33 minutes ago, Xelto said:

That sort of defeats the point of scuttling horror.

The problem isn't the sideways shift. It's the ability to shift in a wide selection of directions, followed by a charge, and it's the primary issue with Fleshrippers, as well.

I still think the better solution is to have exiting terrain end your activation the same way that entering terrain does.

Scuttle is just left or right. That’s it. Your issue is with scuttle near terrain.

As for near terrain, to be frank, it is generally pretty predictable and can be played around. There are only so many good ways to scuttle out of terrain in a given situation. Also, just charge said terrain on the turn that you think they’ll try to enter it.

Ask Jukey. He’s learned to deal with it. The Scuttle shift rarely surprises him and rarely matters in our games. The stun is more significant. It also wasn’t a significant card for me at worlds except for my games against JJ.

I don’t like that you easily get both effects. Making it exhaust to shift keeps all the theme and makes it so you generally have to choose between one or the other. Sure, you can bank inspiration or use Rallying, but that means wounds, slow play, or relying on other units.

.

.

.

People are complaining about Flesh Rippers?

1 hour ago, Church14 said:

Scuttle is just left or right. That’s it. Your issue is with scuttle near terrain.

As for near terrain, to be frank, it is generally pretty predictable and can be played around. There are only so many good ways to scuttle out of terrain in a given situation. Also, just charge said terrain on the turn that you think they’ll try to enter it.

Ask Jukey. He’s learned to deal with it. The Scuttle shift rarely surprises him and rarely matters in our games. The stun is more significant. It also wasn’t a significant card for me at worlds except for my games against JJ.

This strikes me as disingenuous. Coming out of terrain for free (granted, with limited facing) is still a huge advantage for three points, as is entering it. Schrodinger's thresher is simultaneously in and out of the terrain, so it occupies a huge quantum portion of the table. Whether you know it's coming or not doesn't mean it isn't hugely powerful, and you can only plan for one of the many places the thresher might appear.

I don't actually know a **** thing about quantum mechanics so you'll have to forgive my presumably wrong use of the term.

edit: you are 100% right though that shifting sideways out in the open is pretty worthless (aside from disengaging which is another thing I have big problem with)

5 minutes ago, Bhelliom said:

This strikes me as disingenuous. Coming out of terrain for free (granted, with limited facing) is still a huge advantage for three points, as is entering it. Schrodinger's thresher is simultaneously in and out of the terrain, so it occupies a huge quantum portion of the table. Whether you know it's coming or not doesn't mean it isn't hugely powerful, and you can only plan for one of the many places the thresher might appear.

I don't actually know a **** thing about quantum mechanics so you'll have to forgive my presumably wrong use of the term.

Side note: Shrodinger’s Thresher is an amazing name. I love it. Though it was originally a thought experiment/story showing how quantum states don’t scale up sensibly to sizes we can easily understand.

I guess my point is that while I can theoretically put a thresher in dozens of spots around terrain with scuttle, there are usually only 1 or 2 that are really good choices. Your opponent should be able to see that as well.

You can also affect terrain during setup. As first player, put the worst terrain for you where it’ll never be a factor. If second player, you can still keep it down to one piece of terrain to worry about.

I’ve played against a list with 3 Zoidbergs and we had 3 closely lacked pieces of terrain, all with 2 capacity. All I did to nearly completely counter it was to wait a bit away from the terrain with units close enough together that he could only get one flank via Scuttle. Knowing that, I could dial in an appropriate response.

Maybe it’s because I have used it a lot, but the scuttle choices are usually obvious to me when facing it.

I’m with church on this one. We need to distinguish between “I didn’t see this coming, I forget this was coming, or I miscalculated about the effects when this was coming” versus “I keep preparing against this and there is literally nothing I can do to stop it.”

I can still fool opponents who forget, but the regulars take special note, and then place terrain, deploy, and move with the threat in mind.

and in some of my last games I’ve forgotten the triggers entirely on several turns, but most of the time, the scuttle just ends up being inconsequential.

