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.

I have no tactics. I lose a lot.

That is all.

What have you been playing Malf?

stop whining! this game is not for sissys! this is hard! this is brutal! this is WARMACHINE!!! (or Hordes!).....

no, seriously, I#d like to help, just give us a little bit more info

Just frustrated with myself. In a long game I forgot to use eFeora's
feat on the Old Witch. I forgot to Vilmon-run across the river for
control points. In another long game I charged a Centurion to claim the hill.
I completely forgot about his Lancer and thought that Feora would
be safe. And the last one was Feora vs. Terminus trying to claim 3 of 4 hills...

That wasn't pretty at all.

I'm not talking about any one list. I think my problem is that I don't
have any tactical sense whatsoever. I forgot what units can do. I don't
match up correctly, or adjust when needed to. For example, Iron Fangs
in Shield Wall tied up with TFG +UA in shield wall on the River. At one
point I would have been safe to March them with Rhupert, suck up one
or two free strikes and run around them, but I wasn't thinking and just
stayed bogged down in combat round after round.

Warmachine and Hordes are tough like that. I'll often forget to do things in the right order ('damn, I should have cast this spell, THEN popped my feat, then charged with that unit" etc.) or find myself playing defensively in a game that doesn't really reward that kind of strategy.

Then again, if you just got that Avatar...

I've had that Avatar for-evah. It's just so cool...

Hrm. You said E-Feora. That implies 750 games. Maybe you should scale back a bit and get a handle on unit interactions on a smaller scale. Play more 500 point games. You need to be familiar with both your list and what it can do as well as your opponent's.

Warmachine is a lot like chess- you have to think through not only your move, but your opponent's and how that will affect future turns. It is a lot more intellectually intense than most GW strategy (especially 40K, WHFB requires deeper tactical thinking but both are more vulnerable to list optimization than WM) and can be quite draining. Indeed, so much thought can go into it that many tournies impose time limits to curtail excessive deliberations and several times I have seen the idea of chess clocks proposed!

That's one reason why I like having both WM and GW games, actually, for some variation depending on if I want super intense tactical gaming or lighter roll and go.

Good idea.

Actually I think it's less like chess and more like a CCG.

I have to disagree with the "WM is less about list optimization than 40k/WHFB." To me, WM is all about list optimization - Before the game I look at my cards, I figure out the best combos I can piece together, then I try to make them happen on the battlefield. Understanding my opponent's combos obviously helps too - if I see Skarre and Bane Knights, I know I've got to stay out of her Charge+Control Range or I'm going to eat a boostable POW 21 Skarre Bomb.

To me, WHFB is much more like Chess, where a generally weak piece ( say Fast Calvary,) in the right spot can cause devastating damage (flank charge a fully ranked up unit with decent chance of success.)

I agree, though, that 40k is more about the list building, as the actual game play seems to revolve around Heavy Weapon placement (or maybe just deployment,) target priority, and setting up an assault.

Zoned

Why is that, considering you just said that WM is all about list optimization. It seems to me that you're contradicting yourself.

Hrm, it appears you have probably not played very much chess or CCGs. I have played both competitively. The resemblances between CCGs and WM are largely superficial; CCGs tend to rely on combos that are statistically draw dependant whereas chess and wargame combos are usually dependant on spacial maneuvering. True, with wargaming there is a statistical element (hit rolls, etc.) absent in chess, but in that respect most minigames could be compared to a CCG and is not unique to Warmachine. Warmachine does have the handy stats cards, but this is a book keeping and reference mechanism and a clever one at that! Additionally, WM requires the multi-turn piece strategy that is so essential in chess and is not draw dependant like a card game. In summary, CCGs are descendants, and more similar to, games like poker. WM (and many mini games) are descendants of, and more similar to, chess.

Zoned: I specifically mentioned WHFB is a bit different. However, I still suggest that WM is less optimization and list based. Units tend to be more generally viable. There is also more item selection for characters in WHFB and standard selection that involves optimization, whereas in WM the biggest choice will generally boil down to whether you take the UA or not (and the answer is almost always yes). I am not suggesting that this in any way detracts from WHFB or WH40K as games, just that they are different. As I mentioned, I play all of them (as well as others). I have won numerous tournaments in chess, MtG, WHFB, WH40K, WM, and even poker, so I am familiar with competitive elements that are similar, and different, across games.

