Specialist Arms Forum
Warmaster => [WM] Warmaster Fantasy Discussion => Topic started by: Bel on August 18, 2009, 06:05:03 AM
-
Please post here your feedback of WTA armies, any typos and unclear things.
-
Goblin Army p.17, left column, 3d para, 2nd line: 'too' -> 'to'.
-
OK, I've only just discovered this website today and perhaps I've not searched hard enough, but where ARE the Trial Army lists that are being discussed here?
-
http://sites.google.com/site/wmplaytest/ (http://sites.google.com/site/wmplaytest/)
-
Dwarf Younger Holds Army
p40 in the Selector
Dragon Slayer *7 should be *6
Runesmith *5 should be *7
Anvil *5 should be *8
.
-
Please post here your feedback of WTA armies, any typos and unclear things.
I play the Dogs Of War list with one extra element - I allow a Pegasus as a character mount. Stats exactly as per the entry for Bretonnia.
I'd like that added to the "official trial" (huh?) army list.
Cheers, Martyn
--
-
I'm working on assembling and painting a Nippon army at the moment. I plan to sculpt up some of the figures that I cannot find in 10mm -- Oni, Imps, Tengu, possibly Temple dogs.
Question: What is the inspiration for the Temple Imps entry in the army selector? I'm having trouble finding a temple imp in Japanese folklore. I find water imps, and I found Goblin tiles. Or are the imps simply a smaller version of the Oni?
Next question: Are Fanatic monks simply monks with no armor? Ie, all in robes? I assume these are the Ikko Ikki, but I could be wrong.
Thanks for the help!
-
Question: What is the inspiration for the Temple Imps entry in the army selector? I'm having trouble finding a temple imp in Japanese folklore. I find water imps, and I found Goblin tiles. Or are the imps simply a smaller version of the Oni?
Kappa (河童) are creatures that fall under the blanket term yokai (妖怪;よã†ã‹ã„), which means a ghost, demon, monster, or goblin. Kappa are sometimes categorized as fairies or sprites, but I think they can safely be called imps. Although their characteristics may vary, they are generally short, human or ape-like creatures with greenish, scaly skin and webbed feet and claws. They sometimes have duck or turtle-like beaks, as well, and wear lily-pad-like bowls on their head. Which is perfect camouflage, since they live in bodies of water
Next question: Are Fanatic monks simply monks with no armor? Ie, all in robes? I assume these are the Ikko Ikki, but I could be wrong.
Yup.... just robes, could be one shoulder bare, or stripped to the waist.....
-
Lex, thanks for the idea on the fanatic monks.
As for the kappa, my only problem is that they are water imps and not temple imps. If the kappa are the inspiration for the templ imps entry, then I will go with thaqt idea. I suppose that they might have been named "temple" imps just to make it clear that they are associated with monks and not the samurai.
-
Yup.....
I think the idea was to make them more or less like the more traditional imagery of de AD&D Kobold.
-
OK, quick report on the Nippon army list.
I got together with my friend Ian yesterday to play Nippon versus Daemons. We played 2000 points on a side, Battle Royale, and lots of hills and forests. I gave Ian the Nippon army selector last week, so he could have time to study the list and come up with an army.
I thought I would share some of our experiences with this army list.
First up: It is a complicated army list. Ian made a few mistakes with his list.
First up was the break point. He calculated the break point based on both the number of Samurai units and the number of Monk (meaning Temple and Monk) units.
Next, he had more Monk units than Samurai units. He fixed that.
Next, he had a sorcerer and a Shrine in his list. He fixed that by switching the sorcerer to a mystic. By the way, I really like the Mystic's special ability.
So once we straightened that out, we played. And what a battle it was!
At first I was dismayed because of the sheer number of units I had to plow through to get to his Samurai units. His unit of Temple Dogs went down fairly easily because they were left all alone on his right flank. My cavalry lost a stand to take them down. Because the TD were taken out, I had the hill on his right flank, which I invested with a Greater Daemon, a unit of flyers, and 4 units of cavalry.
