Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

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

  • Archeron wrote:

    Squirrelloid wrote:

    Borjnfer Wraith wrote:

    IMHO, Catapults of the size used in this game would never have been used on a fluid battlefield only in sieges. Smaller, far less ranged man-powered machines are reasonable, but they have far less strength and area coverage. This applies to the siege mortars as well. But, we have these big impressive and expensive models that GW put out for us so what can we do about these unrealistic engines we are now stuck with?
    Well we could make them less powerful as well as less expensive to include in the army lists.
    catapults were never used in field battles at all, afaik.Cannon were though. And smaller bore cannons are actually more effective, because you can fire them more rapidly, and the ball experiences less air resistance (so you can stay closer to direct fire). (The difference in hitting power against non-wall targets is pretty much non-existent too).

    While the models might be siege mortars, the strength is pretty low. Seems reasonable for a field mortar.
    no 100% true there are severeal historical battles were are pults used but pults not trebuchets. There is for example a battle of christian Crusaders and osmans were the crusader won cause they placed pults which fired all the time on a point close to a bridge were the osmans need to get through.
    In latest battles of the "german order" there were also used many so called "field trebuchets" to hold constant fire on opponents and break there disciplines. Long time the German order don´t used bows or pults but in last years as knight orders they used them more and more. In same momemt the Knight order also used more and more trained foottroops and less dogs of war.
    Agree there are always a few exceptions to everything, but as a regular option to military commanders in field battles we just don't see them using them. Not until light cannon were war machines fielded on a regular basis. But this is FANTASY BATTLES so anything can be used right?
    Failure is not an option.
  • Archeron wrote:

    Squirrelloid wrote:

    Borjnfer Wraith wrote:

    IMHO, Catapults of the size used in this game would never have been used on a fluid battlefield only in sieges. Smaller, far less ranged man-powered machines are reasonable, but they have far less strength and area coverage. This applies to the siege mortars as well. But, we have these big impressive and expensive models that GW put out for us so what can we do about these unrealistic engines we are now stuck with?
    Well we could make them less powerful as well as less expensive to include in the army lists.
    catapults were never used in field battles at all, afaik.Cannon were though. And smaller bore cannons are actually more effective, because you can fire them more rapidly, and the ball experiences less air resistance (so you can stay closer to direct fire). (The difference in hitting power against non-wall targets is pretty much non-existent too).

    While the models might be siege mortars, the strength is pretty low. Seems reasonable for a field mortar.
    no 100% true there are severeal historical battles were are pults used but pults not trebuchets. There is for example a battle of christian Crusaders and osmans were the crusader won cause they placed pults which fired all the time on a point close to a bridge were the osmans need to get through.
    In latest battles of the "german order" there were also used many so called "field trebuchets" to hold constant fire on opponents and break there disciplines. Long time the German order don´t used bows or pults but in last years as knight orders they used them more and more. In same momemt the Knight order also used more and more trained foottroops and less dogs of war.
    Assaulting a bridge is not a field battle. It's more like a siege, so that doesn't surprise me.

    Any idea which battles the Teutonic Knights used 'field trebuchet' in?
    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

  • Peacemaker wrote:

    I also play EoS, ....I don't remember ever losing against HBE except in extreme circumstances like a special scenario or something.
    EoS is a great counter to the entire HBE book.

    Hummm, strange i feel pretty entrusted when i ear that i have to face EoS ...

    It's a kind of match-up you have to adapt youself, but it seems fairly playable.
  • matrim wrote:

    What do people think about Lion Chariots?
    They usually are important part of my lists and they do pull their weight if not more.

    I know the scoring and inability to take challenges are not ideal but if I have to choose between them and KoR if always go for LC.

    The reason I'm asking is that I don't really see them in competitive lists (may be I missed some big tournament lists lately) so I must be overlooking something...
    I’ve been using a combo of 1lion chariot and 1 reaver chariot. The lion chariot helps really well to zone your opponents monsters and or other chariots. I was running 2 of them but missed the reaver chariot emergency chaff. I’ve submitted my list to Buckeye battles and that combo is in my list.
  • Aegon wrote:

    Grenic wrote:

    I see that we are on to a new Beta Rules version since my last post.

