Author Topic: On the Dark Elf Nerfs  (Read 1346 times)

Fingolfin

  • Playtester
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
  • A Elbereth Gilthoniel!
On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« on: August 05, 2016, 12:45:24 PM »
I recently had the chance to pick up the Dark Elves, and I have thoroughly enjoyed playing them. As someone who never played with them in their original form, I would like to examine whether or not the nerfs that were imposed on them were necessary and fair, given certain facts that I have observed. But first, let me catalog the nerfs as I understand them.
•   Nerf to Fearsome. The nature of Fearsome as a whole was changed from somewhat certain to variable.
•   Change in Charge Bonus. This isn't a nerf per se, but it did strongly affect the Dark Elves.
•   Nerf to Coven. Witching Hour now costs a Command Action to cast.
•   Nerf to Lashmistresses. They now cannot make an engaged attack on the same turn that they make a ranged attack.
•   Nerf to Drake Riders. They now cannot land if Direct Controlled or have their order changed.
•   Nerf to Shooting. Again, wasn't a nerf specifically to the Dark Elves, but it really affected them. Shooting cannot Rout units.
•   Flank from Front Change. See above. This makes Fast units less good
If I missed anything, please let me know! The question is, how many of these nerfs were justified? Let's see (All of this is IMO!).
•   Nerf to Fearsome. Not having played with the older Fearsome, I can't say for certain, but, in principle at least, I very much agree with the change. The older Fearsome rule seemed way too strong.
•   Change in Charge Bonus. I also didn't really play at all with the Power Charge, but it seems that this change was very good for the game as a whole.
•   Nerf to Coven. Here we get to the nerfs that I don't know if I agree with. Making Witching Hour cost a Command Action is a serious drain. Even though I use it regularly, it probably isn't the best use of the Coven. I remember that my brother was surprised by how many restrictions were on Witching Hour, no Command Cards, a Command Action, and the action of the Coven. Not to mention that you have to pay 300 points in the form of the unit for the privilege of using the ability. Obviously the Coven has other spells, but I still don't know about this change.
•   Nerf to Lashmistresses. I haven't actually played with the Lashmistress, so I can't speak on the change. However, a constant CA drain is pretty big.
•   Nerf to Drake Riders. This is a massive change, and honestly I don't think that Drake Riders are worth it any more. I have only used them once, against an auto-close army with the Solo Rules, but they were still massively unwieldy. Context also really hurts them since they are in a faction with a good Light Cavalry unit. I have thought about taking them since, but they never seem worth it. With the Agile rule, they don't have the maneuverability that you would think they would and just don't seem worth taking.
•   Nerf to Shooting. See Charge Bonus. Stand and Shoot is viable, though somewhat weak (IMO)
•   Flank from Front Change. See above. I change that I think was good for Battleground
What do you all think? Were the nerfs deserved or not? What would you change about the Dark Elves? Are they still too strong? I definitely don't think so. I look forward to hearing the community's thoughts!

'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!'

Kevin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2016, 03:19:14 PM »
I'll go down the line with my 2 cents:

Nerf to Fearsome.  The current rules are the rules which were in effect from the start of Battleground through 90% of the time the game was in existence--including most of the time that the DE were being play tested.  They were changed at the last moment with no testing and it took about a year to figure out that was a mistake and they reverted back to what they were.

Change to Charge bonus:  Happened well after the DE were released. I'm not seeing why it really affected them must more than anyone else.

Nerf to Coven:  I was behind this one, the result of multiple very depressing losses in which the player with a close-and-hose army would expect to be shot at, make no significant mistakes, dice would be average, and lose anyway because they were facing a DE army with a huge stack of cards and more fighting power than your ragtag survivors (who has spent every blue card desperately trying not to be annihilated) could muster.

Nerf to Lashmistress.  The DE in general suffered from inadequate play testing (Chad, who had been heavily involved in pre-DE releases, had stepped back here and farmed it out to other players.)  Functionally the LM acts most like Centaurs, and should have cost only slightly less, like 370, but instead was priced at 313 based on some awful assumptions made when pricing the unit (such as that the target would just go forward and engage the LM rather than the opponent have to spend a Command Action to hold it back for fear of getting pinched).  It needed to be nerfed somehow, and this brought it almost, but not fully, into balance.

Drake Riders:  Much with the Coven, the DR could screw the opponent hard ever if the opponent did nothing wrong.  I played a game pre-nerf where I had a MC 5" unit ready to engage the DR and then my opponent took Direct Control, landed them out of range of my guy, and goosed my best unit which rolled my line and there was literally nothing I could have done.  Again, a lot of these "nerds" were based on balancing out play between very experienced players who will do things which newer players don't think of or can't easily pull off.

Nerf to Shooting.  Yeah, this helped give opponents (who weren't just shooting themselves) a fighting chance.

Flank from Front.  Mileage varies.  I'd put the DE in the middle regarding how much they were affected relative to other factions.  

------

I think the Dark Elves are pretty balanced as is.  The faction has great artwork, and nice flavor, and interesting units, and some of the best command cards in the game, but I play it less than other factions, mainly because I find them too tilted toward the offense.  Their better units all have better attack stats than defense states, their faction cards are all red or green (other than one red/blue one that works better as red anyway), and their faction ability is pure offense.  I prefer a faction where I can choose how to allocate my resources to attack vs. defense, but that's impossible here and I'm going to be rolling a lot of rout checks.  If I were to do the faction over I'd make their faction ability defensive to balance out all the offense.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2016, 06:39:04 PM by Kevin »
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill

gornhorror

  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1706
  • Goony goo-goo!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #2 on: August 05, 2016, 05:32:14 PM »
Here are some of the problems with the Dark Elves as I see it.

1.  Their light cavalry unit (slavetakers) is way too good.  I think it would of been better to give them only 2 green boxes, not three. Also not sure if they need to be move 7".  I think they hit to hard to be a fast cavalry.   Move 6 would of been right, IMHO. 
2.  The Slave Warriors should not be core.  The faction would be better balanced if they were standard.
3.  The line units shouldn't of been Fearsome.  I know that the fearsome is paid for in their cost, but when it activates it's too much of an advantage in faction that has many advantages.
4.  The faction ability should of been something else.  With such good ranged units and abilities, their line units don't really need a faction ability to do more damage.  I agree with Kevin here that perhaps the ability could of been a defensive one.

Quick note:  I was the first person to buy the faction at Council years ago.  I have only played them once or twice and never competitively, and I love playing  elves.  My main reason for not playing them was because of the fearsome ability of the line units.  Never seemed right to me.
Where's this shade, that you got it made?

