Seraphobia: why am I the only one with it?

[Thunder_God]

Hm, seems like it can be changed. After all, it doesn't seem to be an inherent rule of Strafe how many attacks it gives. Just like Tactician, Veteran Leader, all with their [x]! It could even be there'd be a model with Strafe[3]. Heh.

[favonian]

2d3 is definitely more balanced. The Seraph with Strafe[2d3] actually feels like its worth 8 points. You can rely on getting 3-5 shots most of the time due to the bell curve. And even getting 2 shots isnt completely debilitating.

That would be ok but I think you are making it more complicated than it needs to be. The seraph really only needs some minor changes. They should swap the mat/rat so that it is rat 6, mat 5. Dump strafe and give it ROF 3.

[Soulblighter]

That would be ok but I think you are making it more complicated than it needs to be. The seraph really only needs some minor changes. They should swap the mat/rat so that it is rat 6, mat 5. Dump strafe and give it ROF 3.

How is changing strafe to 2d3 more complicated than the whole list of changes youre proposing? Your changes fundamentally alter the Seraph and not necessarily for the better. 2d3 is a SIMPLE fix. The Seraph retains ALL of its current functionality while gaining a much needed boost. Changing the weapon profile of the Seraph to ROF3, while it does certainly have some merits, is neither the simplest or best way to fix the Seraph.

Hm, seems like it can be changed. After all, it doesn't seem to be an inherent rule of Strafe how many attacks it gives. Just like Tactician, Veteran Leader, all with their [x]! It could even be there'd be a model with Strafe[3]. Heh.

I think the whole point of Strafe is that you at least have some randomness involved. Besides Strafe[3] is often worse than Strafe[2d3] anyway.

[Neutralyze]

Can I change my feedback? I did most of my feedback last night but forgot about your excellent suggestion of ROF 2 for the teraph. I suggested thresher but I also like the idea of ROF 2. Either or. I'd also like to offer the Strafe 2D3 idea for the seraph, though I have my reservations about that.

at rof 2 i think he would see play in a lot of lists. he would be our go to ranged support beast against infantry (not all but some) while the seraph would be the individual target slayer with a good animus.

just the ROF2 change makes him very playable. keep his stats the same and 1 melee pow 12 tail. teraph fixed

[Thunder_God]

The "Strafe[3]" was as a possible example.
Strafe 3 is worse than 2d3, but I'd take it over d6 any day of the week

[favonian]

How is changing strafe to 2d3 more complicated than the whole list of changes youre proposing? Your changes fundamentally alter the Seraph and not necessarily for the better. 2d3 is a SIMPLE fix. The Seraph retains ALL of its current functionality while gaining a much needed boost. Changing the weapon profile of the Seraph to ROF3, while it does certainly have some merits, is neither the simplest or best way to fix the Seraph.



I think the whole point of Strafe is that you at least have some randomness involved. Besides Strafe[3] is often worse than Strafe[2d3] anyway.

Fundamentally change? The average of 1d6 is 3. Hence ROF 3. That is the same thing as the seraph has now but it takes away the randomness. That isnt fundamentally changing anything. It is the same mechanic that PP already uses for the menoth reedeemer which appears to works just fine. I understand where you are going with the 2d3 but I dont think PP will do that. Strafe is intended to generate a random number of attacks which I am guessing they factored in when they costed the ability.

I offered switching the mat and rat because PP chose to increase the MAT which was unnecessary for a heavy beast that is intended to primarily use its ranged weapon. Thus I would prefer an increased RAT not an increased MAT for an 8 pt model.

[jonconcarne]

The "Strafe[3]" was as a possible example.
Strafe 3 is worse than 2d3, but I'd take it over d6 any day of the week

agreed. at least it would be something you can count on then.

[Soulblighter]

Fundamentally change? The average of 1d6 is 3. Hence ROF 3. That is the same thing as the seraph has now but it takes away the randomness. That isnt fundamentally changing anything. It is the same mechanic that PP already uses for the menoth reedeemer which appears to works just fine. I understand where you are going with the 2d3 but I dont think PP will do that. Strafe is intended to generate a random number of attacks which I am guessing they factored in when they costed the ability.

