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.

Hello, I tried to get answer for this question already, but it seems to deserve its own thread. Of course I do understand, that saying what is the best objectively is very hard, but having a discussion about it should give a reasonable answer.

Ulrik. He is just a great buff character.

Krom, cheap beatstick HQ

Krom? When compared to Ulrik? Yeck.

I can't contribute to the discussion, but I wanted to point out how hilariously contradictory "objectively the best... in your opinion" is.

All of them have their uses. Just depends on the list. Ulrik, Harald, TW wolf lord, and rune priests seem to get the most love when talking HQs.

objectively ... in your opinion?

Nate668 wrote:I can't contribute to the discussion, but I wanted to point out how hilariously contradictory "objectively the best... in your opinion" is.

Psienesis wrote:

objectively ... in your opinion?

Spoiler:

Objectively in your opinion means, that you will tell me the HQ option that is best objectively with all the information that you know. If you would tell me the objectively best option, it would be in your opinion, or you would need to be omniscient.

muzzinator47 wrote:
Krom, cheap beatstick HQ

Krom is worthless with that unwieldy axe and he is all about challenges too so hes worthless.

Personally I like Ragnar (fluff wise mostly)

Objective is a statement that is completely unbiased. It is not touched by the speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. It is verifiable by looking up facts or performing mathematical calculations.
Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.

So as said before you cannot really state something objectively in your opinion. You would either state it subjectively in your opinion (which can still contain facts), or you would prove objectively what the best HQ is.

I.e. I could say Bjon is the best HQ choice, because he is a vehicle, and that makes him immune to small arms fire, so against most weapons in the game he is more durable than any other HQ in the book.

That does not make him Objectively the best HQ. To do that you would need to break down stats on all HQs, and their various abilities, and assign value to them as so to compare the HQs on a point for point basis etc.

Also determining the best option Objectively does not require Omniscience, just proof.

Breng77 wrote:
Objective is a statement that is completely unbiased. It is not touched by the speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. It is verifiable by looking up facts or performing mathematical calculations.
Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.

So as said before you cannot really state something objectively in your opinion. You would either state it subjectively in your opinion (which can still contain facts), or you would prove objectively what the best HQ is.

I.e. I could say Bjon is the best HQ choice, because he is a vehicle, and that makes him immune to small arms fire, so against most weapons in the game he is more durable than any other HQ in the book.

That does not make him Objectively the best HQ. To do that you would need to break down stats on all HQs, and their various abilities, and assign value to them as so to compare the HQs on a point for point basis etc.

Also determining the best option Objectively does not require Omniscience, just proof.

As I stated already, I meant with objectively in your opinion that each poster would try to be as objective as possible, but as you said it would be extremely difficult to prove which option is the best, so saying it "in your opinion" is meant to allow a certain subjectivity. Eg. you could say that Björn is the best because he is a vehicle, which would be an objective statement. That does not however make Björn the best character objectively, but asking people to give just their opinions would mean that saying that "Björn is the best HQ because when I play I always roll well on the charge." would also be correct in this thread, but as it is I am looking for objective facts so it does not fit here.

In other words, please try to be as objective as possible, and can we keep on the discussion now?

Rune priest, ulrik, lord on wolf. Those are basically the only HQs worth taking if you want to be competitive. Bjorn and Logan are way over costed, krom is awful and so is ragnar. You can take 2 rune priests for the cost of Njal so he's out too. Lord on TWC is only worth taking in a TWC based list which aren't as competitive as drop pod melta spam.

objectively the best... in my opinion (LOL!) HQ is a cheap Rune Priest. Because he is cheap.

I run my arguments unbound so I don't worry about being objective.