PDA

View Full Version : Trying to win with less points



Malorian
09-10-2008, 15:05
This idea keep spinning around my head and refuses to leave me alone.

The idea would be that full sized armies are bulky and force you to engage your opponent. On the other hand a smaller force would be able to avoid your opponent and be able to work down weak points.

Forces like this would be based on things like glade riders, pistoliers, or other fast shooty units. I'm sure it could work for combat units too but you would have to be mroe careful.

So for example in a 2000 point game your list would be two units of glade riders and a noble on a steed with hail of doom arrow (you could also add two units of waywatchers). You would stay to the trees and work down weak unit while blasting dangerous ones away with the hail of doom. Even if your opponent wipes you out as long as you kill about equal points you will keep a tie.

Problems with this tactic:

-Table quarters. If will be difficult to capture a quarter so you will have to contest them. This could either be done by quickly moving into each quarter in the last turn or spreading your army out (which would also force the opponent to spread out), but either way this is 400 points that can completely ruin your game plan.

-Shooting. It's hard to hide from shooting so you would really have to watch your angles and make sure you are causing at least negative modifiers, but in the end any loses will really hurt.

-Magic. Less points mean less magic defense, and since most magic doesn't roll to hit it really hurts. Magic heavy armies with magic missiles would probably rip this tactic apart unless you could blast the unit with hail of doom or work the LOS.

-Terrain. Obviously a big part of this is terrain. If you are fighting in a field you don't really have a lot of options.


So there is a fair bit of problems with this idea, but since it can still work given the right situations I keep coming back to it.


What do you guys think?

Harwammer
09-10-2008, 15:58
not using up all your points allowance is a valid form of points denial ;)

Malorian
09-10-2008, 16:17
Exactly, the other player can really only get so many points.

So do you think this could actually work though? It might not win every time, but would it win more than it would lose in general? (Usually by turning losses into ties.)

Chicago Slim
09-10-2008, 17:58
Well, I'll be interested to hear the results of your test-playing!

Anton
09-10-2008, 19:18
So for example in a 2000 point game your list would be two units of glade riders and a noble on a steed with hail of doom arrow (you could also add two units of waywatchers). You would stay to the trees and work down weak unit while blasting dangerous ones away with the hail of doom. Even if your opponent wipes you out as long as you kill about equal points you will keep a tie.

Being completely wiped out means auto-loss, doesn't it?

Other than that, it sounds interesting. As you said, it only works for some armies, like Wood Elves, and only with the terrain on your side.

It could also be fun with Dwarfs, using three or four units of Miners and a character or two with the Rune of Brotherhood. For Core you'd pick perhaps a few units of ranged troops. But at this point, it's a small army, so maybe just as good going all out. :p

Malorian
09-10-2008, 19:34
Nope, it's based on VPs (unless there is a mission or you are playing necrons).

It would work best with wood elves I think, but it would also work with any army with fast cav as core (you could do some interesting things with DE).

skank
10-10-2008, 08:55
Hmmm... DE could do 2 hydras, darkriders, shades(assasins),harpies and mounted mages?

Maybe:

Mage-2 scrolls, steed
3 units of 5 darkriders-musician, xbows
2 hydras
2 units of 5 harpies

for 973pts

The Red Scourge
10-10-2008, 09:34
I see your two units of glade riders and waywatchers and trump it with a Fire Wizard.

Fast cavalry and skirmishers are quite easy to stop with a magical barrage, and your S3 arrows will have a hard time with the tougher units out there.

But do investigate into the Sethayla type army for wood elves, which is quite hated for its non-combat nature basically it consists of Glade Riders, Warhawks and Waywatchers. The enemy can't engage your units, and you whittle him down with an intense barrage of S3 arrows not an army that will get you many friends :p

Faustburg
10-10-2008, 11:19
Taking way under the agreed points limit as a points denial ploy is nothing but cheating ass-hattery...

If you want to play with a small force vs. a bigger one there are a lot of scenarios balanced for that.

Trying it just to win a pitched battle is pathetic, not a clever tactic. Don't expect it to fly in any serious tournament, and if you do it in "freindly" games you are just sad.

skank
10-10-2008, 12:22
Dude... We're not talking about a last turn Khazrak cheese army or something, thats true points denial!