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4486
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2016, 01:42:06 PM »
Yeah the Dark Elves are one of the more controversial factions out there.  I'll go down the line with the context & thoughts behind these nerfs:

•   Nerf to Fearsome. The nature of Fearsome as a whole was changed from somewhat certain to variable.

Like Kevin said, the current iteration of Fearsome is the one that existed for most of BGFW's history.  The change is one of the (IMO) early growing pains of the community-driven Rules Team.  People wanted Fearsome to be more constant, mainly as a boost to Large guys (which people felt were underpowered).  However we moved a bit too quickly on this one and ended up not playtesting it enough to realize that Dark Elves spammed Fearsome.  And so instead of "1 or 2 units getting a -1 die once per game" it was "6-7 units get -1 die once per game."  So the tweak was undone.


Quote
•   Change in Charge Bonus. This isn't a nerf per se, but it did strongly affect the Dark Elves.

Yeah it did, but it's less a nerf and more "undoing a nerf on Pow/Tougness units."  With the Pow charge, factions that relied on Toughness were at a disadvantage, while factions that had a lot of high Pow paid for something that was handed out free.  And while you wouldn't think one turn of +1 Pow for everyone would matter, it turns out it did.  Skill factions tended to dominate the meta and the charge bonus went a long way to fixing that.

As an aside, Large units (always seen as a joke) ended up getting much better as well.  So in trying to give them a little boost with Fearsome, we'd diagnosed a problem (Large units were weak) but went about fixing it the wrong way.  Mind you, Large units still have some very big vulnerabilities (easy to shoot and vulnerable to spears), they are much less vulnerable than they used to be.


Quote
•   Nerf to Coven. Witching Hour now costs a Command Action to cast.

I'll be honest, this is one I don't agree with 100%.  I didn't play the faction extensively before the nerf, so I can't really say.  What gives me pause on this nerf is that there was a huge uproar right after Dark Elves were released and changes were made (IMO) when passions were running high and (again, IMO) without enough playtesting.

I do feel that with the changes to shooting (i.e. Disrupted) and this nerf with may be a bit too much.  Personally, I don't find it worth spending the 300pts on the unit.  If I'm going to take 300pts off the line, I'd almost rather spend it on Command Cards.


Quote
•   Nerf to Lashmistresses. They now cannot make an engaged attack on the same turn that they make a ranged attack.

I hate the Lashmistresses in so many ways.  First off, I don't know if that nerf was balanced or (assuming the unit was OP) it was the right change.  Out here we tend not to curl back flanks to the degree that the East Coast guys do, so the extra chaos caused by the ranged attack is frankly pretty minimal.  So in that case, it's really a question of whether the extra 68pts you pay over Highblood Blades is worth the damage you inflict.  I simply haven't done enough playtesting to determine for myself.  I tend not to field these guys, but that's because of the real reason I hate these guys:

The Siren Song spell just doesn't work.  I don't like special rules that break how the game operates.  I understand what the designers were trying to do with the spell, but IMO it created this annoyingly carve-out that.  Essentially the spell follows its own set of rules.  If this rule came across my desk today it'd get shot down hard.  If the idea was to include it, I would revise it to change the unit's order to Close (with the Lashmistresses as the objective) and the unit would be Stupid for the next turn.  This would make the spell work within the existing BGFW system.


Quote
•   Nerf to Drake Riders. They now cannot land if Direct Controlled or have their order changed.

Yeah this is one of those rules where I agree with it and I hate it.  The problem is flying is balanced but a hot mess.  If you make flying "feel right" it becomes way OP.  Right now the rules team is brainstorming ideas and flying is one of those rules that will almost certainly get a second look.

But yes, I agree that Drake Riders are basically not worth the points right now.  It's not that you can't get value from them, it's that you can get better ROI by spending the points on other things.


Quote
•   Nerf to Shooting. Again, wasn't a nerf specifically to the Dark Elves, but it really affected them. Shooting cannot Rout units.

Yeah, the issue with shooting was that, against Stand & Shoot, a failed rout check basically could doom you.  IMO, shooting is a bit weak as a result and it's one of those things that there's currently a call to review for the next edition of the rules.


Quote
•   Flank from Front Change. See above. This makes Fast units less good

yes, but again, this was a case of a faction with Core 7" cavalry and a card that could turn any infantry into 5" movers being way too good under those rules.


As a whole I think it's worth remembering that at the time the Dark Elves were released, the meta favored lots of cheaper units to flank the enemy and chump stacks to pin people down.  The Dark Elves were designed specifically to counter that meta.  So it's my opinion that in addition to the issues with Dark Elves (and make no mistake, there were issues), they essentially hit people right in the meta and that was frustrating to deal with.  I'm not sure that many of those nerfs are necessary in the current meta.  For example, one of the reasons for the Drake Rider nerf was that Umenzi did not have an affordable 5" mover that could keep the Drake Riders from flanking your line.  Now every army has access to the Stone Monkeys.  I still don't know if affordable flyers are balanced under the old rules, but I also think the flying rules need a wholesale review.

There's other issues I have with the Dark Elves, from a balance and theme standpoint:

Pain Touch:  it's basically Cunning.  I'd be really leery today of having "Cunning on demand" as a checkbox, not without some severe restrictions.  Yes I know that technically you have to use Pain Touch touch and so sometimes it can be dead, but that's simply so easy to mitigate as to not be a problem.

Slave Warriors:  I'm not usually fond of units this cheap being Core, but what really bothers me about these guys is that they're Courage 12 and Spears.  They just feel min-maxed to me.

Variety:  The Dark Elves have a huge meta advantage in that they have almost every form of infantry as Core.  They have chumps, Low Bloods, Half Bloods, and High Bloods all as Core.  In addition they have Slave Taker cavalry as Core.  This means they can field any combination of armies and you don't know what you'll be facing until you set it down.

Army composition is an ability like anything else.  The more variety you have, the more advantage you have.  And the opposite is also true.  For example, with Vlachold, we deliberately did not include any Core choice that was less than ~200pts.  So a Vlachold player is forced to spend 800pts on Core units before you can take the candy.  That was a deliberate handicap we built into the faction. 

This is not to say Dark Elves shouldn't have that ability, but it's worth paying attention that that amount of variety is an ability just as powerful as a checkbox or the composition of your Command Card deck.

Racial Caste System:  My knock here isn't that the Dark Elves are basically "Elf Nazis."  It's that I feel that the designers didn't go far enough with that theme.  If Low Bloods vs Half Bloods is a thing, then represent that with the rules.  Make it so that Low Bloods are "pitch to play" for cards (because the Pureblood generals don't care about them).  And Half Bloods are pitch-to-play for Blue cards.  Make that caste system have a game effect.

