PDA

View Full Version : How do you use a pure beasts of chaos list?



Tormentor of Slaanesh
08-09-2005, 18:17
I've just startd an army and I can't work out how to use them. Their basic troops are weak. Any suggestions welcome.

5upr3m3 h4xx0rz
09-09-2005, 00:58
Their troops arent weaker than any other troops in the game. I would recommend taking 2 beastherds, one bestigor unit, a chariot or two, a unit of 8 centigors, 4 minotaurs, and 4 dragon ogres, and then add characters to flavor. The two units of beastherds should be of larger size...about 16-20, to block line of sight to your whole army while they march up the field. And remember, they can go through forests unhindered. Great way to catch those damn elusive glade guard.

Trunks
09-09-2005, 03:57
http://s2.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index.php?act=idx

That is a messageboard dedicated to beastman armies that will help you out alot.

There are quite a few different ways to play them. I personally think the Beastherds are quite good for their points, at least in my experience they have been.

starlight
09-09-2005, 04:05
All Minotaurs!

Makaber
09-09-2005, 16:55
Hey, first off, you are the one looking for help, so you're the least qualified person in this thread to start passing judgement on their troops.

What list(s) did you use, and in what aspects did it not work out?

Brother Edwin
09-09-2005, 18:54
Beasts are hard to use. They have utter cack Ld, unruly tests and panic tests are sure to lose you a game here and there. You cant make mistakes with them and you must plan everything perfect.

I find you really need a beastlord wih armour of damnation and battle standard with gor banner to stop your general running off first turn. I normally just take 2 scroll caddys for magic.

You need a decent amount of chariots and hard hitters like minotaurs. I wouldant invest to much points on big herds when they often panic anyway. In fact I wouldant rely on the herds at all, they have cack Ld, unruly and dont hit hard, best just to support the other stuff which you can count on.

Dogs are also crucial, you need them to set up charges and whatnot.

Here is my list, 3 herds ambush, dogs set up charges for the hard hitters. Furys marchblock.


2,000points Beastmen.
Beastlord, undivided, armour of damnation, horn of great hunt, great weapon.
161
Battle standard bearer, gor banner, undivided, heavy armour.
110
Bray shaman, 2 scrolls, bray staff, undivided.
131
Bray shaman, 2 scrolls, bray-staff, undivided.
131

Chariot.
85
Chariot.
85
Chariot.
85
Chariot.
85
9 gors, 11 ungors, full command.
142
7 gors, 11 ungors, full command.
128
7 gors, 10 ungors, full command.
124
7 gors, 10 ungors, full command.
124
5 dogs
30
5 dogs
30
5 dogs
30

3 minotaurs, great weapons, undivided.
138
5 furys
75

Shaggoth, light armour, great weapon.
306
2,000points,

Tormentor of Slaanesh
09-09-2005, 20:24
I've posted it before.

Wargor 95
heavy armour
shield
great weapon
pelt of the dark young

Level 2 bray-shaman 160
staff of darkoth
dispell scroll

Wargor 114
heavy armour
battle standard
vitriolic totem

beast herd 151
12 gors, 2h/w
8 ungors
command group

beast herd 151
12 gors, 2h/w
8 ungors
command group

6 warhounds 36

3 minotaurs 138
great weapons

spawn 60

chariot 85

Total 990

Kalanic
09-09-2005, 20:31
Hey, first off, you are the one looking for help, so you're the least qualified person in this thread to start passing judgement on their troops.


Hey--easy there simba, he was just reffering to his impressions starting out, not "passing judgement."

Tormentor of Slaanesh
09-09-2005, 20:49
thankyou Kalanic.
Makaber lives to hate me, look at the vampy tactica.
anyway back to beasts.....

Brother Edwin
09-09-2005, 21:04
I've posted it before.

Wargor 95
heavy armour
shield
great weapon
pelt of the dark young

Seems OK, however armour of damnation can be very good for challenges, my general once beat Crom in a challenge because of it.


Level 2 bray-shaman 160
staff of darkoth
dispell scroll

You wont get spells off so might as well make him a scroll caddy.


Wargor 114
heavy armour
battle standard
vitriolic totem

I would take gor banner, you need the re-roll to panic when they are Ld 7.


beast herd 151
12 gors, 2h/w
8 ungors
command group

beast herd 151
12 gors, 2h/w
8 ungors
command group

You only need about 6-8 gors, since you wont get more in combat. I would take a unit of 17, cheap and effective.


6 warhounds 36

Might as well be 5.


3 minotaurs 138
great weapons

Good.


spawn 60

Make it slannesh.


chariot 85

Total 990

Chariots are good, more the better.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
09-09-2005, 21:24
i'm thinking of more.
my herds are like that cos that's how u buy them.
should i split them into 3 herds?.

Brother Edwin
09-09-2005, 23:33
Chariots are the best units in the chaos book, at 2,000points most people I know use 4, that way two of them can double team to do a horendus amount of damage to one target.
Against calvery who normally out charge you you can send forward a beast herd to flee, then after they fail charge hit them with 2 chariots, this means if the beast herd went unruly previously it dosent matter since that was the plan anyway. However its very possable the chariots might be takeing panic tests if within 4 of the fled herd, so make sure your general is within range.

What I did was put ungor heads on gor bodys to make the ungors.

Defenatly make them into more herds if possable. More units the better. That way you can set up 2 in ambush and have one on at the start with your characters in. When people see all your characters in one unit they waste time shooting at them when all they are killing is a few ungors.

What armys are you haveing trouble against?

MarcoPollo
10-09-2005, 02:11
Ambushing is a good Idea against slow moving armies and stand and shoot armies. Also, if mages are your opponent, then you can force them into units with the ambush rule. Then hit them with your killy troops.

As mentioned before chariots are good and 4 is nice to have. At 85 pts, you may as well make the most of this cheap/excellent deal.

Yes the ld is poor, but marks like khorne and slaanesh are excellent, while undivided is passable, while tzeetch and nurgle are poor for this aspect.

Personally, I like Khorne as it doubles the attack value of your bestigors, while it also increase the effectivenss of the minotaurs. Minotaurs with GW are the best way because there are enough wounds on a minotaur unit to still get most of your high strength after your opponent strikes.

A giant is really helpful too. It can provide stability to a flank and can negate ranks too. I find it is often underrated by beast players.

I like to include the banner of the Gods BSB even at 2K. Sure it cost 210 pts (same as a chaos lord with no equiptment), but can really keep your killy units whittling away even if they loose combat. Get you minotaurs in and keep them there until they tear a unit appart.

Dogs are important but not too many. Sure they are cheap, but too many can cause panic problems if they are far from the general. If you have too many too close to the general, this can create a log jam in your main charge areas.

In order to compete, beasts must win combat and this can happen easily when they win the movement phase. However, if you choose to go magic, wargors can make for cheap tzeetch heros.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
10-09-2005, 22:14
what do you do about charging knights. even the minotaurs struggle to beat them.
I'll split the herds into two units of 7 gors and 5 ungors and a unit of 10 gors and 6 ungors.

Brother Edwin
11-09-2005, 18:46
what do you do about charging knights. even the minotaurs struggle to beat them.
I'll split the herds into two units of 7 gors and 5 ungors and a unit of 10 gors and 6 ungors.


Flee with one unit then hit them with another unit or two. You should NEVER let yourself be charged by knights unless it is part of a bigger plan.

Or you miss-direct them. Angle a dog unit diagonaly to them so that when they charge they line up against them, exposeing there flank.

