So for me the main things are the no saves allowed magic (Which is becoming more needed with these stupid armies with ward saves and good magic resistance or in some cases with banners that take away most magic on a 2+ ward save. Then if you happen to be facing an all elf high cavalry army you can't 13th or cracks call em down and are forced to hit them har), magical fast cavalry units (Sounds cool but plays so dumb considering they can avoid all day and then cast spells at you. If you can't outrun them or corner them with waves of units swallowing up the board then there isn't much you can do if you have little to no shooting or average magic), another annoying thing for me is the cold-blooded rule for lizardmen and the last one i can think of i'd have to say magic needs to be re-worked completely. I know it fits the fluff but more reliable magic might be nice or at least the suggestion that at the start of each turn both players roll a die and the result of the two dice is what you both get for the phase. That said then the vampiric power to re-roll one of their power dice would suck unless the vampire could only re-roll it for his turn.
I suppose this could go into the proposed rules section but this is more rules i dislike than ones i'm trying to change.
Hard to not just go on a rant, but I'd have to say all the minus to hit mods for shooting. Basically, every shooting ever is all on 6s
Being a Lizardman player, I like cold blooded but really think Saurus should be Immune to Psychology. They're literally bred for fighting and murdering/getting murdered. Ld 8 is ok though, I can live that.
Everything in the Dwarf book (Might be getting them next though, Ha haat!) and everything in the ogre book. Move fast, hit hard, shooting AND magic?! Eff off!
Everything in the book breaks a core rule, and is nearly impossible to combat.
The cheesy players have it down to science of about 100 slaves, 2 engineers, doom rockets, double warp lightning, and if they can fit it, plague monks and a furnace.
Redbad wrote: Skaven cheese.
The cheesy players have it down to science of about 100 slaves, 2 engineers, doom rockets, double warp lightning, and if they can fit it, plague monks and a furnace.
Guilty as charged *hands up*
Its not that's cheesey I never understood why people think skaven are sooooo cheesey?
I think in general steadfast is something people dislike tho.
Rerollable 1+/2+. I know the counter is to ignore armor or modify the save, though iirc there's a way to get a 2+ rerollable ward. Or at least there will be for DoT with the new lore of metal spell if rumours are to be believed.
It just means only 1 out of every 36 wounds goes through and that's in the realm of ridiculous.
EDIT;
Steadfast. I get the point but I wish it wasn't so all or nothing. Like if steadfast meant you only took half the Ld penalty I think it would be fine. Currently 10 fully armored knights charge 30 guys, kill fully half of them & whelp these here peasants outnumber you by one rank so with general & bsb Rerolling Ld 10! I don't care who you are, 10 fully armored knights decimating half your unit with no casualties in return has to have some effect on morale.
Shas'O Dorian wrote: Rerollable 1+/2+. I know the counter is to ignore armor or modify the save, though iirc there's a way to get a 2+ rerollable ward. Or at least there will be for DoT with the new lore of metal spell if rumours are to be believed.
It just means only 1 out of every 36 wounds goes through and that's in the realm of ridiculous.
EDIT;
Steadfast. I get the point but I wish it wasn't so all or nothing. Like if steadfast meant you only took half the Ld penalty I think it would be fine. Currently 10 fully armored knights charge 30 guys, kill fully half of them & whelp these here peasants outnumber you by one rank so with general & bsb Rerolling Ld 10! I don't care who you are, 10 fully armored knights decimating half your unit with no casualties in return has to have some effect on morale.
On the steadfast point that was to prevent 7th editions worthless blocks of units, since a killy charger unit will utterly break units to the point where there was no point in taking soldiers except as bare minimum.
I get why, I just think it's a bit too far of a swing and I don't like it.
10 knights charge 30 footmen.
Knights score 7 kills, footmen score 0.
Knights charge + banner +7 +1 rank = 10. Footmen have banner & 2 ranks for 3. Currently under steadfast the footmen have a rerollable 10. even if the knights did 15 wounds.
I would like to see steadfast change so that Footmen lose by 7, due to steadfast they check at -4 (3.5 round up) (rerollable Ld6 thanks to general & BSB).
In my way there is a benefit to being steadfast but not a ridiculous one of "well I outnumber you by as little as 5 so I don't give a rats ass how many of us die". Under the current rules I could out kill you 50-0 & as long as you have 5 more guys than me, it doesn't have any effect on your morale. That is what I don't like about it. Just having 5 extra guys negates ANY effect of the combat res score.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
Yeah no kidding ogres get impact hits when they charge, 3 attacks per rank and stomps as well as cause fear. Even should you attack from the flank they're still hit hitting pretty hard. Then again they're fairly expensive.
That said i hate elves much more these days. Combat avoidance armies with all this fast cavalry is just ridiculous.
Casting/Dispel bonus based off wizard level. It practically forces you to take a level 4 if you don't want to risk being outgunned in the magic phase.
Armybook gripe
Dwarven anti-magic & "runes". "Runes" are just magic items. If it quacks, walks, and acts like a duck, then it's a duck.
Dwarven "I don't get a magic phase so neither do you" antics is uninspired and bring no depth to the game. How about something along the lines of allowing dwarves to force a miscast if they roll irresistable dispel. Now there's more strategy involved, and the risk of using all dispel dice on a single cast means you can potentially allow all other spells to go through for the remainder of that phase.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
Just like Uniting the Elves!
But seriously. Getting rid of MI neuters ogres Fluffwise, and Gameplaywise.
Omg uniting the elves is the worst.
Another i have on hating elves is all this ASF infinite re-rolls or going first nonsense. I was so used to it that when somebody mentioned i can strike simultaneously against his i5 guys with mine i was actually surprised because i'd been fighting elves so frequently and they have magical BS we always strike first crap.
Casting/Dispel bonus based off wizard level. It practically forces you to take a level 4 if you don't want to risk being outgunned in the magic phase.
Armybook gripe
Dwarven anti-magic & "runes". "Runes" are just magic items. If it quacks, walks, and acts like a duck, then it's a duck.
Dwarven "I don't get a magic phase so neither do you" antics is uninspired and bring no depth to the game. How about something along the lines of allowing dwarves to force a miscast if they roll irresistable dispel. Now there's more strategy involved, and the risk of using all dispel dice on a single cast means you can potentially allow all other spells to go through for the remainder of that phase.
At least it makes more sense then the 40k system.
Personal gripe has to do with all da ogre stuff like everyone else states.
Still havent won with skaven so i dunno what all this cheese is about but now i want some.
@desubot: Redbad just uses low tier armies so that's why he's having trouble and also some factions are harder to fight with some factions.
If you want pain face any of the elf factions. If wood elves wanted to they could out-range every gunline in the game. Even jezzails can be moved up to and fired at. All i'm saying is 30" bows with specialty arrows up the butt and magical elf cavalry that can run away forever. Elves basically also counter all of our initiative test or die spells or abilities. Trueflight arrows for instance are a pain considering they avoid all negative modifiers. An elf with trueflight arrows can shoot through a forest, at long range, into a tower, with the storm banner active and howling warpgale active. Normally that would be a -6 modifier to BS shooting but they can do it just fine with no penalty. You know what and add shadow magnet trinket onto that unit and it's a -7 to BS modifiers usually but it still won't effect trueflight arrows.
13th spell only works on infantry so high elves will take knights with BotWD which is pretty much effective against everything skaven have except the doomwheel impact hits, abomination without warpstone spikes (don't ever take the spikes for this reason) and maybe a flank with rat ogres after their unit charges. Seriously just about every weapon you can have that's magical is negated so heroes can't do jack for the most part, all skaven shooting is magical (with the exception of crappy slings which are strength 3 and at best poisoned), all our initiative checks barely effect elves, 13th does nothing, censer bearers do nothing because our freaking flails are magical weapons and i think even the furnace is a magic weapon.
Dark elves have warlocks which are magical cavalry that can actually handle themselves ok in combat. I think it's also saying something that i saw a tournament level player that was good lose with his bretonnia against a dark elf player that was much less experienced because of warlocks. He had no real way to handle them and when his couple ways to handle them died it was just a matter of running around his knights all day and casting magic. It wasn't even hard it was sad to see. Perhaps he should've had more magic himself or something.
Sisters of thorn are also similar in ways to warlocks but you often see them as a character bunker and if somebody takes a magic resistance on anything they instantly get their normal 4+ ward save boosted to a 2+ ward save vs magic. You pretty much can't out move fast cavalry and your best real hope is to surround them and esp. just move across the board in a horde of bodies. Even then if you so much as hit one forest with the majority of your models or a river you will lose all of your steadfast and ranks respectively which skaven need.
----------
So basically if you face a fast cavalry list with magical elf cavalry in there i have no sympathy for you if you lose to an army such as skaven or similar. For dwarves and empire their biggest hope is usually their war machines which could handle the magical elf cavalry ok and then gyrocopters and pistoliers or similar. For other armies it's very hard to deal with this magical elf cavalry because they are fast and even when they flee if they should rally they'll be able to make a free move and do all their crap over again (feigned flight).
I feel sorry for the melee armies that have to deal with this crap. Undead don't have to worry about steadfast going away due to forests but say i'm running an elite melee army like warriors of chaos, daemons or even something like beastmen. What do i even do since i have no shooting? I can't surround the enemy too easily either since my army is elite. In the end i just have to pray magic and units like the daemon prince can deal with it.
This is all considering elves just off the bat. There's a lot more crap dark elves and wood elves can do when they actually plan for enemies to try countering them well. At the very least when facing elf combat avoidance armies use magic missile spam like warp lightning with warpstone tokens on each warlock. Each warlock can substitute a spell for warp lightning and you should do it.
So i dunno i just find magical elf cavalry to be interesting but in the end something which turned out infinitely dumber to face than anything else.
1. Steadfast needs to die under its current incarnation.
My idea for bringing it more down to earth: Units that are Steadfast count as Stubborn, but may not make use of the General's IP or BSB's Hold Your Ground rules. Still good as most units will have Ld7-9, but it's no longer nearly fool proof when turtling around the General/main flag.
2. Cannons ARE NOT! laser beams!!!
Make them roll to-hit on BS. Or else make them scatter. Or perhaps a set to-hit roll... just freaking something to reign them in.
Combining the monster + rider profiles is likely a decent way to bring dragons et all back to the forefront of armies, but if that happens, then Greater Daemons will need a significant boost of their own to avoid becoming shelf decorations.
3. Magic Phase needs to scale.
12 dice is too much in small games of 1250 and under. It's a pretty good cap for 1500 through 2k games, but once you hit 2.4/2.5k and especially come 3K+, you really need more dice.
4. Banner of the No-skill-required Dragon.
Stupidest magic item since the 5th edition version of the Forbidden Rod.
It's not that it's completely unbeatable, but games against it are never fun, especially for DoC as it essentially forces one to simply play a boring game of pure avoidance. (or else bring a tailored list to crush the Banner unit... *cough*cacochoir*cough*)
5. ASF in it's current incarnation.
Honestly, to gain the re-rolls, you should be required to have a higher initiative than what you're fighting. Elves will still be arrogant b******* to pretty much all average level units, but the change would mean that other elites can put up more of a fight, especially against the elves own elites.
6. Reign of Comedy table.
BotWD is easily the most OTT/broken item in the game. This is the outright more idiot rule in the game that serves no real purpose other than 'random!' because... 'reasons'.
I totally enjoy seeing my 500+pts Greater Daemon explode in turn 2... and it's always riveting action when I suddenly lose half my saves. Meanwhile, my opponents just love watching me spending 15+ minutes rolling random dice plus scattering templates everywhere that eventually add up to maybe 5 dudes actually dying...
This whole table is just so badly implemented. Plus it tends to screw the Daemon player over harder than opponents, since the bad rolls easily outweigh the good rolls. (thanks to both essentially losing your Magic phase for a turn due to lack of power dice + the added bad effect itself)
If you get rid of the "Get Back Up" whatever its called, i have no problem with HPA. That single f'ing rule makes me hate that model with no limit. I hope it gets Hydra treatment with the new codex, whenever that is.
A close second is more a side effect of the cannon rules, but cannon shot douchebaggery in general really grinds my gears. I hope that cannons change in 9th, i really do.
Magic phase should be a little more reliable. Even 3d6 dice rolled minus the lowest result is a better table than what we have.
Agreed on ASF being dumb currently and same initiative not allowing them re-rolls to hit.
Steadfast isn't always as bad as people make it out to be. It just requires a spam unit of rank and file and a hitty unit to beat the other spam unit or alternatively you can go into a forest and force them to come at you. Should they even get half their guys in the forest they lose steadfast. Even if that doesn't happen you can kill enough so that the majority of their models in that unit are now in the forest. Steadfast is then gone simple as that or at least in theory.
