PDA

View Full Version : Beastmen?



ftayl5
03-05-2010, 06:18
I've been somewhat out of the loop. I practically missed the beastmen update (ruleswise) So my question is (coz I honestly don't know) have they gotten any better?? Or are they still only just beating Ogres on the competetivity ladder??

Gorbad Ironclaw
03-05-2010, 06:23
I believe the general reaction to them was that people wasn't impressed. It seems to be all about the rare monsters with a guest appearance of core chariots. But I haven't actually seen them used. Looking at the results from a big event around here it seems as if only 3 out of ~160 people brought them and the highest placing of those was 90 or so. But whatever that's a true reflection of there potential I couldn't tell you. If some of the top players have used them they would undoubtedly have finished higher, but then you could of course question why none of the top players did.

mrtn
03-05-2010, 10:15
I think the jury is still out on that, since the army changed quite a bit, and for quite a few people it's like trying to learn to use a new army. I suspect that after the shake down of the new armybook and the new edition they'll end up somewhere lower-middle.

Desert Rain
03-05-2010, 10:56
They don't seem very impressive at the moment, that might change when 8th edition arrives though.

The SkaerKrow
03-05-2010, 11:33
The new Beastmen project to lower-mid tier. They aren't bottom feeders, but they're looking up at most of the other armies in the game.

phoenixguard09
03-05-2010, 11:43
Not great but not exactly crap either. :D

As Gorbad stated earlier they have nice options in Rare with some pretty tough and cheap chariots in Core.

Weaknesses:
No artillery.
Little to no armour.
Ambush is pretty random.
Fast choices are generally pretty bad. Around here Warhounds and the like never get a look in and Centigors never seem to do anything of note in games.

Strengths:
Cygor makes up for artillery. (It's a big stone throwing dude basicly if you didn't know. ;) )
High Toughness generally.
Ambush can be painful, as can Primal Fury.
Ghorgon and Jabberslythe plus Minotaurs and Tuskgor Chariots are nice.

Overall sort of random and disorganised but nowhere near as bad as Skaven or Orcs in that regard. Nice hitting power and aren't too fragile.

Our Beasts player (We only have one) is pretty good and wins more than he loses so hey with an experienced hand, they can be pretty nasty.
Good luck if you do go for Beasts.

immortal git
03-05-2010, 11:54
We have a guy at my local who plays beasts, hes up in the top 5 players in store easily, mind you he was beating everyone before the new book and this new book hasnt stopped him, theres another guy who plays them who uses like eaight chariots a cygor and some minotaurs, its tough to beat.

vinush
03-05-2010, 12:13
I'm going up against Beastmen later today, so will let you know my opinion (that said, the player has only beaten me a handfull of times out of the many many games we've played so far).

THE \/ince

abcz417
03-05-2010, 20:50
I've just started a Beastmen army (at 1k which isn't their optimal size) and I've had one victory against O&G and High Elves - won convincingly against O&G, lost to High Elves (but that was mainly due to a couple of silly mistakes on my part). I think that they're generally good, especially in the hand of the right general. The main problem is that they're very different from their previous incarnation and so many older players are struggling to adapt. They're almost a slightly inferior version of Dark Elves - fragile but very good at combat (when they can strike first), though unlike Dark Elves they don't have a decent shooting or magic phase.

vinush
03-05-2010, 21:45
Well, played against the Beastmen army, and got a turn 1 victory.

My Empire went up against them, and here's how it played out...

My turn 1: Moved up to occupy defensive position with swordmen unit and detatchment the other swordsmen unit and detatchment moved out to enable support charge when the time came.
Magic: My wizard miscast and lost a level (But didn't take a wound from the Str8 hit).
Shooting: Mortar and crossbowmen targetted Gor unit with general who panicked and fled 9" towards the table edge. Other crossbowmen unit took out 4 of the 5 Ungor skirmisher unit, the remaining ungor panicked (couldn't rally) My cannon failed to hit anything.

His turn 1: No charges. Gor unit failed to rally, and fled off the board, leaving him with nothing able to do anything decent. He conceded the game. He never got to ambush his unit of Gors or the Ungor he had waiting to get flanks/rear charges...

Sure, he had bad luck with the Ld tests, and I was quite lucky to get enough kills to cause panic checks.

THE \/ince

pointyteeth
03-05-2010, 22:17
I quite like the list. There is enough variety of choice that it will be a long while before I get tired of playing it.

Competitively, I'd say its middle road. Hard hitting but fragile. Best motto for the army would be "Best defense is a good offence"

mrtn
04-05-2010, 00:03
He never got to ambush his unit of Gors or the Ungor he had waiting to get flanks/rear charges...
He should have rolled for ambush his first turn. General isn't needed anymore, tell him to reread his armybook. :)
Besides, an army mostly consisting of gors and ungors isn't very good against a gunline.


Fast choices are generally pretty bad. Around here Warhounds and the like never get a look in
:eek: Warhounds are great. 30 points for redirecting Grimgor so you can flank his unit is a bargain.

sulla
04-05-2010, 06:46
The new beasts are a more powerful army that the old beast list but also a lot more straight forward to play, which IMO is a disapointment. They were a bit of a finesse army previously. Now they are a blunt instrument that works best in a "HULK SMASH!!!'' sort of way. There is still skill involved in using them, but most of that skill is in army selection and not offering your flanks with you smasher units. Other than that, it is quite a 'wind-up' army with all the power coming from straightforward units like chariots, minos, razors and ghorgons.

