Jump to content

jdripley

Members
  • Content Count

    1159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jdripley

  1. Hmm, now that you mention it, that does make sense, having Logan be a solo or an elite. Personally I'd go the elite route. Here's my thoughts behind it - not sure what your ideas behind that thought were Naterstein. Fluff-wise the Dwarves are one of the true standing armies in Taltos. Yes, you've got local warlords and some very potent military forces - but the way the Dwarves are holding Talon Pass against the Reven, plus fending off the Overlord's slavetraders, they are characterized not by being a small, unorganized group of fighters, but as a truly organized and well trained army. So why in the world is a psycho leading their forces? All of our warriors are professional killers (bane), trained to fight as a unit (trencher/reach). I'd think that to become a leader among the warriors you'd need to show your tactical prowess somehow. Logan's style of fighting goes something like this. Pardon the poetic license.... "RARG me hungry for blood and death!!!!" That fits an elite personality - I'm psycho, need a captain to keep me in line, but man do I fight well. Shouldn't a warlord be somebody who can lead large forces into battle, and actually lead them? Logan's personality requires his army to protect him - instead of him lending his tactical prowess to his army. So don't get me wrong - I think Logan's great, and if he stays as Warlord I'm definately using him, but I do think that having Logan be an elite makes more sense than having him be the warlord. I'd love to be able to field Logan in Logrim's troop! Logrim would be like the older brother who keeps a watchful eye on his berserker little brother, and heals him when he sticks his head out too far. That'd leave room for a dwarf warlord that's somewhere around 250 points :D
  2. Yep, it's in core rulebook printing 2, page whatever where it lists the SA's. I guess the logic is that if you're poking the first-striker with a huge stinking lance (or poleaxe in Thorvald's case) then the "first strike" has to go towards smacking that spear out of the way, as opposed to smacking that head clean off. Gives the target a chance to counter. Or perhaps its simply that there's no good way to get in close enough to a pikeman without him getting at least one good jab in. That's actually it probably. Hrm hoom hoom... Perhaps when facing first strikers it may be beneficial to set up an inverted formation, with my halberdiers in FRONT of my warriors. If I could catch an enemy not thinking about reach, that'd neuter their first strike ability! On a different note: Your opinions please: In a given game - well wait, let's set out some point totals. 750, 1000. No higher because in a game larger than 1k it's safe to assume you have mutliple elite slots. Which is the better model to put in your army: Margara Firetongue or Kara Foehunter? I know which way I'm leaning, but I'd like to hear opinions. If you'd like we could open it up to any dwarf elite - Margara, Ivar, Durgam or Kara. Which elites find their way into your builds in what situations, and how have they done?
  3. Did you forget that Reach cancels out First Strike? Rich haha.... yes.... and now that you mention it we didn't make the discipline checks on her warriors to come into b2b (Logan of course is completely INSANE and ignores Horrid)... not that the warriors' presence would have mattered. Getting two shots on Logan probably would have mattered, but that's water under the bridge at this point.