I had a great round of combat (the Chaos gods favored my dice rolling), destroying 6 or 7 AShigaru and Ronin units (and at least one Zealot Monk unit) for no units lost. However, the 6 units I used in the attacks took casualties -- 1 or 2 stands each. The Zealot Monks were brutal in combat, but ultimately went down due to no armour saves. The Ronin were rather troublesome due to the +1 they get in the first combat round, and for a moment it looked like they might gain the upper hand in their combat. As the Nippon army charged me, I started my turn once the combats were over.
Surprisingly, none of my wounded units went back to the Warp. I charged a unit of Ronin and a unit of Samurai. Both units went down, and I lost a cavalry unit. They unit of flyers that I committed was chewed up, losing two stands. The Greater Daemon floated away, not badly hurt, snacking on leftovers. Once again, I had the devil's own luck in rolling both hits and saves.
Nippon charged into my cavalry with Samurai on foot. My Greater Daemon was charged by the Mounted Samurai. Both might have gone better if the Nippon units could have followed up. Toward the center, 2 units of Samurai cavalry charged a unit of Daemon horde and wiped it out, taking a stand of casualties.
The last turn I was able to take out 3 units of Samurai, losing 3 units that turn and getting more wounded units. The Shrine that Ian took prevented my summoning of daemons to replenish my wounded units.
The battle was an exciting one, and if it hadn't been for my excellent dice rolling, the result would have been more even. The Nippon army was numerous, as I expected. It took a lot of damage, as I expected. But the list did not seem overpowered. Nor did any of the units in that list. And it was quite a pain that I could not summon in new stands to replace the stands that were removed as casualties. Ian used the mystic's ability very well, in some cases knowing he would be able to get an difficult order off.
Ian was happy with how the army played, and now wants a re-match.
So, aside from being a complicated army list, I wholly endorse the Nippon army list as being fun to play and to play against. Good job guys!
-
Tournament Daemon Army -- Specifically Daemonic Instability Tests
A quick paraphrase of the Instability Test table:
1: Unit goes back to the warp
2-3: Unit gets confused
4-5: Unit becomes un-confused if it was confused, other wise no effect
6: Unit must charge enemy; otherwise ignores command penalties for lost stand
On Satyrday, I had a situation in which a 2-stand unit of Daemon Horde that was confused rolled a 6 for its instability test. It had to charge, and it had a unit to charge, so it did.
The table does not say that the unit becomes un-confused. It seems logical that the unit should have lost it's confusion status as a reult of the 6 that was rolled. But we're discussing Chaos daemons here, so anything is possible.
I was able to break my opponent before that combat took place. After the game, we agreed that it seems logical that the unit would have lost its confused status.
So question the question is: Should the result for a 6 include the mention that the unit becomes un-confused if it was confused?
Or is this too confusing? ::)
-
Sorry, didn't see this post earlier.
Just recall when unit that is confused at the start of its turn (a time for instability test) ceases to be confused in normal circumstances. Unless othervise noted, the general rule has priority. Therefore your decision was absolutely correct.
-
Your units become unconfused at the end of your command phase. So if a unit rolls 6 for instability, but is confused and not within initiative you wouldn't be able to order it (even though you ignore command penalties for lost stands :P). That bit from 5 about becoming unconfused should be copied to 6 too.
-
Bel, I'm pretty sure that confusion only comes off after orders are given. I also thought that confused units can't initiative charge. I'll double check rules on confusion.
Dave, I agree that the bit from 5 about being unconfused should be part of 6 also.
I played against the Tournament Daemon army a few weeks ago. 2K points of TD versus 2K points of Tomb Kings. We both had problems with command rolls, and I made the mistake of deploying my artillery behind a hill instead of where they could see the battlefield. As a result, the Tomb Kings made almost no headway against the Daemon army, which was killing one TK unit after another. When the artillery finally crested the hill on turn 4, they blasted huge chunks of the Daemon army to pieces, but this wasn't enough to prevent the Daemons from winning the day.
