Infernal Dwarf Question Time (Important)

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

    Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

    • Infernal Dwarf Question Time (Important)

      Hello everyone! We are hard at work with discussions about the ID FAB, but we need some of the communities input on certain issues as well!

      The following questions have been raised, and as so far, they don't seem to have been discussed much in the public forums. So if you wouldn't mind giving me just a wee moment of your time, can you answer the following? It's in your best interests at the end of the day ;)


      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?

      Lord of the Hobby

      The Great Horde of Chaos <-My hobby blog Tyranno's Ride into the Steppes <-My Makhar hobby/army-list blog
    • Tyranno wrote:

      Hello everyone! We are hard at work with discussions about the ID FAB, but we need some of the communities input on certain issues as well!

      The following questions have been raised, and as so far, they don't seem to have been discussed much in the public forums. So if you wouldn't mind giving me just a wee moment of your time, can you answer the following? It's in your best interests at the end of the day ;)


      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      Hail of the Gods is over-restrictive and unfluffy. ID should be able to send all their dwarves with black powder weapons if they want to, and at present, bringing even 2 big blocks so-equipped is impossible. I don't see a balance issue - extreme short range should provide the necessary balance.



      Also, most people don't bother to bring more than ~25% core anyway. The Hail of the Gods limit only harms people who want to make a suboptimal choice.


      Barrage also feels too limited. Again - ID is hugely tech focused. Its army organization should reflect that.


      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?


      Lammasu was critically harmed by loss of Axe of Battle, which makes the Prophet undesirable in close combat. Either actual combat characters need access to Lammasu, or ID needs a weapon which can give the Prophet at least 4 attacks. It would be a shame to lose Aura of Unbinding, it's such a unique rule, but currently it's not really playable.



      I don't spend much time with bull builds, but my feeling is the small bull is probably fine, but the big bull lacks options.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      I haven't used immortals since 1.0



      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)


      I love giants, but i vastly prefer the whip. Pick is flavorful, the problem is the Crush Attack BRB rule is just bad. Especially on a chassis with S5 base and a different weapon option for S6.


      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?


      I use one reasonably often. No real complaints. If anything, his problem is cost. You can have 3 Annointed for basically the same price.


      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      <3 Witchcraft

      Otherwise thoughts are above under monster-riding builds.
      Just because I'm on the Legal Team doesn't mean I know anything about rules or background in development, and if/when I do, I won't be posting about it. All opinions and speculation are my own - treat them as such.

      Legal

      Playtester

      Chariot Command HQ

    • Tyranno wrote:

      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?
      I think it's mostly good. What I wish for is some more options for certain units.
      EDIT: Well, I really, really want to have a competitive gunline option.

      Tyranno wrote:

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?
      Overlord has his death star-y rules somewhat wasted on his mounts, I feel it's a trap using him mounted. Vizier with the bull I've used multiple times and have had good time with him. Lammasu is for beer & pretzels lists. A lot of items are working at half strength or are just flat out unusable, so I'd say pretty bad overall.

      Tyranno wrote:

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?
      Price notwithstanding, I like the design hole they fill, a wall of bedrock for the enemy shock units. Maybe their special rule should also affect enemy units which gain Devastating Charge?

      Tyranno wrote:

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)
      I might be the only one who likes it. I like anything that can harm high Res enemies, and much rather take him than a Rocket Battery.

      Tyranno wrote:

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      When it comes to the literal cowboys, I much rather use mounted Vizier. When I've used the Subjugator, I've also had a unit for him to go along and hope to not get chaffed or get shot to pieces.
      I think he has a role to play though. To make you feel that you have a real shock cavalry unit, although that unit is so massively expensive that you need to build the rest around it. If we're gonna get a small Taurukh hero to give Taurukhs more of a punch, I think the big one has even less of a role.

      Tyranno wrote:

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      I've no opinion of the Witchcraft save for the wow-factor it gives when a mount can have such a lore when everything else around it uses just fire and brimstone. What I really wish for, though, is it to become more of an anti-mage unit.
    • Tyranno wrote:

      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?
      I dont feel too restricted, apart from Barrage at times as stuff like the Bound Daemon Upgrade suddenly makes the whole model count towards 2 categories with a huge amount of points.