Its not the same thing at all. Its not even close in fact. Because you have to spend fury to make additional shots. Thats fury you cant spend to boost damage rolls.

With strafe 2d3 youd get 2d3 shots and 3 fury to boost.

With ROF 3 you spend 2 fury to make two additional shots and only get 1 fury to boost.

Do you see the difference?

[ArchonXVI]

I was about to say something similar.

It's surreal that the entire faction doesn't see the benefit of a model that gets an additional 1d6-1 attacks each round, at range, for free.

Can you name me anything else that can pump out that many pow 14s at a very, very aggressive RAT?

And beyond even that issue; people have been bemoaning the Seraph's survivability. And it's true, when it gets hit, it hurts quite badly. Why not use cover, forests, obstructions, etc? The Seraph has eyeless sight for a reason; you can't just park it in the middle of the field and expect it to perform. And to those saying 'my opponent won't let me do this'- hopefully you've then removed a fair bit of realestate for him to maneuver in. And when he does start to move around, pick at the flanks. 10" keeps you away from just about everything without reach, and a slipstream to pull them back even further keeps you away from just about everything.

No single model in the game puts out as much ranged firepower as a Seraph on average, at least under incite or HoF. (This does not count a boosted Hydra, because it's your own fault if you let it get that strong).

[Thunder_God]

POW 12. RAT 5 is less than "Very, very aggressive".

Also, the "Additional X attacks for free" would be very nice, if we also had more attacks we could pay for, but it's possible to end with 1 attack, it's possible to get 2 attacks. And then you have an 8 point model that doesn't do much.

Honestly, the Seraph, especially with the buffs available by legion warlocks is currently a melee beast, who also has an above average (for Hordes, especially) ranged weapon. It's not a ranged beast with an ok melee weapon (for a heavy warbeast, it's a sub-par melee weapon), and which can't do power attacks.

Seriously, if it's a ranged beast, give it ranged stats.

Also, there are any number of Cygnar warjacks, and even some Menite warjacks, who put out more ranged firepower than the Seraph, especially if we can add in support, both spells and otherwise (Choir of Menoth, and any number of Cygnar spells). Also, what's HoF? And I'd give the Seraph a Parasite target, if not Incite.

[Soulblighter]

POW 12. RAT 5 is less than "Very, very aggressive".

He said POW14. Obvously hes including Incite. POW14 RAT7 is quite aggressive.

[Thunder_God]

He added incite at the end, when describing the model, if he meant for us to take it into account at the beginning...

Especially since he talks about a faction, and how other factions would love such a model... and well, Incite is not a faction-wide buff, and it's not something other factions have access to... so where's this POW 14, very effective RAT all the other factions are fighting over?

****, if the Seraph had POW 14, RAT 7, no one would say anything. I mean, I want to take the Seraph aside with Vayl, is that so much to ask for?
In fact, I had long said, "Gimme +1 RAT, Fury, POW, and keep him at 8 points," to one of my friends.

[Awefaw]

What do people think about d3+1 and giving it a 4th fury?

[ArchonXVI]

He added incite at the end, when describing the model, if he meant for us to take it into account at the beginning...

Especially since he talks about a faction, and how other factions would love such a model... and well, Incite is not a faction-wide buff, and it's not something other factions have access to... so where's this POW 14, very effective RAT all the other factions are fighting over?

****, if the Seraph had POW 14, RAT 7, no one would say anything. I mean, I want to take the Seraph aside with Vayl, is that so much to ask for?
In fact, I had long said, "Gimme +1 RAT, Fury, POW, and keep him at 8 points," to one of my friends.

That is true, I meant for you to take incite and Manifest Destiny (which I keep calling Hand of Fate for some reason) into account. In order to deal with balance, you have to look at things at their strongest under reasonable conditions. Using Vayl or Epic Thagrosh is a fairly reasonable set of conditions. Under other warlocks I think the Seraph might need a fair bit of love.

And no, for once I don't think other factions would really want/need such a model. Cygnar could probably do the most with it, considering snipe, but even they can't milk the raw damage from it quite like EB.

And therein lies the problem. With Vayl and Epic Thagrosh, it's probably overpowered. Nothing in the game puts out so much damage at range on average. And don't say 'I could roll a 1,' because I'll just respond 'and you could roll a 6.' The average is 3.5, and that's what we have to use. I round it down to 3 usually just to take into account how its randomness is hardly a boon.

