Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now, I'll be the first to say I love the Varghulf's unit entry. Rare is the game where I don't bring one, or maybe two (percentages allowing). It's ded fast, it can march without a babysitter, it's got Hatred and solid Regen and it's a cheap, relatively small monster.

That said, in terms of competitiveness I find the Varghulf tends to come up pretty short compared to the other Rare options. It doesn't have the mass buff potential of a Mortis engine or Black Coach, the sheer murder power of a comparably-priced allotment of wraiths or blood knights, or the killing power and crazy-high Wound potential of a Terrorgheist.

I also think it would be cool to give Varghulfs access to certain powers from the Vampire Powers list - or at least to watered-down versions of those powers. Let the Varghulf get ASF or Fly or Red Fury for its CC attacks (but not for Thunderstomp). Or give it the option to take The Hunger special rule - it is a Vampire, after all, albeit a twisted one. Let it buy Eternal Hatred like the Strigoi Ghoul King, since the two are said to hang out together. Maybe give it a howl that works like the Troglodon, buffing creatures of the night within 12" of the Varghulf.

Thoughts?

Would make sense and be cool (model is great as well!) ... but don't expect VC to be updated by GW anytime soon, they don't need it
Be sure to price quite high any option that might seem really good, so as to avoid any whine from friends that did agree to play with such rules

You're going to have a hard time convincing anyone to buff a 175 pt regen monster with 5/4 stats. It's right there with a Chimera, stats a little worse, but it also costs 50or so point less. It's just amazingly cheap.

There's absolutely nothing it will get for free. If anything, it's undercosted compared to pretty much every semi-similar monster in the game. If you want to add options, they can be added, but you just pay. Anything can be added to anything if it's priced correctly. In same cases the price is simply prohibitive. Like if you gave goblins stomp, that would be a really expensive buff per unit.

I don't think it's as good as a Chimera
agreed it's way cheaper, but
- it doesn't fly
- it has 3 less attacks (2 to 4 really)
- it does not have a 4+ save (which is, I believe, the main issue, as poisoned weapons will murder it quickly)
- it does not breathe fire
- it has -1S
- if it loses combat, it crumbles right away (agreed a Chimera has low Ld, but it can easily be mitigated with Lord & Throgg)

It has hatred though, WS5 and slightly better Init, which means about the same number of hits against WS4 and less

but there's one HUGE difference. A Varghulf is Rare, meaning that's less Mortis Engine / Terrorgheist. Chimera is special which means ... yay, MOAR Chimeras !

 DukeRustfield wrote:
You're going to have a hard time convincing anyone to buff a 175 pt regen monster with 5/4 stats. It's right there with a Chimera, stats a little worse, but it also costs 50or so point less. It's just amazingly cheap.

There's absolutely nothing it will get for free. If anything, it's undercosted compared to pretty much every semi-similar monster in the game. If you want to add options, they can be added, but you just pay. Anything can be added to anything if it's priced correctly. In same cases the price is simply prohibitive. Like if you gave goblins stomp, that would be a really expensive buff per unit.

I wasn't intending that any of the upgrades be free. Just that the creature should have the option for upgrades, partly for flavorful reasons and partly because despite its strengths as a monster, it's competing with so many other versatile choices that it's tough to sell the Ghulf on its own merits.

TanKoL wrote:
I don't think it's as good as a Chimera
agreed it's way cheaper, but
- it doesn't fly
- it does not breathe fire .......

Almost all those things have to be bought by the Chimera, including regen. If it buys them all it is VASTLY more expensive than a Vargulf (65% more, it's not even the same category at that point) and you have to use it like a traditional monster ~300pts where its point costs are prohibitive enough you have to protect it. The attacks:cost of Vargulf and the defense:cost of Vargulf are way better ratios than the Chimera.

Rare or Special isn't a huge concern. It's a dirt cheap Sare. Chimera is an expensive Special. And WoC has a lot of good Specials.

Again I don't see a problem adding options. But it's meant to be a cheap monster IMHO. 175pt regen thunderstomp super fast with solid stats is a steal.

The problem is, it isn't super fast.
It doesn't have swift strider.
Leadership 4 makes it stupidly easy to march block.

It's not worth 175 points. Yes, it's about as good as any S5 T5 monster. The problem is, S5 T5 monsters suck.
S5 doesn't kill enough. T5 dies to fast. And crumble to that, and it is really en effort to find a useful role for the monster.

I like the Vargulf, but when I take it I know I'm over-spending.

IMO, at 175, it should get a small bonus.
Fly would work.
Or allow units within 6" of it to march as if near the general. I don't think it should be better than S5 T5 (since S6 and T6 are the big boys); and cheaper doesn't make much sense either; which only leaves better.


As for any other type of bonus, I should cost you points.
Rare or Special is a huge problem for vampires. Double terrorgheists gives you a very strong scream build, double mortis engines gives a wall of infantry a solid defense.
Taking a single Varghulf really knocks down both of those builds.

I...don't really get why it doesn't have Fly as-is.

TanKoL wrote:
I don't think it's as good as a Chimera
agreed it's way cheaper, but
- it doesn't fly
- it does not breathe fire .......


Almost all those things have to be bought by the Chimera, including regen.

I could agree that the flaming breath is not completely mandatory, but nearly as it's a tremendous help to reduce large units' numbers for quite cheap, and regen is so stupidly cheap there's no reason ever to not take it. It should be costed at around 50 points, but I never saw any chimera without those options (with good reason). I was counting the upgraded price of the Chimera in my comparison, and it's still quite cheap for what it does. There's a reason there's one or two of those babies in every WoC army

DukeRustfield wrote:
Almost all those things have to be bought by the Chimera, including regen.

Considering how ridiculously cheap regeneration is, that's hardly a concern. And, you don't have to buy the breath weapon - it's just a very nice option to have.

DukeRustfield wrote: If it buys them all it is VASTLY more expensive than a Vargulf (65% more, it's not even the same category at that point) and you have to use it like a traditional monster ~300pts where its point costs are prohibitive enough you have to protect it.

What do you mean exactly? It's a bigger investment, but it also gets a hell of a lot more than the varghulf and has better survivability built-in.

DukeRustfield wrote:The attacks:cost of Vargulf and the defense:cost of Vargulf are way better ratios than the Chimera.

That's debatable - especially considering the additional speed and manoeuvrability of the chimera, because of fly.

DukeRustfield wrote:
Rare or Special isn't a huge concern. It's a dirt cheap Sare. Chimera is an expensive Special. And WoC has a lot of good Specials.

and twice as much to spend on them...

It also means that, if desired, you can have 3 in an army, rather than 2.

DukeRustfield wrote:
Again I don't see a problem adding options. But it's meant to be a cheap monster IMHO. 175pt regen thunderstomp super fast with solid stats is a steal.

By what possible measure? Do you like monsters that are pretty expensive and balanced by being crap in combat?

WS5 is meagre compensation for a mere 5 attacks; and Hatred only helps you in the first round. After that, you'd better roll well with your attacks. Also, S5 might sound reasonable, but it's really pretty pathetic. There are a lot of models with T4, and/or 4+ (or better) armour saves (not to mention models with WS5 or better) - and each failed wound hurts you a lot. Furthermore, that's just infantry - as soon as you start facing other models, you start dealing with better toughness and armour saves of 1+ or 2+. Not only that, but against most other units, you don't even get your thunderstomp. Finally, T5 with no armour save to back up regenerate is more fragile than you might think. It's not hard for wounds to slip through even from weak troops - as soon as you get into higher strength models you really see the cracks in its protection.

DukeRustfield wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:The problem is, it isn't super fast.
It doesn't have swift strider.
Leadership 4 makes it stupidly easy to march block.

It's not worth 175 points. Yes, it's about as good as any S5 T5 monster. The problem is, S5 T5 monsters suck.
S5 doesn't kill enough. T5 dies to fast. And crumble to that, and it is really en effort to find a useful role for the monster.

I like the Vargulf, but when I take it I know I'm over-spending.

