PDA

View Full Version : Arachnarok



patchy
11-03-2011, 04:50
How have people found this fella in games? im curious on whether to add one or not. i love the model and all but not sure if i should try and squeeze one into 2250 for that reason alone.

chieftainskritchskritch
11-03-2011, 05:05
Its like any other monster TBH.

* High Movement value

* High Toughness value

* High Strength value

* Lots o' Wounds

* Lots o' Attacks

* Thunderstomp

* Terror

And thats about it. The only thing the big spider lacks is a decent form of save (eg: regen). Its Ld is pretty poor as well, even though its Stubborn, so its not hard to deal with.

Most opponents will deal with an Araknarok the same was that they deal with other big beasties (hydra, hellpit, etc) - either shoot them with cannons, zap them with an appropriate spell or smack them in the face with a fighty Lord.

Nubl0
11-03-2011, 06:14
Well it's abit more speedy than other monsters thanks to fact it can pretty much ignore obsticals, and it can do pretty decent damage. Still doesnt have the destructive potential of a HPA though. Venom surge is pretty good though and the thing that helps goblin shamans channel better is cool, the web flinger sucks though.

Bodysnatcher
11-03-2011, 07:11
Its low strength is a bit of a handicap though - armoured targets survive it quite effectively.

Morkash
11-03-2011, 07:51
It looks good, so there is no reason not to use it.

Kalandros
11-03-2011, 07:53
Since it doesn't have Regen its the same as if it had 4 wounds really - except it can take on one full unsaved 6 wounds from a single cannon ball.
So as with everything - HPA is underpriced, hydra is massively underpriced, Arachnarok is a bit overpriced.

Squigkikka
11-03-2011, 08:08
Hardly! The Arachnarok is properly priced- everything else is just bloody silly :(

Giants on the other hand are overpriced.

snottlebocket
11-03-2011, 08:25
Its low strength is a bit of a handicap though - armoured targets survive it quite effectively.

It's sort of a support monster in my opinion. It's only real defense is it's 8 wounds. It's only real offense is a handful of poison attacks and the chance of a venom surge.

It's a pretty decent medium monster murderer. It'll eat things like stegadons for breakfast. It's a decent flanker, it's fast and as long as someone else is providing the static combat res the spider does great at piling on some extra wounds on infantry.

It does not however do well in frontal assaults on powerful opponents. Venom surge is too unreliable to use on creatures so powerful they need to be killed instantly. Stegadons are fine, you do not however give a bloodthirster too many chances to strike back at the spider.

Storak
11-03-2011, 08:25
Hardly! The Arachnarok is properly priced- everything else is just bloody silly :(

this is a wrong approach. the arachnarok has to be compared to monsters that get used, not to the once that sit on shelves and unused in army books.

and in comparison to the monsters that a being fielded, it is significantly overpriced.


Giants on the other hand are overpriced.

Giants are extremely overpriced and have attacks that do not fit into 8th edition. they are outright stupid and utterly useless.


It's a pretty decent medium monster murderer. It'll eat things like stegadons for breakfast. It's a decent flanker, it's fast and as long as someone else is providing the static combat res the spider does great at piling on some extra wounds on infantry.

it is not a good flanker, because of the low leadership value. it must be kept in range of the general.

it is pretty expensive for something that has to combo charge against most units.

xxRavenxx
11-03-2011, 08:31
this is a wrong approach. the arachnarok has to be compared to monsters that get used, not to the once that sit on shelves and unused in army books.

Which ones do you feel are unused?

Is this the dreaded tournament vs casual, "Tar it all with the same brush" approach creeping in again?

I'm sure competitively, only the vastly undercosted monsters see play. In a relaxed setting however, I bet you'll find that most monsters get used, because "theyre cool".

I can tell you straight up that I didnt even check the points cost nor attacks of my big spider before buying it :) Big spider = Cool = Going in my army.

snottlebocket
11-03-2011, 08:45
it is not a good flanker, because of the low leadership value. it must be kept in range of the general.

it is pretty expensive for something that has to combo charge against most units.

So people keep saying. But in the center of the army it's wasted and you might as well take another block of infantry.