  4. Soldier models can carry standards/be musicians. That includes grunts and adepts. I think that often people refer to soldiers in general as grunts, so in that sense grunt would have two definitians: soldier (Including grunt and adept), and common soldier (including only grunt, not adept). Makes it a little confusing since the term has a technical and a non-technical use and it's not always easy to know when to use which definition because there's so much overlap of meaning. Sorry, word-dork <.<
  5. Yeah dwarf on dwarf was a brutal battle. I for one was used to having tough checks, and seeing my models drop for good each time was a bit dismaying. How I lost Thorvald was pretty funny actually. I swung him around a cluttered town sort of thing.. lots of buildings.. and used him to smash Snorri into paste (on defensive strikes too - poor snorri didn't have a good showing that game). Next round I charged around behind a building and made a grave for Gargram while Fishripper prepared Gargram for it. And during that round, out from behind another building, comes Logan, frothing at the mouth... Thorvald barely had time to see what was happening, and Fishripper is now friend-less :( I got taken apart by the Crypt Legion.. in a stand-up fight I may not have done quite as poorly, but he had great position with his archers so he definately would have won. The scenario that round definately lent itself to the Crypt Legion army that he played - so what can you do. You've heard about round two when I fought the dwarves, besides the hilarity of our Logan's smashing models it was a fairly normal game where we both played pretty aggressively and lost plenty of units. Against Necro the scenario forced us to clump up, and I managed to get Margara on a hilltop in range to Firestorm a pile of Tomb Guards. Very effective! I followed that up with a line of warriors and shieldmaidens hitting his forces, and the combat part of that round was tipped in my favor. We tied the scenario victory condition with some lucky rolling in the last few minutes of play. That was the game where Logan got surrounded and eaten by the zombies... hense my advice to ALWAYS support Logan to keep him from getting swarmed. @ Arbiter10 - I'd take a fluff-writing job in an instant :D Better than selling ink cartridges >.>
  6. Today I played in Storm's tournament and fielded this list Logan w/Margara and Durgam, 3 swiftaxes and 6 piercers Freya w/6 shieldmaidens and 3 halberds Gargram w/8 warriors Thorvald Logan is... different. I put Greater Magic Armor on him so he had 11 defense. But it was still scary to put him into combat for fear of losing him. My 77 point Sgt. has 11 defense... and Logan's 336 after g.m.a. Anyways my strategy with him was to screen him with the swiftaxes and Durgam (though in practice it was mostly the swiftaxes. I found that he worked best if you use him amidst a swarm of your own models (and my 3 swiftaxes just barely did the job). Not so much for support reasons, but to prevent him from being swarmed himself. Pick a target you want dead, make sure it doesn't have more than 3 tracks (key!) and sic Logan on that target. My biggest failures with Logan involved only having grunt targets to attack (but that Khamsin archer was VERY dead) and allowing Logan to be pinned down at range where he didn't have good options for retaliation. My best successes with him involved charging headlong into a troop of adepts and smashing their leader to paste and doing the same with a mage (where you don't really need the 6 MAV.. on an 8 DV.. but the sheer crushing force of having Logan crash into a spellcaster was fairly impressive). So the keys are pick multitracks, support to protect against swarms, and screen from ranged attacks until you're ready to let him attack. Imagine that he's a sort of crazed, almost feral being who's battle rage is barely held in check by his comrades in armes. They must keep him from seeing the battle too early or else he will charge head-long into his own death - so they keep a close eye on him, keep him distracted, until the opportune moment, and then BAM they let him see the battle and off he goes, yelling and screaming and swinging his axes, completely blind to caution and overcome with battle lust. Makes for a fun, difficult and interesting model to play. He's not a solidly amazing model I don't think, because you need to be very cautious with him. But in my eyes that's a plus, I don't like having an invincible model. I like my armies to have advantages AND disadvantages. Gives me plenty to think about and work with/work around during a game.
  7. Here's how I printed the stats out. I used trial and error to figure out that basically you can fit 5 stat cards vertically on a sheet. So I highlighted five statcards and printed, making sure to click the button for "print selection." That way only what you have highlighted will print. I did that for the whole army, and so I had several stacks of 5 stat cards. Next I cut them all out individually and pasted them onto a single sheet of paper (my dwarves have only gotten two additional units from the core rule set, so they all fit on a standard sheet. Obviously the more fleshed out factions will need more paper space). I then put the pasted conglomeration of stats onto the scanner and printed out a fresh copy of all of that. I now have every stat in my army on one easy sheet. Yes, this takes some time. Yes you need a scanner, paper, glue (or tape would work) and scissors. No you don't need Adobe, or Excell, or Word, or anything. So it's not a completely easy solution, but the whole process took me 10 minutes and that included the trial and error - you could probably do it in seven minutes! In summary: it's not as bad as you think. I actually like it better than the individual PDF files that were up before.
  8. That was an error, and has been corrected. sorry :( Ah, ok. Don't worry EE, I'm not mad Just thought I'd throw that out there, I'm sure you're getting your share of upset email's/pm's/posts/etc. I didn't think Piker made Thorvald any less nasty, just changed his role slightly. But it's good to know the correct SA of course, so thanks for the update/heads up. @ Stubbdog: Is it generally the idea that people lead 1k point fighting companies with captains? Again my newness is showing - but I just like the idea of fielding a warlord... He is pretty darned expensive for a 1k though so I see your point. @ anybody - what do you think of my idea of absorbing Freya's troop into Logan's troop? Would that satisfy the elite:soldier ratio?
