2K Competitive - Grant Theft Auto's Seer Council Deldar vs Jy2's FMC Daemons w/Be'lakor (Completed)

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.

**y0disisray**

Wow Jim that was a pretty brutal second turn there. Good news is I think youre going to neuter half of his scoring units by dropping the Heldrake to hover and roasting his bikes in your back corner. This might set you up though for a rear shot from a WK though I can't really tell from the picture angles but it will be worth it IMO. Going to be interesting to see if you can bounce back from this.

**jy2**

Yeah, losing Be'lakor was a big blow but the game is far from over. Next turn I think I can get 2 units of his troops with my heldrake due to his mistake. My strategy isn't to beat his seer council or WK's. It's to kill off his troops and he just helped me big time.

Like I said, my opponent's focus is a little off this game. Maybe he's confusing the rules between 40K and Fantasy, which is what he has been mostly playing recently.

His WK's don't have a shot at my heldrake due to 1) the BLOS-terrain and 2) my heldrake is more than 48" away from them. My heldrake will be safe exposing his a$$ this next turn.

**Naw**

Got to comment, two things:

1) Why on earth did you choose to smash? You wanted to cause wounds, win combat and run them off.

2) You wasted Be'lakor going in alone. It would have been of more use with its Telepathy powers.

3) So I can't count.. Should have gone after / waited for the troops as Eldar cornered himself. He wasn't going anywhere. I have noticed your tendency to be too hasty with FMC's, whether Nids or Daemons.

**Commander_Farsight**

I was just able to read the rest of the report... That was just sad to see Be'Lakor go down like that. I am still shocked. I am excited to see the rest. My only question is that, why did Be'Lakor issue a challenge. If he hadn't that would have not gotten him killed (potentially), right? Oh, and one more. Since the council was able to hit and run out of combat, then cast doom on Be'Lakor, that grounded him. What did his save become then. It just seems unlikely that he would take 3 wounds if his save was still good.

**macexor**

Apparently he isn't a daemon of Tzeentch. Thus is why his save is only a 2++ and not a 2++ rerollable.

**jy2**

Hey guys, I'll try to finish up my report tonight after I get back from dinner.

Naw wrote:
Got to comment, two things:

1) Why on earth did you choose to smash? You wanted to cause wounds, win combat and run them off.

2) You wasted Be'lakor going in alone. It would have been of more use with its Telepathy powers.

3) So I can't count.. Should have gone after / waited for the troops as Eldar cornered himself. He wasn't going anywhere. I have noticed your tendency to be too hasty with FMC's, whether Nids or Daemons.

1. Smash will insta-kill his farseer on a failed save. Otherwise, it would be S7 attacks vs a T4 model. That would be 3 wounds I would do instead of 1. Odds of breaking the unit is better if you can successfully smash.

2. It was a gamble and with me being normally an aggressive player, I decided to go for it. Now if this game was in a tournament, I would have played a little more conservatively, but in casual games, I don't mind taking the gamble. I really don't have much to lose besides the unit itself. In any case, my philosophy is that in an objectives game, all non-scoring units are sacrificial units. That would include my Warlord.

3. That is precisely my strategy. I still aim to kill his troops. However, I have to throw out a "distraction" unit to keep the rest of his army busy. On Turn 2 it was Be'lakor. Next turn, I will throw something else out there. Anything to prevent him from taking control of the middle.

Commander_Farsight wrote:
I was just able to read the rest of the report... That was just sad to see Be'Lakor go down like that. I am still shocked. I am excited to see the rest. My only question is that, why did Be'Lakor issue a challenge. If he hadn't that would have not gotten him killed (potentially), right? Oh, and one more. Since the council was able to hit and run out of combat, then cast doom on Be'Lakor, that grounded him. What did his save become then. It just seems unlikely that he would take 3 wounds if his save was still good.

Honestly, I don't mind losing Be'lakor. He is important, but I am willing to sacrifice any and all of my FMC's if it would increase my chances for a victory.

Be'lakor issued a challenge so that he didn't have to fight the entire seer council by himself. And if my opponent refused, that would be 1 less model that would be fighting back. It's a win-win situation for me to do so.