Like this:

----CCC
----CCC
----CCC

D
--D
----D
------D

Muffin Man
11-09-2005, 21:46
I can't help but think part of your problem is having 350+ points in characters at 1000 points. It's leaving your army fairly small and especially vulnerable to shooting.

For the beastherds, you could take Brother Edwin's suggestion to change the Gor/Ungor ratio or as other people do, convert some of the Gors to Bestigors (apparently the plastic Gors are bigger than metal Bestigors anyways :rolleyes: ).

Also for the chariot, I would recomment also another one. Once it's charged in past your line, where's the support? The minotaurs can keep up and ambushing beastherds could beat them to the target I suppose, but that takes a lot of coordination, all of which could be flubbed up by the other general or just bad luck. Having a pair of chariots to support each other would be an easier solution in my opinion.

Makaber
12-09-2005, 02:56
One of the problems with playing beastmen at 1000 pts. is that your max leadership is 7. A general with Ld 8 in 2000 pts. is bad enough, but 7 is horrendeous, so you can't afford to muck it up.

Your general could be equipped better. There are several neat combos, but Armour of Damnation is a no-brainer. In general, the chaos armours in Hordes of Chaos are a steal, since they're priced for Horde characters, who allready have the 4+ save. Thus, when you buy them for a beastman, you essencially get the 4+ save for free.

I don't see exactly where the Shaman fits in. When I was starting out, some clever BoC general pointed out to me how you can ditch the shaman, and instead buy two Mark of Tzeench on the Wargors. Sure, their lore might leave something to desire, but it does give you more bang for the buck, in a more survivable package. The many magic missiles in the lore also make up a little for the lack of missile troops. Since none of your units have the Mark of Chaos Undivided, it's not benefitting your army to have it on the characters, so you don't lose out on it either. Of course, you'll need some Tzeench troops to allow it, but more on that later.

I've come to the conclution that magical banners is a liability. First of all, the banners just aren't that good. Sure, Viriolic Totem is one of the better, but I find it more important to give the Battle Standard Bearer some survivability and hitting power. You'll need all the fighting characters and morale support you can get, and a BSB isn't supplying either when he's dead.

As others have said, the beastherd ratios could be fine-tuned a little. 6 is a bit on the shy side I think, since you'll always rank up two wider than the regiment you're fighting. I like to have a few extra gors, so I run with a 50/50 ratio. Since my herds are quite large, this means 10 gors and 10 ungors. Sure, I could go with 8/12 and technically save points, but I like to play it safe, and the points I'd save would be ridicilously few anyways. The size of the herds is very individual and there's no set standard for it, but contrary to your "basic troops are weak" statement, beastherds are very good. Two attacks each, WS4, T4, and a good champion, for a very low cost: What's not to love? My last 1000 pts. list had 60 un/gors and mauled both chaos mortals and bretonnians one fateful evening.

Minotaurs with great weapons are good. Never give them anything but greatweapons, many are tempted by the lure of 12 strength 4 attacks, but 9 at strength 6 is better in pretty much every single realistic battle situation.

I don't feel you have to give your spawn Mark of Slaanesh, it depends on how you use them. I use mine as speed bumps in a refused flank maneuver, where their low speed is just fine as it is. So figure it out on your own.

Chariots are good. I use two, but that's mainly because I don't have more models. They're on my "to do"-list.

I'd include some Screamers. First of all, fliers are very handy in a beastman list, since you don't have any reliable way to deal with warmachines. Secondly, Screamers are a very good unit and a steal for 33 points. Finally, they'd allow you to take MoTz on your characters, if you opt to go that route.

The main trick of playing beastmen is to use your mobility for what it's worth. Ideally, you should be able to get a flank charge in most combats, lacking up for the reduced rank bonus of your beastherds. Your goal of the battle should be to break up your opponents battle line where you can utilize your advantage (limitless movement) to max effect, while making your opponent struggle with his disadvantage (ranked units and all their limitations). I'd also recommend you to not be scared of ambushing. Even with a Ld 7 (and the good chance of not ending up where you planned), the prospect of having a solid 20-strong melee unit suddenly appearing behind his or her lines, is enougth to stir up your opponents battleplan to some degree. And if they fail the test, there's a good chance they'll end up somewhere useful anyways.

Speaking for myself, my most common approach is to put two thirds of my herds, some warhounds, and a character in ambush (though this varies wildly depending on what army I'm facing). The rest of the army is deployed in a somewhat vague battleline, trying to balance the flanks somewhat and making my plans hard to read. Then, as the game kicks off, I'll immediately shuffle the line to towards his weakest flank, tying up the other side with disposable units like dogs and spawns. Round two, I'll back the main push with the ambush, trying to deal with any warmachines and missile troops, and generally shifting the weight of my forces further. If this works, I've essencially split his army in two, where I'm fighting one side, while the rest has to shift to adapt to the new dynamics of the game. Of course, you'll develop your own approach as you figure out the army, but that's how I do it anyways.

Good luck with the goatlads. If you have any spesific questions about them, feel free to PM me if you want advice. I'm not a spectacular player by any means, but I'm not clueless either.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
12-09-2005, 20:31
I'm not getting any marks. it is an undivided and just beats army, ie: no daemons or mortals.

MarcoPollo
13-09-2005, 23:05
Well if you are not going to be getting marks, or demons/mortals, you are limiting your ability to fine tune your herd/army. I suppose that fluff would be more important to you than practicality. If this is the case then really, take the models that look cool to you and paint them up awesome. But don't be surprised if they get knocked off regularly due to the lack of variation that a pure undivided beast army offers.

Makaber
14-09-2005, 03:46
Well yeah, I went for that stance myself initially. It works out allright, for instance my own list wouldn't suffer terribly from having no MoTz characters and a shaman instead. As for the demons: The three chaos lists (mortal, daemon, beast) are clearly ment to be modular from a game-wise as well as a background-wise perspective, but within moderation. For instance, I loathe beastmen players who include a single unit of chosen knights "just because they're good", and to a lesser degree, mortal armies who include two herds for no reason other than a cheap screen for their khornite hordes. However, daemons are very tricky to field on their own (due to the immense number of metal miniatures needed and their tactical inflexibility), and from a background perspective are usually summoned by bestial or mortal sorcerers anyways. I don't really think including some daemons ruin the beastmen theme (in the same way a lone unit of knights, anyways). Of course, beastmen benefit nicely from fliers to take out warmachines. It's like cannons in an Empire list: Sure you can win without them, but it really helps to have it around.

As for no marks, Mark of Chaos Undivided is generally very good, since you're generally suffering from a low Leadership score. However, bear in mind that most of your characters won't benefit from this, since it loses its effect the moment a character joins a unit, and the only units you have with a mark is bestigors and minotaurs. Remember that having a mark on a character or unit other than undivided in no way forces you to theme the entire army accordingly: That's just established as a "norm" by the myriads of players who wanted a themed army and went for the most obvious solution.

Anyways, you can't expect to figure out how the army works straight away. Play more with them, and pay attention to what works out and what doesn't. Then try to improve later on. The list you're using isn't terribly flawed by any means, so that's not the crux of your problems.

Ed.: Oh, and just to clear one thing up: Their basic troops (beastherds) are not "weak". If you think they are, you're not using them right, and/or expecting too much of them. They are the most mobile basic infantry in the game, and still packs more offensive punch than most ranked infantry, for a very affordable price.

Brother Edwin
16-09-2005, 22:02
Ed.: Oh, and just to clear one thing up: Their basic troops (beastherds) are not "weak". If you think they are, you're not using them right, and/or expecting too much of them. They are the most mobile basic infantry in the game, and still packs more offensive punch than most ranked infantry, for a very affordable price

Few armys use basic infantry.

