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.

 wuestenfux wrote:

In my experience, I run a 1000pts list of 18 Prosecutors with Jevelin (6 units), 1 Knight-venator with +1 damage relic, 1 Lord Celestant, 1 knight Azyros and 20 Librators. It has no monster and no mortal wound, but is doing very well in most games.

I won against such an army, 1500 pts, with my Khorne army in scenario play.

In scenario everything could be very different. I once lost a scenario game of occupiing a lot of objective against 220 zombies. I cannot kill faster then they respawn.

but if talking about tabling others this is quite effective.

Also I would say Khorne is not a weak army in the end.

At which point you are talking a very specific case. Almost all battle plans (matched play or otherwise) are objective based. Going for tabling is a risk, and in not all cases is tabling a win either - that also depends on the scenario.

I don't think they are weak. I just don't think they are particularly strong either once you snipe the characters out.

 Son Of Khârn 8FP wrote:
Thanks for your input, guys.
What are your thoughts on the the Khorne BB expansion, tho?
Would you buy it?

Personally I wouldn't go for this - but mainly because I would never want that many Blood Reavers. For me variety is the spice of AoS, and so I would try and get as many of the Bloodbound heroes as possible because they seem to add lots of flavour to the faction. Because of that, I would go for Gorechosen instead and get the 4 heroes for cheap. Now if you're playing strictly Pitched Battles, you'll be limited to 6 Leaders at 2000 points, but you might want to suggest to your opponent a "points only game" (mentioned in the GHB). I think fielding 10 Heroes would be great fun.

After that, if you didn't get the White Dwarf Slaughterpriest, maybe consider the Start Collecting box?

Just want to lament the fact everything turns into "the most competitive build for X" instead of just you know playing what suits your background/theme, which seemed to be the entire point of AOS to begin with, not worrying about what's "competitive" or not and trying to min-max the system.

Unfortunately thats just a sign of the times and era we are playing in.

Though I will say that I'm starting a graphic novel project based on AOS battle reports and myself and my opponents are fielding more narrative lists that include things like a lot of reavers etc because those are a lot of fun.

To be honest, games between two most common army list (like one has 15 different kinds of units from Stormcast) are the most interested ones. People in those game really need to think more about everythig. Just one choince on charge or pile-in might lead to totally different results. And most of the time those games are so balanced that you didn't even imagine.

The battle between competitive lists are actually very boring. They are so strong against common list and they are counters for one each other. Those games normally ends in two rounds when someone clearly see he got no chance to win.

Aeonotakist wrote:

 auticus wrote:
The competitive tables here are beastclaw raiders, sylvaneth, and stormcast with two stardrakes and a lot of retributors.

Skaven loaded down with stormfiends and doing with warpfire throwers and warp fire teams 20-30 mortal wounds a turn after they pop up.

Things like that.

Your list sounds like it would be f un to play against with a narrative force (which is what I prefer) but my guess is wouldn't last very long against the things at the tables here.

Then I think your guess is wrong.

I ran this table against main retribution army with Hammerstrike Force Battleion. Also against table with one Dragon Lord under 1000 pts. They got wiped without even killing a single unit of mine. The presecutor used as teleportation point in Hammerstrike got killed before moving. The dargon lord lost 11 wounds in the first round and was taken down in the second.

I also tried beastclaw raiders. Their ability to halve the damage is a big advantage against jevelin Prosecutors. But I think it is still a 50:50 game. If my rolls were better then I can get a narrow victory.
The Sylvaneth with Queen and hunters hide in forest was also a 50:50 game. Their defense was better but my damage is higher. It also depends on dice. Those without Queen was pretty weak against mine.

Haven't tried skaven yet.

maybe i'm wrong, but all artefact for the Order work with MELEE WEAPON, not ranged weapon.

ledha wrote:

Aeonotakist wrote:

 auticus wrote:
The competitive tables here are beastclaw raiders, sylvaneth, and stormcast with two stardrakes and a lot of retributors.

Skaven loaded down with stormfiends and doing with warpfire throwers and warp fire teams 20-30 mortal wounds a turn after they pop up.

Things like that.

Your list sounds like it would be f un to play against with a narrative force (which is what I prefer) but my guess is wouldn't last very long against the things at the tables here.

Then I think your guess is wrong.

I ran this table against main retribution army with Hammerstrike Force Battleion. Also against table with one Dragon Lord under 1000 pts. They got wiped without even killing a single unit of mine. The presecutor used as teleportation point in Hammerstrike got killed before moving. The dargon lord lost 11 wounds in the first round and was taken down in the second.

