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

This is going to sound bitter and ranty, but screw it. I'm in a ranting mood.

Fury is quantifiably better than Focus. There is no way to argue against that statement. People argue that Hordes carries additional risk, and it certainly can, but it doesn't NEED to to have a comprehensively stronger, more versatile and powerful mechanic. A six Fury warlock is the equal of a twelve fury warcaster without one particle of additional risk, because its caster only requires its Fury for itself, and its beasts boost for themselves without affecting its pool. And that's not even bringing up the difficulties in gaining more focus compared to the ease most Hordes armies have in removing excess Fury to avoid risk.

Transfering is better than overboosting. In the first case, no-selling an attack altogether is better than having extra armor. In the second, while Grevious Wounds is admittedly much more common than Arcane Assassin (as a critical effect), Eiryss is an ubiquitous model, and can easily strip a caster of overboosted focus no matter her incarnation. Is there an equivalent effect in Hordes?

Yes, killing a warlock's beasts will do injury to that warlock's ability to function, but this only proves that beast-heavy casters are quantifiably better than beast-light ones, so that they can have more redundancies. It says nothing of the fact that many warcasters are nearly as crippled without heavy 'jacks. For that matter, damaged beasts are comically easy to heal, with a profusion of healing effects and Regeneration to quickly have a damaged beast back to fighting shape. In a pinch, the warlock can even just spend some Fury on the problem, of which, once again, they'll always have more to spare than a warcaster will Focus. Will ANYONE claim that Repair, which has no range and is almost always on models that are either sub-par or possessed of better abilities, is the equal of these?

As to how I would fix it, there is a very simple solution: remove Reaving from the game. Maybe include it as a spell effect, or as a special ability of certain balanced-around-it warlocks, but don't make it an integral part of the Fury mechanic. There's risk for you: should I have more Fury on the board and suffer the possibility of a frenzy, or play it safe and suffer the consequences if an opponent kills off something that was going to feed me Fury next turn. This way, throwing a heavy out in front of my army is a risky proposition rather than standard procedure.

...Okay, I'm done. Descend on me with your math-magics, internets.

Fury IS better than Focus, no one who knows anything about the game disputes that.

To counterbalance that, Warbeasts are substantially more expensive than Warjacks and easier to kill as well, Warcasters are inherently more powerful than Warlocks (both in Feats and in Spell lists), and Warmachine infantry units and solos are also more powerful than Hordes infantry units and solos.

You can't compare just one aspect of the game and say that its unbalanced, you have to compare both games as a whole. And when all of its parts are summed, I wouldn't say that Warmahordes is perfectly balanced, but I would say that it is balanced to the point that player skill can make all the difference in the game and overcome all unbalances and that is good enough.

Leaving Fury for transfers means that a warlock is making a
decision. They are not using their spell list/animi to their full
potential and leaving Fury on to transfer damage to their warbeasts.
If the player frequently uses this as a "tactic" then they're not
using their warbeasts at their full potential seeing as how full
fury prevents transfers.

I rarely leave fury on my warlock. Transfering just never seems to work out, because I tend to take like 10-15 points of damage on my warlock (tough rolls make all my opponents hate me). So transferring to a beast is pointless, because I rarely bring my warlock out to play. So a beast raging at full fury every turn does far more than bringing up my warlock to just get shot.

I often forget about transferring damage anyways, and think that it is rarely a useful tactic in my overall scheme of things. Though, as I try new hordes armies, this might change.

PhantomViper wrote:Fury IS better than Focus, no one who knows anything about the game disputes that.

To counterbalance that, Warbeasts are substantially more expensive than Warjacks and easier to kill as well, Warcasters are inherently more powerful than Warlocks (both in Feats and in Spell lists), and Warmachine infantry units and solos are also more powerful than Hordes infantry units and solos.

You can't compare just one aspect of the game and say that its unbalanced, you have to compare both games as a whole. And when all of its parts are summed, I wouldn't say that Warmahordes is perfectly balanced, but I would say that it is balanced to the point that player skill can make all the difference in the game and overcome all unbalances and that is good enough.

