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.

From what I read in a thread I previously posted, warriors seem to be a higher tier army (easier to win with) not necessarily better. But every single battle report I read or watch chaos warriors lose!

Not that I'm clued up on the army or have much interest in them, so I may be misinformed, but I was just curious if anyone else seems to have this same perception? Or if anyone else has beat them down or been bested by them?

They can easily drop a game against a well built nurgle daemon army or any army with multiple cannons, at least the netbuild (DP, swarm of chariots, chimera) does. Mike Gerald from Skull Bros Awesome wins events with his list regularly. I would check out that podcast if you want some insight into it.

Are you able to give me a link to his podcasts please :3

Because like with any army, you need a clear plan and the knowledge how to use your army to the fullest excent, that and WoC always being outnumberd and outgunned also helps a good deal too

I have a pretty solid record with my warriors of chaos, but when I play I dont take prisoners. There are so many factors that affect a game of warhammer its NEVER going to be as simple as 1 army looses more than any other, off the bat factors like: Army Composition, Enemy Composition, Enemy Force, Human Player Acting for Warriors, Human Player Acting for Enemy Force, Finally dice rolling in general. If you change ANY ONE of these variables (and Im sure there are more) the game could change from a win to a loss that easily. You cant paint armies with a looser brush

Pfft, I have a 100% win ratio with my warriors (after one game).

Warriors are an attractive army for reasons such as;
- low model count = cheaper and/or easier to build up to the 2400 - 2500pts range.

- hard-as-nails models across the board = more forgiving
Their characters especially so, as you can take multiple nearly unkillable models in the same army. (ie: Nurgle Prince + Tzeentch Disc rider)

- have the best close combat troops across most of the army composition slots

- the game's most survivable wizards next to Vamp Lords, alongside access to 3 of the game's top magic lores in Death/Shadow/Slaanesh.


All these perks means more people tend to pick-up the army, especially highly competitive yet less skilled players, as the army can function to a decent degree on a semi-auto pilot level.

However, being so prevalent across most metas, alongside attracting a larger number of newer/less skilled players also means that WoC end up being more easily manageable in the same way that Space Marines are in 40k.
Then you also have another very popular group of players between High & Dark Elves who are pretty much a hard counter to most WoC builds. Lots of shooting, a better Magic phase with access to much greater levels of synergies, and ASF + Prowess boosted elite infantry. Not to mention that both armies tend to run rings around WoC, as well as having the much better chaff/anti-chaff game.

That's not to say that there aren't very good WoC players, just that your odds are much greater of playing against an 'average' skilled opponent is much more likely than compared to say Wood Elves or Tomb Kings or Bretonnians, etc...
Weaker armies, or else playing softer lists rather than the go-to power combos make you a better player. Just picking up the hardest list around with what is essentially a 'beginner' level army makes you lazy and more prone to being out-played.

It's quite annoying as my favourite model in war hammer fantasy is the Khorne Lord on Juggernaut.. I'd love to build an army one day, but as you say, with them being so 'appealing' to lazy players kinda puts me off. I like the customization you get from all the different marks!

Andy140491 wrote:
It's quite annoying as my favourite model in war hammer fantasy is the Khorne Lord on Juggernaut.. I'd love to build an army one day, but as you say, with them being so 'appealing' to lazy players kinda puts me off. I like the customization you get from all the different marks!

Thats what I thought about the lizardmen Lord on carnosaur, such an awesome model... Thats when I realised, I dont NEEED to collect and play Lizzies to buy and paint the model!!

So I just bought it and had a lot of fun assembling, painting and showcasing it... And it feels awesome.

It also doesn't help that our army is a little bit one dimensional. When your facing down an opponent, depending on the army there might be several different options. Will it be an empire gun line or a knight horde or a warmachine fest? Whereas with WoC all we want to do is march in a straight line and break faces. Regardless of what we bring to a battle, that is the only way for us to win. Faces must be broken.

Well...
1. Most player think it's auto win with WoC. So they don't bother with tactics, they just roll some dice and wait for the game to end.
2. They always present the same and the same and the same lists. So everyone else know exactly what to expect, and how to deal with it.
3. If I, as a plaer, confront WoC once every 3 games, I can gather enough experience on how to defeat Skullcrushers, Chimeraes, Chaos Warriors, Chaos chariots etc.
4. It's an elite army with few models. Some bad rolls against Dwellers Below, and you suddenly lose300 points from only 1 spell.

Andy140491 wrote:
It's quite annoying as my favourite model in war hammer fantasy is the Khorne Lord on Juggernaut.. I'd love to build an army one day, but as you say, with them being so 'appealing' to lazy players kinda puts me off. I like the customization you get from all the different marks!

Don't be put off by the 'lazy players'. If you think it's the army for you go for it.

WoC have many viable builds. Of course once you build an army that steps away from the chimera and skull crushers many will look at you like you have gone insane.
Many players like the big win buttons but the beauty of fantasy is how most lists have a chance against most others if played correctly. Tactics actually make a difference.
Like welshhoppo said The less skilled simply rely on their army to be super tough and deploy, then go straight ahead....now imagine if you use more tactics.
WoC have fast units. Tough units. Brutal units. Use them. Get creative.
Hellstriders march 20in.
Keep in mind that people will always tell you what is better, and it may be when playing math hammer and maximizing your points by unit. But there are so many viable builds with WoC, so I say build what you like.

