Jump to content

750 Necropolis


Recommended Posts

Hi, everyone

 

I've been playing Warlord for about a month, and I've been loving it. The only problem is that I don't win much. Anyway, I got more grunts and I've been using that- it seems to work well.

 

Her is my planned list for a tournament (based on my limited collection of models) :

 

Judas Bloodspire with 7 Skeleton Breakers: 373 points

Azarphan with 7 Skeleton Warriors: 198 points

Azarphan (non-unique! yay!) with 4 skeleton archers: 175 points

 

for a total of 746 points

 

How does that look to everyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I love Azarphan as a model. He looks like he should be singing "Tentacles" from "Shoggoth on the Roof". That said, I don't believe it is cost effective to use one warlord and two captains when one Captain and two Sgts will do. This would allow you more grunts.

 

That said, if that's what you got, go for it. People will have a tough time taking out your leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my experience, Warlords are too expensive for 750 pt games. Downgrading to a Captain and two Sgts would gvie you points for a spell slinger or a solo. Skeletons die fast, so you either need tons of them or good support to clean up after them........

 

Castlebuilder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support you purchasing more models but remember, until you have them, proxying is fine in all but the Three Official games (Origins, GenCon and ReaperCon).

 

So when you show up at the Toy Soldier today to play in the games, field what works best for you. And who knows what goodies you'll go home with afterwards, there is a nice box of prizes for the day.

 

I promise your local BL Reps are quite reasonable.

 

Cher :upside:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth mentioning that Warlord is a combined arms game as well. Consider taking 3 warriors w/4 breakers and 4 warriors w/3 breakers vs. giving them units of their own... Try talking with your opponent about the game aftewards.

 

Try swapping sides/armies and playing against your troops as well... this'll help identify tactics, troop composition, or *other* as the reason...

 

A more time intensive exercise would be to write up a battlle report & post it for comments!!!

 

Rgds,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, combined arms...unless you want to combine missile troops with melee troops (pretty basic tactic as i see it)...then you're limited to just one such troop per warband...still trying to figure out where the heck that ruling came from...

Which page/rule are you referring to? ... or which section of the Errata? This isn't to say that I haven't heard of the change of status for archers... I'm just blanking on where it is....

 

Rgds,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, combined arms...unless you want to combine missile troops with melee troops (pretty basic tactic as i see it)...then you're limited to just one such troop per warband...still trying to figure out where the heck that ruling came from...

Which page/rule are you referring to? ... or which section of the Errata? This isn't to say that I haven't heard of the change of status for archers... I'm just blanking on where it is....

 

Rgds,

A discussion of this, with links to several versions of the errata (72 dpi, 300 b/w dpi, 300 color dpi) can be found *Here*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back on topic...

 

I tried combined arms today, and I got more archers as well. I got Kaena, the Banshee, and used:

 

2 Azarphans with 3 breakers and 3 warriors (one with Malek)

1 Banshee

1 Railor with 8 archers.

 

I won every game I played, perhaps because of good luck, bad opponents, or whatever, but I think the advice I got here is good.

 

Thanks, everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, now that I've refreshed my memory cells for a few more minutes: yes, a significant change, but not really a contradiction of what I mean when I say "combined arms". Combined arms to me is:

 

"An approach to warfare which seeks to integrate different arms of a military to achieve mutually complementary effects."

 

I've seen some definitions that talk about "simultaneous", but I'd say that a single turn could be considered simultaneous. Yes it's going to change tactics, but not in a manner that prevents placing the impact where it counts.

 

Consider US Arty tactics vs. Warlord Archer tactics: The arty was applied where it would be most useful. Now that most archers are adepts, the unit will be used to provide extra emphasis on a critical part of the battlefield vs. being easier to time multiple lower-impact attacks.

 

Okee,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...