Freak Ona Leash
16-09-2005, 22:16
Few armys use basic infantry.
Let me think. Dwarfs, High Elves, Wood Elves, Hordes of Chaos, Dark Elves, Empire, Skaven, Bretonnians, Ogres, Orcs And Goblins. All of these have viable(and many times it is the best army build) builds that use basic infantry.

Brother Edwin
16-09-2005, 23:29
Let me think. Dwarfs, High Elves, Wood Elves, Hordes of Chaos, Dark Elves, Empire, Skaven, Bretonnians, Ogres, Orcs And Goblins. All of these have viable(and many times it is the best army build) builds that use basic infantry.


I have never seen a high elf, chaos, empire, dark elf or brettonian army use basic infantry unless they are following fluff or are begginers. All these armys will commonly use all cav or similar fast units since they are stronger, if you face a army useing infantry it is a rare blessing.

Makaber
16-09-2005, 23:59
Few armys use basic infantry.
I will disregard that the proposition is completely off topic in the first place (as the statement on how beastherds are better than most basic infantry is completely irrelevant to how much said infantry is used). However, I see you completely disregard the mentioned Dwarfs, Wood Elves, Skaven, and Orcs and Goblins in your argumentation. Pay attention to how I've gracefully ignored ogres (since technically their infantry isn't "basic" per se) and Hordes of Chaos (since many seem to disregard Marauders in favour of Chaos Warriors, which, while core, is too powerful to be considered "basic"); they could easily be included in the above list, though.


I have never seen a high elf, chaos, empire, dark elf or brettonian army use basic infantry unless they are following fluff or are begginers. All these armys will commonly use all cav or similar fast units since they are stronger, if you face a army useing infantry it is a rare blessing.

I'll agree with you on the Bretonnian issue, since very few Bretonnian players seem to include infantry (other than the occational archers) in their lists (though I feel this is a shame, as I think they have some merit). The rest of your argumentation is hogwash, though.

Are you trying to tell me you've never seen a good Empire player using an army with hundgunners, swordsmen, or spearmen? Not a single successful Chaos army with a solid Marauder unit? The vast (vast) majority of all cavalry armies I see are played by people who just started out playing, and went with the dudes on horseback because they are "best". I can only assume your opponent base is very small and you all live in a tactical vacuum.

Oh, and I find it amusing (though not particularly relevant) that this is coming from a person with 140 hobgoblins in his army. And no bull centaurs, which are "stronger".

MarcoPollo
17-09-2005, 03:35
Here! Here! Makaber!

I too think that having infantry is a critical part of any battle plan. The beauty of Warhammer is that you can go anyway you like and still be able come up with a game plan that works.

Beast herds are multi-faceted. Sure a loaded bretonian charge will smash them to bits, but a loaded bretonian charge can price up to 300 pts and more. While a simple herd of 9 gors and 11 ungors works out to be around 170 pts. There is no shame in a 170 pt unit losing to a 300 pt unit.

A smart player can still create opportunities and surprises against an all cavalry army. With the right standards and magica items this is not a problem at all.

Nevertheless, beast herds will not always be a winning unit on your table. But, if you are a beast or mortal chaos player, it can be hard to win without one.

Andres von Rienholt
17-09-2005, 04:19
Edwin:

As an Empire player, I can safely say that you are not quite mentally competent. I have yet to see an Empire player win with out basic infantry. All knights is useless. I do not even think it is possible to win (except perhaps against a player who is unconscious) with that combination. At MINIMIUM, an Empire player needs a unit of halberdiers or spearmen to hold the center of the axis of attack and a unit of swordsmen or free company to screen or counter charge. Otherwise you have too few units, your line is gone and your knights will be swamped and wiped out.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
17-09-2005, 10:45
now gents, ur going of on a limb.
I only thought that beast herds were weak because I'm used to tough troops or troops that never run, dwarfs and vampies. I just need some getting used to time. I may get daemons and marks just not in 1000 points.

My new list:

wargor 93
dark heart, additional hand weapon, heavy armour

Lv2 brayshaman 160
dispell scroll, staff of darkoth

6 warhounds 36

beast herd 151
7 gors additional hand weapon
5 ungors
foe render, musician

beast herd 151
7 gors additional hand weapon
5 ungors
foe render, musician

beast herd
10 gors additional hand weapon
6 ungors
full comand

chariot 85

chariot 85

3 minotaurs
great weapons
bloodkine

spawn 60

the smaller herds ambush, warhounds screen/disrupt. chariots support minotaurs and main herd. spawn hold flank.
i like the one wizard and i hate scroll cadies so he's staying.

Makaber
17-09-2005, 18:03
The list is very good as it is. A few things I'd change though:

Most importantly, you've got the point costs for the herds wrong. Each of the smaller ones are 94 points each. However, I ran over the list, and totally it's 994 points, so there's no points to save there.

There's a number of minor issues, though. First is the Wargor. I'd give him a great weapon, even if it's a slightly boring choice. You'll almost always charge with him, for two reasons: Beastherds are not able to withstand a charge so you'll most likely flee from it, and the second of course being the very good mibility you have at your disposal. Thus, there's very little reason not to give him one.

The Wargor is also a bit exposed as it is. Heavy armour and T4 isn't going to last very long, and since you haven't filled your magic item quota on him, I'd invest in some better protection for him. You have several options available:


Chaos Armour for 10 points. You can afford this by simply dropping the 6th warhound.
Crimson Armour of Dargan. Since this is from Hordes of Chaos, you effectivly get the 4+ save for free, so it's quite a bargain. Might come very handy in a low-point game, since leadership generally is lower without lords involved. You can afford this by ditching the Bloodkine, which generally isn't worth 20 points anyways.
Pelt of the Dark Young, combined with heavy armour, gives a 4+ save and Magic Resistance (1). Again, you can afford it by dropping the Bloodkine.
A ward save. I'd strongly recommend Crown of Horns for 30 points, even if it means dropping the Dark Heart. The 5+ ward save is nice, but the +1 Ld when rallying is incredibly handy, because you will end up fleeing from charges a lot.


Furthermore, ideally you'd want a bit less gors and a few more ungors. This really doens't improve them, though; it's only to save points, and you'd only save about 12-16 points on it anyways, so it's not something you should bother with unless you have spare ungors and need the points.

The Bloodkine is neat, but a bit heavy on the points for a single additional attack. It's not a complete waste since it can handle enemy champions (and even weak characters) with a little luck, but I generally don't bother with them and spend the points elsewhere instead.

Other than those few tweaks, it looks like a good, solid starting point. Play with it until you figure out how to utilize the herds to their best effect, and then expand on it. In fact, it's nearly identical to a half-size vertion of my 2000 points list.

Makaber
17-09-2005, 19:30
I will disregard that the proposition is completely off topic in the first place (as the statement on how beastherds are better than most basic infantry is completely irrelevant to how much said infantry is used).

Wrong. He need to design his army to fight all cav.


However, I see you completely disregard the mentioned Dwarfs, Wood Elves, Skaven, and Orcs and Goblins in your argumentation.
Still that is half, it leaves many armys which dont use basic infantry.

Pay attention to how I've gracefully ignored ogres (since technically their infantry isn't "basic" per se) and Hordes of Chaos (since many seem to disregard Marauders in favour of Chaos Warriors, which, while core, is too powerful to be considered "basic"); they could easily be included in the above list, though.

Who uses chaos warriors? Pointless. They take maurader horsemen, warhounds and chaos knights.





