Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Chamber of the Everchosen. We hope you enjoy your visit!


Here at COTEC we are all about the Warriors of Chaos in Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

Tactics to help you slaughter your opponent on the tabletop, through to galleries on how to build your next Warshrine. Its all covered... and growing!

We are a forum for gamers and hobbyist alike and again would like to welcome you to a fun, friendly, warm place and hope to see you again!


Join our legion! Takes less than a minute and gives you access to everything!


If you're already a member please log in to your account by entering the correct runes and words of power:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Chaos 8th Ed Book - 2012
Topic Started: Nov 23 2011, 10:29 PM (2,300 Views)
DarkChilde
The Chosen
Kormak,

Combat resolution is the name of the game so an increase in leadership is a huge deal. Taking a chaos lord instead of a sorceror lord is not a competitive choice, because competitive list are built around a level 4 and 2 sorceror. Also, just looking at other forum discussions leadership and a suggested increase on leadership for warriors has been proposed before. The point, I was making about us needing a higher leadership in regards to shooting attacks that Cross was able to get is that because we are an army that is limited in so many other areas i.,e shooting, movement, etc we should have a higher leadership to help us endure combat resolution especially since we are supposed to be these elite warriors but I would argue their are opponents out there in other "elite" armies that can give as good as they get in melee combat and I would include the Ogres in that list. Dwarves get L9, Lizard men get the cold blooded rule. I think chaos should have something to help us endure combat as well.

As regards Tzeentch being resilient. He is the lord of chance/trickery. It makes since for his units and characters to have ward saves that just shows chance is on their side of not getting injured. Plus, Chaos NEEDs those ward saves in order to have any chance of playability. It is a long march across the field and if we had to get shot up getting there with limited ranged attacks back AND we had limited ward saves on top of it. I can't see why anyone would play the army other than someone like yourself who (and I'm not tryign to be offensive here but just give an accurate assessment based on things you have said) really have no concern at all about competitiveness and may not even have WOC as their main army and are more concerned with fluff (story) vs crunch( rules mechanics and their applicable effectiveness).


The Warshrine is a good monster not because of what it does offensively but because of it' overall capabalitiies including resiliency. Here you have a monster that can buff a unit, gets a decent number of attacks, has a 4 up ward save and if you mark it with Tzeentch a 3+ ward save. These things tend to draw enemy fire , but can usually endure it for a few rounds thus taking canon fire away from your infantry blocks.

We will just have to disagree on the whole fluff bit. If Kelly buffed units and gave us ward saves (evidently someone felt we needed them and they were damn right) then I'm cool with this fluff being a little bland. Don't get me wrong. I really like good fluff as well, but I will never sacrifice mechanical effectiveness for narrative dramatis. Solid fluff is only limited by the imagination and can be added to any system regardless of the mechanics. For example the idea that certain portions of the chaos taint that has seeped on to our plan my contain a higher percentage of a certain chaos entitites essence thus tainting every thing in that area with that gods essence. It's fluffy and could be used to explaiin warhounds, but on the other hand all the good fluff in the world is not going to correct bad or ineffective/underpowered mechanics. In short mechanics are the cake of the game. Fluff is the icing.

Darkchilde
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
@ Cross - Khorne is the god of war and respects great warriors, great warriors are not a bunch of loons, you have plenty of ways to make them better in combat than frenzy. Your right it makes sense his champions are immune to fear, IP does that ;) Tzeentch is not harder to kill, thats nurgle ;)

Your correct MR is average, I did like the dispel dice but it would be far to powerful in 8th, on a side not, if you noticed I actually said Khorne armies should be able to dispel as a lvl2 wizard!


@ Darkchilde ,

I am fully aware that competitive builds are based around sorcerers, I have been to plenty of tournaments, do not assume that because I like fluffy lists I have no concept on how the games works. I think its clear you just want a unbalanced list, leadership 9 is a bad idea for core troops, thats something that dwarfs have. Giving Chaos warriors LD 9 just gives you little reason to take a chaos lord, this "balance" has just invalidated a lord choice even more and gives them very easy access to LD10. Yes lizardmen have the cold blooded rule but then again their core combat units do not have comparable stats and can be made to hit chaos warriors on a 5+.