Agreed. Fury is decidedly better than Focus, and Warbeasts can do more than Warjacks can in a turn.

But Warjacks are usually tougher and cost less. And, like Phantom said, you can't discount the more powerful infantry and solos that Warmachine has - not the mention some of the over-the-top Warcasters that are out there.

Look at it in a vacuum, Fury is unfairly better than Focus. But if you take the rest of the games into the equation, it tends to balance out.

...Yeah, you guys are probably right. I just got off someone who DID argue that the two mechanics are the same, and I was feeling ranty. I could dispute individual claims, but that wouldn't do anyone any good.

...Sorry.

Shoulda called it Focus vs. Fury, as that was my real point, not arguing that Hordes is OP or anything.

There are things that bypass transferring to full fury beasts.

In any case, the Juggernaut tends to solve all those problems.

The real downside to fury is that it is intrinsically linked to your warbeasts. It is a totally viable option to focus on destroying a warlocks warbeasts leaving him with no method to produce fury except cutting himself. IMO this is the real limitation of fury. Where as my warcaster does not have this problem.

BryanC wrote:The real downside to fury is that it is intrinsically linked to your warbeasts. It is a totally viable option to focus on destroying a warlocks warbeasts leaving him with no method to produce fury except cutting himself. IMO this is the real limitation of fury. Where as my warcaster does not have this problem.

This is why Saeryn is evil.

Since I run Krielstone bearers, I generally have a turn or two of minor fury use once my Warbeasts are dead, but yes... The toughest win I ever had was when I stupidly left my beasts out in the open, and they were dead by the end of turn 2. I managed to pull out the win because of the sheer tenacity of the Trolls... gotta love tough rolls... Also eVlaad is a pain

Alfndrate wrote:Since I run Krielstone bearers, I generally have a turn or two of minor fury use once my Warbeasts are dead, but yes... The toughest win I ever had was when I stupidly left my beasts out in the open, and they were dead by the end of turn 2. I managed to pull out the win because of the sheer tenacity of the Trolls... gotta love tough rolls... Also eVlaad is a pain

He's on the list. I hate that guy.

Even with the benefits of fury I prefer warmachine over hordes. I love nodes, and the spells warcasters bring to the table. I love my 6pt crusaders. I would not say that the two mechanics are equal, but in the context of the two systems I think hordes is equal to warmachine.

BryanC wrote:The real downside to fury is that it is intrinsically linked to your warbeasts. It is a totally viable option to focus on destroying a warlocks warbeasts leaving him with no method to produce fury except cutting himself. IMO this is the real limitation of fury. Where as my warcaster does not have this problem.

Another advantage for focus in the whole debate is that a jack with focus can wander outside the casters control range and still use the focus. I really screwed up one game - I was trying the Molik Karn bullet, and he rocketed up the field, started killing and sidestepping. . . .and right out of range. Whoops. No forcing for him.

There is one other example where I would prefer to have focus over fury. Let's compare Gorten and Madrak as they are both at the 5 level. They are both put in the same situation. They are the last model to activate on their turn and all they have to do to win is run into base contact with a flag. The only problem is the 6/7 free strikes they'll have to take to get there. I feel it would be more likely that Gorten would make it over Madrak.

But that's an unlikely scenario. I can understand the op's reason for ranting and they do bring up some good points, particularly when looking at tournament results and seeing a whole load of hordes up there. Personally I've never felt hard done by when playing against a hordes faction, but that might be because I play Cryx

Assuming Madrak has the following: 5 fury that he can transfer off, and hasn't used his scroll of grimnar, I would think that Madrak would fare just as well.

yastobaal wrote:Personally I've never felt hard done by when playing against a hordes faction, but that might be because I play Cryx

Yeah, nothing like putting Venethrax and Malice on the table to make your Hordes buddy give you 'that look'.

Isn't it Ironic that Warmachines tends not to run lots of warmachines, and that hordes tends not to be very infantry heavy?