I'll agree with you on the Bretonnian issue, since very few Bretonnian players seem to include infantry (other than the occational archers) in their lists (though I feel this is a shame, as I think they have some merit). The rest of your argumentation is hogwash, though.

How exactly.


Are you trying to tell me you've never seen a good Empire player using an army with hundgunners, swordsmen, or spearmen?

Only in friendly games where we agre to use fluff armys.

Not a single successful Chaos army with a solid Marauder unit?
Only horsemen.

The vast (vast) majority of all cavalry armies I see are played by people who just started out playing, and went with the dudes on horseback because they are "best". I can only assume your opponent base is very small and you all live in a tactical vacuum.

I play on the top tables of any tornament I go to. Where I rearly encounter infantry unless it is skaven or vampire counts.


Oh, and I find it amusing (though not particularly relevant) that this is coming from a person with 140 hobgoblins in his army. And no bull centaurs, which are "stronger".

Bull centours are a waste of time, the chaos dwarf list works because of the hobgoblin units. I wish I could take 10 man squads oof 2 point modals in other armys.

I'll reply to this later, when I have time. And stop sending me replies as PM, it looks like you're not man enough to stand up for your arguments.

Makaber
18-09-2005, 00:34
Allright. As far as I can tell, nowhere in the thread does it say he has to tailor his list against all cavalry. I read posts, not minds. That said, even against a cavalry-based army, I'd still have beastherds as the mainstay. They are without doubt the main asset of the Beastmen list. I've soundly trashed a a bretonnian army in a 1000 pts. game in the past, using little more than three characters, 60 un/gors, a pair of chariots, and a trio of minotaurs.

As for what lists used basic infantry. So far, we've boiled it down to at least half the armies in the game that stands a very slim chance of winning without basic infantry. The rest, including armies such as hordes of chaos and empire, you claim never use basic infantry. Yeah, sure, you can make lists with no or very little infantry with most armies, and possibly play rather well with them, but your statement that these armies never use infantry, is quite franky ridicilous. Very rarely do I cave in during argumentation, but I've had enough of this. For all intents and purposes, you could say the moon was made of cheese, I'd disagree, and that would be the end of it, as I can't physically shove your face full of moon dust over the internet. The only way I could finish this ridicilous avalance of baseless statements, was to show you just how effective infantry is, which I can't do over the internet, either. Thus, let me just concluded that I and the vast majority of the Warhammer players around the world find your stance ridicilous.

Chaos warriors? I am in no position to write a deep analysis of their capabilities, since I don't play Hordes. I will need more than your word for that nobody ever uses them successfully, though. Never uses them. Ever.

How your "argumentation" is hogwash? Why, let me tell you! It's not argumentation. It's just statements, with no reasoning behind them. "Nobody uses chaos warriors!" you say. "Chaos knights is much better!" Why, exactly, are they better? Because their stats are? How about their high price? Low numbers? Vulnerability to war machines? Why aren't chaos warriors good, in your opinion? You talk a lot, but you're not actually saying anything.

What on earth are the empire players you play against fielding? How many tournaments have you played in? How large were said tournaments? Were they consisting of anyone but your close circle of tactically challenged friends?

Finally, you claim that basic infantry is useless, and that cavalry is superior in any way. Thus, there is no need for the skilled and experienced Warhammer players to take anything but cavalry. On the same note, you base your own list on the most basic of infantry, claiming they are the reason the list works. However, the absolutely stunningly effective, flawless heavy cavalry equalient that is Bull Centaurs, is, in your eyes, "a waste of time". Its so wonderfully self-contradictive I almost giggle with glee.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
19-09-2005, 21:57
ok, uve made ur point. the whole cavalry thing was due to the fact that they are the elements of the empire army i fought that did the most damage. this is beasts not i hate chaos knights/warriors so please leave it and go back to ur excellent advice.
my wargor has an additional hand weapon as i see the more attacks the more attacks will hit.

Makaber
19-09-2005, 22:18
Sorry if I got sidetracked. Nothing against Brother Edwin as a person, but he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about and it's starting to severely annoy me.

Sure, you'll hit more with an additional hand weapon, but you'll have to consider the impact of those hits as well. A Wargor doens't have the best of strengths, so with his basic statline, he's not all that likely to actually inflict any damage with his attacks. However, a higher strength is beneficiary in two ways: First, you'll wound more easily, and against higher toughness opponents. Secondly, you'll reduce your opponents armour saves, thus allowing the herd with the character in it to take on heavily armoured infantry with a far greater chance of success. I normally don't like playing by the numbers, but I'll make an exception here, to illustrate my point:

Giving the Wargor a scenario that on paper would benefit an additional hand weapon, we pit him against a weak opponent (toughness 3) with only a hand weapon and shield as protection (5+ armour save).

With two hand weapons (4 attacks, strength 4), he is hitting on 4+, means 2 hits. Wounding on 3+ means 66% of the hits will wound, an average of 1.32. The Wargor has a strength of 4, meaning the armour save gets a -1 penalty, meaning armour saves are taken on 6+, so 16.6% of the wounds will be saved. This means that in every round of combat, the Wargor with two hand weapons will inflict, on average, 1.13 wounds.

Running the same scenario with a great weapon (3 attacks, strength 6), he'll get 1.5 hits. He'll wound on 2+, meaning an 83% chance of wounding. With a strength 6, the armour saves will be taken at a -3 pentalty, negating it completely. All in all, he'll cause 1.25 wounds.

Now, all the math behind the numbers is largely irrelevant: What's important are the results. The great weapon will cause more wounds on average than two hand weapons, even in a scenario theoretically beneficial to the two hand weapons. As soon as you start fighting tougher enemies with more armour, the advantage of a great weapon will skyrocket, completely outclassing two hand weapons.

As for handling cavalry, it will be the toughest challenge you'll be up against as a beastman player. It's very unlikely that a beastherd can stand up to a cavalry charge, so your best bet is to outsmart your opponent and try to lure his cavalry into making charges you can easily flee from, that places his cavalry at a disadvantageous position. Then, hit him hard with whatever you have available. Make no mistake, heavy cavalry is the nemesis of a beastman general.

DeathMasterSnikch
19-09-2005, 22:33
i agree with makabre edwin seems to have significant troubles using a low leadership army.

IMO charots ( fair amount 1 aint gona do much) and large ish herd screens do pretty well if you can keep em in check to cover your valuable units.

Makaber
19-09-2005, 22:52
Chariots are good, but not reliable. Don't count on the crew to do much, the bestigor might look good on paper, but he never seem to hit anything. I always use two chariots but I'm planning on expanding to four. Use them as pairs or in support of beastherds, and don't slam them into enemy units on their own unless you have a very real chance of breaking them right away. Large ranked regiments is a no-no.

Minotaurs with great weapons are also spectacularly useful, with their high strength of 6. Be aware that even with a -3 modifier to armour saves, empire knights will still save on a 4+; they're extremely tough puppies.

A third option is Dragon Ogres. I cannot vouch for them myself, but their offensive capabilities are without question, and people swear by them. I think their price might be a bit steep, but again, I got no experience fielding them. I'll probably get a unit in the future, though.

Finally, if you know you'll be up against a lot of knights, you might want to consider the Great Fang. Ignoring armour saves can be very useful in certain cases, but be aware that it will leave your general very exposed.

Trunks
20-09-2005, 01:59
Chaos warriors? I am in no position to write a deep analysis of their capabilities, since I don't play Hordes. I will need more than your word for that nobody ever uses them successfully, though. Never uses them. Ever.


He (Edwin) is completely off-base with almost everything with regards to his comments on infantry and you should never expect him to ever back up a point with anything other than "I play at top tables in tournaments so I'm right".