I'm with @Bhelliom in this, and it does not seem like you @Church14 and @Vergilius are taking into account that no other unit comes close to the "quantum" state that Scuttling Threshers do. You say that as long as a player do X Y Z they can be handled, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO PLAY AROUND ANY OTHER UNIT LIKE THAT! (Sorry for shouting

11 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

I'm with @Bhelliom in this, and it does not seem like you @Church14 and @Vergilius are taking into account that no other unit comes close to the "quantum" state that Scuttling Threshers do. You say that as long as a player do X Y Z they can be handled, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO PLAY AROUND ANY OTHER UNIT LIKE THAT! (Sorry for shouting

Faolon with unique, LordV, Beastmaster, Gorgemaw with unique, in a way Leonx

All provide either out of turn movement, teleportation, or extremely early potential disengagement.

7 minutes ago, Church14 said:

Faolon with unique, LordV, Beastmaster, Gorgemaw with unique, in a way Leonx

All provide either out of turn movement, teleportation, or extremely early potential disengagement.

But they are 10 points more expensive, have less hp and less damage output, and at least lord V can't do it every turn!

Edit: And all but leonx (which I don't think is much of an comparison) are unique!

2 minutes ago, Church14 said:

Faolon with unique, LordV, Beastmaster, Gorgemaw with unique, in a way Leonx

Some of this is that now almost everyone can do this in some form. Daqan can’t, but zachareth’s unique can look at dials and change them, which is their version of this. Suddenly it looks less like an anomaly and more like a concentrated direction they were trying to take the game.

Just now, Vergilius said:

Some of this is that now almost everyone can do this in some form. Daqan can’t, but zachareth’s unique can look at dials and change them, which is their version of this. Suddenly it looks less like an anomaly and more like a concentrated direction they were trying to take the game.

See my answer above

2 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

See my answer above

Neither church nor I are saying nothing can or should be done. We’re just not convinced we need to go that far. On principle, I’d start small, test, the build from there, as I’ve said earlier.

17 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

Neither church nor I are saying nothing can or should be done. We’re just not convinced we need to go that far. On principle, I’d start small, test, the build from there, as I’ve said earlier.

Sorry for getting wound up, but:

I don't have the standings readily available, but did not both 2018's two large tournaments have a VERY disproportional amount of Uthuk in the top halves and top 4s? I know for certain that they took gold and silver in both. A small nudge on this won't fix that (I believe).

8 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

Sorry for getting wound up, but:

I don't have the standings readily available, but did not both 2018's two large tournaments have a VERY disproportional amount of Uthuk in the top halves and top 4s? I know for certain that they took gold and silver in both. A small nudge on this won't fix that (I believe).

The results are exactly why something should be done. And in the very end, you may be right that a bigger change is required, but hat doesn’t invalidate an overarching principle of baby steps.

Thats also why trying to describe the problem are clearly and concisely as possible is the best first step. We can get at solutionsmore accurately then.

On 1/15/2019 at 6:39 AM, FranquesEnbiens said:

RUNE GOLEMS ARE STILL TERRIBLE, FIGHT ME LUKE

2nd.

Need a RG fix.

54 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

Sorry for getting wound up, but:

I don't have the standings readily available, but did not both 2018's two large tournaments have a VERY disproportional amount of Uthuk in the top halves and top 4s? I know for certain that they took gold and silver in both. A small nudge on this won't fix that (I believe).

I don’t want to nerf into oblivion various Uthuk cards. I want to try incremental changes to see what the effect is. I would also like the data that we don’t have about what types of armies win in each faction.

To make a point. Players have suggested to ban (or have in tourneys?) Insatiable Hunger. Jukey and I tested the sequencing change. The way I play Ravos - with him attacking like a wrecking ball to the kidney and largely operating solo - ends with him taking 2-3 more wounds a game. This forces me to play him closer to the main army if I don’t want him a lot more fragile. That makes it easier (though not easy) for opponents to get archer shots on him or to get him in engagement face to face and kill him. Very small change, very significant difference.