Also cannons holy crap it's more the fact they can kill both the large target and the rider not just different infantry types in a unit. Also for people that say skaven cannons are always better i wouldn't say that's always true. Our strength is variable, we don't get re-rolls from engineers, we can't add runes to ours and in cannon vs cannon duels we usually lose (not that you should be shooting at other cannons with skaven cannons).
BotWD is lame as you say. I already stated it's almost as effective against the skaven as it is with daemons.
I imagine reign of chaos is pretty bad. It nearly wiped out my opponent's khorne army in one game. Pretty freaking stupid to watch and it felt unsatisfying to beat him that way.
-------
@Experiment626: Btw unrelated but did you want that game of warhammer fantasy on universal battle? Apparently we can talk about vassal and such on this forum. So far i've played cthulu is spy and i'm trying to set up a game with thedarkavenger. I sent a pm but heard no response whereas everybody else has.
flamingkillamajig wrote: @desubot: Redbad just uses low tier armies so that's why he's having trouble and also some factions are harder to fight with some factions.
I do play a low tier army, but I frequently win against elves (of all varieties), ogres, undead, and WOC... Skaven are the tough ones for me because their ranged attacks shut down my knights like nothing else, and the 13th trolls my M@A, until I have nothing left.
I think it's just a bad line up.
I do win occasionally, but it's not very often.
Terrorgheist and banshee screams. They don't wound like normal meaning monster and isolataed generals can easily be sniped, they ignore armor, and can also do it into combat.
Warptide wrote: Terrorgheist and banshee screams. They don't wound like normal meaning monster and isolataed generals can easily be sniped, they ignore armor, and can also do it into combat.
Cavalry needs to have a bonus on the turn it charges, perhaps like a -2 to leadership when charged by cavalry. This could be negated if you take spears/pikes. Plus elite units could have special rules to counter this. It would help cavalry to bust core infantry on the charge without effecting elite infantry. Spears are often not the optimal choice for core infantry so it would be nice to see them with a reason to be taken.
lobbywatson wrote: Cannons not scattering at all. I wish my stuff in 40k was as accurate as cannons in WFB.
I don't see how it would scatter tho? You just pivot and aim it straight out of the barrel....the bounce effect works nicely. Scattering it wouldn't make any sense (unless it misfires and the drunk empire crew member stumbles and points the cannon at his own general).
Warptide wrote: Terrorgheist and banshee screams. They don't wound like normal meaning monster and isolataed generals can easily be sniped, they ignore armor, and can also do it into combat.
I find that rule to not actually be that bad when you consider the army has no access to warmachines or other shooting. And aren't exactly stellar in combat or magic.
Also I think in a combat you should always have the option to attack the unit. For example I've recently been seeing multiple dwarf lords on shield bearers in the same unit, taking up the entire front rank. This means the unit has to roll to wound against t7+ so 6's. Also the unit can't direct all it's attacks against the same dwarf lord so killing them is even harder. Also all ethereal units in the front rank is equally dumb, but at least hard countered by even a single character with a magic weapon
Cannons: roll to hit using BS, if you hit you do either 'x' hits or 'x' per rank', whichever is more.
ASF & ASL, these rules need to translate as +/- 2 on Initiative, then let them stack. Drop the re-rolls, instead have a system whereby if you are I+2 you can take a +1 to hit or a re-roll, I+4 you get both.
Ranged weapons, these need to fire more often - maybe allow ranged units to fire on both player turns (not 'slow to fire', though they can then move & fire if not a war machine) - this as a part to adjust for the increased speed of armies on the charge
Remove 'removes models from play', everything causing wounds - with or without saves as required, makes one shotting characters and monsters harder.
Rx8Speed wrote: ]Also all ethereal units in the front rank is equally dumb, but at least hard countered by even a single character with a magic weapon
Nah man. Unit of zombies, 2 wide. Standard musician take front rank, 2 banshees in 2nd rank. 2x the screams 10x the frustration.
Hmm. So you would still be killing zombies but just not a lot I guess because it's only 2 wide? Meanwhile the banshees scream at you? Might have to use that one . just have to not get flanked lol
Also why can't cannon's just scatter? Like, nominate a point, BS based scatter with the artillery die, then bounce as normal? Would make cannons less sniper-ish
Everything in the book breaks a core rule, and is nearly impossible to combat.
The cheesy players have it down to science of about 100 slaves, 2 engineers, doom rockets, double warp lightning, and if they can fit it, plague monks and a furnace.
There goes 200 victory points right off the bat.
Thanks
Austin
too many people complain about the skaven book but its one of the only books whose rules reflect its fluff almost to the letter, Its something that the new additions of WHFB and WH40K is losing steadily IMHO, to0 many armies are becoming generic and less about the fluff which is what most people love about the game and ts a shame
Everything in the book breaks a core rule, and is nearly impossible to combat.
The cheesy players have it down to science of about 100 slaves, 2 engineers, doom rockets, double warp lightning, and if they can fit it, plague monks and a furnace.
There goes 200 victory points right off the bat.
Thanks
Austin
too many people complain about the skaven book but its one of the only books whose rules reflect its fluff almost to the letter, Its something that the new additions of WHFB and WH40K is losing steadily IMHO, to0 many armies are becoming generic and less about the fluff which is what most people love about the game and ts a shame
I have to agree with this. The rules match the fluff so well its awesome!
Everything is expendable and I like blowing myself up in the name of the great horned one!
With the Dark and High Elf books, and now the combined Undead and Chaos Legions, I can't believe people are still complaining about Skaven.
Steadfast is tough, sure. But I've never seen it hinder a serious unit overmuch. "Oh, you held this turn? Well, I took out 30% of the unit on the charge. Next phase, I'll do it again, and you'll break". A few little modifiers is all it needs. Cutting the Ld modifier in half is worthless. If I lose by 14, and cut that to 7, I still might as well have lost by 2,000.
The Abomination does not need "Too Horrible To Die". It also doesn't need it's weird "if you roll triples for Movement" chart, either. Beyond that, he's totally fair. 235pts for T5 and potentially 5 or less attacks is far from reliable. His other stuff rocks, of course, but that's how monsters should be. Other monsters should be built around that.
The magic phases is weird, sure.
Dwarfs? Seriously? I mean...yeah. They're boring and uninspired. I agree, 100%. But they're not broken. Nine Hells, they're not even that good! Their supposed "anti-magic" involves the ability to take more than one Dispel Scroll, a 50-50 shot at stealing a Power Die, and a a smattering of MR1 and a 2+ to Dispel that, at great sacrifice, can be bumped up to a 4+...like everyone else.
Deathstars, gunlines, and complete avoidance-style armies. Do any of these a little bit. That's fine with me. But if you do one of them, and nothing else, the game becomes so rock-paper-scissors I don't even want to play.
I don't care if I lose a bloody, hard-fought game. That's still fun. But I don't want to get steamrolled because you put all your eggs in one basket and--heyo!--those 5 dice you rolled were with you. And I don't want to steamroll you because those five dice decided to spit in your eye, either. Boring!
Warpsolution wrote: With the Dark and High Elf books, and now the combined Undead and Chaos Legions, I can't believe people are still complaining about Skaven.
Steadfast is tough, sure. But I've never seen it hinder a serious unit overmuch. "Oh, you held this turn? Well, I took out 30% of the unit on the charge. Next phase, I'll do it again, and you'll break". A few little modifiers is all it needs. Cutting the Ld modifier in half is worthless. If I lose by 14, and cut that to 7, I still might as well have lost by 2,000.
The Abomination does not need "Too Horrible To Die". It also doesn't need it's weird "if you roll triples for Movement" chart, either. Beyond that, he's totally fair. 235pts for T5 and potentially 5 or less attacks is far from reliable. His other stuff rocks, of course, but that's how monsters should be. Other monsters should be built around that.
The magic phases is weird, sure.
Dwarfs? Seriously? I mean...yeah. They're boring and uninspired. I agree, 100%. But they're not broken. Nine Hells, they're not even that good! Their supposed "anti-magic" involves the ability to take more than one Dispel Scroll, a 50-50 shot at stealing a Power Die, and a a smattering of MR1 and a 2+ to Dispel that, at great sacrifice, can be bumped up to a 4+...like everyone else.
Deathstars, gunlines, and complete avoidance-style armies. Do any of these a little bit. That's fine with me. But if you do one of them, and nothing else, the game becomes so rock-paper-scissors I don't even want to play.
I don't care if I lose a bloody, hard-fought game. That's still fun. But I don't want to get steamrolled because you put all your eggs in one basket and--heyo!--those 5 dice you rolled were with you. And I don't want to steamroll you because those five dice decided to spit in your eye, either. Boring!
Now do you see what i was getting at with these strange people that seem to still insist Skaven are OP. Seriously i dunno what planet they're from anymore. I'm a fairly experienced person of over 5 years of fantasy gaming and a couple of 40k with most of the fantasy knowledge being 8th edition and i have trouble winning with skaven and our heavily FAQ'd and errata'd book. Against wood elves and even dark elves it's so tough to even handle sisters of thorn and warlocks without just swarming them off the board. I even saw a more experienced bretonnia player get owned by a dark elf player with just his warlocks left pretty much. He just couldn't pin them down and had nothing left to handle them. Not to mention all our large targets that can be sniped so easily i don't even bother with the screaming bell in case somebody takes 'dwellers below' or something.
Then we have the combining of elves and all this end times crap trying to break the game or something. As if elves weren't broken enough we need to break em more. To think i actually had a guy not want to play against my skaven with his wood elves for my skaven being OP and thinking i catered to him just because i need to actually prepare to face his faction.
Oh and btw for all steadfast complainers just use forests or rivers. Chances are even if the opponent doesn't have half their unit in the forest when you're done annihilating 20 dudes the majority of the skaven unit will be in the forest and you'll win combat without them getting steadfast. Also a big deal is skaven rank-and-file have all our high leadership so stuff like censers, rat ogres and all other hard hitting units tend to have crap leadership and tend to do poorly. I actually managed to beat trolls in combat and take them down to under steadfast with censers (charging him in his flanks no less) and the trolls rolled insane courage away from the general and everything (and i think he needed insane courage). Course after the first combat flails suck and hatred goes away so they're not doing much more than normal plague monks. So i had to charge in a 2nd censer bearer unit which almost got torn up. So i did win but it was at heavy cost.
Then there's the deal with rat ogres where they have crap leadership and if i lost all packmasters (which is easy) then they suffer from stupidity and their frenzy checks so good luck with that. The abomination is powerful still sure but it's one of our only good units. To say skaven need the abomination taken away is like saying skaven players should forfeit any hope of victory in the name of another army.
Oh and on the topic of slave blocks? I had a unit of about 50 in 5 man ranks gets eaten by an ironguts unit in about 2 rounds of combat. You can quit complaining now about steadfast.
@flamingkillamajig: oookay. Easy, now. There's no "now do you see what I was getting at", here. I always saw. The Skaven book has a few really good choices that are tough to counter with certain popular armies. and people piled on the hate because of their bias.
...that, and some tournament players straight-up roll better than others. I don't believe in luck or any of that drivel, but there are teams around here who consistently build incredibly one-sided armies, and then have all the dice come up in their favor. To roll 10 Power Dice, successfully Plague one of my units, then have it bounce to two more, then to Dreaded 13th a unit off the board, then to land dead-on with the Doomrocket and one Cannon...that's enough to make me hate Skaven, if that crap happens more often than it should. And the smaller the die pool, the more extreme the outliers.
But. I digress. This is NOT a thread about Skaven. It's about rules that people don't like.
I didn't mean to derail it with my comments on skaven.
I've had nothing bad bad experiences, with the 3 seperate skaven player I've played. it's the same net list WAAC bull every time.
I appreciate that it matches the fluff, I too play an army that matches their fluff.
I was actually encouraging a new player to buy a skaven army today, because I really like the fluff and want to live vicariously through that person.
- The Dwellers Below. A spell that takes out 30% of a unit and has a 50-50 shot of taking out the average Wizard that's sitting in it is absurd.
- Soul Blight. Strength and Toughness are both stats that yield almost immediate results when modified in any way, unlike Weapon Skill, Initiative, Attacks, or Movement. Having one spell that effects both is very good. Having one spell that effects both in a large radius for a casting value under 20+ is too good.
- Purple Sun of Xereus. Initiative is the major weakness of more models than any other stat (most Undead, Ogres, Orcs, Dwarfs, Lizardmen). A large template that exploits that is very good. A large template that does so whilst it zooms across the battlefield is insane. And a large template that does both of those things and happens to have Death's Lore Attribute is stupid.
Look at the boosted Purple Sun. Look at it. Now, kindly never complain to me about the Dreaded 13th (which has the same casting value, and a more limited target range) ever again.