Ironic is one way to put it. Many of us find it bothersome. We don't want our infantry nerfed, but we want our 10pt warjack to have the output of a max unit + ua in every possible situation. We're a finicky bunch.

Though it really just comes back to the Focus vs. Fury mechanism. Hordes warlocks need to run beasts or they can't cast spells or mitigate damage. Warcasters need to cast spells or mitigate damage, so they cannot run warjacks.

Heffling wrote:Isn't it Ironic that Warmachines tends not to run lots of warmachines, and that hordes tends not to be very infantry heavy?

Yes. It's also a fundamental mis-alignment that can get people fed up with the faction/game pretty quickly.

I really do think PP needs to get Warmachine more jack centric. For too many lists, the defining aspect of the game system is often an afterthought.

sourclams wrote:

Heffling wrote:Isn't it Ironic that Warmachines tends not to run lots of warmachines, and that hordes tends not to be very infantry heavy?

Yes. It's also a fundamental mis-alignment that can get people fed up with the faction/game pretty quickly.

I really do think PP needs to get Warmachine more jack centric. For too many lists, the defining aspect of the game system is often an afterthought.

Nah. 'Jacks can only be so much of an army. I love me some infantries.

I agree that it can only be so much of an army, but for so many armies 'so much' is 'so little'.

And never have so few done so much for so many!

I guess I've always been fine with the balance.

I don't notice any real balance issues to be honest... I often feel like my friends with Warmachine factions are stronger, but I chalk that up to them being better players.

Yeah, switch armies with someone. They'll show you how it's done!

(Not me, though.)

It does vary - there are some mechanics that allow you to run several jacks without many problems. My pSevy force I've been playing around with runs 3 heavies and a light, with only one unit of actual combat infantry. This is due, of course, to the fact that Sevarius can operate on a very high focus budget (his FOC of 8 is amazing for fueling jacks, and his ability to generate 2 'effective' focus a turn via support also helps him run things) and the Avatar is always an awesome clinch jack to add some heavy support to the field without crimping your caster's style.

Of course, not too many factions outside of Menoth can pull this trick off. Cryx you can attain godlike focus efficiency running Mortenebra, a couple Seethers, the Deathjack, 2 Sirens, and a Leviathan and a couple Stalkers - Terminal Velocity gives you free charges, boosted melee attack rolls vs infantry, the Seethers charge for free and have amazing MAT + Chain attack and a free focus, the two sirens can provide a point of focus each, and best of all Mortenebra herself can just rattle off 7 focus to the Leviathan for a really punishing barrage of shots.

There's a few options like this in every faction, but you tend to need to run a dedicated jack caster who may well not be the top of the pile.

sourclams wrote:

Heffling wrote:Isn't it Ironic that Warmachines tends not to run lots of warmachines, and that hordes tends not to be very infantry heavy?

Yes. It's also a fundamental mis-alignment that can get people fed up with the faction/game pretty quickly.

I really do think PP needs to get Warmachine more jack centric. For too many lists, the defining aspect of the game system is often an afterthought.

I have absolutely no problem with the Infantry / Jack ratio of the game as it is now.

I see Warjacks as the vehicles / tanks of Immoren so it makes perfect sense to me that a force comprising of a few infantry / cavalry units would only have 1 or 2 warjacks as support.

Besides, every faction has at least one warcaster that is more than able to support an all Warjack army so you can do that as well.

malfred wrote:Yeah, switch armies with someone. They'll show you how it's done!

(Not me, though.)

Why not you?

Also I'm doing exactly that today. I want to win the Cygnar coin today at my store's Wrath event (better late than never), so I'm playing a Tier 3 eCaine list... hopefully I'll pick up some tips and tricks.

Oh, I'd have to beat you first.

Probably not going to happen. I have an awful track record.

The Avatar definitely doesn't count as running a jack. He runs himself. Protectorate has some cool options though like Sacrifical Lamb or whatever. You lose one warrior model and all your warjacks get 1 focus. That's simply awesome.


But yeah, kinda sucks that only "jack casters" can run a lot of jacks well. I would love to run like 4-5 jacks every game with all kinds of casters but it isn't very effective.