PDA

View Full Version : Are Ghouls worth it?



Seth the Dark
12-01-2006, 20:56
I was thinking of using 2 units of 9 ghouls in my Necrarch army but I was wondering if people use them or hate them.

Odin
12-01-2006, 21:02
Yes.

From the point of view of someone who plays against Vampire Counts on a regular basis, Ghould are one of my most hated units. They can get anywhere and charge in any direction, they cause fear like everything else in the army, and they have T4 and 2 poisoned attacks each. Very nasty. 2 small units should be very useful.

Keller
12-01-2006, 21:26
Most definately, although you can do fine without them, too. Aside from being quite powerful troops, with their T4 and 2 poisoned attacks, they provide a great tactical approach for the VC, which they don't otherwise have. As skirmishers, they can get around the board quickly, make great screens for missile fire (especially with their T4), and can swarm units well. By swarming, I am refering to skirmishers ranking up as far across as they like (provided they reach) so that you get more models in contact than a standard formation, and you have no (usually) reason not to lap should a combat be protracted. Despite all of this, the biggest thing the Ghouls bring into a VC army is due to the fact they are Alive! As such, they can delare charge reactions, meaning they can flee a charge. This can set the enemy up for counter attacks by your deadites once you have them where you want them.
Ghouls do have their drawbacks though, namely their sub-par leadership. Since they cause fear and none of your other units will be running, the only psychology tests you really have to worry about is panic from shooting and destroyed units. But if you don't win a combat, and are away from the general, ghouls don't tend to stick around long. And in my experience, once they start running, they don't come back, but that holds true for my Ld8 troops of other armies.

Another thing to consider is how well they fight into the theme of the army. Its been a while since I have read my VC book, but from what I remember Nechrachs dispise the living, so they probably wouldn't want to keep a bunch of ghouls around. That doesn't mean you couldn't use something else as ghouls, say one of their experimental subjects, or that your count might be a bit more accepting of others.

Worth it? Most certainly.
Required? Not at all.

Fortdeadlykick
12-01-2006, 21:27
Ghouls are one of the best units in the VC army. They are, in my opinion, better than dire wolves. I run direwolves regularly, and they get taken off the table very soon with little impact. Ghouls are hardy, deadly, and often more maneuverable than direwolves, due to being alive and skirmishers.

Use them muchly.

Skitter-Squeek
12-01-2006, 22:20
I am a Skaven player and i play against VC strigoi a lot and let me tell you i hate those ghouls more then the vampire..... if that says anything for ya lol.

Alco Engineer
12-01-2006, 22:29
I've used them in a few games and found them handy. Especially against things like Ogres or other lightly armoured tough opponents. They are good at surviving missile fire and I usually tie up a unit with them and then get my black coach in to the flank.

It's handy that they can march without having to be too clase to the general too, making them good for flanks (Dire wolves suffer at the flanks so the normally march once then charge)

m1s1n
13-01-2006, 06:05
I have never fielded them once and I have more wins with my VC than loses. However, I see them being a really great unit. I don't play them because they do not fit into my current VC style of play, but I see no problem implimenting them in future games. Tactically skirmishers are some of the best ways to control the movement phase. Even though the VC can move around the board with some speed, they still lack a lot of range--so their few "fast" units are very helpful.

speedygogo
13-01-2006, 08:08
Ghouls and dire wolves are the 2 essential troops in the VC army IMO. 360 LOS, poisonsed attacks and the ability to flee as a charge reaction make ghouls indespensible.

SteelTitan
13-01-2006, 09:59
Ghouls and dire wolves are the 2 essential troops in the VC army IMO. 360 LOS, poisonsed attacks and the ability to flee as a charge reaction make ghouls indespensible.

Dire Wolves essential? Not really...like someone said before Ghouls are quite a bit better then Dire Wolves. Dire Wolves are a bit too fragile to depend on

Keller
13-01-2006, 16:12
Ghouls and dire wolves are the 2 essential troops in the VC army IMO.

Going along with Steel Titan, I hardly find Dire Wolves essential. I almost never take them, simply because they are too fragile. Any enemy who thinks about shooting them will whipe out the unit, since there are usually only 6-10 of the T3, no save wolfies. Ghouls, while less than half as speedy, have the toughness and penalty to be hit to keep the alive, so I always choose them instead. Plus they are more flexible, although wolves being able to negate ranks sure can be handy.