The only place where it's remotely useful is on the flank. It's powerful enough to murder most flanking stuff. Fast enough to change direction straight over terrain and the only place where it has value is racing up the flank to line up horizontally with the main army.

I mean the short story on the arachnarok is really that it's basically a rather subpar choice. You'll need to take some risks and some care to make it useful. But really, in most cases 300 points worth of orcs will do you more good.

Ultimate Life Form
11-03-2011, 08:54
It's obvious that the Arachnarok has issues against the really good stuff, so keep clear or = 300 points of dead spider.

On the other hand, taking on small stuff is quite a waste and therefore = 300 points wasted.

So this leaves going up against medium-sized stuff, which it will happily eat for breakfast. It can sweep entire flanks clean, whereas in the centre of the army, as noted, it doesn't really contribute anything substantial.

Has anyone tried using it against Ogres? I can imagine it really chews through those juicy, saveless fatties without breaking a sweat - especially in the flank where only 3 attacks come back. :p

Vampiric16
11-03-2011, 09:10
Having a brother who plays High Elves, I can sing the praises of the web slinger. Ok, it won't wound much, but that's not what it's for. It gives ASL to any units it hits; against stuff like swordmasters that's pure gold.
As for the beast itself, you can't look at the competitiveness of it alone. It's a beautiful model, and if you want to field it, field it.

Wade Wilson
11-03-2011, 09:21
In time i really want to get hold of one but i dont know if i can justify spending the points in games under 3000 and alas most of the ones i play are between 1500-2500 (which is a shame as 8th seems geared towards 3000+ games). I think in terms of power and balance thae araknarok is a fairer monster than HPA and Hydras but is slightly over priced (by slightly i mean by 30-40 points!)but that is only in comparison to other monsters. If there is a pice increase for some under costed beasties (just HOW cheap did you say a war hydra is???)then it will be fairer.

I am happier with cheaper Wyverns to be honest! Hahaha! If only heroes could use them....

plantagenet
11-03-2011, 09:39
I am in the process of painting one up at the moment as I plan to try running it in a 2400 point army.

People seem to be completely disregarding 4+ save but against bow fire it is every bit as good as a regen save. Admitedly against handguns and crossbows its save will become worse but fire cannot cancel it out altogehter either which is the case with regen. The Spider is also more reliable than a giant or a A-bomb as it always attacks as you want i.e with 8 st 5 and 8 st 3 attacks plus d6 thunderstomp. It is also very quick and able to move over terrain so this could lead to some very interesting approaches to your enemy that an A-Bomb or Hydra could never hope to achieve. I also have taken the opportunity with the spider coming out to decide to field my general on the Wyvern again. Working off the principal of too many targets which one to shoot at time effect.

Troop wise I am fielding two unit of 50 NGs one unit of 25 Orcs and another of 20 Orcs, also runnign a unti of boars and a nice selection of war machines. It may be rubbish but will fun trying to work it all out :)

Squigkikka
11-03-2011, 09:41
this is a wrong approach. the arachnarok has to be compared to monsters that get used, not to the once that sit on shelves and unused in army books.

and in comparison to the monsters that a being fielded, it is significantly overpriced.

No, you are taking the wrong approach to balancing a game. If the Arachnarok was any cheaper, like lets say a 180, it'd certainly be on the level of the hydra but it would also be a goddamn rapefest against everything else (for that price).

And so you'd create a game in which every new monster has to be balanced against the hydra/abomination, which in turns means every new monster that comes along is OP as **** and no one is happier.

The real way to do this is to bump the hydra up in price, or perhaps change how it works.

I have hope for 8th ed armybooks and rules, because it seems to me that GW are intent on creating balanced books instead of popping out as much sick stuff as they can (Beastmen, Dark Eldar, Orcs and Goblins- we'll have to see about Tomb Kings). It's a really slow process with several months inbetween, but I think that slowly and steadily all races will be toned down or balanced in their new armybooks.

Or at least, that is what I hope.

I'm probably wrong though :( Either way, I guess the Arachnarok would be a bit more reasonable around the 250 pricetag, but I do not think it's overpriced- rather, it is the crazy stuff of other races that makes it seem less in comparison.

