Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
From a competitive perspective, WoC seems to be mainly about spamming casters and Warriors (plus the obligatory Lord and BSB) because nothing is better than the Warriors in the Army Book point-for-point. I'm thinking of Dragon Ogres and Chaos Ogres mainly, who were or perhaps still are the successors to the Throne of Asskicking that used to belong to Chaos Knights and for a little while to the Chosen ('till people realised they pay too much for that EotG roll, especially with having a Warshrine or two around). This leads to very similar - if not identical - lists in a competitive environment, turning a once-colourful army into a boring, brainless bunch, too much like their 40K cousins.

At least thats how I see it. :p

Whats your opinion? Is it possible to maintain relatively similar levels of asskickery to competitive lists while remaining colourful? If so, how?
 

·
Eastern Potent
Joined
·
2,654 Posts
I agree with you. But I felt the same way in 7th, mine have been shelfed for a while tbh. They just dont have flavour, assuming your playing to win. You can be moderatly effective with a number of builds, but nothing so much like the classic MoK, halberd spam, backed with 2-4 sorcs and a BSB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
I find they work best if you physically hurl the dragon ogres at people. The point-effective sturdy metal works well in the eyes of your gods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
478 Posts
Warriors against change.

I'm seeing that same pattern pop up at the gaming centers I visit.

With the myriad of options open to WoC, I'm surprised that so many people just take the same A-B-C or sometimes D options.
WoC have some of the most fantastic monsters (dragon ogres/ shaggoths) and amazing lore and characters.
I realize that the lore is full of "hordes of armored juggernauts marching forward" but seeing that there's four gods, 3 unique lores of magic and some of the best 'i'll kick your teeth into your throat before you can retaliate or cry for mommy' heroes/ lords, it's saddening to see the army become the newest, or most popular min/maxed list.

I was starting a small WOC army that celebrated the pantheon of the gods through their destruction, but due to the expense of shaggoths and Massive marauder units, not to mention their over-popularity, the project has been back-burnererd for the Beastmen...again.

A fun army would be around "kholek the sun eater". 2-3 good groups of Warriors, 2 HUGE groups of mauraders, harpies & horsemen to harry and as many Shaggoths & Dragon Ogres you could fit while led by Kholek and a lord on a dragon.
...not saying it would work, but it would make your opponent soil themselves staring at that many juggernauts. (allowing your harpies to run in and gouge their eyes out...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
Here's my reasoning:

The book is called Warriors of Chaos. That implies that Chaos Warriors should be a major part of the army.

If I wanted to collect an army of mediocre combat troops, I would have taken up Orcs or Empire instead. I went for Chaos because it has the most elite infantry in the game.

We have 3 Core choices which must make up at least 1/4 of our army. One is terrible (warhounds), one has pretty bad models that force you to paint dozens and dozens of them (marauders) and the last one is easy to paint, good models, and amazingly good in game. Guess which one most people will go for?

Given the new focus on big units, squads of 12-18 Warriors don't cut it any more. You more or less must have a unit of at least 20 or you're going to get dragged down through weight of numbers and never break the enemy (steadfast). Add in the fact that Marks become more cost effective the more models you buy, and you have a lot of incentive for big units (25-30 strong).

On to specials... with the exception of chosen, I can't see anything I would be happy to spend 50% of my points on. Most people take one unit of Ogres/Trolls/Knights/Dragon Ogres, and each has their own merits, but they're support for the Warriors, rather than the Warriors being the support for them (like Knights in last Ed). Because we don't spend a huge percentage on Special, that gives us more points to go on... well... Core choices. Or should I say "Choice"?

Our rare slots are pretty cool, everyone who plays at my local club runs either a shaggoth, giant or hellcannon. One of them. So not exactly taking up the full percentage of points there either. Oddly enough, only two of us use Shrines.

Which brings us back to Characters. In this current edition, you must have a level 4 wizard in 2000pts. It's that simple. There are too many spells that will rape you sideways with a rusty pitchfork unless you invest in magical defence, and a level 2 just doesn't cut it. Add in that Tzeentch and Nurgle are both very undercosted for what they do in the new edition, and have some excellent arcane items, and taking at least 1 caster is a complete no brainer.

The highest Ld in the Army being 9, you're going to need a BSB as well. Being able to reroll everything from Terror tests to Fast Reforms or Marching within 8" when your average Ld is only 8 is just too good to miss.

