't mean it should change. There are bits and bobs of infantry around. And the new flameguard themes will help. Maybe allow it to trample over med bases?

    I agree with you on the rager. Drop a point and i would be happy.
    Quote Originally Posted by PPS_Hungerford View Post
    Day Two Back From Vacation
    Dear Diary,
    Someone posted a thing about errata. I got the forums arguing about cartoons instead.
    2017 is going to be alright.
    Sincerely,Me

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •