All times are UTC


It is currently Mon Dec 02, 2024 10:43 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:59 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:01 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Ipswich
Cheers!

That answers that one. It also tells me not to read rulebooks at 0400 hrs when I've awoken too early before work. Sad or what?

Despite being a Gondorean player I still think that GW should avoid doing what they did with LoTR SBG and over-compensating for some earlier mistakes. I think Winged Nazgul are, with the exception of Khamul, correctly pointed (mainly because of their inability to 'hide' in units). Epic Hero Nazgul are under-priced, yet Mordor needs, I reckon, at least 9 levels of magic in a 1500 pt army to survive, let alone be competitive.

Stephen

_________________
"We may have cared about many things in life, but what will we have in our last moments.”
St. Teresa of Avila
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:26 pm 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 817
Location: Chch, NZ
Why do they need so many magic levels? They (or rather, most Evil lists via the Nazgul that count as part of their lists) are pretty exceptional in terms of the levels they can pack in due to the sheer cheapness of their level 3 casters. I think making them level 1 is too much, but at the moment they are they only models at that point level with that many spells available. It makes no real difference when there is one or two Nazgul but becomes pretty significant when three plus at 1000 (or five for 1500) and the spell output becomes reliably more than their opponent's ability to mitigate it. The special abilities some of them have on top of this is just an added level of 'wrong'. I am not sure how in this day and age, game designers did not stop to think that giving 'open ended' abilities (ie applies to a whole formation) might be a bit problematic, especially when more than one could be stacked.

Even without Nazgul being over the top, Mordor will still only be 'burdened' with being a list with access to great and affordable heroes, 25 pt Str 4 heavy inf, massed 2HW Orcs to go with their Darkness/Ruin Spells, very nice heavy cavalry an elite heavy inf unit with str 5 and Berserk, 50pt arty, as well as also having all the more normal things that other lists get! - I think they'll manage. :) This is not to say that I'd be looking to boost any other heavy inf based army either. Other lists are in more need of a little lift IMO.

I don't see many Winged Nazgul around, if anything they are perhaps too vulnerable for their points vs Good casters.

_________________
http://www.roughwotr.blogspot.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:55 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 1332
Location: Ha, wouldn't you like to know.
Images: 4
Xelee wrote:
Why do they need so many magic levels? They (or rather, most Evil lists via the Nazgul that count as part of their lists) are pretty exceptional in terms of the levels they can pack in due to the sheer cheapness of their level 3 casters. I think making them level 1 is too much, but at the moment they are they only models at that point level with that many spells available. It makes no real difference when there is one or two Nazgul but becomes pretty significant when three plus at 1000 (or five for 1500) and the spell output becomes reliably more than their opponent's ability to mitigate it. The special abilities some of them have on top of this is just an added level of 'wrong'. I am not sure how in this day and age, game designers did not stop to think that giving 'open ended' abilities (ie applies to a whole formation) might be a bit problematic, especially when more than one could be stacked.

Even without Nazgul being over the top, Mordor will still only be 'burdened' with being a list with access to great and affordable heroes, 25 pt Str 4 heavy inf, massed 2HW Orcs to go with their Darkness/Ruin Spells, very nice heavy cavalry an elite heavy inf unit with str 5 and Berserk, 50pt arty, as well as also having all the more normal things that other lists get! - I think they'll manage. :) This is not to say that I'd be looking to boost any other heavy inf based army either. Other lists are in more need of a little lift IMO.

I don't see many Winged Nazgul around, if anything they are perhaps too vulnerable for their points vs Good casters.


Probably because spells of darkness work best when in another formation. They are also, as you say, very vulnerable and you can't really make the best of their abilities when on fell beast. I would say that morranon orcs, morgul knights, and ringwraiths are the things that you need for a super-competitive army+Gothmog perhaps.

_________________
"War does not determine who is right, only who is left."
- Bertrand Russel
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:40 pm 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:25 am
Posts: 506
Location: netherlands
Morgul knights are not super competive I think Mordor doesn't need any cavalry just massed out morannon orcs. Terror is much less usefull in Wotr cause almost all formation have a hero in them in Wotr.

And about the Gt armylist. Looks like a very good army and I think it is even fun to play against and with. 2+ ringwraith and morannon orcs is just boring.