IMO, at 175, it should get a small bonus.
Fly would work.
Or allow units within 6" of it to march as if near the general. I don't think it should be better than S5 T5 (since S6 and T6 are the big boys); and cheaper doesn't make much sense either; which only leaves better.


As for any other type of bonus, I should cost you points.
Rare or Special is a huge problem for vampires. Double terrorgheists gives you a very strong scream build, double mortis engines gives a wall of infantry a solid defense.
Taking a single Varghulf really knocks down both of those builds.

This.

The problem with Varghulfs is that, whilst they're relatively cheap (by monster standards), they struggle to actually do anything. They're just about passable against very weak troops (and maybe some medium ones), but anything else with shred them. Also, in addition to lacking the manoeuvrability to easily get to a unit's flank or rear, they're unstable - so if you multi-charge them it's really easy to lose combat and have them killed outright.

The problem isn't that the Varghul is "only S5", or that it's "only T5 with Regeneration" (which is a laughable statement. Sure, he'll get wounded. Things get wounded. My A-bomb is T5 with Regen, and he survives plenty of abuse.), the problem seems to be that you've got a solo-model that isn't big enough on his own to handle significant targets, and that he's too expensive to fulfill other rolls.

I'd say: drop Hatred and add Fly and The Hunger ('cause that just makes sense; he's got wings, and he's a vampire). Then give him upgrades: Eternal Hatred for 25pts, maybe some kind of Fear Incarnate rule, etc.

Any upgrades should make him more reliable; get rid of the low outliers in his performance. Nothing that makes him min-maxed or adds more high outliers.

175 isn't too expensive. I'm sorry, but he's probably the least expensive monster in the whole game and has regen. For good or ill, there is a monster tax. Or call it a thunderstomp tax. No monster is cheap and very few are worth their points. The best dragon in the game is sucky compared to comparable points of ogre ironguts. It would have VASTLY less wounds, attacks, etc. But that's not how they are priced.

The most useful monsters seem to be ones that aren't pure punch, but work like special characters in that they give something unique that the rest of the army doesn't have.

I don't know the VC army well in how it plays, but Varghulf is pure punch. He seems to be a fast high strength high defense high attack solo unit in an army that's low strength low defense (not counting healing). There's some overlap with Vargheists but there's a lot of overlap with a lot of units.

And, as per my usual criteria, I always like to ask before looking at a particular unit/spell/whatever: "is this army hurting?" Is there some deficiency in VC that makes it systematically inferior to others that needs to be corrected such that this may be a good place to start? Saying I want to make Unit X better because I think Unit X is spiffy, I don't know if that's a valid reason. Presumably if Unit X is made better, the whole army will be made better by some amount. WoC has plenty of units that I doubt many people use much, Shaggoths, if you want to talk about Rare monsters that aren't living up to expectations... Likewise Ogre Gorgers and Yhettees. The reason there hasn't been a huge fire to "fix" those units is because the army is really successful already. If Gorgers became some new Maneater alternative, I think people might be afraid they'd take it to 11 in terms of army power.

^^anyway, all that mouthful said, if there's still room for VC to grow, then just look at pricing any modifications properly. But, you know, look at what Varghulfs were added to the army to do. They're big ass, relatively simple, meat shields. In that vein I could see adding a +scaly skin buff or a +fly or a +attacks. But it's clearly not a Mortis Engine or Black Coach. It's a face puncher.

1. I didn't say he's too expensive. I said he seems too expensive for a unit that fulfills the roles he can fulfill.
WS5 S5 T5 A5 is great. Fantastic, even. But he can't be big and monster-y enough to make up for the weird composition of the army he's in.
And for all those other things he could be doing, mayhap there are more efficient options.

2. Every unit should be in some way good enough to see potential play. That just seems obvious. Of course, some units will see more play than others. Perfection might be unattainable, but we can still try for it.

You're implying that Varghulfs are not viable in any way. I'm looking at them and can't believe that is possible. There is NO build in which Varghulfs can contribute? Even contribute worth their points? Every possible army composition has been exhausted? I don't buy that. They are solid units. Arguably a lot better than many monsters out there in an army that isn't low tier.