-
We play weekly and have used a lot of the armies from the trial lists. The Tournament ones all seem fine and Dogs of War has become something of a staple replacement for Empire while no one will even consider not using the revised High Elf list. The experimental & 'Fan'armies are outright banned from my table though as none of them seem at all balanced (Dwarven Engineers in particular is ridiculous!)
-
The experimental & 'Fan'armies are outright banned from my table though as none of them seem at all balanced
What is your issue with the chaos dwarf list? Please be specific.
-
The experimental & 'Fan'armies are outright banned from my table though as none of them seem at all balanced.
I can see your point with the Fan armies, although specifically the oriental armies received a lot of play-test attention when they where created, but most of the experimental armies faced off against other regular or experimental armies on my table(s) before they ever saw publication and I all the obvious imbalance was taken af far as we spotted it.
The way you put it "as none of them seem at all balanced.." could be taken to imply that you writ ethem off on face value. If you DID actually play(test) them I would love to receive your points of critique, as their was a reason why they are called "experimental", and that was to get people to play(test) them and provide feedback 8)
-
Just to take a few examples of the things i found unbalanced/needless or just didn't like:
Wood Elf Army.
Wardancers ignore armour on 6's and have an attack of 5
Waywatchers are cheaper and better than regular elven archers and ignore armour on 6's
Young Dwarf.
A personal bugbear i think but i really think flame cannon are OPand allowing 3 per 1000 poins is madness :o
Losing access to 3 of 4 troll slayer units in a typical (for us) game in return for access to dirt cheap militia and some ninja tanks... i mean miners is a no brainer. Giving those remaining slayers some free movement is of very dubious merit IMO.
Also... why exactly do they need the addition of a terror causing maniac for so few points?
I already consider the dwarves to be one of the most powerful army's and just don't see justification for these buffs?
Nippon/Cathay.
One of our regulars really wants to play one of these which is reason enough to raise suspicion :)
Slayer Dwarf.
We trialed these and they were bonkers... not so much OP as WTF?
Dwarf Engineer.
Do i really need to explain what is wrong with an army that can have 6 flame cannons and 4 normal cannons?
Do I really need to explain why allowing the player to spend 130 points to give all that artillery a +1 to hit is a really bad idea?
Really, i have nothing good to say about this army... I have never played a less enjoyable game than playing against this (3 times!!!) Everything else in the book gets tainted for being close to it >:(
The rest.
There isn't anything terrible about the others (that i can see) it's just debatable how much they add to the game. Grimgor's seems a typical example of adding flavour that adds nothing much to the game. A new and awkward mechanic that just seems to be a heavy handed solution to orcs low command. I don't really think this needs solving in the 1st place? Others just seem a bit too niche so we put a motitorium on using them and rather than just pick and choose it was felt (mostly by me) that it was easier to just limit army selection to the main lists and the tournament options. I am sure we will re-appraise that at some point but not for a while.
Oh, and just to answer Frogbear... Nothing particularly wrong with the Chaos Dwarf at a glance. I am pretty sure we did play that one once or twice and i can't remember having any substantial issue with it. Not keen on giving it access to so much cheap orc and hobgoblin cannon fodder but thats more a niggle than a complaint.
-
Thanks ... helpfull!!
-
The experimental & 'Fan'armies are outright banned from my table though as none of them seem at all balanced
I would agree with some of your statements that are quite reasonable, others are extremely controversial.
Nevertheless this is a thread for Trial armies discussion and we are very glad to get a feedback.
How about some statistic data (size of your gaming group, number of warmaster games per week/month, size of armies, perhaps some photo, the results of games/points difference)?