With that said, however, a second note on the mechanics that represent two ways of doing the same thing:
There are two ways to hurt a unit. One is to roll up a number of attacks or hits against it. That might be by attacking it with another unit, or hitting it with a Fireball, an Organ Gun, or a banshee's wail.
The other is to effect a number of models in the unit once. Like stone throwers, breath weaons or The Dwellers Below.
The second way is good for taking out huge chunks of large units. The first way, though, can be waaay too good at targeting small units or single models. Focused-fire.
The examples that come to mind: (1) the Vampire Count's Deathshriek, as described above. It's stupid.
I'm okay with a giant bat-monster screaming at some troops, and a handful of them die as their hearts explode in their chest or they age a hundred years in an instant or whatever. I'm not okay with that same bat-monster screaming at a Dragon, and the Dragon keeling over dead.
(2) The Dreaded 13th. Whittling a unit down to 14 or less models, with a super-tough character or two in there, and then BAM! Your level 4 Wizard and your BSB are now Clanrats.
I think the best way to get around this would be to avoid having those set number of attacks/hits/wounds take on qualities like "with no saves of any kind" and the like. Fireball is fine. My lone character might survive, if he's tough and/or lucky.
Um...other things...you know what? I'm cool with magical fast cavalry. You know what they don't need, though? Poisoned ASF spears that re-roll 1's to wound and are immune to Miscasts.
And the other ones don't need a spell that kills 30% of my models when I move ANYWHERE and also happens to give me an additional penalty. Pretty sure Curse was not meant to work that way. As it stands, it is in all but one way a better, easier-to-cast version of the #6 Metal spell. The only thing going against it is that your opponent can avoid the damage by holding still. But if the caster is a block of fast cavalry, that will prove to be problematic.
Um...other things....yeah, Steadfast needs to be changed up. We've beat that horse to death.
Battle Standards should be for break tests only.
Spears should be as good as the hand weapon/shield combo.
End the favoritism heaped upon Warriors of Chaos, Vampire Counts, and Dark Elves. Beastmen, Tomb Kings, and Wood Elves need love, too!
And don't even get me started on Orcs & Goblins.
Dwarfs are still boring!
And the Banner of the World Dragon. Make it 100pts, change it, or get rid of it all together.
For me the worst single rule is cannons hitting a monster mount and then playing pinball with every one on it most annoying. In a close second is int attack spells purple sun etc as i play dwarfs ogres and both undead having a large chunk of your army die from one spell is nuts, more so with my ogres as there not cheap in points and even my general only has i4 or 3 if using a slaughtmaster.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
And yet, the Blightkings were not "worthless" despite being Infantry rather than MI...
And you just brought up the biggest reason I hate that rule. Ogre Kingdoms.
An entire special rule(Killing Blow) is invalidated because of the MI rule.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
And yet, the Blightkings were not "worthless" despite being Infantry rather than MI...
And you just brought up the biggest reason I hate that rule. Ogre Kingdoms.
An entire special rule(Killing Blow) is invalidated because of the MI rule.
And Blightkings are better then anything that costs the same in OK, or even if it costs more (better then Maneaters or any other elite unit), so what is your point?
Also yeah it invalidates it, because having something 3-5 times more costly die to a rule that is relatively common in some armies would utterly break the balance.
Warpsolution wrote: Spears should be as good as the hand weapon/shield combo.
Are you suggesting spears should give a Parry save like a hand weapon as well as retaining their ability to fight in an extra rank? If so, no they shouldn't.
End the favoritism heaped upon Warriors of Chaos, Vampire Counts, and Dark Elves. Beastmen, Tomb Kings, and Wood Elves need love, too!
And don't even get me started on Orcs & Goblins.
Don't really understand this. Granted, Beastmen do need a new book, but that will happen in time. There's no favouritism.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
And yet, the Blightkings were not "worthless" despite being Infantry rather than MI...
And you just brought up the biggest reason I hate that rule. Ogre Kingdoms.
An entire special rule(Killing Blow) is invalidated because of the MI rule.
And Blightkings are better then anything that costs the same in OK, or even if it costs more (better then Maneaters or any other elite unit), so what is your point?
Also yeah it invalidates it, because having something 3-5 times more costly die to a rule that is relatively common in some armies would utterly break the balance.
What armies have Killing Blow as "relatively common"(read: more than two rank and file units or characters)?
And quite frankly, it's not like Killing Blow is so reliable that you can count on it to "break the balance".
I think it could be a bit more balanced to say "Killing blow: Any roll to wound of 6 ignores armor & will slay the model outright, regardless of how many wounds they have remaining"
"Monster(ous): Are immune to being slain outright by killing blow" This way KB still ignores the armor & has some benefit.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
And yet, the Blightkings were not "worthless" despite being Infantry rather than MI...
And you just brought up the biggest reason I hate that rule. Ogre Kingdoms.
An entire special rule(Killing Blow) is invalidated because of the MI rule.
And Blightkings are better then anything that costs the same in OK, or even if it costs more (better then Maneaters or any other elite unit), so what is your point?
Also yeah it invalidates it, because having something 3-5 times more costly die to a rule that is relatively common in some armies would utterly break the balance.
What armies have Killing Blow as "relatively common"(read: more than two rank and file units or characters)?
And quite frankly, it's not like Killing Blow is so reliable that you can count on it to "break the balance".
Getting rid of MI will push KB far over the top, as it will make units like grave guard and executioners so good against ogres.
Ogres won't go near executioners unless they get the charge anyway. Making them vulnerable to killing blow will mean that they can't go near executioners at all.
VC - Grave Guard, Black Knights, Krell (just off the top of my head)
TK - Potentially every melee unit with the right spell off, and the Kings themselves.
It's not particularly widespread, but when an entire unit has it (especially in the Special slot), it's enough to be enormously problematic. I had the good graces to watch a block of TK spearmen tear their way through Blight Kings and a ~20 odd block of Warriors without breaking a sweat.
It's a stupid as hell rule and it needs to go away.
This rule going away will completely invalidate the whole ogre armybook and will make EVERY single MI unit virtually worthless. MI is not broken at all.
And yet, the Blightkings were not "worthless" despite being Infantry rather than MI...
And you just brought up the biggest reason I hate that rule. Ogre Kingdoms.
An entire special rule(Killing Blow) is invalidated because of the MI rule.
Blightkings if MI should be at least 60 points a piece. They are very good and are frankly under costed by ~5 points or so.
If MI goes away then everything in the OK book needs to drop by 15 points due to the loss of those supporting attacks, killing blow, the horde rules, ect. Since they lose all of that id say the points difference should be a good 15 points per model. If MI was that "broken" then ogres would be taking GT after GT and that is NOT the case at all. While ogres are competitive and quite a good army they are by no means broken. The best armor save we can get on rank and file is a 5+ with a parry. How easy is that to crush. A simple block of empire halberds can break ogres whilist staying steadfast themselves. Oh and thats another thing, rarely do MI ever get steadfast. If they do, it loses tons of killing power and wouldnt likely win combat and in a grind would lose overall.
Your argument that a few units in the game dont quickly destroy ONE of 15 armies thus the whole army in question must be destroyed is silly. Executioners still butcher ogres just fine without killing blow.
alex87 wrote: Are you suggesting spears should give a Parry save like a hand weapon as well as retaining their ability to fight in an extra rank? If so, no they shouldn't.
I said "as good as" not "have the same effect and have more as well".
Show me a unit that might actually want to upgrade to spears. I'll show you the one and only case: Saurus.
...really? Seriously?
Look at the Orcs & Goblins book. Look at the Tomb Kings book. Look at the Wood Elf book.
Now, look at the Dark Elf book.
The fact that the Dark Elves fared so well compared to books that came out before and after them is a pretty strong indicator that at least someone in the design team has the "I like these guys therefore they should be awesome!" goggles on. The fact that the last Dark Elf book was more of the same all but proves it.
Same thing with Vampire Counts.
And same thing, to a lesser extent, with Warriors of Chaos and High Elves.
When's the last time these armies were terrible? I mean, come on! Compare them to Ogre Kingdoms. Their book was in rough shape, back in 7th. They're doing pretty well, now! And then Daemons of Chaos are the opposite; the designers seemed to say, "well, we certainly don't want to make THAT mistake again!", and planned accordingly. And that's how it should be. Attempting to find balance and improve the game.
It may seem like favoritism but you have to realize the books are written by different authors with different playtesters in different areas during different years in relation to different armybooks it is against. There's also no formula for points it's mostly trial and error.
Matt Ward wrote the DE book, Matt Ward was a notorious escalator. He almost always (new daemons lol) ADDED power to an army. This can be good in the short term but in the long run just creates an unfixable arms race.
Some authors may view WHFB from a competitive lets make this tough as nails Matt Wardish perspective. Some may be from a softer view. The reality is the books will never be truly balanced, there are far too many variables.
No book should ever be terrible. As for daemons yes, it was a swing too far in the opposite direction. It's almost like they took a great 7th army (Daemons) tried to nerf it down, realized they nerfed it too much & then made sure they didn't do it again with the next great 7th army (DE).
The other thing daemons suffer from is they transcend 40k & Fantasy so the designer tries to make things similar in both, which I feel is wrong.
I fully realize that there are a lot of variables in play...and the design team doesn't always take them into account.
A designer taking a competitive view is fine. It's good, even. But that doesn't mean "hey, I'm designing this army, so I'm going to make it DA BEST". Designing a competitive army means attempting to design an army that is balanced with the others (except the more outdated ones, etc), to encourage competitive play.
Anyone who wants to make Their Army awesome has no business in designing it.
And no, true and perfect balance will never be a thing (mostly because there's no way to quantify it). But we can try.
alex87 wrote: Are you suggesting spears should give a Parry save like a hand weapon as well as retaining their ability to fight in an extra rank? If so, no they shouldn't.
I said "as good as" not "have the same effect and have more as well".
Show me a unit that might actually want to upgrade to spears. I'll show you the one and only case: Saurus.
...really? Seriously?
Look at the Orcs & Goblins book. Look at the Tomb Kings book. Look at the Wood Elf book.
Now, look at the Dark Elf book.
The fact that the Dark Elves fared so well compared to books that came out before and after them is a pretty strong indicator that at least someone in the design team has the "I like these guys therefore they should be awesome!" goggles on. The fact that the last Dark Elf book was more of the same all but proves it.
Same thing with Vampire Counts.
And same thing, to a lesser extent, with Warriors of Chaos and High Elves.
When's the last time these armies were terrible? I mean, come on! Compare them to Ogre Kingdoms. Their book was in rough shape, back in 7th. They're doing pretty well, now! And then Daemons of Chaos are the opposite; the designers seemed to say, "well, we certainly don't want to make THAT mistake again!", and planned accordingly. And that's how it should be. Attempting to find balance and improve the game.
Since you asked, both High & Dark Elves especially were near to unplayable in 6th edition as their books were so lackluster. Dark Elves were so bad, GW actually printed a full-on Errata in WD for them to give them a break! Both High & Dark Elves as well required a lot more refurbishing of their model line to boot. While both are in great shape now, (High Elves especially so), it's been a long haul waiting game for their player base to get the bulk of their units converted over to plastic from a nearly all-metal/finecrap range.
Vampires were gross in 7th yes, but very bland overall with little in the way of real unit choices. Most armies looked fairly similar, and this was massively compounded when 8th edition came out, to the point the core mechanics gakked all over Undead in general that the poor VC's were reduced into a strict "one list to rule them all" level of pure suckage. (sure the aptly named 'Dickenhof Guard' deathstar was amazaballs, but it was literally the only real play VC's had!)
Not to mention, VC's required a great deal more love on the model front as only Dwarfs, Brets & Tomb Kings had a model that was as outright ancient as VC players were putting up with.
Overall, the only armies that have been consistently 'strong' across the various editions have been:
- Skaven
- Chaos Warriors and to a lesser extent, Daemons. (broken-good in 5th, horrible in 6th until the Storm of Chaos list, helped to completely break 7th, utterly dysfunctional in 8th)
- Bretonnians (no, seriously! These guys were filth in 5th, ended off very well in 6th, and in the right hands are still filth despite being 2 full editions out of date!)
- High Elves (they were to 5th edition what DoC were to 7th, they began the 'uber arms race of 7th, and they're a top dog in 8th... 6th was just a hiccup for the HE in all honesty.)
Everyone else has had major ups & downs across the various editions, or else have always been a simply 'average' army, such as O&G's... sure they get a lot of model-love, but they've never really had a super powered book or been accused of destroying the game in the way other armies have.
Anvil of Doom!
Whats the point its so sad yes it was slightly broken in the way it allowed out of sequence moves but lets be honest how much does that extra 6 inches really give dwarves (hur hur).
Only way you are getting spells off with it now is double sixes or if your opponent doesnt bring a Wizard!
alex87 wrote: Are you suggesting spears should give a Parry save like a hand weapon as well as retaining their ability to fight in an extra rank? If so, no they shouldn't.