When it comes to Chaos Warriors, they do not tend to be the core of a chaos infantry army. Marauders tend to be very numerous (along with Beastherds) to give you numbers. It can be pretty difficult to win when your Chaos Warriors outnumber your other infantry usually (I've seen people try because "it looks cool"). They can be very effective but are a little over-priced (not to the point of being unusable though). Chaos Warriors tend to be used as either a central anvil regiment (surrounded by marauders) or as flanking regiments for large marauder blocks.

MarcoPollo
21-09-2005, 03:49
Makabers comments are right and to the point with great weapons. But the important point to realize is that the balance of hand weapons and great weapons is key.

For instance, A bestigor unit will have great weapons that will be striking last. If you put a character in with a great weapon you are needing to wait for you foe to strike and kill off a few of your bestigors. Then you may only be able to attack with half your bestigors and your hero at strength 6 or 7.

Conversly, if you use two hand weapons, especially on a lord, you will be able to dole out some punishment to you foe, this will reduce the attacks back on the unit allowing more of your bestigors to attack back at st 6 to punish the armor in the unit.

This is even more important with Khornegors as their extra attack really makes much more difference if you are going to pay for it. Give the general or hero the extra hand weapon to be able to strike first.

I know the discussion is at 1500 pts, so no lord, and about beast herds. But the point can be applied in many situations.

Makaber
21-09-2005, 16:54
MarcoPollo makes a very good point. However, there's no bestigors in the list we're currently working on, and I feel your herds will benefit more from the high-strength of the great weapon.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
21-09-2005, 19:07
the model i have has additional hand weapons but that may change. i see chariots are popular so i'll bear that in mind.
I don't like bestigor they don't seem worth it.

MarcoPollo
21-09-2005, 20:02
Personally I think only the bestigor are woth it if they are Khorne. If you are going to pay 12 pts a model you may as well do the upgrade into Khorne and get 2 st 6 attacks from your front rank.

I too do not like any other bestigor other than Khorne. Of course, I play a full khorne beast army so it suits me well.

Makaber
22-09-2005, 00:33
Bestigors aren't bad per se. Looking at their stats, they are fast, hard hitting, good toughness, and as good an armour protection as most other similar infantry. There's two problems with them:

In an army of other ranked regiments, they'd be a steal, since all the other regiments would behave in a similar fashion with regards to movement and getting shot at. However, in a beastmen army, which consists of hyper-mobile units and a vast percentage of skirmishers, they become the one single ranked unit in the army. Comparativly, they become sluggish, easy to shoot, and thus easy to deal with.

The other is their punch. If they become locked in combat after the first round, toughness 4 and a save of 5+ will mean quite a few bestigors migth get killed before they are allowed to hit back with their great weapons, and with just a single attack on each, they can't rely on inflicting enough casualties to make up for it. Thus, they need to break a unit right away to be effective. And with just a single attack each (even on Strength 6), they will have a hard time achieving this.

I've experimented with a couple of solutions. One is to give the unit the Battle Standard Bearer, equipped with the Beast Banner. This makes it horribly devastating, but also very expensive, and the unprotected Standard Bearer is easily killed, thus losing both the banner and the character. Another is to put a Beastlord in the unit, lending it his punch. This makes for a really expensive unit, though. The third is to give it a Mark of Khorne, of course, but this doesn't suit all armies from a background perspective. My favorite is to include a Wargor in it, for a few more attacks, and a Warbanner for the extra CR. This is usually enough to break almost anything. With the Wargor you can get the Dark Heart into the unit as well, giving it a charge range of a brisk 11"-13".

I assume it's also possible to field it in a smaller unit of perhaps 10 or so, acting as a detatchment to a beastherd, sort of like chaos warriors commonly are used with a larger marauder unit. However, in such a role, there is really little reason why to not take minotaurs instead.

The last, important thing to remember with bestigors is to give it some sort of morale bolstering effect. It will recieve a lot of attention, so be prepared to take a lot of leadership tests with it. Being (probably) the most expensive unit in your army, you'll want it to behave. Mark of Tzeench is a big no-no. Mark of Undivided is good, but remember not to put any otherwise-marked characters in it. Khorne and Slaanesh are excellent, and Nurgle at least makes them immune to Fear and resistant to Terror.

To sum up, purely statwise, Bestigors are very capable. However, they suffer from being either the single large ranked element in the army, or (if used in a smaller role) outclassed by other units. I still like them, though. They add flavour, and is one of the few "true" beastmen units.

MarcoPollo
22-09-2005, 18:20
Well said Makaber.
I like the idea of the dark heart. This will make it very devastating and a huge surprise.

Of course, you can always "cheat" and take a unit of marauders to compensate for the lack of ranked infantry with Beastmen. But if you are trying to stay completely beastmen, then bestigors are your only option.

Makaber
23-09-2005, 01:27
You can, of course, take two units of bestigors. I've never seen it done, though.

Hywel
23-09-2005, 01:39
One opponent that soundly beat me with his beastmen seemed to use the bestigor as something of a harbour for his characters.

They spent most of the game drifting around, making all the beastherds very threatening as they could join any of them, but could also leap into the bestigor unit to make it insanely hard and pummel my strong units.

I confess I was inexperienced against beastmen at the time, but the fluid nature of the beastman army and its ability to have roaming characters coincides nicely with the ability to throw in a tough ranked unit as the lines meet. Takes good timing, but its effective.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
23-09-2005, 20:41
well for now i won't have any beastigor. would a giant be worth it and will we're at it a shaggoth?

Makaber
23-09-2005, 22:20
Giants are normally a very sound investment. At worst, they attract way more missile fire than they're worth, and at best, they're perfectly able to decimate a unit on their own. They work very well in holding up larger units, being stubborn with a very high Ld. Mutant monstrosity is a good investment as well, it's very handy against bows, and the side effect isn't really negative either.

Shaggoths are a different matter entirely. Very often, fledging beastmen players ask about what to take between a giant and a shaggoth, but they very different roles. The giant acts as an unpredictable "ace up the sleeve", able to take on both ranked infantry and larger monsters, but excelling at none, instead being one of the few units you have that reliably won't flee from a lost combat. The shaggoth instead works just like it's smaller bretheren, like shock troopers, filling the role normally held by heavy cavalry.

The problem with the shaggoth is that it isn't really weak, and can be used to great effect, but it's in a niche better filled by other choices (namely, dragon ogres). It just isn't good enough at what it does, having too low unit strength, not enough attacks, and not enough protection. In short, it's too expensive and doens't contribute anything new. It's a shame really, because the concept has a lot of merit, and the Beast of Chaos list really should have some sort of large monster (apart from the giant).

MarcoPollo
23-09-2005, 23:03
I don't think a Shagoth is worth it. I sent out a thread asking for the best/worst large target and there was a resounding negative reply for the Shagoth. There were various reasons perhaps you should check the thread out.

But the giant got an overwhelmingly positive reply. I like to us a giant as a tar pit, rank negator. Sure it can be a bit unpredictable, but that is what makes it so interesting to play.
I refused to play my beastmen until I had my Giant ready. Before that I would only use beast herds in my mortal campaings.

snikch13
26-09-2005, 00:36
beastlord, with horn of hunt (and some combat type MI of your choice)
beast shaman (lvl 2 with MI of your choice, preferrably shadow or beasts)

20 bestigors sb, mus, ch
20 bestigors sb mus ch
20 bestigors sb, mus, ch

beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch
beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch
beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch
beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch
beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch
beast herd 5 gors, 20 ungors, sb, mus, ch

approx 2,000 pts (some rough figuring there, minor adjustments required)

other things to consider would be less bestigors for centigors, and/or a chariot or two. (tho im not fond of chariots due to str 7 or higher busting em too easy)

Makaber
26-09-2005, 02:49
I honestly can't stand "concept lists", taking a basic principle and stretching it too far. Sure it might be fun as a theoretical experiment, but I pity the fool who actually has the inclination to buy, assemble, paint, and last but not least play with an army considering of nothing but 212 beastmen. Feel free to toy around with your own personal wet dreams in your own home, but don't you dare present your lunatic powergaming rambelings in a thread about someone actually looking for genuine advice on how to play a beastman army.