Magos Saphentos
04-05-2010, 06:55
Best motto for the army would be "Best defense is a good offence"

Surely this should be Their only defence is a good offence :shifty:

On topic yeah i see them as a middle tier army mainly due the lack of armour on most of the models, but it might be different under 8th ed will just have to wait and see.

phoenixguard09
04-05-2010, 08:28
:eek: Warhounds are great. 30 points for redirecting Grimgor so you can flank his unit is a bargain.

Well as I said around here they aren't that good. They don't seem to accomplish most anything in a game. We have a gentlemen's aggreement not to bring SC's and for some reason we don't tend to have many frenzied units. Different playing style I suspect.

Zilverug
04-05-2010, 08:50
I wasn't inspired at all by the new list. I liked the previous book, making Beastman movement and ambush something really special. Mixed herds was good - and gone. The loss of Chaos marks didn't help diversity either. The big monsters do not interest me at all.

Bestigor capturing standards is fun - but they shouldn't be special, should have kept their (optional) mark and they are quite expensive as well - points-wise. Minotaurs didn't really need improvement. I think the Centigors are better now.

In other words: meh...

ftayl5
04-05-2010, 09:22
OK, so they're better, but not much. Thanx

The SkaerKrow
04-05-2010, 12:35
The new beasts are a more powerful army that the old beast list but also a lot more straight forward to play, which IMO is a disapointment. They were a bit of a finesse army previously. Now they are a blunt instrument that works best in a "HULK SMASH!!!'' sort of way. There is still skill involved in using them, but most of that skill is in army selection and not offering your flanks with you smasher units. Other than that, it is quite a 'wind-up' army with all the power coming from straightforward units like chariots, minos, razors and ghorgons.If you try to play Beastmen as a wind-up army, you will never win with any consistency. They are perhaps the single most unforgiving army in Warhammer at this point, and while they do have a decent cross-section of hammers, none of them come without serious liabilities. Indeed, I'd say that Beastmen are a more challenging army to play than Beasts of Chaos were, as you're now compelled to worry about positioning and charge arcs where before you could field entire armies of combat skirmishers.

Zaustus
04-05-2010, 14:14
Well as I said around here they aren't that good. They don't seem to accomplish most anything in a game. We have a gentlemen's aggreement not to bring SC's and for some reason we don't tend to have many frenzied units. Different playing style I suspect.

Warhounds are amazing bait units, even against non-frenzied enemies. You can force the enemy to either charge the dogs (and if you set it up right, you'll then get a flank charge), or they'll have to sit there while you move flankers in from the side. For 30 points, either of those options is a bargain.

IMO Warhounds, Ungor Skirmishers and scouting Harpies (i.e. the bait brigade) are a hugely important part of the Beastmen list.

willowdark
04-05-2010, 18:57
They land just above HE and WE, are amazing against VC and terrible against Daemons. They're about even with DE and WoC, though DE should usually come out on top. They're good against Skaven, as long as he has bad luck with his Warpstone.

That is all 100% conjecture. No one around here plays them. ;)

sulla
04-05-2010, 21:14
If you try to play Beastmen as a wind-up army, you will never win with any consistency. They are perhaps the single most unforgiving army in Warhammer at this point, and while they do have a decent cross-section of hammers, none of them come without serious liabilities. Indeed, I'd say that Beastmen are a more challenging army to play than Bests of Chaos were, as you're now compelled to worry about positioning and charge arcs where before you could field entire armies of combat skirmishers.Not in my experience with the new list. I started out playing them very carefully like the old list but trial and error has taught me to play very aggressively with them. Don't get me wrong, ungor raiders and dogs and jabbers and magic still have their part to play, but the army seems (in my experience) to respond best when putting pressure on your opponent by very fast, very aggressive movement, not by patience and setting traps for your opponent like the previous list.

Karguy04
04-05-2010, 21:33
Good thread for someone just starting out and looking into beastmen.

~PrometheuS~
04-05-2010, 21:52
In the right hands any army can be good

that said, atm beastmen may suffer, but with 8th ed coming, they might improve greatly ;)

Going to build my army, atim 10 gors/beastlord lol and get a few games in with them before new rules

The SkaerKrow
05-05-2010, 13:12
Not in my experience with the new list. I started out playing them very carefully like the old list but trial and error has taught me to play very aggressively with them. Don't get me wrong, ungor raiders and dogs and jabbers and magic still have their part to play, but the army seems (in my experience) to respond best when putting pressure on your opponent by very fast, very aggressive movement, not by patience and setting traps for your opponent like the previous list.Playing aggressive and playing "wind-up" are very different things, though. A wind-up army doesn't pick its spots, it can reliably charge forward and bash its way through just about anything else on the table, and because of that it doesn't require much strategy. Beastmen are certainly a punch (not counter-punch) army, but you have to be far more judicious about where you throw that punch. Identify a weakness in your opponent's formation (or create one with your ambush units and mobility if one does not exist), and then overwhelm it with hammer units. All Beast units are fragile, and if you try to put strength on strength, your prospects of coming out ahead aren't good.

Charistoph
06-05-2010, 04:28
From what I've read, a lot of players were surprised at how effective the new book is. On paper it seems to be less powerful, but when put into practice, they turn out to be very powerful.