Uthuk seem to also cause some NPE that seems above and beyond just effectiveness. When they win big it seems like the losing side felt it never had a chance. That’s a concern to me as well. One I’m less confident in addressing.

1 hour ago, Church14 said:

Faolon with unique, LordV, Beastmaster, Gorgemaw with unique, in a way Leonx

All provide either out of turn movement, teleportation, or extremely early potential disengagement.

Oh don't worry, those are all in my crosshairs!

The root of the issue is that being able to put yourself in even just one or two really good spots at such a low cost is a really powerful ability! Your opponent properly identifying those spots doesn't change the fact that they then have to plan around this additional utility. If I get my way, no one will be able to enter or exit terrain outside of their own activation, and suddenly a lot of the problems the above models cause goes away.

2 minutes ago, Church14 said:

I don’t want to nerf into oblivion various Uthuk cards. I want to try incremental changes to see what the effect is. I would also like the data that we don’t have about what types of armies win in each faction.

To make a point. Players have suggested to ban (or have in tourneys?) Insatiable Hunger. Jukey and I tested the sequencing change. The way I play Ravos - with him attacking like a wrecking ball to the kidney and largely operating solo - ends with him taking 2-3 more wounds a game. This forces me to play him closer to the main army if I don’t want him a lot more fragile. That makes it easier (though not easy) for opponents to get archer shots on him or to get him in engagement face to face and kill him. Very small change, very significant difference.

Uthuk seem to also cause some NPE that seems above and beyond just effectiveness. When they win big it seems like the losing side felt it never had a chance. That’s a concern to me as well. One I’m less confident in addressing.

Yeah I really like the sequencing change. Makes him feel more like a dangerous wrecking ball that you've really gotta manage. I'd also like to see Fear Incarnate buffed a little bit to make that a more competitive choice.

What do you see as weak options in the Uthuk lineup? To me, the 6-tray flesh rippers seem weirdly expensive.

Scuttle doesn't need much. A simple tweak of exhaust to scuttle, or discard to stun, or shift before dials are set is about the extent of what it should get for a nerf. Any one option would help, but not nerf it into uselessness.

I also second Shrodingers Thresher!

1 hour ago, Church14 said:

Faolon with unique, LordV, Beastmaster, Gorgemaw with unique, in a way Leonx

All provide either out of turn movement, teleportation, or extremely early potential disengagement.

Opportunity costs on F and B/G. Vs. 3 points and an upgrade they clearly don't need to succeed. Also, each of these are limited to line of sight or range from another unit, tying a lot of points into supporting this play instead of doing their own thing exclusively, and making it impossible out on an unsupported flank. Finally, they can't be executed on initiative zero, giving quick units on good positions time to act to mitigate the option in some way.

Leonx are closer, but can only do it once engaged, and one of the possibilities involves giving up their attack. Scuttle actively punishes getting "good" position on Threshers, can be done in combat or out, and can force you to defend against a charge against multiple units of they begin the turn in terrain, making their quantum position even more effective. Leonx will only ever invalidate one unit's dialed action if they opt to bounce or not.

Exhaust might be enough. Before dials would likely be enough. Discard to stun isn't, too many people forget it can stun entirely and still cause problems. 😉

3 hours ago, Bhelliom said:

This strikes me as disingenuous. Coming out of terrain for free (granted, with limited facing) is still a huge advantage for three points, as is entering it. Schrodinger's thresher is simultaneously in and out of the terrain, so it occupies a huge quantum portion of the table. Whether you know it's coming or not doesn't mean it isn't hugely powerful, and you can only plan for one of the many places the thresher might appear.

