PDA

View Full Version : Are VC so Broken?



Caine Mangakahia
21-10-2008, 03:52
Having seen VC being flamed alongside Demons as being "broken" (although not quite so much as Demons and deservedly so) and as an old VC player myself I was wondering what makes them so daunting to other gamers out there.
IMO:VC combat seems to be rather muted compared to 6th edition as is the survivability of its all-important characters.
Sure I'll admit VC can have a pretty overwhelming magic phase, but you pay through the nose for it and it only just seems to make up for the general crappyness/pricyness of its troops.
Personally, I tend to lose as many battles as I win against such foes as HE DE and especially DoC, all of whom can have some fairly solid army builds.
So am I just a lousy General, do I need to roll better dice?

Voodoo Boyz
21-10-2008, 04:01
Having seen VC being flamed alongside Demons as being "broken" (although not quite so much as Demons and deservedly so) and as an old VC player myself I was wondering what makes them so daunting to other gamers out there.
IMO:VC combat seems to be rather muted compared to 6th edition as is the survivability of its all-important characters.
Sure I'll admit VC can have a pretty overwhelming magic phase, but you pay through the nose for it and it only just seems to make up for the general crappyness/pricyness of its troops.
Personally, I tend to lose as many battles as I win against such foes as HE DE and especially DoC, all of whom can have some fairly solid army builds.
So am I just a lousy General, do I need to roll better dice?

That you even have to ask is silly.

"You pay through the nose" for that overwhelming magic phase?

Good thing that that Overwhelming magic phase means you can raise up all the troops you didn't spend points on to compensate for having over 1k points in characters.

That's one half of what makes VC so stupidly powerful. The other half is the fact that you can re-cast movement spells multiple times through the same caster and others, not to mention a bound item.

Being able to raise up an army you didn't pay points for, and can then "keep raising them" just makes the army ridiculous.

Don't let DoC fool you, VC is still plenty stupid broken. In fact if I had to pick out an army I'd least like to face if I were using Daemons, it'd be Vamps.

theunwantedbeing
21-10-2008, 04:02
More troops = better list.
More character's = worse list.

Lots of powerdice, recasting the same spells over and over...powerful character's in combat even when not tooled up at all.
Not to mention all the hideously nasty combinations of items/powers you can make.

The main issue is that you can take slightly small units to save on points (your troops arent exactly expensive to begin with, sub 10pts is NOT in the least bit expensive for effectively unbreakable fear causing troops) and then raise more onto those units for free to get them to however big they need to be.

So you dont need to spend 500pts on a huge unit, you can spend 150pts on the unit and say 10 powerdice making it as big as a 500pt unit. But the unit is still only worth 150pts to the enemy.

Vamp lord, skeletal steed
Dreadlance, Red fury, Night Shroud, Walking death(+1 combat res power)

He's sick.....

They are of course beatable, you generally need to hit a vampire along with some zombies and murder all the zombies and the poor vamp tends to crumble rather quickly regardless of how many of your men he kills.
Killy troops have a field day with undead...things like swordmasters are a complete and utter pain for undead, same for chosen knights,flesh hounds...etc etc.
Anything that's not scared of you is hugely problematic too.

It's worth posting a list and the stuff you tend to face so we can see what the problem might be.

Feefait
21-10-2008, 04:18
well you just listed the 3 newest armies, and the current favorites for "powercreep" comlaints. Personally I think if you gear for VC they are fine. If you get suprosed you are playing them they kill you. It's just in order ot beat them you generally have to do something different then any other army. sure thats nasty, but its dealable and I think the main reason people get upset si it takes them out of their comfort zone and patterns.

Lazarus15
21-10-2008, 04:32
VC aren't broken, they like daemons, require a different mentality and strategy to play. A buddy and I had an awesome themed game ( I play Tzeentch and Slaanesh Daemons he had a magic heavy--no characters list) at 3400 points. We had a good time, but I screwed up by not focusing on his units and killing them outright. Once you do that, he cannot use Nehek on them. Do that and focus on killing the vamp.

orks2134
21-10-2008, 05:04
well you just listed the 3 newest armies, and the current favorites for "powercreep" comlaints.

And that's all the complaining is ... "new army fever"...

Next month the VCs will drop off the radar, and those rascally Chaos Mortals will be "teh winnzor!".

Just wait until those broken down Lizards come out!

Lord Dan
21-10-2008, 05:18
Next month the VCs will drop off the radar, and those rascally Chaos Mortals will be "teh winnzor!".

iherd w.o,.chaos R gona b BROKD!!!11 PPL Who play chos warr. r cheetn

I just couldn't do it anymore. Seriously, though, I think it's a valid point. Already I've found people care much less about VC, even though they're still placing quite high in GTs and tournaments. It apparently has less to do with actual breakability than it does percieved breakability (which seems to be primarily influenced by how new the army is).

SolarHammer
21-10-2008, 05:22
I still think Vampires are the second best list in the game, and Daemons are the best.

Dark Elves are 3rd or so, and Warriors of Chaos are right near the bottom.

Nicha11
21-10-2008, 05:52
in my opinion some armies are more powerful then others.
And VC are definetely one of the most powerful.

Kalec
21-10-2008, 05:52
I think Warriors are higher up then that, but you are correct about the top 3.

Ward.
21-10-2008, 07:24
Not quite, but they are definitely still right up there with the most powerful books. The fact that so many people have adapted their gameplay (although they still play a lot like the old VC) and they are still considered over powered should prove this point pretty well.


EDIT: I'd also put WOC at about lizardmen levels.

Vile Druchii
21-10-2008, 07:43
I've been collecting Vamps for a long time now and, even though the characters have been toned down a little, I think this current army is more powerful than ever, for the reasons people have stated. A cunning general can do such things as raising up so many troops that the enemy simply can't deal with them! For a short time, one of my favourite builds was a Lord with Master of the Black Arts (for the 2 power dice) Dark Acolyte (mostly for the extra dice!) and Lord of the Dead, whilst equipping her with The Skull Staff and Crown of the Damned.

This meant that I could cast Invocation of Nehek on a unit of Skeletons on a 2+ a possible 8 times each magic phase! (Two standard + 4 for her level + 2 from Master) Which could boost the unit up by a potential 48 Skellies per turn. Which, if you do that maths, is 384 points (I really never saw a point in buying them with spears!)

Obviously, this sort of thing is ridiculous by anyone's standards, so I quickly dropped that build so that people wouldn't run away as soon as they saw me coming into the room with my two big miniature carry cases! (Mostly to hold the insane amount of skellies I had!) The only drawback of it was the exceptionally rare cases when I failed a stupidity test, but that barely ever happened and, because I surrounded her unit of skeletons with other units of skeletons, it never led to any problems.





They are of course beatable, you generally need to hit a vampire along with some zombies and murder all the zombies and the poor vamp tends to crumble rather quickly regardless of how many of your men he kills.



Not sure what you mean here as a character can't go in a unit of zombies. If you mean hitting a character and a unit of zombies at the same time, then what's a vamp doing running around outside a unit? (Unless they've got the helm of commandment on, of course! But then, I'd keep it behind the zombies, not aligned with them.) If you meant hitting zombies alongside a unit containing the vamp, then the unit can crumble before the vamp.

Gorbad Ironclaw
21-10-2008, 07:44
Overpowered is a relative concept. If GW have decided that the power level should be pitched more like VC, DoC, DE (and it seems they have) then they are not overpowered at all, it's just the older books that are underpowered.

And to be honest, I'd rather see that style of books, where almost everything is actually a good valid choice to use than the often times more hit and miss of previous books. Although once again it seems like VC have the edge there, even over the other two latest books.

Urgat
21-10-2008, 08:16
In fact if I had to pick out an army I'd least like to face if I were using Daemons, it'd be Vamps.