Urgat
11-03-2011, 09:43
it is not a good flanker, because of the low leadership value. it must be kept in range of the general.

It's probably a great flanker. It doesn't exactly need to test on its Ld any time it has to do something, it's protected by its terror rule, and is fast and nimble enough to get away from most things that would be dangerous to it. The rest will run away from it instead.


On the other hand, taking on small stuff is quite a waste and therefore = 300 points wasted.

And I don't believe taking on small stuff is wasted. Killing a unit (then two, then archers, then...) of fast cav isn't just about earning... what am I arguing about? I almost forgot I was on warseer, where you win by making points back. Not posting much lately was a smart move, let's keep at it, let's keep at it.

Wade Wilson
11-03-2011, 09:48
I almost forgot I was on warseer, where you win by making points back. Not posting much lately was a smart move, let's keep at it, let's keep at it.

naturaly! if your 600 point unit doesnt make Every single spent point back then it was a FAIL...even if said unit did help you to decisivly win a battle by having your enemy throw unit after unit at it rather than concentrating on those smaller units that have slowly but surely been getting into position for that vital game winning strike..... ;)

Squigkikka
11-03-2011, 09:52
Wade that signature is amazing, I wish I could steal it.

Storak
11-03-2011, 10:14
No, you are taking the wrong approach to balancing a game. If the Arachnarok was any cheaper, like lets say a 180, it'd certainly be on the level of the hydra but it would also be a goddamn rapefest against everything else (for that price).

And so you'd create a game in which every new monster has to be balanced against the hydra/abomination, which in turns means every new monster that comes along is OP as **** and no one is happier.

The real way to do this is to bump the hydra up in price, or perhaps change how it works.

I have hope for 8th ed armybooks and rules, because it seems to me that GW are intent on creating balanced books instead of popping out as much sick stuff as they can (Beastmen, Dark Eldar, Orcs and Goblins- we'll have to see about Tomb Kings). It's a really slow process with several months inbetween, but I think that slowly and steadily all races will be toned down or balanced in their new armybooks.

Or at least, that is what I hope.

I'm probably wrong though :( Either way, I guess the Arachnarok would be a bit more reasonable around the 250 pricetag, but I do not think it's overpriced- rather, it is the crazy stuff of other races that makes it seem less in comparison.

no, my approach is right, yours is wrong. we are not talking about months. we are talking about years until a new skaven book and at that moment, 8th edition will be over again.

balancing the 8th edition monsters means making them more similar to the hydra than to the giant. with attacks from the second rank and hordes of high strength attacks, monster take damage from units. they also can t break units that easily any longer, because of steadfast.

and this is not about tournament play, but about competitive games.

the point cost of the arachnarok should be much closer to 200 points than to 300 points. (so our point costs are not all that different. 220-230 might be my first try to balance it)

Squigkikka
11-03-2011, 10:18
Lets totally agree to disagree

Ultimate Life Form
11-03-2011, 10:28
Lets totally agree to disagree

Not again. :rolleyes:

This line would actually befit every single thread on the forum and serves as a knockout argument to choke off any further discussion - which is actually what this board is for, reducing the entire idea of an internet forum to absurdity.

In the future, I probably should plan my threads as follows:

1. Present an argument in my initial post.

2. Add a 'let's agree to disagree' disclaimer

3. Close thread - done!

Would make life so much easier! :p

Odin
11-03-2011, 10:28
Has anyone tried using it against Ogres? I can imagine it really chews through those juicy, saveless fatties without breaking a sweat - especially in the flank where only 3 attacks come back. :p

I doubt anyone fields Ogres in only one rank now - the second rank can fight with 3 attacks each, so 2 ranks minimum. But yes, it would do a fair bit of damage - though Ironguts would do plenty back.


no, my approach is right, yours is wrong. we are not talking about months. we are talking about years until a new skaven book and at that moment, 8th edition will be over again.

balancing the 8th edition monsters means making them more similar to the hydra than to the giant. with attacks from the second rank and hordes of high strength attacks, monster take damage from units. they also can t break units that easily any longer, because of steadfast.