      Tyranno wrote:

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?
      Quite inflexible. Theres hardly any reason to put a Prophet on a mount (apart from getting acess to the Lamassu). The Overlord/Vizier builds are limited as they obviouslly need protection but on the other hand aren't good enough fighters on their own. Not being able to enchant Infernal Weapon or being able to take Paired Weapons plays into it. 3/4 A with S4 is just to few for that cause.

      Tyranno wrote:

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?
      They do have a purpose but are restricted to being "the block". Without Bodyguard you wouldn't see them (apart from maybe resilient Icon bearers, but I doubt that).
      If one wanna do some damage you take some sort of Kadims/Disciples, depending on whether you wanna have lots of attacks or high strength.
      To properly fight they need an Overlord as 1A hitting more often than not on 4+ (parry) doesnt match up well against other armies combat elites.

      Tyranno wrote:

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)
      You can give it a pick?

      Tyranno wrote:

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      Needing to keep 5 Annointed alive so you don't have him die against a doomwheel/canon is quite a task. You'd at least want 6 Annointed, which just don't fit in every list.
      If you're at the point of playing 6 Annointed..do you really want one sligthy better one for three times the points?

      Playing him solo and naked, I'd rather spend 30 points more to get 3 Annointed and have more hitpoints and more importantly scoring (which on a fast unit is super relevant for ID).
      Playing him solo and equipped..well for that points I'm slowly in getting a Titan territory.

      Tyranno wrote:

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      The Lamassu's problem is that it wants to do a bit of everything, as a result never excells at it. But I love the concept and am still looking to finally get a decent model for it. Also huge fan of Witchcraft. Thankfully I know you won't tell me in the next 4 weeks that we're getting to chose from it on our Prophets as that would get me so excited I'd fail my coming exams.
    • Tyranno wrote:

      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      It is quite restrictive due to the large quantity of stuff in the bound and binders category including character mounts.



      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      There are plenty options for builds however most are probably pointless or not viable in competitive builds. Other than the great bull there is little incentive to play the others.



      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      Immortals are fine, very reliable and consistent. They do what’s expected of them, they carry the icon of inferno if needed and provide a safe bunker for characters. They also are a credible anvil without characters.



      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      The mining pick seems like quite a pointless item in its current version.



      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?

      Yes due to massive cost of running a unit of annointed and the subjugatior. However as a cowboy on his own he is fine or in a unit he’s great if you can somehow fit him and 5 annointed (about 1/3 of your list in which case).



      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?


      Lamassu is very expensive and even more so when you factor in the cost of a wizard to put on him (which are very expensive when compared to HBE ones who cast better for example). Access to witchcraft and a caster mount is fantastic as a concept but this needs a serious rework. The lamassu could lose some of his more useless rules (such as aura of unbinding) straight up for a small point drop.
      ETC 2020 Luxembourg: Team Ireland Captain
      ETC 2019 Novi Sad: Team Ireland :ID:
      ETC 2018 Zagreb: Team Ireland :O&G:
    • 1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?
      There are lots of options but I would like more customisability like in the DL and warriors books with marks and manifestations. We have different gods and cults and this should be reflected somehow. Be it army composition or upgrades.

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?
      There are very few viable builds I feel. Everyone takes the same.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?
      Not really. They aren't very immortal. I only see their use as a full deathstar with overlord or as an icon caddy.

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)
      It's terrible. I'd never consider it as giants miss in combat too much. Get rid and give us something cool instead. Shield, giant flintlock, prophet mount, flamer for example.
      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      Yes. He's too pricey and doesn't add anything special.
      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      I like that it gives the ravens wing possibility but don't like the lammy in its current guise. His rules need to be slimmed down. Is an unridden lammy an option?
    • 1. Yes and no. I dont see the use of hail of the gods and I think Barrage is overly charged by Bound deamons with full costs. Would rather restrict the bound deamons in number.

      2. Actually I find the great bull of shamut quite good as a gigantic mount. The other mounts are kind of bad, which I consider all the large monsters. Lamassu Mage is to expensive and the bull is simply no option.