Lord of trickey does not equate to having better wardsaves than anyone else, his previous incarnation was far better with the heroes and lords also being sorcerers. If chaos need 3+ wardsaves then be playable then clearly the book is terribly written, no other army needs 3+ wardsaves on their characters so I fail to see why you think WoC are special in this case. The army isn't even designed with the intend of them having them! wardsaves are not required to get models across the table unless your are purely thinking of discs, goldern eye used to a 3+ wardsave against shooting, it was adjusted for the new MoT.

Well then the warhsrine is a terrible monster, it resilience is irreverent if it can be charged by a fully ranked unit and broken easily, it could be a chariot for anyone cares and just buff units. Yet another unit with access to a 3+ wardsave, I use mine without the MoT and it performs fine (thats at competitive tournaments btw). I tend to find hellcannons draw the most fire as it is the only ranged unit.

Phil Kelly doesn't have a clue what he is doing, but if you want to be exact the book is designed to 7th ed and is designed with chaos warriors having no proper wardsaves. With this is mind clearly the MoT is not designed with a 4+ wardsave that has no negatives and really isn't designed with parry saves in mind either. You keep going on about buffing units but that would have happened regardless of limits being removed so I don't really get what your getting at. This is what I don't get, you have never played the previous book, I don't see how you can make a single comment on it! the comments you do make no sense at all which seem more like a attempt to twists the fact. Chaos warriors would have been better, why, because rules are designed to sell models and everyone used chaos knights and marauder horsemen in the previous book.

Phil Kelly wrote the single most boring chaos book in the entire time I have played warhammer without doubt, HoC is without doubt the best chaos army book produced, it was far more fluffy and didn't have the dumbest rule to hit the army, eotg.






Edited by Kormak, Nov 27 2011, 05:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cross
The Chosen
@ kormak.

dispelling as a lvl 2 wizard would be sweet. lets hope we get something like that.

just curious do you like the new ogre book?? fluff vs game mechnics i mean. i picked it up today have only browsed through it. do you know who wrote it??

would like hear what you think.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
Not really read the new ogre book, it was done by Jervis Johnson and Jeremy Vetock however, shame Rick Priestly and gav thorpe are gone are they are two of the guys that did the HoC book.

But yeah dispelling as a lvl2 is all thats needed to keep a mono Khorne army from being completely uncompetitive while remaining fluffy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Judgex83
Member Avatar
The leech lord
HEY i run a chaos lord and festus and a lvl 2 nurgle sorcerer and I do just fine. I just felt like tossing that in since everyone thinks a sorcerer lord is are only option.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rothgar13
Member Avatar
Clanlord
That's kind of what Kormak meant - give a mono-Khorne army at least a +2 to dispel checks, along with some ways to stuff spells (or cast spell-like effects of their own), and they should be OK.

I also salute your courage on going without a Sorc Lord or a Scroll caddy. I think you really only need one of them to at least be competent on the magic defense front, but I'd certainly feel nervous without having either of the two.
Edited by rothgar13, Nov 28 2011, 12:49 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Judgex83
Member Avatar
The leech lord
I will ignore the fact that you related my army to a "derp were angry and we have axes" army *ducks for cover in fear of kormak throwing a skull or something lame and khorne like*. I used to run a lvl 4 sorcerer as my lord back in 7th but I dunno something about the random amount of dice for casting phase thats made me care alot less about the magic phase. YAY im lvl 4 I rolled 2d6 and got 4 dice awesome I can cast 1 good spell ^o) Now I know the flipside is I can get a whopping 12 dice and thats great but now that they lifted the amount of dice you can throw at a spell ive found my lvl 2 is just as effective at getting the job done even thou its more dangerous and as ive said before I use lore of nurgle and all I want is his first spell and festus has curse of the leper so im set for magic
Edited by Judgex83, Nov 28 2011, 01:44 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
Judgex83
Nov 27 2011, 11:10 PM
HEY i run a chaos lord and festus and a lvl 2 nurgle sorcerer and I do just fine. I just felt like tossing that in since everyone thinks a sorcerer lord is are only option.
depends on your local meta, in a competitive environment you might not do as well, chaos lords are just a massive points sink for what they bring to the table, a exalted champion will generally do the same job for half the points.