I also tried beastclaw raiders. Their ability to halve the damage is a big advantage against jevelin Prosecutors. But I think it is still a 50:50 game. If my rolls were better then I can get a narrow victory.
The Sylvaneth with Queen and hunters hide in forest was also a 50:50 game. Their defense was better but my damage is higher. It also depends on dice. Those without Queen was pretty weak against mine.

Haven't tried skaven yet.

maybe i'm wrong, but all artefact for the Order work with MELEE WEAPON, not ranged weapon.

Can you post the rule? I have a Chinese offical translated pdf which didn't mentioned melee or ranged.

I have an English GHB far away from me now so I cannot look up.

Aeonotakist wrote:
What is the name and exact descripetion of this battlion? Is it pointed?

It's the Clan Skryre battalion from the grand alliance book and 'skryrefire' is referring to a specific way of running it, but I realized my statement is actually wrong since skryrefire can't fit in 1000 pts (false alarm!).

But to answer your question, the battalion is 200 points and has a rather long description (modular, containing 2-5 mini-battalions called 'Enginecovens') but here's the relevant bit:

Gautfyre Skorch: 1 Warlock Engineer, 1-3 units of Stormfiends, 1-5 Warpfire Throwers, 1-5 Warp-grinders

"Instead of setting up a Gautfyre Skorch Enginecoven on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and declare that it is constructing an elaborate network of tunnels beneath the surface. In any of your hero phases, the Enginecoven can surface under the watchful eye of its Warlock Engineer. Set up one of the Warp-grinder Weapon Teams anywhere on the battlefield, then set up each other unit from the Enginecoven within 8" of it. Any unit that is set up within 3" of the enemy suffers D6 mortal wounds."

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Aeonotakist wrote:
What is the name and exact descripetion of this battlion? Is it pointed?

It's the Clan Skryre battalion from the grand alliance book and 'skryrefire' is referring to a specific way of running it, but I realized my statement is actually wrong since skryrefire can't fit in 1000 pts (false alarm!).

But to answer your question, the battalion is 200 points and has a rather long description (modular, containing 2-5 mini-battalions called 'Enginecovens') but here's the relevant bit:

Gautfyre Skorch: 1 Warlock Engineer, 1-3 units of Stormfiends, 1-5 Warpfire Throwers, 1-5 Warp-grinders

"Instead of setting up a Gautfyre Skorch Enginecoven on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and declare that it is constructing an elaborate network of tunnels beneath the surface. In any of your hero phases, the Enginecoven can surface under the watchful eye of its Warlock Engineer. Set up one of the Warp-grinder Weapon Teams anywhere on the battlefield, then set up each other unit from the Enginecoven within 8" of it. Any unit that is set up within 3" of the enemy suffers D6 mortal wounds."

Well then I see this one. I think it could be countered somehow.

Last time a Sylvannith army ran against this table. The Skaven got around 1800 points with two of this battlion. The treeman was main hunter table and saperated his army into five different units with almost equal points. Each standing 20' away from the other. The Skaven tunneling team wipedout about 700 pints of Sylvannith in one turn, but cannot fight the remaining about 1000 points of hunters. They keep teleporting between forests and warpfire cannot really kill enough before being shot to death.

I dont know exactly what happend duing the process. But I made s simulation, seems like this strategy (MSU of powerful long range shooting troop seperated wide enough) can bring a lot of problem on warpfire units.

 Bottle wrote:

 Son Of Khârn 8FP wrote:
Thanks for your input, guys.
What are your thoughts on the the Khorne BB expansion, tho?
Would you buy it?

Personally I wouldn't go for this - but mainly because I would never want that many Blood Reavers. For me variety is the spice of AoS, and so I would try and get as many of the Bloodbound heroes as possible because they seem to add lots of flavour to the faction. Because of that, I would go for Gorechosen instead and get the 4 heroes for cheap. Now if you're playing strictly Pitched Battles, you'll be limited to 6 Leaders at 2000 points, but you might want to suggest to your opponent a "points only game" (mentioned in the GHB). I think fielding 10 Heroes would be great fun.

After that, if you didn't get the White Dwarf Slaughterpriest, maybe consider the Start Collecting box?

Well, I've already ordered the expansion, and I WILL be getting the Gorechosen box when it comes out. XD
As for the White Dwarf Slaughterpriest..he's built and ready to prime as we speak.