---

I feel that Dark Elves are still a pretty strong faction, but only if you avoid the candy.  Lashmistresses, Drake Riders, Covens, etc. are simply not worth the effort.  You can put together some really strong builds with Dusk Lances, Dusk Blades, Slavetakers, and the rest of the menagerie of infantry.  It's just that makes me a little sad, that the candy of the faction is usually better left in the box.

RushAss

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3781
  • Eat your beets - Recycle!
    • My Facebook.  Where you can see my, uh... face.
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2016, 09:24:30 PM »
The Dark Elven faction put a bad taste in a lot of mouths due to the things that slipped through the cracks.  But it's still a really wild faction and like no other.  At this point I feel it's pretty balanced and as Kevin said, that command deck is still pretty nasty.  The biggest issue to me (and it's already been mentioned here) was that Fearsome/Shaken thing.  You could spam your line with Fearsome units and your opponent could be hosed even if they passed all of their Fear checks because you'd still lose an attack die for every unit engaging one of those cats.  With the old POW charge, then meant most units would only get 4 attack dice facing a bunch of 3/1 defensive profiles.  That's pretty rough because the charge turn is the single most important turn when it comes to
damage inflicted. 
"Art as expression, not as market campaigns
Will still capture our imaginations"
-Rush, Natural Science

Fingolfin

  • Playtester
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
  • A Elbereth Gilthoniel!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2016, 10:37:57 AM »
I'll go down the line with my 2 cents:
...
Change to Charge bonus:  Happened well after the DE were released. I'm not seeing why it really affected them must more than anyone else.

Yeah, I probably should have put the Fearsome Change, the Dice-Charge, Shooting Change, and Flank-from-Front as rules changes that somewhat hurt the Dark Elves rather than nerfs.

Nerf to Coven:  I was behind this one, the result of multiple very depressing losses in which the player with a close-and-hose army would expect to be shot at, make no significant mistakes, dice would be average, and lose anyway because they were facing a DE army with a huge stack of cards and more fighting power than your ragtag survivors (who has spent every blue card desperately trying not to be annihilated) could muster.

Fair enough. The Coven doesn't seem like a very good buy right now, but, if it was overpowered, so be it.

Nerf to Lashmistress.  The DE in general suffered from inadequate play testing (Chad, who had been heavily involved in pre-DE releases, had stepped back here and farmed it out to other players.)  Functionally the LM acts most like Centaurs, and should have cost only slightly less, like 370, but instead was priced at 313 based on some awful assumptions made when pricing the unit (such as that the target would just go forward and engage the LM rather than the opponent have to spend a Command Action to hold it back for fear of getting pinched).  It needed to be nerfed somehow, and this brought it almost, but not fully, into balance.

As I said earlier, an ability that is a semi-constant CA drain on the opponent is pretty powerful. I haven't played with the unit, so I would definitely bow to those with greater experience.

Drake Riders:  Much with the Coven, the DR could screw the opponent hard ever if the opponent did nothing wrong.  I played a game pre-nerf where I had a MC 5" unit ready to engage the DR and then my opponent took Direct Control, landed them out of range of my guy, and goosed my best unit which rolled my line and there was literally nothing I could have done.  Again, a lot of these "nerds" were based on balancing out play between very experienced players who will do things which newer players don't think of or can't easily pull off.


The problem seems to be that pre-nerf these guys were overpowered, but now they aren't worth the points. Maybe after the flying rules get sorted out, we can work on these guys.

I think the Dark Elves are pretty balanced as is.  The faction has great artwork, and nice flavor, and interesting units, and some of the best command cards in the game, but I play it less than other factions, mainly because I find them too tilted toward the offense.  Their better units all have better attack stats than defense states, their faction cards are all red or green (other than one red/blue one that works better as red anyway), and their faction ability is pure offense.  I prefer a faction where I can choose how to allocate my resources to attack vs. defense, but that's impossible here and I'm going to be rolling a lot of rout checks.  If I were to do the faction over I'd make their faction ability defensive to balance out all the offense.

I think that their offensive tilt gives them great flavor and makes them more balanced, but that is more of a personal preference.


Here are some of the problems with the Dark Elves as I see it.

1.  Their light cavalry unit (slavetakers) is way too good.  I think it would of been better to give them only 2 green boxes, not three. Also not sure if they need to be move 7".  I think they hit to hard to be a fast cavalry.   Move 6 would of been right, IMHO.  
2.  The Slave Warriors should not be core.  The faction would be better balanced if they were standard.
3.  The line units shouldn't of been Fearsome.  I know that the fearsome is paid for in their cost, but when it activates it's too much of an advantage in faction that has many advantages.
4.  The faction ability should of been something else.  With such good ranged units and abilities, their line units don't really need a faction ability to do more damage.  I agree with Kevin here that perhaps the ability could of been a defensive one.

I have to say that I disagree. The Slave Takers are good, but they hit barely harder than Scouts or Roman Equites. Compared to Hawkshold Light Cavalry, which is really more of a Medium Cavalry but I digress, they are very lacking in the damage department. Antonians are light cavalry that hit far harder and are much more survivable (although they are possibly the best light cavalry in the game). I don't like the 7 hitbox thing because it is usually reserved for knights, but, as is, Slave Takes seem fine to me.

I don't get the love fest for Slave Warriors. Their 1/1 defense paired with the dice charge means that an average unit will hack through them pretty quickly. An actual damage unit will cut through them like a hot knife through butter. Sure you can chump stack with them, but even then I don't think they will hold out for long.

As has been mentioned previously, I think that removing Fearsome from the line units makes them a better buy. Fearsome doesn't really seem worth the points that a unit pays for it, so it ends up being more of a flavor thing. As such, it fits the Dark Elves perfectly.

I actually think that a defensive ability would make the Dark Elves overpowered. Their command deck is so offense focused that a defense ability would see a lot more use than Pain Touch.


Yeah the Dark Elves are one of the more controversial factions out there.  I'll go down the line with the context & thoughts behind these nerfs:
...
Quote
•   Change in Charge Bonus. This isn't a nerf per se, but it did strongly affect the Dark Elves.

Yeah it did, but it's less a nerf and more "undoing a nerf on Pow/Tougness units."  With the Pow charge, factions that relied on Toughness were at a disadvantage, while factions that had a lot of high Pow paid for something that was handed out free.  And while you wouldn't think one turn of +1 Pow for everyone would matter, it turns out it did.  Skill factions tended to dominate the meta and the charge bonus went a long way to fixing that.

As an aside, Large units (always seen as a joke) ended up getting much better as well.  So in trying to give them a little boost with Fearsome, we'd diagnosed a problem (Large units were weak) but went about fixing it the wrong way.  Mind you, Large units still have some very big vulnerabilities (easy to shoot and vulnerable to spears), they are much less vulnerable than they used to be.