Doom didn't ground Be'lakor. It was because he had to land in order to be able to assault. On my next turn, had he survived, then he would have been able to go into flying mode again. That's one of the drawbacks of a FMC. You have to pick your combats carefully. What usually happens in many cases is that your 300+ FMC to assault a 100-pt unit and overkills it. Then on your opponent's turn, he is on the ground for your entire opponent's army to shoot down. Now you've just traded your 300+ unit for a unit that costs a fraction of his points.

He had a 2++ save, but even 2++ 4W means nothing when your opponent's entire army is shooting at you. Yeah, you'd have a chance if he needed 6's to hit but when you're on the ground, he's hitting at full BS. On top of that, he's re-rolling to Wound for his entire army due to Doom. Trust me, you're not going to survive both the shooting and assault of an entire army unless you've got a re-rollable 2++, which Be'lakor doesn't.

macexor wrote:
Apparently he isn't a daemon of Tzeentch. Thus is why his save is only a 2++ and not a 2++ rerollable.

Correct. He probably would have survived if he had a re-rollable 2++, but he's only got a normal 2++. That's just not going to hold up against the entire shooting and/or assault of an entire army.

**thanatos67**

LOL at that jetbike move behind the helldrake. JY2 are you going to LVO?

**jy2**

Like I said, my opponent's game was a little off that day.

Yes I will be at the LVO.

**Dozer Blades**

The move with Be'lakor was risky but could have been a game winner.

**Grant Theft Auto**

On key thing Jy2 didn't mention before I assaulted on turn two was because Be'lakor was still invisibly I decided to use mind war on him to do some extra wounds in shooting but because we tied he didn't take any wounds but instead went down to WS1, which helped me out to hit him in CC.

Instead of 5's I needed 4's which helped immensely, because he only failed one of the saves 2++ saves.

That move by my jetbikes was really bad I didn't know what I was thinking3, I honestly was probably thinking 45* arcs fantasy at the time. I have been playing a lot of fantasy in prep for the quake city rumble gt in July.

**Dozer Blades**

I am glad the game is using the 2+ re rollable. It's as it should be and makes this match up that much more interesting.

**herpguy**

Dozer Blades wrote:The move with Be'lakor was risky but could have been a game winner.

Exactly. Even though it was very risky the game could have ended then and there.

Dozer Blades wrote:I am glad the game is using the 2+ re rollable. It's as it should be and makes this match up that much more interesting.

I wholeheartedly agree. If daemons were winning tournies and filling the top 10 at the rates of Tau and Eldar then maybe I would support a change, but as it stands it's just needless daemons hate.

**Commander_Farsight**

The having to land to assault is definitely a weakness to Daemons. So if your opponent falls for it, (this is risky because you would loose a unit of infantry) you could use an infantry unit to bait the FMC (only do this if you really need to), make it land to assault, and then kill it with the rest of your army the next turn. Now that would be a pretty dumb move unless you could go for game on your next turn, because in this case, had that happened, Be'Lakor would have gone down, and there would have still been 4 more FMC to kill. Do you think that this could work, or is there a better way at exploiting this rule to your advantage?

**jy2**

Battle report completed.

**Commander_Farsight**

Awesome! Thanks!

So after reading that... I am truly shocked. I think that that was just some bad luck coming your way jy2. That was really unfortunate. I don't think that your opponent did much except watch single FMCs run up and then kill them. Other than that, it seemed to me like just like attempts that could have been game changing that never worked out for you. I don't think that your opponent got the full wrath of Daemons (like I pretty much did).

**Naw**

I still disagree with the Belakor-move. You should have used another one of your FMC's and kept Belakor around for his useful powers.

In a typically daemonic fashion this game was decided by the warp storm table. It has screwed me over more often than helped me and I refuse to acquire Fateweaver. GUO and KoS will have to do.

**Tactical_Genius**

Great report, as usual

Can't remember if I posted or not earlier to say that I thought having be'lakor as warlord would lose you the game... Personally I would have replaced the black mace prince with be'lakor, then had a dual lash prince in the second primary HQ slot.
Fateweaver's warlord trait is almost mandatory, for the reasons that should be self-evident after reading this report! :p
Great game, bad luck with the dice.
Looking forward to more jy2 reports

-TG

**thanatos67**

Should've had belakor as an ally in lieu of the black mace. Fatey as warlord couldve prevented that really untimely warpstorm roll. Oh well hindsight's always 20/20 I really dislike belakor as your warlord though.