Really? I'd thought the daemons would be the best army to face daemons, all with the ignore fear, the magic attacks on all the minis, the killiness, the ubber characters and the nuke powered magic phase?
You see any other army more fit for the job?

Caine Mangakahia
21-10-2008, 08:25
A couple of interesting points made, the main point seems to be the combination of "spamming" of invocation and Vanhels.
Personally, my argument is that the undead magic phase is something of a two edged sword, if you have an average magic phase (and we all do) you're not so overpowered after all. Even single dice spamming with a summoning bloodline (even with the Skull Staff) is likely to fail 1/3 of the time (my pesonal average is a 2/3 failure rate).
A clever opponent can focus his magic defence, you don't really need to dispel every spell, just the ones you really dont want,a single wizard with a dispel scroll can block that vital vanhels charge. Of course if your opponant has managed to get vanhels on every single character and manages to cast every single spell then the dice are just rolling that way, they could just as easily roll that well in the combat phase.
As for getting troops you don't pay for, I'd argue that part of those points are part of the initial cost (Who'd pay 4 points for a WS 1 T&Str 2 Zombie without being able to summon them, compare the price of Bloodknights compared to Chaos Knights). Spending points on being able to summon them means those units will start out pretty small.
VC don't have the combat potential of old ( which is probably why we are seeing the uber caster builds these days, which I'm not fond of, but it works better than the combat alternative ) and while admittedly powerful in their own right other armies can feild better combat models that are just as good, if not better at a smaller price.
Also the bigger the character, the more of a point sink, lets not forget the "crumbling" rule dead character=dead army, especially with the new low Ld throughout the army
Of course, I am by no means saying that VC are a bad army, they are a very good army. I especially like a lot of the synergy in it. But I don't consider them Broken, there are more holes in the army than you can poke a stick at (and my opponents do)

WLBjork
21-10-2008, 08:37
This meant that I could cast Invocation of Nehek on a unit of Skeletons on a 2+ a possible 8 times each magic phase! (Two standard + 4 for her level + 2 from Master) Which could boost the unit up by a potential 48 Skellies per turn. Which, if you do that maths, is 384 points (I really never saw a point in buying them with spears!)

Is it no wonder people hate VC when you don't follow the rules? ;)


No matter how powerful a Wizard might be, he cannot cast a spell where the total of the dice result is less than 3. A result of 1 or 2 is always considered a failure, despite any modifiers. This is true regardless of any bonuses that might apply in any form, whether from a magic item or some other source.

Vile Druchii
21-10-2008, 08:57
Ahhh...fair enough. Totally missed that one! I suppose the problem is that when you go through so many versions of the rules, and so little changes from one rule book to the next, you tend to miss little things like this. Still, casting on a 3+ would still be awesome, and I'd have freed up 65 points on that staff!

Rookie1986
21-10-2008, 09:15
Personally I think if you gear for VC they are fine.

To true, i battled my brothers VC yesterday (our first battle in a long long time) and my WoC ripped them apart, my fast cavalry and hounds tied up the units they needed to until my warriors were able to get in range for a charge in their flank, my heros geared towards magic and with items like the beguiling gem my sorcerers only took one wound between them all battle and with some lucky dice rolls i pushed out Ecstatic Seizures on his two large zombie regiments reducing them to dust!

I wouldn't say all armies are equal but if you know your codex inside out and have an idea who you are going to battle then you can tailor to beat just about anyone, but it always comes down to the luck of the dice and thats why even the strongest army can fail,

/Rookie

W0lf
21-10-2008, 11:32
If its all 'new army book sydrome' then why are De being complained about far far less then daemons. Why are daemons taking over half the top 10 spots in tournys and why are warrors of chaos already wrriten of as mid/lower tier before release by people who have read/have the book?

Daemons and vampires are both broken army books. Fear/Immune to psy/'Unbreakable' over a whole army leads to issues.

Lordsaradain
21-10-2008, 11:48
Having seen VC being flamed alongside Demons as being "broken" (although not quite so much as Demons and deservedly so)

Daemons and VC aren't broken, they are just the two most powerful armies atm.

So what if VC are slightly less powerfull than daemons, it doesn't change the fact that they are much more powerful than alot of the other armybooks like Empire, O&G, TK, OK, Skaven, LM etc.

The powercreep and the fact that all armybooks arn't on the same scale in power is ther reason why people scream "broken".

EvC
21-10-2008, 12:12
If its all 'new army book sydrome' then why are De being complained about far far less then daemons. Why are daemons taking over half the top 10 spots in tournys and why are warrors of chaos already wrriten of as mid/lower tier before release by people who have read/have the book?

The funny thing is the people who are saying that Warriors aren't very good are now being decried as being whiners by the same people who were telling them off for saying Daemons were too powerful! I guess we should just accept that everything is absolutely perfect how it is :D

Kahadras
21-10-2008, 12:24
VC broken? Not really IMHO. They're a hard army certainly but I agree that people always complain about the latest armies. How much complaining was there back when the High Elf book was released? Nowadays I hardly ever hear people complaining about how 'broken' they are.

Kahadras

kramplarv
21-10-2008, 12:40
VC aint broken. Some builds of the VCarmy may be broken if the player wants them to be...

If an army is Broken, ALL ARMYLISTS CREATED BY IT, NO MATTER BUILD MUST BE A WINNERLIST. If that statement is true, the army is broken. But since VC are beatable and by some armies it's not even har dto beat them, like DoC, HE;DE;WE probably WoC will kick vampirebutt.

VC aint broken. They are hard as nails that's true. But not broken. or cheesy. The only army that might be broken are the DoC. But i do not think they are.

personally the VC is more balanced than ever, there are much more differents builds with it which are viable, that is what makes the army so difficult to master, as instead of VC list 1A we have VC list from 1A to 5F. In last edition VC hade 1A builds. LIke Empire used to have.

theunwantedbeing
21-10-2008, 12:46
Not sure what you mean here as a character can't go in a unit of zombies. If you mean hitting a character and a unit of zombies at the same time, then what's a vamp doing running around outside a unit? (Unless they've got the helm of commandment on, of course! But then, I'd keep it behind the zombies, not aligned with them.) If you meant hitting zombies alongside a unit containing the vamp, then the unit can crumble before the vamp.

*Facepalm*
I knew I should have put skeletons instead of zombies. Somebody will always point out that character's cannot go in zombie units.......
*sigh*

I mean you get them in the same combat (multiple units can be in the same combat aterall) and you slaughter the units he is with.
They dont have to be zombies...they can be skeletons, ghouls or heck..even blood knights, they just need to be weaker than the vampire is.
Then you flatten the unit, and the vampire in the unit dies to combat res.

Do no point out that a BsB with the drakenhof banner will most likely nullify this tactic as you obviously single him out and kill him before attempting this tactic.

Ixquic
21-10-2008, 12:52
VC aren't broken like demons since they at least tried to put in some sort of balance: army crumbles when general dies, can't march without proximity to characters, expensive crappy troops to offset raising, no good ward saves without some sort of handicap, special characters are mostly mediocre, expensive bloodline abilities to even get mundane equipment or magic levels and almost no decent magic weapons.

The problem is they didn't do a good enough job since the really great stuff like the Master or +2 power dice abilities are a no brainer when combined with unlimited casting on any unit in the game. Overall I would say the list is fairly balanced although clearly top tear. The problem comes into play when people go hog wild, get 13+ power dice and raise so many extra models that the opponent can't deal with it (which IS broken). This kind of lack of foresight into how people are going to actually use the army is getting more and more prevalent, what with 2+/2+/4+ Dreadlords sitting in InP ASF Stubborn units with two attacks per model flanked by two Hydras. GW needs to have power gamers break their army books during testing so these sorts of strategies can be mitigated and make a more balanced game for every army.