From what I have gleaned from the forums, the Dice Charge did wonders for the game, even if it did hurt my elves.

Quote
•   Nerf to Coven. Witching Hour now costs a Command Action to cast.

I'll be honest, this is one I don't agree with 100%.  I didn't play the faction extensively before the nerf, so I can't really say.  What gives me pause on this nerf is that there was a huge uproar right after Dark Elves were released and changes were made (IMO) when passions were running high and (again, IMO) without enough playtesting.

I do feel that with the changes to shooting (i.e. Disrupted) and this nerf with may be a bit too much.  Personally, I don't find it worth spending the 300pts on the unit.  If I'm going to take 300pts off the line, I'd almost rather spend it on Command Cards.

Agreed.

Quote
•   Nerf to Drake Riders. They now cannot land if Direct Controlled or have their order changed.

Yeah this is one of those rules where I agree with it and I hate it.  The problem is flying is balanced but a hot mess.  If you make flying "feel right" it becomes way OP.  Right now the rules team is brainstorming ideas and flying is one of those rules that will almost certainly get a second look.

But yes, I agree that Drake Riders are basically not worth the points right now.  It's not that you can't get value from them, it's that you can get better ROI by spending the points on other things.

This one makes me very sad because I want to like Drake Riders, but, as you say, you can get a better ROI.

Pain Touch:  it's basically Cunning.  I'd be really leery today of having "Cunning on demand" as a checkbox, not without some severe restrictions.  Yes I know that technically you have to use Pain Touch touch and so sometimes it can be dead, but that's simply so easy to mitigate as to not be a problem.

Slave Warriors:  I'm not usually fond of units this cheap being Core, but what really bothers me about these guys is that they're Courage 12 and Spears.  They just feel min-maxed to me.

Variety:  The Dark Elves have a huge meta advantage in that they have almost every form of infantry as Core.  They have chumps, Low Bloods, Half Bloods, and High Bloods all as Core.  In addition they have Slave Taker cavalry as Core.  This means they can field any combination of armies and you don't know what you'll be facing until you set it down.

Army composition is an ability like anything else.  The more variety you have, the more advantage you have.  And the opposite is also true.  For example, with Vlachold, we deliberately did not include any Core choice that was less than ~200pts.  So a Vlachold player is forced to spend 800pts on Core units before you can take the candy.  That was a deliberate handicap we built into the faction.  

This is not to say Dark Elves shouldn't have that ability, but it's worth paying attention that that amount of variety is an ability just as powerful as a checkbox or the composition of your Command Card deck.

Racial Caste System:  My knock here isn't that the Dark Elves are basically "Elf Nazis."  It's that I feel that the designers didn't go far enough with that theme.  If Low Bloods vs Half Bloods is a thing, then represent that with the rules.  Make it so that Low Bloods are "pitch to play" for cards (because the Pureblood generals don't care about them).  And Half Bloods are pitch-to-play for Blue cards.  Make that caste system have a game effect.

I think that Pain Touch is a very powerful army ability, just not in the Dark Elf Faction. I already expressed my dislike for Slave Warriors. It is also very true that the Dark Elves have massive versatility advantage. Might I also mention that I like your Caste System Idea?

I feel that Dark Elves are still a pretty strong faction, but only if you avoid the candy.  Lashmistresses, Drake Riders, Covens, etc. are simply not worth the effort.  You can put together some really strong builds with Dusk Lances, Dusk Blades, Slavetakers, and the rest of the menagerie of infantry.  It's just that makes me a little sad, that the candy of the faction is usually better left in the box.

It truly is sad that the coolest and most flavorful units of the faction are also some of the worst buys. But C'est la vie.


The Dark Elven faction put a bad taste in a lot of mouths due to the things that slipped through the cracks.  But it's still a really wild faction and like no other.  At this point I feel it's pretty balanced and as Kevin said, that command deck is still pretty nasty.  The biggest issue to me (and it's already been mentioned here) was that Fearsome/Shaken thing.  You could spam your line with Fearsome units and your opponent could be hosed even if they passed all of their Fear checks because you'd still lose an attack die for every unit engaging one of those cats.  With the old POW charge, then meant most units would only get 4 attack dice facing a bunch of 3/1 defensive profiles.  That's pretty rough because the charge turn is the single most important turn when it comes to
damage inflicted.  

Yeah, with the Old Fearsome and the Power Charge, I am not surprised that these guys were overpowered.

Also, thought of another Nerf.
Arrogant Spite: This one was more of a cosmetic change, and I don't get it. Sure it is more powerful if your unit is engaged with more than one unit, but my retort is the same as the one for We Few.
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!'

gornhorror

  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1706
  • Goony goo-goo!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2016, 12:07:17 PM »
Quote

I have to say that I disagree. The Slave Takers are good, but they hit barely harder than Scouts or Roman Equites. Compared to Hawkshold Light Cavalry, which is really more of a Medium Cavalry but I digress, they are very lacking in the damage department. Antonians are light cavalry that hit far harder and are much more survivable (although they are possibly the best light cavalry in the game). I don't like the 7 hitbox thing because it is usually reserved for knights, but, as is, Slave Takes seem fine to me.

Quote

Well, they get the offensive cavalry bonus and the Scouts do not.  A (6) 5/6 with an impact hit vs. a (6) 5/5 with an impact hit is more than just barely hitting harder.  I know that the Slavetaker unit is 35 points more than scouts but the unit is maxed out.  It moves 7", hits like medium cavalry, has 3 green boxes (which in my honest opinion a 7" mover shouldn't have) and has a faction ability that does additional damage.   Plus, it's core. 
Where's this shade, that you got it made?

Fingolfin

  • Playtester
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
  • A Elbereth Gilthoniel!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2016, 12:46:31 PM »
Quote

I have to say that I disagree. The Slave Takers are good, but they hit barely harder than Scouts or Roman Equites. Compared to Hawkshold Light Cavalry, which is really more of a Medium Cavalry but I digress, they are very lacking in the damage department. Antonians are light cavalry that hit far harder and are much more survivable (although they are possibly the best light cavalry in the game). I don't like the 7 hitbox thing because it is usually reserved for knights, but, as is, Slave Takes seem fine to me.

Quote

Well, they get the offensive cavalry bonus and the Scouts do not.  A (6) 5/6 with an impact hit vs. a (6) 5/5 with an impact hit is more than just barely hitting harder.  I know that the Slavetaker unit is 35 points more than scouts but the unit is maxed out.  It moves 7", hits like medium cavalry, has 3 green boxes (which in my honest opinion a 7" mover shouldn't have) and has a faction ability that does additional damage.   Plus, it's core. 

