Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/06 12:50:25
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
40kenthus
Manchester UK
|
I have a friendly tourney coming up in September and I want to take Warriors of Chaos. Because of an impending house move time and money aren't really on my side, so is it viable to get a low model count 2400pt army that could wreck a bit of face?
I have the book here, and am leafing though it and so far I'm liking the idea of a chariot core. Of course Dakka is the one stop shop for all things gaming so here I am to throw myself at the mercy of the dark gods and their infinite wisdom!
Cheers!
|
Member of the "Awesome Wargaming Dudes"
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/06 13:17:49
Subject: Re:Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Agile Revenant Titan
In the Casualty section of a Blood Bowl dugout
|
If it's tight funds that are the issue, I wouldn't jump so quickly onto chariot core. Although it is a much lower model count (and hence should appear to be less costly), Chaos Warriors actually work out cheaper, as you get 12 for £20 from GW, whereas a single chariot sets you back £25. Warriors also have far more options to boost their cost. For example, a unit of 24 Warriors with Halberds, Shields, MoN, FC and some sort of magic banner will cover almost your entire Core cost (I think adding in two units of 5 Warhounds should do it) and will only set you back £40 from GW. A similar points cost of Chariots (4 of them, all with MoN) will instead cost you £100. So, souped up units of Warriors, Skullcrushers, characters and maybe Knights and Chimerae too are probably the best way to go.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/06 13:17:56
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/06 15:45:06
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
40kenthus
Manchester UK
|
You give sage counsel, Mr The Shadow. Thanks.
Element Games have a pre packaged bundle pretty much covering what you suggest for about £170. Shame I need dental work doing next week. SAD FACE!
Edit: stupid autocorrect
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/06 16:08:59
Member of the "Awesome Wargaming Dudes"
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/06 18:50:08
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Drakhun
|
I once wrote a warriors of chaos comprising of 9 models at 2000points. However, if you want your warriors to have halberds (which are nearly always the best option, unless you go MOT sword and board) will cost you a little bit more.
|
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+
Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/07 01:02:53
Subject: Re:Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Ambitious Marauder
Missouri
|
As mentioned earlier, Warriors are the best option. Another fun option is that one of the best unit sizes for them is 18 warriors in an 8 x 3 formation. Three boxes of Warriors will create two proper units for around 700 points.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/07 16:25:30
Subject: Re:Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight
|
Virus wrote:As mentioned earlier, Warriors are the best option. Another fun option is that one of the best unit sizes for them is 18 warriors in an 8 x 3 formation. Three boxes of Warriors will create two proper units for around 700 points.
6x3*, but yes!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/07 23:10:22
Subject: Re:Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Ambitious Marauder
Missouri
|
Must have been a glitch in my software, thanks!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/08 07:11:48
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
40kenthus
Manchester UK
|
Thanks for the input, Virus (and Evertras)!
Two blocks of 18 Warriors it is then!
Sword and Shield? A mate reckons Halberds are the way to go, but that's more cost on the upgrade kits then of course I'd have to wait for them to be delivered.
From a background perspective going dual gods is viable isn't it? I mean, Archaon had all sorts with him right?!
Khorne and Nurgle have always appealed to me most, even way back when I was a nipper (my GCSE art piece was a GUO in the Wayne England style), so I'd look at mixing these two up, Nurgle Warriors and Sorcerer with Khorne Juggers and Chariots.
I don't want to labelled a cheese monger, but last time we all played everyone brought proper cheddar except me and I didn't score ANY POINTS so I don't mind a sprinkle.