Just my 2 cents.

WoC have an insane number of units and combinations. And while most are melee-ish, there are still a lot of flavors. That said, they don't all jive well together.

When you consider that most units can take marks and have upgrade options, you can really put a lot of stuff out there. But you can also waste a lot of points.

You can totally go, yar, I'm going to make a slaughterbruting, slanesh-riding, chimera-spewing, double-warshrining, marauder army whose main goal in life is to be confused and lose every fight. In that sense it's a little like 40K in that you need to do pretty decent list-building or your expensive units with lotsa rules aren't going to help each other.

I think that's what a drawing me I into chaos. Is the multiple different builds I can do... I'm not bothered about tournaments. They don't interest me, as we only ever play friendly haha, I wouldn't mind buying the throgg model either and making a monster mash army to fight my friends ogres.

It was just a weird coincidence that when I started watching reports they always seemed to lose, but as it's been said, maybe it's because people are too reliant on a powerful army rather then being a good general.

Are maurader armies viable? Maybe as wulfrik as your Lord? What are more offensive Lord builds? I've seen the defensive Tzeentch one? I quite fancy building a slaanesh/khorne army

I think part of it is the 'underdog' phenomenon. Winning with WoC is nice, but not exactly noteworthy. Beating WoC feels good, as it should. In a straight up, rush-at-each-other battle, WoC will generally just plain win. It's when you start using interesting tactics that you can get the upper hand, and that makes for interesting battle reports. WoC certainly needs to respond with interesting tactics of their own, but hopefully you get the gist.

Marauder armies are viable in the sense that they'll work fine in casual play. I don't see them winning any tournaments, but so long as you're not in a competitive environment and just playing like-minded people, they'll work just fine. Skip out on Wulfrik though, he just causes more problems than he solves, as neat as he sounds.

Also, Slaanesh Demon Prince with level 4 Lore of Slaanesh is bonkers fun and super killy to boot. If you're looking for a Slaanesh/Khorne army, I can link you a mono-Slaanesh list I had a lot of fun with that might give you some inspiration.

I must have 2 really good Warriors of Chaos players in my area, they have been spanking everyone in our area. along with a deamon player. I'm not sure why they keep losing in battreps here. maybe the guys above are right those players are really bad at list building, stratagy and dice!

Yeah we never play Tournaments, its always friendly between me and my friends, so it will be nice to try out less competitive builds and see where that gets me

Yeah i wouldnt like the idea of playing a mindless "move forward and win" type of army. i know WoC play almost entirely melee based but it will be nice to have tactics to boot

I think players are just letting the army play for them... I've always shied away from warriors because my friend doesnt like them and im very easily persuaded. He thinks they're too powerful, but doesnt obviously doesnt see the price tag with said power.

I play friendly battles mostly. I am actually building another army because starting to get moans as my WoC is currently 10-0-0 and that is with suboptimizing my build to make it more fun. I don't play a DP, I don't play a disc unkillable, I think a BUS of knights is fun though not the optimal. I do run crushers but that is more for flavor and they are often not my scariest combo or MVP of a game.

I actually have tough games a lot because most of my match-ups are not favorable for WoC (my common enemies are HE, WE, TK (damn 50 poisoned shots per turn with never modified shooting), and Empire (knight swarm + warmachines can make me quiver). I do well but it is through tactics and not just overpowered lists.

Play what is fun. Enjoy it. and remember playing what is fun also includes what is fun for you AND your opponent. Have no issues giving them advantages and figure out how to make them up.

If WoC is fun, do it. Just try not to always be TFG while doing it imo.

Andy140491 wrote:
Yeah we never play Tournaments, its always friendly between me and my friends, so it will be nice to try out less competitive builds and see where that gets me

Yeah i wouldnt like the idea of playing a mindless "move forward and win" type of army. i know WoC play almost entirely melee based but it will be nice to have tactics to boot

I think players are just letting the army play for them... I've always shied away from warriors because my friend doesnt like them and im very easily persuaded. He thinks they're too powerful, but doesnt obviously doesnt see the price tag with said power.

WoC is very easy to use effectively compared to other armies. There's still a lot of tactics required once both players get deeper into the game, but initial impressions are very easily going to be "Wow that army is stupidly good". Happened to my coworkers too. There's plenty of tactics to use as WoC, it's just they don't need those tactics so much at lower levels of play. Which, as you said, is basically just letting the army 'play itself'.

That's pretty much summed it up then could the same be said about ogre kingdoms? They get rewarded for charging, have one great shooting unit, and a great cannon, as long as being predominantly a combat army?

Andy140491 wrote:
That's pretty much summed it up then could the same be said about ogre kingdoms? They get rewarded for charging, have one great shooting unit, and a great cannon, as long as being predominantly a combat army?

Ogres get stomped on by Purplefun, and pretty much everyone bar Orcs & Gobbos have access to Lore of Death.