-
Wood Elf army has too many special rules (against WM spirit IMHO), the 'place-your-own-forests'-rule is very powerful with the best shooting units in the game able to get defended in them in the middle of the table without CdT penalty.
This list allow for building extremely efficient shooting army with very good command and good flyer/cavalry. If properly played it would break most armies very easily, expect maybe HE, Chaos and Dwarf.
I've played it once and found it way too much OP. Once only, because too powerful ;)
It requires a lot more skills to play than the High-Elf army, but it is even more powerful I believe.
Regarding magic:
Tree Singing is a nightmare regarding ease or play point of view: moving terrain without moving units is not easy at all, and moving units by error is very often a problem. Plus it looks ridiculous to move a whole forest at this scale...
Call of Hunt is simply not needed when you have such good command chain. This extra chance is not needed.
-
About other lists I've tested:
HE tournament army: much better than the official one, still both too strong and easy to play for my liking, but better nonetheless.
Bret tournament army: more balanced, more fun, this is a very good one.
-
Witch Hunters … embrace the lunacy.
I’ve had this army for several years now and have played somewhere between 10 and 20 games, including at tournaments, but I didn’t really keep track. I have rarely won but the losing has been fun and the occasional victory a pleasant surprise. Here are my impressions ...
Superficially, lots of Flagellants should be a good thing especially as you can give them warhounds as an upgrade. However, although they give the army a good cutting edge, they get themselves killed very quickly and that costs lots of points and pushes you very quickly towards your break point.
I’ve commented on Zealots on the Rules Questions board. They’re good for increasing your break point but – unlike other armies’ low quality infantry – they can’t be relied upon to sit at the back on defensive terrain because they charge out of it on initiative. Also, compared to say Bretonnian peasants, they’re perhaps a bit expensive at 35 points.
The biggest problem for the army is the lack of cavalry. Whether other WM army lists should have access to such huge volumes of heavy cavalry is a perennial problem which I won’t address here. In a standard army (2,000 points), you only get 2 knights and 2 pistoliers. That’s a real handicap and – perversely for a bunch of supposed fanatics – can create the necessity for the army to act defensively.
Most opponent criticisms have revolved around the Sanctuary spell. The list does not specify a time limit on the defensive upgrade for that patch of ground or the necessity for the warrior priest to remain with the unit and so I have had opponents call ‘foul’ . Given that they often had ridiculous amounts of heavy cavalry, it seemed a bit rich for them to complain that my poor-quality infantry might be given a fighting chance of surviving in the open! My reading of the rule is that the warrior priest joins the unit and then that unit’s footprint is consecrated; he can then move on and do the same to other units.
The other problem with Sanctuary is that you’re usually using in on low-quality infantry that are at the front of your army and 2 times out of 3 it doesn’t work. This means the warrior priest is stuck with that unit and in my experience the unit then gets hit by flyers and is wiped out along with the priest thus giving easy points to your opponent and halving your 'magic' capability.
In summary, I wouldn’t recommend any substantive change to the list. It’s an Empire infantry army and, if you’re playing with it, you’re probably not doing so to win tournaments. I’ll post up some photos of the lunacy being embraced at some point.
-
That is very interesting, I only play once against them and I am agree with your statements. For sanctuary spell I could not have a reliable opinion.
I am really interested in a feedback about how it works against chaos and undead. As you have played a lot could you give us your point of view against those armies?
-
Played a few times against Vampire Counts and same against Chaos. The Zealots' +1 attack in first round was not a big factor. This was because - for reasons explained above - they are not a very significant contribution to the army's overall effect. But more importantly, it only lasts for one round! I therefore think the rule is a fair one. It would be a bit cheesy if it applied to the whole army but it only applies to the poorest infantry units in a mainly infantry army.
-
The Sanctuary spell currently is worded pretty ambivalent and could do with a make-over.
Also. the effect should (IMHO) be based as a radius spell centered on the priests location.
As with all spells in WM the effect dissipates after a turn. So the Priest would have to renew is in his next turn.