One thing I've found is that people find good combos and want the rest of the units to fit into that mold. And if they don't, they aren't "good." Scream lists being an example. We've seen people come up with really wacky lists that beat the snot out of tournaments that had no (common) use before. If you were given a $500 challenge to build a varghulf list that could compete, I bet you could do it without much effort. You might have to throw away some existing builds, but that's part of the fun, right? Varghulfs aren't Yhettees, and even Yhettees can be put into (barely) viable builds.

 DukeRustfield wrote:
175 isn't too expensive. I'm sorry, but he's probably the least expensive monster in the whole game and has regen.

Discounting Monstrous Mounts, the Varghulf is not the cheapest by a long shot.

Hydra, 160
Kharibdyss 160
Bastiladon 150
Necrolith Colossus 170
Heirtitan 175
Let's not forget that the varghulf also is only packing 4 wounds, making him tied for the most squishy monster in the game (tied with bastiladon, who's 25 points cheaper).

A long shot? Where do you come up with this stuff? You basically went through every book looking for anything cheaper and you found 4. That means every other one, let's say about 20, are more expensive. The ones that were cheaper varied from 3% to 17% cheaper at the most. And you had to say, A long shot. I'm not sure what the shots are like where you live, but around here, that doesn't qualify as a long one.

He has regen. He isn't remotely the squishiest. He is less squishy than monsters worth 50% more points. That's frankly a ridiculous thing to say otherwise. A bastilodon would trade his armor for regen, heirotitan/colossus would certainly trade their 5+ armor, Khari would trade its armor, Hydra probably wouldn't trade its ability, however...

We can dig up the threads here if you like, but it's not wounds, 4/5/6 that people say is the weakness of monsters. No one suggested that if all monsters had +1W they would suddenly be fixed and good. Or even +2W. No, the major concern of monsters has always been the fact they are alone and war machine bait. I believe there's an active thread on this now. No one is going to take cannon shots at a Varghulf. First of all, it's 50% auto failure, even discounting misfire issues. Second, it's cheap. So it's not 300pts of lol-victory if you succeed.

You want to make an argument that Varghulfs are trash, that's cool. But this isn't it. At least pretend a 3% price differential on a unit that is way better isn't a huge deal. Or do you think TK would not trade all the stats and abilities of a Colossus for a Varghulf in a heartbeat? Even if it cost them a whole 5 pts more.

 DukeRustfield wrote:
You're implying that Varghulfs are not viable in any way.

No, no. My second comment was in response to your second comment, which was more about making changes to an army book in general, rather than this specific issue.
I don't think the Varghulf is terrible by any means. But I'm trying to pin down why he isn't taken. And, thus far, it seems like he's missed the sweet spot of cost-effectiveness in the current popular meta.
Units not fitting into popular builds is a legitimate point. What I'm saying is that the goal of creating an army book ought to be to promote as many different builds as possible, by making sure that all the units are equal, point-for-point.

But you can't do that because of metas. If you start building a buff-centric army, units outside of that concept will not gain the same benefits and will not be worth the same. If you're trying for mega magic, spending a ton of points on combat heroes will be detrimental. I can't believe there is no combination possible where Varghulfs are used to great effect. They simply have a lot going for them. Again, I'm not going to profess to be a VC expert, you either like zombos or you don't.

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about, here. My point, plain and simple, is that some units are better than others. And we should try to narrow that gap as much as possible. That's all.

Units don't fight by themselves. They fight in armies. There is no plain and simple way of saying "this unit is better in every single combination of armies that is humanly possible to create, including ones that aren't popular and we don't know about yet."

E.g., a Mortis Engine is not a good unit. It is too expensive for having a bunch of S3 attacks and regen on a chariot. But you don't just compare it to some other 220pt chariot or 220pts of Crypt Ghouls. It is a force multiplier and fits into army builds to make the whole stronger.

Varghulfs do not have straight 1 stats. They are total beasts. I am sure there are builds where Varghulfs fit and are as useful as any other options or more so. They just might not be the popular builds now.