    Any progress in making the HbE more playable or did they decide to double down on reducing the army further?
    I will try to summarize the most important things (-->These are my commentaries):
    - Lion' Fur can be combined with Dragonforged Armour --> nice little change

    - Fleet Officer rework (you can choose to get +1 to pick Deployment Zones, better Ld when in BSB/General (with this honour) range) --> still not worth it

    - High Warden of the Flame nerf (you can't use shields (no 1+ Armour Save) , no Divine Attacks and you get Flaming Attacks which can be easily hard countered by the Dragonfire Gem) --> this nerf killed this character for me

    - Daemon's Bane rework (will give you +2 armour against Magical Attacks only) --> I want a stable armour save (Ghostly Guard is the limit, as non-magical attacks are far more likely) and not a situational one, therefore: useless for me

    - Ring of the Pearl Throne rework (you will disable a single special equipment in base contact) --> powerful but at 100 points not worth it

    - War Banner of Ryma rework (lose +1AP when charging, but gain +1Adv ONLY if used by infantry) --> killed it for cavalry use, will consider it for infantry

    - Frost Phoenix reowrk (lost its sweep attack, will debuff the enemy as before but only -2 to Initiative/Offensive-/Defensive-Skill) --> not worth it

    - Hereditary spell | casting value reduced by 1 --> good change, makes the spell playable (still a high casting value)


    So overall another fail in terms of internal balance.

    But you can decide for yourself ;) .
    Thank-you for the updates.

    Yes, the changes continue to appear to be less than an ideal solution.
  • New

    Grenic wrote:

    - High Warden of the Flame nerf (you can't use shields (no 1+ Armour Save) , no Divine Attacks and you get Flaming Attacks which can be easily hard countered by the Dragonfire Gem) --> this nerf killed this character for me

    - Daemon's Bane rework (will give you +2 armour against Magical Attacks only) --> I want a stable armour save (Ghostly Guard is the limit, as non-magical attacks are far more likely) and not a situational one, therefore: useless for me
    This is what I don't understand about some of these complaints (for the record, I totally agree with some, it's just things like this which get me).

    Read the first bit, then the second, now take a moment to reread the first. Anything strike you as contradictory here?

    I totally agree about the Daemon's Bane BTW, but that is why I don't get the fuss about the HWotF. How often do you guys actually see anyone take stuff like the Dragonfire Gem? I very rarely see it, and would almost certainly never take it (unless it becomes available for Treefathers...), for the EXACT SAME reason you guys don't like the Daemon's Bane.

    I don't want to spend points, and perhaps more importantly, an artifact slot, on an item which only protects me against flaming attacks. They aren't exactly rare, granted, but neither are they common enough to rely on them to protect my very expensive characters. I need something which will protect my characters all the time, not just against the very occasional character to have non-optional flaming attacks, or for solo characters, fireballs etc (and how much of a threat are fireballs really to most solo characters?). If Pyromancy still had that little extra bit of AP, it would still make more sense, but not now.

    I haven't played that much recently, but I haven't seen the Dragonfire gem used in months.

    Granted there are models in the game who have in-built protection against flaming attacks, but they aren't exactly super common.

    Frankly I think the HWotF is still a fantastic choice, and easily one of the best on-foot characters across all 3 elven books.
  • New

    CariadocThorne wrote:

    I haven't played that much recently, but I haven't seen the Dragonfire gem used in months.
    Dragonfire gem (or equivalent)? I think i've seen one since 1.3.4 started. But basalt armor? I see that every single game, cause it's the cheapest armor enchantment that works on any model and gives +1 armor without drawback.
    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

  • New

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^

    @CariadocThorne,
    This. Even if it's only a 3++, that's still REALLY Powerful (and honestly, makes the whole argument of "3++ must always be obscenely priced regardless of limitations" ridiculous). You'd have to have 9 attacks get to the Aegis just to take out ONE guy. Impossible in one round of combat (even rolling VERY LUCKY, you can max out at 8). And Kind of hard against things that are T5. ON average you are putting 3 wounds to the Aegis save per round of combat on a T5 dude, so 3 rounds to kill for a High Warden.

    Since .204, I have seen ONE list with High Warden, which ran 2+/4++/Spear. . . . so his presence has gone down significantly since he actually saw play. Honestly, most of the time these days what I see is Mage Generals with some form of BSB or a Dragon rider. (Sometimes ALSO A MAGE). Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like Princes are staying home to administer the realm and enjoy luxury while the mages have had to rush out in defense of the land.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

  • New

    CariadocThorne wrote:

    How often do you guys actually see anyone take stuff like the Dragonfire Gem? I very rarely see it, and would almost certainly never take it (unless it becomes available for Treefathers...), for the EXACT SAME reason you guys don't like the Daemon's Bane.
    That's very true, I never take it in any army list.

    The Basalt Infusion (35 pts) though is rather popular. Not because people fear flaming attacks all that much. But simply because it's the only useful/generic armour upgrade below 55 points. Which as a side effect grant Aegis vs flaming. So it sees quite regular use, especially by commander/captain/BSB level characters who have some limited allowance points to spare.
    Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
  • New

    Well the HWotF was very popular for what ?? 3 weeks ??