**tyrannosaurus**

Think a couple of people are being very harsh over the whole jetbikes hiding behind the turkey thing. As JY2 said, Grand Theft Auto [GTA] seemed tired, and by GTA's own admission he has been playing loads of fantasy lately. Plus, we all make mistakes.

Also, I don't think this Eldar win can be put down to bad dice on JY2's part. GTA had a strategy [albeit a very defensive one] and stuck to it. Despite everything he still comprehensively beat a highly experienced and successful tournament player.

So my contribution is... great bat report [love 'em all JY2, keep them coming please

] , and well down Grand Theft Auto!

**hippesthippo**

A well played game, but for me at least, it really emphasizes just how un-fun the game becomes with 2++ re-roll saves. I mean.. all that died was a few Jetbikes, a Daemon Prince whose head imploded, and Belakor, whom you sacrificed.

Tactical? Yes. Winnable for both armies? Yes. Fun for the reasons we got into war games for in the first place? Probably not.

Thanks for another great report, Jim.

**Red Corsair**

It's more the problems with 6th in general. I am sticking to the hobby side until they update this edition personally. I really don't see a whole lot of strategy between "competitive" lists. It's all about last turn objective grabs, period. Do I get second turn? and dose the game end turn 5. Everything in between is just are chaff. Just my 2cents, I am not doom saying, I like the hobby side plenty at the moment but the core rules have just become to fat again IMO.

Good report though. Interesting center piece, I couldn't wrap my head around what on earth is was?

**tyrannosaurus**

Red Corsair wrote:
It's more the problems with 6th in general. I am sticking to the hobby side until they update this edition personally. I really don't see a whole lot of strategy between "competitive" lists. It's all about last turn objective grabs, period. Do I get second turn? and dose the game end turn 5. Everything in between is just are chaff. Just my 2cents, I am not doom saying, I like the hobby side plenty at the moment but the core rules have just become to fat again IMO.

Good report though. Interesting center piece, I couldn't wrap my head around what on earth is was?

5th edition was Drawhammer, 6th is a bug improvement in terms of getting a definitive result imo.

**DarthDiggler**

Is this what passes for highly competitive games? Sorry, but this game was very boring. I blame the lists which are both min-troop max damage lists. Notice how that even with Reece's double objective game, there is very little interaction between the armies and in fact the best tactic for one army is to not engage the opponent at all.

Can this game be the poster child for the modified missions being promoted by Mike and Neil? It can certainly be the poster child for the camp who wants to comp the hell out of the game.

**Commander_Farsight**

Naw wrote:
I still disagree with the Belakor-move. You should have used another one of your FMC's and kept Belakor around for his useful powers.

In a typically daemonic fashion this game was decided by the warp storm table. It has screwed me over more often than helped me and I refuse to acquire Fateweaver. GUO and KoS will have to do.

I think that the move was fine. It was not a tournament or anything, so if you could pretty much get game, and its just for fun, I think that the move was just fine. It did not turn out well for jy2, but like I said, it was just a friendly match. Props to Grant too. He is amazing with his Seer Council. I have not yet gotten to experience it first hand, but I have watched it happen multiple times (live).

**Red Corsair**

tyrannosaurus wrote:
Red Corsair wrote:
It's more the problems with 6th in general. I am sticking to the hobby side until they update this edition personally. I really don't see a whole lot of strategy between "competitive" lists. It's all about last turn objective grabs, period. Do I get second turn? and dose the game end turn 5. Everything in between is just are chaff. Just my 2cents, I am not doom saying, I like the hobby side plenty at the moment but the core rules have just become to fat again IMO.

Good report though. Interesting center piece, I couldn't wrap my head around what on earth is was?

5th edition was Drawhammer, 6th is a bug improvement in terms of getting a definitive result imo.

I disagree. Neither edition was perfect and in fact GW missions have always sucked. The major difference was at least in 5th you engaged your opponent earlier then turn 5+. I figure even with a new edition missions will need to be tailored but at least the core mechanics can be reigned in a tad so there isn't a HUGE discrepancy between the durability of skimmers to tracked vehicles, MC's to walkers and this cluster feth with some units having near impossible to kill units or units that can move so fast they literally can avoid engagement until they want to.

