PDA

View Full Version : 8th Ed, the age of 2 Lords



Marshal Augustine
17-06-2010, 03:30
So, in a 2K game my TK will now be able to run my King and my High Priest with about 85 pts to spare for gear.

With the advent of percentages, how common are the double or even triple lord lists going to become? The power of magic of any level 4 or 3 plus the combat prowess of generals will mean that good combinations that used not to be possible have suddenly opened their doors.

Comments?

Emeraldw
17-06-2010, 03:32
I don't think many will want to go that route. Combat lords need gear to stay alive and mages are squishy. Magic is powerful yes, but if you mess up......

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 03:37
You don't have to spend your entire points allowance. I'm going to run a lvl4 Prophetess for my Brets armed only with a dispel scroll, leaving me with with 235 points to spend on my lord. I suspect many people will actually trim the amount of magic items they take, because if they can find the points they can put another hero in their army or upgrade a wizard.

Darkspear
17-06-2010, 03:38
Well for undead armies (especially VC) combat and magic are not mutually exclusive. Nevertheless I will be taking a TK and a High Liche Priest. I m replacing my old LP hierophant with my HLP (a promotion?) and my incantations have thus increase from 7 "power dice" to "11". cool beans.

Paraelix
17-06-2010, 03:48
Well there's already been heaps of talk of the 2250 double slann/engine army.

gdsora
17-06-2010, 04:23
My 2.5 TK list
has 1 King, 1 HLP
1 icon bearer, 1 prince, and 1 priest

Some with full gear, others naked.
want to test it out, to see how well it works. I need to find the right balance of incantations and actuall units now

Irish_Icicle
17-06-2010, 04:38
two lords might work, but after a few games of 8th @ 2500 points today it seems like the more points you spend on characters the less you have for troops (I know his is obvious and the same as now). Life is cheap in the warhamer world now, things die by the score. The way stepping up and casualties from the back work together, you want to try to keep your attacks at a maximum by throwing another rank or two on. Also because ranks are counted at the end of combat it's even more reason to have more, having more ranks then your enemt gives you stubborn.

i guess what i'm trying to say, if you don't go over board with your points for them, yeah it can work, but if you push your lord % to the max you're going to be suffering elsewhere more then in 7th i think.

ChaosVC
17-06-2010, 09:47
Time to take a look at what I can do with my Low elves... I think I can manage to squeeze a fully equiped prince and a lvl 4 with some neat budget magic items too.

Ronin[XiC]
17-06-2010, 09:53
2 Lords?
Say hello and welcome: 5 Nightgoblin Waaaghbosses for 55 points EACH ;)

a more reasonable approach for O&G for a 3000 point battle (750 Lords) probably will be something like:
Blackorkwaaaghboss on foot for ~225 with equipment
Ork Great Shaman Level 4 for ~300 Points with equipment
And maybe one or two goblin/nightgoblin waaaghboss for 65/55 points each just because they are uber cheap.

CaptScott
17-06-2010, 10:12
Or Empire Generals for only 80 points each :)

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 10:31
A lot of people's theorycrafting is relying on the game being played at higher points values so that they can take their big expensive horde unit and an army on top of it. When I bring my 2k army I won't have to worry about it, because they can either reduce their army list size to mine or not play. And if they use their huge units at 2k then hopefully their ability to support them will be reduced.

Some people have been complaining in 40k over the past year or so that higher points level tournaments are making the game less interesting, because people aren't forced to make choices. They can get everything they want and need in generous amounts. I think that's going to become the case in 8th edition, especially in regards to space for flanking. "skill" matches are going to be played at 2k and below.

ChaosVC
17-06-2010, 10:38
A lot of people's theorycrafting is relying on the game being played at higher points values so that they can take their big expensive horde unit and an army on top of it. When I bring my 2k army I won't have to worry about it, because they can either reduce their army list size to mine or not play. And if they use their huge units at 2k then hopefully their ability to support them will be reduced.

Some people have been complaining in 40k over the past year or so that higher points level tournaments are making the game less interesting, because people aren't forced to make choices. They can get everything they want and need in generous amounts. I think that's going to become the case in 8th edition, especially in regards to space for flanking. "skill" matches are going to be played at 2k and below.

Not if you have played a Apoc game or a seen the epicness of a 6k per side warhammer battle...of couse with fully painted armies only.

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 10:39
I'm afraid those are not remotely competitive matches.

RanaldLoec
17-06-2010, 10:40
Nah I love big games if I was looking for a game of balance and skill where armys are identical and there are no suprises from the Gods of the Dice then i would be playing chess.

Forget your tournaments get a group of 4 friends togther give each of them 3000 points ally and you have a whole day of dice rolling model moving fun lined up. I digress for me its going to be a grand master or a lvl4 wizard lord, or a general of the empire, or Karl Franz on a dragon oh I just can't decide.