I said "as good as" not "have the same effect and have more as well".
Show me a unit that might actually want to upgrade to spears. I'll show you the one and only case: Saurus.
...really? Seriously?
Look at the Orcs & Goblins book. Look at the Tomb Kings book. Look at the Wood Elf book.
Now, look at the Dark Elf book.
The fact that the Dark Elves fared so well compared to books that came out before and after them is a pretty strong indicator that at least someone in the design team has the "I like these guys therefore they should be awesome!" goggles on. The fact that the last Dark Elf book was more of the same all but proves it.
Same thing with Vampire Counts.
And same thing, to a lesser extent, with Warriors of Chaos and High Elves.
When's the last time these armies were terrible? I mean, come on! Compare them to Ogre Kingdoms. Their book was in rough shape, back in 7th. They're doing pretty well, now! And then Daemons of Chaos are the opposite; the designers seemed to say, "well, we certainly don't want to make THAT mistake again!", and planned accordingly. And that's how it should be. Attempting to find balance and improve the game.
Since you asked, both High & Dark Elves especially were near to unplayable in 6th edition as their books were so lackluster.
So incredibly lacklustre. As a High Elf player 6th was an absolute nightmare for me amongst a playing group that comprised Chaos, Skaven, Bretonnia, VCs, 2 Empire and a Dark Elf. Dark Elves were poor but in a 1v1 vs a HE army they probably batted above their weight. Ever since that book we've been well looked after.
Overall, the only armies that have been consistently 'strong' across the various editions have been:
- Skaven
- Chaos Warriors and to a lesser extent, Daemons. (broken-good in 5th, horrible in 6th until the Storm of Chaos list, helped to completely break 7th, utterly dysfunctional in 8th)
- Bretonnians (no, seriously! These guys were filth in 5th, ended off very well in 6th, and in the right hands are still filth despite being 2 full editions out of date!)
- High Elves (they were to 5th edition what DoC were to 7th, they began the 'uber arms race of 7th, and they're a top dog in 8th... 6th was just a hiccup for the HE in all honesty.)
Everyone else has had major ups & downs across the various editions, or else have always been a simply 'average' army, such as O&G's... sure they get a lot of model-love, but they've never really had a super powered book or been accused of destroying the game in the way other armies have.
It's literally no joke. At the top end Bretonnia are still a force. Lack of options does mean they are a little 'samey'. I'd only consider High Elves as game breaking in a 1on1 against DoC. Against most everyone else they are well and truly upper-middle to lower-upper class. I'd still have Dark Elves and WoC as the true 'top-dogs'.
@alex87: Make no mistake, High Elves are definitely a top level book atm, they're simply more prone to being screwed over by Tournament scoring formats...
In strait-up win/loss scoring events, they do ridiculously well, and are definite contenders for taking 1st place.
Their downfall comes under those events which use the 20-0 scaled scoring system however, as while HE's are very good for winning games, they're not really a great army for outright steamrolling the enemy which that type of scoring encourages.
So it's really more so the tourney scene itself which has hamstrung the army, rather than the book itself being slightly below the typical 'winners' of WoC/DE's/DoC power build/etc...
Overall, I have really liked 8th edition. I play Skaven, High Elves, Bretonnia, and VC. I've never come across a situation that was insurmountable or found myself thinking "wow, there is no way I could ever win against -x- army".
The rules feel really quite solid compared to other games I have played, GW or otherwise. That being said, some do still seem as though they have room for improvement, and other issue's do need some addressing.
The test or die spells stay. As long as you have multiwound characters sporting rerollable 1+ armour saves and 4+ or better ward saves, this has to be the case. You cannot make breaking them in combat and running down the only option to deal with this. Multiple threats to everything keep a game level.
The principle behind the steadfast rule is solid. Weight of numbers should absolutely play a roll. However, there needs to be more of a way to negate it in a tactical sense, using the numbers currently used. Two ranks of infantry into the flank should deny rank bonus and steadfast if another facing is also in combat. Cavalry should be able to do the same with 1 rank of five models, provided the other facing has at least 2 ranks.
Cavalry in general need some love. Impact hits make sense, single imlact hits at the strength of the mount makes sense. Having each model count as two for the purposes of rank bonus also makes sense. Think about it, if you were fighting 1v1 on foot against a mounted opponent, would you feel like you each represented the same weight of force?
I enjoyed the magic phase when it was more individualized, less pooled. I think I'd like a return to that. An idea I've enjoyed is keeping the power dice on a wizard by wizard basis. Every wizard may roll a single D6, and add a number of dice equal to their wizard level, to determine how many dice that one wizard can cast with. Exactly the same for dispeling wizards, as it never seemed fair a level four could do all the dispeling against multiple wizards. It would make taking different levels beneficial again, as you dont have to be as stingy allocating dice.
monsters
nagash
characters on monsters
terror thingies
vamp lords
chaos chariots
giants
etc.
Slayers will get minced normally and cost a lot more points, dwarf lord cant really go toe to toe with a DP or Tooled up vamp lord, all that being said I take only 1 and 2 organ guns, and a stone thrower (sometimes), most games I have zero artillery (odd I know) and slowly march up the board with infantry backed by crossbows.
as to my most hated rule... don't really have one, ASF doesn't bother me as I usually strike last anyway, skaven get on my nerves a tad with all there sheaningans, but nothing really stands out as being particually awful.. well apart from test or die spells.
Experiment 626 wrote: Since you asked, both High & Dark Elves especially were near to unplayable in 6th edition as their books were so lackluster...Vampires were gross in 7th yes, but very bland overall with little in the way of real unit choices.
Okay, fair enough. So they sucked, and are now too good. That is a much more forgivable mistake. But it's still a mistake.
When it comes to game mechanics, I don't care if an army is bland or not. Is it good? If the answer is yes, then that's all I need to hear.
Now, if we were talking about a book's overall versatility or the models of a given army, then yes. That should be as balanced as how competitive the army is. Absolutely. I'll agree with you, 100%.
Experiment 626 wrote: Overall, the only armies that have been consistently 'strong' across the various editions have been:
- Skaven
- Chaos Warriors and to a lesser extent, Daemons. (broken-good in 5th, horrible in 6th until the Storm of Chaos list, helped to completely break 7th, utterly dysfunctional in 8th)
- Bretonnians (no, seriously! These guys were filth in 5th, ended off very well in 6th, and in the right hands are still filth despite being 2 full editions out of date!)
- High Elves (they were to 5th edition what DoC were to 7th, they began the 'uber arms race of 7th, and they're a top dog in 8th... 6th was just a hiccup for the HE in all honesty.)
I'd agree on all counts (especially Bretonnians; I don't know why people underestimate them) except Skaven. I watched them do nothing but struggle before their new book came out.
monsters
nagash
characters on monsters
terror thingies
vamp lords
chaos chariots
giants
etc.
To all of those besides Nagash? Hordes of S5-6 models, as well as crossbows, Drake Guns, Grudge Throwers, and Organ Guns. Dwarfs have tons of options to take on T5 and 6 beasties. These options will take more casualties than a pair of cannons, but they also won't fold to a unit of 5 Marauder Horsemen with flails.
Honestly, there have been plenty of times where my Abomination has been minced into tiny, pallid cubes of worm-augmented-with-rat-bits meat, all thanks to the humble Dwarf Warrior with a great weapon. Hitting on 3's and wounding on 4's isn't bad against 6 wounds, even with Regeneration (2.5 wounds in a turn, not including Hatred).
dwarf warriors are str3? so str5 GW, still fair point about all the shooting stuff, can someone math hammer how many crossbow shots it would take to kill a necrosphinx, abomb, etc.
drake guns are not bad but very easy to bypass, grudge throwers are again not bad, but not as reliable, organ guns is absolutely correct, its why I have 2.
so long story short is that nothing dwarfs have is as good at killing monsters as cannons, which to me is clearly intentional.
Formosa wrote: dwarf warriors are str3? so str5 GW, still fair point about all the shooting stuff, can someone math hammer how many crossbow shots it would take to kill a necrosphinx, abomb, etc.
drake guns are not bad but very easy to bypass, grudge throwers are again not bad, but not as reliable, organ guns is absolutely correct, its why I have 2.
so long story short is that nothing dwarfs have is as good at killing monsters as cannons, which to me is clearly intentional.
Formosa wrote: dwarf warriors are str3? so str5 GW, still fair point about all the shooting stuff, can someone math hammer how many crossbow shots it would take to kill a necrosphinx, abomb, etc.
drake guns are not bad but very easy to bypass, grudge throwers are again not bad, but not as reliable, organ guns is absolutely correct, its why I have 2.
so long story short is that nothing dwarfs have is as good at killing monsters as cannons, which to me is clearly intentional.
60+ models hitting on 4s kill a sphinx.
In general the problem is getting those dwarves up close to a monster with far better movement.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: In general the problem is getting those dwarves up close to a monster with far better movement.
Or those models shooting the enemy from 30" away.
Formosa wrote: dwarf warriors are str3? so str5 GW, still fair point about all the shooting stuff, can someone math hammer how many crossbow shots it would take to kill a necrosphinx, abomb, etc.
15 Dwarf Warriors are carving 3.3 wounds of an Abomination.
20 Quarrelers strip 1.7 wounds off said A-bomb in one volley.
15 Irondrakes knock him down by 3.8. wounds.
15 Hammerers dish out 6 wounds.
Formosa wrote: drake guns are not bad but very easy to bypass, grudge throwers are again not bad, but not as reliable
Irondrakes are easier to avoid and harder to get rid of. And if you've got Quarrelers, a Grudge Thrower, an Organ Gun, Irondrakes, Hammerers, and other misc. Dwarf-y things...where, exactly, is that monster going to go?
And Grudge Throwers aren't as reliable. But they're harder to hide from, and can take on other units more effectively, too. And are cheaper.
Formosa wrote: so long story short is that nothing dwarfs have is as good at killing monsters as cannons, which to me is clearly intentional.
That's not a Dwarf-thing. That's a cannon-thing. Nothing is as good at killing monsters as cannons. Which is a problem.
The other options in a Dwarf army might not be as stupidly efficient (and they shouldn't be!), but they're not awful at it, either. I say: strip a few wounds off as it closes, let it take out a few ranks, and then drag it down to an axe-y doom.
That army was built out of scale with the rest of Warhammer. It does things in the magic phase that should never have passed muster, its monsters have 1-2 wounds too many and 1 pt of toughness too many. Pain Trains and Magma Cannons just highlight the sheer stupidity.
- Artillery Dice Rerolls
Taking the only small offchance a monster lives through a cannon, and nullifying it. Let Engineers add +1 to the misfire result or something.
- People saying Demons are no good.
They have a single bad matchup. RoC is NOT worse for them than the enemy, because they can mitigate results. Further, with Legions of Chaos, they get the top two of four dice and have had their chart reworded heavily in their favor.
Demons have won 4 of 8 tournaments this year that I've attended, including 100+ people cons like Rockwars and Slobberknocker, both of which were Grand Tournaments.
1: Sniper cannons. A cannon should not be able to snipe a single character on a small base. Make the "line" scatter up to 1d3 to either side, could be one solution, then they can still hurt large monsters, but not snipe.
2: Tomb Kings can't march. Tomb Kings are way to slow, and can't compensate like VC can.
So basically you are expecting what will most likely be 6's to hit and 6's to wound (BS3, long range shooting, cover, 7+ if in hard cover) to ping it? Have you actually ever seen this happen before out of curiosity? If so, props to whoever done it.
Honestly my main issue is with Cannons being as accurate/strong as they are, I love monster units and having them auto counter such models makes it irritating, along with instant death spells.
They have a single bad matchup. RoC is NOT worse for them than the enemy, because they can mitigate results. Further, with Legions of Chaos, they get the top two of four dice and have had their chart reworded heavily in their favor.
Demons have won 4 of 8 tournaments this year that I've attended, including 100+ people cons like Rockwars and Slobberknocker, both of which were Grand Tournaments.
1. If you only care about curbstomping opponents, then yes, DoC are very good because their 2-3 filthy lists are 'uber levels of filth.
If you care more about having fun and just playing the theme/models you like, DoC are utter trash because the power scale is so horribly borked... A player who loves Nurgle or Slaanesh can very easily end up ruining the game for opponents by complete accident because so many of those units/abilities are simply too good. On the other hand, Khorne & Tzeentch fans get the shaft, with many of their most iconic units being very lackluster. (ie: Bloodletters, Bloodcrushers, non-min/maxed Horrors & Flamers)
This is why so many Daemon players hate our book. It's far too many extremes and there's no real middle ground! (on top of the pants on head stupid bits such as the LoC being the outright worst wizard, yet best potential 'fighty' Greater Daemon. )
2. Reign of Comedy is worse because the bad rolls are not balanced in any way by the good rolls, on top of the rather head-scratching lack of Instrument re-rolls that seemingly got lost along the way.
