Jump to content
cbtb11235813

Who can take the most beating?

Recommended Posts

Inspired by the recent thread about who has the highest consistent damage output, lets go the total opposite direction. Give me your most ridiculous/broken/to-complicated-to-ever-actually-work combos for tanking the most damage. 

I think it is Joss in a Sandeep crew. Sandeep makes Joss incorporeal, and Joss Stands next to an Enforcer with Well Rehearsed and Snowstorm for bullet proof. That means for an enemy to do more than 1 damage to Joss in a single hit they would have to do 

- 9+ damage on Sh
- 7+ damage on Ml
- 3+ damage on Ca

So lets call it an average of 6.3+ damage in a single hit to do 2 damage. Then you have to get through HTK and Well Rehearsed. This isn't counting Imbued Protection which only works on the first hit, or things like Enchanted Weapons or Leveticus just ignoring everything. 

Can you find something even dumber?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fill the rest of the gang with steamfitters to weld metal plates to joss, maybe have a tool kit for joss to kill to generate scrap as well to give 3 of the steamfitters chance to give joss +3 armour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, dannydb said:

fill the rest of the gang with steamfitters to weld metal plates to joss, maybe have a tool kit for joss to kill to generate scrap as well to give 3 of the steamfitters chance to give joss +3 armour

Joss already have armor, so no steamfitters shenanigans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the same with Carlos, and you also have self healing at the end of the turn. No HtK (but you could get that with the Automaton), but in my opinion, Carlos is at least as tanky as Joss. Also, Captain for even more Bullet Proof, and Imbued Protection gets him to Df 7. Or you could get him Warding Runes for Counterspell and other nice things from the mages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's not just damage on hit but a general survivability thing then I think Cassandra with southern charm up and protected by a steamfitter can also be quite tricky to deal with. You could also add the incorp and stuff mentioned above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they're a very big consideration with both Joss and Carlos depending on armour to make up for low Wd stats and, in Joss's case, an average defence. As is the fact that armour neither prevents small attrition from little hits or makes a real difference to the big hits. Not a defence to rely on, and Carlos doesn't even have armour except when he's on fire

For me, the simple ten wounds, impossible to wound, hard to kill, plus healing on a melee trigger  make the slate ridge mauler comfortably our most resilient model, especially for a meager 7 stones and no requirement from other models to support it. A real gem in an otherwise frustratingly fragile faction. Post errata, the defence 6 and 9 wounds of a Razorspine Rattler are also pretty amazing for a 6 stone minion, equal to the much more expensive Carlos. In terms of support, both can also benefit from :+flip defence and extra healing from Myranda, in addition to most of the defensive buffs already  mentioned.

Also, in the realm of absurd amounts of set-up, since they're minions, Rasputina can use december's favour to them into frozen heart minions, and then allow them to benefit from the tome trigger on the 'sub-zero' upgrade to end an attacker's turn after taking damage in melee. That's a powerful extra safeguard against a lot of the most dangerous models.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dereikt said:

Also, in the realm of absurd amounts of set-up, since they're minions, Rasputina can use december's favour to them into frozen heart minions, and then allow them to benefit from the tome trigger on the 'sub-zero' upgrade to end an attacker's turn after taking damage in melee. That's a powerful extra safeguard against a lot of the most dangerous models

Not only that, but December's Touch also gives armor 2, so you could bump up anyone's required min by 2 with that, or 4 if they're incorporeal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandeep. He's been face-tanking the complaints against him for over a year! :P 

  • Haha 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could go with OPs suggestion but use Carlos instead.

Steamfitter uses 1 AP to remove burning, (0) to drop scrap then 1 AP to apply armour to Carlos. Then whenever Carlos has burning 2+ he will go to armour 3+ AND with stunt double he can drop a card at the end of the turn to heal.

 

And as preemptive explanation, removing burning does not remove the armour condition entirely because it just lowers it by 2, so he will be on constant armour 1. Due to wording of the card, he can gain max +2 armour from burning, but that is independent of any other armour, and will stack.

 

With OPs suggestion this gives 

-9+ pts of dmg on ml for 2dmg

-11+ pts of dmg on sh for 2dmg

-4+ pts of dmg on ca for 3dmg

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hollingydale said:

Could go with OPs suggestion but use Carlos instead.

Steamfitter uses 1 AP to remove burning, (0) to drop scrap then 1 AP to apply armour to Carlos. Then whenever Carlos has burning 2+ he will go to armour 3+ AND with stunt double he can drop a card at the end of the turn to heal.

 

And as preemptive explanation, removing burning does not remove the armour condition entirely because it just lowers it by 2, so he will be on constant armour 1. Due to wording of the card, he can gain max +2 armour from burning, but that is independent of any other armour, and will stack.

 

With OPs suggestion this gives 

-9+ pts of dmg on ml for 2dmg

-11+ pts of dmg on sh for 2dmg

-4+ pts of dmg on ca for 3dmg

 

He won't be on constant armour one. The two sources of armour stack into a single condition using the timing of the last applied source which is his burning. That goes away at the end of the turn and thus the entire armour condition expires. He will have armour +3 until the end of the turn or condition removal though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ludvig said:

He won't be on constant armour one. The two sources of armour stack into a single condition using the timing of the last applied source which is his burning. That goes away at the end of the turn and thus the entire armour condition expires. He will have armour +3 until the end of the turn or condition removal though.