If someone wanted to play a small raiding force against me i would hardly object. The scenarios you're talking about usually give the smaller force bonuses like auto going first and ld penalties for the larger (WE scenario) so its hardly WAAC.

It's not cheating to go below points so chill out.

themandudeperson
10-10-2008, 14:33
Personally, I don't think it's a valid tactic. Now, as a form of a handicap, I think it's a great idea. Also, the bragging rights that come along with whomping someone who has a 500 pt or more advantage over you would be more than enough to make me try it in a "friendly" game. I will say this though: Go head and play me with 1000-1500 points of WE against 2000 pts of any army I know well enough to use properly and I will trounce you nearly every game and anyone who is an average to above average player will easily do the same.

Dragon Prince of Caledor
10-10-2008, 15:57
I love being the underdog; more epic when i roll 6's ;) if that pertains to your thought.. :)

gerrymander61
10-10-2008, 16:07
it'd be risky and the smaller army wouldn't be able to win and it's cheating and.......

Blagh, who am I kidding, this is a great idea!


The Box:
___
|.....|
|___| ----------------> Malorian is outside of it

Ward.
10-10-2008, 16:18
Honestly I can see this making for some very boring games, or ones where your opponent takes the same things as you and spends the rest of his points on ranged troops.

skank
10-10-2008, 18:20
A game that is a bit different and not your adverage 1:1 slugfest... thats boring?

Think themandudeperson has the right idea. If nothing else it shows you can have a handicap game and the game still works. Never thought of that myself.

Anton
10-10-2008, 19:29
Nope, it's based on VPs (unless there is a mission or you are playing necrons).

It would work best with wood elves I think, but it would also work with any army with fast cav as core (you could do some interesting things with DE).

I see, didn't know this.

Yes, Dark Elves would have some interesting options.

Chicago Slim
10-10-2008, 19:39
But do investigate into the Sethayla type army for wood elves, which is quite hated for its non-combat nature basically it consists of Glade Riders, Warhawks and Waywatchers. The enemy can't engage your units, and you whittle him down with an intense barrage of S3 arrows not an army that will get you many friends :p

Time was, back in early 6th ed, Wood Elves were using an army list from a 4-page White Dwarf spread, which allowed Core units of Archers to have 5+ models. Those were great days for the guerilla tactics of Wood Elves. Sure, they didn't have Forest Spirits back then (except for Treemen), but they were just about impossible to run to ground, anyway...

In those days, my housemate used to say, "Wood Elves aren't an army, they're a scenario."

Crispian25
10-10-2008, 19:57
Scenarios work great for this. I played in one called 'Flank attack' I think, where two people are on teams, and you play to 8 turns. Two armies face off at 2000 points, and then two other people face off, where the attacker has 1750 and the defender has a thousand, trying to keep the attacker from helping his team mate and flanking the other player, as anything moving off my deployment edge could join the other battle on the flank next turn. Playing with just warriors of chaos (I didn't have any beasts of daemons then), I was able to hold off a superior force of Bretonnians and defend my partner. It came down to me using the terrain to my advantage and forcing him to come down a single pathway (mutual terrain set up and then rolling off for table side, mind you) that created a meat-grinder. It is possible, but my force really was supposed to lose, and just whittle down the flanker before he hit my partner.

There is also the Archaon's horde scenario 'Halting the Tide' in the Storm of Chaos book. Basically, you play a game where the attacker has twice as many troops, but the defender is immune to panic and the attacker has to wipe the opponent off the board without taking a certain amount of casualties. I'm sure that there are plenty more that exist, just ask around.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
10-10-2008, 20:22
Taking way under the agreed points limit as a points denial ploy is nothing but cheating ass-hattery...

If you want to play with a small force vs. a bigger one there are a lot of scenarios balanced for that.

Trying it just to win a pitched battle is pathetic, not a clever tactic. Don't expect it to fly in any serious tournament, and if you do it in "freindly" games you are just sad.