I don't actually know a **** thing about quantum mechanics so you'll have to forgive my presumably wrong use of the term.

edit: you are 100% right though that shifting sideways out in the open is pretty worthless (aside from disengaging which is another thing I have big problem with)

Just FAQ is correctly where they cannot leave terrain. When in terrain, all edges are you front, so don't allow the side shift.

On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 7:52 AM, Darth Matthew said:

What I'm worried about is the 13 lancers (or a lot of them). Is it too good to have 1 lancer throw in a blight and then have several others throw a red and 2 blue for mortal wounds?

I'd like to try and break this by spamming lancers and see how it pans outs.

Tried two games, one with lancer spam, one with 4 solo lancers supporting. Not being able to put a 2nd blight out hurt a lot. Being able to put multiple blights on a unit in combat is too good.

Maybe add a blight at range, or give an unblighted unit in combat a blight? Losing the ability to give multiple blights at range in exchange for 1 blight in combat didn't feel like a boost. Opponent just banked an inspiration and waited until he needed it.

New Ardus + blight factory was good; (2 archer units, 3 worms, and a reanimate block with protect banner to prevent archers from being shot); and the Lancers did horrendous damage. But, had I fought higher wound lower defense opponents, the Lancers would have been pretty average.

1 hour ago, Darth Matthew said:

Tried two games, one with lancer spam, one with 4 solo lancers supporting. Not being able to put a 2nd blight out hurt a lot. Being able to put multiple blights on a unit in combat is too good.

Maybe add a blight at range, or give an unblighted unit in combat a blight? Losing the ability to give multiple blights at range in exchange for 1 blight in combat didn't feel like a boost. Opponent just banked an inspiration and waited until he needed it.

New Ardus + blight factory was good; (2 archer units, 3 worms, and a reanimate block with protect banner to prevent archers from being shot); and the Lancers did horrendous damage. But, had I fought higher wound lower defense opponents, the Lancers would have been pretty average.

Very interesting!

Just to understand better:

1) Do you think that the blight change wasn't an improvement due to the Lancer spam, or would it be meh even if only running a few lancer units (it has turned out clearly beneficial for me when running 2)? I can see the limitations it brings in a spam as you say, but spams are not necessarily desirable, if you know what I mean? But I really appreciate that you tested!

2) New Ardus: The feedback in this thread has been that the ability is overpowered. Could you elaborate on you experience please?

40 minutes ago, Maktorius said:

Very interesting!

Just to understand better:

1) Do you think that the blight change wasn't an improvement due to the Lancer spam, or would it be meh even if only running a few lancer units (it has turned out clearly beneficial for me when running 2)? I can see the limitations it brings in a spam as you say, but spams are not necessarily desirable, if you know what I mean? But I really appreciate that you tested!

2) New Ardus: The feedback in this thread has been that the ability is overpowered. Could you elaborate on you experience please?

Ardus was stupid good. Move up, in a wheel 3 and leave my flank open to my opponent. He orders an init 3 charge, I pop ardus at init 2, and dance clear. Being able to completely replace pretty much any initiative with "2" is just too good. It's like having an easy button. I was never punished for a poor move, as I could always just adjust at init 2. Throw wind rune onto some units, and you're now shifting are reforming out of danger.

If Ardus had an init 5 skill, that item might work.

I like the idea, the execution is just too good. I'd rather see Ardus doing something else; even if it's steal vitality. Skill: Friendly unit at range 1-3 takes 1 wound; Ardus gains 1 vitality token.

He needs something, but not that init shift.

16 hours ago, Maktorius said:

I appreciate this discussion!

Let's start with what we agree upon:

1. Ardus is not up to snuff (though we differ on to what extent).
2. Ardus has potential due to his VERY early (initiative 2) Skill action that is currently unused.

What we seem to disagree upon is

3. I think that he is too hard to keep alive and contributing to the fight. He is too slow and too soft and lacks ranged abilities. He is an easy target for long and short charges as well as getting sniped by archers. His battlefield role usually becomes "Hide the points!" or "Expensive meatshield!"