Especially as we begin the 'Reign of the Elves', Ogres are really a middle of the road army. They are a bit easier on newer players in similar ways to WoC... (ie: cheap to build, lots of hard to kill models, good speed, good chaff in sabertusks, good shooting, good combat, Runemaw + Hellheart are nasty, etc...)
However, they lack the versatility of armies like High/Dark Elves, Empire and get steamrolled by Slaanesh Daemons rather easily. Warriors under the right builds can also be pretty mean to the fat ones.

Many people here have failed to address the part of your question about battle reports. I've written a few, and there is a certain type of game that really lends itself to a battle report:

1) The game lasts the whole six turns.
2) The game is close, with the reader unable to tell the winner at the end of turn one.
3) It features interesting armies, preferably fully painted.

Warriors of Chaos, when they win, tend to totally steamroll the opposition, resulting in a swift massacre that mops the table up on turn 2 or 3. This doesn't make for an interesting report, since it becomes very rapidly apparent who wins, leaving little incentive to keep reading.

Also Warriors are particular prone to the netlist phenomenon, that is 'every army looks the same'. This isn't true of all players, but certainly I think that people have less interest in reading a report when they recognize one army down to the model as a netlist. Since Warriors players, like Ogres, often tend to be obsessed with sticking as close to their netlist as possible, it means that you see unusual and interesting armies less often with them.

Taken together, it isn't that Warriors lose more games. It just means that rarely will a Warriors win make for an interesting battle report, and so they don't typically get written up. I know that Jimmy does feature a lot of battle reports with his brother's Warriors of Chaos army, which you can find on the Tomb King and High Elf faction forums.

WOC are a very good army, as they are super easy to collect and there basic Warriors can go toe to toe with most Elite units in the game, and as mentioned above, they are easy to get started with. There strengths are tough, high armored save infantry, High Leadership, access to gifts of Chaos, Daemon Princes, and overall, they are very easy to play, as there usual strategy is to get into CC as soon as possible. Plus, Nurgle Chaos is always a pain to deal with, which is arguably the best Chaos Mark right now for what it does.

That being said, I really haven't had too many issues with them. I have played WOC 8x times with my Bretonnian's, and so far I am currently 5-1-2 against them, while with my High Elves, I have a record of 3-0-1 after 4x games going against them. Both my HE and my Bret's have a number of reasons of why I have been successful, bu to keep it short, reason I have been doing so well:

Bretonnia:

*Heroic Killing blow Lord is great vs Daemon Princes

*Trebuchets demolish Chaos Infantry, while bowmen with flaming attacks provide good harassment.

* Knights all will have a 5+ ward save vs WOC, as most Chaos Players take Warriors w/Halberds.

* Lance Formation.

High Elves:

* Magic Phase with Lore of Metal. Granted some people might call it tooling, however Lore of Metal is my favorite Lore to use and I use it most of the time I play so this case is an exception.

* 3x Units of White Lions (2x of 21, 1x of 30), can easily go toe-to-toe with Warriors of Chaos.

*Bolt Throwers have proven very useful at harassing enemy units.

That basically sums it up, however I will be playing with my Bretonnians more often then not for awhile, as they are getting a new book really soon (I hope), and then hopefully we will have an easier time against armies like WOC. I have won most of the time with my Brets, but it has never been easy thanks to Bretonnia still having "Old Book, Point's, Rules Syndrome" .

Warrior are good for new players but whqt often happens is that a player who has dominated new players gets over confident and plays a crafty veteran. This leads to the exposure of their playing weaknesses.

Also the chaos netlist suffers to lore of death as chimeras don't make it. Also deamon princes if you can neutralize most of their attacks. Oldbloods on cold ones do this well as you can have a 1+ rerollable 4++ at t 5 this means that a standard nurgle dp with sword of striking. Hits you on 2's from his 5 A that's 4.16 hitswounds on 3's equalling 2.77 wounds 1st armor drops that to 1.38. The re-roll to 0.69 and ward to .35 no stomps.

I hit back with 5 and hit with 2 after predatory fighter wound with 1.6 his armor reduces to 1.1 ward to .8 so we are locked in a stalemate where lucky rolls determine everything.

The difference is one of these is 250+ Skaven slaves the old blood is 130 Skaven slaves meaning I have room for some buddies who kick butt.

This is where chaos has a problem they have a couple of nasty hammers DP, chimera, skullcrushers. But they are very limited in the model count so each kill you make is far more valuable.


As always in fantasy Target priority, movement, and knowledge are the keys.

Because all WoC armies play basically the same, and anybody who plays enough warhammer to write battle reports has played that army a thousand times.

It's also a very easy army to play, comparatively. There is a tremendous amount of forgiveness since basically everything in your army is durable enough to take charges and receive them both. Even the chariots - they're T5 for f***'s sake. It means there's an overabundance of new players running Warriors, because they're compensating a lack of generalship for a harder perceived army and list.

Which isn't to say that a GOOD warriors player can't win games. They do; it's a strong army. But I think that good players tend to get bored with Warriors and gravitate towards something with a little more...subtlety.