someone having a extra +2 to dispel makes a huge difference as I have shown to people in the past, still your opponent having a +2 advantage is far better than a +4
Edited by Kormak, Nov 28 2011, 03:48 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DarkChilde
The Chosen
Kormak,

Chaos lords are already an unoptimal choice. Giving a leadership boost to warriors is not really going to unbalance them even more. I am interested in having a balanced list in the sense that I want a list that has a winning schtick like every other army just about in the book. You know chaos can get outmagiced by lizardmen, dark elves, and slaan. They can get out shot by everyone. For sheer brutality you have the ogres, etc. Being an army that is passable at everything, but has a able to be outdone by another army in everything is not really balanced and this has been reflected on a tournament level. Some eople can make personalized attacks against me, saying I just don't know how to play the army (which incidiently is on of the recognized forms of an illogical argument; to attack the arguer instead of the argument-for anyone who has studied logic or had a philospy clas in logic), but I have wongames as well, but if you look at the overall tournament results in GT tournaments including Ard Boyz WoC is not doing well and that is including our "broken builds" of chosen Tzeentch stars and Throgg blocks.

Tzeentch as lord of change doesn't mean he gets better ward saves than everyone else in YOUR opinion, because the rules are working out that he does. For me in from a fluff sense it makes perfect sense it is like his people are the guys that are lucky and can never get him to use a comic book analogy I picture his ward save boost being kind of like Domino, the X-Men characters power to MOSTLY have bullets and attacks avoid hitting her.

As concerns the Warshrine and the Hellcannon yes the Hellcanon does draw heavy fire and as I said in a post in another forum has been one of the biggest point giveaways of my army as it draws heavy fire and only has a 4+ save. Canon fire can take it down quick, which is why recently I have dropped it from my list and being running double warshrines and others units with the 205 pts I saved from not taking an HC. The warshrines I keep in the rear of my units but in range to give a buff. The enemy focuses on them but I mark them with Tzeentch and usually this means it takes a while for the enemy to take them down (if at all) and meanwhile that is less shots fired at my infantry blocks Chosen, CW and maybe Marauders that have to march across the board under constant fire and whatever magic didnt' get countered to get to the enemy.

Okay, dude. I said from the start I begin playing in 8th not in previous editions. You keep bringing up the past book book from however many edition ago and the good old days of Chaos. Here is what I know. I don't like the idea of not being able to mix marks or put characters of a certain marks in a unit. This is becoming redundant so I guess we will agree to disagree on this. Now, whatever happened or the rules were in the past edition great for those editions and those who still play those editions.

Darkchilde
Edited by DarkChilde, Nov 28 2011, 11:14 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
Yes Chaos lords are already unoptimal choice, the only real reason to have a chaos lord is for high leadership, to then go and give chaos warriors high leadership just makes them even worse, you factor in a +1ld banner and you have no point in using him at all. He is already going to need tweaking to make him a viable choice as it is!

Lizardmen, skaven and dark elves are certainly a issue however they need new books, they simply need to be brought inline with he rules of the current. Sadly with warhammer how it is WoC have to many up hill battles, any skaven list that includes a grey sheer is going to be a struggle. This isn't a problem with WoC and changing stats isn't going to fix this, the problem is the dreaded 13th spell. Then you have lizardmen, most armies struggle against them because of the items in the book are that give them such a amazing magic phase are not designed with 8th ed in mind, same applies to DE. Throggs list not doing well? is it that surprising? it relies on low I models which are just going to get rapped by spells such as purple sun, Chosen would be fine if not for dreaded 13th. Your suggestions simply continue the trend of codex/armybook creep, this does not promote balance, it promotes imbalanced, didn't you say something about wanting chaos to be the top dog?

You are certainly right that chaos gets out shoot by everyone, has this actually caused you any major issues, rather than change the style of the army I would rather see better counters added to the list, we used to have flyers, I don't see why we don't have any now. As for attacks against yourself, hardly, if you find ld8 such a issue it suggests to me a problem with yourself rather than the army why, I don't find leadership 8 a problem, then again I have been use to using them with Ld8 since 6th ed and the ravening hordes came out. I would also point out that you have said leadership 8 is terrible multiple times,I their is a difference between saying leadership 8 isn't high enough and leadership 8 is terrible, a massive difference. I am also going take someone less seriously when they make up bogus reasons for dogs to have chaos marks, I understand why you want the MoS on chaos hounds. 5pts to make them IP but still be able to flee would be brilliant game mechanic, just don't try and make up fluff excuses, I think its painfully obvious you don't collect the army for the fluff. Something to consider, how you feel about the army being changed so fluffy lists are viable at the expense of your army, thats kinda how many people felt when they changed the book, it screwed over a hell of alot of people armies.