  9. This situation came up yesterday and I'm not sure how it all works out. I have two troops. Both have been... significantly firestormed... resulting in Fulumbar with two grunts left as one troop, and a handful of warriors as troop two. Troop two contains two stunned models. On Fulumbar's activation I choose to regroup the warriors into Fulumbar's troop. Do the warriors get to make their tough checks directly after the regroup action? Or do they have to wait until Fulumbar's next activation in order to perform tough checks? My opponent let me make the checks but neither of us had any idea how it should work. They failed the checks so it wasn't a big deal anyways.
  10. Here's my first attempt at a Logan Battlefury army: Logan w/+2DV and DF Durgam Deepmug 3x Swiftaxes +music Gargram Heavyhands 5x Warriors + music Freya Fangbreaker 3x Piercers +music 2x Warriors Thorvald 997 points total, 4 initiative cards Things I like: -Uses a warlord - new concept for us Dwarves! -good number of initiative cards Things I don't like: -Logan's troop has pitiful defense and will get torn apart if supported weakly -No magic Perhaps it'd be a good idea to take out Freya, put her warriors in with Gargram, her piercers in with Logan, and add in Margara with a few spells. Could I do that and satisfy the elite:soldier requirement? I'd have the leader, 2 elites, and 6 soldiers. I suppose that's 3:1, isn't it. I'd need to absorb Freya's two warriors into Logan's troop to satisfy the elite:soldier requirement. Of course Thor loses Reach so my strategy of holding him in reserve for the initial fight and using him as reach support won't work. He'll prowl around the backfield and pick of cavalry models that try to mess up my Piercers. Gargram's troop is the anvil, holding the center and hoping to draw the initial charge. The Warrior's 10DV w/deflect will help them to hold the line better. Logan's troop is obviously focused around high MAV and high Spd values. I'll try to hold them behind Gargram's screen and then use them to exploit enemy weaknesses. That much MAV is sure to destroy a weakened enemy, and by not rushing them in I hope to reduce the liability that the low DV presents. What do you guys think?
  11. I don't have the experience with Warlord that many of you have so that's a grain of salt you'll want to take into consideration. That said: Most of these changes present challanges that we can work at overcomming. A few extra points here, a couple knocked off there.. we can tweak our armies and get on with it. I do think that the adept/grunt change w/o sublists to rectify that stings quite a bit. My friend plays Reptus and is already a little put out that there's such limited model selection. I know that for friendly games I'm definately not going to enforce the Adept status on his warriors (btw.. MAV 1 does not an adept make!) The Reptus (my take on this, at least) are a primarily defensive army. The lore fits it: they're defending their ancient society. Their stats (did) reflect that: high DV warriors, etc. Yes the nagendra have lower DV, but Reptus themselves had excellent DV. Now a Reptus player can have a core of high DV but the rest of his soldiers have low DV - kindof cuts out the "point" of their army. I'm not sure why these changes were made, but I for one would like to see Reptus Warriors and similar newly adept models that don't have a faction book out to help sublist/un-adept them become grunts until such time as their faction book comes out. Reptus have a loooong wait, and they're already crippled enough as it is.
  12. My totem uses reaper's Treasure Horde II. It's not a statue of the mt. god... I took a literal approach to the line in the rules that says "the most important part is to have fun." So I decided that dwarves generally have a thing going for treasure hordes, and I figured that if one was on the line they'd probably fight extra hard to make sure it stayed safe. Once the new dwarf warlord comes out (soon!) my plan is to re-paint King Thorgram as a statue and add him to the treasure pile :D Ranzadule's got the right idea. In battleforces where you want to boost the MAV by so much that it's cost effective to include a totem, then go for it. I've been fielding a totem for no better reason than the fact that I don't have enough models to fill 1000 points - so putting 100 towards a MAV boost was a good idea. So I guess that's another reason to put a totem in.. probably not the best reason, but you do what you can with what you've got I guess! I have found that having a totem can help you to continue to put bodies on the ground even when you're getting smacked around and you lose enough models that getting adequate support is a problem. That +1 really does help more than you'd think, so unless your army is built around either range or high point models, I'd say go for a totem. Especially in a swarm type army that +1 spreads out among a lot of figures and nets you alot more offensive power.