The funny thing is the people who are saying that Warriors aren't very good are now being decried as being whiners by the same people who were telling them off for saying Daemons were too powerful! I guess we should just accept that everything is absolutely perfect how it is :D

I'm honestly curious what the new argument will be once WoC gets released and Demons continue to dominate.

Mireadur
21-10-2008, 13:45
I actually have HUGE troubles to beat VC with my HE. Neither me or my friend make cheesy lists, but ive come to the conclusion i need to make really specific lists to face VC and can win only if he plays bad or im able to fool him during the battle.

Ethereal units are nasty agaisnt my low numbered troops which rarely go over +3CR, their troops are just extraordinarly cheap for their abilities and have several resilient bitches to always keep flanks under control.

Indeed the solution of tailoring up lists, wizards just to make sure drain magic is there and the abuse of ''the amulet of light'' are very poor resources imho.

EvC
21-10-2008, 14:18
Using the Amulet of Light is not abuse. It's just a bit sad, since it doesn't work against its intended target any more (Daemons)!

Vile Druchii
21-10-2008, 16:58
*Facepalm*
I knew I should have put skeletons instead of zombies. Somebody will always point out that character's cannot go in zombie units.......
*sigh*

I mean you get them in the same combat (multiple units can be in the same combat aterall) and you slaughter the units he is with.
They dont have to be zombies...they can be skeletons, ghouls or heck..even blood knights, they just need to be weaker than the vampire is.
Then you flatten the unit, and the vampire in the unit dies to combat res.

Do no point out that a BsB with the drakenhof banner will most likely nullify this tactic as you obviously single him out and kill him before attempting this tactic.

Well, even if a character could go in a zombie unit, I certainly wouldn't put them in there for this very reason. Most units can rack up a pretty decent combat res when fighting zombies, and eventually they'll all crumble, along with the vampire. However, I think you're underestimating Skeletons and Ghouls a bit. Sure, Skeletons aren't brilliant in combat, but they're fairly cheap, easily raised and benefit from the hand weapon and shield rule, so have a fairly decent save against most infantry (unless you pay 1 point per model to ruin the unit!)
Ghouls have toughness 4, so would be harder for most standard infantry units to hurt, plus with two poisoned attacks, they aren't terribly shabby in dealing out a little pain too.
But this is assuming that the vampire player is going to put his/her lord in a core unit, something which a lot of armies wouldn't even think about doing. Grave Guard will give pretty much any enemy a hard time. Toughness 4, a 3+ AS and Killing Blow is enough to ruin anyone's day. Well...not a Bloodthirster...but they're a whole different kettle of fish. Hmmm...a fish Daemon...

Attacking the unit is probably the most reliable tactic for killing a vampire, but because of their summoning, it's not the most efficient. It really depends what unit your attacking with, where the vampire is placed in the unit, if you've managed to open up a flank to attack, whether you can beat them in one or two rounds without being pinned in place whilst another unit flanks you and if there's any supporting characters around that unit. The amount of times my WS6 Skeletons have took a flank charge and laughed about the results is rather astounding.
I think that's where vamp's strengths lie; in the fact that most of their units excel in protracted combat. There's very few units, let alone core units, in the game that could shrug off a charge from heavy cavalry, and be up and running at full strength the turn after. I think it's this reason that people complain about vampires, and I can absolutely understand that.

Conspyre
21-10-2008, 17:28
One of the biggest difficulties I have against them also applies to Daemons and to a lesser extent Tomb Kings. Dealing with that much fear at once requires planning specifically for that opponent, which becomes problematic when trying to build "all-comers" style lists. The Dwarfs at least have access to multiple fear-mitigating items, but most other forces have a single banner that makes a unit immune to fear, and perhaps a unit or two with that ability naturally. Without a serious commitment to avoiding fear, most "elite" races (dwarfs, HE, Bretonnia) have to pray that they never have a bad round of rolling, or a single leadership check can break units costing many times more than the regiment they're fighting against.

My most common opponent tends to run all his eggs in one basket. BSB and General in the middle of a great big block of Grave Guard. I've never seen a better unit for VP denial, since it's difficult to kill the vampires in the front, and unless the whole GG squad gets eliminated simultaneously, they'll be at least above half strength on the next turn, if not entirely restored.

VC Doke
21-10-2008, 17:30
This meant that I could cast Invocation of Nehek on a unit of Skeletons on a 2+ a possible 8 times each magic phase! (Two standard + 4 for her level + 2 from Master) Which could boost the unit up by a potential 48 Skellies per turn. Which, if you do that maths, is 384 points (I really never saw a point in buying them with spears!)


You can't a spell unless you roll a natural 3+. Its in the magic rules. No matter what you have for casting bonuses you need a 3!

VC are powerful and probably the best list out there. However, other armies will catch up with new codexes. Just give them time. :D

Emeraldw
21-10-2008, 19:04
VC are powerful and probably the best list out there. However, other armies will catch up with new codexes. Just give them time. :D

I don't think so really. Even Dark Elves aren't on this level. My old Daemons steamrolled the new dark elves and he was rolling really really well. I wasn't even using a broken list, I was just being normal and I flattened him.

Daemons and Vampire Counts are really strong. Vampire counts break rules about the magic phase (largely vanhel's dance macabe imo) and the daemons just have flat high power.

I am selling my Daemons and getting Vampire counts, but now I'm wondering if I am moving from one broken army to another. Daemons are great all around but I thought with VC's I could just not use those broken builds. However, I plan to do some of the things mentioned in this thread. A 6 PD lord with +1 to cast, starting size 15 units and even if I play magic light, I will still need plenty of PD.

I DON'T want a broken army. Thats no fun. Now I'm lost as to what to do. I was hoping to get a different army to my Wood Elves and Vampires seemed like a good choice to face my Friends new found Warriors. Maybe I should switch to High Elves rather than have my friend have to fight his way through endless hordes. But then again, if I don't abuse my magic phase, maybe it won't be so bad.

Mireadur
21-10-2008, 19:21
Fear actually isnt the issue imho. It has always existed, its nothing new having to play agaisnt it. The problem is when you have to face those fear causing armies and you realize they are not the pansies they should be anymore while their units point cost keep going down and down.

I personally consider the VC book a master job, a personal success from Gav just darkened because the rest of the armybooks arent on par. He made every single unit useful and added a few new ones, while putting a very special care on each one of them.
Necromancy was also an almost useless lore until this edition. It was usually nearly impossible to get off van hells dances or raising models until 7th edition, but he went too far with the allowance.

Of course, magical items and the specific magic lores keep being his weak points: While its nice from him that he adds so many magical items in their army books (in opposition to other developers) he has this nasty tendance of creating deadly items and combos, worst part is that he doesnt even notice what kind of combinations hes coming up with (at least that's whats he's implied on an interview).

About the necromancy i feel that if he wouldnt have allowed to cast a spell more than once per turn on the same unit (while still allowing the casters to cast the same spell several times in the same phase) all problems would have been solved with VC magic:

People can deal with watching a dark knight reraising per turn, but watching how the 4 guys you have hazardously killed come back with just 4 PD spent is way over the top.

You realize then, that VC players arent ''paying for the nose'' for their magic, but rather they get an ultra cheap deal with it.

eagletsi1
21-10-2008, 19:32
My take:

Spamming the magic phase is just too easy. An maybe your group plays with people that limit themselves, but mine doesn't.

Basically, there is no penalty to starting with small units of skeletons. Because one the first turn you can summon so many back and build every unit to a fight rank of at least 20

Also allowing the casting of a Magic Movement spell multiple times is just crazy.

Two Fixes were needed both of which were suggested by our play test group.

But ignored:

1) Add +2 to the casting value each time Invoc the spell has already been successfully cast by a vampire (not necro)
2) Minimum unit size should be 20-25 at the start of the game
or If unit size goes below 15 models then the unit starts to crumble lose D3 models at the end of each turn while below 15 models. (Magic Instability)

3) Only allow Necros to cast the Van Hels multiple times.