DarthDiggler wrote:Is this what passes for highly competitive games? Sorry, but this game was very boring. I blame the lists which are both min-troop max damage lists. Notice how that even with Reece's double objective game, there is very little interaction between the armies and in fact the best tactic for one army is to not engage the opponent at all.

Can this game be the poster child for the modified missions being promoted by Mike and Neil? It can certainly be the poster child for the camp who wants to comp the hell out of the game.

I would say this is definitely the poster child. HUGE mistakes were made by both players yet none of it mattered come turn 5 except the roll to see if their was a turn 6.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commander_Farsight wrote:
Naw wrote:
I still disagree with the Belakor-move. You should have used another one of your FMC's and kept Belakor around for his useful powers.

In a typically daemonic fashion this game was decided by the warp storm table. It has screwed me over more often than helped me and I refuse to acquire Fateweaver. GUO and KoS will have to do.

I think that the move was fine. It was not a tournament or anything, so if you could pretty much get game, and its just for fun, I think that the move was just fine. It did not turn out well for jy2, but like I said, it was just a friendly match. Props to Grant too. He is amazing with his Seer Council. I have not yet gotten to experience it first hand, but I have watched it happen multiple times (live).

Anything is fine in a casual game. I think he [Naw] is analyzing it competitively because that's the whole point of these reports he [jy2] puts out generally. It's kind of like wanting to be looked up to when your gamble pays off, but when it blows up in your face its discounted because its a friendly game. Either way he admitted it was a move he wouldn't make in a tournament so I think that settled it right then.

**Asmodai Asmodean**

DarthDiggler wrote:
Is this what passes for highly competitive games? Sorry, but this game was very boring. I blame the lists which are both min-troop max damage lists. Notice how that even with Reece's double objective game, there is very little interaction between the armies and in fact the best tactic for one army is to not engage the opponent at all.

Can this game be the poster child for the modified missions being promoted by Mike and Neil? It can certainly be the poster child for the camp who wants to comp the hell out of the game.

I'm sorry but how was this game boring? Do you just want a drawn out slugfest between 120+ models a side? Cat and mouse with Council/Daemons was very fun and tense.

**macexor**

I myself find these types of games more challenging and interesting.
I don't mind playing against a typical list but it is figuring out how to beat a Screamer Star/Seer Council or how to approach a 2+ Riptide, 6+ Broadside list and facing them on table what thrills me most.

**y0disisray**

It was hide and seek until turn 5 then the game ended. It wasn't that entertaining but from a competitive stand point it was tactically sound. I think Jy2 did what he could to knock out his troops but it was just short of enough.

**jy2**

I will address some of the comments here in my Post-Game Analysis and come back to address some of the other comments later. Thanks for reading!

POST-GAME ANALYSIS:

Spoiler:

Isn't it ironic to see what are normally 2 very aggressive armies playing so passively? That may make for a more boring game, but I feel that tactically, it makes sense in this matchup. Over-commit against an army with so much mobility and you just may be in trouble. The foolish thing would have been to rush the enemy. The more prudent thing would be to wait and see what happens. I know, that's very uncharacteristic of my playstyle. Likewise, it is also very uncharacteristic for my opponent as well. I'm talking about someone who would aggressively assault my 1000 pt+ paladinstar with his seer council in my other games.

So why did I do the things that I did? Why did I send Be'lakor all by himself against the entire Eldar army? Some see this as a mistake and I will say that I do not disagree with them. It was a calculated gamble that I took. The risk was high but so was the reward. I sacrificed Be'lakor, my Warlord, in order to potentially take out a unit about 3x his cost. Taking out that unit would have almost guaranteed me the game. Now if this was in a tournament, I most likely wouldn't have made that gamble. I would have chosen the safer route and kept Be'lakor in the air instead (or fly him off the table). However, this was just a casual game. In a casual game, it's ok to take some gambles. It's ok to take risks. That is what casual games are for - practice. You can practice unorthodox lists and strategies. You can experiment with tactics/things you normally don't do or use. It's ok to take a stumble and then try to get back up again. My win/loss record isn't as important to me as many would think. Of course I play to win, but I honestly don't mind losing if that would help me to improve my game. As a matter of fact, I'm actually glad I did what I did here in a casual game rather than if I had done it in a tournament game.