  13. Maybe they'd make miner type models then. A new Sgt, perhaps with a lantern (to guide his troop through the tunnels), and soldier types... well probably adept types if they're nifty burrowers - you're right Wildbill, an army entirely made up of burrowers would be pretty stinking difficult to fight against, wouldn't it? - anyways the soldier types could have an assortment of picks, mattocks and shovels or whatnot.
  14. I understand where you're comming from. I've played MK and MW:DA and have also found that some of the wordings are similar enough that you get caught thinking like the other games. Fear not, that wore off for me after several games. There's hope I think you'll find Warlord to be a good upgrade from MK. They're both reasonably simple to learn, however Warlord's version of simplicity leaves you with many options that quite frankly MK simply didn't have. Another fantastic bonus is that you know what you're buying - no more of that random booster nonsense. Additionally your models won't become invalid for tournament play when a new set comes out! You lose steamtech which imo isn't a good thing, but given the way the two games in question works, steamtech was an aesthetic thing anyways. One more thing I'll add: In MK charge combined movement and combat. In Warlord charge is in no way a combat action! Charge is a movement action only. So you could use your movement action to charge into an enemy model, and then use your combat action to swing your axe. Combat does not automatically happen from a charge. I suppose you could also make a combat action, kill the model you're in contact with, and then charge another model. In that case you can't swing your axe at the second model. I only belabor that point because charge was one of the rules that gave me headaches comming from a Wizkids Games mindset and going into a R.A.G.E. mindset.
  15. Dwarves are natural miners and tunnelers. Perhaps one of their sublists could be like a mining guild. I would take away any sort of range - archers, magic, etc, and give the whole sublist Burrow. Dwarves' ability Bane means that their toughness is a huge bonus to them. Unfortunately most of their models only have tough/1! Perhaps one of their sublists could grant a modifier to tough.
  16. Awesome idea! I like the idea of having reinforcements come in after certain objectives are met. These could be simple tokens on the field that you need to loot, or perform a search action on, or whatever. Kill a certain enemy model.. eh, alright, I wouldn't make it the primary means of getting reinforcements or the enemy will just hang that model back and use thier overwhelming numbers to hack the wave player apart. Objectives would help to keep the game aggressive... preventing the wave player from hanging back and delaying much. It's to his benefit to play aggressively to nail those objectives in order to bring more troops into play. It's to the standing force player's benefit to fight tooth and nail to keep the wave player off of the objectives. Then all you'd need to do was figure out how to make the objectives difficult enough to hold that the standing force player can't just swarm them and make raspberries at the wave player as he dies an undignified death.
  17. Zoinks.... Guess I missed that!
  18. Realistically how often are we talking about facing a shooty freelance army? Is this a big problem as in "this is a loophole in the rules that is exploitable" or is this a big problem as in "we're seeing this more and more and it's really degrading the play experience of Warlord.? If the only reason we're talking about this is because one guy did it to prove it could be done, and that's the end of it, then no big deal if you ask me. If the community generally likes playing faction pure armies, or likes playing balanced freelance, then, ok, point proven, shooty freelance is broken, but the strength of the community of players means it's one of those dark bad things that lurks in the corner but nobody interacts with. But if people are having to face this frequently, then it's a problem that really does need to be dealt with. So I, for one, would like to hear from people. Have you been facing the shooty freelance army? Yes/no? And I'll answer no, with the exception of a Razig army, but that doesn't count because a) it's not freelance and b) that's the point of Razig and c) there are limitations to that specific army that make it potent but not broken.