|
Member of the "Awesome Wargaming Dudes"
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/08 11:02:36
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Nimble Pistolier
|
Halberds can be easily converted by using the existing hand weapons and extending the handle (above and below the wrist) with brass rod...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/08 16:14:42
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight
|
monders wrote:Thanks for the input, Virus (and Evertras)! Two blocks of 18 Warriors it is then! Sword and Shield? A mate reckons Halberds are the way to go, but that's more cost on the upgrade kits then of course I'd have to wait for them to be delivered. From a background perspective going dual gods is viable isn't it? I mean, Archaon had all sorts with him right?! Khorne and Nurgle have always appealed to me most, even way back when I was a nipper (my GCSE art piece was a GUO in the Wayne England style), so I'd look at mixing these two up, Nurgle Warriors and Sorcerer with Khorne Juggers and Chariots. I don't want to labelled a cheese monger, but last time we all played everyone brought proper cheddar except me and I didn't score ANY POINTS so I don't mind a sprinkle. From a fluff perspective there's been plenty of instances where the followers of different gods have teamed up. These alliances don't always last particularly long, but if there's something out there to RIP AND TEAR, Chaos is on it and very willing to put aside differences. Everyone's for Chaos in general after all, and that's much more a uniting factor than which particular god. There's just infighting once there's nothing else to do, more or less, and on the battlefield they'd rather not stand right next to each other in the same unit. As you said, Archaon has the blessing of all 4 gods, which is the nail in the coffin right there. Khorne and Nurgle are the two 'best' marks, generally, so if you like them, you'll have a solid army. What you described is a pretty solid skeleton for a standard, straightforward WoC army. It'd be pretty brutal, if anything. See above for any fluff concerns. Sword and Shield is bad. Some people like MoT with Sword and Board for the 5++ ward save, but the point of warriors is to RIP AND TEAR. Halberds or great weapons are the way to go for Nurgle in particular, with the choice being preference at that point IMO. There is one exception to this that's open to you, though. Festus gives his unit poisoned attacks. This makes taking an extra hand weapon a viable option (normally halberds are strictly better in all situations). You can make extra hand weapon warriors with the regular kit, so you wouldn't have to wait for an extra bits pack to arrive while still getting juicy WYSIWYG correctness. The downside to this is that you're then stuck with models that are only good with Festus if you want to keep WYSIWYG. As another alternative japehlio is 100% correct. Take a look at these two pictures. Second from the left with the big tall axe is from original kit The GW halberd conversions instead of regular weapons They're still held in one hand, and the head is basically a fancy axe. You can still give them shields to help against shooting (which I'd recommend).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/08 16:15:27
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 07:50:21
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
40kenthus
Manchester UK
|
Great feedback, thanks again Evertras.
Halberds it is!
|
Member of the "Awesome Wargaming Dudes"
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 09:29:30
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Evasive Eshin Assassin
|
Evertras wrote:Sword and Shield is bad. Some people like MoT with Sword and Board for the 5++ ward save, but the point of warriors is to RIP AND TEAR.
S4 A2 and a 3+/5+ is a solid unit. -1S for +1 armour and +2 Ward? Viable trade-off. Especially when you're (1) facing a gunline that you need to weather before any such ripping and tearing or (2) facing something really scary that you need to hold in place for a turn or two (Monstrous Cavalry, a Vampire Lord, etc.).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/09 09:30:07
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 11:26:58
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Agile Revenant Titan
In the Casualty section of a Blood Bowl dugout
|
But remember, Warpsolution, you only get parry in combat so, since most Warrior units take shields anyway, you're only getting the bonus of a 6++, which won't make much of a difference. Then, in combat, there are situations like flank attacks in which you don't get parry, whereas units with MoN give the enemies -1 to hit, which is probably just as good as a 5++ (would need to do the maths) and almost certainly better than a 6++. And then of course Halberds mean you hit harder in combat.
So going from MoN Halberds to MoT Sword and Board, you're trading superior combat prowess for a marginal boost in survivability at range and a slightly cheaper cost (iirc).
Not a great trade off, in my opinion.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 11:27:29
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Fireknife Shas'el
|
Also I know its not reliable but a metal mage can give you a 1+ for you foot chaos warriors. That said Shields are a choice but Halbreds offer more utility against all foes
|
8000 Dark Angels (No primaris)
10000 Lizardmen (Fantasy I miss you)
3000 High Elves
4000 Kel'shan Ta'u
"He attacked everything in life with a mix of extraordinary genius and naive incompetence, and it was often difficult to tell which was which." -Douglas Adams |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 16:11:18
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight
|
Warpsolution wrote: Evertras wrote:Sword and Shield is bad. Some people like MoT with Sword and Board for the 5++ ward save, but the point of warriors is to RIP AND TEAR.