As for my opponent, he actually played alright. He had a sound, if somewhat conservative strategy. Then again, so did I. He was slightly off his game in regards to some of the finer details, and it almost cost him, but overall, his strategy was fundamentally sound. But despite all his mistakes, I basically handed Grant the game when I lost my Grimoire DP to the Warpstorm. I felt that that was the real turning point in the game, not the loss of Be'lakor. Losing Be'lakor hurt, but at that point, I still felt that I had control of the game. But after I lost the Grimoire, it just went downhill from there. Even my dice seemed to abandon me thereafter.

Running Fateweaver, Be'lakor and the Black Mace Daemon Prince prince makes for a potentially devastating combo, but for the long haul, I think I'm going to stick with Fateweaver, Lord of Change and Be'lakor. As a daemon player, if you are looking for some consistency in your army, you definitely need a way to control the Warpstorm table. In other words, you need Fateweaver to be your Warlord.

**jy2**

Grant Theft Auto wrote:
On key thing Jy2 didn't mention before I assaulted on turn two was because Be'lakor was still invisibly I decided to use mind war on him to do some extra wounds in shooting but because we tied he didn't take any wounds but instead went down to WS1, which helped me out to hit him in CC.

Instead of 5's I needed 4's which helped immensely, because he only failed one of the saves 2++ saves.

That move by my jetbikes was really bad I didn't know what I was thinking3, I honestly was probably thinking 45* arcs fantasy at the time. I have been playing a lot of fantasy in prep for the quake city rumble gt in July.

Right. I forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder.

herpguy wrote:
Dozer Blades wrote:The move with Be'lakor was risky but could have been a game winner.

Exactly. Even though it was very risky the game could have ended then and there.

Dozer Blades wrote:I am glad the game is using the 2+ re rollable. It's as it should be and makes this match up that much more interesting.

I wholeheartedly agree. If daemons were winning tournies and filling the top 10 at the rates of Tau and Eldar then maybe I would support a change, but as it stands it's just needless daemons hate.

Just a point of note, the re-rollable 2+/4+ is a nerf that targets both Eldar and Daemons. I don't see it as daemon-hate but rather, an attempt to curb a much hated game mechanic.

You're probably thinking about FoB's proposed ban on the Grimoire, which is much different than the reduction from 2+/2+ to 2+/4+.

Commander_Farsight wrote:
The having to land to assault is definitely a weakness to Daemons. So if your opponent falls for it, (this is risky because you would loose a unit of infantry) you could use an infantry unit to bait the FMC (only do this if you really need to), make it land to assault, and then kill it with the rest of your army the next turn. Now that would be a pretty dumb move unless you could go for game on your next turn, because in this case, had that happened, Be'Lakor would have gone down, and there would have still been 4 more FMC to kill. Do you think that this could work, or is there a better way at exploiting this rule to your advantage?

It's a fair rule. Otherwise, daemons (and tyranids) would be super-powerful if they could assault and still stay in the air (it also wouldn't really make sense). That would mean that you would almost always need 6's to hit them with shooting. But with the rule as it currently is, a FMC needs to carefully consider who and how it wants to assault. Just don't go after the chaff units. You can always fly over them and vector-strike them in your pursuit of more "strategic targets" in need of your assault.

Naw wrote:
I still disagree with the Belakor-move. You should have used another one of your FMC's and kept Belakor around for his useful powers.

In a typically daemonic fashion this game was decided by the warp storm table. It has screwed me over more often than helped me and I refuse to acquire Fateweaver. GUO and KoS will have to do.

The thing is, I have to expose Be'lakor in order to use his Maledictions. Unless I hide him like all my other daemons, my opponent should be able to fire at him if he tries to use any of his powers (with the exception of Invisibility, but they could always take away the cover with Reveal/Conceal). With those powers being a relatively short 24" range, the eldar could have just stayed out of range and force him to move towards them.

Yeah, the Warpstorm has screwed me over a few times. Being able to re-roll that is so important.

Tactical_Genius wrote:
Great report, as usual
Can't remember if I posted or not earlier to say that I thought having be'lakor as warlord would lose you the game... Personally I would have replaced the black mace prince with be'lakor, then had a dual lash prince in the second primary HQ slot.
Fateweaver's warlord trait is almost mandatory, for the reasons that should be self-evident after reading this report! :p
Great game, bad luck with the dice.
Looking forward to more jy2 reports
-TG

thanatos67 wrote:
Should've had belakor as an ally in lieu of the black mace. Fatey as warlord couldve prevented that really untimely warpstorm roll. Oh well hindsight's always 20/20 I really dislike belakor as your warlord though.

