|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on May 8, 2019 14:32:31 GMT
Getting the 1+, 3++ rerolling 1s is very easy, it costs just the 45 pt Talisman of Preservation and 5 pt Enchanted Shield. Well I can see the Enchanted Shield getting the lord down to 1+ armour with 4+ Chaos Armour and then being mounted on a disc, but the Talisman of Preservation only gives him 4+ Ward - I can see that Mark of Tzeentch would give an extra +1 to that to give 3+, but where does re-rolling 1s come from? |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 8, 2019 14:57:53 GMT
I think it is pretty obvious that HE, DE and WoC rule the top 3. The DP is extremely problematic for armies that can't field cannons. Overall, I'd say that the Hortennse Lord is even better as that 1+ 3++ rr1 save combo is pretty tough to beat. The re-rolling of ward saves of 1 in conjunction with a 3+ ward is a bit broken to say the least. [/quote] The Hortennse lord typically has a GW, so the Oldblood will be hit on 3's, wounded on 2's and will rely on a 5+ armour save. Keep in mind that in 8th edition you can't have a 0+ armour save, the save is capped at 1+. The Oldblood will hit on 4's and wound on 4's. So mathematically the Hortennse Lord has a very small edge, with a 37% chance to wound per attack while the Oldblood only has a 25% chance to wound per attack. The Oldblood can generate more attacks with Predatory fighter, but the Hortennse lord has a chance of healing himself. Hortennse is also stubborn (with my general build). So it is a close match, but Hortennse still has the edge. And that is list building against an all-comers Disc Lord. If one were to take out the crown of command (which I wouldn't do, this is just for 1-on-1 sake) that would leave enough room for something like the Trickster's Helm or Glittering Scales, which would further tip the contest in the Chaos Lord's favour. Also, Hortennse is far more maneuverable because he flies, so if the Chaos player doesn't want to engage in the match-up he doesn't have to. Moral of the tale, while the Oldblood is one of the best characters in the game, the Hortennse Lord is better (at a substantial increase in points though). The argument can be made that an Oldblood is more cost efficient, but in terms of absolute performance, Hortennse wins the day. Getting the 1+, 3++ rerolling 1s is very easy, it costs just the 45 pt Talisman of Preservation and 5 pt Enchanted Shield. Well I can see the Enchanted Shield getting the lord down to 1+ armour with 4+ Chaos Armour and then being mounted on a disc, but the Talisman of Preservation only gives him 4+ Ward - I can see that Mark of Tzeentch would give an extra +1 to that to give 3+, but where does re-rolling 1s come from? The re-rolling of 1's comes from a Chaos Mutations & Powers upgrade called Third Eye of Tzeentch. A Chaos Lord has access to 50 points worth of Chaos Mutations & Powers in addition to his normal allotment of 100 points of magic items. |
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on May 8, 2019 15:04:51 GMT
The Hortennse lord typically has a GW, so the Oldblood will be hit on 3's, wounded on 2's and will rely on a 5+ armour save. Keep in mind that in 8th edition you can't have a 0+ armour save, the save is capped at 1+. The re-rolling of 1's comes from a Chaos Mutations & Powers upgrade called Third Eye of Tzeentch. A Chaos Lord has access to 50 points worth of Chaos Mutations & Powers in addition to his normal allotment of 100 points of magic items. It's also worth pointing out that you cannot improve an armor save past 1+. Even if it would theoretically be a 0+, you cannot get it better than 1+. Thanks for clarifying these. I didn't realise that armour saves couldn't go below 1+. Kind of a shame really as otherwise that could well have worked better |
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatHornedRat on May 8, 2019 16:02:30 GMT
Thanks for clarifying these. I didn't realise that armour saves couldn't go below 1+. Kind of a shame really as otherwise that could well have worked better Funnily enough, I think this change in 8th edition nerfed WoC the hardest as they were the army with the most offenders here. This is a great discussion I love everyone elses insight. I heartily agree about the Daemon Prince - There's NOTHING in my army sans characters that wouldn't need 6's to hit that guy (I guess Queeks Stormvermin are the one and only exception) and most of them would wound the things on 6's as well. When you have to rely on random S cannons and random S warp lightning to kill the thing its...troublesome. But I have done it  The Hortensse Lord...I actually don't mind that one as much. Yes he's hard to kill but he also barely does anything as he just doesn't have enough offensive punch to worry much about. My warmachines fear the guy...but nothing else really does. And when my opponent has invested that many points to kill my warmachines well...kudos I guess? |
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on May 8, 2019 16:13:24 GMT
I’m loving these discussions chaps. 👍👍 sedge I would love to face dark elves that actually bought some corsairs rather than witches, let alone any ‘normal’ RnF elves. I can appreciate that coming with any less than at least 3 units of darkelf riders is akin to a witch elf getting through a day without killing anyone 😉. |
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on May 8, 2019 16:30:26 GMT
