Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Reaperbryan

Reptus Discussion

Recommended Posts

I think that what I dislike most about the Reptus to warrior change is that it really does completely change the way the army will handle.

 

Before warriors acted as shields for archers and they were very defensive fighters. It is a tactic very different from the rest of the game. Outlasting your opponet, and being just as effective on defensive strikes was a fun way to use them.

 

Now we are forced to shove breakers into a roll that I do not think any breaker was designed for. Breakers have always been about creating a hole, or packing a punch on a hero. Now they are to be the backbone, supported by different types of reach models.

 

When someone says adept I think of some outstanding ability that makes this model unique from other grunts. Whips or chains with distract, wicked models with horrid, mounted cavalry, ranged attacks, two attacks, beasts, multiple damage tracks, or serious fighting power.

When I think of the Reptus warrior, I only see an average defensive warrior. Then I look at the dwarven warrior changes and get just a tad jealous. For one more point of DV we go adept... yet they have better MAV and better abilities.

 

Reptus are on the painting bench and will remain there until their faction book comes out.

 

 

What are some of your guys' army lists going to look like, with consideration to this change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for that evaluation of what I should and shouldn't be doing. I happen to enjoy smaller-point games for their faster resolution... and just because my turns move quickly does not necessarily mean that my opponent's do as well. You can disagree with my opinion all you like, but please keep the personal comments out of it. Otherwise, the next time you feel obliged to offer your opinion on what I should be doing, I'll recommend what I think you should be doing in return, and I'd much rather not do that.

 

*shrug* If you like to play games that aren't within the optimal design parameters of the game, you'll likely have less than optimal games.

 

And I'll kindly disagree with your assesment of Reptus breakers versus other army's warriors, point value-for-point value. They are slow and defensively weak; with the neutering of the warriors to adepts, hordes of slow DV 9 Breakers aren't going to win games. Take a look at the secondary warriors in any number of factions, and you'll find the the Reptus Breakers are 2nd rate to them... good specific examples would be Ivy Crown Skirmishers, Dwarf Warriors, Awakened, and Lesser Orc Warriors. All better bang-for-the-points than Breakers, and all Grunts rather than Adepts.

 

MAV + DV, the Reptus Breakers are better than Elf Warriors, Darkspawn Warriors, Awakened, Lesser Orcs, IC Skirmishers, Merc Warriors, Skeleton Warriors, Overlord Spearmen (or Bondslaves, take your pick of my Grunts)... That looks like it's half the warriors in the game to me.

 

I won't even start in on the whole "I've got to buy new models now" part of this.

 

Good, because that would be lame.

 

It's nice that the olive branch of a 2nd troop under Khong has been presented as an option, but the move was still premature in my opinion. This won't stop me from playing Reptus, nor will it turn me away from the Warlord game... just yet. But the shine is certainly off the penny.

 

YMMV

 

~v

 

PS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*shrug* If you like to play games that aren't within the optimal design parameters of the game, you'll likely have less than optimal games.

 

Huh? I have never seen it written that that Warlord was optimally designed for 1501+ point games and any games with fewer points would result in a lesser experience. I thought that Warlord was supposed to scale well between small games and large games.

 

I like lower point (750 to 1000) point games as well, partly because they play well in a shorter time period, and partly because they're easier and more accessible for the new players that we are trying to recruit. I'm not about to start insisting that everyone field a 1501+ point force so that they can have an "optimal" game.

 

How about just respecting different styles of play and games? That way we can all have fun and promote Warlord.

 

Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MAV + DV, the Reptus Breakers are better than Elf Warriors, Darkspawn Warriors, Awakened, Lesser Orcs, IC Skirmishers, Merc Warriors, Skeleton Warriors, Overlord Spearmen (or Bondslaves, take your pick of my Grunts)... That looks like it's half the warriors in the game to me.

 

Why yes, you are absolutely correct. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I guess I just wasn't paying attention. Maybe it is because I was too focused on the fact that every one of your examples costs 4-8 points LESS than Reptus Breakers (with most falling in the 19-20 point range). Let's throw in Skeletal Crewman for completeness, which also fall in the same range (MAV 2 DV 8), but are also 4 points cheaper. The Dwarven warriors from my previous example are the only ones that come in at comparable points (actually, identical) to the Reptus breakers, and they have superior stats to Breakers (as mentioned in another post) and are still Grunts. Perhaps I was being too obtuse when I said "point value-for-point value" and "bang-for-the-buck" in my post. I didn't say that the Reptus breakers didn't have better stats, but rather that their point cost compared to these other options are part of what makes them ineffective as a secondary grunt. That MAV 3 of the Reptus breakers means nothing if they don't make into melee combat in significant numbers, and the slower movement and DV 9 are the nails in that coffin.

 

So I guess that means from where I'm standing, the Reptus current options for a secondary warrior are, in fact, worse than every other faction out there. Thanks for playing.

 

~v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×