[Archive] Bull Centaurs as flying unit?

Grimstonefire:

Would this be a bad idea?

From a fluff and visual point of view it makes them closer to lammasu/taurus, from a tactical point of view you can provide some support to your general on flying mount.

It could be unbalanced though because of the high movement, so you would need to consider this when balancing the list.

Is a flying unit just too fast for a CD list? Should movement 7 be the fastest?

Willmark:

Visually I don’t see anything really wrong with the idea. As you correctly surmise it might be a question of how to fairly represent them rules wise.

cornixt:

It sounds better suited to have Taurus riders than trying to fit BC into being a flying unit.

Lord Zarkov:

I Second Cornixt

Balancing issues are also likley to be a problem - especially as the main thing we lack at present is skirmishers, adding flying skirmishers is removing yet another of our weaknesses. (and if thier stats remain similar it will become absolutly sickining)

Hashut’s Blessing:

I can see where you’re coming from, but they seem to be almost lammasus by that point. The only difference being the magic resistant breath and the two arms. As above, it would be unbalancing. However, it does bring up the idea of converting a Lord to be like that instead of mounted (would be strange to explain his sudden legs if the Taurus/Lammasu died though…). Just think of Bull Centaurs as being that unit,. but they haven’t yet developed their wings or wings capable of lifting them yet.

Grimstonefire:

Seems to be a staff only thread atm :wink:

I agree that taken in the context of the RH list it would make them unbalanced.  The issue for balancing them would be the other parts of the list, primarily the wolf riders.  Fast cavalry and a flying unit would be too fast for us, so IMO the wolf riders would have to go to compensate.  Being rare however, it would help to balance them overall if suitably priced?

I guess you’d have 3 variations on this idea:

Keep them on cavalry bases.

Put them on 20mm bases (2 bull legs only).

Put them on 40mm bases (as taurus riders).

Keeping them on cavalry bases would require a rethink of the rules; giving them only one weapon option (GW & HW or additional hand weapon only) no option for a shield (to try to balance them a little more?).  The price would have to be quite high to reflect their tactical uses, however keeping their stats the same would compensate IMO.  They would hit hard, but not nearly as strong as other rare cavalry, and when taken in consideration of the rest of the list they would be fighting alone very far ahead of the rest of the battle line most of the time, with one wound and 5+ AS.  Skirmishing US 2 models may also suffer tactically.

Putting them on 20mm bases (changing them to something that�?Ts no longer a �?~bull centaur�?T as we know them), would bring them back in line with the rest of the army.  As a unit of US 1 skirmishers they would be much more useful for attacking/ holding buildings etc.  Being a new unit you could have fun with the rules to make them suitably elite to justify the rare slot, cause fear for instance.  IMO bull centaurs as they are atm are only justified in rare because of their fluff and balancing within the RH list, they are not strong enough to deserve it otherwise.  

Putting them on 40mm as ridden beasts again would change what they are, ridden Taurus.  This could be a very hard unit, and might not be too unbalanced if suitably priced.  I�?Td need to have a look at how effective Pegasus knights are overall for inspiration.

So another question; if this were the ONLY unit faster than M4 in the list, would they still be unbalanced?

Hashut’s Blessing:

I think if there were a limit, for example 0-1+ (the plus being that every High Sorcerer and maybe Lord gives and extra 0-1) they should be fine. I think them being the only unit above M4 is also a good thing (other than characters). I’m tempted to say cavalary bases, but I think it should be akin to pegasus knights, except the “rider” is the beast as well, rather than them being separate entities riding one another. A points cost that represents their stats and uses would be fine then, rather than making them more expensive to limit their use.

Theory_Man:

@ Grimstonefire

I’m your interpretation and creation of fluff, do you see bull centaurs as a stage in a metamorphic process which ultimate goal is evolving into a Taurus or lammasu?

If so you could have upgrades for your Bull Centaurs (like flying) in your army list to represent various phases in this process.

Sorry for breaking in this staff only thread thread :stuck_out_tongue:

Grimstonefire:

I’m currently seeing them more as the middle option above (what I call the Mardak), but if they were to remain more like their current incarnation I don’t see them metamorphosising during their lives into lammasu or taurus.

In babylonian/ assyrian myths the lammasu is often depicted as a winged bull with a human head (curiously a female deity with a male head?), whereas a Shedu has a human upper body, but a bull’s lower body (also has horns and bull ears, and a male head).  Two distinctly different versions.

Interestingly the lammasu is also depicted as a winged lion body with a human head, and the Shedu as the winged bull (with a human head only). So the current lamassu model is actually a sneaky blend of the two mythical creatures (half bull, half lion).    

So it gets a little confusing. :slight_smile:

Fluffwise I’d see the lammasu more as noble intelligent mounts, and the Shedu/ Bull Centaurs as the gatekeepers and temple guardians.  Having them change during their lives makes this more complicated.

Merchant:

Visually I  don't see anything really wrong with the idea. As you correctly surmise it might be a question of how to fairly represent them rules wise.

Willmark
I agree with Willmark, Visually it will be really cool to see some CD looking Lammasu :o But on the rules side, it might be just to unbalanced... However, with the right rules - almost anything can be done :cheers

Narflung:

That would make a very interesting modelling option.

Would you mount the wings on the bull body, as per the lammasu, or on the chaos dwarf body, like an angel?

Would they have to replace Bull Centaur, or could this be a new unit entirely. Not nearly as strong as Bull Centaur, but more mobile. A possible way to keep the rules simple could be to treat them as fast cavalry - as mentioned, replace wolf riders (even though i love them).

Alternately, 40mm bases as suggested, would be ok. Just think how hard maneaters are, as long as we keep unit sizes small.

Sousunou:

My thoughts are that you could limit the equipment options, you could remove the great weapon as it is heave and would mess up their balance in the air, and heavy armour would be the same. so limit to hw and shield or additional hw to keep them balanced. and i agree making them a 0-1 choice fits too.

:cheers:

TheVoice:

I think making the BC unit into flyers would be… silly. However, a Lammasu-mutation for a sorceror (Lammasu-centaur) could be an option, but then why not just ride one.

lord blackadder:

Y not have CDs riding baby or adolescent lammasu/tauras