FigureFour
21-10-2008, 19:43
I don't think that Vampire Counts are broken, but I think that being broken is a matter of perspective.
There's no denying that they are a powerfull army, but they aren't the only powerful army or even the most powerful army. They have some builds that do very well against certain other armies, and a few that do well against all armies.

However, what makes something "broken" is when it's so powerful/unbalanced/unusual/whatever that they spoil the fun of the game for it's players.

I enjoy playing with and against Vampires and think they have a unique style, I think that an army of the dead SHOULD be scarily powerful and I love the achilles heal that killing the general provides. However, if you HATE the vampires and don't want to play them, then yeah, for you they're broken.

Malorian
21-10-2008, 19:55
Things to keep in mind when fighting vampires:

-Kill the vampires: This one is obvious and we all know it and yet I rarely see people trying to do it in battle reports. In your all comers list start having a character killer just like you always take dispel scrolls. It's not like other armies won't have characters you want to kill. These characters killer are usually also perfect at taking care of wraiths and spirit hosts.

-Target hammer units. Don't send those warmachines and missile fire at the troops, send it at the support units and take them out. You can deal with the troops in combat.

-Engage EVERYTHING. One of the fastest ways that undead units are killed is through crumbling. Remember that once a unit is raised it must go through two combats before it can be helped again. If you are fighting several units at once the vampires can't summon fast enough to keep up. I'd have to say this is the biggest mistake made when playing against vampires as most people try to just pick on one unit at a time allowing the vampires to put all their energy into that one unit. Another tip with this is try to engage several units into one combat. If you normally would have two combats in which you would win by three in each the vampires lose 6 models to crumbling. However if that was put togther into one combat so that they lose by 6 then each unit involved crumbles and they lose 12 models.

-Be picky about what you dispel. Don't just go trying to dispel everything. Carefully let less critical ones go through and then save up for the inportant ones. And for god sake start taking the staff of sorcery. It will help you against all armies and will REALLY help you against vampires. For one it's harder to make a unit of zombies than it is to raise them, so aim to stop raise dead rather than IoN on them after. This sucks more dice out of the pool that can't be used for spamming.

-Finally don't give up. Things can turn against vampires very quickly and so even if it looks hopeless a bad miscast, lucky cannon, or good charge later and the vampires are on the ropes.

Mireadur
21-10-2008, 21:24
Those are indeed the points to follow if you expect to win agaisnt the VC, the point of the discussion however, is that they start off with the upper hand.

Basically it is easier for them to counter your counter-measures than for you to accomplishing them. its just this what makes the matches a little bit unbalanced, but i agree certain armies suffer more than others (this is obvious anyway).

Malorian
21-10-2008, 21:35
Just the fact that they won't ever have to worry about a bad panic lossing them the game gives them an advantage but I wouldn't put them leaps and bounds ahead of other armies either.

Any army with lower leadership will have a harder time, but I still think all armies have a good chance of winning (or at least getting a tie) against vampires.

Lord Dan
21-10-2008, 22:10
I don't think so really. Even Dark Elves aren't on this level. My old Daemons steamrolled the new dark elves and he was rolling really really well. I wasn't even using a broken list, I was just being normal and I flattened him.

Congratulations. You've proved that either you're a brilliant tactician, or your opponent was entirely incompetent. Smashing another army aside rarely has anything to do with relative power level, as we see in this case.

Malorian
21-10-2008, 22:13
We find the same thing with bretonnians. They either smash their opponent or they get crushed. Very rarely do you see brets getting a tie.

WEEVILWOOD
21-10-2008, 22:29
Sorry everyone says vc are broken, but look at what they were in the previous edition, slow, more expensive, less flexible, and very tricky to get right <2000pts, with limited vampires and the reliance on necros, Now the vampires are at "full power" its al moans and groans, and the ability to raise new units has gone from cast on 3+ to cast on 5+, and now new skeleton units have gone the way of the dragons. Now when you look at vc armies now yes the army grows and adds xxx amount of points but at the end of the day how hard is it to kill 5 zombies?

Bob the Butcher
21-10-2008, 22:37
I don't think Vamps are particularly broken, certainly against my Ogre Army but this is Fear causing Army itself which helps.

However I think there are some nasty match winning Vampire builds which I have come across lately.

orks2134
21-10-2008, 22:42
If its all 'new army book sydrome' then why are De being complained about far far less then daemons. Why are daemons taking over half the top 10 spots in tournys and why are warrors of chaos already wrriten of as mid/lower tier before release by people who have read/have the book?

Daemons and vampires are both broken army books. Fear/Immune to psy/'Unbreakable' over a whole army leads to issues.

What is a "tier" that you speak of?

I looked and looked and looked, and nowhere in the rulebook could I find "Army Tiers".

Anyone remember when we played for fun? Anyone?

Tokamak
21-10-2008, 22:49
The army has just way too many no-brainers for it to be tactically interesting, and with that I don't mean the zombies.

Badbones777
22-10-2008, 00:14
but at the end of the day how hard is it to kill 5 zombies?

Not very hard at all. But the nub of the issue is more so down to the fact that they only cost 4 points, and can be brought back (or even created when they didn't exist in the first place!) Its not a question of how easy they are to kill-would that it were!-its more so the fact that all you need do is ensure there are as many in a given unit as the number of attacks the best enemy regiment has x2+1 (to survive even the worst bout of crumble). And between their low cost and VC magic, this is more than possible.

To put it another way, its the equivalent of me saying to my opponent my skavenslaves are even worse and cost twice as much.......oh but by the way theyre not tied to the mainstay rule, can be brought back from the dead, iwll never run away and in fact I can add more of them to the table almost at will if I make character choices X, Y and Z.

Emeraldw
22-10-2008, 00:20
Congratulations. You've proved that either you're a brilliant tactician, or your opponent was entirely incompetent. Smashing another army aside rarely has anything to do with relative power level, as we see in this case.

Neither. My friend while not a fantasy player for as long, has been a superb 40k general for a very long time even placing 3rd or so at the Local Ard boyz. I wouldn't call him incompetent. Also, by "old" I meant the army I'm selling, I used the new daemons rules.

But when I say I steamrolled, I mean it all over. My greater daemon could flank any unit and run it over. Phantasmagoria alone caused him so much grief failing leadership tests. Even his tooled up assassin was nothing but a joke against my units. The only thing in his army that was annoying was a tooled up dark lord with all 3 saves and a str 5 weapon. but the rest of the army was nothing more than a road bump.

Daemons really are very strong. Which was my point in the first section. I have played it more but this was against the only "updated" army.

Caine Mangakahia
22-10-2008, 01:03
Things to keep in mind when fighting vampires:

-Kill the vampires: This one is obvious and we all know it and yet I rarely see people trying to do it in battle reports. In your all comers list start having a character killer just like you always take dispel scrolls. It's not like other armies won't have characters you want to kill. These characters killer are usually also perfect at taking care of wraiths and spirit hosts.

-Target hammer units. Don't send those warmachines and missile fire at the troops, send it at the support units and take them out. You can deal with the troops in combat.

-Engage EVERYTHING. One of the fastest ways that undead units are killed is through crumbling. Remember that once a unit is raised it must go through two combats before it can be helped again. If you are fighting several units at once the vampires can't summon fast enough to keep up. I'd have to say this is the biggest mistake made when playing against vampires as most people try to just pick on one unit at a time allowing the vampires to put all their energy into that one unit. Another tip with this is try to engage several units into one combat. If you normally would have two combats in which you would win by three in each the vampires lose 6 models to crumbling. However if that was put togther into one combat so that they lose by 6 then each unit involved crumbles and they lose 12 models.