Daemon players have 3 absolutely horrible results, that are then further compounded by effectively losing your magic phase due to lack of power dice It's a double negative that didn't need to happen. (and as a Tzeentch player, that's typically about half of my army's entire damage potential out the window, meaning I can suffer more damage than my opponent on my own freaking turn!) Losing half your save or being forced to take army-wide DI tests with no bonuses for the General's IP rule to boot, is crippling.
Opponents only have 2 results they're really worried about on the other hand, as the 'God storm' results overall tend to do very little, unless you're a Skaven player . (unlike in 40k where the Instrument re-rolls help to make the storm results more threatening, and also far less likely to zap the Daemon player!)
I'd have loved to see the Legions re-write, but unfortunately, the local store I called up and put a 'hold payment' on their 1 copy with, turned around and sold my book to someone else before I could make it down.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: So basically you are expecting what will most likely be 6's to hit and 6's to wound (BS3, long range shooting, cover, 7+ if in hard cover) to ping it? Have you actually ever seen this happen before out of curiosity? If so, props to whoever done it.
I'm expecting a 5+ to hit at long range, and then a 4+ at close range and for a Stand and Shoot reaction, and then a 5-6+ to Wound.
Hard cover's a possibility and all, but that monster's got to come out sooner or later.
You don't need to kill it in one round. You just need to peg him once or twice, and then mince him up in combat.
They have a single bad matchup. RoC is NOT worse for them than the enemy, because they can mitigate results. Further, with Legions of Chaos, they get the top two of four dice and have had their chart reworded heavily in their favor.
Demons have won 4 of 8 tournaments this year that I've attended, including 100+ people cons like Rockwars and Slobberknocker, both of which were Grand Tournaments.
1. If you only care about curbstomping opponents, then yes, DoC are very good because their 2-3 filthy lists are 'uber levels of filth. If you care more about having fun and just playing the theme/models you like, DoC are utter trash because the power scale is so horribly borked... A player who loves Nurgle or Slaanesh can very easily end up ruining the game for opponents by complete accident because so many of those units/abilities are simply too good. On the other hand, Khorne & Tzeentch fans get the shaft, with many of their most iconic units being very lackluster. (ie: Bloodletters, Bloodcrushers, non-min/maxed Horrors & Flamers)
This is why so many Daemon players hate our book. It's far too many extremes and there's no real middle ground! (on top of the pants on head stupid bits such as the LoC being the outright worst wizard, yet best potential 'fighty' Greater Daemon. )
2. Reign of Comedy is worse because the bad rolls are not balanced in any way by the good rolls, on top of the rather head-scratching lack of Instrument re-rolls that seemingly got lost along the way. Daemon players have 3 absolutely horrible results, that are then further compounded by effectively losing your magic phase due to lack of power dice It's a double negative that didn't need to happen. (and as a Tzeentch player, that's typically about half of my army's entire damage potential out the window, meaning I can suffer more damage than my opponent on my own freaking turn!) Losing half your save or being forced to take army-wide DI tests with no bonuses for the General's IP rule to boot, is crippling. Opponents only have 2 results they're really worried about on the other hand, as the 'God storm' results overall tend to do very little, unless you're a Skaven player . (unlike in 40k where the Instrument re-rolls help to make the storm results more threatening, and also far less likely to zap the Daemon player!)
I'd have loved to see the Legions re-write, but unfortunately, the local store I called up and put a 'hold payment' on their 1 copy with, turned around and sold my book to someone else before I could make it down.
Hrm. The new book makes Reign really powerful. Since your demons are "Unbreakable, Unstable", but do NOT have Demonic Instability, the Snake Eyes result doesnt hurt you at all, because only models with DI take the leadership tests.
Further, 7 is no longer eye closed, but an attack based on the god of your general that only affects enemy units. Thats a big one for Slaanesh, as his is really powerful.
There's a few other changes in there too.
In the old reign though, I don't feel like its any worse for the demon than the other guy. Reign is a quirk to your magic phase, but not an asset your power is based on. I think the odds of losing my wizard in small games with no BSB or a seperated secondary caster is peanuts to you having a 6+ ward for a turn, or losing some of your guys in blocks. But you and I have gone round and round on this one in the past.
Hrm. The new book makes Reign really powerful. Since your demons are "Unbreakable, Unstable", but do NOT have Demonic Instability, the Snake Eyes result doesnt hurt you at all, because only models with DI take the leadership tests.
Further, 7 is no longer eye closed, but an attack based on the god of your general that only affects enemy units. Thats a big one for Slaanesh, as his is really powerful.
There's a few other changes in there too.
In the old reign though, I don't feel like its any worse for the demon than the other guy. Reign is a quirk to your magic phase, but not an asset your power is based on. I think the odds of losing my wizard in small games with no BSB or a seperated secondary caster is peanuts to you having a 6+ ward for a turn, or losing some of your guys in blocks. But you and I have gone round and round on this one in the past.
Honestyly I'd rather have daemonic instability than unstable. Unstable says I lose by 5 I lose 5 wounds. DI says I lose by 5 but steadfast, IP & BSB says I'm rerolling my Ld test on a 9 or 10, more often than not I'll pass & take 0.
Hrm. The new book makes Reign really powerful. Since your demons are "Unbreakable, Unstable", but do NOT have Demonic Instability, the Snake Eyes result doesnt hurt you at all, because only models with DI take the leadership tests.
Further, 7 is no longer eye closed, but an attack based on the god of your general that only affects enemy units. Thats a big one for Slaanesh, as his is really powerful.
There's a few other changes in there too.
Trading DI for Unstable is both a positive and a negative at the same time...
If you lose a combat by only a point or two, Unstable is generally leagues better than DI as there's 0 risk of the entire unit going pop. Solo Beasts may not like it, but that unit in general is pants on head stupid-good anyways so some nerfing there is a good thing!
If you lose combat however by larger margin, Unstable is horrible for Daemons since we're not priced nice and cheap like Undead are. Generally you don't fret much if that Skellie or Zombie unit suffers 12-15+ casualties, because you still likely have a handful left and the ability to mass raise a bunch back.
Losing 12-15 Daemons on the other hand is almost certainly watching what was left of your unit simply vanish - something that doesn't happen nearly as easily under DI.
Thunderfrog wrote: In the old reign though, I don't feel like its any worse for the demon than the other guy. Reign is a quirk to your magic phase, but not an asset your power is based on. I think the odds of losing my wizard in small games with no BSB or a seperated secondary caster is peanuts to you having a 6+ ward for a turn, or losing some of your guys in blocks. But you and I have gone round and round on this one in the past.
For a Tzeentch army, Reign of Comedy is game-killing...
In general, those low rolls can win the opponent the game if they're clever. With the proliferation of Elves, alongside Empire & Dwarfs tending naturally towards lots of shooting, getting hit with -1 save for a turn can easily mean your chaff is toast and thus give board control to your opponent. (especially against any kind of typical elf army!)
Or else it can (and does) swing a crucial combat entirely to your opponent's favour as their damage output will now essentially double. What *should* have been a solid victory can now likely turn into a stalemate, or even a loss.
The army-wide DI tests early game are effectively handing your opponent an easy win as long as they're competent, since it typically destroys most of your valuable chaff units. (Furies, the mainstay chaff unit pretty much auto-explode due to Ld2 for example, while Seekers, Screamers and solo Beasts can suffer those 1-3 critical wounds that leave them open to a finishing volley of arrows/MM.)
Or else, imagine for a moment watching as your 500+ point Greater Daemon suddenly pops for no reason at all... most often though, the double 1's result can strip a wound or two from him, leaving him extremely vulnerable to being focus-fired by an opponent.
Then there's the game where almost half you entire army goes boom turn 2 because of that stupid chart.
Experiment 626 wrote: Trading DI for Unstable is both a positive and a negative at the same time...
Shas'O Dorian wrote: Honestyly I'd rather have daemonic instability than unstable.
Good thing the point you're both trying to counter is that the Reign of Chaos isn't as bad as it once was, due to a shift in rules, and not a comment on whether or not those rules in them selves are bad.
Experiment 626 wrote: Or else it can (and does) swing a crucial combat entirely to your opponent's favour as their damage output will now essentially double.
No. It will not essentially double. The number of wounds that go unsaved will increase by 16%. Bad? Yes. Double the damage output? Not even close. 100 attacks means 50 wounds means 33.3 unsaved wounds or--gasp!--41.7 unsaved wounds, with the reduced Ward save.
I'll agree heartily that it's dumb. One of the dumbest things in the game (mostly because it's so complicated and takes forever). But c'mon.
TK being unable to march and being forced to augment it with with magic. The new endtimes undead book basically makes TK a much better army, but before then, it really upset me that VC didn't have to deal with that to an extent while TK did.
Experiment 626 wrote: Trading DI for Unstable is both a positive and a negative at the same time...
Shas'O Dorian wrote: Honestyly I'd rather have daemonic instability than unstable.
Good thing the point you're both trying to counter is that the Reign of Chaos isn't as bad as it once was, due to a shift in rules, and not a comment on whether or not those rules in them selves are bad.
Experiment 626 wrote: Or else it can (and does) swing a crucial combat entirely to your opponent's favour as their damage output will now essentially double.
No. It will not essentially double. The number of wounds that go unsaved will increase by 16%. Bad? Yes. Double the damage output? Not even close. 100 attacks means 50 wounds means 33.3 unsaved wounds or--gasp!--41.7 unsaved wounds, with the reduced Ward save.
I'll agree heartily that it's dumb. One of the dumbest things in the game (mostly because it's so complicated and takes forever). But c'mon.
You suffer double damage in the sense that you're now only saving half of what you should have saved.
If my unit takes 12 wounds, then I normally should be saving on average 4 wounds. On a turn with the -1 in play though, I'm now only saving on average 2 wounds, thus doubling the damage my saves *should* have prevented.
That +50% damage from failed saves is often enough to completely turn combats against the Daemon player in anything involving more than simple chaff clearing fights.
Its not +50% damage, it's -50% damage reduction. That 33% off-the-top damage reduction your entire army gets for free? That nobody else gets? That you pay for by risking DI and Reign? When you roll that effect, *that* free protection is halved.
So instead of only taking 4/6ths the losses you otherwise would, you instead take 5/6ths.
Instead of only taking 4/6ths damage, you take 5/6ths what anyone else would take.
4/6 -> 5/6 is a 25% increase in damage taken not 50%. And is still miles better than the 6/6ths everyone else gets.
(Not calling demons broken, just ensuring the math is right, and reminding you that you get a weaker bonus when that happens, not a penalty.)
Bharring wrote: That 33% off-the-top damage reduction your entire army gets for free?
Uhhhh... No. Try "Included in the points cost", remember most daemon stuff is expensive I mean a bloodletter costs as much as a Chaos warrior & we all know which is the better choice. Daemons don't have a single model below 11 pts per and without the 5++ you know their stats don't warrant that cost.
Bharring wrote: That 33% off-the-top damage reduction your entire army gets for free?
Uhhhh... No. Try "Included in the points cost", remember most daemon stuff is expensive I mean a bloodletter costs as much as a Chaos warrior & we all know which is the better choice. Daemons don't have a single model below 11 pts per and without the 5++ you know their stats don't warrant that cost.
So a WS5 S4 model isn't worth it without a 5++. Well. I guess I'd better burn all my black guard.
@TDA stop being a troll. The comment was about daemons and whether or not the 5++ is taken into account in calculating the point cost of the unit & whether or not they'd be worth their points without it. Remember I said their sats don't warrant that cost but OK you'll nitpick so let's ammend that to their rules don't warrant their cost without having a 5++. Your comment blatantly adds nothing to the discussion & is just looking to stir up gak but I'll humor you this time.
Black guard have:
I6
Ld9
2 Attacks base
ASF Stubborn
Murderous Prowess
Eternal hatred
Access to a magic banner & magic weapon
and lack frenzy.
All of which makes them worth it. Now if you'd like to discus the issue of daemond being worth their cost without having the 5++ fine, otherwise go back to your bridge.
Bharring wrote: Claiming that the 5++ is already factored in, but the fact that the 5++ is, on rare occasions, a 6++ for a turn is not, seems quite arbitrary.
What about the equal chance of that 5++ becomins a 4++. The chance of it changing to a 4++ is equally the same at it being a 6++ which means that on average it's still a 5++ which has been calculated in.
Now a common pitfall is to say that going from a 5++ to a 6++ hurts more than a 5++ to a 4++ benefits and this isn't true. Going up or down either way increases or decreases your odds of surviving a wound by 1/6th. It just seems like it hurts more because people view is as I am 50% more squishy rather than I have decreased my odds of survival by 1/6th. The save modifier needs to be compared to the dice roll not the previous save modifier.