    After that he went really quick passed by the MoCT lord which is now very often passed by ….
    well … a lot of things.

    For the amount of tears those two (spear and character) draw, it could be surprising to see both shelfed (i admit divine attack + spear was too strong) or at least very unpopular.

    Out of 10 lists (averge would have been 13.5) on a 36 team event (6 man team), there's 2 spears, 2 HWotF (1 lord with said spears and 1 commander), 2 queen companion, 2 fleet officer and 2 dragon (same list, ancien and Young).

    Meanwhile we have 8 MoCT, no royal huntsman

    Something is telling me internal balance is not great.


    Other story on mage though. 4 asfad, 4 vanilla and 1 OotFH. While those are related to the lvl of the said magician (asfad is only paid on wizard master).
  • New

    Ok, perhaps it's just my local scene then. I know Hero-level combat characters have almost entirely vanished here, apart from BSBs, and the Lord-level characters tend to go for something with a 4++ or at least a 5++, or Mithril + Talisman of Shielding (or own book's trinket).

    I have seen Basalt Infusion around a few times, but it was usually on a character who already had an aegis, so could afford to use their armour enchantment for a cheapish +1AS with a situational aegis.

    If it's just my local scene, and it's more common everywhere else, then objections to the flammable attacks make more sense. I don't tend to look at a lot of tourney lists or other lists posted online, apart from in the SE forum, and while I haven't seen it in too many lists there, I can think of reasons why SE might not take it as much as other armies.
  • New

    @CariadocThorne:

    Hi,

    I will try to explain my thoughts behind these issues.

    CariadocThorne wrote:

    This is what I don't understand about some of these complaints (for the record, I totally agree with some, it's just things like this which get me).

    Read the first bit, then the second, now take a moment to reread the first. Anything strike you as contradictory here?
    I guess you are talking about the contradiction of the situational protection from the Dragonfire Gem?

    Personally, I don't think it is a contradiction, because you can buy two artefacts in total and you don't screw up one entire defense slot (=Armour enchantments).

    The Dragonfire Gem is a nice and cheap item (just like the Lucky Charm), perfect if you have some points left and want to protect your highly armoured combat lord (against alchemy spells for example).

    Another important point:

    I wouldn't buy the Dragonfire Gem to rely on its save, it is just a situational protection against certain units/spells.

    BUT, and that is the most important part, I have this artifact IN ADDITION to my basic defense (=Artefacts+Armour Enchantments).

    If I buy the Daemon's Bane enchantment, I would give up my most important defense slot (as an High Elf) in exchange for a situational armour save.

    CariadocThorne wrote:

    I totally agree about the Daemon's Bane BTW, but that is why I don't get the fuss about the HWotF. How often do you guys actually see anyone take stuff like the Dragonfire Gem? I very rarely see it, and would almost certainly never take it (unless it becomes available for Treefathers...), for the EXACT SAME reason you guys don't like the Daemon's Bane.
    The Dragonfire Gem was just an example.

    The most important problem is the fact that your opponent knows that your 600 points infantry-character has Flaming Attacks.

    As this character is on foot and in an infantry unit (most likely), you aren't mobile enough to dictate the fight and therefore your opponent can use this fact to his advantage.

    If I could choose when to use these Flaming Attacks, this would be another situation.

    But that is not the only issue:

    As this character can't use a shield and you usually don't want to end up with a crap 3+ armour save for your 600 points infantry character, you won't use the Protection of Dorac anymore.

    Therefore you lose 2 points of defensive skill in comparison to the old popular build.

    The max armour save went down from a 1+ save to a 2+ save, which is very sad.

    At the same time, you lose one of the benefits of using a spear = the ability to use a shield in addition.

    All these changes killed this character for me.

    Maybe there are players who still like this guy and I wish them all the best, but I don't see any benefit in using him anymore.

    Just my personal view on it ;) .
    Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
  • New

    Actually yeah.. "HWotF has flaming attacks and may choose to use them at the start of each round of combat". I see it as a spell he knows, not an unconditional characteristic of his weapon, so it makes sense he can turn them on or off. However that would definitely make the price go up, flaming attacks are powerful and giving you the option to not use them would make a dragon gem a complete waste of points if the opponent only grabs it when he schedules a game against you
  • New

    That's true, but then that opponent is a jerkwaffle. That's list tailoring to the extreme. Unfortunately, there's a LOT of items that are "created for list tailoring" (the dragonfire gem being one of them). The sad part is that when these don't get taken, the ones that are USEFUL end up seeing price hikes while the bad ones see tiny point drops that don't fix the underlying issue (they are designed as badly).