-Be picky about what you dispel. Don't just go trying to dispel everything. Carefully let less critical ones go through and then save up for the inportant ones. And for god sake start taking the staff of sorcery. It will help you against all armies and will REALLY help you against vampires. For one it's harder to make a unit of zombies than it is to raise them, so aim to stop raise dead rather than IoN on them after. This sucks more dice out of the pool that can't be used for spamming.

-Finally don't give up. Things can turn against vampires very quickly and so even if it looks hopeless a bad miscast, lucky cannon, or good charge later and the vampires are on the ropes.


Nice post :) All the right answers and almost precisely the reasons I wonder why people complain about VC when my regular oppoants tend to laugh at them.
I will concede that the VC magic phase is no fun for almost everyone involved, I'll admit that even I heave the occasional sympathetic sigh when I pull out my power dice, but more oftn than not, I'll be muttering a prayer for a kind roll to recover from whatever drubbing I've just received in the combat/shooting/opposing magic phase.

Voodoo Boyz
22-10-2008, 02:15
I love how people talk about how "easy it is to kill zombies".

People don't "buy" zombies. You never spend points on them, or you rarely do only when you're not maxing out to a powerful build on purpose and need to fill a core requirement and don't want to have to run a summoning army.

The only core troops that are bought are minimum units of Skeletons or Ghouls, whichever you prefer, which are rather hard to kill, especially if it's a summoning army where your opponent has geared to make them hard to kill by investing in the Helm, a Drakhenoff banner (for Graveguard, who are hard to kill anyway).

All Zombies do is get summoned at odd angles to redirect units and muck-up charges. Or you can summon, raise them up, and then dance them into things.

And I stand by the fact that I would find VC to be one of the hardest armies to face if I was running Daemons. The only Daemon army I can see that REALLY can stand up to a tooled summoning VC list is a very heinous Khorne + Tzeench army that combines a Bloodthirster with 12PD and 8DD. That or the good old Slaanesh LD modification army that gets as many heralds on the table that can pump out the Stupidity spell, which can combine with the Masque + -2 LD Banner to make Vamps or key units stupid once the spell gets through.

Dexter099
22-10-2008, 02:48
Haven't played against the new VC yet, though I played one game against the demons with the warriors fo chaos get you by list. And I got annihilated. I killed half of a unit of seekers and that was it. Once my chaos knight unit bit it, because I didn't know his keeper of secrets could challenge my chaos lord, who got killed by failing three 5+ 6+ 4+ saves out of 4 wounds which broke my chaos knights. The keeper then flanked my units and my warriors of chaos were nothing compared to his bloodletters, they all got owned and I killed maybe 5 bloodletters and 3 daemonettes. I couldn't pass a break test thanks to his banner that gave me -2 Ld.

I'm not saying demons are cheesy, I'm saying that from my experience, they are very powerful if you let your battleline slip a little bit and the greater demons get through. Then you're screwed.

FigureFour
22-10-2008, 02:53
That or the good old Slaanesh LD modification army that gets as many heralds on the table that can pump out the Stupidity spell, which can combine with the Masque + -2 LD Banner to make Vamps or key units stupid once the spell gets through.

Slicing Shards of Slaanesh is just as deadly (or more) as causing stupidity, if it goes off. Any unit without a Vampire Lord in it is testing on somewhere between 0 and 5 to stop taking hits.

Edit: I'm an idiot. Of course the Lord will be the general as well . . .

GavT
22-10-2008, 11:01
Here's my take on the perception of the Vampire Counts army. Pretty much every army has builds that focus on a min/ max approach, whether it uses a gunline, magic-heavy, the hitting power of Bretonnian lances or whatever. I don't think that the 'best' VC list is any better than the 'best' list from other sources.

However, in terms of perception the 'broken' versions of Vampire Counts armies look less obviously skewed on the tabletop top than, say, two Steam Tanks and a War Altar or some of the excessive Dwarf anvil builds or the double Treeman line-up. It used to be the case that 'broken' accusations usually went hand-in-hand with an army build that seemed uncharacteristic of the race in some fashion. This is the idea that 'broken' was diametrically opposed to 'fluffy' (miaow - splat! :evilgrin:). With the Vampires, amongst some other armies traditonally seen as more 'broken', the most powerful builds are emergent from the main army dynamics - endless hordes of shambling troops, Fear-causing, backed by some nasty but expensive characters and specialist units.

So, I wouldn't say that VC are any more or less powerful at the cutting edge than other armies, but that players feel less dirty using such an army because it exploits the classic characteristics of the race. This in turn means that there's an assumption that this power level is somehow inherent in all army builds of VC, while this isn't actually the case.

I also think that there is less of a power gap between this 'optimal' VC composition and other army selection themes, so the power/ fluffy (miaow - splat!) divide is less pronounced.

Cheers,

GAV

W0lf
22-10-2008, 11:08
Everytime ive seen vampires vs daemons the daemons have eaten the vampire alive.

Heralds eat vampire heros for breakfast. Vampire count usually count on winning combat by a little and using fear+outnumber to win. When a greater daemon is around vampires need to win combat by at least 3 to statistically kill 1 daemon model.

EvC
22-10-2008, 11:41
Vampire Heroes? Hell, some Heralds can destroy Vampire Lords- and not just casty Lords, but full-on killtacular Lords. Tzeentch Heralds can survive thanks to their 4+ ward and Khorne Heralds will just destroy.


The army has just way too many no-brainers for it to be tactically interesting, and with that I don't mean the zombies.

I disagree- as long as you don't take the no-brainers all the time, there's plenty of interesting match-ups to be had.

Cromenon
22-10-2008, 11:43
Things to keep in mind when fighting vampires:

-Kill the vampires: This one is obvious and we all know it and yet I rarely see people trying to do it in battle reports. In your all comers list start having a character killer just like you always take dispel scrolls. It's not like other armies won't have characters you want to kill. These characters killer are usually also perfect at taking care of wraiths and spirit hosts.

-Target hammer units. Don't send those warmachines and missile fire at the troops, send it at the support units and take them out. You can deal with the troops in combat.

-Engage EVERYTHING. One of the fastest ways that undead units are killed is through crumbling. Remember that once a unit is raised it must go through two combats before it can be helped again. If you are fighting several units at once the vampires can't summon fast enough to keep up. I'd have to say this is the biggest mistake made when playing against vampires as most people try to just pick on one unit at a time allowing the vampires to put all their energy into that one unit. Another tip with this is try to engage several units into one combat. If you normally would have two combats in which you would win by three in each the vampires lose 6 models to crumbling. However if that was put togther into one combat so that they lose by 6 then each unit involved crumbles and they lose 12 models.

-Be picky about what you dispel. Don't just go trying to dispel everything. Carefully let less critical ones go through and then save up for the inportant ones. And for god sake start taking the staff of sorcery. It will help you against all armies and will REALLY help you against vampires. For one it's harder to make a unit of zombies than it is to raise them, so aim to stop raise dead rather than IoN on them after. This sucks more dice out of the pool that can't be used for spamming.

-Finally don't give up. Things can turn against vampires very quickly and so even if it looks hopeless a bad miscast, lucky cannon, or good charge later and the vampires are on the ropes.

Finally some wise words are spoken.

Personally, I'm soooooo tired of all this "VC are teh brokenzzz!1!!" crap. Because as some of you have said, their armybook is, IMHO, one of the best GW has published recently. It is not flawless, ok (example: the complete lost of bloodlines which gave a lot of flavour to the game) but, if you think about it, it doesn't have stupid armywide rules (which seems to be a trend lately) and/or stupid overpowered units.

I know nasty combos can be done, for example the infamous Grave Guard Deathstar Unit. But even those can be "easily" beatable (kill the BSB) and costs a lot of points (125 pt+BSB+unit is a bit expensive). And at last, that's one unit in the table, moving slowly.