-
I agree that it may need clarifying, but I think the unlimited duration is clearly implied by the phrase ‘unless the affected unit moves, it counts as being defended’. I don’t see a problem with that. Araby Mirage lasts more than one turn. However, an alternative could be a single turn radius spell of, say, 15cm? Whatever the solution, the army needs something to give it a fighting chance!
-
I would agree with some of your statements that are quite reasonable, others are extremely controversial.
Nevertheless this is a thread for Trial armies discussion and we are very glad to get a feedback.
How about some statistic data (size of your gaming group, number of warmaster games per week/month, size of armies, perhaps some photo, the results of games/points difference)?
We play weekly with armies of 2000 points a side. As there are between 4 & 7 players we usually have 2 commanders in overall charge with others acting as sub commanders for sections of the army... If we have an odd number then usually someone acts as referee for the inevitable rules discusions ;D
Table used to be 2m long by 1.5m wide but i had too cut it down a little so it would fit behind the furniture when not in use. We are about to start a mini campaign/league so i will probably be able to post some detailed data at some point.
PS. I know some of my comments might be a bit contoversial and are certainly pretty harsh but i don't mean to offend anyone and do appreciate that a lot of hard work went into producing these lists. All the tournament armies we have tried have been great and i think some other lists could use a little of this treatment (Dark Elf)
At the end of the day though I do feel that harsh criticism is often more useful than damning with faint praise and hope that some constructive use can be gotten from such
.
-
Oh, and just to answer Frogbear... Nothing particularly wrong with the Chaos Dwarf at a glance. I am pretty sure we did play that one once or twice and i can't remember having any substantial issue with it. Not keen on giving it access to so much cheap orc and hobgoblin cannon fodder but thats more a niggle than a complaint.
I never found this an issue as I find it very hard to take many of those units in favour of the other items in the list. With both those units not having a save, and the slaves having a -1 command penalty if not brigaded in a mixed brigade, I cannot really see this being abused.
I guess it really comes down to the meta game of the group that you play.
-
@Black Ed + Dave
In reply to your question of Daemon Tournament Army and instability rule when rolling a 6...
Actually the intention were, that the unit has to attack and in case nothing is withing attack range it can be given orders without any penalties of the lost stand and of course it will not be anymore confused if having been before. I thought it were clear but if not then this should be added.
Regards
Claus
-
Claus,
Thanks. Yes, that makes sense.
Ed
-
Quick Ogre Kingdoms question:
In the Bull Gorger spell, when it states, "The spell adds +1 Attack for each stand in a unit the Butcher has
joined, including his own stand.", it's not clear whether "his own" refers to adding an additional +1 attack to the Butcher himself for a total of +2 (are characters 'stands'? I didn't think they were) or to the stand he has joined, in which case the wording seems superfluous.
Which is it?
-
My interpretation would be that you add a +1 to his normal attack value, therefore giving him an attack value of +2. All other stands in the spell affected unit gain the bonus of the extra +1 attack.
-
In the Ogre Kingdom list, why ogre bulls cost 110pts and 105pts in the rule book for all the other armies?
Why did you accept à Wood elf list so différent of the rest of the army list with spécial stand and rules? IMHA the first Wood elves list was enought balanced.
-
I also prefere the wood elf list of warmaster magazine.
-
In the Ogre Kingdom list, why ogre bulls cost 110pts and 105pts in the rule book for all the other armies?
Bkz of min/max limits.
Why did you accept à Wood elf list so différent of the rest of the army list with spécial stand and rules? IMHA the first Wood elves list was enought balanced.
A cavalry (with standard abilities stated in current rules) in woods absolutely breaks the game mechanics.
-
In response to playing Nippon at the PlayTest Weekend in Bergen op Zoom, I have some feedback on the Nippon army list:
1) I lost 2 games and had a two draws. I lost on points, because the units that didn't count toward my break did not significantly harm the enemy. The two draws came after I changed my army a bit.