I'm also thinking that the Chaos Warshrine would be awesome with all these Bloodreavers.

Aeonotakist wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Aeonotakist wrote:
What is the name and exact descripetion of this battlion? Is it pointed?

It's the Clan Skryre battalion from the grand alliance book and 'skryrefire' is referring to a specific way of running it, but I realized my statement is actually wrong since skryrefire can't fit in 1000 pts (false alarm!).

But to answer your question, the battalion is 200 points and has a rather long description (modular, containing 2-5 mini-battalions called 'Enginecovens') but here's the relevant bit:

Gautfyre Skorch: 1 Warlock Engineer, 1-3 units of Stormfiends, 1-5 Warpfire Throwers, 1-5 Warp-grinders

"Instead of setting up a Gautfyre Skorch Enginecoven on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and declare that it is constructing an elaborate network of tunnels beneath the surface. In any of your hero phases, the Enginecoven can surface under the watchful eye of its Warlock Engineer. Set up one of the Warp-grinder Weapon Teams anywhere on the battlefield, then set up each other unit from the Enginecoven within 8" of it. Any unit that is set up within 3" of the enemy suffers D6 mortal wounds."

Well then I see this one. I think it could be countered somehow.

Last time a Sylvannith army ran against this table. The Skaven got around 1800 points with two of this battlion. The treeman was main hunter table and saperated his army into five different units with almost equal points. Each standing 20' away from the other. The Skaven tunneling team wipedout about 700 pints of Sylvannith in one turn, but cannot fight the remaining about 1000 points of hunters. They keep teleporting between forests and warpfire cannot really kill enough before being shot to death.

I dont know exactly what happend duing the process. But I made s simulation, seems like this strategy (MSU of powerful long range shooting troop seperated wide enough) can bring a lot of problem on warpfire units.

Sounds like the Skaven player got out-played by a more skilled opponent, especially if he had double Gautfyre. With 8" off the Warp-grinder and another 8" of warpfire range just one of the enginecovens could readily hit two targets even at 30" apart. But Kurnoth bow spam is on a similar level of power (read: overpowered) so while I think the Skaven player would have the edge since he gets the 'first strike' there would be a strong element of skill in such a matchup. Of course if random initiative is in play and the skaven player gets a double turn when he shows up that's game over.

But Skryrefyre, Kurnoth-bow spam, Thundertusk-spam, etc. Are really all exercises in 'who can break the game hardest' rather than legitimate armies in my eyes. Outside of a tournament with little to no comp/sportsmanship aspects involved I would have serious TFG concerns over anyone running such a list. Which is to say I think the solution to these and the like lies more in the players rather than the army lists.

I agree.

 auticus wrote:
Competitive: I rate khorne as a C. They lack the ability to dish tons of mortal wounds and pretty much just take it on the chin and require character synergy to do well (which means smart opponents kill the characters first and its game over)

Aesthetics: I am a khorne player and enjoy the aesthetic. Against friendly or campaign armies, they are fun to play with. Against competitive lists, they are not fun to play with unless you don't mind getting curb stomped and groin split every game.

Well i guess Warlords just proved Khorne majority army is viable. It just placed third in Warlords. He did have two warp fire cannons and LoC, but the rest was Khorne mortal .

I wouldn't say an army with a LoC and two Warp-Lightning Cannons is Khorne, really. Khorne-focused, maybe, but I wouldn't call it a 'Khorne Army'.

Yeah. That's not a khorne army. Thats an army with khorne elements in it.

A bloodbound khorne army would be entirely khorne mortals in it.

All Khorne Bloodbound units except two "F ranked" Warp Lighting Cannons and a "C ranked" LoC. You should show this to your group Auticus if you're worried about your meta choosing the most "efficient" units only.

So 500 points of other Chaos elements, and 1500 points of Khorne Mortals and you say it ain't Khorne, right. Oh Dakka!

I found two Bloodsecretors in my 1500 pt army an absolute must-have. If spread out properly, they help to keep your army alive.

 Bottle wrote:
All Khorne Bloodbound units except two "F ranked" Warp Lighting Cannons and a "C ranked" LoC. You should show this to your group Auticus if you're worried about your meta choosing the most "efficient" units only.

We've discussed ad naseum what that data represents and where it needs to go to have another go around here about it once again.

 auticus wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
All Khorne Bloodbound units except two "F ranked" Warp Lighting Cannons and a "C ranked" LoC. You should show this to your group Auticus if you're worried about your meta choosing the most "efficient" units only.