When I compare this book to the other ones since HE, I see it clear. ASF for HE? Why? Hatred for DE? Why? As I said, flavourless armywide rules. (note that I am not saying these rules are overpowered/broken at all!! What I said is that by giving everyone armywide rules, well, you tend to loose the character of those armies; for example, I agree with the HE army composition set, because I think it represents quite well what an elven army should be)

And 'bout daemons...

Everytime ive seen vampires vs daemons the daemons have eaten the vampire alive.

Heralds eat vampire heros for breakfast. Vampire count usually count on winning combat by a little and using fear+outnumber to win. When a greater daemon is around vampires need to win combat by at least 3 to statistically kill 1 daemon model.
Not much to add, really...

Edit:
Vampire Heroes? Hell, some Heralds can destroy Vampire Lords- and not just casty Lords, but full-on killtacular Lords.
That made me lol :D

neXus6
22-10-2008, 11:52
Maybe it's cause one of my regular opponents plays Vamps so I've got a fair bit of experiance against them but I'm another voice to add to the "no they are not broken" side.

I will admit they can be very forgiving, which means if you have two inexperianced players the one with Vamps is likely to win, but with two experianced generals (using balanced armies) things are a lot closer.

I would also say the same about daemons, they are forgiving but if you've got two experianced generals, with balanced armies, things are fine.

Problems only arise when you look at totally over-powered tourney lists and for some reason people seem to look at Vamp and Daemon tourney lists and compare them to balanced lists from other armies, rather than comparing them to other overpowered armies like the WarAlter, Dual SteamTank Gunline. :rolleyes:

Ixquic
22-10-2008, 12:02
Vampire Heroes? Hell, some Heralds can destroy Vampire Lords- and not just casty Lords, but full-on killtacular Lords. Tzeentch Heralds can survive thanks to their 4+ ward and Khorne Heralds will just destroy.



I disagree- as long as you don't take the no-brainers all the time, there's plenty of interesting match-ups to be had.

Hell, EMPIRE heroes can take on Vampire Lords in some cases. It never ceases to amaze me that more people don't just go straight for the Vampire Lord and start crumbling the army, especially when they know that he's not configured for murdering stuff (even then he's better at going after infantry than character duels). I think people still have the super Blood Dragon Lord with a great weapon from 6th edition stuck in their minds since 7th ed Vampires are much more squishy and rely on invocating themselves for survivability.

Jerrus
22-10-2008, 12:05
VC have an army wide rule, it's called "Undead".

EvC
22-10-2008, 12:35
Hell, EMPIRE heroes can take on Vampire Lords in some cases. It never ceases to amaze me that more people don't just go straight for the Vampire Lord and start crumbling the army, especially when they know that he's not configured for murdering stuff (even then he's better at going after infantry than character duels). I think people still have the super Blood Dragon Lord with a great weapon from 6th edition stuck in their minds since 7th ed Vampires are much more squishy and rely on invocating themselves for survivability.

Well, pretty contrived cases involving VHS ;) In my experience the weaker the Lord, the harder it is to get to him. I've never seen a Vampire Counts player foolish enough to put his caster Lord in harm's way*, and he is really easy to protect (e.g. massive Grave Guard unit in front of his own unit). It really is nowhere near as simple as kill the Vampire Lord- you're really doing an injustice to the opponents of VCs by assuming they're not trying to kill the Lord! I dunno, maybe players just aren't as good as the ones in my neck of the woods? I played against one VC army against a random Italian fella, very new to the army and inexperienced and even he knew to bunker up and keep the Lord away from all my Ogres. I did manage to get there and stomp him in the end but someone less familiar with the armies would have never managed it. Against an experienced player I dread to think what would have happened!

*exception is myself when I tried one to make a change. Never again :D

logan054
22-10-2008, 12:38
no evc thats not very true, i've seen a VC general put his vaster lord in position to get stomped by a unit before :p

W0lf
22-10-2008, 12:47
Yes but you cant really comment on a book in refrence to how bad players play it.

Ive seen people throw blood thirsters in front of multiple pieces of artilary then complain when they die. Ive also seen people throw dragons at the front of units such as Chosen, Grave guard and Plague bearers. Does this make blood thristers poor?

Its like complaining a tier system dosnt exist without considering how a army book could be maximised in potential. Sure vampires are fine if i take Vlad and 3 necromancers with blocks of 30 skeletons without any command.

I think this is why people confuse the idea of tiers. It is possible to write a daemons list that will do worse in a tournament then orcs and goblins.

Tier systems are not 'Tier 1 always beats tier 3'. A tier system merely reflects that with min-maxed tourny lists and player with equal gaming ability then high tier armies have a distinct advantage.

Its alot easier to get consistent wins with vampires and play them successfully then it is with beasts of chaos.

Another point is whilst wood elves are a top tier army i would argue they require the most skill and ability of a general to play successfully. From personal experience i would definatly say they are by far the most demanding army where generalship is concerned.

Ixquic
22-10-2008, 12:47
Well, pretty contrived cases involving VHS ;) In my experience the weaker the Lord, the harder it is to get to him. I've never seen a Vampire Counts player foolish enough to put his caster Lord in harm's way*, and he is really easy to protect (e.g. massive Grave Guard unit in front of his own unit). It really is nowhere near as simple as kill the Vampire Lord- you're really doing an injustice to the opponents of VCs by assuming they're not trying to kill the Lord! I dunno, maybe players just aren't as good as the ones in my neck of the woods? I played against one VC army against a random Italian fella, very new to the army and inexperienced and even he knew to bunker up and keep the Lord away from all my Ogres. I did manage to get there and stomp him in the end but someone less familiar with the armies would have never managed it. Against an experienced player I dread to think what would have happened!

*exception is myself when I tried one to make a change. Never again :D

Yeah it's often hard to get to the lord, but when the oppurtunity presents itself (which I've seen on many occations) I don't see it being taken very often. I just don't think many people realize how easy it is to kill Vampire heroes since logically they should be eating mortals for lunch, instead trying to avoid them entirely. I even run less powerful "fun" lists where my Lord is up front in a unit of skeletons and half to time people avoid the hell out of that unit when I know that they have stuff that could take my general down and cause me to start crumbling. Don't think this is me bitching about VC being "weak" or anything though.

W0lf
22-10-2008, 12:53
Tbh in all the games ive seen where the lords died the cumrbling hasnt been all that crippling.

Its usually turn 4+ that he dies and then the Ld 9 Wight in Grave guard, the vampiric vargulf and bloodknights and the units with vampires in pretty much shrug it off.

Ixquic
22-10-2008, 13:09
Tbh in all the games ive seen where the lords died the cumrbling hasnt been all that crippling.

Its usually turn 4+ that he dies and then the Ld 9 Wight in Grave guard, the vampiric vargulf and bloodknights and the units with vampires in pretty much shrug it off.

I literally roll box cars 50% of the time for wraiths, black knights, etc to crumble when my lord dies but I'm catastrophically unlucky to the point where people don't let me touch their dice. :(

zak
22-10-2008, 13:21
I found that initially my Vamps did very well. My opponents then found out that my Lord wasn't that difficult to kill and tragetted him with everything they had. It was amazing how many times he got cannon sniped. Oh, how I laughed everytime a champion in a forward unit was targetted and then through a obvious miscalculation of ranges my Lord got hit!! There was only so many times I could roll a dice before the dreaded 1 appeared! This then happened with the Warpcannon, Trebuchet etc.

The VC are not broken. Even the multi-dice caster types.

The DoC. Now that is an example of broken.

W0lf
22-10-2008, 16:12
Yer.

Vampires are deffinatly top tier and id argue they are a-little-to-good. The word broken is over-used. The only truley broken army in fantasy is Daemons.