All of these comments were directed at helping the OP shift his frame of reference a bit so that he could improve his WM game and offered for that purpose. If you disagree, I would ask you to show how this will help the OP, as that is the purpose of the thread. It has been my experience that players who predominately play one game get tunnel vision and sometimes have difficulty thinking outside the box of that game. This seems to be particularly common among GW game players as they often have less exposure to other games than many historical players, for example. Of course, exceptions exist, and this being the Innerweb I am sure that someone will want to vehemantly disagree with me.

To Ghaz: Yeah, I did contradict myself. I shouldn't have added 40k in my opening sentence. I should have written:"WM is less about list optimization than WHFB" - a statement I disagree with.

To jmurph: My apologies, my comments were rather OT, and more of an add-on to Ghaz's comments. For the record, I do play (and enjoy,) 40k, WHFB, WM, Hordes, and other games as well.

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the term "UA," so I can't cooment about why you feel WM is less optimization and list based. WM is famous for being a game where changing your caster radically changes the way your army performs, and I find this to be generally true. I pick a caster, then I pick the units that work best with my caster due his spells, feat, or whatever. I then look at how those units work together, and hope they complement.

This is not to say list building is the be-all end-all to WM, as optimal use of these units taking mission, terrain, bad/good luck into account also matter. I simply feel players in WM have a set plan going into a game, whereas WHFB players tend to be a little more open-minded about their approach to victory..

Of course, this isn't always true either, as gun line Dwarves that castle, Vampire Counts, all-cav armies...etc tend to play one way and one way only.

Back on topic:

To Malfred: Whenever I teach somebody new how to play any strategy game, I notice the same problems cropping up in new players - just because a unit can do something, doesn't mean it should. For example, just because Scouts can Infiltrate, doesnt' mean they should versus a Tyranid/Ork army, as all you're offering them is an early lunch. Always take a step back, pull your head out of the game, and ask yourself honestly:"is that a smart move?" Weigh the pros and cons, figure out the worst case scenario and see if you'd be cool with that. As jmurph suggests, take the time to analyze the best moves. Your initial games may be slow, but as you play and analyze more, the best moves will come quicker to you. Just make sure you practice vs some patient friends! Good gaming!

All table top games are about list optimization. 40K's lists are currently unbalanced which is why it gets a bad rap. The new codex's will correct this problem. I'll even say the new DA dex follows the warmachine model by limiting your options on troop levels.The true brillance of warmachine is they didn't give gamers the chance to abuse their lists by min maxing.

I agree with JackBurton01. When I first started playing I thought certain casters in WM were unbalanced but after playing I found all the casters have thier strengths and weaknesses. Especially when thier comboed with certain jacks or troops. You just have to figure them out. Warmachine is very balanced because just when you think a certain combo list is broken someone else figures out how to break it. The higher the battle points the more mistakes are amplified also. Someone earlier said you need to master 500pts first and I totally agree. The complexity goes up as the points go up.

I'm going to try. A lot of the league players play and thrive on 750 pt.
games, so maybe if I can convince them the game will be fast they'll agree
to the 500 pointers.

Week One of Malfred Boot Camp: Kreoss.

EDIT: I want to use Severius, too!

Sorry, that was entirely random.

UA= Unit Attachment. Basically add ons that increase (usually) underpowered units.

500 tends to run quite a bit quicker than 750.

HE Kreoss is a very good all around caster. Defensively, spells like POM can greatly help models survive. Lam is great to keep spellcasters like Sorscha off your back (but watch nodes...) and AMP makes sure things like Crippling Grasp don't hurt quite so bad. Offensively, Immolation is quite good, especially through an arc node. His FOC is high enough that he can hit many things and also cast it 3 times, if necessary. Kreoss has solid MAT and P+S with Reach, but is fairly slow and has a lower than average Def+Arm for a warcaster. His feat is outstanding and can be used offensively to cripple forces or go after a caster and defensively to hamper retaliation. With FOC 7, it covers a large area.