Now, as to why it puts out so much damage. I've been running the numbers, and what keeps coming up is the dual buff of +RAT and +POW. If it boosted one or the other, it wouldn't be an issue. As it stands, it might as well be boosting the attack to POW 17.5. This is because at RAT 7, you'll rarely need to boost to hit against most medium targets; jacks ~arm 18, and light warbeasts/jacks. Then, you can spend all your fury boosting damage instead. This is far, far more damage output than any other ranged model in the game puts out; indeed, it's more than anything short of doubletapping longgunners.

Of course, only the first three shots hit that hard, but you're still getting nonboosted 14's after. And yeah, you could roll a 1, and it sucks. 2d3 would be a fantastic option, but with incite/MD that'd crank it well into insane territory. The fact it can do this kind of damage from behind trees and such is just icing.

And I'm curious to see what you think matches it in terms of ranged firepower. Give it whatever circumstances you want; I don't think you'll find anything that does even close, with the /possible/ exception of the Leviathan with spell support. I'd have to run the numbers on that.

Edit: As a solution to fix the Seraph? I suggest making Incite/MD melee only, and giving the seraph +2" of range and +1 RAT. Or, simply making it 7 points.

Double edit: Anything that decreases the standard deviation for Strafe while keeping the average number of shots ~3 will make it too strong (with incite/MD). While more than 3 shots is nice, 3 is the magic number, as that's the number of boosts you get. More is just gravy, making up for possible misses.

[Thunder_God]

Let's suppose the Seraph gets 3 attacks, simply because I don't want to think of how to calculate boosting 3.5 attacks
Under Incite, RAT 7, let's say we even hit all 3 attacks, boost damage, that's effectively 24.5 damage before armour on each shot. ARM 18 makes it 19.5 damage, ARM 16 25.5, ARM 20 13.5.

Charger with Powerful shot, same range, we'll assume it hits everything the Seraph does (with powerful attack, it is effectively RAT 9.5 on average, so it's actually considerably better). Damage is, for 3 Focus, 2X 22.5. Now, you said any combination I want, and we have Incite going for the Seraph, so I'd pick, why, I believe I'd pick the feat of Siege, note, this is only one Charger, which costs half as much as the Seraph.
Against ARM 18, I deal 27 damage. Against ARM 16 29 damage, against ARM 20 25 damage.
And I get to take 2 Chargers for the price of one Seraph.

[jonconcarne]

...you have to look at things at their strongest under reasonable conditions...

Double edit: Anything that decreases the standard deviation for Strafe while keeping the average number of shots ~3 will make it too strong (with incite/MD). While more than 3 shots is nice, 3 is the magic number, as that's the number of boosts you get. More is just gravy, making up for possible misses.

2 things:
First of all, just like you have to look at things at their strongest, you also need to keep in mind the average, and for 8 points I just have trouble with the randomness. My only real problem with the Seraph is that you can't count on it...at all. That could just be me and the fact that I almost always get screwed by the dice, but it is very frustrating to roll a 1 two turns in a row.

Second of all, why is 2d3 that much crazier? It's not like it's exactly a cheap beast in the first place. Heck, if they made it 2d3 for the strafe and costed it at 9, I'd be happy to pay the 9 points for one reason. I could include it in plans rather than use it when plans A, B, and C fail.

[Necra-Chi]

The "what if we roll a 1" is a perfectly good argument for the seraph being unreliable and in need of work but otherwsie great, becasue there are very few turns in a game, and every timne it rolls a 1, its effectively a wasted turn, it might be up against teh wrong target for that few shots, it might die the next turn as a result, and is therefore 8 points of resource that is underperforming.

This is made more valid by the fact that the "what if you roll 6" defense has little validity, because in reality if the seraph didn't do what it needed to with 4 shots, it isn't going to do it with 6.

[ArchonXVI]

Let's suppose the Seraph gets 3 attacks, simply because I don't want to think of how to calculate boosting 3.5 attacks
Under Incite, RAT 7, let's say we even hit all 3 attacks, boost damage, that's effectively 24.5 damage before armour on each shot. ARM 18 makes it 19.5 damage, ARM 16 25.5, ARM 20 13.5.