S4 A2 and a 3+/5+ is a solid unit. -1S for +1 armour and +2 Ward? Viable trade-off. Especially when you're (1) facing a gunline that you need to weather before any such ripping and tearing or (2) facing something really scary that you need to hold in place for a turn or two (Monstrous Cavalry, a Vampire Lord, etc.). I very much disagree. First off, where are you getting the +2 ward? If you've got MoT, then that's +1 ward no matter what weapon you have. The 5++ kicks in if you're in close combat being attacked from the front, and only then. That's 1/5 less ward saves failed and maybe 1/4-1/5 less armor saves failed. That'll save what... one? Two warriors a game? If you're facing a gunline you can still get the bonuses of a shield and MoT's Blasted Standard while still carrying halberds to bring the pain later, so that's irrelevant. I've an anti-gunline list after getting tired of my coworker's dwarf shenanigans that involved a big block of MoT Chosen with halberds and the Blasted Standard. Going sword and shield would've done nothing to help me there. Against MC I'd MUCH rather have MoN or MoK warriors with halberds any day. Here's the real tradeoff for MoT halberds versus sword and board: -1S, +1 armor, +1 ward save. That -1S means -1 to wound, and +1 to their armor save. You're trading your higher armor for their higher armor and you're wounding less to boot! The ward save is vaguely nice, but again, that'll save maybe one or two warriors out of your block of 18+ (and you should have 18+) while taking a significant hit to your offensive output. Who cares if one or two extra warriors die when you've dealt 2-3 extra wounds yourself and possibly taken out one of those MC before they could even strike. The biggest problem with WoC 'anvils' is that WoC cannot afford to hold something in place for a turn or two. We are outnumbered. We have to chew through opposing units quickly and efficiently before we can get surrounded. Holding anything in place is a setback for us. Automatically Appended Next Post: The Shadow wrote:But remember, Warpsolution, you only get parry in combat so, since most Warrior units take shields anyway, you're only getting the bonus of a 6++, which won't make much of a difference. Then, in combat, there are situations like flank attacks in which you don't get parry, whereas units with MoN give the enemies -1 to hit, which is probably just as good as a 5++ (would need to do the maths) and almost certainly better than a 6++. And then of course Halberds mean you hit harder in combat. So going from MoN Halberds to MoT Sword and Board, you're trading superior combat prowess for a marginal boost in survivability at range and a slightly cheaper cost ( iirc). Not a great trade off, in my opinion. MoN is actually better than MoT in close combat in almost every situation (with same gear otherwise, only time it's worse is when you factor in auto-hit abilities of some sort), but it's definitely close. MoT gives you the advantage of having extra defense against ranged attacks. That's the real tradeoff.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/07/09 16:13:45
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/09 20:40:46
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Drakhun
|
Aye, as I have found out Warriors of Chaos do not use Hammer and Anvil tactics, they use hammer and sledgehammer tactics.
|
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+
Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 03:23:57
Subject: Re:Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Ambitious Marauder
Missouri
|
Personally, I'm still a fan of Tzeentch sword and board units. Then again, I tend to run 3+ units of warriors, and 1+ are halberd units as well. Hammer and sledgehammer is the truth though.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 11:48:44
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Agile Revenant Titan
In the Casualty section of a Blood Bowl dugout
|
Evertras wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Shadow wrote:But remember, Warpsolution, you only get parry in combat so, since most Warrior units take shields anyway, you're only getting the bonus of a 6++, which won't make much of a difference. Then, in combat, there are situations like flank attacks in which you don't get parry, whereas units with MoN give the enemies -1 to hit, which is probably just as good as a 5++ (would need to do the maths) and almost certainly better than a 6++. And then of course Halberds mean you hit harder in combat.
So going from MoN Halberds to MoT Sword and Board, you're trading superior combat prowess for a marginal boost in survivability at range and a slightly cheaper cost ( iirc).
Not a great trade off, in my opinion.
MoN is actually better than MoT in close combat in almost every situation (with same gear otherwise, only time it's worse is when you factor in auto-hit abilities of some sort), but it's definitely close. MoT gives you the advantage of having extra defense against ranged attacks. That's the real tradeoff.
I thought it might be. In a D6 based game, simple -1/+1 modifiers do actually have a huge impact.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 14:13:18
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Evasive Eshin Assassin
|
The Shadow wrote:MoN give the enemies -1 to hit, which is probably just as good as a 5++ (would need to do the maths) and almost certainly better than a 6++. And then of course Halberds mean you hit harder in combat.
So going from MoN Halberds to MoT Sword and Board, you're trading superior combat prowess for a marginal boost in survivability at range and a slightly cheaper cost ( iirc).
-1 to Hit is 17% less hits. +1 armour and a 5+ Parry/6+ Ward results in 45-56% unsaved wounds against S7 or less.
So, against 100 attacks (just using a big number so I have something to work with), with, say, WS5 S5, Nurgle takes 14.8 wounds, and Tzeentch takes 11.1. Automatically Appended Next Post: Evertras wrote:First off, where are you getting the +2 ward? If you've got MoT, then that's +1 ward no matter what weapon you have. The 5++ kicks in if you're in close combat being attacked from the front, and only then.
A 5+ Parry is 2 steps better than none. Yeah, it's only to the front. I d'know. I rarely see Warrior players around here exposing their flanks very much. And when they do, it's with the halberd-wielding Nurgle Warriors, since they don't care as much.
Evertras wrote:If you're facing a gunline you can still get the bonuses of a shield and MoT's Blasted Standard while still carrying halberds to bring the pain later, so that's irrelevant.