Shas'O Dorian wrote: @TDA stop being a troll. The comment was about daemons and whether or not the 5++ is taken into account in calculating the point cost of the unit & whether or not they'd be worth their points without it. Remember I said their sats don't warrant that cost but OK you'll nitpick so let's ammend that to their rules don't warrant their cost without having a 5++. Your comment blatantly adds nothing to the discussion & is just looking to stir up gak but I'll humor you this time.
Black guard have:
I6
Ld9
2 Attacks base
ASF Stubborn
Murderous Prowess
Eternal hatred
Access to a magic banner & magic weapon
and lack frenzy.
All of which makes them worth it. Now if you'd like to discus the issue of daemond being worth their cost without having the 5++ fine, otherwise go back to your bridge.
Blood letters are only frenzied if you buy the locus. As they are basic, they're black guard minus rerolls.
Shas'O Dorian wrote: @TDA stop being a troll. The comment was about daemons and whether or not the 5++ is taken into account in calculating the point cost of the unit & whether or not they'd be worth their points without it. Remember I said their sats don't warrant that cost but OK you'll nitpick so let's ammend that to their rules don't warrant their cost without having a 5++. Your comment blatantly adds nothing to the discussion & is just looking to stir up gak but I'll humor you this time.
Black guard have:
I6
Ld9
2 Attacks base
ASF Stubborn
Murderous Prowess
Eternal hatred
Access to a magic banner & magic weapon
and lack frenzy.
All of which makes them worth it. Now if you'd like to discus the issue of daemond being worth their cost without having the 5++ fine, otherwise go back to your bridge.
Blood letters are only frenzied if you buy the locus. As they are basic, they're black guard minus rerolls.
No, no they are not.
They're more like WS5/I4 Grave/Tombguard than they are a non re-rolling elf killing machine.
They also need the charge to gain better strength, and especially against elves, they should never realistically be getting a charge off unless the elf player goofed up and/or picked a bad fight and left themselves open to a counter charge.
Shas'O Dorian wrote: @TDA stop being a troll. The comment was about daemons and whether or not the 5++ is taken into account in calculating the point cost of the unit & whether or not they'd be worth their points without it. Remember I said their sats don't warrant that cost but OK you'll nitpick so let's ammend that to their rules don't warrant their cost without having a 5++. Your comment blatantly adds nothing to the discussion & is just looking to stir up gak but I'll humor you this time.
Black guard have:
I6
Ld9
2 Attacks base
ASF Stubborn
Murderous Prowess
Eternal hatred
Access to a magic banner & magic weapon
and lack frenzy.
All of which makes them worth it. Now if you'd like to discus the issue of daemond being worth their cost without having the 5++ fine, otherwise go back to your bridge.
Blood letters are only frenzied if you buy the locus. As they are basic, they're black guard minus rerolls.
No, no they are not.
They're more like WS5/I4 Grave/Tombguard than they are a non re-rolling elf killing machine.
They also need the charge to gain better strength, and especially against elves, they should never realistically be getting a charge off unless the elf player goofed up and/or picked a bad fight and left themselves open to a counter charge.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: In general the problem is getting those dwarves up close to a monster with far better movement.
Or those models shooting the enemy from 30" away.
Formosa wrote: dwarf warriors are str3? so str5 GW, still fair point about all the shooting stuff, can someone math hammer how many crossbow shots it would take to kill a necrosphinx, abomb, etc.
15 Dwarf Warriors are carving 3.3 wounds of an Abomination.
20 Quarrelers strip 1.7 wounds off said A-bomb in one volley.
15 Irondrakes knock him down by 3.8. wounds.
15 Hammerers dish out 6 wounds.
Formosa wrote: drake guns are not bad but very easy to bypass, grudge throwers are again not bad, but not as reliable
Irondrakes are easier to avoid and harder to get rid of. And if you've got Quarrelers, a Grudge Thrower, an Organ Gun, Irondrakes, Hammerers, and other misc. Dwarf-y things...where, exactly, is that monster going to go?
And Grudge Throwers aren't as reliable. But they're harder to hide from, and can take on other units more effectively, too. And are cheaper.
Formosa wrote: so long story short is that nothing dwarfs have is as good at killing monsters as cannons, which to me is clearly intentional.
That's not a Dwarf-thing. That's a cannon-thing. Nothing is as good at killing monsters as cannons. Which is a problem.
The other options in a Dwarf army might not be as stupidly efficient (and they shouldn't be!), but they're not awful at it, either. I say: strip a few wounds off as it closes, let it take out a few ranks, and then drag it down to an axe-y doom.
the abomb maths you did, does that factor in regen? and 1 round of shooting is all I will get usually from a competent player, but that's obvious.
so what im basically saying is, without at least a couple of warmachines dwarfs cant deal with monsters, cannons are just the best for dealing with them and people shouldn't pile 500pts into super characters and expect them to wreck face freely all game. it reminds me of those sad little girly men on battlefield 3 that say "no stingerzzzz" as they fly around in there helecopters and rack up 50+ kills.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh btw I'm not saying cannons are not op and agree they should be toned down, just saying they are the best way to deal with the big uns
@Formosa: Yeah but cannons shouldn't snipe out characters whether on a monster or not. Taking a character on a monster used to seem cool and then everybody avoided it like the plague because of how bad it could hurt them. It's why i am hesitant to take a screaming bell even with the 360 degree arc of sight to cast spells. It's just not that good anymore. Sure it seems to roll d3 wounds on the chart to toughness 7 or above units and that helps a lot (esp. with crew on war machines replacing wounds so that 2/3 of the time it just wipes a war machine off the board) but everything else it does or can do is very sub-par. A 24" BSB that only lasts in my own turn starting in the magic phase? That'll help a lot *rolls eyes*. d6" movement for the bell alone? Not helping much.
I've had my abomination go down to mostly pistolier fire. As well as re-directed by them. I don't find empire or current dwarf shooty armies to have issues vs aboms. Esp. considering it just dies if one wound it got was from a flaming attack. Usually the preferred route for killing one last i checked was cavalry with the flaming banner or something shooty with the flaming banner.
----------
Anyway i still don't get the hatred of skaven. Dwarfs and empire can corner castle with gunlines and elves can just avoid you all day and be dumb with magical elf fast cavalry or BotWD. These days i'm finding it hard to even win with skaven though admittedly i play tourney level players.
My only real issue is fighting against elves. I find it so ridiculous that things have gotten to the point where if you don't prepare to face elves you probably won't win against them (unless you have a crazy gun-line army with nice units).
Maybe it's just a rock/paper/scissors thing with some factions. I honestly don't see much issue fighting a gun-line but that's because i can just spam core for lots of super cheap t3 bodies with no armor (wouldn't matter anyway vs handguns). At the end of the day a t3 elf and t3 slave die just as easily to handguns and same goes to the more elite units skaven have. At the end of the day when you look at a handgun army the cheap core units actually help a ton more against them than elites with a lot of things esp. considering with elves the more elite it's more expensive while still dying just about as easily.
1. Skaven are currently getting rather old & tired with their current book. It's been what, 7 or 8 years now since they've last been updated?
2. The game has well and truly moved past the infantry horde stage. Elves have most definitely seen to that, alongside other well known MSU armies such as competitive DoC lists and WoC bringing lots of chariots alongside Chimeras & Skullcrushers.
The Skaven book just can't handle an MSU heavy meta as their counters to it are fairly overcosted now considering what they're up against. (Globadiers, Jezzails, Gutter Runners, Censer Bearers, MSU Rat Ogres, etc...) Those units are especially very expensive to purchase as well, meaning it's difficult to get enough of those option unless you've been playing Skaven for a decade or longer, or just have a tone of disposable income to play with!
Basically, if you can't deal with MSU or mixed MSU with a small amount of MMU armies, you're not going to do well on the competitive scene.
3. Dwarfs are the army you take when you want to make both players miserable!
Wrong, dwarfs are not an army to take to make players miserable, GUNLINES are, please learn that dwarf does not equal gunline, yes there good at it, no it's not the only way to play them.
Formosa wrote: Wrong, dwarfs are not an army to take to make players miserable, GUNLINES are, please learn that dwarf does not equal gunline, yes there good at it, no it's not the only way to play them.
Depends on style of games. Competitive dwarfs are bound to gunlines.
Formosa wrote: Wrong, dwarfs are not an army to take to make players miserable, GUNLINES are, please learn that dwarf does not equal gunline, yes there good at it, no it's not the only way to play them.
I was trying to be more tounge-in-cheek...
Bad attempted joking aside, Dwarfs simply have a bad rap and tend to go loooooooong periods between updates while being somewhat shoehorned into favoring the gunline style of play, simply because until now, they've lacked enough units to give them a more capable Movement phase.
Plus, let's face it, until 8th edition, you never heard the words, "I'm charging" come from a Dwarf player since everything out distanced them!
It annoys me that dwarfs are seen only as a gunline and everyone says "but crossbows, handguns" what about those of us that love the dwarf infantry, my favourite games are tons of warriors, longbeards, hammerers and ironbreakers and I just wear down my opponent, I find (and agree to a certain extent) that shutting down the magic phase is a tad extreme but since we literally have no wizards (anvil doesn't count) its kind of neccesary
Formosa wrote: the abomb maths you did, does that factor in regen? and 1 round of shooting is all I will get usually from a competent player, but that's obvious.
15 Warriors need 3's to hit, so 13.3 hits in the first round. 4's to wound, so 6.7 wounds, 4's to Regenerate, so 3.3 unsaved. Etc.
Also, how is he only giving you one turn of shooting against an abomination? Average move of 10.5" means he's charging your front line by turn 3.
Formosa wrote: so what im basically saying is, without at least a couple of warmachines dwarfs cant deal with monsters
I just proved that wrong. Dwarfs can deal with monsters. They can shoot them with small-arms fire, and then they can bring massed great weapons to bear.
Formosa wrote: Oh btw I'm not saying cannons are not op and agree they should be toned down, just saying they are the best way to deal with the big uns
Well, obviously. Why are cannons too good? Because of their efficiency against monsters. So what is an army's best answer to monsters? Uh...cannons.
Experiment 626 wrote: 1. Skaven are currently getting rather old & tired with their current book. It's been what, 7 or 8 years now since they've last been updated?
2. The game has well and truly moved past the infantry horde stage. Elves have most definitely seen to that, alongside other well known MSU armies such as competitive DoC lists and WoC bringing lots of chariots alongside Chimeras & Skullcrushers.
The Skaven book just can't handle an MSU heavy meta as their counters to it are fairly overcosted now considering what they're up against. (Globadiers, Jezzails, Gutter Runners, Censer Bearers, MSU Rat Ogres, etc...) Those units are especially very expensive to purchase as well, meaning it's difficult to get enough of those option unless you've been playing Skaven for a decade or longer, or just have a tone of disposable income to play with!
Basically, if you can't deal with MSU or mixed MSU with a small amount of MMU armies, you're not going to do well on the competitive scene.
3. Dwarfs are the army you take when you want to make both players miserable!
It's been more like since 2009 i think so about 5 years. I started playing skaven about 5 or so years ago starting with the new book so that'd make sense. Back then they were powerful sure but currently they're one of the only books yet to be updated to 8th. We have no flyers, cavalry of any kind whether fast, magical or heavy, armored units and besides our tunneling teams, gutter runners and some vanguard equivalent for nightrunners (which are known to suck) our fastest movement is generally about 6 unless it's random movement or the vermin lord which also kind of sucks because no armor and cannons.
For the most part the skaven melee ability is absolute garbage with the exception of the abomination pretty much. The idea of winning a melee with them is nearly hilarious even if you happen to hit your enemy in the flank with a ranked up unit. Rat ogres are overpriced and are basically worse than vargheists which can fly and have better leadership for the same cost (when you factor in a packmaster it is, not to mention vargheists have better leadership and they won't suffer stupidity for lost handlers).
Skaven magic other than the 13th spell is also not very good. Even our magic missiles which are strength 5 and do d6 hits have a chance to hit us when we roll 1 for the amount of hits. Against MSU armies, elven armies which laugh in the face of initiative test or die spells and gear and other such things the skaven tend to do poor damage with their spells. 13th is so overly specific by needing to target only infantry and people never seem to realize it. Against ogres 13th is absolutely useless unless you think it's worthwhile to change gnoblars and same goes for bretonnia with peasants. Seriously i get called out on using magic missiles against a wood elf army with the newer dropped army book. Like wtf am i supposed to do against armies that can do a magic cavalry bunker with a magic resistance 2 hero effectively making them immune to most magic that isn't test or die. Then the skaven abilities which are test or die only effect initiative which does nothing vs elves. In the end it all comes down to shooting but bows esp. longbows outrange skaven horribly with the exception of jezzails which cost 52 USD for 3 and i can't afford. That said it's a 20 pts per model unit.