True, a 6/5/6  with an impact hit is quite a bit better than a 6/5/5 with an impact hit. Where I really disagree with you is that it hits like medium cavalry.  Versus a 2/2 defense, Slave Takers deal 2.67 damage on the charge. Hawkshold Light Cavalry deals 3.33 damage on the charge. Stag Cavalry deals 3.67 (a full extra point of damage!). High Elf Chariots deal 4 damage (Side Note: I love Chariots). Antonians deal 4.22. Even Spanish Cavalry (a really light cavalry) deal 2.5 damage. I guess to a certain extent it comes down to how you define medium cavalry. I get the frustration with 3 green hit boxes. If I was designing the unit, it would probably have 2 green, but, as is, I think it's fine. I don't think that Pain Touch is amazing for the Dark Elves. Sure, it's an extra point of damage, but the faction is already offense heavy with its command cards. As for it being core, I don't think that changes anything. If my opponent takes a line of Slave Takers, I will feel very confident in my victory. I guess it does allow the Dark Elves to field a line that moves a 5" or more, but I don't think that is a problem. The High Elves can do it better. If I take them to fill Core, I could have done it far cheaper with Slaves or Lowbloods.
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!'

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4486
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2016, 11:44:37 AM »
I don't get the love fest for Slave Warriors. Their 1/1 defense paired with the dice charge means that an average unit will hack through them pretty quickly. An actual damage unit will cut through them like a hot knife through butter. Sure you can chump stack with them, but even then I don't think they will hold out for long.

There's four parts to the Slave Warrior hate.  (all of this is IMO, of course)

First: they still chump stack pretty well.  Remember the Dark Elves are all about offense, about blowing through people quickly.  In that case, a unit doesn't have to delay an enemy for very long.  Assuming that they pass all rout checks (which with Cge 12 and a reactive Courage reroll card, is not crazy) single Slave Warrior unit will hold for 3 combats.  And if you give these guys Hold with an Objective so they don't charge when the rest of your turn does, that's holding out for 4 full combats (i.e. 2 turns).  Usually that's long enough for the game to be pretty close to decided.  And that's a 96pt unit, holding up a ~190pt unit.

If you stack them (so that you're spending 190pts vs his 190pts) that's holding up an enemy unit for 6-8 combats (depending on rout checks and/or courage reroll cards).  In that case, I can pretty much pin your unit down for either the whole game or long enough that game is truly decided.


Second:  by virtue of being spears, the Slave Warriors punch way above their weight against cavalry.  Especially light cavalry.  If your opponent tries to sneak around your flank with one of those 150-180pt Mv 6", D:2/1 light cavalry, the Slave Warriors can easily contain them.  Because if the light cavalry charges they're going to take ~2pts, which means that with a card it's easy to force a Yellow check on those guys.  At the very least you're likely to contain the light cavalry but more importantly you do it for anywhere from two-thirds to half the cost. 

Even if you have something like Hawk Light Cavalry ("Lancers") the Slave Warriors have a shot at doing 1-2pts.  Admittedly it's an outside shot of doing 2 pts, but again, you're talking a 96pt unit vs a 245pt unit.  I could put two Slave Warriors to contain that cavalry and still come out ahead on points.


Third:  you also have to remember the era when Dark Elves dropped.  Specifically this was the Pow charge era.  Slave Warriors are much more vulnerable with the dice charge.  Against those generic line infantry in the first point, the Slave Warriors will take enough extra damage that by round 3 of combat the expect damage is 7.56 so it's a 50-50 shot to kill the unit.  With the pow charge the expected damage is only 7.22, so its unlikely that they'd kill the Slave Warrior outright.

Even with cavalry, like Hawk Light Cavalry, they do more damage with the dice charge than the Pow charge.  This is on the order of like an extra quarter point, in addition to having more dice that can be modified by command cards.  So a lot of the hate directed towards them is a holdover from not only how optimized they were at chump stacking (i.e. Cge 12 on an otherwise crappy unit), but also how optimized they were against fast light cavalry, AND how optimized they were about taking damage (i.e. T1 in the pow-charge era).

If it had just been this one unit, I think people would have let it slide.  Every faction has a unit or two that are optimized.  But in addition to the shenanigans of the Drake Riders, the Lashmistresses, the Coven, the super-shootyness of the Lord of Dusk, the very optimized Slave Takers their really nasty command card deck,, and the meta advantage of their Core choices, it just left a bad taste in people's mouths.


Fourth:  and this one is really a personal opinion, but I hate the Slave Warriors a lot because of their design.  I'm a guy who crafts a theme ("tells a story") and then build units that bring that story to the tabletop.  So for me it's just crazy for a unit of slaves to have the same Courage as a unit of professional soldiers like Hawkshold Spearmen.  It just screams of min/maxing.

And then there's the spears.  Simply having a pointy stick does not grant the spear bonuses.  That, to me, comes from training and unit cohesiveness.  If these guys were Janissaries or Ghulams, a set of slave soldiers with a strong training regimen, I could see it.  But that's not these guys, as evidenced by the story and the stats.

Slave Warriors bother me because it feels like it's a min/maxed unit with some really flimsy story slapped on after the fact.  It offends my game design sensibilities from both a balance perspective and a theme perspective.


Quote
I have to say that I disagree. The Slave Takers are good, but they hit barely harder than Scouts or Roman Equites.

Actually, they do appreciably more damage.  Scouts or Equites will do 2pts on the charge and Slave Takers do 2.67pts.  So two-thirds of the time Slave Takers will do 3 pts of damage, which is important because if you trigger Pain Touch these guys can force a Yellow check on a 200pt infantry unit.  Sending Slave Takers into a unit isn't usually a great idea, but it's also not crazy either.  If you're willing to gamble, you might achieve a breakthrough.  Whereas sending Scouts or Equites into an average line unit is just suicide.

Now Slave Takers are like 40pts more than Equites/Scouts.  So it's not like Slave Takers get all this candy for free.  They pay for what they can do.


Quote
Where I really disagree with you is that it hits like medium cavalry.  Versus a 2/2 defense, Slave Takers deal 2.67 damage on the charge. Hawkshold Light Cavalry deals 3.33 damage on the charge. Stag Cavalry deals 3.67 (a full extra point of damage!). High Elf Chariots deal 4 damage (Side Note: I love Chariots). Antonians deal 4.22.

True, but remember not all damage is created equal.  Upgrading from doing 3pts to 4pts is usually worth more than the 33% increase, because most average units have 4 Green boxes.  So what I think Brook's saying is that Slave Takers can force a Yellow check almost as reliably as Hawk Lancers for like 2/3 the cost.  Plus the Slave Takers have Pain Touch, so you can get them from 3pts to 4pts without expending a limited resource like a Follow Through or Cunning. 