Brilliant. So what you're saying is that the horribly undercosted monsters should never be fixed, but that GW should instead compound the error by making all monsters completely overpowered and underpriced? Er, no thanks. Yes it will take a few years to get around to fixing the Hydra, probably longer with the HPA. But making the problem worse is not a solution!

Kyte
11-03-2011, 10:52
a couple of broken owerpowered units should not be compensated for by owerpowering other things. That is like fighting fire with fire, which just ends up in more fire.

Speaking of fire, let's not start a flame war, and let's in stead stay on topic and discuss the Arachnarok.

It is the single most impressive plastic kit GW has ever done, and has set whole new standards for miniature sculpture in general, so aestetically, it's even more overpowered than the HPA and Hydra, whose models are fairly bad sculptures IMO.

In Game Terms, it is a fair choice. It has good survivability, and stats, and the special rules offers whole new tactical options, that OnG cannot get elsewhere. The ASL catapult is really cool, and especially usefull in all goblin armies, where any debuff is your friend.

The option of using it as a Great Shaman mount, however is a rather poor choice as I see it... It's not like the EoTG, where it turns your average caster into a survivable casting powerhouse, and should not see much use.

In my oppinion, it is the perfect OnG flanker, and an especially golden choice in pure goblin armies.

Again, the shaman sculpture is characteristic and really cool, so I don't complain about the option.

Also there's like 10 or so small spiders in the box, which could be put on 40 mm bases for forest goblin themed snotling swarms. They are also great for general conversions and unit fillers.

The vast crew models is the biggest advantage of the kit IMO.

Find a bits supplier or get some epoxy rubber and casting resin, and make a unit of Forest Goblins! Pure epic!

Squigkikka
11-03-2011, 11:15
I think the Arachnarok is amazing, both in model and stats. True, I haven't used it a whole lot but the result is very positive! It, along with numerous fast cav, pump wagons and other fast movers (well, fast moves on a regular basis :P) provide a lot of different targets for the enemy to shoot- too many, even. All are threatening early on for WMs and weak units, not all can be taken out.


Not again. :rolleyes:

This line would actually befit every single thread on the forum and serves as a knockout argument to choke off any further discussion - which is actually what this board is for, reducing the entire idea of an internet forum to absurdity.

In the future, I probably should plan my threads as follows:

1. Present an argument in my initial post.

2. Add a 'let's agree to disagree' disclaimer

3. Close thread - done!

Would make life so much easier! :p

Hey, if you'd like to continue reposting my thoughts on how I think a game should be balanced go ahead and be my guest. Nothing more can be added to the subject, and he disagrees with me. If continuing posting the same stuff over and over for the next few pages is your idea of a good argument, I'm afraid I can't oblige!

I don't argue for the sake of arguing.

Storak
11-03-2011, 11:16
Brilliant. So what you're saying is that the horribly undercosted monsters should never be fixed, but that GW should instead compound the error by making all monsters completely overpowered and underpriced? Er, no thanks. Yes it will take a few years to get around to fixing the Hydra, probably longer with the HPA. But making the problem worse is not a solution!

i think the confusion here is caused by the effect that these monsters had in 7th edition. these monsters would run into combat, strike first because of the charge rule, kill everyone in base to base contact, suffer zero return attack and beat static combat resolution, often breaking the rank and file unit they were charging.

most of this has changed significantly in 8th edition. thunderstomp helps, but doesn t compensate all of the negative effects for the monsters. most of them will not break a unit of similar points any longer, and in general they will suffer close combat wounds from rank and file these days.

some of the good monsters are still underpriced, but only by a little. (i think the bigger problem are bad rules, for example handler ward save on the hellcannon which also has a too high shooting strength or the breath attack of the hydra)

mostly they FEEL underpriced in comparison to other monsters (like the giant) or other units in similar role (cavalry). but the real problem is with the prices of those other units, in 8th edition it is not mainly the price of the good monsters.