BigbyWolf
17-06-2010, 10:41
Think Goblins, it becomes the age of 6 Warbosses (assuming 25 points of magic items), and 9 Big Bosses (assuming the same).

Thinking even further, aren't the Skaven engineers 15 points each?

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 10:45
Balanced games that require skill do not require identical opponents, where was that suggested? Of course a person's definition of fun may vary, I wouldn't tell anybody else how to enjoy themselves (that's a hint), but for those of us who have around 2 hours to get a game in and enjoy the tactical challenges of the game then I think its going to be necessary to draw a line in the sand over points values.

Orcboy_Phil
17-06-2010, 10:46
I'm afraid those are not remotely competitive matches.

No, but there fun and epic. If you want competitveness go play Tragic.

Tymell
17-06-2010, 10:46
I do like how, when the rumour was for 25% lords and heroes combined, we had plentiful worries/complaints that 8th ed would cripple character choices and armies focused on those.

Now it's gone the other way and we're getting worries/complaints about there being too many :p

RanaldLoec
17-06-2010, 10:47
I'm afraid those are not remotely competitive matches.


Mudkip its a hobby don't get stuck in one mind set open up to the possabilites of the hobby and try to think about having fun.

Example I once was using Karl Franz on a warhorse and charged some HE Pheonix guard with the specail character who explodes when hes killed.

The HE player my good friend issued a challenge I could of refused to meet him with karl franz and used my precepator knight instead but I accepted with Karl Franz as it was an epic size game and its far my fun to watch big characters slug it out.

Needless to say the HE character died horribly exploded and karl franz died followed by his unit of inner circle knights ending the game in a draw instead of a solid victory.

You know what it was still a kick ass game and was loads of fun.

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 10:48
No, but there fun and epic. If you want competitveness go play Tragic.

The issue here is you appear to assume that your definition of fun and epic are the universal definitions. It may surprise you to learn that plenty of people hold huge matches in contempt and consider them infantile and utterly boring.

Spiney Norman
17-06-2010, 10:51
So, in a 2K game my TK will now be able to run my King and my High Priest with about 85 pts to spare for gear.

With the advent of percentages, how common are the double or even triple lord lists going to become? The power of magic of any level 4 or 3 plus the combat prowess of generals will mean that good combinations that used not to be possible have suddenly opened their doors.

Comments?

I very much doubt we'll be seeing many wizard lords in 8th Edition until the points get adjusted. Given that with the new magic system all additional levels do is give you extra spells and +1 to cast, and the 75pt jump from your average L2 to your average L3 seems somewhat too high a price to pay for one additional spell, +1 to cast and an extra wound.

There are exceptions of course, a High Liche Priest is fairly good value for his points, while a reg Liche priest is probably the most over-pointed character in the game so I imagine we'll see a King and HLP in most Tk lists (well you certainly will in my TK list). The other exception is the Slann, otherwise I think most armies will opt for multiple L2s.

ChaosVC
17-06-2010, 10:54
Well, lets just say that every edition has its own form of min maxed BS, 8th ed is no exception. Just get decent friends to play with, should you encounter such a build against a random gamer, take it as a challenge. You can always refuse to play if such army builds are too much of a game spoiler to even bother playing against.

Baboon
17-06-2010, 10:56
Balanced games that require skill do not require identical opponents, where was that suggested? Of course a person's definition of fun may vary, I wouldn't tell anybody else how to enjoy themselves (that's a hint), but for those of us who have around 2 hours to get a game in and enjoy the tactical challenges of the game then I think its going to be necessary to draw a line in the sand over points values.


Balanced game play and WFB.....never the 2 shall meet.

RanaldLoec
17-06-2010, 10:59
Ok I'm only putting across a different point of view, I enjoy small and large games I see good points to both small games are quick paced and fast.

I play with mainly veteran players 10 plus years at playing warhammer and large games move allot quicker when everyone knows the rules.

Don't take anything too personnal I'm not saying your wrong or that larger games are better smaller games i'm saying that in the right circumstances they offer a different and enjoyable way to pass away a day.

Deathjester
17-06-2010, 11:00
I really don't understand people who think that fun & competetive are mutually exclusive!

It really isn't the case.

Warlock engineers are indeed 15pts however 3 clanrats with shields have a 5+ save in combat and a 6+ ward save.... have 3x the attacks, and 1.5x the wounds....

Warlock enginneers stats aren't really good enough to use as massed ranked units!

Warlords + Grey Seers in one army on the other hand...

Mudkip
17-06-2010, 11:03
I've not taken anything personally, you can't trust your impressions of a person's tone over the Internet. None of my points have anything to do with what you are talking about. I didn't say bigger matches were bad, or that people who play them should feel bad, if anything people in this thread having been trying to shove their views down my throat without bothering to even read what I type.

scarletsquig
17-06-2010, 11:08
As for big games, I feel like 3k still retains the tactical element. I've played a lot of 3k games and it's been fine, as long as there's a big enough table and plenty of time. I feel like the changes to horde units and ranked missile fire might just make 3k games playable and fun on a 6x4 board now, it should be enough now that we don't have to string out missile regiments (one of the best changes of 8th, IMO).