Yeah, he was just a trial run.

tyrannosaurus wrote:
Think a couple of people are being very harsh over the whole jetbikes hiding behind the turkey thing. As JY2 said, Grand Theft Auto [GTA] seemed tired, and by GTA's own admission he has been playing loads of fantasy lately. Plus, we all make mistakes.

Also, I don't think this Eldar win can be put down to bad dice on JY2's part. GTA had a strategy [albeit a very defensive one] and stuck to it. Despite everything he still comprehensively beat a highly experienced and successful tournament player.

So my contribution is... great bat report [love 'em all JY2, keep them coming please ] , and well down Grand Theft Auto!

Yeah, Grant's overall strategy was good. He just had several brain farts along the game when it came to the details. It almost cost him, but he was saved by the Warpstorm.

hippesthippo wrote:
A well played game, but for me at least, it really emphasizes just how un-fun the game becomes with 2++ re-roll saves. I mean.. all that died was a few Jetbikes, a Daemon Prince whose head imploded, and Belakor, whom you sacrificed.

Tactical? Yes. Winnable for both armies? Yes. Fun for the reasons we got into war games for in the first place? Probably not.

Thanks for another great report, Jim.

DarthDiggler wrote:
Is this what passes for highly competitive games? Sorry, but this game was very boring. I blame the lists which are both min-troop max damage lists. Notice how that even with Reece's double objective game, there is very little interaction between the armies and in fact the best tactic for one army is to not engage the opponent at all.

Can this game be the poster child for the modified missions being promoted by Mike and Neil? It can certainly be the poster child for the camp who wants to comp the hell out of the game.

I can see how this game would be boring for some. For 2 epically confrontational armies, they were doing anything but. But we don't necessarily play for the entertainment of the audience. Rather, we play for the win and sometimes, the win may require you to play in a boring manner, just waiting, testing the waters and reacting.

Red Corsair wrote:
It's more the problems with 6th in general. I am sticking to the hobby side until they update this edition personally. I really don't see a whole lot of strategy between "competitive" lists. It's all about last turn objective grabs, period. Do I get second turn? and dose the game end turn 5. Everything in between is just are chaff. Just my 2cents, I am not doom saying, I like the hobby side plenty at the moment but the core rules have just become to fat again IMO.

Good report though. Interesting center piece, I couldn't wrap my head around what on earth is was?

It's just a tall LOS-blocking piece of terrain. The external side was facing Grant so I never had the opportunity to take a clear picture of it. Instead, I could only get pictures of its backside, which was the side facing towards me.

Wait, actually, I do have pictures of it:

Front side.

Back side.

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
DarthDiggler wrote:
Is this what passes for highly competitive games? Sorry, but this game was very boring. I blame the lists which are both min-troop max damage lists. Notice how that even with Reece's double objective game, there is very little interaction between the armies and in fact the best tactic for one army is to not engage the opponent at all.

Can this game be the poster child for the modified missions being promoted by Mike and Neil? It can certainly be the poster child for the camp who wants to comp the hell out of the game.

I'm sorry but how was this game boring? Do you just want a drawn out slugfest between 120+ models a side? Cat and mouse with Council/Daemons was very fun and tense.

Yeah, this game was almost like a game of chess, with moves and counter-moves and the threat of counter-counter-moves to discourage the moves. Lol.

In any case, I was prepared for Grant's strategy but I think my strategy surprised him a little. I think he was kind of expecting me to play a lot more aggressively.

macexor wrote:
I myself find these types of games more challenging and interesting.
I don't mind playing against a typical list but it is figuring out how to beat a Screamer Star/Seer Council or how to approach a 2+ Riptide, 6+ Broadside list and facing them on table what thrills me most.

I usually enjoy these types of games, but even I have to admit that the 2+/2+ thing gets tiring.

y0disisray wrote:
It was hide and seek until turn 5 then the game ended. It wasn't that entertaining but from a competitive stand point it was tactically sound. I think Jy2 did what he could to knock out his troops but it was just short of enough.

Correct. The game wasn't pretty, but we both did what we felt gave us the best chance for a victory.