The Blasted Standard is better, yeah. But if you're strapped for points or are already using the Standard and you want something that's super-ultra-crazy-durable, shields and Tzeentch are another option.
Evertras wrote:Who cares if one or two extra warriors die when you've dealt 2-3 extra wounds yourself and possibly taken out one of those MC before they could even strike.
The biggest problem with WoC 'anvils' is that WoC cannot afford to hold something in place for a turn or two. We are outnumbered. We have to chew through opposing units quickly and efficiently before we can get surrounded. Holding anything in place is a setback for us.
Um...you're not outnumbered by Monstrous Cavalry, that's for sure.
I'm not saying that Tzeentch Warriors with shields are better than Nurgle ones with halberds. I'm just saying that it's not a terrible option. It's got it's place. That place is indeed more limited; you could run a good list with just Nurgle + halberds, or a few blocks of Nurgle + halberds and one Tzeentch + shields, but not just Tzeentch + shields. But that place exists.
If the philosophy of "Warriors need to cut through their opponents as quickly as possible, that is all that matters" was 100% true, then why don't people exclusively take Khorne Warriors? Nurgle lends to survivability. Because it's a legit concern.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/10 14:24:59
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 16:13:42
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight
|
Just to clear two things up:
I am not the ultimate final authority on WoC. I may have come off acting that way in my earlier posts. So... apologies if that's the case.
I like MoK warriors. I think MoN with halberds or great weapons are a viable alternative if you prefer a little more durability, but I personally prefer MoK for most situations. MoT with shields just goes too far down the defensive path in my opinion, which is where I take issue.
Warpsolution wrote: The Shadow wrote:MoN give the enemies -1 to hit, which is probably just as good as a 5++ (would need to do the maths) and almost certainly better than a 6++. And then of course Halberds mean you hit harder in combat.
So going from MoN Halberds to MoT Sword and Board, you're trading superior combat prowess for a marginal boost in survivability at range and a slightly cheaper cost ( iirc).
-1 to Hit is 17% less hits. +1 armour and a 5+ Parry/6+ Ward results in 45-56% unsaved wounds against S7 or less.
So, against 100 attacks (just using a big number so I have something to work with), with, say, WS5 S5, Nurgle takes 14.8 wounds, and Tzeentch takes 11.1.
This is incorrect. Both actually take more wounds. Supposing those stats, Nurgle with halberds actually takes 18.52 and Tzeentch with sword and shield takes 14.81.
The statement I made above in that MoN actually performs better than MoT in all close combat situations that do not involve autohits (notably stomps) holds true here. MoN with shields would actually take 12.35 wounds. For the record, MoT with halberds take 23.15 wounds (ouch).
For the math, 100 attacks = 50 hits against MoT and 33.33333333333333333333333333 against MoN. Don't look at it as 17% less hits, you have to look at the actual probabilities on the dice. MoT takes 50 hits and 33.33333333 of those are wounds (2/3 of them, needing 3+ on dice). Of those 33.33333333, 22.222222 get through the 5+ armor save (3+ goes to 5+ against S5, which is 1/3 chance to save). Then that goes down to the final value of 14.81 when you factor in the 5+ ward, which is another 1/3 chance to save.
For MoN, 100 attacks = 33.333333333 hits, as above. Of those 33.33333333, 22.22222222 get through as actual wounds (2/3 chance to wound needing 3+). Of those 22.22222222 wounds, the 6+ armor save turns it into 18.52 (1/6 saved).
The fun part is that with sword and shield, MoN only takes 33.333333 hits... which goes to 22.2222222 wounds.... which goes to 14.81 after armor (the final value of MoT after their parry!), which then drops to 12.35 when you factor in the 6+ parry save.
The tradeoff is, very explicitly, that MoN is more durable in close combat while MoT is more durable against ranged. What you equip them with doesn't change this. You can give a sword and shield to MoN warriors just as easily as you can MoT.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Evertras wrote:First off, where are you getting the +2 ward? If you've got MoT, then that's +1 ward no matter what weapon you have. The 5++ kicks in if you're in close combat being attacked from the front, and only then.
A 5+ Parry is 2 steps better than none. Yeah, it's only to the front. I d'know. I rarely see Warrior players around here exposing their flanks very much. And when they do, it's with the halberd-wielding Nurgle Warriors, since they don't care as much.
5+ parry is two steps better than none, correct. But it's only one step better than MoT with halberds or MoN with shields, and MoN with shields will outperform MoT with shields in close combat where you're getting that 5+ parry anyway.