Charger with Powerful shot, same range, we'll assume it hits everything the Seraph does (with powerful attack, it is effectively RAT 9.5 on average, so it's actually considerably better). Damage is, for 3 Focus, 2X 22.5. Now, you said any combination I want, and we have Incite going for the Seraph, so I'd pick, why, I believe I'd pick the feat of Siege, note, this is only one Charger, which costs half as much as the Seraph.
Against ARM 18, I deal 27 damage. Against ARM 16 29 damage, against ARM 20 25 damage.
And I get to take 2 Chargers for the price of one Seraph.

Well, you forget that you're spending focus on those chargers, which is a major limiting factor.

And sure, I'll give you the rest... now, shall we drag it out over more than one turn? Over a whole game, I think you'll see those numbers even out really, really quickly...

2 things:
First of all, just like you have to look at things at their strongest, you also need to keep in mind the average, and for 8 points I just have trouble with the randomness. My only real problem with the Seraph is that you can't count on it...at all. That could just be me and the fact that I almost always get screwed by the dice, but it is very frustrating to roll a 1 two turns in a row.

I see your point, which is why I liked the 2d3 solution. However, as it stands, it'd be too strong.

Second of all, why is 2d3 that much crazier? It's not like it's exactly a cheap beast in the first place. Heck, if they made it 2d3 for the strafe and costed it at 9, I'd be happy to pay the 9 points for one reason. I could include it in plans rather than use it when plans A, B, and C fail.

Because while that'd probably fix it for everyone but Vayl and EThagrosh, it'd make it /even better/ for them. Seeing as it's already very, very strong, that just compounds the issue.

The "what if we roll a 1" is a perfectly good argument for the seraph being unreliable and in need of work but otherwsie great, becasue there are very few turns in a game, and every timne it rolls a 1, its effectively a wasted turn, it might be up against teh wrong target for that few shots, it might die the next turn as a result, and is therefore 8 points of resource that is underperforming.

This is made more valid by the fact that the "what if you roll 6" defense has little validity, because in reality if the seraph didn't do what it needed to with 4 shots, it isn't going to do it with 6.

I agree that it's unreliable and in need of work; that's the entire premise of my post. It's too strong with two casters, and too weak with all the others, for the reasons you stated above.

However, I feel that with the level of damage output it regularly sees with incite/MD, it performs admirably with Vayl and EThagrosh. If we buff it further, it will get out of hand.

As such, my solution was to change incite/MD, and then buff the Seraph to make it good for everyone.

And as an aside, I can think of many times where an additional 2 RAT 7 POW 14 shots could help, just a bit.

[Aedric]

Then noone will take Ethag/Vayl with ranged beasts at all. It'll entirely change the dynamic. I'm thinking its not the best option.

I'm thinking the best option is some sort of special rule on strafe that guarntee's a second shot. Its not a strafe if only one shot is put out.

Sometimes like :

Blighted fire: When the seraph rolls 1 for a strafe roll you may add 1 to the roll.

Something like that.

[Thunder_God]

It's too weak with all the others, even aside from its lack of reliability. Even if it were reliable, it wouldn't actually be good with any other caster, the lack of reliability means it's both unreliable and not very good, if you ask me.

Well, even not on feat turn, so long I spend the focus, two chargers still beat a 3 shot Seraph. Sure, it's a cost, but you said I can support it however I want, and this is long-term, so no longer is the Feat involved. Only on ARM 21 can an Incited Seraph once more surpass two fully focused Chargers.
Signs and Portents with Behemoth, sure, it's 1 Focus more, but it also boosts all my nice infantry.

No Focus: 2 Vassals of Menoth, Vanquisher, Choir of Menoth. Same RAT 7 as a Seraph, so we'll assume it hits. Only Range 10, but 3 attacks, and POW 16. Hands down win, and it got 3 AoE 4 who deal 9 damage.
Heck, let's just take the Reckoner with the above scenario. Range 12 as Seraph, RAT 7 as incited Seraph, POW 15, beats incited Seraph, 2nd and 3rd shots are effectively RAT 9. Now, if we throw in boosting, say, 3 focus (Incite/Manifest Destiny cost 3 Fury from the warlock, so it's ok, and if it's not ok to allocate focus, then please don't use incite, mmkay?), then we're dealing before ARM, on these 3 shots, well, 1 damage more than the incited Seraph per shot, for 3 damage more total.