Quote
From what I have gleaned from the forums, the Dice Charge did wonders for the game, even if it did hurt my elves.

I prefer to think of it as  "Elves were OP and the dice charge restored balance to the Battleground universe."  And yes, the Dice Charge was a great thing for the game.


Quote
I think that Pain Touch is a very powerful army ability, just not in the Dark Elf Faction.

Remember, availability has a value.  The more common an ability is, the more valuable it is.  Six reroll cards is more important than 2 reroll cards, because you don't have to hoard the 2 cards and you increase the likelihood of drawing them. (yes, I know past a point the value does decrease and even turns negative:  if you have 30 of them the value becomes negative because you're not going to take 30 rout checks in a game and you're missing out on cards like Cunning and Accuracy).  This is why, for example, the dwarf Rune cards are awesome.  If there was just one or two they're be very m'eh.  But because there's 10 of them you can toss them out at every rout check.

Being able to do +1 damage almost on command is a really powerful ability.  Also because when it comes to the bidding process of playing cards, I have a great option if we both pass (a great BATNA in negotiation terms).  Normally it's usually better to pass when it comes to playing Red cards, because if you play a Red card first (say Strike) your opponent can play a Hardened.  Now you've both expended the same number of command cards and you're doing less damage than if you just rolled the dice.  (Context obviously is what changes this a lot)

With a marked Pain Touch box, you now have a great incentive to not play cards.  You pass and if he plays a card like Mettle, you can respond with a Force and still have the Pain Touch for next turn.  If he passes, then you roll the dice and are comfortable knowing that the "worst case" you get +1 damage this turn.

Take this with a unit like Dusk Lances.  If I charge a D:2/2 unit I'm comfortable knowing I'll do ~5pts of damage.  If I have Pain Touch I'll often pass on playing a card.  If he plays a blue card to mitigate it, I can counter with a Red card.  If he doesn't then I'm going to do 6pts of damage (with a 20% chance of doing 7pts and forcing a Red check that turn).  Against most D:2/2 units I'm going to force a Yellow check this turn and a Red check on the next turn.  If he fails either of those checks, it frees the Dusk Lances up to charge on my next turn.

When you factor in that it changes the command card dynamic and on top of that gives me a Cunning whenever I need it (i.e. I want to blow through a unit quickly.  Spending a CA to get a Blue or Green card would be a waste, because I really need a good Red card.  So I use Pain Touch to have a guaranteed Cunning), you can see why Pain Touch on these guys was a bit too much.  Maybe if it was a sort of thing where it can do a damage to them but does a damage to your unit as well I could see it.  Or maybe if Pain Touch was something you had to play before the dice were rolled.


Quote
Might I also mention that I like your Caste System Idea?

Thanks!


Quote
Also, thought of another Nerf.
Arrogant Spite: This one was more of a cosmetic change, and I don't get it. Sure it is more powerful if your unit is engaged with more than one unit, but my retort is the same as the one for We Few.

Yeah but doing 1 damage to multiple units is more powerful than getting +1 Cge for multiple units.   :)

I remember this was a case where the faction designer came out and said "I never intended this card to do multiple damage to multiple units."  Which is something people were doing.  Slave Warriors got pinched?  Out comes Arrogant Spite and they do 2 pts.  People were doing the Slave Gambit where you race them forward to get pinched by three units.  The Slaves do 3 pts and makes the other guy expose the flanks of two of his units.

Fingolfin

  • Playtester
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
  • A Elbereth Gilthoniel!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2016, 06:47:26 PM »
First: they still chump stack pretty well.  Remember the Dark Elves are all about offense, about blowing through people quickly.  In that case, a unit doesn't have to delay an enemy for very long.  Assuming that they pass all rout checks (which with Cge 12 and a reactive Courage reroll card, is not crazy) single Slave Warrior unit will hold for 3 combats.  And if you give these guys Hold with an Objective so they don't charge when the rest of your turn does, that's holding out for 4 full combats (i.e. 2 turns).  Usually that's long enough for the game to be pretty close to decided.  And that's a 96pt unit, holding up a ~190pt unit.

Makes sense. Slave Warriors almost fill a tank roll within the faction if you would; even so, other factions can do this, arguably better.

Second:  by virtue of being spears, the Slave Warriors punch way above their weight against cavalry.  Especially light cavalry.  If your opponent tries to sneak around your flank with one of those 150-180pt Mv 6", D:2/1 light cavalry, the Slave Warriors can easily contain them.  Because if the light cavalry charges they're going to take ~2pts, which means that with a card it's easy to force a Yellow check on those guys.  At the very least you're likely to contain the light cavalry but more importantly you do it for anywhere from two-thirds to half the cost. 

Even if you have something like Hawk Light Cavalry ("Lancers") the Slave Warriors have a shot at doing 1-2pts.  Admittedly it's an outside shot of doing 2 pts, but again, you're talking a 96pt unit vs a 245pt unit.  I could put two Slave Warriors to contain that cavalry and still come out ahead on points.

Yes and No. On the Charge, Slave Warriors still on 2's versus most cavalry, 1's versus most Elven Cav. That's significant. That being said, the point you make about cost is quite convincing. Also, Charging any Cavalry unit into a chump stack isn't ideal.

Third:  you also have to remember the era when Dark Elves dropped.  Specifically this was the Pow charge era.  Slave Warriors are much more vulnerable with the dice charge.  Against those generic line infantry in the first point, the Slave Warriors will take enough extra damage that by round 3 of combat the expect damage is 7.56 so it's a 50-50 shot to kill the unit.  With the pow charge the expected damage is only 7.22, so its unlikely that they'd kill the Slave Warrior outright.

Even with cavalry, like Hawk Light Cavalry, they do more damage with the dice charge than the Pow charge.  This is on the order of like an extra quarter point, in addition to having more dice that can be modified by command cards.  So a lot of the hate directed towards them is a holdover from not only how optimized they were at chump stacking (i.e. Cge 12 on an otherwise crappy unit), but also how optimized they were against fast light cavalry, AND how optimized they were about taking damage (i.e. T1 in the pow-charge era).

If it had just been this one unit, I think people would have let it slide.  Every faction has a unit or two that are optimized.  But in addition to the shenanigans of the Drake Riders, the Lashmistresses, the Coven, the super-shootyness of the Lord of Dusk, the very optimized Slave Takers their really nasty command card deck,, and the meta advantage of their Core choices, it just left a bad taste in people's mouths.

It does seem that there is a lot of residual hate left towards the Dark Elves, though I'm sure at one point that hatred was deserved.