I don't need anyone to prove that a unit is worse " in every single combination of armies that is humanly possible to create, including ones that aren't popular and we don't know about yet.", I just need enough evidence that one is vastly inferior or superior to others in suitably numerous situations.

My knowledge of Vampire Counts comes mostly from playing against them so often. But even then, I'll trust a Vampire general's judgement over mine. Assuming it seems at least halfway reasonable, anyway.

I think the Varghulf is a pretty scary thing to face, honestly. I can't get rid of him quickly or easily, and he packs way more punch than any of my units of maneuverability.
But I haven't seem one in all those games.

 DukeRustfield wrote:
Units don't fight by themselves. They fight in armies. There is no plain and simple way of saying "this unit is better in every single combination of armies that is humanly possible to create, including ones that aren't popular and we don't know about yet."

Of course not. But are the armies that the Varghulf is most useful in also armies that are good in the current meta? I still think that very few armies would prioritize the Varghulf over the other, more dangerous alternatives. I do, because as I said I love the unit and I like using my homemade grave abomination model. But I know that, if I just made room for another 50 points (and shelled out another 80 bucks) I could get a Terrorgheist and get a lot more than 50 points' worth of performance and synergy.

But that's not because a var is bad its because a terror is stupid good. And while that is net same if every unit was balanced up to terror you d have a crazy powerful vc army

I think the point that Duke is making and that is getting lost in all the varhgulf comparisons here is that it is literally impossible to make every unit equal in terms of effectiveness, even from a point-for-point perspective, because a units subjective effectiveness is determined by the units in the opposing army. In some meta's I'm sure taking varhgulfs would be amazing, however in some they are rendered as sub-optimal choices. Point still remains that, point for point, varhgulfs are NOT a bad choice.

I'm not a VC player either... So I'll make an example based on an army that is familiar to me.

I'll use white lions as an example, if I'm facing mournfang/skullcrushers or equivalents really often then those 15 points per model is a pretty sound investment. If I'm regularly playing against slaves/zombies then lions really have no advantage over a regular spearman. 'Equalisation' in Warhammer is a moot point.

alex87 wrote:
I think the point that Duke is making and that is getting lost in all the varhgulf comparisons here is that it is literally impossible to make every unit equal in terms of effectiveness, even from a point-for-point perspective, because a units subjective effectiveness is determined by the units in the opposing army. In some meta's I'm sure taking varhgulfs would be amazing, however in some they are rendered as sub-optimal choices. Point still remains that, point for point, varhgulfs are NOT a bad choice.

I'm not a VC player either... So I'll make an example based on an army that is familiar to me.

I'll use white lions as an example, if I'm facing mournfang/skullcrushers or equivalents really often then those 15 points per model is a pretty sound investment. If I'm regularly playing against slaves/zombies then lions really have no advantage over a regular spearman. 'Equalisation' in Warhammer is a moot point.

No advantage other than wounding on 2's, ignoring the armor save (if any) having a higher leadership, and only being hit on 5+ thanks to the higher weapon skill.


The Varghulf is a bad choice for several reasons.
Mostly, the bonuses it does get doesn't mesh well with the limitations it has.
It can march, but it's stupidly easy to march block.
You could run it up a flank, but the lack of flight makes it really easy to redirect.
It doesn't give up bonuses for being hit in the flank or rear; but does die very quickly to static combat resolution.
Due to crumble, you don't want to throw an expensive unit into a fight that has your core or chaff in it.
That puts the Vargulf either fighting alone (which it has mobility issues), or fighting with Grave Guard, Crypt Horrors, Hex Wraiths, Black Knights, or Blood Knights.
None of those really need any help.
It's a support monster in an army that doesn't like support.

If I could take it with a steadfast block, throw it into the corner, and not crumble, I'd take him every time.
But the fact that crumble kills him is a big problem.

-Matt

Except both the examples I gave don't have armour, already hit spearman on 5's and that Lions have the same leadership as spearman (stubborn is a moot point as well considering they will never lose a combat to the aforementioned enemies).