EvC
22-10-2008, 17:44
no evc thats not very true, i've seen a VC general put his vaster lord in position to get stomped by a unit before :p

Note the * at the end of my post ;)


Yeah it's often hard to get to the lord, but when the oppurtunity presents itself (which I've seen on many occations) I don't see it being taken very often. I just don't think many people realize how easy it is to kill Vampire heroes since logically they should be eating mortals for lunch, instead trying to avoid them entirely. I even run less powerful "fun" lists where my Lord is up front in a unit of skeletons and half to time people avoid the hell out of that unit when I know that they have stuff that could take my general down and cause me to start crumbling. Don't think this is me bitching about VC being "weak" or anything though.

True, yeah! I remember posting on another forum about how easy Vampire heroes are actually quite easy to kill - even an Eagle or a Tiranoc chariot will have a fair chance of dispatching a typical Vampire in close combat - and several of the members rounded on me for suggesting such a stupid idea. Of course when one of the more prominent members posted a topic about how easy Vampires are to kill, because he managed it with a Chariot, he was widely applauded as a tactical genius. I'm sure there's a moral about most people being ******, there.

I also run a fighting Vampire Lord most the time, but my opponents usually know to be scared of him unless they have something that can charge, not be challenged out by a unit champion and dish out the damage, like a Hydra.


I literally roll box cars 50% of the time for wraiths, black knights, etc to crumble when my lord dies but I'm catastrophically unlucky to the point where people don't let me touch their dice. :(

I know the feeling! I had a game the other week where I was facing Daemons (Who I hadn't beat with VCs until that point), and I was kicking all kinds of ass. Then I let my Lady get killed with one turn to go, whoops. My opponent had been rolling badly for his instability tests that game, but once I picked up the dice and started rolling leadership tests there was no stopping me. I rolled 11-12 for 6 out of 8 tests (The only lower results being once for Zombies that were doomed either way, and once for Dire Wolves, an 8 when 5 remained, so I didn't need to roll as highly). As it was an objective game I could've still won without my Lady as I had scoring units on every objective... but after two turns of crumbling like that I only had 1 unit left. Fortunately, it was enough to get the win, but good god, my dice!

logan054
22-10-2008, 17:50
Note the * at the end of my post ;)

bet you added that in afterwards :P

EvC
22-10-2008, 18:01
Nope, I covered my bases from the start ;)

Mireadur
22-10-2008, 19:12
Here's my take on the perception of the Vampire Counts army. Pretty much every army has builds that focus on a min/ max approach, whether it uses a gunline, magic-heavy, the hitting power of Bretonnian lances or whatever. I don't think that the 'best' VC list is any better than the 'best' list from other sources.

However, in terms of perception the 'broken' versions of Vampire Counts armies look less obviously skewed on the tabletop top than, say, two Steam Tanks and a War Altar or some of the excessive Dwarf anvil builds or the double Treeman line-up. It used to be the case that 'broken' accusations usually went hand-in-hand with an army build that seemed uncharacteristic of the race in some fashion. This is the idea that 'broken' was diametrically opposed to 'fluffy' (miaow - splat! :evilgrin:). With the Vampires, amongst some other armies traditonally seen as more 'broken', the most powerful builds are emergent from the main army dynamics - endless hordes of shambling troops, Fear-causing, backed by some nasty but expensive characters and specialist units.

So, I wouldn't say that VC are any more or less powerful at the cutting edge than other armies, but that players feel less dirty using such an army because it exploits the classic characteristics of the race. This in turn means that there's an assumption that this power level is somehow inherent in all army builds of VC, while this isn't actually the case.

I also think that there is less of a power gap between this 'optimal' VC composition and other army selection themes, so the power/ fluffy (miaow - splat!) divide is less pronounced.

Cheers,

GAV

Im honestly surprised that you really dont/cant see certain features in VC (and DE) over the top when comparing them to the other 7th ed armies.

SolarHammer
22-10-2008, 19:14
@ Mireadur
I'll second that.

What the hell? :confused:

loveless
22-10-2008, 20:32
Ehh...I agree with Gav that every army has a min-max-style build that's more competively effective than other builds from that army (at least, that's what I took from the first part of his post).

As to whether or not VC are "over the top"...I've gotta go with "no." VC play like they should from what I've seen (for the most part, see later in this post) - but there are some item combinations that make the old "kill the Vampire, kill the army" (save the cheerleader, save the world?) method a bit harder (verging on nigh-impossible) to accomplish.

The Drakenhof/Banner of Blood Keep combo unit is a bit ridiculous. Multiple casts of Invocation of Nehek, not so much. Multiple casts of Van Hel's...well...that seemed perhaps a bit much. Giving multiple casts to just Invocation and Raise Dead would have sufficed. The Vampire Counts army should be about pulling up the endless horde, not rushing the endless horde into the enemy's face.

The Miasma of Deathly Vigour makes sense as well...with so much Necromancy in the air, it should follow that anything "alive" would have a harder time reacting, attacking, whatever as their life "weighs them down" in the heavy air of magic.

Hmm...I don't even know if I've heard complaints about much else, in all fairness. That's in person though, not the interwebz. Typically, vampire comments I hear are more in line with "Damn, that's rough..." but not really "OMG BROKZORS!" :p

Shamfrit
22-10-2008, 21:01
What could would a necromancer be if he could only raise a zombie a day?

Mireadur
22-10-2008, 21:59
He could keep casting the spell on different units or to raise new units, just 1 cast per unit/turn would have been pretty balanced.

Emeraldw
22-10-2008, 23:44
He could keep casting the spell on different units or to raise new units, just 1 cast per unit/turn would have been pretty balanced.

It's not invocation that's the problem. It's really Van Hel's imo. My wood elves have been outmaneuvered before thanks to spamming of that spell. My friend had so many power dice I couldn't stop it. If one fails, the next one won't. When I win combat, it's generally by a lot and if he had only one cast, I would break units all the time.

I really feel like Vampire counts need their magic phase but at the same time, it's that very phase that causes the issues.

Darkangeldentist
22-10-2008, 23:59
I don't think VC are broken although they are powerful.

The magic is potent and although I can see why people can get thoroughly fed up of facing the endless castings of Vanhel's and invocation however it's not as terrible as all that I think. At least you can only move a unit once with vanhel and it takes two dice to cast.

Personally I very rarely roll it. I generally take a necromancer just because I tend not to get it as one of my rolled spells. (Very frustrating.)

The thing they got most wrong was the mastery powers. +1 to cast and removing the cap on that unit is too cheap. I can agree with the one or the other but not both for those points.

logan054
23-10-2008, 00:15
Im honestly surprised that you really dont/cant see certain features in VC (and DE) over the top when comparing them to the other 7th ed armies.

Im not all that surprised, some time we cant see our own mistakes or choose not to, its part of human nature, i dont think it would be as bad however if all the lists continued on with this trend. To me it seems we have armies for modellers, armies for games and then armies for the rest of us.

FigureFour
23-10-2008, 00:57
Another point is whilst wood elves are a top tier army i would argue they require the most skill and ability of a general to play successfully. From personal experience i would definatly say they are by far the most demanding army where generalship is concerned.

I've heard that a lot actually. Just goes to show you how much personal style and preference can contribute to gameplay.

I started out playing Wood Elves when I picked the game up again this edition and found them pretty easy. They fit right into my movement centered, avoid then flank brain and I did quite well even in my first games.

On the other hand I can't seem to get the hang of coordinating these clumsy blocks of skeletons and ghouls if my life depended on it. It feels like even the dwarves are outmaneuvering me.

40kdhs
23-10-2008, 01:50
Some people here mention about killing vampires and it's a unrealistic advice because a VC player will not let you kill them easily with a banner of WS7 and regen on top of 3+ AS in CC.