YOWZA! "Cheating ass-hattery," "pathetic," "not clever," "and if you do it in 'friendly'(fixed that for you) games you are just sad." You know, there's nothing quite like violently disagreeing with someone and insult-throwing to set a tone of civil discussion on the Internet.

That sounds really interesting, Malorian. I've never thought of doing something like that. I guess I always focused on getting as many troops as I could for the points limit. I wonder how this would actually play out for my Orcs and Goblins...

Faustburg
10-10-2008, 20:44
There is a vast difference between playing it for fun as a guerilla war style scenario, handicap for being a superior player, or just a challenge with potential bragging rights for winning against the odds, and attempting it as a "tactic" in a stand up pitched battle, clearly under the WAAC banner.

The latter is the cheating ass-hattery. Simple as that.

Malorian
10-10-2008, 20:51
This is hardly under the WAAC banner.

It is however under the 'trying to win just like everyone else' banner.

theunwantedbeing
10-10-2008, 20:59
You could play using the other army as a guide to how many VP you need to amass to win.

eg.
1k vs 2k
The 2k list needs to be 75vp up to win(minor victory)
The 1k list needs to be 225vp up to win(minor victory)

Not a massive change but it's noticable when your a small army needing to gain quite a few VP off your opponent for as little as possible a loss from your own army.

Since the new DE rules have appeared I often find I have about 250points of my army that simply aren't needed. Simply as that's roughly how many point's I've saved combined with the increase in power of my list.
So it's certainly a plausable idea, especially if you find that you win most of your games (*cough* daemon player *cough*) then lowering the points you take makes things that much more fair for your opponent.

If you are taking less points, spread the remainder you didn't take around your own list.
ie.
10 units, you have spent 1750 of your 2k list, each unit goes up in price by 25points.

Simple, not underhand then as no advantage is gained.

Faustburg
10-10-2008, 21:00
Then go play like the game is intended!

Putting 500 points on the table, trying to kill more than that before you are wiped out, and claiming it to be a fair win is absolutely WAAC if it is a straight 2250 battle ...

Malorian
10-10-2008, 21:06
The points given are simply a maximum.

Surely you don't call people that bring 1999 to a 2000 battle cheaters do you? Well this is the same thing but with a specific tactic in mind.

ZigZagMan
10-10-2008, 21:13
I've done the same thing in a 40k tournament using the latest "last chancers" rules I brought 600pts to a 1850 tounament.
I pulled off 2 ties and a loss, Not bad I thought, almost had a win except for mission pts I just couldn't stop my opponent from getting.
I later found out that the tournament organizer (the regional manager of Houston and surrounding areas) had disqualified me without telling me. Otherwise I probably would have gotten the sportsmanship award (the only thing you can really expect to get with this kind of army)

Faustburg
10-10-2008, 21:19
Taking 1999 points is not the same as taking 500, is it now?

Your "tactic" is cheating the other player out of a chance of a honest game as intended, is that fair?

(it is hardly novel, BTW, it has been suggested and shot down for decades...:p)

Malorian
10-10-2008, 21:26
Your "tactic" is cheating the other player out of a chance of a honest game as intended, is that fair?

Either play against my 500 wood elves or my 2000 bretonnians. I leave it up to you, but I KNOW which one you'll have more fun with... :evilgrin:

Faustburg
10-10-2008, 23:30
Not if it is a tournament where points are scoured on a VP difference or derivation thereof... your 500 points wood elves are wiped of the table turn one by ranged attacks, while on the table next to you someone wins by 1800-1000 after a full game...

Not only have you wasted them one game of six, they get shafted tournament-points wise as well.

(this was an actual happening at a tournament a few years back, this guy entered around 700 points high elves "because he wanted to play with his army as he was learning the game". People who met him, crushed his army, and lost their chance of finishing at a good position because the game only gave them a "minor victory", opposed to the ppint they could have scored for winning by a better margin. They were pretty miffed, and the guy really should have been told to go learn the game somewhere else, not in a tournament with substantial prizes and an entry fee. But he was a friend of the organizers, apparently...)