2) I used the Kamikaze spell. The spell description does not mention this, so my question is: Does the spell caster need a line of sight to the target?
3) Next question about the Kamikaze spell: When is the target unit confused? Is it only when I roll a 6 to drive the unit back?
Alex also ran a Nippon army and tried a list stuffed to the gills with Samurai. I will let him provide feedback on how that worked.
-
Played the Goblin army from the tournaments lists last night.... I had great fun but i am slightly concerned that the Doom Divers are an awful lot of firepower for the cost. Should the unit size actually be 1 rather than 2 or was it felt that a serious chunk of long-range hurt was needed to balance an otherwise very squashy army?
-
In the Ogre Kingdom list, why ogre bulls cost 110pts and 105pts in the rule book for all the other armies?
Bkz of min/max limits.
Why did you accept à Wood elf list so différent of the rest of the army list with spécial stand and rules? IMHA the first Wood elves list was enought balanced.
A cavalry (with standard abilities stated in current rules) in woods absolutely breaks the game mechanics.
I agree to this but special unit with two stand does breaks the game mechanics too 😉
-
I'm working on a "tidier" Wood Elf list that doesn't have as much "flavour" but hopefully my opponents won't mind me bringing to the table.
-
Hello, this is my first post here. Over the years I have been building various armies from the official army lists and from the trial armies. Now I have started gathering a Norse warband. The list is actually very good. But there is one unit I'd like to add, and one rule I'd like to be clearer. Oh, and add a reference to Shield Maidens in the lore text :-)
The unit to add is Snow Trolls. They're a member of the Norse armies ever since their publication in Citadel Journal so I think they deserve their place in this Warmaster list too.
The rules for Valkyries have to be cleaned. There's too much dice rolling and the wording of the rules is very difficult. So please find my errata below. All comments very welcome!
Norse Army
By Warmaster Playtest Team. Based on a list by David Simpson originally published in Yahoo Warmaster Group, 2005. Revised by Toco, 2016. Original background info by Andy Jones and Bill King.
Warmaster Trial Armies
Unit / Type / Attack / Hits / Armour / Cmd / Size / Points / Min;Max / Special
Snow Trolls / Infantry / 5 / 3 / 5+ / - / 3 / 110 / -;1 / *7
Norse Army Selector
Bondsmen - Bondsmen normally make up the majority of warriors of a Norse army, sometimes accompanied by units of Shield Maidens. They are all fierce fighters, and show few qualms about laying down their lives in battle.
Special Rules
6. Horn of Resounding. A single Shaman in a Norse army may be given the Horn of Resounding as a chariot mount upgrade. In addition to benefit in close combat it also allows the Shaman to summon the unit of Valkyries as allies once per battle.
• The first precondition for summoning the Valkyries is that at least one unit from the Norse army must have been destroyed in a previous Combat phase.
• The second precondition is that there must be at least one Norse unit engaged in combat within 60cm of the Shaman.
If both preconditions are met then the Shaman may try to summon the Valkyries in the Norse Command phase instead of issuing a normal command. To do this the Shaman takes a command check. If the roll is successful then the Valkyries are placed on the battlefield within 20cm of the Shaman, but not into combat. The Shaman may then attempt further orders on them; most likely to get the Valkyries into combat. In subsequent turns the Valkyries may only be ordered by the Shaman with the Horn of Resounding. The Valkyries can still move by initiative, but may only Home Back towards the Shaman with the Horn of Resounding.
In addition, if the Shaman is killed, or rolls a blunder then the Valkyries disappear from the battlefield their job being complete. Valkyries neither add to the army’s break point. Their loss through combat or through disappearing does not contribute to reaching the army break point for the purposes of withdrawal. Your opponent will not gain any victory points from destroying the Valkyries, or if they disappear because of a blunder by the summoning Shaman. However, killing the Shaman with the Horn of Resounding will grant the victory points for Valkyries and the Shaman, as well as the immediate withdrawal of the Valkyries from the field of battle. Valkyries are flyers, thus all the rules for flyers apply. Valkyries cause terror due to their rather eerie spectral nature and spectacular method in which they enter the battle.