      3. I think Immortals is one of the best units in the game. Bodyguard for everything and the blessing.

      Fits great as anvil but is no death star which is good. People have to accept that we cannot be as good as dwarves due to Taurukh, Kadims and Hobgoblins.

      4. Generally dont think the giant fits to ID. The mining pick is horriblem

      5. In the current state yes. He cannot be protected from shooting without five other taurukhs and be shot down by a single Canon shot. If he does not get a rule only distributen at 3 or less Rank and file models, he should become something like the felldrakhero.

      Somehow I think he would be better as normal taurukh.

      6. I dont like the Lamassu because he is to expensive in combo with a wizard. Witchcraft seems a funny lore but not worth using it for us.

      Would change him to something like a stand alone magical monster or with wizard conclave / Adept rider upgrade. Also something with a flying arround familiar with 6 inch range to cast spells through him

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Traumdieb ().

    • Tyranno wrote:



      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?


      I do think it's easy to create a new and list, however the bound and binders category have too many entries.



      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?


      Too retrictive on the vizier, and not enough good options for the overlord.


      I feel the prophet is fine.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?


      I think Immortals are fine as they are purposewise, but they are too expensive.

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)


      Never tried it.

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?


      I think he works okay as a cowboy, but would not use him in a unit of anointed, which is sad.

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?


      Really like the witchcraft path as it brings something else to the table, and the Lamassu is fun entry but could use a fine tuning.
    • Tyranno wrote:

      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?
      For the most part I don't have much of an issue with it. It does what it is supposed to do (i.e. prevent me from using too many war machines, prevent me from using too many Kadims, etc.) I don't often find that I am prevented from trying out interesting ideas with the current organization setup. That said, I have 2 problems with the current setup.

      1) Hail of the gods is totally pointless. I don't think I have EVER come close to hitting the cap on this. ID infantry shooting is not good enough to make an entire list out of (which is why no one ever does). It is not like we can make an evasive list like SE used to using our infantry shooting.

      2) While barrage itself is fine, engineers coming out of barrage is not. So long as engineers come out of barrage, they will NEVER be included in any competitive list (by which I mean a list that is intended to be a challenge to play against, rather than specifically used in a competition) and will always be sub optimal compared to just bringing another war machine.


      Tyranno wrote:

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?
      They are super restrictive. I need to make sure that I have enough offense/defense to make up for the cost (in the case of a Vizier on a bull or a prophet on a bull or lamassu). If I am using a mount, I am a large juicy target, so I need to make sure I can live long enough to make use of the monster and then make sure it can do enough damage to be worth the cost (which isn't often). There is no room for items that are not strictly defense or offense.

      In the case of the Great Bull, I have never once used it due to the wasted cost of the overlord. I have a big expensive guy with wasted abilities on a big expensive mount that is begging to be shot to pieces. No thanks.


      Tyranno wrote:

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?
      I have no problem with immortals. They are a good anchor unit for the army, and one of the few units in the army I am happy to put in line formation (the other being Disciples). I treat them a lot like SA Temple Guard: a great unit for keeping characters safe, especially when I have something else I want to do with my core points.


      Tyranno wrote:

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)
      I don't like crush attacks. I would rather have several attacks instead of just one that can miss. I can see its purpose, but it isn't anything that I'm going to use.


      Tyranno wrote:

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      Kinda, yes. He's really expensive for what he does. I suppose he can make a good cowboy, but so can the vizier on the bull (and the vizier is going to hit harder, have more attacks, and be more maneuverable for roughly the same price). The only advantage the Subjugator has over the mounted vizier is that he can go in a unit of Anointed, but those are SUPER pricey too (compare their price and damage output to OK Tuskers and then weep).


      Tyranno wrote:

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      The Lamassu was really hurt by the Great De-optioning of v1.2. Instead of being a versatile mount, it is an overexpensive mess of counteracting abilities. I used to love taking a bare-bones spell casting lamassu (just the casting abilities: no melee ability at all) and using it as a mobile casting platform for a cheap magus. With it as it currently stands, I am spending a LOT for abilities that I don't want based on my play style. If I want a mobile spellcaster that is good in a fight, I'll take my prophet on a bull.