If you don't kill them off in 1 turn, a VC player can undo what you did in the previous turn because he will spam invocation of hek UNTIL he's tired. You basically accomplish nothing because they don't run. If you give a VC player more than 1+ turn to raise, you are in heap of trouble because you will be outnumbered by a fear causing unit.

txamil
23-10-2008, 04:11
Most importantly, they are boring to play against. Worse than a dwarf gunline.

GavT
23-10-2008, 09:56
Im honestly surprised that you really dont/cant see certain features in VC (and DE) over the top when comparing them to the other 7th ed armies.

Certain features is what I addressed. Every army has certain features that could be considered over-the-top. I dispute the assumption that every feature is over-the-top and thus 'broken'. Players of a certain type or in competitive situations will focus upon the most efficient and effective army build, regardless of the army list, and I do not see that the VC are any different in this regard.

I will admit to the existence of an issue with certain VC builds if they are still regularly defeating the likes of the double Treeman army, Bretonnian RAF, Skaven Seer Army in another 6 months. Those armies haven't changed, yet the furore over them has died down since the release of High Elves, Vampires and other recent armies. Much of the criticism is still a hangover from the first months of release.

Cheers,

GAV

Kahadras
23-10-2008, 11:26
Certain features is what I addressed. Every army has certain features that could be considered over-the-top. I dispute the assumption that every feature is over-the-top and thus 'broken'. Players of a certain type or in competitive situations will focus upon the most efficient and effective army build, regardless of the army list, and I do not see that the VC are any different in this regard.

I agree.

IMHO the VC book is no more 'broken' than any other armies book out there that gives the player the oppertunity to build tournament style lists. Outside of tournaments the problem should be much less serious. One thing that I've always accepted is the fact that VC are different to other armies out there and my army might need tweaking slightly to be able to give the undead a fair fight, same with Wood elves.

Kahadras

logan054
23-10-2008, 11:34
the certain features that are over the top however something that all VC armies need to include, its just that these features are very easy to max out on with very little thought put into the list. Its like the spell spamming, to me i thing either higher casting values or a additional casting costs each time it was caste would have solved alot of the issues. You need to consider that in order to kill a VC unit you really have to kill it in a single turn or its just going to recover all those wounds and then some, this in itself just makes the game far to easy for a VC player because they can essential hold any unit in postion until they are ready to deal with. Then we factor in things like corpse cart, i dont think this would have been a issue if it was just a character mount for necromancers, again its far to easy to spam, in essence a game against VC seems more reliant on dice rolls than my tactical ability.

Thinking about to a point i can see why they have access to so many powerdice, i guessing its to counteract the effect a black coach could have on a magic phase, the real problem is when people dont use the black coach or use it so it has a very minimal effect on powerdice.

Fredmans
23-10-2008, 16:28
I think most of it has been said already, but I still want to give my non-tournament take on the VC army, and what I consider to be the top three issues with VC:

a) the O&G problem. Many complaints that gave actual examples of VC being broken came from O&G players. We seem to be many on this forum. When people said "VC is broken", the response was usually "take 2 steam tanks and a war altar with arch lector". As an O&G player, I feel the set-up against VC to be an up-hill battle. Sure, it is possible to win, but the VC army is piecemeal better than mine. Vampires are better casters and better fighters, whereas I have to choose. O&G rely on static CR. Spam invocation, end of problem. Sooner or later, the unit will auto-break. Winds of undeath is a **** in the *** as an O&G player. You have nothing to deal with ethereals, and scores of units. I can gear my army against VC (squigs and savage orcs, but that brings us to the next issue).

b) the all-comers situation. VC requires you to gear your army towards it. Period. Without magic defence, active CR, psychology boosters and character killers you are in trouble. The most recent army books have affected the meta-game too much, in my opinion. ASF renders some units worthless (squig hoppers or any skirmishers). DoC is just a steam roller, but you still have to factor in army-wide fear. Our gaming group likes all-comers evenings, but it gets harder and harder to get rewarding match-ups. Most games go rock-scissors-paper. Honestly, to claim that an army is not broken, because you should have fielded two steam tanks and a war altar, or two treemen is my definition of a game system in trouble. I should not have to buy 40 metal savage orcs in order to play my friend's VC (I actually have 25, fielded 2x12 or 1x25). What is the purpose of a points' system, when that is not sufficient? 2000 points of x should be expected to have an even battle against 2000 points of y. Having to gear your army upsets the most important rule of balanced war games. What does VC have to field against O&G (except for 3 core units and a general)?

c) VC army builds going OTT do so from gifts and items combinations. There is nothing separating "broken armies" from "fluff armies" (in GavT:s definition). They are the same. Spamming steam tanks and treemen actually require you to buy models for it. VC does not. In response to those claiming that the VC problem is restricted to tournaments, I say that you are wrong. There is nothing stopping any VC player anywhere from going OTT. On the more casual scene, most people do not buy two steam tanks or two treemen. Items? Gifts? Sure, why not? That is the difference, and I guess that is why the VC-being-broken rant has persisted. Most players have actually faced VC, unlike DoC.

I did not mean to sound so pessimistic, but I am concerned. I can play VC, any day, and enjoy it, but I would lie if I did not find the situation problematic.

/Fredmans

kramplarv
23-10-2008, 16:39
så lunkar vi så småningom från Bacchus buller och med bång ;)

But i agree with some of the points. But I think everyone should be using the WPS comp system when they build a. Just to see how boring their list are.

EvC
23-10-2008, 17:07
But Fredmans, you can go OTT with pretty much any army. Even with Orcs and Goblins, take 10 warmachines and watch people roll their eyes in disgust. It just so happens that the most powerful VC combinations are magic item combinations that you can't see to prohibit. Steam Tanks and Greater Daemons and the like are big and obvious. It's easy to say, "I'll play your Empire, but only one Tank max ok?" but it's not so easy to say "Okay I'll play your VCs, but max 10 power dice and 1 bound item, you have to take 2 full-sized proper core units, no Helm, no Drakenhof, etc."

If your VC players have some concept of restraint you should still be able to get good games in against them.

Fredmans
23-10-2008, 18:52
@EvC: I have not questioned the possibility of other OTT armies. We totally agree that VC differ from other armies in that their OTT-ness comes from item/power combos, instead of maxing out on an underpriced unit or units that work better in synergy. My theory is just that this makes OTT VC armies far more common than 10 war machine O&G armies in friendly gaming. They are easier to build, and therefore also harder to resist building. I believe this is a major reason for the anti-VC sentiments.

We do not even have to consider OTT armies, just powerful builds. Most war gamers are in some way restricted to what models they own/have painted. Items/gifts are not. Say that you restrain yourself from having 13 PD and go for 10. It is still a powerful army.


I also stated that I enjoy playing VC, although I find it a challenge. With so many army books, one has to accept that some match-ups are plain disadvantageous. I play O&G, and my bad match-up is VC. Animosity, terror, fear plus being outnumbered due to invocations seem to work in synergy to produce too many opportunities for me to fail those game-deciding dice rolls. My own experiences aside, the reason I mentioned O&G is that I found a lot of "whining" about VC being broken to come from O&G players. I have not heard many (any?) Wood elf, Lizardmen, Daemons or High elf players claim that VC is broken. I belive O&G players is a major source for this claim.

Maybe I was not clear, but the question I tried to answer was "Are VC so broken?" and in my post I tried to give three reasons as to why VC caused such a "storm" of brokenness:

a) O&G suffers badly in this match-up. The loudest anti-VC sentiment can therefore partly be seen as an outgrowth of the now infamous O&G-needs-an-update sentiment.

b) VC changed the meta-game, and for some armies (for instance O&G) that change is more disadvantageous than for others.

c) Strong builds lie in gift/item combinations instead of in unit combinations. This makes strong/OTT VC builds far more common than 2 steam tanks (never faced) or 2 treemen (never faced).

/Fredmans