Point.

[Awefaw]

Seraphs are range 10 not 12 assuming thats what you meant.

[Necra-Chi]

Well, you forget that you're spending focus on those chargers, which is a major limiting factor.

And sure, I'll give you the rest... now, shall we drag it out over more than one turn? Over a whole game, I think you'll see those numbers even out really, really quickly...

I see your point, which is why I liked the 2d3 solution. However, as it stands, it'd be too strong.

Because while that'd probably fix it for everyone but Vayl and EThagrosh, it'd make it /even better/ for them. Seeing as it's already very, very strong, that just compounds the issue.

I agree that it's unreliable and in need of work; that's the entire premise of my post. It's too strong with two casters, and too weak with all the others, for the reasons you stated above.

However, I feel that with the level of damage output it regularly sees with incite/MD, it performs admirably with Vayl and EThagrosh. If we buff it further, it will get out of hand.

As such, my solution was to change incite/MD, and then buff the Seraph to make it good for everyone.

And as an aside, I can think of many times where an additional 2 RAT 7 POW 14 shots could help, just a bit.

ROF2 solves your concerns and mine. You can pay for reliability, but the reliable increase in total, max and average shots, comes at a cost, without introducing a 2D3 curve that means the seraph will consistently get more shots than most other shooters for free.

It solve sthe unreliability with everyone but Vayla nd E-Thag, and doesn't unduly increase the damage output with E-Thag and Vayl.

The problem with ROF 2 is it does allow a shot at a totally different target area, which is too useful to be allowed. 2D3 might be too reliable but its the ebst suggestion I've seen with a precedent.

As soon a syou get into other strafe numbers that still address the problem [D3+1] you're into the territory of no precedent.

I also want to add that I'm not yet convinced that having an extremely reliable strafe would unbalance the seraph with Vayl and E-Thag. Why? Because in my experience the seraph spends a large portion or most of the game engaged by enemy, and is therefore fighting with its tail unless it wants to take a free strike, or get some outside help to free it. Thankfully its pretty good with its tail now so that isn't too bad, BUT it does mean that when we do shoot we need it to be good the few turns that we do, and it doesn't happen often enough to unbalance Vayl and E-Thag.

[Thunder_God]

Even better for my comparison, that Seraphs are range 10".

[ArchonXVI]

Stuff.

As I said; Seraphs need to be buffed if incite/MD does not affect them. If they are buffed, Vayl/EThagrosh will still likely take them.

It's too weak with all the others, even aside from its lack of reliability. Even if it were reliable, it wouldn't actually be good with any other caster, the lack of reliability means it's both unreliable and not very good, if you ask me.

Oh, if we fixed the reliability, I think people could find a use for 4 boostable 12's, especially if we add just a hair more to sweeten the deal, like -1pt cost or +1 RAT.

Well, even not on feat turn, so long I spend the focus, two chargers still beat a 3 shot Seraph. Sure, it's a cost, but you said I can support it however I want, and this is long-term, so no longer is the Feat involved. Only on ARM 21 can an Incited Seraph once more surpass two fully focused Chargers.

Meaningless, that's two models. I said one model.

Signs and Portents with Behemoth, sure, it's 1 Focus more, but it also boosts all my nice infantry.

Only 2 pow ~16s with worse RAT. I'll work the numbers, but I have a feeling it'll come out to less.

No Focus: 2 Vassals of Menoth, Vanquisher, Choir of Menoth. Same RAT 7 as a Seraph, so we'll assume it hits. Only Range 10, but 3 attacks, and POW 16. Hands down win, and it got 3 AoE 4 who deal 9 damage.
Heck, let's just take the Reckoner with the above scenario. Range 12 as Seraph, RAT 7 as incited Seraph, POW 15, beats incited Seraph, 2nd and 3rd shots are effectively RAT 9. Now, if we throw in boosting, say, 3 focus (Incite/Manifest Destiny cost 3 Fury from the warlock, so it's ok, and if it's not ok to allocate focus, then please don't use incite, mmkay?), then we're dealing before ARM, on these 3 shots, well, 1 damage more than the incited Seraph per shot, for 3 damage more total.