      I do really like the witchcraft aspect, though. Please keep that.

      My ideal lamassu would have its options returned to it. At its base it is just a flying monster with a 5+ aegis and some spell casting. Give me the option for the aura, an option for the breath attack, an option for improved spell casting, and maybe an option for the magic resist. We are only ever going to field one at a time, so it isn't like we'd be able to confuse what the monster does with another one on the field. Let the lamassu be whatever we need it to be in our army.
    • 1. Yes ans no. Hail of the gods is totally meaningless. I do not even notice it. On the other side, Barrage is way too cluttered. Maybe you should give the ingeneur and the bound demon in Hails of the god, then the relationship would be a bit more balanced. But otherwise the distribution is very good

      2. The monsters only read well on paper. They never get their points in. I also do not know anyone who plays them. The overlord's ability is wasted, which is a pity. The fire-cracks in the bull are fluffy, but I have no way to give him the best protection in the game (deathcheater).

      3. Immortals are a great unit. They do exactly what they should. They are a perfect anvil. I almost always play it. But they are too expensive after the basic costs. Moreover, they are the only unit where the icon makes sense.

      4. Without comment. Only bad!!

      5. Actually, he is a good character model. The problem is that it is only protected in a big unit Taurukh. He needs a special rule like "Srapling Lookout"

      6. I find the concept of a flying magic platform very cool. But somehow there is not enough incentive to play this monster. And his special ability is totally meaningless. This is never used.
    • 1- I think its quite allright. Hail of the gods seem unnecessary atm but hopefully not post-fab ;)

      2- Quite allright. However Great Bull definitely lacks a purpose at the moment. Also some more items for the flying dudes to give them different roles would be cool.

      3- I rarely use them as i feel they right now lack something. What that something is i have no clue about tho.

      4- Dont like it. Could be nice with some shooting option for the giant. A flame thrower for instance.

      5- He has his uses. However he is too expensive for my taste.

      6- I see endless possibilities in this thing so i would really really like some focus on it (so really nice to see a question about it!). Could be really cool if it were more customizeable (?). Like:
      - Caster / not a caster
      - Support role (either within something inches, or if in the same combat)
      - Option for bound spells
      - Option for breath weapon
      - Option for longer fly
      - Option for more attacks/higher str (yeah yeah, you could take the small bull, but lammasu is way cooler!)
      - Option for size-upgrade to monster (to honor the miniature options from Lost Kingdom and Raging Heroes)

      I think witchcraft as a lore is a fitting choice for it. Occultism would be cool too.
    • 1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      I only feel the limits when I take much units that count in two categories (shooting Infernal Engine, Bound Daemon, mounted characters). It usually prevents me from taking to many big things (Engine and Titan and Big Bull for example). But that's what those limits are made for, right? On the other hand the 20% Barrage is rather restrictive for an army with designated playstyle "Gunnline" .

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      There are at least two builds for every mount that is more or less playable. But every build has some details that spoile the fun a little. My tweaks for the mounts would be:
      Big Bull: Come on same Att as his little brother? Needs at least 5 or D3 Impact Hits.
      Little Bull: why is he the exception from the Aegis (5+) pattern? A breathweapon could be nice as well.
      Lamassu: So much cool stuff but too inconsistent. If those things were optional this could be great.
      There are always the people that want their mount slender and cheap and others that want cool and fluffy stuff and don't care about the points too much. Making updates optional is the key and going away from options and having them build in (as a general direction for the whole project) was a mistake in my opinion.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      I do use them and they have a purpose as bodyguard. I actually like that they are in between Kings Guard and Deep Watch. There is a merit in not being highly specialized, versatility. Compared to those (and other units like Iron Orcs) they are a little bit too expensive (probably Blessing of Nezibkesh beeing overrated) and the great weapons are a joke.

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      Never used it.

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      I might consider him if he was protected in his unit (like for example Ogres Scrapling Lookout). Still pricey though. I don't like cowboy's in general.

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?

