292 replies to this topic

[Killax]

I currently feel that Cato is better due to the fact that he can disrupt great set ups and now can punish these further.

Ragnar can play a great aggressive game but more and more factions can play Aggro now. Including Eldar who's Warlock blows Sentinels out of the water.

However both have specific match ups who work better for one or the other. I would only prefer Cato due to the multitude of x/1 bodies and with Crushing Blow can easily eliminate x/2's.

[Asklepios]

So after all the new expansion packs is Cato or Ragnar the best SM Warlord?

 

I was thinking Ragnar after the first pack but now that the other two have been released I think that Cato is the better Warlord for SM.  All the new cards just seem to synergize better with him.  Just my opinion.

 

Right now?

 

I think Cato, for meta reasons. Right now we're seeing a lot of decks that run a mass of cheap not-very-tough cards, thanks to the deckbuilds that favour Ammo Depot, the deckbuilds that are punished by Klaivex Warleader, and the increase in numbers of quality 1 and 2 drops. Cato thrives in a horde-heavy environment.

 

Ragnar had his time, and that was the Howl of Blackmane expansion, when his 2 cost sig squad fixed the SM cost curve at a time when there were almost no good 2-drops for that faction, with or without allies. I think he's slipped back again since then, as the main downside of Cato (a 3-cost signature squad, that while being a very good card messes up a cost curve in a deck that is reliant on 3-cost cards) has been thoroughly mitigated by the growing card pool.

[Kingsley]

Right now?

 

I think Cato, for meta reasons. Right now we're seeing a lot of decks that run a mass of cheap not-very-tough cards, thanks to the deckbuilds that favour Ammo Depot, the deckbuilds that are punished by Klaivex Warleader, and the increase in numbers of quality 1 and 2 drops. Cato thrives in a horde-heavy environment.

 

Ragnar had his time, and that was the Howl of Blackmane expansion, when his 2 cost sig squad fixed the SM cost curve at a time when there were almost no good 2-drops for that faction, with or without allies. I think he's slipped back again since then, as the main downside of Cato (a 3-cost signature squad, that while being a very good card messes up a cost curve in a deck that is reliant on 3-cost cards) has been thoroughly mitigated by the growing card pool.

 

I think much the reverse is true, actually. Cato is best-suited to fighting against medium/big units, with Fury of Sicarius, Tallassarian Tempest Blade, and Sicarius's Chosen all being strong against heavy hitters and relatively weak otherwise. Cato also wants to run Tau allies and Iron Halo (another card good against big opponents), while Ragnar typically doesn't.

 

As a result, I think Ragnar is more suited for the current environment than Cato. Ragnar also has the advantage in the mirror.

[Killax]

I'd say it truly depends on your local meta's. I'd say they have their different match ups where the one pans out better as the other...

 

Both can hold their own against specific fations (and even Warlords) really well while others spell trouble. I do agree with Kingsley however that Cato is ideally set up against the bigger units. Or at least more equiped against those.

 

Where Ragnar's Aggro orientated design is very much able to punish other Aggro it suffers highly against Chaos and also Dark Eldar. Who both are very able to play an Aggro game of their own albeit with many more removal pieces (Choke or direct Removal).

 

Cato's Midgame orientated design is able to thake over the mid to lategame by disrupting set ups of your opponent... Something Ragnar is very able to fully play around but works better agains Tau, Chaos and Orks in general.

 

Anyhow here would be my current ideal split up:

 

Cato: Shadowsun, Eldorath, Kith, Zarathur, Ku'gath, Nazdreg

 

The theory here is that Cato's ideal match ups are this way because:

- Shadowsun needs to build up, allowing this and dealing with it later allows you to be more flexible and deal with it mid to lategame. This way initiative does not always have to play a huge role in winning battles (which can be the case with Ragnar).

- Eldorath, even with Warlock Destructor, also likes to build up. Doom also hits Ragnar much harder as Cato. Thus I'd drop Cato against him.

- Kith, can play an Aggro game but doesn't have to to be succesfull. In my experience Kith is very able to trade blows later on with Ragnar by swarming him with Tokens (which eventually becomes much harder for Sentinels to deal with as opposed to Chosen).

- Zarathur and Ku'gath have no trouble dealing with a multitude of X/1 or X/2 bodies. Ku'gath's Nurglings in special can be punished really well by Chosen and punish Sentinels really well on the other hand.

- Nazdreg, like Shadowsun likes to set up.

 

Ragnar: Straken, Coteaz, Aun'Shi, Baharroth, Urien, Zogwort, 

 

The theory here is that Ragnar plays the ideal Aggro game, which in turn can punish opponents a lot who also play this game but don't have an abundance of removal or other option of playing.

- Straken needs to build up, but copying them with your own AM usually means that your able to do the same and Ragnar still blows Straken out of the water in combat (eventually).

