PDA

View Full Version : Balanced armies



Drayken
22-03-2009, 17:44
It seems to me like a lot of people either max out in something (combat/magic/shooting) or play power armies. I've always liked playing balanced armies, all rounders that don't specialize and can still give a pretty good fight (or shoot/zap). It's funner too, you get a real feel of the army anda nice looking one.

Please tell me I'm not alone in this opinion, but balanced armies are so much fun, even when you lose.

Sneaky Gitz
22-03-2009, 17:52
Empire, O&G, and Skaven can all make pretty well rounded lists.

theunwantedbeing
22-03-2009, 17:55
My dark elf army is balanced and almost unbeaten.
The reason I've kept my list almost exactly the same for so many years is that each new opponent brings the need to fight in a different way and apply my forces in a different way to the previous battle.

Drayken
22-03-2009, 17:58
Skaven is okay, except for SAD.

TeddyC
22-03-2009, 17:58
not at all!!!

I only play balanced lists (and despite what WAAC players think im perfectly capable of making power lists) Dwarfs can compete in a balanced game pretty well

Drayken
22-03-2009, 18:04
Can you have a non-WAAC demon army? just curious, cause I've heard a lot of bad stuff thrown their way.

Hvidponi
22-03-2009, 18:12
Every army in the game can be made balanced, just a matter of choices.

Tokamak
22-03-2009, 18:16
I don't like balanced army lists. If you want to have a match with two equal all-rounders, go play chess.

There's a difference between specialising and being cheesy. A specialised army has character.

Drayken
22-03-2009, 18:51
Specialising can be just as cheesy. once you've seen one gunline army wt a few mages, you've seen them all. Balanced gives you the oppurtunity to play differently every time.

Tokamak
22-03-2009, 21:20
Yet every army will look the same. Sugar, spice, and everything nice. It's when asymmetrical armies face each other, real interesting fights emerges.

My last game involved six stegadons and a carnosaur hitting my large blocks of orcs (pure melee). Spectacular stuff.

TheLionReturns
23-03-2009, 00:36
I'm more of a fan of balanced armies. If you specialise you end up being locked into one way of playing or at least a narrower range of tactics. When specialising, list design, the formation of a strategy and the execution of that strategy are what are important with only minor tweaking for circumstances. If you take a balanced list the focus is on the ability to adapt and make good decisions in-game. Its more a matter of adapting your strategy to best tackle your opponent (without list tailoring) rather than imposing your style on your opponent.

For me its a matter of whether you prefer seeing a plan come together or thinking your way out of a tight spot. Specialise if you find the former more rewarding, go for the balanced approach if you prefer the latter.

Darkmaw
23-03-2009, 00:50
If a match with two equal all-rounders is similar to chess, then i would say a match with two very specialised armies is similar to scissors-paper-stone.

And i agree with TheLionReturns on balanced lists training the player better.

Kirth
23-03-2009, 09:32
If a match with two equal all-rounders is similar to chess, then i would say a match with two very specialised armies is similar to scissors-paper-stone.

Personally I would rather play chess than rock-paper-scissors given this analogy. Who wants to play a game that purely comes down to chance when the same game provides you the opportunity for strategy?

Aurellis
23-03-2009, 09:49
Can you have a non-WAAC demon army? just curious, cause I've heard a lot of bad stuff thrown their way.

Yes, it's called Mono-God lists. The single god lists have enough weaknesses to balance out the power advantage that they have, Slaaneshi ones are a great example with their Mv 10 movement being able to grant them lots of flank charges but they sometimes struggle with dealing the pain against stubborn/ranked troops as they rely on the charge breaking the enemy.

Talk of Skaven SAD lists being broken are pretty unfounded now, back in 6th they were overly-powerful but 7th edition gave them a great big nerf, handing the title of gunline army of doom to the High Elves magic and shooting battleline.

slingersam
23-03-2009, 10:00
Lizardmen are a very balanced list, you got the strong melee blocks,
Strong Magic, and O.K. shooting there are some better shooters
out their.

Urgat
23-03-2009, 10:15
I don't like balanced army lists. If you want to have a match with two equal all-rounders, go play chess.

No, I go play warhammer with balanced armies >>

Aurellis
23-03-2009, 10:17
No, I go play warhammer with balanced armies >>

I agree, Chess isn't half as good looking or interesting. When was the last time Chess had a magic phase?

Chess only has 1 phase, movement; whereas Fantasy has 4 phases to think about.

nosferatu1001
23-03-2009, 10:29
With lizards you have situationally good shooting - low S but poison or low S template that may overshoot / eat it's crew...

DE can also make balanced lists quite easily; as in all things i like a mix - i've played mono Khorne lists that were fun and played multigood daemon lists that were also fun to play. I think everything but a pure gun line can be fun to play against, which is why my clanrat units arent min size, i have 1 warp lightning cannon etc.

Luthor
23-03-2009, 10:49
Ah, but Chess is less expensive and more tactically rewarding. You see there are two sides to every argument.

The Red Scourge
23-03-2009, 11:05
Please tell me I'm not alone in this opinion, but balanced armies are so much fun, even when you lose.

You aren't. :)

I imagine people start out playing these lists, as it is easier to concentrate on one aspect of the game – especially those ruled by dice, such as shooting and magic. You then grow bored with these one-dimensional games and move on to other things.


Ah, but Chess is less expensive and more tactically rewarding. You see there are two sides to every argument.

But I want to spend a lot of money, and I want my tactics to fall apart from poor dice rolls :cheese:

Desert Rain
23-03-2009, 18:56
I've always perfered a balanced army so that I can take part in every phase in the game. I also like to be flexible and having more than one way of dealing with threats.
A gunline for example wins by rolling well and loses when it can't kill most of the enemy before they can engage the gunline in close combat. And warhammer as scissors-paper-stone is dull.

I feel that a balanced army is more rewarding to play with and funnier to face for your opponent. And honestly, nobody likes to play against a gunline or a mageline.