If you want to be a well-respected beastman general playing fun games against your friends, do not listen to snikch13. His idea of how to play a beastmen army is dumb, incredibly one-sided, counter-productive, and boring both in concept and execution (as playing an army with 150 skirmishers would take stupidly long time).

That said, sadly, I'm not sure how I'd approach said list with the hope of winning. Congratulations, dear Sir, you broke Warhammer. :mad:

wanderingblade
26-09-2005, 17:09
Makaber, chill please. There's no need to try and kill someone with words simply because you disagree with them. Consider this a formal warning.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
26-09-2005, 18:51
ditto, please don't kill/put off people.
I see your point about the shaggoth and the giant. i've played against a orc and goblin giant many a time and they are so fun.

nurgle_boy
26-09-2005, 21:06
ok, im startin a beast of chaos chariot army.
dont worry, its not a dirty clipping army, its a head on killy army.
ita basically, magic, 7 chariots (including the lords) and 2x8 centigor, or 3x6 centigor

Tormentor of Slaanesh
26-09-2005, 21:11
you'll be murdered by terrain.

Hywel
27-09-2005, 00:13
Indeed, not to mention 'terrain creation' like treesinging and the howler wind where you suddenly find your chariots unable to move.

Chariots are a support unit, I wouldn't advise making an army of them. You'll also need to go to town on conversions to stop the army looking boring, but that'd be kinda fun I guess...

Brother Edwin
28-09-2005, 11:44
ok, im startin a beast of chaos chariot army.
dont worry, its not a dirty clipping army, its a head on killy army.
ita basically, magic, 7 chariots (including the lords) and 2x8 centigor, or 3x6 centigor

And what will you do when you face a army like brettonians who out charge you out fight you and are better than you.

Freak Ona Leash
28-09-2005, 11:46
And what will you do when you face a army like brettonians who out charge you out fight you and are better than you.
Use tactics? *gasp awe*

Strictly Commercial
28-09-2005, 19:27
And what will you do when you face a army like brettonians who out charge you out fight you and are better than you.

How is that? :confused: Beastmen are one of the hardest armies in the game. Being charged is hardly something that can't be countered using good movement strategy.

MarcoPollo
29-09-2005, 17:48
One nice thing to note is that a chariot is worth just 10 more points than a Dragon Ogre. Consider having 3 dragon ogres vs 3 chariots. I don't know about you, but the 3 chariots can deal out alot more pain that those 3 dragon ogres.

nurgle_boy
29-09-2005, 19:08
And what will you do when you face a army like brettonians who out charge you out fight you and are better than you.


i change my army lists, and dont play beardy losers like yourself!

easy!

Tormentor of Slaanesh
01-10-2005, 22:07
but on a serious point, hpow would you beat brettonians? the way i see it you'd have to sacrifice something and lure them into a trap of large heavy, sharp great weapons.

Brother Edwin
02-10-2005, 00:54
i change my army lists, and dont play beardy losers like yourself!

easy!

So you will refuse to play:

Brettonians.
High elves.
Empire.
Chaos.
Dark elves.

If you are refuseing to play all these armys how will you ever get a game?


How is that? Beastmen are one of the hardest armies in the game. Being charged is hardly something that can't be countered using good movement strategy.

But his army is all chariots, he cant do any fleeing since he wong gurante a rally on Ld 7, he moves 7 where his enemy will be moveing 14-20, plus the fact he will have a hard time doing damage to heavy calvery and wont have the ranks and banners of the beastherds to back him up.

I would'nt say beastmen are one of the hardest armys in the game, crap Ld, little magic, unruly tests, and are actually quite slow for a combat army. However feel free to win a GT with them.


but on a serious point, hpow would you beat brettonians? the way i see it you'd have to sacrifice something and lure them into a trap of large heavy, sharp great weapons.

You do exactly that, you also use ambushing and terrain to your advantage. Something nurgle boy's army cant do.
Try to march block parts of his army whale you surround and deal with the rest. Remember it is perfectly fine to flee with minotaurs or beastherds to set up charges since they are likely to rally, however chariots are not.
Pegasus knights are a pain.

Look at this:

Lance-----------Lance

-------WOOD

-----Beast army.


Turn one the beast army runs towards one part o the bretts where march blocking the other. I always use the lance itself to block LOS from my furys getting charged by peg knights.


_________

Makaber
02-10-2005, 03:06
So you will refuse to play:

Brettonians.
High elves.
Empire.
Chaos.
Dark elves.

If you are refuseing to play all these armys how will you ever get a game?
How does this make any sense at all? It's a completely irrelevant and unfounded assesment.


But his army is all chariots, he cant do any fleeing since he wong gurante a rally on Ld 7, he moves 7 where his enemy will be moveing 14-20, plus the fact he will have a hard time doing damage to heavy calvery and wont have the ranks and banners of the beastherds to back him up.
You don't get much better than Ld 7 in a beastman army anyways! And you can't possibly guarantee a rally in any case, you'd need some magic item or an Ld of 12. Sure he can't march with chariots, but he'll still be charging 14" with everything, which is better than a run of the mill army. The chariots also benefit tremendeously from their easy maneuvering.

Of course the list suffers from a lack of high-strength attack, rank bonuses and banners, but it benefits from its strenths (mobile, impact hits), something you (again) blatantly disregards.


I would'nt say beastmen are one of the hardest armys in the game, crap Ld, little magic, unruly tests, and are actually quite slow for a combat army. However feel free to win a GT with them.

Again, you fail to take into account the strengths of the army: Unsurpassed mobility, cheap yet highly effective troops (ranging from beastherds to the awesome minotaurs). Your statement is like me going "Dwarves are bad because they're slow". I realise you might think beastmen are a bad army, because they don't fit your playing style, but please make that clear in your statements instead of making gross unbased generalisations. Not everyone bases his armies on static no-brainer number crunching excersises.

Brother Edwin
02-10-2005, 12:53
How does this make any sense at all? It's a completely irrelevant and unfounded assesment.

All these armys can consist entirley of units which out manover and hit harder than beastman chariots.



You don't get much better than Ld 7 in a beastman army anyways!
Minotaurs or a beastherd are ld 8, beastherds next to general are ld 9.

And you can't possibly guarantee a rally in any case, you'd need some magic item or an Ld of 12.
No but from ld 7 to ld 8 gos from just over a 50% chance to a 75% chance.

Sure he can't march with chariots, but he'll still be charging 14" with everything, which is better than a run of the mill army. The chariots also benefit tremendeously from their easy maneuvering.

That is still quite slow, all combat armys I know move at least 14, and that is quite slow, they will hhave there units where they want them more than the beastmen.


Of course the list suffers from a lack of high-strength attack, rank bonuses and banners, but it benefits from its strenths (mobile, impact hits), something you (again) blatantly disregards.

That dosent help against heavy cav armys who absorb damage and out manover him.