I like to field Kreoss with a Revenger for the durable, cheap arc node and a redeemer for some AOE love (and potential for assassination on the feat turn). Usually, I also pack a Crusader for cheap beats. Since I often field 3 'jacks, the choir naturally comes along. Other good choices include Devouts (anti-assasination and his special strike is outstanding), zealots with MB (good targets for POM if you think the enemy may actually go after them, also devastating to KD models), Exemplar Seneschal (works well with zealots), Rhupert (speed boost), Vilmon (who isn't he good with?), Eiryss (devastating to KD warcasters), Deliverers (min unit is a cheap way to thin out things like bile/mech thralls and get really nasty on feat turn), and TFG (good POM target and now usable thinks to the UA).

With Kreoss, you have a wide variety of tools and must adjust your strategy a bit to hamstring the enemy. Don't bother casting LAM, for example, if the enemy caster will likely never get that close (IE Coven, or Denny w/nodes). OTOH upkeep it for casters that like close up spell work (Sorscha, etc.). Use AMP to disrupt enemy plans (IE Crippling Grap on your heavy or Fortify before you feat). Use Ward to supplement the Choir against foes. If a big guy wants to play, give it a Retributioned Revenger or Devout to deal with.

And always keep an eye out for a caster that is close enough to KD than pounce with Boosted redeemer shots, chained Immolations, etc. But don't be afraid to use it early if you can cripple his forces. Some players will spend so much effort avoiding the pop 'n' drop that they will leave their fighting forces vulnerable to an alpha strike.

Do be careful not to overcommit Kreoss on his feat turn though. If a caster kill is not probable, be very wary of rushing Kreoss himself in as most warcasters can waste a nearby warcaster low on focus if you don't put them down.

2 wins today. I think I was at the shop for a total of 8 hours, so about 3-3.5hrs
per game. That was painful.

Both games came down to Kreoss immolating, causing fire, boosting damage.

It was also my first time fighting AGAINST Protectorate. You know, I was a little
annoyed by the bonuses, but it felt good knowing what he was going to try to do
at any one moment in time. I knew the stats of all his models, he knew the stats
of mine, the game went smoothly.

Except for the 3.5 hrs part.

Of course, my two wins were against players who just started playing recently,
but the Protectorate player was really good and tough to beat. If I'd slipped up
and if he hadn't tried to rescue his Temple Flameguard with Martyrdom, I
wouldn't have won.

The Cygnar player lost because of activation order. He kept full throttling with
Darius and then trying to Pit Stop with his half-jacks. Eventually, I locked
down this week's mud pit fight with Lamentation, fire, run and bombing zealots
and all sorts of mean-nastiness. That was a wreck of a game, too.

It was fun, but hard fought.

Dude, you guys need to play with some time/turn limits. 3.5 hours is brutal!

Yeah, but League games are fun that way.

I guess.

jmurph had some great advice for using Kreoss. He is the best caster out of prime IMO because every spell he has is usable and his feat is devastating.

A good way to learn the game is to make specific tactic lists - say a pop & drop kreoss list or a jack-heavy Amun Ra list that advances in formation with a choir. Sure, your list is a one trick pony, but that's fine - these are good tricks. You have a singular objective as you play and you can start every turn with "Can I do my trick this turn? Yes - do it, no - maneuver to get a better chance to do it next turn". Once you have your trick mastered you can branch out a little, try to learn a new trick. This way you master each unit in your list and the combined play style of your list - then you can start mixing and matching later on when you have a large number of tricks up your sleeve.

WM functions on the same design principle as a few fighting games do: an Equality of Cheese. Everybody has their own little broken combo that mangle rules and enemies alike, so most people don't really scream when it happens to them because that's exactly what they were trying to do themselves. The question is often who can manage their combo o doom first, or failing that who can survive their opponent's turn to unleash their own can of whoopass.

The problem for new players is that said combos have to be understood before they can be used or countered. This creates situations more complex than 40k, where most units operate in an essentially independent fashion. You never hear a Chaos player go "My Lord uses his Mark of Slaneesh to break all units within 12 inches so my Dreads can automatically Fire Frenzy, because there's nothing unbroken to charge, in exchange for getting auto penetrated this turn, but the Thousand Sons are all immune to the area of effect damage and charge you after", but combos of that nature are pretty much the foundation of competent WM play.

(I'm not a new person anymore!)

Its the combo's that make WM more akin to a cardgame.

EDIT:  Weird, both new posts I made today started a new page!