Scythe
13-01-2006, 17:44
Ghouls are great troops. Due being skirmishers and being alive they add a lot of tactical flexibility the vampire counts army usually lacks. Sure they have low leadership, but they are also dirt cheap for their abilities. Fear, T4 and 2 poisoned attacks for a mere 8 pts is a bargain.

Frankly
13-01-2006, 23:06
Ghouls and dire wolves are the 2 essential troops in the VC army IMO. 360 LOS, poisonsed attacks and the ability to flee as a charge reaction make ghouls indespensible.

I agree with you.

Like ghouls, dire wolves are a dirt cheep unit, you pay a lowly price for a bare bones flanking unit that has fear, a 18" charge range with +1str and immune to pyche.

Both are really flexible work-horses on the battlefield, but both still play differently.

Dire wolves play differently than ghouls, so its hard to say which is better or more flexible, negating ranks is a huge boon for V.C. as its an army that works well when creating CR before the dice are even rolled.

Distraction, shielding cavalry and going after supportng units are all duties dire wolves do well, making them a really good flexible unit.

Sure dire wolves get shot down and to be honest it's a really, really good thing, I always prefer that my opponants shoots at units I want him to shoot at rather than targeting my more elite units, vampires, B.knights, G.guard etc, etc. For me one of their major jobs is to take wounds so other units don't have too, for me all my dire wolf units are through away units.

Ghouls are great meat shields in the opening part of the game and then turn into an excellent little choppy unit throughtout the rest of the game, they don't negate ranks and they don't have any real speed to threaten your opponants static supporting units so they play alittle differently. Still, they one of my favorite units in the game and are excellent at what they do.

DrkAp0stle
14-01-2006, 01:39
In my opinion..

Dire Wolves-Not essential, but very nice if you have some points left over.

Ghouls-Essential! in anyway. I am relatively new to VC and play necharchs. There is nothing like seeing a dwarf player's face when I danse macabe+book of arkhan into his war machine crews that were so safe behind their trees. :)


-Ap0stle

Velkyn Kyil
14-01-2006, 01:57
You cast Dance Macabre on Ghouls? That's not possible as they're not Undead...

Psyan
16-01-2006, 03:32
One of the nicest things about Ghouls is that they really put a hurting on Ogres. Poison is nice.

MarcoPollo
18-01-2006, 00:02
I agree, poision and the ability to skirmish are the real nice benefits of those cheap buggers. But what alot of people forget is that they can flee. They are not undead and when playing them I often forget that they flee. This can be a real trap for the inexperienced, or even experienced but inebriated player ;) .

speedygogo
18-01-2006, 07:38
The reason why dire wolves are essential is because of speedy and they can act like a bullet proof vest for either a strigoi or von carston vampire. Both ghouls and dire wolves can dictated how a game is fought and that is what makes them so important. It is much better to have a couple rounds of shooting directed at wolves that at actually important stuff in an army. Fear causing, 9" moving fast cavalry that is str4 on the charge and costs 10pts a model is not a good deal?

Scythe
18-01-2006, 10:46
Well, I rather have the enemy shoot my resummonable 8 or 6 points skeletons or zombies as shoot my vulnerable unsummonable 10 pts T3 no save dire wolves.

Frankly
18-01-2006, 23:19
Well, I rather have the enemy shoot my resummonable 8 or 6 points skeletons or zombies as shoot my vulnerable unsummonable 10 pts T3 no save dire wolves.

I'd prefer them shooting at my dire wolves than my B.knights.

People also HAVE to target your dire wolves if they are threatening their battle line in turn 2. Dire wolves don't just meat shield or draw fire, they distract your opponants targeting options, redirect charges, threaten easrly in the game.

It depends alot on how your play your list, the V.C. armybook is pretty wide ranging in tactic's, the tactic of summoning undead units as meat shields isn't always viable or usueful tactic, especially infront of your B.knight units.

Scythe
19-01-2006, 22:13
I'd prefer them shooting at my dire wolves than my B.knights.

People also HAVE to target your dire wolves if they are threatening their battle line in turn 2. Dire wolves don't just meat shield or draw fire, they distract your opponants targeting options, redirect charges, threaten easrly in the game.

It depends alot on how your play your list, the V.C. armybook is pretty wide ranging in tactic's, the tactic of summoning undead units as meat shields isn't always viable or usueful tactic, especially infront of your B.knight units.