Point.

Fair play, I forgot you could use 2 Vassals on the same model.

And for the record, I never said you couldn't boost. If you don't boost, the Seraph wins in the first example.

ROF2 solves your concerns and mine. You can pay for reliability, but the reliable increase in total, max and average shots, comes at a cost, without introducing a 2D3 curve that means the seraph will consistently get more shots than most other shooters for free.

It solve sthe unreliability with everyone but Vayla nd E-Thag, and doesn't unduly increase the damage output with E-Thag and Vayl.

The problem with ROF 2 is it does allow a shot at a totally different target area, which is too useful to be allowed. 2D3 might be too reliable but its the ebst suggestion I've seen with a precedent.

As soon a syou get into other strafe numbers that still address the problem [D3+1] you're into the territory of no precedent.

Considering their point cost, I don't think that allowing a totally different target area is too useful to be allowed. This is a really elegant solution, though I'm not entirely sure it fixes the problem.

Even if we did this, they'd still be a bit under the curve for everyone but EThag and Vayl.

[Necra-Chi]

You cannot use ancillary attack twice on the same model. You can use enliven and ancillary attack on the same model.


Archon, with ROF 2 I'd field them with the others. I think they're already great on any turn they get 2+ shots.

[Thunder_God]

RoF 2 also means we'll need 1 more Fury to buy an extra attack.

Also, I don't have 4 boostable attacks with the Seraph right now, only 3. Fury 3...

Edit: And you're right on Ancillary attack, hm.
Might need to look at the warcasters, which is a headache

[ArchonXVI]

Archon, with ROF 2 I'd field them with the others. I think they're already great on any turn they get 2+ shots.

If you say so- perhaps they fit your style more than mine. I don't know that I'd be able to milk enough use from them.

RoF 2 also means we'll need 1 more Fury to buy an extra attack.

Also, I don't have 4 boostable attacks with the Seraph right now, only 3. Fury 3...

Well, you have 4 boostable attacks, and you can boost them three times. If you were to miss with one for example, you could still boost three times.

And yeah, that's one of the reasons I'm not entirely sold on the ROF fix myself. One of the major benefits of the Seraph is that you don't have to pay for your extra attacks. +1 fury would be a poor way of fixing it unless incite and such were fixed, but I can see that being reasonable otherwise.

[Necra-Chi]

Its the fact that you have to buy the additional attack that makes the ROF2 idea balanced with Vayl and E-Thag. You're not realistically going to get much more out of the additional shot than you would from just boosting on of the shots it does get.

[Thunder_God]

I think you're viewing incite the wrong manner.

It's her hallmark spell. She's one caster. A beast caster, an 8 Fury one. You want it to be weak?

Heck, this always amazes me in a way, we look at strong spells/feats at Hordes and say they're way too strong, because we compare them in our game, but if we look at WM, we see a dozen abilities that compare, several in each faction. It's not that Vayl is too strong, and it's not just that the other warlocks are too weak, it's that almost every faction has several such casters, and they were not born equal.

Incite is alright. Manifest Destiny is alright. WM has equivalent stuff, more or less (Eye of Menoth, Blood of Kings).

And as always, you can only try to balance the warbeast, because each warbeast has to be "worth it", and is a universal tool, no matter which warlock you add later, and which support you add later. The warbeast should be fine on its own, and then if you have 1-2 outlier warlocks change them to work with what the faction has without breaking anything.
The only other solution, aside from having the Seraph be "Just balanced" with a couple of Warlocks, and way underpowered with the rest, is to make sure each and every warlock can boost the Seraph in some way...

Also, if you can't get beyond "Just balanced", why work on synergies and combinations? Unsupported models deserve to be "Just balanced", once you throw in 3 Fury spells, it should become better, stronger, and it's not "overpowered", it's supported.

[Necra-Chi]

I agree with you Thunder_God but some beasts benefit differentially from manifest desitny and incite because they have a lot of attacks to benefit from the effect. An angel balanced with any other warlock will be balanced with Vayla dn E-Thag. Carnivean, Typhon, Seraph and shredderswarms, even raeks are a whole different ballgame because the leverage or gearing they get from their volume of attacks per point.