Again, you fail to take into account the strengths of the army: Unsurpassed mobility, cheap yet highly effective troops (ranging from beastherds to the awesome minotaurs). Your statement is like me going "Dwarves are bad because they're slow". I realise you might think beastmen are a bad army, because they don't fit your playing style, but please make that clear in your statements instead of making gross unbased generalisations. Not everyone bases his armies on static no-brainer number crunching excersises.

I am great with my beastmen winning 80% of my games, please do not put word into my mouth. There is a huge difference between saying a army is "bad" and saying they are "not the hardest army in the game".

Makaber
02-10-2005, 15:26
Why are you playing a beastmen army so successfully, when you think infantry is "worthless" and heavy cavalry is better at everything? And again, all your argumentation is based on a fictional world where everyone play all-cavalry armies, which simply doesn't exsit. I'll leave this thread alone for now, as the purpose of it is long lost, and I find it increasinly hard to continue this excersise in futility without resorting to namecalling and under-the-belt characterisations.

If anyone need some real advice about Beastmen, feel free to PM me.

Brother Edwin
02-10-2005, 15:49
Why are you playing a beastmen army so successfully, when you think infantry is "worthless" and heavy cavalry is better at everything? And again, all your argumentation is based on a fictional world where everyone play all-cavalry armies, which simply doesn't exsit. I'll leave this thread alone for now, as the purpose of it is long lost, and I find it increasinly hard to continue this excersise in futility without resorting to namecalling and under-the-belt characterisations.

If anyone need some real advice about Beastmen, feel free to PM me.

Any decent torny will have all cav armys, plus the fact if you can beat allcav armys you should not have problems with infantry.
I am playing beastmen because they are a challenge and suit my stlye of play.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
02-10-2005, 20:02
infantry you have to take rank bonus into account. and flank charges aren't as effective. most armies have at least some element of both.
please stop all of the nastiness and get back to beasts.
the problem with the terrain idea is that cavalry sometimes avoid terrain like the plague.

nurgle_boy
02-10-2005, 20:45
bro edwin, where, WHERE did i say i wouldnt play the armies... i said i wouldnt play beardy losers like yourself, not the armies!
i thin you must be blind as well :rolleyes:

back to beastmen, my army is doing fine, oh and guess what? today i beat a brettonian army!

hounds are good!

Brother Edwin
02-10-2005, 23:31
infantry you have to take rank bonus into account. and flank charges aren't as effective. most armies have at least some element of both.
please stop all of the nastiness and get back to beasts.
the problem with the terrain idea is that cavalry sometimes avoid terrain like the plague.

Use that to your advantage.


bro edwin, where, WHERE did i say i wouldnt play the armies... i said i wouldnt play beardy losers like yourself, not the armies!
i thin you must be blind as well

I said how would you deal with certan armys, you said something along the lines of not playing "beardy" losers, and seeing as beardy is slang which means nothing I automaticaly assumed you thought of armys which have acces to calvery "beardy".
So basecly you ignored the question and resorted to needless insults. Congrats on the trolling.

snikch13
03-10-2005, 22:08
....but I pity the fool who actually has the inclination to buy, assemble, paint, and last but not least play with an army considering of nothing but 212 beastmen.
i have that inclination, i did it with my skaven, i have over 250 models in my 2,000 point skaven army.


Feel free to toy around with your own personal wet dreams in your own home, but don't you dare present your lunatic powergaming rambelings in a thread about someone actually looking for genuine advice on how to play a beastman army.
i was merely giving him my 2 cents, and the simplest way to do that was by writing up a basic list stating how i consider beastmen best played. i dont understand why people think someone should play with less than par units in order to be counted as fair.


If you want to be a well-respected beastman general playing fun games against your friends, do not listen to snikch13. His idea of how to play a beastmen army is dumb, incredibly one-sided, counter-productive, and boring both in concept and execution (as playing an army with 150 skirmishers would take stupidly long time).
your opinion, but no need to make your argument based on intimidation, you have a choice in playing against such armies you may consider "cheesy" or "beardy".


That said, sadly, I'm not sure how I'd approach said list with the hope of winning. Congratulations, dear Sir, you broke Warhammer. :mad:
trust me, its beatable, but i think this list is one of the great examples at how people need to focus less on special and rare, and more on core choices when making solid, strategic tournament winning armies.

im not trying to start an argument, merely responding (rather late i might admit) to counter someone's point in which i disagree with.

beyond that, i noticied the mentioning of cav too, and i would like to say that they arent a big deal to handle either, the key is to find a way to keep them from breaking you on the turn they charge you, when you do that, youll see how pathetic cav really are. in the end it will take lots of games in which you lose to a better opponent with a better army for you to truly understand and realize how to play the game, if after that you find you dont like the game dont play, but the worst thing you could do for your self is to refuse to play someone you consider "beardy" as they tend to be the best practice.

Makaber
03-10-2005, 23:04
I went over the top on my initial statement, and I'd like to apologise for that. I still stand by my statements, especially this part:

I honestly can't stand "concept lists", taking a basic principle and stretching it too far.
Liking core choices is well and good, but the army is nothing but. All the herds are identical, and quite lopsided. I just don't agree with the style, I find it bland and boring. That's all.

I fully agree on your view on cavalry though.

Brother Edwin
03-10-2005, 23:39
What on earth are the empire players you play against fielding? How many tournaments have you played in? How large were said tournaments? Were they consisting of anyone but your close circle of tactically challenged friends?

I play at the UKGT, AKA the meeting place of the best players in europe. 450 people enter.


Sorry if I got sidetracked. Nothing against Brother Edwin as a person, but he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about and it's starting to severely annoy me.

Yet I make a list in 5 minites which is capable of beating you.


He (Edwin) is completely off-base with almost everything with regards to his comments on infantry and you should never expect him to ever back up a point with anything other than "I play at top tables in tournaments so I'm right".

Thats like saying someone with a law degre wont back anything up with anything other than "I have a law degre so I am right". The fact he has a law degre prooves he knows what he is on about.


That said, sadly, I'm not sure how I'd approach said army

What? The army has only 3 dispel dice and no scrolls. No hitting power and crap Ld. What kind of general are you if you cant beat that?

redemptionist15
03-10-2005, 23:57
Brother Edwin if you could actually back up your claims of doing well in GT's and Tournaments with some actual evidence people might believe you.

To me you seem to be just a dreamer who makes lists he believes will be good, but are ultimately very flawed.


On-topic, the best beasts lists i have seen tend to involve a nice mix of ambushers with shock troops. I think swinging just one way or the other is a bad idea. From what i've played against a Beastlord is a very good idea in 2k+ simply because of the LD, theres no point having a horde if the lot flees due to one panic check.

Makaber
04-10-2005, 00:21
I play at the UKGT, AKA the meeting place of the best players in europe. 450 people enter.
It's the largest. That's all. I wouldn't say the average level of players there is any better or worse than any other turnament. Playing at the UKGT means you paid the ticket, not that you're on Team Awesome.


Yet I make a list in 5 minites which is capable of beating you.
Give me a break. In 5 minutes you made a one-sided powergaming madhouse that narrowly managed a technical win against my fun-to-play, fun-to-play-against run-of-the-mill "games night at the club" list. Besides, T10 played it, not you. As you've said before, the list doesn't matter, the player does, so teach what you preach, bud.


Thats like saying someone with a law degre wont back anything up with anything other than "I have a law degre so I am right". The fact he has a law degre prooves he knows what he is on about.
No, it's like someone saying he has a law degree. I've never seen anything indicating you've actually placed high in a Grand Tournament other than your own word.