      Access to Witchcraft is great and brings a nice synergy with Blunderbusses and flamethrower gunneryteams. While the Aura of Unbinding is useless in 9/10 games, it does tell a story about the Lamassu. I would like to see more of this anti magic aspect. Maybe an Aura that reduces MR around it or the Breath Attack having some anti magic effect instead of damage.
      If the small Bull got a 5++ (see above) he could fulfill the role of the offensive platform and the Lamassu could focus on defense and weirdness :D .
    • Tyranno wrote:



      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?


      It's mainly OK except that Hail of the Gods is useless since all the shooting comes from core and for the mixed points between Barrage and Bounds and Binders for some units (Train, Bound Daemon) and the Engineer coming both from Characters and Barrage. The barrage percentage is 20% and that's the good limit, crowding things between other "slots" seems unnecessary and restrictive.


      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?


      The only mount I like at the moment is the small bull for the Vizier. The other mount options seem wasted for how they are now.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?


      Immortals are quite in a good shape (only with shield and magic weapon). They are a bunker and an Icon carrier, and ideally they should be the best anvil around while Kadims and Tauruks do the damage.

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)


      Never considered it. I like the Whip though.

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?


      He is very expensive (as 3 Tauruks) and he needs a lookout rule when added to 3 or more Tauruks.

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?


      I like the Witchcraft on the Lammasu and would love to see this model competitive. It should be an option for a flying Prophet, but without all the useless rules that make him so expensive. He should never see combat, but be well protected and difficult to shoot down.
    • 1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      Too restrictive in the B&B category. Because demon engines and demons are together in one category any really themed army cannot be played.
      I suggest seperating warmachines/demon engines and demons/lugars

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      All have to fly which is a downside as they don't a really good safe. So you need to put points inside defensive items which restricts the overall build.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      They are not highly defensive and not highly offensive. They are in the middle which most people seem to dislike.

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      The giant itself is not picked often. And if he gets picked the not with the pick. Thematically cool option but not good.
      Give it MW 2 against monstrous stuff.

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?

      Yes. Right now he is just a slightly fightier visier. If you have spare points the a bull visier can be better.

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?

      Witchcraft is cool and could fit the trickster lugar theme.
      Please give the lugars more options and make the abilities of the Lammasu optional.
    • Tyranno wrote:

      Hello everyone! We are hard at work with discussions about the ID FAB, but we need some of the communities input on certain issues as well!

      The following questions have been raised, and as so far, they don't seem to have been discussed much in the public forums. So if you wouldn't mind giving me just a wee moment of your time, can you answer the following? It's in your best interests at the end of the day ;)


      1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      1-Bounds and binders are a bit cluttered, but I see why it has to be. I would probably remove Lammassu from there as that is probably the main reason it never gets played. Barrage is fine and hail of the gods is almost never maxed. I would propose switching the gunnery teams from Barrage to hail of the gods and lowering the HotG cap to 15-20% so that you can take BS-shooting in core, or from gunnery teams with a fighting core.

      2- Pretty good selections, nothing to add. Lamssu on non-mages would be nice, but it´s mostly wishlisting

      3- They fill their role well but needs to be a tad cheaper, for both weapon options.

      4- Never played it, won´t comment.

      5- Seldom played him, but feels a bit too expensive for what he does.

      6- One of the coolest models that I never play. Removing it from B&B would help a lot I think. I for one would love to see more options for witchcraft overall in the army.
      Square bases, happy faces!

      ETC Team Sweden 2016 - Infernal Dwarves
      ETC Team Sweden 2017 - Infernal Dwarves
      WTC Team Sweden 2018 - Empire of Sonnstahl
      ETC Team Bulgaria 2018 (as Mercenary) - Vampire Covenant

      UN SW

      Tournament Support

      Tournament Analysist

    • First of all, thanks for asking us. I only red the first post and not other people opinions just to make sure I am not somehow influenced in my description of my impressions. Here is my point of view.

      1. I always struggle with the B&B cap so maybe it is too restrictive but I understand the reason behind this limitation. Although for me infernal engine / bound deamon WM should not really be in the B&B where lugars and kadims belong.