Fourth:  and this one is really a personal opinion, but I hate the Slave Warriors a lot because of their design.  I'm a guy who crafts a theme ("tells a story") and then build units that bring that story to the tabletop.  So for me it's just crazy for a unit of slaves to have the same Courage as a unit of professional soldiers like Hawkshold Spearmen.  It just screams of min/maxing.

And then there's the spears.  Simply having a pointy stick does not grant the spear bonuses.  That, to me, comes from training and unit cohesiveness.  If these guys were Janissaries or Ghulams, a set of slave soldiers with a strong training regimen, I could see it.  But that's not these guys, as evidenced by the story and the stats.

Slave Warriors bother me because it feels like it's a min/maxed unit with some really flimsy story slapped on after the fact.  It offends my game design sensibilities from both a balance perspective and a theme perspective.

Some of the flavour for the Dark Elves was spot on. Some just wasn't (Evidence: Slave Warriors).

Quote
I have to say that I disagree. The Slave Takers are good, but they hit barely harder than Scouts or Roman Equites.

Actually, they do appreciably more damage.  Scouts or Equites will do 2pts on the charge and Slave Takers do 2.67pts.  So two-thirds of the time Slave Takers will do 3 pts of damage, which is important because if you trigger Pain Touch these guys can force a Yellow check on a 200pt infantry unit.  Sending Slave Takers into a unit isn't usually a great idea, but it's also not crazy either.  If you're willing to gamble, you might achieve a breakthrough.  Whereas sending Scouts or Equites into an average line unit is just suicide.

Now Slave Takers are like 40pts more than Equites/Scouts.  So it's not like Slave Takers get all this candy for free.  They pay for what they can do.

Sigh...
That said, I did overstate my case (a bad habit of mine).
When will I learn?

True, but remember not all damage is created equal.  Upgrading from doing 3pts to 4pts is usually worth more than the 33% increase, because most average units have 4 Green boxes.  So what I think Brook's saying is that Slave Takers can force a Yellow check almost as reliably as Hawk Lancers for like 2/3 the cost.  Plus the Slave Takers have Pain Touch, so you can get them from 3pts to 4pts without expending a limited resource like a Follow Through or Cunning. 

Interesting Point, but I think that you are handing out CA's for free. It's not fair to assume that the Slave Takers will have Pain Touch and the opponent won't play a Command Card. All things being equal, Slave Takers will not deal 4 damage on the Charge turn.

Quote
I think that Pain Touch is a very powerful army ability, just not in the Dark Elf Faction.

Remember, availability has a value.  The more common an ability is, the more valuable it is.  Six reroll cards is more important than 2 reroll cards, because you don't have to hoard the 2 cards and you increase the likelihood of drawing them. (yes, I know past a point the value does decrease and even turns negative:  if you have 30 of them the value becomes negative because you're not going to take 30 rout checks in a game and you're missing out on cards like Cunning and Accuracy).  This is why, for example, the dwarf Rune cards are awesome.  If there was just one or two they're be very m'eh.  But because there's 10 of them you can toss them out at every rout check.

Being able to do +1 damage almost on command is a really powerful ability.  Also because when it comes to the bidding process of playing cards, I have a great option if we both pass (a great BATNA in negotiation terms).  Normally it's usually better to pass when it comes to playing Red cards, because if you play a Red card first (say Strike) your opponent can play a Hardened.  Now you've both expended the same number of command cards and you're doing less damage than if you just rolled the dice.  (Context obviously is what changes this a lot)

With a marked Pain Touch box, you now have a great incentive to not play cards.  You pass and if he plays a card like Mettle, you can respond with a Force and still have the Pain Touch for next turn.  If he passes, then you roll the dice and are comfortable knowing that the "worst case" you get +1 damage this turn.

Take this with a unit like Dusk Lances.  If I charge a D:2/2 unit I'm comfortable knowing I'll do ~5pts of damage.  If I have Pain Touch I'll often pass on playing a card.  If he plays a blue card to mitigate it, I can counter with a Red card.  If he doesn't then I'm going to do 6pts of damage (with a 20% chance of doing 7pts and forcing a Red check that turn).  Against most D:2/2 units I'm going to force a Yellow check this turn and a Red check on the next turn.  If he fails either of those checks, it frees the Dusk Lances up to charge on my next turn.

When you factor in that it changes the command card dynamic and on top of that gives me a Cunning whenever I need it (i.e. I want to blow through a unit quickly.  Spending a CA to get a Blue or Green card would be a waste, because I really need a good Red card.  So I use Pain Touch to have a guaranteed Cunning), you can see why Pain Touch on these guys was a bit too much.  Maybe if it was a sort of thing where it can do a damage to them but does a damage to your unit as well I could see it.  Or maybe if Pain Touch was something you had to play before the dice were rolled.

Sorry that I was unclear. Pain Touch is a really nice Faction Ability, but I think that a defensive ability would be better in the context of the faction. The Dark Elves are starved for Blue Cards, and I think a defensive faction ability would fit that need perfectly. Pain Touch would be better in a faction that has a less offensive oriented command deck. That said, Pain Touch is a really nasty ability; it would be even better in a different faction.

Quote
Also, thought of another Nerf.
Arrogant Spite: This one was more of a cosmetic change, and I don't get it. Sure it is more powerful if your unit is engaged with more than one unit, but my retort is the same as the one for We Few.

Yeah but doing 1 damage to multiple units is more powerful than getting +1 Cge for multiple units.   :)

I remember this was a case where the faction designer came out and said "I never intended this card to do multiple damage to multiple units."  Which is something people were doing.  Slave Warriors got pinched?  Out comes Arrogant Spite and they do 2 pts.  People were doing the Slave Gambit where you race them forward to get pinched by three units.  The Slaves do 3 pts and makes the other guy expose the flanks of two of his units.

Interesting. Fair point about We Few. Also, sure, it makes the peasant gambit nastier, but the opponent has to fall for the gambit first. That said, I get why it was changed.
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!'

Kevin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2016, 07:10:28 PM »
FWIW, Slave Warriors don't really bother me, apart from the mix-maxed bad flavor thing.  Though such a cheap Core unit allows the Dark Elves to fill their army with fancy stuff.
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill

BubblePig

  • Shoeless God of War
  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
  • Y'all are just hating on my steez.
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2016, 07:28:14 PM »
FWIW I think Slave Warriors fit the faction flavor just fine.
IMO Dark Elf armies are true to their flavor when they have a few Highbloods/Purebloods to keep the cannon fodder pointed in the right direction. And the less Dark Elf blood on the front lines dying for the cause, the better. Also, this seems to work out reasonably well from a tactical as well as a flavor perspective. YMMV.
 