7. Snow Trolls. The Snow Trolls are common Trolls from the Orc army list with their standard described rules.
-
Good wording
-
The preconditions are slightly changed too. An entire unit has to be destroyed instead of just one stand. To bring this back into balance: the original rule to roll for the summoning, with modifiers for dead people, has been removed. Less dice rolls!
Another advantage is that the standard rules from the WM rulebook are not changed too much now. Regular command checks for the Shaman towards the Valkyries from now on.
-
The list is actually very good. But there is one unit I'd like to add, and one rule I'd like to be clearer. Oh, and add a reference to Shield Maidens in the lore text :-)
Yes,yes,yes,yes! I love the idea of Snow trolls unit! Even there are awesome Snow trolls minis from Copplestone FM5 15mm Snow Trolls, which I bought and painted. (http://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/images/fm5%20snow%20trolls%20colour.jpg)
About Shield Maidens I have thought too. There are my thoughts about them:
Warmaster Trial Armies - Norse army
Introduction
Shield maidens are fierce female warriors, which accompany bondsmen to war. Enemies can spot them either as support of bondsmen, or as patrol on the army wings. They do not fight in ranks, but in circular defense. So it is very hard to surprise them.
Norse Army Selector
Unit / Type / Attack / Hits / Armour / Cmd / Size / Points / Min;Max / Special
Shield Maidens / Infantry / 3(/1*) / 3 / 6+(5+*) / - / 2 / 60 / -;1 / *8
Special rules:
*8 According the nature of Shield maidens, unit can be used in two modes:
First mode: You can split the stands at deployment phase and add them to bondsmen units working in terms of rules like Empire skirmishers. In this mode stands lost their ability of "circular defense" (noted below) and change their Armour to 5+ (same as bondsmen).
Second mode: You can deploy them as separate unit. In this mode takes effect "Circular defense" special rule. Circular defense is in terms of rules "shooting" which works only against enemy charges regardless of direction. Moreover unit with Circular defense has not penalty from "Enemy facing own side or rear" in combat.
-
Yes, I had my eye on just those models to use as Yhetees in an Ogre Kingdoms army.
-
In the warmaster daemon tournament list the daemon Swarm lost the 6+ armor with no cost change :-\
The new cost Will be more 35 than 45 no?
-
From my games against BlackEd, they're worth every point at 45. They soak up the missile fire, don't get driven back, and allow you to close with your hordes.
-
I understand Dave, the swarm rule is the same for the skaven, but If the Swarm loose the 6+ armor, you need to reduce the cost.
-
DAemon swarms may disappear due instability.
-
I understand Dave, the swarm rule is the same for the skaven, but If the Swarm loose the 6+ armor, you need to reduce the cost.
Why? Is the Daemon tournament list loosing that many games because people don't have 20-40 points more to spend?
-
I understand Dave, the swarm rule is the same for the skaven, but If the Swarm loose the 6+ armor, you need to reduce the cost.
Why? Is the Daemon tournament list loosing that many games because people don't have 20-40 points more to spend?
YES ;D
this is not really the issue it is just to have a fair cost for a list dedicated to the tournament ;)
-
I for myself are playing daemons a lot lately and I choose the tournament list over the regular one.
I wouldn't change it because of the importances of the swarm unit. If it becomes cheaper you can just put that extra unit in your list. It then effects the breakpoint and more important your are able to deliver one of the best infantry units there is to the enemy.
The tournament Unit is totaly worth its points.
Cheers
Ole
-
YES ;D
this is not really the issue it is just to have a fair cost for a list dedicated to the tournament ;)
Fair is highly subjective. You already have two people on this thread saying they're worth 45 points.