      2. I find the defensive build very limited in particular. For me the great bull is the mount which is really below par at the moment, he lacks something defense-wise (4+ AS would be my suggestion). Regarding the smaller mounts basically ghostly guard + reroll is a decent choice for the lamassu but I always struggle to find a good defensive build for the bull of shamut. I always pick basalt + talisman of shielding for 85 pts which is decent but definitely not as good as death cheater (which is as you know not available due to volcanic embrace). I would suggest to modify the secrets of mythril in someting more stable, like a straight 4++ ward save. I don't like it currently (item with AP conditions are so specific...)

      3. For their current price I just don't field them but their role seems well defined.

      4. I don't play it at all. The giant is not an attractive choice for me.

      5. I believe the Subjugador as a role at the moment as a very resilient not too expensive cowboy. I fielded him regularly and found him quite convincing to be honest. With death cheater we have a pretty decent cowboy. I would just give him & the Taurukh Annointed the rule impact hit (1). For me this rule would suit perfectly their style and give them a slight boost because it looks like they are still not competitive in regards with other choices.

      6. I love the fact that the lammasu (and only him) has access to witchcraft. To be honest I would be happy if we had the possibility to field the lammasu on his own as well. At the moment the lammasu is probably in a better state than our other mount choices.
    • 1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      As most people says, barrage is crowded and hail of goods never fullied. Engineers (who deserve its own entry) and gunnery teams should become hail of the gods instead of barrage

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?
      Restrictive. Since you are investing at least 500 points, you need defense. This limits you to ghosthly guard, basalt infusion (wasting aegis vs fire) and alchemy alloy to increase armour and dusk forged, talisman of shielding or secrets of mithril as special save. Also, in general, our charachters lack ofensive options, since onyx core gives something you can't have in other way in the army, burning steel is situational (either to god or to bad) and hero's heart is okayish. No other option seems desirable (maybe if infernal weapon could be enchanted it will be diferent, can't understand how other armies can enchant their special weapons and we can't).
      Can't understand why big bull is the big monster with less damage output among monsters. Also, unlike other armies, there isn't a special item for him.
      I would like master prophet general to have acces to big bull and maybe overlord acces to lammasu.

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?
      Tried them a lot. Currently I play like 18-20 as mage and bsb bunker, since they failed as deathstar. I would like them to have acces to armour 5

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)
      A hit or miss option is a big no for me. If it was free I will still pick whip/club. I would change it for shield and/or infernal armour or acces to volcanic embrace rule.

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?
      It is a cowboy, but not a great one. I use him with basalt infusion, talisman of shielding, mask of the furnance and great weapon to have a S7 thread in each side of my army (titan in one side and subjugator where there are ruins)

      6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more?
      Want to try him, but lack the mini. Arguably, it seems like paired with blunderbusses is a good option. If overlord could pick him, it would see more play.
    • 1- What do you think about the army organisation? Is it too restrictive? Not fun to try and come up with new builds?

      So for me the organisation of the army is correct .the restrictions aren ' t.
      Problem with barrage and bound.
      Personaly new build with backstabbers / engeneer/immortals/greatbull coupe be nice;)

      2- How flexible/restrictive are the builds for characters mounted on monsters?

      Bull is good
      Greatbull isn ' t ( 4a????,no enchantement. ...)
      Lamassu good on book not on table (2a?????? Elves can get dragons which can help in close or make fear to the opponement.here we have à wizard on wizard ......)

      3- Do Immortals feel right? Do they have a purpose in the army? Or are they too restricted at doing one thing?

      Still missing one attack or something hells To .be at the level .

      4- Is the Giant's Pick actually liked? Or does nobody... pick it (ba dum tish!)

      Not played ....no opinion

      5- Does the Taurukh Subjugator feel like he lacks a role in the army?

      Cowboy ...but the boundary is not cool for movement.

      1. 6- Overall thoughts on the Lamassu. And do people like the Witchcraft aspect and possibly want to see more
      2. Lamassu is good like free Monster without characters Because mounted is too expensive and still be a wizard on wizard.wichcraft could be very fun in ID but really strong imo