Bigger than that though, and I agree, the system breaks down.

Leogun_91
17-06-2010, 11:11
Well for undead armies (especially VC) combat and magic are not mutually exclusive. Nevertheless I will be taking a TK and a High Liche Priest. I m replacing my old LP hierophant with my HLP (a promotion?) and my incantations have thus increase from 7 "power dice" to "11". cool beans.Though High Liche Priests are mayorly nerfed now, with random powerlevel you want to roll as low as possible (as you have to roll more then the powerlevel to cast a boundspell) which means that normal Liche Priests are actually better at casting spells then High Liche Priests.

Deathjester
17-06-2010, 11:13
As for big games, I feel like 3k still retains the tactical element. I've played a lot of 3k games and it's been fine, as long as there's a big enough table and plenty of time. I feel like the changes to horde units and ranked missile fire might just make 3k games playable and fun on a 6x4 board now, it should be enough now that we don't have to string out missile regiments (one of the best changes of 8th, IMO).

Bigger than that though, and I agree, the system breaks down.

The only system which really broke down at higher points was magic.

It just never really has an effect at higher points.

I never really found anything else dropped out at higher points values!

However i do argee that taking too many missile units at high points was awkward! but bow units being able to volly fire totally reduces this!

Desert Rain
17-06-2010, 11:15
At games of 2000 and 2250 I will not go with a double lord, it's to expensive. Probably I'll just take a L.4, a BSB and possibly a cheap noble.

mrtn
17-06-2010, 12:02
Getting back on topic. :rolleyes:

It's possible, I'll probably try it out at least. A Beastlord with S8 and 1+ save costs 249 points, leaving room for a level 4 Great Bray Shaman with a 15 point item in 2k. Add a BSB and spend the rest of your points on core and special, could work.

StarFyre
17-06-2010, 12:04
I don't know why 2 slann would be a good thing. Wouldn't you want to use all the 2d6 PD for 1 slann so that he can use 3-5 spells/round instead of splitting them up with 2?

Sanjay

Valtiel
17-06-2010, 12:07
Well, personally me as a WoC player will probably only have one Lord and 2 heroes in my games. I'm not even sure I want that many characters, but with the new magic items in the new rulebook I might just make a Lord and his compatriots worth it. Being able to have an expensive lord (about 350+) that I can give great protection and damn good combat ability (3+ ward, S7 etc.) I find it better to gear one up instead of taking several cheap ones.

Might take some Sorcerers along with it... but I just need to test it out when I finally get a game in.

Lordmonkey
17-06-2010, 16:14
In 2k it's really hard to find a situations where it would be desireable to have two lords for 500pts instead of one lord and maybe a hero.

What about two Chaos Lords with basic gear and mounts? Could be quite powerful if each then led a unit of chaos knights...

sulla
17-06-2010, 18:20
What about two Chaos Lords with basic gear and mounts? Could be quite powerful if each then led a unit of chaos knights...Except they'll probably both be in the same unit, of course...

Lemonbrick
17-06-2010, 18:58
I think it will depend on the army

some armies benefit a lot or have cheap lords such as O&G,Tomb kings or empire

others the second lord choice may not give you much bang for your buck, dwarfs, elves, orges or be very limited in equipment.

as always its down to preference and what will give you personally bang for your buck!

Edit
17-06-2010, 20:18
I want to take my unit of 5 skaven warlords, but I think 3 on litters will be sufficient :P

shartmatau
17-06-2010, 21:22
I think what many people are hinting at in specifics can be summed up here. At least from these early speculations 8th seems to be still character heavy but all of those characters will be magic item light. The usefullness of characters as being the kill generator in units is being minimized so characters don't necessarily need as many magic items as before. Instead you will tend to see several characters with few if any magic items to spread leadership around, act as a beefed up unit champion, etc.
This is especially true of the armies that have real cheap characters like O&G, Empire, Skaven...

enygma7
17-06-2010, 21:47
Yeah, I think multiple lords its mainly going to be popular with the more hordesque armies, especially those who want to have a level 4 mage and still benefit from the LD of a cheap combat character as the general. The other application would be a horde combat army with multiple combat lords with a light loadout - its hard to make beastmen and skaven characters very resilient, so why not keep the investment low and have several?

The % system stops major powergaming abuses in the main with heavily loaded out characters, but I think we'll see competetive players taking the opportunity to have large numbers of very cheap lords and heroes (in say goblin and skaven armies) and then making units where the whole front rank is full of them (e.g. large unit of wolf riders with 5 heroes in the front rank).