Well, against most forms of basic shooting, Black Knights are more resilient as Dire Wolves anyway. Bows, for example, only have a 5% chance of killing a 25 pts black knight assuming they hit. For wolves, its 50%. Crossbows kill the knights 16.7% of the time, still better points wise as 66% dire wolves kills. Even handguns come out equal pts wise, 25%*25 pts about equals 66.7%*10 pts. The only thing they are really handy for is drawing war machine fire, but even that can be avoided at times.

Frankly
19-01-2006, 22:33
Well, against most forms of basic shooting, Black Knights are more resilient as Dire Wolves anyway. Bows, for example, only have a 5% chance of killing a 25 pts black knight assuming they hit. For wolves, its 50%. Crossbows kill the knights 16.7% of the time, still better points wise as 66% dire wolves kills. Even handguns come out equal pts wise, 25%*25 pts about equals 66.7%*10 pts. The only thing they are really handy for is drawing war machine fire, but even that can be avoided at times.

In your last post your said that you'd rather have people shooting at your cheeper zombies and skellies than you would your wolves and now your saving you'd let your B.knight take shot?

Who's cares if they are B.knights are more resilient than dire wolves, you DON'T want crossbows or handguns shooting at your B.knights ... not if you can help it. You want your blocks or units of knights intact and hard hitting, your also blocking LOS with your wolves against the magic phase and you can redirect charges away from your B.knights and/or set up counter charges.

How are you going to avoid B.throwers, cannons and other warmachine in the fast moving army without good screening?

Takaratie
20-01-2006, 15:58
How are you going to avoid B.throwers, cannons and other warmachine in the fast moving army without good screening?

And for this purpous I just love ghouls, there very cheap ( My guess is that they wil nerfed next armybook).
Like said before, they are also alive giving them an tactical advantage over other units.

IMO there one very nice unit, and I always field one unit of them.
Just to get back on direwolves, there also great as missile magnet.
One less volley of an organ gun/hellblaster means that your GG or BK have one less round of being shot to bits.
I love both of these units.

Scythe
20-01-2006, 16:25
In your last post your said that you'd rather have people shooting at your cheeper zombies and skellies than you would your wolves and now your saving you'd let your B.knight take shot?

Who's cares if they are B.knights are more resilient than dire wolves, you DON'T want crossbows or handguns shooting at your B.knights ... not if you can help it. You want your blocks or units of knights intact and hard hitting, your also blocking LOS with your wolves against the magic phase and you can redirect charges away from your B.knights and/or set up counter charges.

How are you going to avoid B.throwers, cannons and other warmachine in the fast moving army without good screening?

The point is that, even tough dire wolves are cheaper as black knights point wise, there is little point in letting them screen black knights, as you are better of just buying some extra knights for the points. Imho, I rather have my opponent shoot everything else in the vampire counts army instead of extremely fragile dire wolves.

Units like bolt throwers, cannons, and handgunners are a lot of the time on hills anyway, so your screening won't do squat. Besides, cannons can just as easily bounce trough the wolves and still hit the juicy knights behind them. Even so, I am not so worried about the single kill a cannonball or bolt thrower can do on single file knights. If you desperately want some screen, have ghouls before them in your first turn, as Takaratie said. Next turn, you should be able to handle the missle casualties. I rather lose a kinght or maybe 2 instead of a whole unit dire wolves, and still risking damage to the knights.

In summary, dire wolves are not suited for screening. They are to fragile and expensive for that job, and your wasting their excellent speed if you use them as screeners. You should be spending your time hiding them from sight and getting in position to flank charge.

Frankly
21-01-2006, 01:19
The point is that, even tough dire wolves are cheaper as black knights point wise, there is little point in letting them screen black knights, as you are better of just buying some extra knights for the points. Imho, I rather have my opponent shoot everything else in the vampire counts army instead of extremely fragile dire wolves.

Units like bolt throwers, cannons, and handgunners are a lot of the time on hills anyway, so your screening won't do squat.

In summary, dire wolves are not suited for screening.


I totally disagree. Honestly, I understand what your saying, but ....

No, most of the time ranged shooters aren't on the hill, the majority of the time, I have found that a player doesn't have the option of a hill in their deploy zone. If so, then its not more than 1 or 2 units.

As soon as people start shooting at your B.knights, your lossing rank bonuses and unit strength, in any cavalry unit these are costly combat bonuses to lose(especially if its because you want to hide your dire wolves), B.knights are good, but not that good, you need your ranks and offcourse you need outnumbering for fear causing units.