Your right the rules are written that way, the marks are however very badly thought out in the current book, hence why you have a standard price per unit, I mean seriously, who takes a warshrine of khorne? 30pts for +1 attack? why would anyone take that over the MoT? They wouldn't, why, well just as I said they are badly thought out. Please stop bringing the fluff excuses, if you like the game mechanic then fine, thats your choice, your not going to get me to agree with using poor fluff excuses. Tzeentch is the god of change, he is not the god of lucky leprechaun's ;)

Hellcannons are always going to be a topic for hot debate, they are very hit and miss, really they should just be a rock lobber rather than having it compete with the other monsters in the list. They do draw alot of a fire but then again, if they draw two turns of cannon fire, that two turns those cannons having been shooting at your chaos warriors or nights. If you use chosen then I can see why you would use a warshrine, I dislike them as they only really serve a limited purpose for a couple of turns.

Your right, I do, however you yourself having never read the books or played the armies (which was still used well into 7th ed) have made very damning statements, many of which are just false (such as the old mark system being the problem with the old book). When I correct you all you do is argue, partly because you don't listen, yet again you say:

Quote:
 
I don't like the idea of not being able to mix marks


The old book never prevented you from doing this, if you wanted a mixed god army you took a character with mark of chaos undivided as your general, if you wanted a purest list then you gave your general a mark. Thats the difference between now and then, currently the book or really caters people such as yourself.

What can I say, with the state warhammer is in these days, tournament play should not be the primary focus when writing a book, warhammer has never been about tournaments.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DarkChilde
The Chosen
The chaos lord vs the sorceror lord is not unbalanced when taking into account the greater context that in just about all the armies that I have seen having your general be a level 4 vs a more melee oriented character is the better choice (except for Ogres because their wizard is very strong in melee). Melee characters as generals in general have not been the norm in 8th edition for any army so again keeping the CL unequal is not imbalanced when viewed in a holistic sense.

Has shooting caused any major issues? Hell, yes. Move and shoot canon the (the iron blaster can be devastating). Dwarven gun lines can be devastating. There are only so many blasted standards to take, and the 90 point skaven warp canon that ignores armor can also be very devastating even with our awesome ward saves. Yes, shooting is a bugging problem.

Leadership 8 is bad for an army that supposed to be this strong unbreakable elite melee army. A nine falls more in line with that fluff.

I don't have to make a fluff excuse for warhounds to bear a mark. You see that is the thing with fluff...it's made up. :)

Also, when I made a comment about people attacking I wasn't referring to you per se, but to comments made by perhaps yourself and others about using the army wrong and attack me instead of the argument. As I said, when viewed overall WOC are not doing well in GT tourneys.

As regards the HC yes it has been an issue of debate and it will fit into a chosen star twin Warshrine list, but what was happeing was people would focus fire on it and take it down and then spend the rest of the game playing point denial since or maybe focus on the unit that wasn't the chosenstar. The thing with WOC again we are an army where speed is a premium so it isn't that hard to out do us in the movement phase of the game. It only takes a hundred points to win so once they dropped the HC and avoided other units as much as possible, especially the Chosen I was findig it wasn't that hard for them to win. When I discovered this I dropped the HC to better success in games.

Warhammer may not have been intended for tourneys. Again, I don't know about the past (although it seems tourneys and competitions have been a big part of the game for while now...well before 8th edition), but competition is a part of the game now and all the books should be written for competitive play in mind. Also, just out of curiosity what do you mean when you refer to "the state Warhammer is in these days"?

Darkchilde

Edited by DarkChilde, Nov 28 2011, 12:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheOneHawk
Warrior of the Chamber
I'm just gonna throw out that I don't think a chaos lord is that bad of an option. I have been switching back and forth between level 4 and Lord, and I do a lot better with my lord than my caster. He just needs to be equipped right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
Once slight problem with you logic, your just ignoring the chaos lord choice, why because it isn't worth the effort, that isn't good game design and again shows you have no interest in game balance. If something is broken you should make a attempt to make it more attractive, not less attractive, personally I would possibly make exalted heroes ld 9 and chaos lord ld 10, I wouldn't touch the leadership of chaos warriors or sorcerers.