If I understand you correctly, you only fear the short charge because you usually can handle the long charge and archers by screening, and you don't have trouble getting him effectively engaged and still keep him alive?

Do I understand correctly that you solve this by putting him on the flank ("using him to cover flanks") protected by an inner screener?

I would think that it's hard to screen for a unit that is on the flank, as you usually only have potential screener (who I would assume often needs to help out in the center instead of protecting the flanker)?

And when screened, how do you get Ardus in melee smoothly, doesn't his poor dial and the screener get in the way?

If so, It does seem limiting play-wise to only have 1 viable strategy for him, Keep him screened on the flank. I would also be afraid that he would be out of range to use his "Surge-Borrowing" ability when standing on the flank.

I agree that Ardus is a bit weak, but I think most people are undervaluing/under-using Host of Crows in particular. When you maximize it he is pretty close to worth his cost. I think this is the important point where we disagree. If he is close to where he needs to be then the Horn of the Legion is too strong a bump, especially if it's for free. Now as a 6ish point artifact upgrade...

I have experienced the same problems you describe of him being difficult to keep alive or being an overpriced blocker. However, I have found (especially recently) that not only is his army building ability seem more valuable the farther I push it in my lists, but that he can be a wrecking ball when used very carefully. These two things together start to justify his weaknesses in my mind.

To answer your questions about how I use him:

I typically use him to protect the flank of a more valuable unit in my list. Lately that's been this one:

Reanimates [35] 3x2
Deathcaller [5]
Raven-Standard Bearer [3]
Marching Drummer [2]
Support Carrion Lancer [6]
Simultaneous Orders [2]
Total Unit Cost: 53

Then I screen Ardus with one (or both) of two units typically:

Wraiths [24] 3x1
Trumpets [2]
Raven Tabards [2]
Total Unit Cost: 28

Carrion Lancers [15] 1x1
Total Unit Cost: 15

The wraiths typically actually screen from the side. They can be deployed a reasonable distance to Ardus flank and wheel to in his direction in such a way that they can pin anything trying to square off with him leaving that unit open to a charge from Ardus. The Carrion Lancer can screen Ardus pretty well by lining up nearly right next to him but slightly in front. That way it can typically engage something while still leaving an opening for Ardus to get in after it. It's init 3 rally march also works very well for jamming up things trying to get to Ardus.

Additionally, I've often been putting a 2x1 of RAs with CI and MCWs behind, or a bit to the side and behind Ardus. This gives Ardus some blight cover and some great surge synergies.

Finally, I've been running a 2x1 of DKs with Obcasiums and Dispatch Runner. This unit has, more than once, allowed Ardus to swing 3 times against a unit before they can retaliate. It also becomes a great threat to heros like Ravos getting in to take Ardus out before he can get his value in.

Note the high amount of synergy and heavy use of Host of Crows here. When you go all in on this stuff it pays off a lot and you start to see a lot more value from him.

Is this a limited strategy? Kind of... but it works very well. And a large amount of the strategy with Ardus comes from the list building aspect, not the dial. Once I've gotten the value from Host of Crows, I'm trying to muster as much value out of him in gamplay as I can. With this strategy I've had him be the MVP of my list more than a few times. When it's not him it's the Wraiths with Raven Tabards or the Deathcaller Disco Reanimates carrying. Or the DK's dispatching the Reanimates. All three of these units only exist in the same Army with Ardus in it.

16 hours ago, Maktorius said:

Back to our different solutions

It is of course natural that if we disagree on his weaknesses, we disagree on the solution.

What I'm thinking is that Death's Gaze still puts him in the same voulnurable and limited position. BUT in some cases (faced with a short charge) he has a better chance to survive. But I wonder what the percentage of that succeeding is, as the cards that make the enemy reform are not level 1 and they are far between and are even harder against Steadfast units (i.e. Uthuk). I can't see how this makes him more than a smudge more reliable. Though it is still far better than nothing, so I would support it 100% rather than leaving him as is.    

