First of: Bastiladon has never been meant to be combat monster. I don't get where that idea comes from.
It is inherently a support unit who can alternatively cover main-blocks flank from flankcharges.
Even its name basicly means Fortress.
What the 9th age guys did to it is REALLY good for our army.
+1 WS will push a lot of our units ahead of the opposition, as they will hit on 4+ and we still have our extra, now re-rollable, attacks.
add in poison attacks and a Saurus horde suddenly gets ultra violent.
+1 str, Stubborn ? You already got that monster, the stegadon.
I think we disagree on 8th roll for the Bastiladon. It's ineffectiveness in combat made it take up a support/flank guard roll in 8th. Inherently support, it is not. I think you answered your own question when you said his name means fortress, as well as it being modeled after arguably the most combat-defensive adapted dinosaur to ever exist. As well as originally having several combat abilities including having no flanks and a str 10 attack.
That is where the idea of being a combat monster came from. I hope I'm not the only one who had that idea.
Making him a corpse cart is an injustice. Further they removed the special monster with stubborn. And if you didn't catch that I said I assumed the Bastiladon was intended to fill the role we lost. As well as saying he is now very good. I fully understand that having a corpse cart fallowing around our combat units giving them pioson and +1 WS is very good. It's just an injustice to the model and not as intended. It seems my mistake was assuming other Lizardmen players wanted the same thing as me. I'll revise my statement to say "I am disappointed and feel that they completely missed the mark and I would have much prefered that they fill the hole they created in many of my lists and raise the Bastiladon's defensive aspects, keep his slight buff, and stay true to his name and original design mechanics, but do it better than 8th did. Doing it in a way it can actually be in combat, IE not run away to LD rolls it's first phase. "
It may be because I do run the small steg more often than the usual LM player. But the way I anticipate this Bastiladon to play, saddens me. Think about me when you place your "fortress" behind your Saurus block. Then you may understand my perspective. Not as a competitive player understanding how insanely good this new Bastiladon is, but as a fluff player hiding his "fortress" from magic and shooting. His combat abilities are useless fluff and may as well be removed since the pivotal role this model now plays makes him far too valuable to see any combat and is a slap to the fluff's face.
Why the hate on Templeguard?
They have better circumstances than a lot of other infantry.
WS4 S5, A2 (re-roll 1s) T4 with an 4+ AS is pretty solid in my book.
....and...remember that thing that just happend to high magic?
you know, that attribute that gets us "IGNORE WOUND!" counters?
and then there is that spell that gives a straight out ward-save.
I see : lets check it out before we decide its not good enough
I think you misinterpreted what I said. I was pretty wasted when I typed it as I am now. But it makes sense to me reading it now. I hate on the 7th and 8th edition TG. Mostly because, as I stated earlier, in a doubles match my slann miscast twice and blew away their combat effectiveness. Them being a large majority of my army's points, my teammate carried the overpowered 7th edition LM to victory. And he knew it! And he let me know! It was embarrassing to me. Since I am an uncommonly unlucky player, I no longer bunker my slann in the TG in fear the decision will end up ruining my night. To run a unit of TG without a slann, is not something I do either.
In 8th, you are effectively paying 3 points per model for +1 WS +1 str +1 Initiative, No parry save(HW) / 1 less rank of predatory fighter(spear). I don't find that worth it. But that is a personal preference. If you reread that section, I wasn't actually hating on the TG, merely stressing the point that I don't often run the slann or the TG/slann unit. And how awe struck I am at "9th's" decision to nerf the slann in this way. I honestly would be much more satisfied if they increased his base cost by 150pts. It really is crippling to the LM army. And I don't mean our effectiveness given the buffs, in particular the Bastiladon going from a 5 out of 10 to a solid 10/auto include. I mean crippling to our way of life, our style of play. I'd much rather play something that sucks, but is true to the army (tomb kings in 8th), rather than something that is good, but bastardizes the basic ideas of the army (9th age LM).
I don't mean to offend. Just assume my angrier post are made while drunk.