Crumble does really hurt but surely there are cases where it would provide support to a unit that won't blow up due to combat res?

Var isn't a support monster. That's like a Black Coach/Mortis (if they were monsters). Or ogre ice monster. Or Heirotitan. Etc.

Var is straight combat stats. Period. Done. And it gets those combat stats at a very attractive price. It doesn't do anything special except be big and gribbly for cheap.

You keep trying to say it has some horrible mobility when it has 8M, which is more than most monsters. It can't often march but if other armies are going to fail their march some % of the time due to LD then varghulf's avg. movement is still pretty decent across all armies/monsters/games.

you don't want to throw an expensive unit into a fight..

Then don't. Use a Varghulf. Which, has been made pretty painfully clear, is not expensive for a monster. It doesn't breath fire or fly or give you 2389 power dice, but it's still a cheap monster.

The crux of "my" point is that people are often say equivalents of: there are often better choices for your points. That is a far cry from saying something is butt-terrible and useless in any kind of army configuration. I still have confidence a two night bender fueled by Mountain Dew and Cheetos could come up with an army that makes tremendous use of Varghulfs and is viable. Thus making any buffs unnecessary.

My post was never about free buffs. It was about adding point buy options so you don't need am all night mountain dew bender just to come up with a reason not to use better, more flexible choices.

Ogre Ironblasters are better than any of their other Rares by a lot. But people still use Stonehorns and Thundertusks and can find reasons to. But they are worse. It is clear they are worse, especially if you're using any of the standard 99% army strategies.

If you don't want to come up with new, inventive, different builds, then don't use anything new, inventive, or different than whatever is current standard/meta/all-comers. But not every unit should be dumbed-down and hammered out to fit into the most vanilla strategy. A Stonehorn shouldn't have an option to mount a cannon on it just so it can be as good as an Ironblaster and you don't fret that you're wasting Rare points that would be better spent on the IB.

Again, no one is saying the Vars are some horrible unit. Because they aren't. They're saying if they want to use a standard build and have access to Terrors (because they got the points/model/whatever) then their points are better there, or a buff mobile. Those reasons just don't yell out for "fixing."

If you got unit X and unit Y and they do the same thing at the same cost and X is better in all ways and scenarios than Y, then that is asking for a fix. Or if they are the same and there's a huge cost differential. My example of that is like Yhettees, which, try as I might, I have a tough time figuring out any role for them whatsoever. Gorgers, aren't even in that category. Knowing they exist and what they do, if you put one to the side like you MIGHT be placing one, the enemy might set up some of his units differently. Not even having one in your army can help. A Varghulf is not a Yhettee. And even them I have a tough time buffing because the army is already so damn good and it's not going to get any worse with another viable unit.

I can take 2 Ironblasters and still get a Stone Horn, or a Thundertusk. (590 total)
I don't Fret that I'm "Wasting" points on a stone horn instead of an iron blaster, because I can take both my Iron Blasters, and still get my stone horn.

On the other hand,
If I take 2 Mortis Engines (1 with book), I don't have the points for a varghulf. (625 in rares)

@2500, I can take a varghulf and 2 terrorgheists, as it's 625 points of rares. Less than 2500 points, the Varghulf costs you on of the better rare choices, and that isn't true of your Iron Blaster example.


What I would like to see is:
Loping Strider (swift strider) for 15 points
Blood Roar (fear/terror tests use an extra die and drop the lowest) +30 points.

Those are both abilities the Carnisaur has, and the cost and benefit would mesh well with the Varghulf.

Having a unit that is fluffly and cool, and never have it hit the table because of the army list and rules for it, are the exact reason why it needs to be fixed.

When Silver Helms when from core to special in 7th edition, they vanished from the tournament scene. When 8th edition rolled around, they still were missing. Then, they get shifted back to core, and now they are on the table again.
The Slot a unit is in, and the competition in that slot has a huge impact on what gets put on the table.

In ideal game balance, I'd like to see variety of units. Sadly, how the synergy of most armies are built, you won't multiples of the best stuff, and that squeezes out the other choices.