What? The army has only 3 dispel dice and no scrolls. No hitting power and crap Ld. What kind of general are you if you cant beat that?It was a spur of the moment statement. Disregarding that, the army still has its merits: "No hitting power"? 60 bestigors! Sure they're individually not spectacular, but 60. Come on. That should at least warrant a "some", even from you. "Crap Ld"? 4 is "crap" Ld. 7 is average Ld. You'll never get excellent Ld in a beastmen army anyways, and it's a weakness of it. It's compensated in other ways. It's called variation, and without it we'd all be playing lizardmen and be bored senseless. Stop assuming everyone plays the same way as you. Bringing us onto the next point:

As for magic, stop making the assumption that every army needs to carry 10 (!) dispell scrolls to be effective. Again, I nearly defeated T10 playing the Chaos Dwarves, even with no dispell scrolls and just 4 dispell dice. And before you start accusing me of being a bad general for not taking more: It was the list I brough to a beer and pretzels game, magic is fun, and dispell scrolls tend to ruin that fun.

Anyways, I've broken my own promise and indulged myself a reply, something I regret allready.

Freak Ona Leash
04-10-2005, 21:16
I play at the UKGT, AKA the meeting place of the best players in europe. 450 people enter.




As said before, the largest, not best. The players there are just as good (and bad in some cases) as players at other tourneys.
Yet I make a list in 5 minites which is capable of beating you.
:rolleyes: That has to be the most arrogant statement I've ever heard from you Eddie. I doubt this to the extreme. And this list has fairly nice hitting power. And crap leadership? Empire has ld 7, Orcs have ld 7, hell most people have l-frelling-d 7. Its not crap, its average.

snikch13
05-10-2005, 00:18
one last point and ill shut up ;)


I honestly can't stand "concept lists", taking a basic principle and stretching it too far.

sorry but i have to disagree, i belive that in conceptualizing a strategy and list before hand will save money and time; it will also give a solid base from which to build your final army list, and in that it is my firm belief that a "concept list" should consist of mostly core units, with an overall basic principle from which to build and learn from.

likely one will find that they may wish to drop a few beat herds for chariots or minotaurs, or what not later, but by maxing out initially they have learned how to use the basic core units of the army; and it is the core units that make an armylist distinct.

i suppose in the end we wont agree my friend, you play the game for different reasons than i do.

Makaber
05-10-2005, 02:20
i suppose in the end we wont agree my friend, you play the game for different reasons than i do.

No, I think we agree on the principle, but not on the approach. Army list category aside, I believe the four core beastman units are beastherds, warhounds, minotaurs and chariots, and it's through the mastery of these four building blocks the fundament to a well-rounded, effective beastman list lies. In your list, you only focus on one of these four units, and thus I feel you remove a lot of the fundament of the list.

Furthermore, I don't believe it is right to make a 2000 points list right off the bat with nothing but the fundamental units, simply because a player probably will alter the list to suit his or her style. Thus, taking your list as an exampe, a player starting off with it will possibly (or probably) want a lot less herds, less bestigors, some minotaurs, a chariot or two, and more than likely some exotic unit as well, like dragon ogres or a giant. The net result? A lot of wasted time learning the tricks of the trade of a very specialised army with nothing but beastmen, the effort of integrating the new units into the list, and the wasted time and money buying, assembling and painting a lot (a lot) of redundant models.

Instead, I follow the more conventional school of thought teaching staring players to get the base essensials first, for example a couple of heroes, two beastherds, two chariots, three minotaurs and a couple of warhound units. Build a small army from there, and expand as dictated by personal preference. Think minotaurs are awesome? Get some more of those. Want a list with nothing by beastherds and chariots? Get more beastherds and chariots. Eventually, the player will have expanded his or her fledging army into a full-blown horde, while learning to know the army in the process.

In the end, I think it's a fundamentally different approach to learning a new army. Of course, I believe my way of thinking is superior, but as there's no hard evidence at hand to support either of us, and I feel we're reached some sort of agreement, I won't really delve further into the subject.

Latro
05-10-2005, 08:49
I'll second that :cool:

Brother Edwin
05-10-2005, 17:16
Brother Edwin if you could actually back up your claims of doing well in GT's and Tournaments with some actual evidence people might believe you.

To me you seem to be just a dreamer who makes lists he believes will be good, but are ultimately very flawed.

Go to the results of the UKGT heat one and look where Edwin Smth and Melvin Campbell placed for generalship, both of us useing armys I made.

Brother Edwin
05-10-2005, 17:21
It's the largest. That's all. I wouldn't say the average level of players there is any better or worse than any other turnament. Playing at the UKGT means you paid the ticket, not that you're on Team Awesome.[quote]

Have you actually BEEN to it? Its a fact its where the best players go. And I did not just play at it I playced highly at it.


[quote] Besides, T10 played it, not you

Exactly, if it had been me AKA the person who designed the list and knew exactly how it is supposed to work you would of been masacred.





No, it's like someone saying he has a law degree. I've never seen anything indicating you've actually placed high in a Grand Tournament other than your own word.

Look at the results.


It was a spur of the moment statement. Disregarding that, the army still has its merits: "No hitting power"? 60 bestigors! Sure they're individually not spectacular, but 60. Come on. That should at least warrant a "some", even from you. "Crap Ld"? 4 is "crap" Ld. 7 is average Ld. You'll never get excellent Ld in a beastmen army anyways, and it's a weakness of it. It's compensated in other ways. It's called variation, and without it we'd all be playing lizardmen and be bored senseless. Stop assuming everyone plays the same way as you. Bringing us onto the next point:

Bestigor are still infantry and very expensive, they will suffer from shooting and magic plus just get charged by calvery and killed.
Ld 7 is crap, and the army will be takeing lots of panic tests since it will be going towards thee enemy.
However if you disagre feel free to bring it to the UKGT and prove me wrong.


As for magic, stop making the assumption that every army needs to carry 10 (!) dispell scrolls to be effective. Again, I nearly defeated T10 playing the Chaos Dwarves, even with no dispell scrolls and just 4 dispell dice. And before you start accusing me of being a bad general for not taking more: It was the list I brough to a beer and pretzels game, magic is fun, and dispell scrolls tend to ruin that fun.

If you think it dosent need them to be effective feel free to bring your list to the UKGT and see how well it does.

Avian
05-10-2005, 18:01
Guys, this is not a pissing contest. Calm down or this thread will be closed.

-The Moderators

g0ddy
05-10-2005, 20:38
Exactly, if it had been me AKA the person who designed the list and knew exactly how it is supposed to work you would of been masacred.


Someone is a bit full of themself...



Look at the results.


Ive been unable to track down the UKGT results on the UK GW page :(
... I wonder how many Edwin/Ed/Eddie SMITH's there are in the UK...


Bestigor are still infantry and very expensive ..... plus just get charged by calvery and killed.


I suppose in your book, by definition all infantry is crap - solely beacuse its infantry? add another ridiculous sweeping generalization to the list boys.



However if you disagre feel free to bring it to the UKGT and prove me wrong.


:wtf: I suppose this will be B. Edwins standardized response in the future whenever someone disagrees with him.



If you think it dosent need them to be effective feel free to bring your list to the UKGT and see how well it does.


Surprise ! Surprise ! ..... :(

:eek: Back on topic people! the Mods are getting angry!

- g0ddy

TWB
05-10-2005, 21:24
With a warning to quit you still continue to flame.
Strike for g0ddy.
Warning to Makaber you need to remember not to feed the troll. nobody forces you to post and ignoring a particular poster is very easy, there will be no more warnings, next time it'll be a strike.
Brother Edwin, next time I see your name involved in a row like this you'll get a strike, regardless.