  19. My point was more that it can be done with infantry, and the key was to keep on chugging across the field and not to dilly dally behind blocking terrain since in a timed game that hesitation to engage only works in the favor of a shooty army. Also re: Gus's post about cavalry and other high speed interceptors. I think the key to using them correctly is to engage them at the best possible time. Your first activation is a terribly bad time to send a griffon into the skies and get him in close range to the archers. Let the archers activate first (this'll probably mean moving your infy up the field, and you'll probably suffer some casualties to enemy fire - so be it. Then charge that griffon, or cavarly, whatever, into the line of archers that's already activated. Against a shooty army I don't even think I'd make use of flight - at least not right away - since it grants LOS to all archers in range. I'd keep him on the ground and tucked behind some terrain until it was time to activate him, then I'd charge across the ground into combat. You gain 2 things. This turn your interceptor can't be swarmed (by that archery troop... he may have some melee grunts from a different troop hanging out, so you may have that to deal with), and you gain the chance of getting to activate the griffon prior to the enemy's activation of that particular troop. That way you get the combat that you charge with, then next turn hopefully you get another combat, then they swarm with what's left of their archers and you get defensive strikes. In the case of the griffon that might as well be 6 guaranteed corpses and a low chance of getting hit since the griffon has the stats to take on low MAV/DV models in melee. So you've decimated one of their shooty troops, meanwhile your infantry is charging headlong towards the rest of the enemy army. Now you've got a pretty good advantage. Of course things don't always go as planned.... let's say they do get to pincushion your griffon. That's so many less arrows flying at your infantry, and so much the better. Don't get flustered by losing your birdy-cat, and keep those grunts moving up the field.
  20. Why is this possible? Sorry, still new to Dwarves and Warlord. For a volley attack you must have 5 or more archers and they all need to have Volley. Piercers do have volley, so in this case you would put them into two lines, with 5 each, and declare two seperate volley attacks.
  21. Dwarf rogue for the Warlord series optimized for melee combat So far the dwarf rogues are optimized for ranged, so you end up paying ~100 pts, where as Ssathuss for Reptus is far cheaper, is a leader to boot, and is an excellent rogue since he's optimized for melee and doesn't waste points on range. Maybe dual-wielding daggers, packing leather armor, perhaps he could have various thiefly tools on his belt or something like that. A bandana wrapped around his face as a mask would be pretty slick looking I think :D
  22. Hmm, I'm rethinking my position. Freelance ruins the flavor of Warlord. Now I'm feeling: Freelance offers different flavors to Warlord. All Ranged Adept armies aside, freelance would be a fun sort of army to build. Pull a little here and there from various factions and put it all together. I'm wondering about the problem of getting into melee with a shooty army. Let's use 5 as an average movement number. Figure you add musician, so that becomes 6. You can double move 12 inches. At Maximum, you'd need to do that three times, if your all ranged enemy was smart enough to back up their archer line as they were shooting at you. Add in the extra 2 inches of charge for the last move and you've definately got them. How long are these games? 1 hour for a 1000 point game? If I were the hand to hand player going against a shooty army, you can bet your bottom dollar I'd be wasting absolutely no time at all advancing. I'd declare my actions, measure quick and move the minis up. 10 seconds, then flip the card and keep the game chugging. Unless your opponent is really underhanded and munchkinly, they'll be courteous and move quickly as well. I realize that's quite alot to be asking of human beings. Granted they've got to be making ranged combat actions as well as their "strategic withdrawal" to maintain the range distance as long as possible. But still. "volley attack by this troop." Then you point to a figure that's in the AOE, they roll off against it. dead or alive, next mini. Roll. etc. Goes pretty quick. You suffer your losses, and flip the next card. I dunno, it seems to me that getting into melee wouldn't be the problem, at least not time-wise. I think the big problem would be getting into melee with enough figures to rip down the archers. Most ranged models are adepts because Reaper acknowledges the prowess of ranged models in the RAGE system. RAGE is awesome because it allows you to defensive strike, and by and large with range you can avoid that dynamic, and on top of it you have a very long arm with range. It's just powerful, no doubt about it. So they make them adepts to limit the ranged craziness. You can still field a