People also seem to forget most of the damage dealing units for skaven are fairly fragile with the exception of the abomination. Almost everything that does damage is toughness 3 and generally has no more than a 5+ armor save or 4+ in the case of jezzails and you pay through the roof for those saves. If you want to spam ranged units then good luck trying to hit something. Slaves with slings are cheap but they can't really kill anything other than a couple models worth of chaff. Gutter runners shoot well but they're toughness 3 with 6+ wards for 18 pts per model when fully kitted out.
Then there's the issue with our weapons teams which can be singled out by any unit with line of sight whether in a tower, on a higher unit (cavalry or monstrous infantry) or the ability to just maneuver around. Not to mention the very second i have line of sight to shoot with my weapons teams they're in the enemy's crosshairs to shoot. I won't lie though that weapons teams are wonderful against melee armies but the second an army with decent shooting comes along your best bet is to shoot away chaff and chances are you're better off just removing the weapons teams before the game even starts. They're just free easy points for an army with bows or possibly even gunlines. The fact a poisoned wind mortar can use its parent unit to direct its shots is nice but then it will always scatter.
I feel like i'm going insane with skaven these days. I'm actually considering doom flayers for melee because they're cheap and if you flank with them they might do damage. Sure censers can too but flails and hatred last one round and one round where the enemy doesn't break and flee basically dooms that unit in a fight. Rat ogres are 40 pts per rat ogre and are special. I feel crazy for even considering doom flayers but times are crazy and flayers are core. In case you don't know flayers are one of the worst considered weapons teams in the game but if i have a higher armor save with a ward for sticking behind my wall of clanrats then it could be ok. Chances are though if it's a melee army and they're engaged with my slaves i'm just better off targeting them with shooting weapons i may have though. Skaven just feel so tricky to play these days. I'm also considering the vermin lord with plague magic since it has higher toughness, can move quickly and can throw out some alright spells while getting where it needs to go just fine.
On the positive side i will try out more skaven ranged some time which can be alright. It more seems to rely on bogging the enemy down with slaves and just spamming shooting attacks on the enemy which can be fairly effective at times though considering how fast a unit can be butchered it might not matter. I've heard jezzails en masse are so ridiculous but 52 USD for just 3 is crazy. I'd need to be rich even to get a decent amount of them and if they end up sucking i just lost hundreds of dollars for nothing.
-----------
On the subject of dwarfs they're slow for everything but their copters.
-----------
Elves can die to gunlines esp. with super elite armies and skaven don't have that problem. That said if skaven have to fight elves everything just gets stupid.
-----------
@Experiment 626: Did you want to play a game on 'Universal Battle' at some point? I never did get a response back from you on that. I really could use more practice at some point.
Formosa wrote: the abomb maths you did, does that factor in regen? and 1 round of shooting is all I will get usually from a competent player, but that's obvious.
15 Warriors need 3's to hit, so 13.3 hits in the first round. 4's to wound, so 6.7 wounds, 4's to Regenerate, so 3.3 unsaved. Etc.
Also, how is he only giving you one turn of shooting against an abomination? Average move of 10.5" means he's charging your front line by turn 3.
Formosa wrote: so what im basically saying is, without at least a couple of warmachines dwarfs cant deal with monsters
I just proved that wrong. Dwarfs can deal with monsters. They can shoot them with small-arms fire, and then they can bring massed great weapons to bear.
Formosa wrote: Oh btw I'm not saying cannons are not op and agree they should be toned down, just saying they are the best way to deal with the big uns
Well, obviously. Why are cannons too good? Because of their efficiency against monsters. So what is an army's best answer to monsters? Uh...cannons.
see that's why I don't like mathhammer, I have played my mates skaven a hell of a lot (hi lee) and NEVER have I put 3.3 wounds on a HPA in a single round with GW, maths hammer is a useful tool I grant you, but useless for real life.
and its not "wrong" you haven't "showed" me all you did was say what happens in a vacuum, it fails to take into account player skill, setup, etc. so it would be more accurate to say "I disagree, according to the statistics this is what SHOULD happen, but not neccesarily always, as other factors may apply", the second part "using small arms fire" also doesn't take into account all the other threats that are on the field, monsters IF they reach combat can totally decimate units (not all monsters of course) and there should be a decent counter to monsters, rather than a average to below average change with str4/5 weapons, this will be made a lot worse when flyers come to fantasy (bet it happens)
that last bit was a clarification of my stance, but again just for you, yes cannons are goods, but some armies need them to reliably kill monsters, yes they are too good as current, so slightly tone them down. simples
Formosa wrote: the abomb maths you did, does that factor in regen? and 1 round of shooting is all I will get usually from a competent player, but that's obvious.
15 Warriors need 3's to hit, so 13.3 hits in the first round. 4's to wound, so 6.7 wounds, 4's to Regenerate, so 3.3 unsaved. Etc.
Also, how is he only giving you one turn of shooting against an abomination? Average move of 10.5" means he's charging your front line by turn 3.
Formosa wrote: so what im basically saying is, without at least a couple of warmachines dwarfs cant deal with monsters
I just proved that wrong. Dwarfs can deal with monsters. They can shoot them with small-arms fire, and then they can bring massed great weapons to bear.
Formosa wrote: Oh btw I'm not saying cannons are not op and agree they should be toned down, just saying they are the best way to deal with the big uns
Well, obviously. Why are cannons too good? Because of their efficiency against monsters. So what is an army's best answer to monsters? Uh...cannons.
see that's why I don't like mathhammer, I have played my mates skaven a hell of a lot (hi lee) and NEVER have I put 3.3 wounds on a HPA in a single round with GW, maths hammer is a useful tool I grant you, but useless for real life.
and its not "wrong" you haven't "showed" me all you did was say what happens in a vacuum, it fails to take into account player skill, setup, etc. so it would be more accurate to say "I disagree, according to the statistics this is what SHOULD happen, but not neccesarily always, as other factors may apply", the second part "using small arms fire" also doesn't take into account all the other threats that are on the field, monsters IF they reach combat can totally decimate units (not all monsters of course) and there should be a decent counter to monsters, rather than a average to below average change with str4/5 weapons, this will be made a lot worse when flyers come to fantasy (bet it happens)
that last bit was a clarification of my stance, but again just for you, yes cannons are goods, but some armies need them to reliably kill monsters, yes they are too good as current, so slightly tone them down. simples
By your argument, My Elf legion has never fought an abomb. Therefore they can't kill it.
your being purposely argumentative, I was clear in saying that maths work in a vacuum, and in my experience doesn't pan out in a real game, that's pretty clear, your analogy of "My Elf legion has never fought an abomb. Therefore they can't kill it." makes no sense in that context.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
How do you think i feel? Rat ogres cost 40 pts a piece and require handlers to not be stupid. For a handler for every two rat ogres you are looking at 88 pts. On the other hand a vargheist has better leadership, WS and has every single stat rat ogres have except they can also fly. Basically they're flying rat ogres except better and i think they only cost like 92 pts for 2 of them and no possibility of stupidity. I have both army books here with me so i know this for a fact. A little too lazy to look up the exact cost right now but i probably will in a few moments.
That said tomb kings have it bad. I'm not even sure how they feel anymore with the 'end times' stuff. Anybody that enjoyed their fight against nagash must be squirming in agony at nagash owning them now. Then again malekith has elves. Jesus i still can't get over all the elves rolled into one. Please tell me they actually decreased the army's power instead of increased. Seriously each is bad enough on their own.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
How do you think i feel? Rat ogres cost 40 pts a piece and require handlers to not be stupid. For a handler for every two rat ogres you are looking at 88 pts. On the other hand a vargheist has better leadership, WS and has every single stat rat ogres have except they can also fly. Basically they're flying rat ogres except better and i think they only cost like 92 pts for 2 of them and no possibility of stupidity.
Please, you guys don't what useless is until you've shot yourself in the foot by taking a unit of Flamers...
40pts for a guy who can't hit the broad side of a barn and hands out Regen like candy because... "reasons"
A full unit setting you back a whopping 240pts is just barely capable of wiping out 5 generic T3/5+ save Fast Cav with their shooting, yet will instantly melt the second anything touches them - even freaking Gnoblars chew apart Flamers!
Formosa wrote: See that's why I don't like mathhammer, I have played my mates skaven a hell of a lot (hi lee) and NEVER have I put 3.3 wounds on a HPA in a single round with GW, maths hammer is a useful tool I grant you, but useless for real life.
It is most certainly not useless. That's one of the best ways to actually be good at this game. You gotta' know the averages. Should I charge my 15 Stormvermin into your 10 Dwarf Quarrelers? If you don't ever look at the averages, you'l never know if it's a good idea or not.
Formosa wrote: and its not "wrong" you haven't "showed" me all you did was say what happens in a vacuum, it fails to take into account player skill, setup, etc. so it would be more accurate to say "I disagree, according to the statistics this is what SHOULD happen, but not neccesarily always, as other factors may apply", the second part "using small arms fire" also doesn't take into account all the other threats that are on the field, monsters IF they reach combat can totally decimate units (not all monsters of course) and there should be a decent counter to monsters, rather than a average to below average change with str4/5 weapons, this will be made a lot worse when flyers come to fantasy (bet it happens)
Okay. So, you're saying that I'm not taking into account all of the different variables.
Which leads me to believe that you think you are.
Which leads me to believe that you, somehow, believe that a Dwarf army cannot--your words, mind. CAN. NOT. No possible way. Failure, in ever scenario--deal with Monsters, without a cannon or two. And we both know that's not true. For example, my Abomination is terrified of your Hammerers. Because, on average, they'll kill him in one round. Which is why he avoids them, and one of the other reasons why I focus on that unit with other resources.
- I will never account for player skill when considering anything tactical. That's absurd. "This unit's too good, because a veteran player could do X", "this item isn't good enough, because a new player would probably just do Y".
- set-up and other threats on the field are issues for everything ever. The fact that cannons are so remarkably efficient at killing this one type of unit that targeting them is an obvious and automatic choice just goes to show how weird the rules are.
Formosa wrote: yes cannons are goods, but some armies need them to reliably kill monsters, yes they are too good as current, so slightly tone them down. simples
If cannons did half the wounds they currently do to Monsters, that would be enough to strip a few wounds off. Then, they can be finished in close combat, or in a later shooting/magic phase.
Easy, there.
As a general rule, I think we can assume that other players know the general capability of an army. No need to list every capability of every unit.
You're clearly frustrated with the Skaven book...we get it.
Math hammer works in a bubble if you have nothing forcing you to attack as soon as possible you can take an extra turn manouvering so that you can setup a flank charge dwarves are movement three its not hard to outmanouver them tie the unit up with slaves then flank charge them however if there are cannons making staying out of combat a bad idea the skaven player will be more likely to pick the worse option.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
Ushabti have a place in competitive TK lists. Or good ones. (Gunlines or 1200 points of necroknights). I've actually been using 12 with great bows and now nobody wants to play my tomb kings. Which is a shame, as I love the army list.
bertmac wrote: Math hammer works in a bubble if you have nothing forcing you to attack as soon as possible you can take an extra turn manouvering so that you can setup a flank charge dwarves are movement three its not hard to outmanouver them tie the unit up with slaves then flank charge them however if there are cannons making staying out of combat a bad idea the skaven player will be more likely to pick the worse option.
I have almost no idea what you're trying to say, here.
Mathhammer isn't a way to determine if you can win a game or not. It's a good way to figure out about how difficult a particular situation is.
The numbers I provided were pretty damn simple: front-to-front combat, and assuming that there were at least 15 Dwarfs attacking. Now, if your opponent whittles your unit of 30 down to 20, and then the A-bomb takes out another 10, obviously you'll do less wounds. But then again, the A-bomb most likely lost a wound or two as well. Or the other resources the Skaven general is using to whittle down the Dwarf unit are dealt with, etc. So, in closing, Mathhammer isn't attempting to take every variable into account. It's just a rough guideline. And without some basic form of it in hand, you can't play this game. You need to know the odds even somewhat remotely.
bertmac wrote: Math hammer works in a bubble if you have nothing forcing you to attack as soon as possible you can take an extra turn manouvering so that you can setup a flank charge dwarves are movement three its not hard to outmanouver them tie the unit up with slaves then flank charge them however if there are cannons making staying out of combat a bad idea the skaven player will be more likely to pick the worse option.
I have almost no idea what you're trying to say, here.
Mathhammer isn't a way to determine if you can win a game or not. It's a good way to figure out about how difficult a particular situation is.
The numbers I provided were pretty damn simple: front-to-front combat, and assuming that there were at least 15 Dwarfs attacking. Now, if your opponent whittles your unit of 30 down to 20, and then the A-bomb takes out another 10, obviously you'll do less wounds. But then again, the A-bomb most likely lost a wound or two as well. Or the other resources the Skaven general is using to whittle down the Dwarf unit are dealt with, etc. So, in closing, Mathhammer isn't attempting to take every variable into account. It's just a rough guideline. And without some basic form of it in hand, you can't play this game. You need to know the odds even somewhat remotely.
What i'm saying is that if you take away the threat of cannons the opponent whoever it may be has no need to charge into a bad matchup if we took everything based on front to front combat we could just roll off at the start of each game to see who would win!
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
How do you think i feel? Rat ogres cost 40 pts a piece and require handlers to not be stupid. For a handler for every two rat ogres you are looking at 88 pts. On the other hand a vargheist has better leadership, WS and has every single stat rat ogres have except they can also fly. Basically they're flying rat ogres except better and i think they only cost like 92 pts for 2 of them and no possibility of stupidity.
Please, you guys don't what useless is until you've shot yourself in the foot by taking a unit of Flamers...
40pts for a guy who can't hit the broad side of a barn and hands out Regen like candy because... "reasons"
A full unit setting you back a whopping 240pts is just barely capable of wiping out 5 generic T3/5+ save Fast Cav with their shooting, yet will instantly melt the second anything touches them - even freaking Gnoblars chew apart Flamers!
That's pretty sad actually. You have my pity. Not sure what else the flamers can do with what they've got.
@Warpsolution: Yeah i know but i don't get how other people can field them so successfully. Perhaps i don't have the money to field them correctly? I just have no idea how to field skaven anymore. Before it used to be easy and then i won significantly against some players and then my lizardmen playing friend started taking a slann before their current army book (back when slann were ridiculous) and things were just hard. That and anybody i face is generally a tournament level player on Universal Battle and in some cases in real life too. I don't think i'm terrible at playing the game. It's just i've never struggled like i currently have been. Almost every game i have is a loss these days. It's just really disheartening and ruins my morale for the game. Admittedly it's giving me a bit of humility losing so much but often the people i play throw out a power list like that nurgle with epidemius army i faced.
bertmac wrote: What i'm saying is that if you take away the threat of cannons the opponent whoever it may be has no need to charge into a bad matchup
Wrong. There are other war machines. There's small-arms fire. And there's magic.
None of these things are as efficient as cannons. Because cannons are too efficient.
bertmac wrote: if we took everything based on front to front combat we could just roll off at the start of each game to see who would win!
No. Just no.
You seem to be accusing me of saying "all of my combats will be two units, meeting front-to-front". And I'm not. At. All. I'm saying "what usually happens is, you charge my unit in the front. I counter-charge into the flank. Then you threaten my other flank, so I charge, but then you flee...".
It is completely and utterly pointless trying to account for every little variable in this game. Because there are so many crazy situations that arise. So, how do I get some sort of vague idea as to how my unit A will fair against your unit B? Why, I do a little Mathhammer! That way, I'll know how many rounds my Slaves can hold up that unit over there, or how many Warp Lightning Cannon blasts I'll need to take out this unit, over here.
And yes, sometimes, that Mathhammer involves figuring out the averages of a flank charge.
To apply any of this to the original point, though: the statement was that Dwarfs need cannons to deal with Monsters. I said they don't need cannons to deal with monsters. Is it easy to get a unit of Hammerers into combat with an A-bomb? Yeah, probably. But you use terrain, and fleeing, and other shooting. And the Skaven player uses screening units and shooting and magic, etc. It goes back and forth. I really am at a loss as to how this is so hard to understand.
Will it be likely that you engage that A-bomb on your terms, and that he goes down without a fight? No. You'll take some losses, probably. He might even get a flank charge off on this unit, or Regen a Grudge Thrower's stone. But I assume that, for everything that goes in your opponent's favor, you can orchestrate something to go in yours.
Because I assume that you and your opponent are roughly on equal footing, tactics-wise. Because assuming anything else is pointless and silly.
They're nothing like tomb guard. They aren't the worst unit in the book, for a start.
Hes not just argumentative, (ask him about arcane unforging requiring a wound), but also has apparently never played Tomb Kings.
Ushabti are by far the worst unit in my book.
A 50pt iron gut that cannot march and is only move 5 and is limited to recovering 1 wound a phase. Undead Legions helps, but then they compete with a 38pt crypt horror, which has a regen save, T5, Poison, and move 6.
How do you think i feel? Rat ogres cost 40 pts a piece and require handlers to not be stupid. For a handler for every two rat ogres you are looking at 88 pts. On the other hand a vargheist has better leadership, WS and has every single stat rat ogres have except they can also fly. Basically they're flying rat ogres except better and i think they only cost like 92 pts for 2 of them and no possibility of stupidity.
Please, you guys don't what useless is until you've shot yourself in the foot by taking a unit of Flamers...
40pts for a guy who can't hit the broad side of a barn and hands out Regen like candy because... "reasons"
A full unit setting you back a whopping 240pts is just barely capable of wiping out 5 generic T3/5+ save Fast Cav with their shooting, yet will instantly melt the second anything touches them - even freaking Gnoblars chew apart Flamers!
That's pretty sad actually. You have my pity. Not sure what else the flamers can do with what they've got.
Well, as long as tournaments/LGS's are gracious enough to allow the WD rules, for 120pts 'tax', 3 Flamers can be used to pass their Skirmishers rule onto an Exalted Flamer or two who will wreck stuff! (albeit Warpflame is still an issue...)
Still, that's typically a 300pts unit - 3 Flamers + 2 Exalts, so for that kind of investment it damn well should get to wreck something!
flamingkillamajig wrote: @Warpsolution: Yeah i know but i don't get how other people can field them so successfully. Perhaps i don't have the money to field them correctly? I just have no idea how to field skaven anymore. Before it used to be easy and then i won significantly against some players and then my lizardmen playing friend started taking a slann before their current army book (back when slann were ridiculous) and things were just hard. That and anybody i face is generally a tournament level player on Universal Battle and in some cases in real life too. I don't think i'm terrible at playing the game. It's just i've never struggled like i currently have been. Almost every game i have is a loss these days. It's just really disheartening and ruins my morale for the game. Admittedly it's giving me a bit of humility losing so much but often the people i play throw out a power list like that nurgle with epidemius army i faced.
Your book is just getting super old and what makes it special isn't so hot anymore.
I honestly think Skaven work better when going heavy on Clan Pestilence - lots of Plague Monks who while still only average, throw out more attacks than other ranked units worth using. One unit can carry the Plague Banner which while a one-shot item, is still a really good one.
The Furnace is solid for maximising the frontage for annoying Toughness tests. (Elves get a special kind of screwed since these go before their ASF attacks, guaranteeing you some kills) Censer Bearers just need some cheaper models really... Sure they'll kill themselves, but they do tend to worry opponents a lot simply because they never fail to cause havoc!
Spells of Plague are leagues better than the Spells of Ruin in all honesty. If your group/store allows Special Characters, seriously take Lord Skrolk as he's a complete b********! Lv3 wizard and his magic weapon is plain mean. (and it's toughness test is not blocked by the stupid HE banner either!)
Plague Priests are also fairly resilient for a Skaven character. Pricey sure, but they bring a high utility with both decent fighting abilities + magic.
The only thing that really keeps my from cracking open the masses of Skaven boxes hiding in my closet honestly is that I'm not a huge fan of Clan Pestilence... Personally I'm more into the Warlord Clans, (Clan Vulkan because I like fire & burning things!) Plus ninja rats, because, they're freaking rat ninjas! I don't mind a smaller army of the putrid ones, but I'm not into the idea of building & painting a full 2400+ pts army of them...
Oh, and about the on-line battles thingy... computers aren't my thing sadly, and vassel/whatever thingy sounds complicated...
That and my on-line/video gaming time is currently being taken by Fantasy Life 3DS! (sooooooo damn addictive!)
If you have a 3DS and FL though, I can try and monkey my way with figuring out how Friend Codes work and can add you on that.
sigh!
Your point was dwarves can kill Abombs if they get to fight it on their terms then go on to say well that likely wont happen. So just suck it up? Or is it fair that they get a chance to even the odds via cannons?
@Experiment 626: True spells of plague can be nice but if i can't take warp lightning spam on my warlocks then i'll have issues with chaff. It's not super good but it helps. Censers aren't as good as they can be. If your opponent managed to lose combat but passes morale then they're absolutely dead in the water (man i must be playing way to much xcom: enemy unknown). Plague monks i've been considering heavily again if only to hold up the enemy and give off less combat resolution in a fight (though sadly they're special rather than core unless you take skrolk). Keep in mind they're 7 pts for a toughness 4 model which isn't too shabby. Although going up against a gunline slaves are probably ideal the plague monks could take plenty of shots too. The furnace is decent and sometimes manages to hold up but once again it takes up a significant portion of hero points though i suppose with 50% lords and heroes that shouldn't be as big of a deal now. In fact double furnace or more should be very possible. That said i'd need a way to take care of war machines. That way is either ambushers or more reliably skitterleaping a warlord on war litter or something in there and just chopping up the war machines one by one. Sure they might die but against this one guy i managed to reliably kill most of his war machines and he had no way to stop it. It's funny because usually that method has worked for me every time i used it. The problem though is that it costs a decent amount, can only take on one or so war machines at a time and might not have much validity beyond that. That said if the enemy has no cannons you can just keep the warlords in other units and use them to help out combat resolution so it can be a bit of a win in that sense.
Oddly enough i'm considering things that other skaven players probably think is insane. One of which being the vermin lord and the other being the doom flayer. Considering both is so crazy i wonder if skaven players will take me seriously. That said the vermin lord can approach an enemy quickly and has terror and when equipped with some of the short ranged plague spells can actually go places with his good movement. Sure he costs a lot but against an elf army depending on what's taken he could really throw out some damage. He isn't great and would require some serious work to use correctly but he could be ok. Storm banner might also be a plus to use with him considering the incoming cannons. Doom flayers kind of suck but if i can manage to hold in a combat with plague monks or similar they could probably do some damage provided they hit an enemy army that has lower initiative or equal initiative to them and if i flank with probably 3 of them in the same combat. This excludes elves but elves are mostly doing the shooting and avoidance fast cavalry armies with magical fast cavalry.
Most of the spells of ruin aren't that great. That said cracks call, skitterleap and massed up warp lightning can be alright. Sometimes i'm even considering taking a vermin lord with spells of ruin on the off chance i can get cracks call. Basically a march of 16" into the flank of an ogre army and then casting cracks call with 6 dice or a decent amount. That's a crap ton of dead ogres unless they can make 6 or so ogre initiative checks. Some people might state you can use warlocks or grey seers for that but grey seers are incredibly expensive and vulnerable and warlocks are cheap and also vulnerable. Sure it's totally possible with march of 10" but nobody is gonna let em get off both skitterleap and cracks call and in some cases that's a dead skaven wizard if they can't get off cracks call. In the case of a vermin lord it's just one spell they need and they can usually stand up to another attack. Also though it sounds incredibly stupid i could probably block line of sight from a vermin lord with a furnace or abomination or similar large target. Sure cannons can hit both but they need to kill one completely to get to the next one and if they can't then it doesn't go through. That way i could save my vermin lord with the abomination just a bit.
Skaven do need a re-release. Hopefully 'end times' will help considerably or if the next book is skaven (whether army book or end times book). I hope like hell they do jetpack skaven already whether with dual warplock pistols or poisoned wind globes. That alone would be worth it. Do that or possibly some fast cavalry options. It's really not asking too much in my view.
It's a shame you won't play Universal Battle. It's a good system and those players are really good. It's basically warhammer fantasy. It's a bit confusing at first but i taught CthuluIsSpy how to play on there so i could teach you too provided you had the time. You already said it confuses you though so i guess not.
bertmac wrote: sigh!
Your point was dwarves can kill Abombs if they get to fight it on their terms then go on to say well that likely wont happen. So just suck it up? Or is it fair that they get a chance to even the odds via cannons?
Again. Not sure if I'm following you.
Dwarfs can deal with monsters such as the Abomination with more than just cannons. Yes. That is what I was saying. If I put down an Abomination, and my Dwarf opponent does not field any cannons, they don't go "oh. An Abomination? Well, darn. Good game, man. I lose!"
They have other options. None of them are as good as cannons. Because, once more: CANNONS ARE TOO GOOD AT KILLING MONSTERS[i].
Just look at the numbers on those Hammerers. Look! They will, on average, fell an un-wounded Abomination in one round of combat, assuming he leaves 15+ standing (he will). Now, will it be easy for my opponent to get those Hammerers into combat with him? No. I'll try to stop them. And they'll try to stop me stopping them. And 'round and 'round we go. That's how you play this game!
. just have to not get flanked 
If so, props to whoever done it.
. (unlike in 