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4486
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #12 on: August 10, 2016, 11:43:52 AM »
Quote
Makes sense. Slave Warriors almost fill a tank roll within the faction if you would; even so, other factions can do this, arguably better.

Tanks and chumps tend to fulfill very similar roles, but IMO they go about it in different ways.  A tank delays by not taking damage, usually through superior stats.  Chumps delay by simply soaking up the damage.  So yeah, Slave Warriors chump stack or sandbag.  And they do it as well as any unit out there.


Quote
Now Slave Takers are like 40pts more than Equites/Scouts.  So it's not like Slave Takers get all this candy for free.  They pay for what they can do.

Sigh...
That said, I did overstate my case (a bad habit of mine).
When will I learn?

Heh. :D 

My point wasn't that you were making too strong a case, it was sort of a middle between your position and Brooke's.  Yes Slavetakers are very good.  And they're one of the units that benefited a great deal from the dice charge (having 4 attack dice).  But I don't think they're too good, even at Core.


Quote
Even if you have something like Hawk Light Cavalry ("Lancers") the Slave Warriors have a shot at doing 1-2pts.  Admittedly it's an outside shot of doing 2 pts, but again, you're talking a 96pt unit vs a 245pt unit.  I could put two Slave Warriors to contain that cavalry and still come out ahead on points.

Yes and No. On the Charge, Slave Warriors still on 2's versus most cavalry,

Against those zippy D:2/1 cavalry:  6 dice needing 2s to hit is:  6*1/3 = 2.  2 Hits needing 5s:  2*5/6 = 10/6.  Now obviously you can't roll partial successes, so I was rounding up.  Which is what's likely to happen 2/3 of the time.


Quote
1's versus most Elven Cav. That's significant. That being said, the point you make about cost is quite convincing.

Oh sure, but as you said, the cost differential becomes quite significant at that point.  The cheapest "Elf" cavalry (by which I think you mean Def Skill 3/x) is like 200pts more than the Slave Warriors.  Remember, my point wasn't that these guys beat 300+pt cavalry, it's that they nullified the 150-200pt fast cavalry for like half the cost.

If I have High Elf Knights against Slave Warriors, I'm probably going to send the Knights in.  At that point the difference in skill is so much that I'm not afraid of them and I want to get stuck in as quickly as possible to get through that chump stack.  It's not ideal, because I let my 370pt Knights get chump stacked, but if it happens then I have to make the best of a bad situation.


Quote
Some of the flavour for the Dark Elves was spot on. Some just wasn't (Evidence: Slave Warriors).

I actually think the Slave Warriors could fit with the story of Dark Elves pretty easily.  Between the Lashmistresses and some of the Coven Spells, you can see a bit of entrancement/charm/mind control theme to their magic.  I could totally justify the Cge 12 on Slave Warriors by saying the Dark Elves weaponized love spells as a way to keep their slaves in line.  But I don't think I could get to them having the spears bonus with their stats.


Quote
Sorry that I was unclear. Pain Touch is a really nice Faction Ability, but I think that a defensive ability would be better in the context of the faction. The Dark Elves are starved for Blue Cards, and I think a defensive faction ability would fit that need perfectly. Pain Touch would be better in a faction that has a less offensive oriented command deck. That said, Pain Touch is a really nasty ability; it would be even better in a different faction.

Ah, I get your point.  And you may be right.  I just think it's too powerful period, regardless of who its on.  I dunno, maybe a faction full of (5)5/4 or (5)4/5 units it'd be fine (essentially the "Umenzi principle" for offensive stats).



Quote
True, but remember not all damage is created equal.  Upgrading from doing 3pts to 4pts is usually worth more than the 33% increase, because most average units have 4 Green boxes.  So what I think Brook's saying is that Slave Takers can force a Yellow check almost as reliably as Hawk Lancers for like 2/3 the cost.  Plus the Slave Takers have Pain Touch, so you can get them from 3pts to 4pts without expending a limited resource like a Follow Through or Cunning. 

Interesting Point, but I think that you are handing out CA's for free. It's not fair to assume that the Slave Takers will have Pain Touch and the opponent won't play a Command Card. All things being equal, Slave Takers will not deal 4 damage on the Charge turn.

I was thinking of the Slave Takers souped up with Premeditation.  Which in fairness, isn't something I do much.  If I have Premeditation, I usually put it on Dusk Blades and Dusk Lances.

But I wasn't exactly handing it out for free.  Remember I said how Premeditation allows you to win the "command card game?"  So I spend the CA on Premeditation and you spend it drawing a card.  Assuming you get a Blue card that can help (no guarantee), I'm forcing you to expend that Parry for the game.  Or even better, you expend a Mettle or a Fumble or a Roll with the Blow.  If I can get you to use those cards for an ability that doesn't "expire" that's still a win for me. 

Fingolfin

  • Playtester
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
  • A Elbereth Gilthoniel!
Re: On the Dark Elf Nerfs
« Reply #13 on: August 11, 2016, 10:21:38 AM »
Against those zippy D:2/1 cavalry:  6 dice needing 2s to hit is:  6*1/3 = 2.  2 Hits needing 5s:  2*5/6 = 10/6.  Now obviously you can't roll partial successes, so I was rounding up.  Which is what's likely to happen 2/3 of the time.

I see what you're saying, and it makes perfect sense. The light cavalry that is normally ideal for shattering chumps has a somewhat unfavorable match-up versus Slave Warriors.

I actually think the Slave Warriors could fit with the story of Dark Elves pretty easily.  Between the Lashmistresses and some of the Coven Spells, you can see a bit of entrancement/charm/mind control theme to their magic.  I could totally justify the Cge 12 on Slave Warriors by saying the Dark Elves weaponized love spells as a way to keep their slaves in line.  But I don't think I could get to them having the spears bonus with their stats.

Interesting way of justifying the 12 courage. I like it! I personally don't like the spear bonus because it doesn't fit the artwork or, as you say, the theme of the unit.

I was thinking of the Slave Takers souped up with Premeditation.  Which in fairness, isn't something I do much.  If I have Premeditation, I usually put it on Dusk Blades and Dusk Lances.

But I wasn't exactly handing it out for free.  Remember I said how Premeditation allows you to win the "command card game?"  So I spend the CA on Premeditation and you spend it drawing a card.  Assuming you get a Blue card that can help (no guarantee), I'm forcing you to expend that Parry for the game.  Or even better, you expend a Mettle or a Fumble or a Roll with the Blow.  If I can get you to use those cards for an ability that doesn't "expire" that's still a win for me. 

I didn't realize that you were thinking of Premeditation. My bad. And I agree. The ability to win the "Command Card Game" is huge.
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!'