I agree that when the condition and burning is applied it merges into one condition, however there is nothing in Carlos's card that states the entire armour condition is removed when burning is removed, it is only implied it's lowered by the amount of burning as he will no longer benefit from burning armour.

 

 

There is no reason why the Steamfitter's armour should remove as far as I'm aware, but please quote a ruling that shows otherwise if you have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hollingydale said:

I agree that when the condition and burning is applied it merges into one condition, however there is nothing in Carlos's card that states the entire armour condition is removed when burning is removed, it is only implied it's lowered by the amount of burning as he will no longer benefit from burning armour.

 

 

There is no reason why the Steamfitter's armour should remove as far as I'm aware, but please quote a ruling that shows otherwise if you have one.

Everytime this comes up and I look at Carlos’s ability I come away thinking something different. 

Carlos’s ability doesn’t say he “gains a condition” it says he “has” the condition “... at the same value its Burning Condition ...”. It almost seems like the value of his Armor  condition is always going to equal his Burning condition (and not be higher than 2).

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WWHSD said:

Everytime this comes up and I look at Carlos’s ability I come away thinking something different.

I have this also, but so far haven't found a contradiction to the way I'm playing it and have been supported by anyone in the U.K. meta I've mentioned it to, so will continue to play this way until told otherwise. There are plenty of conditons which increase and decrease without removing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2018 at 9:17 AM, Hollingydale said:

Could go with OPs suggestion but use Carlos instead.

Steamfitter uses 1 AP to remove burning, (0) to drop scrap then 1 AP to apply armour to Carlos. Then whenever Carlos has burning 2+ he will go to armour 3+ AND with stunt double he can drop a card at the end of the turn to heal.

 

And as preemptive explanation, removing burning does not remove the armour condition entirely because it just lowers it by 2, so he will be on constant armour 1. Due to wording of the card, he can gain max +2 armour from burning, but that is independent of any other armour, and will stack.

 

But why has dance of flame not removed the armour already. It says Carlos has armour equal to his burning. I believe this would remove armor+1 if he was on 0 burning. It rewrites the card, not just giving additional armour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Adran said:

But why has dance of flame not removed the armour already. It says Carlos has armour equal to his burning. I believe this would remove armor+1 if he was on 0 burning. It rewrites the card, not just giving additional armour. 

I disagree. There's no part of the ability that says the armour condition is removed.

1+2 = 3

3-2 = 1

This is the interpretation myself and many other UK Arcanists have been using 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Hollingydale said:

I disagree. There's no part of the ability that says the armour condition is removed.

1+2 = 3

3-2 = 1

This is the interpretation myself and many other UK Arcanists have been using 

 

but the ability does say you gain the condition armor equal to burning, and if burning is then at 0 it will force armor down to 0 too, everytime burning increases or decreases it will check armor and make it equal to burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thottbot said:

but the ability does say you gain the condition armor equal to burning, and if burning is then at 0 it will force armor down to 0 too, everytime burning increases or decreases it will check armor and make it equal to burning.

There is no burning +0 condition to force it down to 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hollingydale said:

There is no burning +0 condition to force it down to 0.

what is your reasoning then for armor being able to get up to 3 and sticking to the model after the end of the turn? 😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Thottbot said:

what is your reasoning then for armor being able to get up to 3 and sticking to the model after the end of the turn? 😕

1+2= 3

3-2= 1

😛

 

Im not arguing it's a permanent armour 3, it just reduces to 1 at the end of the turn and builds back up from the next iniative flip.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Hollingydale said:

There is no burning +0 condition to force it down to 0.

But if doesn't have the burning condition it should lose the armour. It is not a case of 1+2=3. As you said it's not gaining armour +2, it just is armour +2. 

If burning becoming 0 didn't make the armour 0, then why would you have removed his armour at the end of each turn before. There isn't a" this armour is based on burning condition. ". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Adran said:

But if doesn't have the burning condition it should lose the armour. It is not a case of 1+2=3. As you said it's not gaining armour +2, it just is armour +2. 

If burning becoming 0 didn't make the armour 0, then why would you have removed his armour at the end of each turn before. There isn't a" this armour is based on burning condition. ". 

I don't think we're going to agree here 😂

You continue your way, and I'll continue mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Hollingydale said:

I don't think we're going to agree here 😂

You continue your way, and I'll continue mine.

I'm with your opinion, but I desire to know the truth... We must post that in rules xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Hollingydale said:

I disagree. There's no part of the ability that says the armour condition is removed.

1+2 = 3

3-2 = 1

This is the interpretation myself and many other UK Arcanists have been using 

 

Dance of flames says model has the following condition (Armor +1) based on its burning condition to maximum of 2   If he has no burning condition, then he has no armor.   This will remove any armor given to him.  This is because it says he has the condition. Not he gains the condition.  If it said gain the condition, then I believe your interpretation is right.

I also agree with Fictor,  a question should be posted in the Rules forum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×