So the skill I proposed for Ardus, again was this:

While your dial is revealed with a skill on it, any enemy unit within range 1-3 and in line of sight of Ardus must make a severity [Stable] morale test before revealing their dial.

OMG I think someone just asked me to do Runewars math! (rubbing hands together)

Let's look at it in the vacuum of no cards have been pulled from the morale deck and a single, non-steadfast unit with no banes/boons is facing off against Ardus:

There are 30 cards in the morale deck:
7 Severity 3
8 Severity 2
15 Severity 1

When there is 1 Stable rune:
You have a 50% chance to get a severity 1 morale test.
You have a 10% chance to get Frozen with Dread (3/30). You have a 13.3% chance to get Disarray (4/30). You have a 16.6% chance to get rising panic (5/30). You have a 10% chance to get wavering Resolve (3/30).

So even with 1 blue rune you have a 23.3% chance to jam them up for the round. If you don't get the stun or immobilize you have a 26.6% chance to have 1 to 2 panic tokens on them which could potentially net you a large morale test next round. Note also that if you get a stun (the best result) your opponent will end up failing their charge and getting a panic, giving the possibility of a severity 3 morale test next round as well.

With 2 Stable runes:
Odds get a bit funky here because the first card you pull changes the odds of what you will pull on the second. Additionally you have increased odds to get a particular card because you are drawing two. All percentages are approximate.
You have a 75% chance to get a severity 1 morale test.
You have a 40% chance to get a severity 2 morale test.
You have a 15% chance of getting Frozen with Dread. You have a 20% chance of getting Disarray. You have a 40% chance of getting Rising Panic or Wavering Resolve. You have a 10% chance of getting Uncertainty (2/30), a 15% chance of getting Loss of Faith (3/30), and you have a 15% chance of getting Communication Breakdown. You have an overall 92% chance to get a severity 1 or 2 morale test at all (granted some are obviously much better than others).

So with 2 stable you are often probably hoping for a stun, an immobilize, or a reform. The odds of catching one of those 3 is 45%. If you don't you have a decent chance of removing a tray, putting panic on them, or getting inspiration for yourself or an ally.

So there is the math in a vacuum. Outside of a vacuum it is obviously not as good against steadfast units, especially steadfast fear. Note that getting a severity 2 is still pretty good against those units though as you can still get a decent chance of a stun, immobilize, or removal of a tray.

It is also worth noting that units coming into Ardus, in my experience often come with either a bane or a boon, or both. Carrion lancer spit, archer blight, and panic from failed charges while trying to predict an aggressive move are all pretty normal. All of these situations change the math as well as what makes for a good result. If a unit has a blight and an inspiration token, then remove all boons is pretty decent as it means Ardus is much more likely to survive the charge and punish them back. If I am dispatching Ardus, or I have Dimodian Blades on him, an inspiration token is also pretty good. Additionally, outside of the situation in which Ardus is staring down another unit, sometimes he doesn't have the opportunity to get into a position on his own and the ability to generate a couple of morale tests on units engaged with his allies could be pretty **** good.

All of this is not to convince you that this is a better upgrade to Ardus than the Horn you propose. It just isn't. I just don't think he needs that much improvement and I view this upgrade as something that is both flavorful and helpful, while not being overbearing.

Wow! So many conversations going on -- it's hard to keep track of all the proposed changes!

I moved the Ardus discussion to a new thread, and I also copied the points made by @Darth Matthew and @QuickWhit in order to keep the discussion together. Sorry for the hassle!

Post 8 and 9 in this thread has been set up to link to discussions (initiated by @Xelto ) on Rune Golems and the Terrain. If some sort of conclusion comes, I will ad that text to those posts.

Also seriously altered the Head post to pick up on other community members work instead of just pushing my own thoughts. Hope that is OK!