Aaand then you need someone to take challenges because of the stupid "You must always issue and accept" Chaos rule. That means if you want your caster in a unit, you need to put a beefed up hero or lord choice in with em. Sometimes the BSB can deal with it, if he didn't get a magic banner, but in my mind it's too risky to lose him on an unlucky challenge.

So basically by following common sense, you end up at the "standard" chaos list. I don't actually see the problem here, because you can still have a lot of variation without losing much power potential. Want a unit of 40 Marauders with Flails? Alrighty then. Want a unit of Dragon Ogres and Knights? Sure. Want two Hellcannons? Should be alright. Want a special character? They're expensive, but pretty good.

In tournaments, people might run identical lists, but that's nothing new. Rare are the armies that have more than two competitive builds available. Casually though, I think Chaos can reasonably be called one of the most varied armies out there. It's always "Warriors + something" but there are so many options for "+ something" I've yet to see two armies that are the same.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,564 Posts
...one has pretty bad models that force you to paint dozens and dozens of them (marauders)....
Very true.

I do not share the common hatred of the Marauder models, and am getting peeved at the point to effort ratio.

I assume as you do not mention them specifically, you include Horsemen within the Marauder category?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
Very true.

I do not share the common hatred of the Marauder models, and am getting peeved at the point to effort ratio.

I assume as you do not mention them specifically, you include Horsemen within the Marauder category?
Nah, the horsemen are fine, but lost the march blocking with the new edition and consequently very few people bother. They can still be taken to deal with War Machines, but for the cost of a decent unit of them I'd rather take another 10 warriors instead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Thats a clever and clear argument there, Sethis, I have a hard time coming up with a counter-argument. :p I guess the only thing I can say is that for example the Beastmen have at least 3 completely different list types: Gor-spam, Minotaur-spam and Chariot-spam, whereas WoC, as you said, have Warriors+X, where X can be Chaos Ogres, Dragon Ogres and Knights. But then again, this type of Army Book/Codex seems to be a new style from GW, since their recent Army Books/Codices follow the same idea: 2-3 types of competitive armies could be made from one Army Book/Codex.

So yeah, I can't really come up with anything. Have I mentioned that I have five knights, two of which are painted red and gold? :p I have to give a look to my old pyromaniac WoC list...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
I agree this is a new (and welcome) direction for them to take with codex-writing, and the rumours of the Dark Eldar seem to indicate that even more variety in competitive settings is on the way.

I guess when we get a new book then we will get a lot more specialisation and options for our choices. Those of us currently looking to break the mold can still field our "King Throgg" army in the mean time!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
Tell that to my Galrauch Troll list. It's generally so different, that only massed multi-wound causing weapons do much damage to it. Mutant Regeneration with Dual Warshrines is an extremely dirty combination, and that you need to cause 3 wounds to even reduce the damage potential - combined with a 4+ Regen, and roll on the EotG if you pass 2 Regen Saves, you're looking at really hurting enemy lines.

Your army has S5 basic anyway, is faster (m6), and the only thing it needs is a Sorceror with Puppet and a BSB, which all good warrior armies have anyway.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Dark Knight
Joined
·
985 Posts
this is true but you can have some change if you don't mind losing and just having fun,

l went to a 1000pts torny with my Snow WoC army and it was

1x troll king
12x trolls
1x shaggoth

sure its not the best 1000pts l could have (if anyone takes fire l am going to die) but it was crazy fun and that what counts :biggrin:

p.s. l still came 3rd because noone took a fire mage :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Which brings us back to Characters. In this current edition, you must have a level 4 wizard in 2000pts. It's that simple.

Aaand then you need someone to take challenges because of the stupid "You must always issue and accept" Chaos rule. That means if you want your caster in a unit, you need to put a beefed up hero or lord choice in with em. Sometimes the BSB can deal with it, if he didn't get a magic banner, but in my mind it's too risky to lose him on an unlucky challenge.
Hey Sethis, I agree with you with basically everything. Marauders are retarded, Lolhounds are garbage and Warriors are pure win. That being said, I'm curious about the above quote.

I always take a Lvl 4 Tzeentch Sorc Lord on foot with Infernal Puppet and Talisman of Preservation (with MoT it's a 3+ Ward vs everything). My question is why would you need to take a Hero or Lord to do the challenging and not just let a Champion do it? The only reason I can think against this is that if the Champ loses it usually brings a bad Overkill against your CR, but at the same time a Champ still has crazy good melee stats and with a shield and MoT it's a 3+ AS, 5+ Parry or 6+ Ward, so they're pretty decent in a challenge. Also, if someone does take the challenge against your Champ, it takes their Hero or Lord out of the combat, which means our Warriors have free reign to rape face and make up for the Overkill and hopefully force a Break test.