I agree those things are annoying as hell, thats why every chaos player used to include furies, when they split daemons they should have added harpies to the list instead (like back in 5th ed). The army needs counters to shooting, its much like dwarfs, rather than giving them wizards and changing the flavor of the army they gave them runepriests.

Who said anything about warriors being a army of unbreakable warriors? clearly they are otherwise they would control the old world, sounds like what you really want is daemons.

Yes fluff is made up, if you read a book and you came across something like that which just didn't work with the rest of the book you would think its strange, no if you meet the writer and asked why and he responded "well its made up and doesn't matter" you might think the guys a bit of a idiot. Competitive play is certainly a part of warhammer but it isn't the biggest part of warhammer or infact any GW game, if it was it would play far more like chess than it does. I am fully aware WoC is not a top dog at tournaments but this goes back to what I said about Lizards, DE and skaven not really being designed with the new rules in mind. GW needs to bring these books inline rather than bring the other books inline with them. If they did it like that it will be 7th ed all over again instead of DoC breaking the game WoC breaking the game.

Yes I have experienced that myself against a empire player, was incredibly boring, was highly amusing locking his pope in a challenge with my sorcerer lord the entire game. Sadly all we have to force people to engage us is magic and the hellcannon, you should have tried using chaos without the hellcannon! Is not that speed is premium simply because of the age of the book? I mean chaos knighst used to be in every list and you could roll someone over very easily. I think once all the books are redone the game is going to be a better, we just don't need another DoC.

Big difference between writing a book with competitive play in mind and writing a book exclusively with competitive play in mind, some how I don't think your the former. As for the state of warhammer i simply mean the meta, big blocks, high level wizards, mega spells, books still having items/abilities not suited for 8th ed.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DarkChilde
The Chosen
Kormak,

The problem with your logic on the CL is that you are trapped in a paradigm of previous editions. Even with the new books that have been released: O&G, Tomb Kings, Ogre Kingdoms their melee characters have not been made to be the optimal choices for their army general. A level 4 wizard has which is why makes OK players run a wizard as their general now unlike before their book was released. You wanting to start midgame to make the CL a more optimal choice is both analgesic and unrealistic at this point as that is not the direction this edition of the game has taken. It would require the new books that have just been released to be rewritten first, and that is not going to happen anytime even remotely soon.

As far as chaos warriors being hard to break I thought the description in the book that "when he is roused for battle however, he becomes a roaring, unstoppable force" (WoC codex page 46) was a good basis for my critic. This sounds like an L9 to me. You disagree and that is cool. This is one point where I guess we are destined to just differ. "Yeah, these guys are roaring and unstoppable elite warriors, but you know if the fighting gets heavy they will run thoough" doesn't sound elite to me. To me WOC should equal dwarves in resoluteness of combat.

Again, maybe GW games weren't originally made for tourneys and competitive play, but that aspecto of the game doesn't appear to be going away, and I agree Skaven and Dark Elves need a new book to be brought in line with other books but WOC is also suffering because the new books amps up armies and we already don't really have a schtick as someone else pointed out in another thread. For sheer brutal melee combat; ogres out do us for elite troops high elves can equal us though not as tough, artillery/shooting wise we can be outdone by everyone, magic lizards and dark elves are hard to beat, etc. Then you throw in units like Mournfang which pretty much puts other cavalry to shame, plus the prevalenc of artillery. You know, it's funny before this thread, I called the 800 GW number to ask about the rules question pertaining to Frenzy to see if what this guy was telling is correct at my local game shop. During the course of the conversation I mentioned to the GW person you know WOC needs a new book as if you look at our competitive record as a whole we aren't doing so hot. The guys response (paraphrasing was) "Yeah, WOC is kind of taking a beating right now, especially since shooting and artillery as whole has become more prevalent in the game but usually the way it works it GW will start with older books like dwarves first and then the newer ones and the WOC book is not really old so while I can't say for certain more than likely chaos will get a new book but later rather than sooner."