We've discussed ad naseum what that data represents and where it needs to go to have another go around here about it once again.

You misunderstand. I certainly don't want to discuss your ratings system again, I am only saying the results of warlords could be useful to share with your gaming group to have them consider units they may have written off as non-competitive, as this is something you oft complain about on the forums.

 thejughead wrote:
So 500 points of other Chaos elements, and 1500 points of Khorne Mortals and you say it ain't Khorne, right. Oh Dakka!

I'm not sure why this seems strange... By the rules I cannot mix in 25% Beastclaws with Ironjawz and call it an 'Ironjawz army' so why does Khorne get an exemption? If it were something like a Ghorgon mixed in then sure, I'd call it a Khorne army, but a LoC is about as un-Khorney as it gets. And that's the greater point; the army requires key components that are not Khorne to make the Khorne part of it work, so it has a crutch.

 Bottle wrote:

 auticus wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
All Khorne Bloodbound units except two "F ranked" Warp Lighting Cannons and a "C ranked" LoC. You should show this to your group Auticus if you're worried about your meta choosing the most "efficient" units only.

We've discussed ad naseum what that data represents and where it needs to go to have another go around here about it once again.

You misunderstand. I certainly don't want to discuss your ratings system again, I am only saying the results of warlords could be useful to share with your gaming group to have them consider units they may have written off as non-competitive, as this is something you oft complain about on the forums.

Ah gotcha. Different metas I suppose. We don't see many lightning cannons etc. What we do see a lot of are storm fiends everywhere

Personally I think a room rule of higher points for more than one or two same units will help to improve the game environment of AoS. Now most 'competitive table' are just repeating several same units.

Spam (repeating units) is a thing in most any competitive environment since those environments are about minimizing liabilities and maximizing output.

We sometimes use a "no spam" rule which means barring battleline stuff you can't include more than one instance of something.

This works for some people and chaffes others so we cannot use it all the time.

It depends on the army, sometimes some armies want to spam some things because of how useful they can be, others can get by without really needing such.

Though it's certainly a fun little rule.

Call it what you want. It's a Khorne army to me. I don't have KBB benefits right now so I'll take it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thejughead wrote:
So 500 points of other Chaos elements, and 1500 points of Khorne Mortals and you say it ain't Khorne, right. Oh Dakka!

I'm not sure why this seems strange... By the rules I cannot mix in 25% Beastclaws with Ironjawz and call it an 'Ironjawz army' so why does Khorne get an exemption? If it were something like a Ghorgon mixed in then sure, I'd call it a Khorne army, but a LoC is about as un-Khorney as it gets. And that's the greater point; the army requires key components that are not Khorne to make the Khorne part of it work, so it has a crutch.

 auticus wrote:

 Bottle wrote:

 auticus wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
All Khorne Bloodbound units except two "F ranked" Warp Lighting Cannons and a "C ranked" LoC. You should show this to your group Auticus if you're worried about your meta choosing the most "efficient" units only.

We've discussed ad naseum what that data represents and where it needs to go to have another go around here about it once again.

You misunderstand. I certainly don't want to discuss your ratings system again, I am only saying the results of warlords could be useful to share with your gaming group to have them consider units they may have written off as non-competitive, as this is something you oft complain about on the forums.

Ah gotcha. Different metas I suppose. We don't see many lightning cannons etc. What we do see a lot of are storm fiends everywhere

I've faced Stormfiend wrath in a tournament! And I know Terry Pike from Facehammer painted up a load for Warlords (absolutely beautifully too!) Luckily there's no Skaven player down my local :-) (although I am tempted to start!)

 thejughead wrote:
Call it what you want. It's a Khorne army to me. I don't have KBB benefits right now so I'll take it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 thejughead wrote:
So 500 points of other Chaos elements, and 1500 points of Khorne Mortals and you say it ain't Khorne, right. Oh Dakka!

I'm not sure why this seems strange... By the rules I cannot mix in 25% Beastclaws with Ironjawz and call it an 'Ironjawz army' so why does Khorne get an exemption? If it were something like a Ghorgon mixed in then sure, I'd call it a Khorne army, but a LoC is about as un-Khorney as it gets. And that's the greater point; the army requires key components that are not Khorne to make the Khorne part of it work, so it has a crutch.

Ok, then your argument has no bearing in regards to Auticus' point that Khorne armies rate as mediocre. It seems the statement is "by my personal standards Khorne armies are not mediocre" rather than a comment on Matched Play as a whole.