I'm reminded of Animal Farm, where everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.

[Thunder_God]

Again, the issue is not to balance beasts, but to balance casters.

Also, those with extra attacks usually benefit more equally, or that is to say, they benefit more, no matter what boost you give them, and thus it's translated into their cost.
Typhon/Carnivean/Shredder benefit more from attacking something under Parasite than does anything with just one attack. It's always true, no matter how you boost (Fury on a Krea/Ancestral Guardian is better than Fury on say, Void Spirit).

Same as all other things being equal, casting a buff/debuff on a bigger unit gives you more yield than casting on a smaller unit, and that in turn more than on a single model. But we don't say a spell is broken because the faction has a unit with UA that can be targeted and not only 6 models units.

[ArchonXVI]

Again, the issue is not to balance beasts, but to balance casters.

Also, those with extra attacks usually benefit more equally, or that is to say, they benefit more, no matter what boost you give them, and thus it's translated into their cost.
Typhon/Carnivean/Shredder benefit more from attacking something under Parasite than does anything with just one attack. It's always true, no matter how you boost (Fury on a Krea/Ancestral Guardian is better than Fury on say, Void Spirit).

I agree with this on all points. However, the big difference is this; the Seraph is one of the very, very few models with a volume of boostable /ranged/ attacks. This puts it in a whole new ballgame.

[Aedric]

I'm sure privateer knows by this point that the seraph needs to be buffed/tweaked.

I would not be surprised if they've already made the majority of their decisions on most models already.

I kinda feel like the conversation on the seraph is now going in circles and nothing new is being added. There have been a number of different options expressed with good/bad sides for every option.

The damage output of the seraph can be staggering or very low.

I almost feel like it doesn't have a place in mk2 metagame. We have a bunch of round holes and the seraph right now is a square peg.

Hopefully privateer can trim the peg.

Thats the end of my rant. Carry on.

[Soulblighter]

Incite is alright. Manifest Destiny is alright. WM has equivalent stuff, more or less (Eye of Menoth, Blood of Kings).

I disagree. There isnt a single battlegroup spell in Warmachine thats equivalent to Incite or Manifest Destiny. Even Signs and Portents isnt as good as MD because it costs Vlad 4 focus to cast, which is 4 less focus he can give to his warjacks, while eThagrosh can cast MD and still force all his warbeasts to their full potential. The very fact that casting battlegroup spells in Hordes doesnt detract from Warbeasts being able to force is what makes spells like Incite and MD much better than their Warmachine counterparts.

[ricefrisbeetreats]

Does Blood of Kings still work on units? Because that's why I thought it was 4 focus, not for the jacks.

[Soulblighter]

I figured he meant signs and portents.

[Thunder_God]

Signs and Portents is just as good, if not better, because it also works on non-battlegroup models, such as the mortars, widowmakers, whatever.

Eye of Menoth is likewise, it's just +1, costs the same as Incite, but it also affects non-battlegroup models.

I call them "More or less equivalent."

As for what Thagrosh can do, and how spells take away from allocated focus? I'm not getting into another focus versus fury debate. I'm comparing spells and debunking claims made.

[withershadow]

Signs and Portents is just as good, if not better, because it also works on non-battlegroup models, such as the mortars, widowmakers, whatever.

Eye of Menoth is likewise, it's just +1, costs the same as Incite, but it also affects non-battlegroup models.

I call them "More or less equivalent.".

Also, those spells don't require the ENEMY to be within their radius, just your own models, and in the case of EoM, can be upkept essentially for free.

[Thunder_God]

Yes, that was the other part, which I forgot when making the latest post.

Well, Manifest Destiny is the same, while your models are in your control, unlike Incite which requires the targets to be within control.

[Soulblighter]

Signs and Portents is just as good, if not better, because it also works on non-battlegroup models, such as the mortars, widowmakers, whatever.

Eye of Menoth is likewise, it's just +1, costs the same as Incite, but it also affects non-battlegroup models.

If you take only warbeasts with eThagrosh or Vayl, than MD and Incite are better. That was my whole point. Because casting those spells doesnt cost you potential boosting for your warbeasts like it does in warmachine with warjacks.