- Coteaz, much like any Aggro Warlord, can't do anything without it's men. Usually they'll be X/1's or X/2's and Ragnar is very able to punish those. As Coteaz is also very likely to show up at planet 1. (I'd say as much as Coteaz).

- Baharroth, small body and isn't save for Ragnar's ability despite having Mobile.

- Urien, choke usually works very well on decks who run heavier cards, depleting them of card options quite fast. Ragnar is less hinderd by this because of it's usual lower curve but also because he can continue to play his Aggro game (go to planet 1). 

- Zogwort, like the other "Aggro" Warlords is the Warlord that eventually loses out against Ragnar because of Ragnar's ability and signature Pieces. On the other hand Zogwort can spell doom against many Warlords who aim for a mid to lategame strategy.

 

Now I do have to say that this set up is very open for debate. In all honesty I think the differences between Cato and Ragnar versus Straken, Kith and Aun'Shi can go very much both ways. Depending on which gameplay the opponent prefers. The others however are much less flexible and usually will go their own ideal route.

 

So I'd say, if your meta runs heavy with Kith's go Cato. But if your meta runs heavy on Cato, go Ragnar.

[Asklepios]

I think much the reverse is true, actually. Cato is best-suited to fighting against medium/big units, with Fury of Sicarius, Tallassarian Tempest Blade, and Sicarius's Chosen all being strong against heavy hitters and relatively weak otherwise. Cato also wants to run Tau allies and Iron Halo (another card good against big opponents), while Ragnar typically doesn't.

 

As a result, I think Ragnar is more suited for the current environment than Cato. Ragnar also has the advantage in the mirror.

 

Actually, with some testing under my belt, I'm agreeing with you and coming back to Ragnar.

 

As I mentioned in the Ragnar thread though, I am excited by Tense Negotiations, and think Cato gets more out of Tau allies than Ragnar does... though of course Tallarn adds another cheap command body to make Ragnar even more command efficient

[Killax]

Tense Negotiations for sure is something worth looking at for Cato. In special when you consider that it's a cheap way for Cato to do a lot by himself. For me personally he is indeed on the list of potential Warlords who can get a whole lot out of Tense Negotiations. The others are:

 

- Shadowsun

- Aun'Shi

- Eldorath

- Baharroth

 

Funny enough Ragnar isn't on this list but the reasons are posted in his deck thread. The added ATK he provided, which sometimes can be doubled (or more) simply is worth more for his Aggressive strategy.

- For Aun'Shi this also would have been true if he wasn't forced to run once he attacked. 

[steinerp]

Cards are always worth looking into (ok Throne of Vainglory might not be) but I have serious concerns about using it with Cato. Based on the early results from the game report spreadsheet, when Cato loses games (which is less often than most) it is usually because he is dead. 6 out of 9 losses have been due to being assassinated, no one else is above 50% and only a quarter of all games end due to assassination.  These aren't a lot of numbers and can still be easily skewed but this tends to match my experience as well.  He is so dominant on resources that you tend not to win slugfests with him, but with only 6 HP he goes down fairly quickly.  You could argue that it makes him more survivable as he can trigger the healing planet or do some other trick, but it is definitely something that needs to be watched out for.

[Killax]

Cards are always worth looking into (ok Throne of Vainglory might not be) but I have serious concerns about using it with Cato. Based on the early results from the game report spreadsheet, when Cato loses games (which is less often than most) it is usually because he is dead. 6 out of 9 losses have been due to being assassinated, no one else is above 50% and only a quarter of all games end due to assassination.  These aren't a lot of numbers and can still be easily skewed but this tends to match my experience as well.  He is so dominant on resources that you tend not to win slugfests with him, but with only 6 HP he goes down fairly quickly.  You could argue that it makes him more survivable as he can trigger the healing planet or do some other trick, but it is definitely something that needs to be watched out for.

 

Perhaps more people should play Iron Halo on him when in fear of getting death (Aun'Shi, Ragnar, Zarathur and Ku'gath can do that) I know it helped quite some people out at worlds

While his own attachment is also great I think it's save to say that Cato doesn't want to get all Rambo with his stats.

[steinerp]

More people should play iron halo.  I put a iron halo into a Cato deck I built over the weekend for exactly that reason.  Also with 2 relics, the conflict of getting both isn't awful and they both are good for shields as well.  However I am not sure that I would include Tense just because I have might the halo to shield an attack.  Also don't forget the games number two assassin (from the database) Eldorath (or probably more accurately Isha) where the Halo is more important since Indominable can be nullified. and the halo can't.

[Killax]

I currently feel that once Zogwort is out the real battle between Crushing Blow and Tense Negotiations will begin. And from that standpoint I wouldn't find it to unlikely to see Crushing Blow victorious. It might seem less interesting (and it is) but the combination of the multitude of AoE units and Chosen that are presented in the Cato deck that extra damage can really matter. Even more so once we see all the Warlord groupies and '2 damage' being dealth before Combat begins will be even more important.