You know you got move and shoot canons out there, lead belchers that do an artillery shot of dice per man with no chance of misfire, scrap launchers that as I recall are a tempate weapon with killing blow (I'm not sure if they still have this in the new book as since the new book all the OK players I see are running Iron blasters and why not), warp canons that ignore armor and you asked in a previous post is shooting/artillery an issue? Really? Throw in the fact that the new books have this big bad monsters, and yes I am aware single monsters don't usually win combat but they can be a big detriment if you ignore them and they can tie up a unit for awhile of have you use your magic (our defacto artillery) to take them down instead of another unit. Monsters like the giant spider O&G got, the bone giant, the thundertusk which offers great battlefield control against higher initative armies or anyone really as the order of striking is important, etc. Mournfang cavalry that pretty much eat through other cavalry in the book except maybe Brets.

Our army will get worse as newer books are released. The VC are going to get some nasty stuff. So, I don't think the designers are writing books now the way you want, and if your whole issue with the fluff is hinging upon a 30 pt unit of warhounds having improved Itp so to speak then the rules could be tweaked to say warhounds marked with slaanesh are itp that way they can't flee and be used as redirecters but will still be usefull as filler units against shooty armies.

Edited by DarkChilde, Nov 28 2011, 09:46 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kormak
Member Avatar
High Executioner of Khorne
DarkChilde,

Sadly you are very mistaken with your comment on my logic, Chaos lords have never been more viable than heroes and sorcerers, I think the only time chaos lords have been viable is 5th but the army was selected in a very different way and you could have mutiple chaos lords, even at 2k, not forgetting it was hero hammer. We all accept that chaos lords are going to be hard to make viable, this isn't a reason to remove them from the equation. Can you please not twist what I am saying, i said nothing about making chaos lord more viable, I will put this very bluntly, you pulled that out of your arse, you just want Ld9 troops and don't care how that effects the rest of the army. It was just to good back in 4/5th ed, its going to be to good now! Lord fighting characters are more viable in other lists because you can still take a lvl4 wizard in your Lord allowance. To solve the issue with lvl4's being a auto include magic lores need to changes rather than armies being rewritten.

Chaos warriors are hard to break because they are powerful combat units able to generate lots of combat res, currently their issue is attrition due the sizes of units and ogre bull charges doing S6 inpact hit (sometimes D3), having 3 attacks each and then stomping afterwards. Ld 9 isn't going to change this issue and with reroll painic test as well as BSB's, MoS and and MoK fear, panic, terror should not be a problem for a WoC army. What your talking about is exactly the same with space marines, you have to make some compromises when it comes to reflecting a unit on the table as it would either over powered or just too expensive.

GW games are still not made for tournaments, no one is saying that this aspect of the game is going away either, sadly tournament players are in the minority just as anyone over the age of 12. When you turn up to a tournament and you take out the guys who just turn up for beers and throwing dice how many are left who serious tournament players? half 2/3? what percentage of the total player base globally is that really? 10% I've been to several tournaments in the UK and its always the same people, that really tells me something.

Template weapons are certainly a concern these days but how many infantry do you take at 2400pts? My Tzeentch list has 3, one with blastered standard, one with ironcurse icon and a unit of Chosen, that's all your infantry covered. Most tournaments are either 1500pts, 2000pts or 2400pts so covering your army isn't actually that hard, you then have your cheap as chips hounds you can use to tie up warmachines until you reach combat or your disk riders (which previous could have a 3+ wardsave again ranged attacks without needing a +1 to wardsave). Still the bottom line is WoC need either harpies of furies just so they can include some sort of warmachine hunter, this is a very viable solution that doesn't involve changing leadership.

On lead belchers, they can't shoot every turn, they are BS3, tell still suffer -1 for range and still suffer -1 for MoN, if they hit they wound on a 4+ and you still get a 5+ save, it isn't that scary. Ironblaster is a chariot with Ld 7 so really depends how close it is to the general, if its not I would actually try and drop a hellcannon on it just to cause panic test, perhaps using hounds to try and draw the deathstar out of range by making it look like I am other a speed bump.

Mournfang cavalry are certainly good, tried using MoN and banner of rage in units bigger than 5? only need to win by 2, leadership 5 break test, they are very good but just take a little thinking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Chaos · Next Topic »
Add Reply