Mid'ean
11-03-2011, 12:05
Well I have used it twice so far. Did a bat rep on one of them. Used him against a HE army were he did well soaking up missile fire and chasing off remnents of other units. Other game against a crazy poison shooty TK army were he was killed first turn before I even got to go......:wtf:

Things I have come away with using him are that he will die to a hvy shooting army, but that will take fire away from other units. If used as a support unit with the flinger it's a waste of the monsters abilities and will get shot down. Only way I would use it is a point and click medium unit/maybe monster attacker that you need to keep near your general for his LD and the spiders stubborn. And with his large base that is pretty easy to manage. In fun games at your local store he's fun and looks awesome on the table. In a tourney/competitive environment I can spend 290 points better.

Wade Wilson
11-03-2011, 12:18
Wade that signature is amazing, I wish I could steal it.

Steal away! it was written by a far wiser (or at least wittier) person than myself and somes up angry arguments about the game online very well. ;)

Spiney Norman
11-03-2011, 12:41
no, my approach is right, yours is wrong. we are not talking about months. we are talking about years until a new skaven book and at that moment, 8th edition will be over again.

balancing the 8th edition monsters means making them more similar to the hydra than to the giant. with attacks from the second rank and hordes of high strength attacks, monster take damage from units. they also can t break units that easily any longer, because of steadfast.

and this is not about tournament play, but about competitive games.

the point cost of the arachnarok should be much closer to 200 points than to 300 points. (so our point costs are not all that different. 220-230 might be my first try to balance it)

However logical that approach seems all it does is feed the power creep that so comprehensively screwed up 7th Edition. Consider this; no army book is absolutely perfect, even the most balanced books are likely to have a unit or two which are underpowered and hardly used, or a bit overpowered and hence end up in every army.

If you drive your production by trying to pitch the next book at the same level as the overpowered elements (i.e the hydras and HPAs) of the previous book you get a progressively escalating spiral of power creep that eventually reached the point that Chaos daemons did in 7th, and you have to drastically rejig the core rules to reset the goal-posts (i.e 8th Edition).

For the good of the game they cannot set everything at the same power level as HPAs and hydras, if only because there are books like beastmen which are the same age or younger than skaven/dark elves which didn't get the "jump-lead" treatment and will be nigh unplayable if everything in 8th was raised to HPA level.

And as someone who started O&G at the start of 7E I really don't get where all this giant-hate comes from, either he gets knocked out be a cannonball early on or he gets stuck into combat and causes absolute mayhem. I have never been disappointed with my giant's performance in the games where he has actually got into combat. I realise that some people are still mourning the loss of monsters as the auto-win button that 7th granted them, but I really think its time to get over it and move on.

Replicant253
11-03-2011, 13:19
[QUOTE=And as someone who started O&G at the start of 7E I really don't get where all this giant-hate comes from, either he gets knocked out be a cannonball early on or he gets stuck into combat and causes absolute mayhem. I have never been disappointed with my giant's performance in the games where he has actually got into combat. I realise that some people are still mourning the loss of monsters as the auto-win button that 7th granted them, but I really think its time to get over it and move on.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. He is slightly over priced but of all the rares in the Beastmen book he is the one i always take (i refuse to field a Beastmen army without at least one monster).

He consistently does well, is a great model and has different/fun rules.

To keep this every so slightly on topic, i intend to use an Arachnorak and see them good and getting up flanks quickly.

Kalandros
11-03-2011, 20:10
If I'm not mistaken - Monsters may Assault buildings as well, so you can assault a building, like the Watchtower Scenario for example - sure, the spider won't occupy it afterward, but if you can shift a unit out of the watch tower then its all good - bring in your boyz after that. The spider gets all 8 of its attacks and the 8 crew attacks and then add thunderstomp - Combat result is decided by wounds dealt only plus musician - so unless you wiff completely, you're sure to win the combat and then you can hope they fail their annoying Steadfast test..

edit: Okay the Thunderstomp can only hit one model, not the unit but you can direct that at an annoying model or hey, if it gets you one more kill on those 3+ ward save chosens, its all good, just reduce their numbers until you can wipe them out and then occupy the watch tower - you can charge it every turn starting on turn one with an Arachnarok O: Just keep killing models until your own infantry can squeeze through! :D

Turtleking
12-03-2011, 15:30
I agree with the Spider being used in support. I just don't think it could handle things on it's own.