_________________
"There are only 4 things you need in life: Lasagna, beer, a girlfriend and of course a gondor army."
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:46 pm 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 495
Location: Brisbane, Australia
morgul knight are pretty competitive, just not SUPER competitive. D7, lances, terror... thats pretty dam good.
you made a good point with courage, imagine the tainted + there will be no dawn (fate) + terror causers XD
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 1:02 pm 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:25 am
Posts: 506
Location: netherlands
But no one uses the tainted cause you can have a morgul knights formation that can reroll hits or one that discards hits on 5+

_________________
"There are only 4 things you need in life: Lasagna, beer, a girlfriend and of course a gondor army."
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 10:23 pm 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 495
Location: Brisbane, Australia
and thats because they dont use their imagination, everyone just rushes to the obvious/OP choices, khamul, betrayer, KoU
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 10:35 pm 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 817
Location: Chch, NZ
Morgul Knights are fine, I'd be happy to field them in any Evil list. The only Good Cav option that matches them would be unshielded Minas Tirith Knights. Compare those Morgul Knights to what Good armies have to pay for the equivalent heavy hitters - SKODA.

35pts for def 7 (these guys can even weather some missile fire) Cavalry with Lances is very, very attractive - even without terror (and, unless you are Gondor, hero courage generally isn't everywhere) a unit of those Knights hitting with Heroic Fight is going to leave a hole. Then they can do it again, and again.

_________________
http://www.roughwotr.blogspot.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:33 am 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 495
Location: Brisbane, Australia
ya, last time i was up against them i got my 7c blackshields into them (used might to make a 9" charge). I had 5c fight directly and only killed 2c of them.... (out of 4). later on the dragon flew in behind then cast tremor. killing off the 2c morgul knights, 2c wild men of dunland, and some uruks :D
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:18 am 
Craftsman
Craftsman
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:44 pm
Posts: 484
Location: London
I like MK's a lot, but I find Giant Spiders to be much more useful for the same points cost. First of all you don't worry about maneuvering and if you have a lot of terrain, that might be a problem - it will be tough to get many companies from flanks. S5 is equivalent to charging S3+1. F4 is 1 extra attack, but spiders get re-rolls 1s so it's the same thing pretty much. Spiders from flanks are much stronger - S5+1 is better than S3+1 ;)

However, I wouldn't field MK's over Morannons in a competitive Mordor list - the Morannons are just much better in saving Nazgul inside and can take much more beating.

_________________
Coordinator of the Great British Hobbit League
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:10 am 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 817
Location: Chch, NZ
BlackMist wrote:
However, I wouldn't field MK's over Morannons in a competitive Mordor list - the Morannons are just much better in saving Nazgul inside and can take much more beating.

No argument there, against the 'average' both the Morranans and the Wraiths are very, very good for their points... unless house-ruled 8)

That's a good point about the spiders, getting cav blocks lined up and on target can be a PITA. I really like Cav but even without Wraiths and Str 4 to lean on, I still find it 'easier' to run with Epics and Minas Tirith Warriors in a Gondor list - Cav is too often in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There is something very satisfying about hitting a formation with lance armed Cav from the front, calling the heroic fight and watching the coys dissapear though.

_________________
http://www.roughwotr.blogspot.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:27 am 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 495
Location: Brisbane, Australia
I got to remember to call heroic fights, ive been oblivious that they will be disordered when you fight again (ohhhhhhh look out for my dragon!)
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR GT Winning Armylist
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:51 am 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 1332
Location: Ha, wouldn't you like to know.
Images: 4
Xelee wrote:
BlackMist wrote:
However, I wouldn't field MK's over Morannons in a competitive Mordor list - the Morannons are just much better in saving Nazgul inside and can take much more beating.

No argument there, against the 'average' both the Morranans and the Wraiths are very, very good for their points... unless house-ruled 8)

That's a good point about the spiders, getting cav blocks lined up and on target can be a PITA. I really like Cav but even without Wraiths and Str 4 to lean on, I still find it 'easier' to run with Epics and Minas Tirith Warriors in a Gondor list - Cav is too often in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There is something very satisfying about hitting a formation with lance armed Cav from the front, calling the heroic fight and watching the coys dissapear though.


But I think it will be even more satisfying to call a heroic fight with prowlers and envenomed bite AND S5 on the flank :-D . But I agree, Morgul Knights are incredibly satisfying especially when the enemy fail their charged by terror test.

_________________
"War does not determine who is right, only who is left."
- Bertrand Russel
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 137 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: