WDG book 2.0 discussion

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.

  • umbranar wrote:

    Rothulf wrote:

    I think it all comes to the result you expect.

    Do you want to perform on the tournament at all cost? Does your team expect an easy list to handle for the pairing?
    => Go for the common list they already prove what they could/could not do.

    Do you want to have fun mainly?
    => Try anything you want, you might do better then expected (you could also regret it, but hell, is that not worth a try?).
    A great example of bypassing the most common lists used and make something work in my group and so playing what's fun, was @Sander making a very hard DH list with vanguard units and lots of seekers. The list was the bane of our group and no one of the forum saw how it should work on paper but in practice it rocked.
    Goes to show that maybe we just need to find a combination outside the "norm" to make an army rock. Something the opponent is just not ready for and I believe someone already found something funny using 2x6 wretched ones. I'm curious is we just don't see a combination just like that. Of course, getting more bang for our buck would be great first as we pay top-dollar right now.
    The only thing is such lists are good at is a surprise value. My first WODG victory happened because my opponent never encountered forsaken one before, so he charged him with his warboss so they killed each other. It will never happen again I am afraid.
    DH - main
    WODG - secondary
    OK - passion project for the future
  • @WastelandWarrior Yeah I do see that. What did you run at the last tournament you went to out of interest?

    I completely see the internal balance problem. I suppose the difficulty with balance as a competitive issue is that it becomes linked to tourney data. And at tournaments you are more likely to take units that are multipurpose, so some units rise to the top (for example EH).

    Some units must be specialist to give the book flavour and diversity, but if I am writing a tournament list I will rarely take these as in some match ups they lose their value. For example, how do you differentiate Chosen Knights from Feldraks? Feldraks are good against units with fly, but how often is that relevant in a tournament setting?

    I think a good comparison is in HBE, you see White Lions much more often than Swordmasters. Does this make Swordsmasters a worse unit? Not necessarily (they kick the snot out of the white lions), but they have more bad match ups, so aren't a usual tournament choice. But if you looked at tournament data you would probably say the White Lions are "better" than Swordmasters. Whereas actually sword master are a high risk / high return unit, and you are unlikely to see these units in strongly written SINGLES tournament lists which are based around being able to get points out of all match ups.
  • Happy Aspid wrote:

    When I play a non-tournament game I usually never share any data about our army-lists or even race they playing before we meet each other. So I usually prefer to be ready to anything. This is why army is called an army instead of spec forces.
    This is the same thing then. You bring an all-comers list.

    All units in the book can not be equally good in this kind of list.
  • zulu wrote:

    @WastelandWarrior Yeah I do see that. What did you run at the last tournament you went to out of interest?

    I completely see the internal balance problem. I suppose the difficulty with balance as a competitive issue is that it becomes linked to tourney data. And at tournaments you are more likely to take units that are multipurpose, so some units rise to the top (for example EH).

    Some units must be specialist to give the book flavour and diversity, but if I am writing a tournament list I will rarely take these as in some match ups they lose their value. For example, how do you differentiate Chosen Knights from Feldraks? Feldraks are good against units with fly, but how often is that relevant in a tournament setting?

    I think a good comparison is in HBE, you see White Lions much more often than Swordmasters. Does this make Swordsmasters a worse unit? Not necessarily (they kick the snot out of the white lions), but they have more bad match ups, so aren't a usual tournament choice. But if you looked at tournament data you would probably say the White Lions are "better" than Swordmasters. Whereas actually sword master are a high risk / high return unit, and you are unlikely to see these units in strongly written SINGLES tournament lists which are based around being able to get points out of all match ups.
    Last tourney i took;

    Herald
    Sorceror on dragon, adept, alchemy, paired weapons, hero heart, binding scroll, lucky charm

    5 fallen
    20 halberd warriors, mark pride, command

    4 feldraks, halberd, champ
    4 chosen pride, halberds, mus

    Feldrak elder, halberd
    5 dogs
    5 flayers.

    The id have been much better off without the dragon i felt, the feldrak elder always felt a let down for the cost too. Finished middle pack and think id have done better if id optimised the list with the more cost effective units. Probably not loads better as im not that good a player though!
    Take a look at my painted army so far. Feel free to share a pic of yours!

    Pics of my ever expanding warriors army

    WastelandWarrior Painting League 2018
  • zulu wrote:

    Happy Aspid wrote:

    When I play a non-tournament game I usually never share any data about our army-lists or even race they playing before we meet each other. So I usually prefer to be ready to anything. This is why army is called an army instead of spec forces.
    This is the same thing then. You bring an all-comers list.
    All units in the book can not be equally good in this kind of list.
    But some books fair much better than current WODG book in terms of such balance.
    DH - main
    WODG - secondary
    OK - passion project for the future
  • zulu wrote:

    Some units must be specialist to give the book flavour and diversity, but if I am writing a tournament list I will rarely take these as in some match ups they lose their value. For example, how do you differentiate Chosen Knights from Feldraks? Feldraks are good against units with fly, but how often is that relevant in a tournament setting?
    That doesn't excuse a badly designed unit. If a specialist unit is countering something almost non-existent in the game - what is the point of having that unit in your list? You won't take something useless that's not going to have an influence on your game for fun, you are playing something that would have some unusual influence on your game for fun.
    Unless you are going to persuade your opponent to take something you could counter with your unit, but I didn't see a situation like this even once.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Kaitin ().

  • Balanced all comers with a monostyle monoapproach book is an oxymoron.
    My gripe isnt with the elite-ness of each individual unit, nor with the problematic cost efficiency of certain choices.

    My gripe is with the logical breach that comes with having an army play mono-push (akin to how @panterq played today).

    Either you fail, and feel like a muppet
    (because with no shooting, little alternative in magic and an unrewarding movement phase - the constraints are rather confined)
    OR you succeed in scoring an unrewarding one-button-win.

    Should WDG non-monstermash builds really play like variations of Wall of Pestilence?

    Why?
    Make T9A armies clash again! #BringBackBattlelines

    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    For questions of tactics, The Savage Arts of Playtrolling
  • zulu wrote:

    IMO WDG characters have just taken that small hike from expensive to unaffordable. It is very rare that an 800 or so point combat character will make his points back. Against good players he will eat chaff for 3 turns and thats about it...

    The mounted characters are even more expensive and I feel are too vulnerable for the points investment. It's just small price changes but in the context of the army it means they are unaffordable and they generally perform less well then the EH for similar cost.

    Just comparing to what you used to be able to do in previous version - you could have a fairly cheap BSB on demonic mount with 1+ rerollable and fireborn, wrath and great weapon for I think around 600 points, similar (but worse) build now costs around 700. That's the same price as 4 chosen cav!

    Similarly you used to be able to put a lord on a fly 9 disc, so he would be in a favourable combat turn 2, a fly 6 disc means turn 3 which is another round of being shot / magicked that a 3 wound character really doesnt want.

    This is the problem with the internal balance of the book. Some choices are just clearly more points efficient than others. Combat characters, unfortunately, are really inefficient way to spend your coin and this is why you don't see them. If your 800 point, non-magician lord has to kill 800 points of the enemies units to be worth it, how often does that happen? And then conversely, he is a 1000 point target for your opponent (including general), and on a 3 wound model that's so risky. So the options are put him on foot in a unit (in which case he will often not see combat), or put him on a mount in a unit, in which case you are probably better of with two mounted units rather than one + character...

    Think it's so important this is rectified as WDG should really be an army that focuses on its killy combat lords, but at the moment I take them in all the other armies I play but not WDG : (
    I quoted your text on the fb-page of the 9th age, where someone ' defended' the killy chosen lord of our army :D Your text is just perfect as a reply.

    His explanation: In my personal opinion the EH is highly overrated. He’s kind of bland and cookie cutter. My chosen lord Broke him in half before he could even swing. I don’t find him overly impressive. For my points the chosen lord with entropic aura and a wizard master are roughly the same cost and offer much more to my army. The build that broke the EH in half... chosen lord with karkhadan, death cheater, swift potion, lucky charm, idol of spite, burning portent and marked greed. 1+ armour 4+ regen, halberd as the weapon and d3 wounds. Pop the potion and the idol and swing with 6 s7 ap10 agility 10 attacks that do d3 wounds. Feel free to roll that up. He kills the EH more of than not and easily survives even if the eh swings on him. That particular chosen lord killed everything in front of him.