    Honestly, I think that the High Warden ate too many nerfs at once. People abandoned ship and tried to find the next "this is actually playable" thing. As I've said before, The Elf Problem (Dread, Sylvan, and Highborn) is REAL. Unfortunately, elves are for some reason not really allowed to fix it (unlike many other armies that actually have various ways to "get around" their bad chassis and downsides (some of which aren't even downsides)).

    Kopistar wrote:

    Well the HWotF was very popular for what ?? 3 weeks ??

    After that he went really quick passed by the MoCT lord which is now very often passed by ….
    well … a lot of things.

    For the amount of tears those two (spear and character) draw, it could be surprising to see both shelfed (i admit divine attack + spear was too strong) or at least very unpopular.

    Out of 10 lists (averge would have been 13.5) on a 36 team event (6 man team), there's 2 spears, 2 HWotF (1 lord with said spears and 1 commander), 2 queen companion, 2 fleet officer and 2 dragon (same list, ancien and Young).

    Meanwhile we have 8 MoCT, no royal huntsman

    Something is telling me internal balance is not great.


    Other story on mage though. 4 asfad, 4 vanilla and 1 OotFH. While those are related to the lvl of the said magician (asfad is only paid on wizard master).
    High Warden saw play after our Lion Chariot ate an UNGODLY amount of nerfs (9th Age design at its finest, right there) that took it from "our lynchpin unit" to "a massive liability". Thanks to the change to Lion Guard's Bodyguard AND the Spear of the Blazing Dawn being fixed from "Better version of RH" along with a few minor additions (eg Willow's Ward) everything got put together so that an INNATE 4++ suddenly became VERY usable for an on foot lord (even if that was his only distinguishing characteristic). Previously he HADN'T SEEN PLAY FOR YEARS DESPITE HAVING EVERYTHING. So it quite literally wasn't that he had been overpowered all along but that a host of factors combined to make him the most viable entry IN COMBINATION WITH THE REST OF THE ARMY BOOK.

    The only competition he had was the MoCT, and the BSB version gave almost as good use as the Lord version. Suddenly you WANTED a Prince General On Foot because your Lion Guard would be stubborn. Once condition #1 was in place, then you wanted the most survivable lord possible. That ended up being High Warden w/ Willow and Protection of Dorac. He skyrocketed to "most used entry" because our two previous lynchpin units (Ancient Dragon and Lion Chariot) were both nerfed into the ground (has anyone SEEN either of them competitively since they were nerfed for No Valid Reason?) and other changes in the book made him the most efficient choice. If you're given a choice between a nice wristwatch and a broken clock, I think most of us will pick the wristwatch to tell time. The High Warden of the Flame was our watch while everything else in the book was a broken clock.

    The problem was never the High Warden of the Flame being overpowered. It was that the rest of the character's section is utterly dysfunctional.

    The character section being unbalanced is so obvious it's not even funny. Frankly speaking, the ARMY BOOK is so badly balanced internally that it needs to be burned to the foundations (Magic, Dragons, Defensive) and rebuilt from the ground up. Unfortunately, the "identity crisis" that the Powers That Be continue to foist on the book is not helping matters.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Aenarion43 ().

  • New

    @Aenarion43

    And worse, VC can build an even killier character with 4++ and similar attack shenanigans, except on an S5R5A5 chassis and with a mount. But that wasn't a problem...
    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

  • New

    I have a Prince in a shooty list who is a a Queens Champion. Has a spear with the Sliver of the Blazing dawn item. Wears Dragonforged armor and sports the very lovely, (and highly expensive) Ring of the pearl Throne. So if I get it into combat I can ixnay one of those pesky magical items that prevent me from wasting my opponents model.
    So what prevents the WotFH from using the Ring?
    Failure is not an option.
  • New

    Squirrelloid wrote:

    @Aenarion43

    And worse, VC can build an even killier character with 4++ and similar attack shenanigans, except on an S5R5A5 chassis and with a mount. But that wasn't a problem...
    Based off of another long thread in a different forum that bacame very heated i think the intent is that certain armies can achieve that level of eliteness while others aren't meant to. VC and WDG are meant to with their combat lords
  • New

    what prevent you is that you most likely won't kill a R5 lord in 1 turn.
    Buuut as a R3 lord with what seems to be a 3+ you have ABSOLUTELY no chance to survive anything better than a hero.

    It may win you the mind game though.

    What prevent the HWotF is :
    - a single 4++ (5+ armor is senless is such fight) means you still have a hefty chance to die.
    - taking a 100pts item wwith the possibility that he got negated by a 35 (or so) item feels sooo bad
    - i'm nit sure about the order but if the opponent has time to use potion of swiftness, well a 10pts item just screw you