As far as dire wolves being expensive goes, I really don't understand what your saying, they're 10pts, 50pts for a "throw away unit", its not costly or expensive at all, not by along shoot.

Not only that, but a B.knight also will have to sit out in the open against not only a shooting phase but also a magic phase and charges.

I totally agree with shielding B.knights with ghouls, its a great option for turn 1.

Basically, after running all cavalry armylists for a long time, I've realised that the most important thing about a B.knight unit is to deliver the unit into combat fully intact, any losses of the unit will usually mean a loss of 1 or 2 CR bonuses and you can't have that against rank and file troops I'd much, much prefer to loss 1 or 2 "throw away" units than B.knights.

I buy a certain amount of dire wolf units to take damage and a certain amount of dire wolf units to flank and rare charge, this means in an all cavalry army I run around 60 to 80 dire wolves to deliver 3 units of B.knights.

Wights and Vampires might do the damage, but its the wolves that actually win the games, because of screening.

Scythe
21-01-2006, 19:37
As soon as people start shooting at your B.knights, your lossing rank bonuses and unit strength, in any cavalry unit these are costly combat bonuses to lose(especially if its because you want to hide your dire wolves), B.knights are good, but not that good, you need your ranks and offcourse you need outnumbering for fear causing units.

Well, this depends in which role you use your Black Knights of course. If you use them as headlong unit breakers, this might be true. For flank treating, losing a few knights isn't so bad.


As far as dire wolves being expensive goes, I really don't understand what your saying, they're 10pts, 50pts for a "throw away unit", its not costly or expensive at all, not by along shoot.

For those 50 pts, I could buy also buy 2 extra knights, which are more difficult to kill in most cases. Also, with 5 wolves, it is quite difficult to completely screen a 6 or 7 man wide black knight unit.


Basically, after running all cavalry armylists for a long time, I've realised that the most important thing about a B.knight unit is to deliver the unit into combat fully intact, any losses of the unit will usually mean a loss of 1 or 2 CR bonuses and you can't have that against rank and file troops I'd much, much prefer to loss 1 or 2 "throw away" units than B.knights.

Well, I think this is why we think different. I don't use an all cavalry troops, and do not use my Black Knights purely as shock linebreakers. One of the most effective approaches to black knights I have found is take units of 12 (6x2, including any characters). The opponent will do one of two things: either start shooting the hell out of the unit, which they can handle. Sure, I lose my extra rank and probably outnumbering, but the opponent has to kill 7 T4 2+ save models before he starts affecting their hitting power. If the opponent shoots them, they revert to flankers. Alternatively, opponents don't shoot them at all, figuring that it takes too much firepower to take them down, and I can throw a US 24 fear causing unit with banner and rank bonus against his infantry blocks.

Anyway, my knights don't have a fixed role. Tough they are a very potent unit on their own if they remain intact, their real purpose is supporting my infantry blocks, and drawing attention away from other fragile units.

m1s1n
21-01-2006, 21:36
I think that you two are going in circles. You are both making excellent points, but it isn't a circumstance where there is a clear right and wrong.

I agree that dire wovles are fragile as paper--but they're also pretty cheap, and depending on circumstances 50 points that never sees combat can still have its uses. On the other hand I have seen dire wovles be extremely effective because of their speed.

Either or, comparing black knights to dire wolves is apples to oranges.

Frankly
21-01-2006, 23:35
For those 50 pts, I could buy also buy 2 extra knights, which are more difficult to kill in most cases. Also, with 5 wolves, it is quite difficult to completely screen a 6 or 7 man wide black knight unit.





Reform them sideways in one rank infront of the B.knight unit, in the opening turn you can do this with 2 dire units to guard a 2 B.knight units.

Scythe
23-01-2006, 18:47
I think that you two are going in circles. You are both making excellent points, but it isn't a circumstance where there is a clear right and wrong.

I agree that dire wovles are fragile as paper--but they're also pretty cheap, and depending on circumstances 50 points that never sees combat can still have its uses. On the other hand I have seen dire wovles be extremely effective because of their speed.

Either or, comparing black knights to dire wolves is apples to oranges.

You're probably right. Let's agree that we disagree, shall we? :p

It depends on how you play your Vampire Counts. Obviously we play in a different way, which is imho a good sign. If every player would use exactly the same VC tactics, the game wouldn't be fun anymore, would it?