    Food for thought!
    Historian, librarian, wargamer.
  • Krokz wrote:

    Daemonic engine wrote:

    Food for thought!
    You cannot enchant Burning portent on Halberd.For 800+ points he should kill a lot. But since he can die to a single Alchemy spell, you probably do not want to field him on a tourney.
    Not to mention he need chosen knights bunker to NOT die from that spell.
    DH - main
    WODG - secondary
    OK - passion project for the future
  • Happy Aspid wrote:

    Kaszalot wrote:

    Burning portent is s hand weapon enhancement, it doesnt work with halberd?
    Yes. It doesn't. So only hand weapon or paired weapons.
    Not even. ONLY hand weapon solely.

    And btw: a herald without at least a single shamanism manifestation can be killed by many things.
    It doesnt need a high geared up chosen lord for this.
  • Daemonic engine wrote:

    zulu wrote:

    IMO WDG characters have just taken that small hike from expensive to unaffordable. It is very rare that an 800 or so point combat character will make his points back. Against good players he will eat chaff for 3 turns and thats about it...

    The mounted characters are even more expensive and I feel are too vulnerable for the points investment. It's just small price changes but in the context of the army it means they are unaffordable and they generally perform less well then the EH for similar cost.

    Just comparing to what you used to be able to do in previous version - you could have a fairly cheap BSB on demonic mount with 1+ rerollable and fireborn, wrath and great weapon for I think around 600 points, similar (but worse) build now costs around 700. That's the same price as 4 chosen cav!

    Similarly you used to be able to put a lord on a fly 9 disc, so he would be in a favourable combat turn 2, a fly 6 disc means turn 3 which is another round of being shot / magicked that a 3 wound character really doesnt want.

    This is the problem with the internal balance of the book. Some choices are just clearly more points efficient than others. Combat characters, unfortunately, are really inefficient way to spend your coin and this is why you don't see them. If your 800 point, non-magician lord has to kill 800 points of the enemies units to be worth it, how often does that happen? And then conversely, he is a 1000 point target for your opponent (including general), and on a 3 wound model that's so risky. So the options are put him on foot in a unit (in which case he will often not see combat), or put him on a mount in a unit, in which case you are probably better of with two mounted units rather than one + character...

    Think it's so important this is rectified as WDG should really be an army that focuses on its killy combat lords, but at the moment I take them in all the other armies I play but not WDG : (
    I quoted your text on the fb-page of the 9th age, where someone ' defended' the killy chosen lord of our army :D Your text is just perfect as a reply.
    His explanation: In my personal opinion the EH is highly overrated. He’s kind of bland and cookie cutter. My chosen lord Broke him in half before he could even swing. I don’t find him overly impressive. For my points the chosen lord with entropic aura and a wizard master are roughly the same cost and offer much more to my army. The build that broke the EH in half... chosen lord with karkhadan, death cheater, swift potion, lucky charm, idol of spite, burning portent and marked greed. 1+ armour 4+ regen, halberd as the weapon and d3 wounds. Pop the potion and the idol and swing with 6 s7 ap10 agility 10 attacks that do d3 wounds. Feel free to roll that up. He kills the EH more of than not and easily survives even if the eh swings on him. That particular chosen lord killed everything in front of him.

    Food for thought!
    Except you can't enchant a halberd with burning portent, it's hand weapon only and thus limited to strength 5 (unless gluttony/idol shenanigans). And being enchanted, you must use that weapon.
  • Exalted Champion wrote:

    Happy Aspid wrote:

    Kaszalot wrote:

    Burning portent is s hand weapon enhancement, it doesnt work with halberd?
    Yes. It doesn't. So only hand weapon or paired weapons.
    Not even. ONLY hand weapon solely.
    WUT? I was always told that HW enchantments combines with PW. Never used it myself. I am brain-dead never-mind. This fact only reinforces my negative attitude towards BP - too restrictive, too expensive.
    DH - main
    WODG - secondary
    OK - passion project for the future
  • Happy Aspid wrote:

    Exalted Champion wrote:

    Happy Aspid wrote:

    Kaszalot wrote:

    Burning portent is s hand weapon enhancement, it doesnt work with halberd?
    Yes. It doesn't. So only hand weapon or paired weapons.
    Not even. ONLY hand weapon solely.
    WUT? I was always told that HW enchantments combines with PW. Never used it myself. I am brain-dead never-mind. This fact only reinforces my negative attitude towards BP - too restrictive, too expensive.
    With Idol of Spite you can have at least for one round S6.