Storak
12-03-2011, 17:25
However logical that approach seems all it does is feed the power creep that so comprehensively screwed up 7th Edition. Consider this; no army book is absolutely perfect, even the most balanced books are likely to have a unit or two which are underpowered and hardly used, or a bit overpowered and hence end up in every army.

If you drive your production by trying to pitch the next book at the same level as the overpowered elements (i.e the hydras and HPAs) of the previous book you get a progressively escalating spiral of power creep that eventually reached the point that Chaos daemons did in 7th, and you have to drastically rejig the core rules to reset the goal-posts (i.e 8th Edition).

For the good of the game they cannot set everything at the same power level as HPAs and hydras, if only because there are books like beastmen which are the same age or younger than skaven/dark elves which didn't get the "jump-lead" treatment and will be nigh unplayable if everything in 8th was raised to HPA level.

i think there is a serious problem with your approach. the difference between our views seems to be, where the middle of the power level is.
And i am really sure, that the beastmen book is nowhere close to the middle of power!

as i said in the beginning. people should look at the monsters that do get used, not at those that are barely or never used in competitive games.

i simply have serious doubts about the plan, to bring all monsters down to giant level. it wouldn t be good for the game (basically removes monsters from competitive games) nor would it be good for GW sales. (people seriously dislike big nerfs to their expensive model collection, especially when they have to pay a premium price to BUY the nerf (army book).

so the only way to "reset" the game is, to make changes with an update, for example the FAQ changes for 8th edition would have been a good opportunity. such an update could advice players to bring army books in line, by changing point costs to balance at least the worst units.

then players could still look forward to new beneficial changes in the army books.


And as someone who started O&G at the start of 7E I really don't get where all this giant-hate comes from, either he gets knocked out be a cannonball early on or he gets stuck into combat and causes absolute mayhem. I have never been disappointed with my giant's performance in the games where he has actually got into combat. I realise that some people are still mourning the loss of monsters as the auto-win button that 7th granted them, but I really think its time to get over it and move on.

some of the orc attacks just do not work at all in 8th edition. "yell and bawl" is completely useless in an environment in which the giant nearly always strikes last and faces steadfast troops, if there are even only 5 of them!

the giant is not only bad against shooting and magic, but is also easily killed by the units that currently form the majority of battlefield environment.


I agree with the Spider being used in support. I just don't think it could handle things on it's own.

i used the spider to support nigh goblin units in my first battle with the new book. the huge basesize turns out to be a massive handicap for the spider. if you factor it in, the spider is not flexible at all. unless you keep massive space between units, most turn moves of the spider are illegal.

snottlebocket
12-03-2011, 18:35
i used the spider to support nigh goblin units in my first battle with the new book. the huge basesize turns out to be a massive handicap for the spider. if you factor it in, the spider is not flexible at all. unless you keep massive space between units, most turn moves of the spider are illegal.

That's why I keep saying run it up the flank where it has space. Sure it's leadership sucks but it shouldn't run into anything that will drive it of on a flank either. It'll either die running up the flank or it'll be setup to flank charge by the time your center hits the melee.

Risks need to be taken. Otherwise just get 300 points worth of orcs.

Storak
12-03-2011, 21:47
That's why I keep saying run it up the flank where it has space. Sure it's leadership sucks but it shouldn't run into anything that will drive it of on a flank either. It'll either die running up the flank or it'll be setup to flank charge by the time your center hits the melee.

Risks need to be taken. Otherwise just get 300 points worth of orcs.

in the game that i played on friday, the flank that it would have been placed on contained 5 hounds, a hero on a flying disc and a unit of 5 chaos knights.

the hero could just fly around it. the dogs would delay it for 1 turn and the knights would beat the spider in combat, forcing a Ld 6 roll...

i do not really see any use for it on an unsupported flank.

snottlebocket
12-03-2011, 21:59
in the game that i played on friday, the flank that it would have been placed on contained 5 hounds, a hero on a flying disc and a unit of 5 chaos knights.

the hero could just fly around it. the dogs would delay it for 1 turn and the knights would beat the spider in combat, forcing a Ld 6 roll...

i do not really see any use for it on an unsupported flank.