I don't like putting my Sorc in a challenge, but with a 4+ AS and 3+ Ward vs everything, he usually doesn't die very easily, if at all. Sorcs are still really good in melee, and with a great save they're even better!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
I always take a Lvl 4 Tzeentch Sorc Lord on foot with Infernal Puppet and Talisman of Preservation (with MoT it's a 3+ Ward vs everything).
I normally only bother with Talisman if the Sorc is not going to be inside a unit, otherwise I take items that make him a better caster.

My question is why would you need to take a Hero or Lord to do the challenging and not just let a Champion do it? The only reason I can think against this is that if the Champ loses it usually brings a bad Overkill against your CR, but at the same time a Champ still has crazy good melee stats and with a shield and MoT it's a 3+ AS, 5+ Parry or 6+ Ward, so they're pretty decent in a challenge.
Requires you to field a Tzeentch Warrior unit with H/W and Shields, which I simply refuse to do because they kill half as many basic infantry models as Khorne ones with Halberds and Shields.

Yes, the Champion has good stats (mine frequently has 5 S5 Attacks due to a Shrine blessing) but you still hit on 4s, wound on 4s/3s, and then they have armour/ward. If you're lucky, you do 1 wound (assuming you strike first). In return you get hit back by someone hitting on 3s/4s, wounding on 3s/4s, and generally modifiying your armour to the point of uselessness. Your champion dies. That doesn't matter at all unless the combat continues into the second round. At this point your Sorcerer (who is probably worse than the unit champion in combat due to having a hand weapon and not much else) is forced to step up to the plate, and will get hammered by most peoples Hero choices, never mind Lords.Bad waste of a 400pt model in my mind.

I don't like putting my Sorc in a challenge, but with a 4+ AS and 3+ Ward vs everything, he usually doesn't die very easily, if at all. Sorcs are still really good in melee, and with a great save they're even better!
They can survive, sure, but I'd rather avoid the situation in the first place by accompanying him with a combat character, or just avoiding units with an enemy combat character in them. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
l am more worried about a miscast while in the unit then anything else, :grin:
And thats why we keep 'em on discs and stick to the bushes. :)

Oh and just a quick question: is it the same in terms of performance if I take a Chaos Lord instead of a Sorcerer Lord and buy lots (2-3) Sorcerers instead, rather than the usual lvl4 Sorcerer Lord with a BSB and the occasional combat Hero?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
Lords are Overkill. Heroes do the job adequately at standard Lord Level Price (I.e Empire Grand Master, Breton Lord) - it's only let down by its 2 wounds, but it's I6 and S6 (with Halberd) more than make up for that.

Perhaps for fun I'd take a Lord on Dragon - but then again I'd give up the chance for a L4 sorceror in 2500 - instead I'd take Galrauch (well, I do anyway) which gives me roughly the killing power of a Lord (3 Breath Weapons make up for the less basic attacks and lower I and WS).

But no, +5 to cast (+6 with SoK/Book of Ashur) is far too good to pass up.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
But no, +5 to cast (+6 with SoK/Book of Ashur) is far too good to pass up.
+7 with both of the above items, if you turn a level 2 into a skull caddy! Only really worthwhile at 2000+ points though. Fun to cast your entire Lore on one or two dice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
You know, I might actually end up getting Galrauch for a Lord and some choppy Exalted for Heroes. Seeing as how I need a reliable CC monster and casting. Would that work out then?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
+7 with both of the above items, if you turn a level 2 into a skull caddy! Only really worthwhile at 2000+ points though. Fun to cast your entire Lore on one or two dice.
Well, Book of Ashur is Arcane, as is the Skull of Katam. To have a Caddy, you'd need to 3 Casters in total - I suppose that a LoS Sorceror could back it up well - Pandaemonium+Treason+Delusions could really put the pain on a large central warrior block. Anything lowering leadership is amazing.

I run Galrauch in a Monster Army - with a BSB and Throgg, there's a couple of bubbles which will do wonders while Galrauch is off Pandaemonium+Treason+Transmogrification resulting in a painful set of damage on a single unit - especially when you can then follow up the next turn with 2 Breath Attacks.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top