Evertras wrote:If you're facing a gunline you can still get the bonuses of a shield and MoT's Blasted Standard while still carrying halberds to bring the pain later, so that's irrelevant.
The Blasted Standard is better, yeah.
But if you're strapped for points or are already using the Standard and you want something that's super-ultra-crazy-durable, shields and Tzeentch are another option.
I'd argue at that point that if you can't find the points for halberds, you should probably have a different unit.
Evertras wrote:Who cares if one or two extra warriors die when you've dealt 2-3 extra wounds yourself and possibly taken out one of those MC before they could even strike.
The biggest problem with WoC 'anvils' is that WoC cannot afford to hold something in place for a turn or two. We are outnumbered. We have to chew through opposing units quickly and efficiently before we can get surrounded. Holding anything in place is a setback for us.
Um...you're not outnumbered by Monstrous Cavalry, that's for sure.
There are, in general, more units and models on the table for an opposing army than for WoC. There are certainly exceptions to this, but they are very certainly exceptions. If it was just a unit of MC against a unit of warriors, then yes, the warriors have the numbers. But there's the entire rest of the army to contend with too.
I'm not saying that Tzeentch Warriors with shields are better than Nurgle ones with halberds. I'm just saying that it's not a terrible option. It's got it's place. That place is indeed more limited; you could run a good list with just Nurgle + halberds, or a few blocks of Nurgle + halberds and one Tzeentch + shields, but not just Tzeentch + shields. But that place exists.
We may have to agree to disagree here (though we do both agree that all MoT with shields is a bad, bad idea). To me, there are so few situations where MoT with shields is a better choice that I'd rather have the MoN warriors with halberds for consistently good results. There are no situations where I can imagine wanting to hold something in place rather than just killing it as WoC, or at least any situation where I'd want MoT warriors with shields for the job.
If the philosophy of "Warriors need to cut through their opponents as quickly as possible, that is all that matters" was 100% true, then why don't people exclusively take Khorne Warriors? Nurgle lends to survivability. Because it's a legit concern.
To be honest I always take MoK warriors with halberds whenever I'm playing a list that isn't a fluffy fun one. I put Nurgle on my Gorebeast Chariots and my DP. My MoK blenders are vicious and I love them.
But yes, this is a good point. I misrepresent things a bit when I imply that offense is the one and only possible deciding factor in what equipment you choose. After all, if that were true, why would I want to take shields to help survive against ranged? The best way to put it, I think, really is the 'hammer and sledgehammer' philosophy. MoK is a hammer. MoN with halberds is a sledgehammer. The difference between MoN halberds and MoT shields is that MoN halberds still have significant killing power while giving up a small amount of defense in close combat relative to sword and shield.
I think I'm going to put up a big Math! post on WoC warrior marks and gear load outs, hopefully by the end of today. I think it's a topic that needs a lot of exploration.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 18:37:34
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Inspiring Icon Bearer
|
I wonder how Troll core works out on the cost-of-army scale.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 20:42:49
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Drakhun
|
Much more expensive considering how GW doesn't do many chaos trolls. Plus you would have to buy throgg, who is pretty expensive in his own right.
|
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+
Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/07/10 23:02:56
Subject: Low model count WoC?
|
 |
Evasive Eshin Assassin
|
Evertras wrote:This is incorrect. Both actually take more wounds. Supposing those stats, Nurgle with halberds actually takes 18.52 and Tzeentch with sword and shield takes 14.81.
Yeah, not sure how I got the first number. But the proportions are the same, and that's the main point.
Evertras wrote:The fun part is that with sword and shield, MoN only takes 33.333333 hits... which goes to 22.2222222 wounds.... which goes to 14.81 after armor (the final value of MoT after their parry!), which then drops to 12.35 when you factor in the 6+ parry save.
Honestly, never even considered Nurgle with shields. Never seen 'em.
So, yeah, I suppose it comes down to how many WS-based wounds you plan on taking, versus magic missiles, shooting, impact and stomps. Of the two, I'd bet on the prior.
Evertras wrote:We may have to agree to disagree here (though we do both agree that all MoT with shields is a bad, bad idea). To me, there are so few situations where MoT with shields is a better choice that I'd rather have the MoN warriors with halberds for consistently good results. There are no situations where I can imagine wanting to hold something in place rather than just killing it as WoC, or at least any situation where I'd want MoT warriors with shields for the job.
With the numbers of Nurgle + shield out there...yeah. Um... MSU Night Goblins with Fanatics, Manglers, Chariots and a gunline? That's...that's about it. And not by much.
As far as Trolls go, the models are expensive, and at a mere 35pts per Troll, they don't actually lend themselves much to a small model count.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|