[HidaHonk]

Interesting. In the last few tourname t winnung cato decks is always see less and less play of ion rifle and promotions. ..since space is limted and crushing blow seems to be fixed, is the switch from the rifles to tense negotiations worth a try? Who is tge playtesting experience with tense negotiations?

[Killax]

Interesting. In the last few tourname t winnung cato decks is always see less and less play of ion rifle and promotions. ..since space is limted and crushing blow seems to be fixed, is the switch from the rifles to tense negotiations worth a try? Who is tge playtesting experience with tense negotiations?

 

Great notification Honk! I personally have not yet tested it but I do agree that currently we have come to a meta where Earth Caste Technician becomes much more optional (even for Cato) as mandatory. 

 

Crushing Blow and Tense Negotiations also allow for comparble costed battle effects. With Crushing Blow actually being better considering the ammount of "pingers" in Cato's deck. Will update my deck asap!

[WarFather]

In the tournament I just won with Cato I used 0 ion rifles and only 1 promotion. I think the deck should have both crushing blow and tense n.

[HidaHonk]

Still i have a problem with reducing the number of promotions... cata tau already is behind on the schedule only having 1 two Hammer two cost unit

[Liyan]

Has anyone tested Staging Ground with Cato yet? Im thinking of using cappers and 2 drops with high attack to hunt with staging ground as my DPA.

[Asklepios]

Been looking at Ragnar for that deck, mostly because the Signature Squad costs 2, and that greatly boosts the chance of getting a Stageable unit off command draws. I think with Staging Ground, the goal is rarely going to be to hold back deployments to play as surprises, but rather to play hard at command, then use the support for some bonus combat power.

 

Also, of course, Ragnar's event card synergises better with hunting and there's established Ragnar/AM decks that work well.

[Liyan]

I see your point. I was thinking that ragnar's economy might not support staging ground + 2drops. Ill to test it after the SC this weekends.

[Asklepios]

Cato does generate resources faster than Ragnar, of course, but in my experience Ragnar draws cards faster than Cato, just because Sentinel is one cheaper than Chosen, which is probably the most significant difference between the two warlords. Of course, Ragnar has two duff Signature cards otherwise while Cato's are all of good quality, but those Sentinels really do dramatically alter the cost curve of a deck that tends to run 3-costers in its standard incarnation (Maxos, Librarians, Veterans/Bikers). My main dilemma at present is not so much economy for Ragnar (as he never had a huge problem with affording his plays) but more with a conflict between Staging Ground and 2 cost includes vs Drop Pod Assault and 3-cost includes. Its not clear whether the new deck shape, lower cost curve though it is, is better than the original build, mostly because DPA was ALSO a 2-shielder.

 

Also, I'm finding that Straken + Staging Ground just seems plain stronger than either SM warlord + Staging Ground, thanks to access to Ammo Depot, and the inherent synergy of that card with low cost units. In a Straken build, there's so many good picks that the deck gets to 70 cards then cuts are being made down to 50, whereas with either SM Warlord, I'm getting to about 45 cards, then taking suboptimal choices.

 

In all three decks, my current thinking is that strong play of Staging Ground requires more than 30 units, to increase the odds of drawing units on command-draw. This, however, is proving something that forces more cuts than I comfortable with.

 

You know when you're looking at a deck and thinking "can I lose the Promotions?" that you have a lot of strong picks there!

[AronKazay]

I'm currently testing a Cato-AM deck with Staging Ground, Tallarn Raiders, Elysian Assault Team and Secluded Apothecarion thrown in the mix. Maxos and Drop Pod are x3, obviously. The idea is to further mess with opponents heads, as they never know which battle is going to turn into a bloodied mess. I find this approach quite effective against chaos, but its nerve-wracking to play right (action-window wise). I feel like Cato's superior economy, and the Chosen's ability to completely mess up the board state if deployed mid-challenge makes this better than Ragnar. 

 

But i have to admit, that I haven't play tested this enough to draw a conclusion, and the next two war packs will certainly shake this up. Especially if Blood Claw Pack becomes a thing with that Space Wolves tank. Now only if we had a similar ability that could target the Ultramarines Dreadnought...

[HidaHonk]

So a new pack and new ideas. Using my Berlin storechamp decks as the starting point I exchanged 2 of the three iron halos with the new bolter. I also exchanged 2 ion rifles for 2 salamander terminator and 3 Trailblaizers with the new iron fist unit.

First playtest results indicate thr usefulness of both the bolter (does it s ability every combat round!) and especially the iron fist unit. I think the salamander terminator is too expensive. However i would prefer playing 31 units over the current 29. Ion rifles are the weakest attachment/action of the deck. But without them i am only playing 7 attachments reducing the usefulness of ECT significantly. Therefore the usefulness of Tau instead of AM For cato is reduced. What is the opinion of my fellow sm players?