So, again... It is not a legitimate "tactic". Asking someone if they like to try a full army against your 500 points WE = Cool, Doing it because you can win by point denial = cheating or at least typical WAAC.

Should (will) be stopped as you turn in your list before the event at a tournament, and just sad if your try it at a friendly game.

Lord Dan
11-10-2008, 01:26
Sorry Malorian, I'm not a fan of this one. Points denial urks me to begin with, so this sort of takes the cake.

Besides, it wouldn't be allowed at any tournament. Any. You could start arguing your point, and the organizer would just tell you to leave. Actually he might have some thugs throw you out movie-bar-scene-style.

theunwantedbeing
11-10-2008, 01:46
How do you only get a minor victory against somebody who brigns 700points to a 2k game?

Kill his general and claim all 4 table quarters..along with the rest of the army.
That's 1200points right there.
Only half that is well into solid victory territory...so barely getting a minor victory means thye must have been truly hopeless generals.

Ward.
11-10-2008, 02:42
A game that is a bit different and not your adverage 1:1 slugfest... thats boring?


It'd still be a 1:1 slugfest, except with points denial.

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy a bit of variety in in my games whether it's seeing someone take the siegebreaker on a butcher or a scenario but this just doesn't seem like anything all that different.

buttematron
11-10-2008, 03:47
Either play against my 500 wood elves or my 2000 bretonnians. I leave it up to you, but I KNOW which one you'll have more fun with... :evilgrin:

I guess if I was forced to play you for some hellish reason I would play against the full army, so I could, you know, get a game of Warhammer in instead of pin the tail on the jackass--I mean Wood Elf "army." I can unapologetically say that this is a really stupid idea.

This isn't some awesome tactic you've come up with, and, if according to you, it's not cheating, it's completely lame. I suppose no one would care if you just did it with your buddies, but you're saying it's a tactic people should use. Everyone knows that the point value is a guide to play pick-up games with, and that if you don't have the agreed points value on the table, then I can't really play the game where the point is to kill your guys. So, if you want to take a -1500 VP deduction at the beginning of your game, then it may start to make some sense.

Malorian
11-10-2008, 06:30
Now should use, as I've pointed out the obvious draw backs, just can use.

In tournaments I agree it screws over your opponets, but in regular games I see nothing wrong with it.

SolarHammer
11-10-2008, 06:38
Then spring this on your regular opponents as a surprise and see what happens, but quit bragging about it here until you do.

Von Wibble
11-10-2008, 09:53
What if the opponents army isn't unwieldy? Say you are facing wood elves?

2 x glade riders + noble + 2 x waywatchers

vs

3 x glade riders + noble + 2 x waywatchers + 2 x glade guard + 2 x dryads + 2 x spellsinger + 2 x warhawk riders......

I know who my money is on.

Harwammer
11-10-2008, 16:19
Then go play like the game is intended!

Putting 500 points on the table, trying to kill more than that before you are wiped out, and claiming it to be a fair win is absolutely WAAC if it is a straight 2250 battle ...

Erm, the idea is to have your small, elite and mobile force survive, not simply slugfest your own points worth then die (300 style!)

Putting 500 points on the table and trying to kill enough points to earn back our own worth is going to result in a loss; the enemy should be able to achieve at least 1k points from this (4 quarters and general).

The idea behind 'Trying to win with less points' is by having less on the table you are more mobile, have less need to worry about psychology, can pick your fights better, and thus are more likely to have enough units surviving to compete table quarters.

Its not like I'm encouraging a dwarf lord with MRoKingship, Rune of brotherhood, a BSB with Rune of brotherhood in an uber unit of miners and min core missile troops :P

Bob the Butcher
11-10-2008, 18:13
It could also be fun to have a more experienced player use a smaller force, than a newer player for example.

Faustburg
11-10-2008, 18:16
Like...ehh... the scenario style game that has been suggested above, maybe?:rolleyes:

Bob the Butcher
12-10-2008, 00:14
Yes exactly

waiyuren
12-10-2008, 09:42
I like the idea, it would take a fair amount of skill to pull off and there would be no help if something went wrong!

Pity about the troll though.

Nevermind, some people just need to take a breather, step back and remember that it is just a game.