powerful ranged army, but you're not as cheezy since the archers are adept. Perhaps the answer is to enforce an "only one ranged adept troop per 1000 points" rule. That would achieve the same affect in a freelance army as it would in a faction pure army. At max one big troop of nasty archers. Perhaps army construction can help limit the crushing power of an all ranged army. I'm new to this so help me out here. But most armies have a cavalry unit or something like that. Somebody who's fast and can move up the table quickly. I'm thinking of the Griffon for Dwarves, the cavalry for Nef, Overlords, Crusaders (are there others?) Even the low model count Reptus have Uru, who's not super fast but he moves around and has a high enough DV that he'd be a pain for archers to pull down. Use your fast intercept type models to get to the archers fast and start mixing it up. Even if the archers whip out their daggers and make mincemeat of your interceptor, that's one less troop of archers chipping away at the bulk of your force on your way in. I dunno, I just think that building a balanced army is always a good idea. A solid melee core, some range, some speedy interceptor types, then a mage or a melee monster at your pleasure. But having some of those basic elements helps even the odds against specialized armies, because, in my experience in Warlord and other mini games, specialized armies are typically build to crush other specialized armies. Build a well rounded force and you'll have elements that the specialized army can't handle so well. Then it's up to you to play smart enough to leverage those advantages. Yeesh long post
  23. Well I'm sure players who have been at this longer than I have will have more in depth posts, I'll add my two cents. One of the aspects I like most about Warlord is the "feel" of the different factions. I think Reaper has done a good job of distinguishing them through model selection, statistical themes, and faction abilities. I've fought Overlords, Reven, Reptus, Razig and Nefsokar, and each time I've felt like I was facing a different army. I think freelance armies reduce the game to a flavorless meltingpot. Just an opinion, I know, but I think that by removing the army abilities and taking the cream of every crop, the game goes from being a bunch of factions facing off to a power crawl where everybody takes the highest stats and rolls off with a dice... and that gets lame quickly. For example. My dwarf warriors hit decently enough, but have pretty low armor. That's a weakness inherent in my army; my line of warriors will most likely crumble if I don't get a good position on you. If I continue to play faction pure, then it forces me to deal with the low armor, and makes the game more fun for me and my opponents. I have to think about how I can do the most damage to them without over-exposing my fragile units. They have a nice juicy target to go after in my low DV warriors. If I play freelance, then I'd pick up several blisters of the fabulous Overlord warriors, keep my 2 MAV and gain excellent DV as well. I gain a great unit that will fight well, but I lose the flavor that makes Warlord fun. Those are my thoughts. Nobody I play with does freelance so it isn't a big problem for me, but I've played games in the past where freelance was the normal thing to do, and the games lacked stayingpower.
  24. Thanks for the post. It's nice to see more new blood (even if it is dwarven... ) Dwarves don't have blood, only beer!
  25. Hey everybody. I played dwarves. I don't own enough models to field a decent 1000 pt army, but here it was anyways :) Troop 1 Thorvald w/+2 DV Troop 2 Fulumbar w/Divine Favor 4x Warriors w/+1 DV each, musician Halberdier Margara Firetongue w/+1CP, 3x Ice, 1x Scare, 1x Bolt, 1x Fireball Troop 3 Gargram 4x Warriors w/musician 2x Halberdiers Troop 4 Freya 3x Piercers and to top it off, a Totem of Battle. 993 points, total. Or 996. I forget. The general strategy was to use Fulumbar and Gargram as the beatsticks, marching those two troops up the battlefield and engaging. Margara would provide some ranged support on the way in. Thorvald would hang back, providing reach support as needed and wait for a hole to plug or some point to exploit. Freya would guard her piercers, which I spread out across the line to take pot shots where I could. I'd say my biggest problem was lack of numbers. I gave as well as I got, but all of my enemies simply had more units on the field. If we both lost 5 or 6 models, I was down to two left in my troop, and they still had 4 or 5 left. Of course there was a good bit of outmaneuvering and general better playing on the part of my opponents as well For the most part I took out approximately half of the opponent's army before being taken out myself, which I thought was saying something, considering I fought without enough models, have only been playing for a month or two, and faced Qwyksilver, OverlordDan, and Ravenwolf (I believe), all of whom had great armies and and were excellent players. Next tourney's in the fall and I aim to put up even more fight then!
×
×
  • Create New...