Thanks for clarifying these. I didn't realise that armour saves couldn't go below 1+. Kind of a shame really as otherwise that could well have worked better Note that there is an Erratum, and the relevant paragraph on BRB p. 43 now reads: “Note that a save of any kind can never be better than 1+. This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+. Also, remember that a roll of 1 is always a failure.” This is important if the model in question is affected by negative modifiers from spells etc. So, if a model has a AS of 0+, that AS will be capped at 1+; if the model is affected by (a single instance of) Plague of Rust, it will then still have a AS of 1+, not 2+. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 8, 2019 17:23:07 GMT
Thanks for clarifying these. I didn't realise that armour saves couldn't go below 1+. Kind of a shame really as otherwise that could well have worked better Funnily enough, I think this change in 8th edition nerfed WoC the hardest as they were the army with the most offenders here. This is a great discussion I love everyone elses insight. I heartily agree about the Daemon Prince - There's NOTHING in my army sans characters that wouldn't need 6's to hit that guy (I guess Queeks Stormvermin are the one and only exception) and most of them would wound the things on 6's as well. When you have to rely on random S cannons and random S warp lightning to kill the thing its...troublesome. But I have done it The Hortensse Lord...I actually don't mind that one as much. Yes he's hard to kill but he also barely does anything as he just doesn't have enough offensive punch to worry much about. My warmachines fear the guy...but nothing else really does. And when my opponent has invested that many points to kill my warmachines well...kudos I guess? I believe Lizardmen had a ridiculously easy time getting 0+ or even -1+ saves under 7th edition because of their scaly skin. The Hortennse Lord is not limited to warmachine hunting. Monsters are easy pickings, as other elite units with less models (elite knights, monstrous cavalry, etc.). Most importantly though, the Hortennse Lord is a perfect anti-deathstar tool, as he will hold them there for the entirety of the game (assuming he is equipped with the crown of command; having the BSB nearby is handy too) or hold them in place for an easy flank/rear charge. My preferred use of Hortennse is to neutralize the scariest unit the opposition fields (which usually costs more points than the Lord). |
|
|
|
Post by saniles on May 8, 2019 22:26:45 GMT
Thanks for clarifying these. I didn't realise that armour saves couldn't go below 1+. Kind of a shame really as otherwise that could well have worked better Note that there is an Erratum, and the relevant paragraph on BRB p. 43 now reads: “Note that a save of any kind can never be better than 1+. This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+. Also, remember that a roll of 1 is always a failure.” This is important if the model in question is affected by negative modifiers from spells etc. So, if a model has a AS of 0+, that AS will be capped at 1+; if the model is affected by (a single instance of) Plague of Rust, it will then still have a AS of 1+, not 2+. Can you clarify this a bit? So what about something like AP or a high Str attack??? Am I now going off of the 0+ for modifiers there? |
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatHornedRat on May 8, 2019 22:33:48 GMT
It means that even if your unit somehow has a better than 1+ save - for all intents and purposes, your save is capped at 1+. When calculating armor save modifiers, their armor save is 1+ (S4 = 2+, S5 = 3+, etc...)
HOWEVER - if you get hit with plague of rust (permanent -1 armor save) and you had say...a 0+ armor save somehow before; that armor save is now 1+, NOT 2+.
Think of it like this:
BEFORE:
4+ plate
3+ Mounted
2+ barded
1+ shield
0+ scaly skin 6+
= 1+ due to cap
AFTER:
4+ plate
3+ Mounted
2+ barded
1+ shield
0+ scaly skin 6+
= 1+ due to plague of rust NOT 2+ due to 1+ cap AND THEN plague of rust applying
Does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by saniles on May 8, 2019 23:14:21 GMT
It means that even if your unit somehow has a better than 1+ save - for all intents and purposes, your save is capped at 1+. When calculating armor save modifiers, their armor save is 1+ (S4 = 2+, S5 = 3+, etc...) HOWEVER - if you get hit with plague of rust (permanent -1 armor save) and you had say...a 0+ armor save somehow before; that armor save is now 1+, NOT 2+. Think of it like this: BEFORE: 4+ plate 3+ Mounted 2+ barded 1+ shield 0+ scaly skin 6+ = 1+ due to cap AFTER: 4+ plate 3+ Mounted 2+ barded 1+ shield 0+ scaly skin 6+ = 1+ due to plague of rust NOT 2+ due to 1+ cap AND THEN plague of rust applying Does that make sense? I get the rationale presented. The part I don’t get is why the plague of rust isn’t working off the capped amount like the rest OR why the modifier isn’t working off the zero. Why is there a difference in the way it’s treated is the question I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on May 9, 2019 4:17:09 GMT
As is made clear by the Erratum, you first calculate the total AS a model has (even outside combat), and the result is then capped to 1+. When wounded, you apply the negative modifier(s) of the attack on that capped AS.
Edited for clarity.
|
|
|
|
Post by saniles on May 9, 2019 15:05:59 GMT
I’ll check out the erratum. Thanks man.
|
|
beastyboy
Full Member
5th eddition lizardmen !
Posts: 205
|
Post by beastyboy on May 20, 2019 18:52:59 GMT
Right at the top with a bang its those lovable dark elves....
Number 2 on my top tier countdown is those really fluffy high elves ...
Number 3 is warriors of chaos with core infantry choice that good you only need one unit of them !!!!
Number 4 is demons.... but not vanilla, nurgle demons with the putrid sores and epidemus and his poxy tally yay!
|
|