That's not a normal flank. That's a sizeable portion his army and should be treated as such.

Da GoBBo
12-03-2011, 22:04
And seeing as that chaos flank is representative for all flanks, that renders Spidey useless as a flanker :wtf: I find your way of comparing throughout these 8th ed. O&G debates odd, to say the least. You never seem to take the army a unit poses in into consideration. I think the Arachnarok is not really usefull in a Chaos Warrior army for example, they don't need such an expensive supportunit. Cheap goblins however do well with a monstrum like this, whereas Orcs fare well enough with just a chariot. I greatly agree with your remarks about monsters in 8th as opposed to monsters in 7th though.


i think the confusion here is caused by the effect that these monsters had in 7th edition. these monsters would run into combat, strike first because of the charge rule, kill everyone in base to base contact, suffer zero return attack and beat static combat resolution, often breaking the rank and file unit they were charging.

most of this has changed significantly in 8th edition. thunderstomp helps, but doesn t compensate all of the negative effects for the monsters. most of them will not break a unit of similar points any longer, and in general they will suffer close combat wounds from rank and file these days.

Good stuff and a good point in the debate about Arachnarok/Hydra/HPA pricing. It also illustrates why the Arachnarok is not a solo unit. Some people assume they might as well take an orc unit for the same points. I say they fullfill different jobs and even if they can perform the same role, the Arachnarok is a fantastic flavourunit. I mean, just look at the kit, it's awesome? Why they sculpted the spiders mouth like a woman's private parts with fangs on the inside is beyond me though :wtf: a bit disturbing too.

Kalandros
12-03-2011, 22:11
One trick is to teleport the Arachnarok 5d6 away :D Now you're behind any redirecting/delaying units. Stab the enemy in the rear.
Gotta combine Big and Lil Waaaghs!

patchy
12-03-2011, 23:54
after a play test it did fairly well. hand of gork really made it usefull. sure it didnt pile up massive amount of points in kills but it sure did plenty as far holding up the enemy and some lucky bow fire snagged a lone wizard

Storak
13-03-2011, 07:49
And seeing as that chaos flank is representative for all flanks, that renders Spidey useless as a flanker :wtf: I find your way of comparing throughout these 8th ed. O&G debates odd, to say the least. You never seem to take the army a unit poses in into consideration. I think the Arachnarok is not really usefull in a Chaos Warrior army for example, they don't need such an expensive supportunit.

no. this was a flank in a game that i played. the problem is NOT that this entire flank would have been difficult for the spider. the real problem is, that EACH of the units on that flank pose a problem to it. the flyer can basically ignore it. (it could also win combat, forcing a test against 6!) the dogs can delay it for at least a turn, for a really cheap price. and the knights would beat it in combat, again forcing a test against gobbo leadership on a 300 point monster!

i simply do not think that it is as efficient as a flanker as people say.


Good stuff and a good point in the debate about Arachnarok/Hydra/HPA pricing. It also illustrates why the Arachnarok is not a solo unit. Some people assume they might as well take an orc unit for the same points. I say they fullfill different jobs and even if they can perform the same role, the Arachnarok is a fantastic flavourunit. I mean, just look at the kit, it's awesome? Why they sculpted the spiders mouth like a woman's private parts with fangs on the inside is beyond me though :wtf: a bit disturbing too.

O&G desperately needed a unit that adds kills to the blocks of troops. (i do not think that chariots are enough any longer) i fear the spider has to be placed in general range, next to the outermost unit on one side of your battleline.

snottlebocket
13-03-2011, 08:11
i simply do not think that it is as efficient as a flanker as people say.



Nobody said it was an efficient flanker.

Here's the thing, and I get the idea that this little fact keeps getting ignored. The Arachnarok is not very good!. It's simply not an amazing monsters, it's underpowered, badly protected and it costs a ton of points.

None of these posts are claiming to be the uber arachnarok strategy. Most of it is just people trying to make the most out of a fairly bad monster simply because it's such a cool creature. It's pretty lousy to begin with and you'll have to take some fairly serious risks to get it to pay of. Hence the flanking. There's safer ways to use the spider but it'll be an even bigger waste of points than when you take a risk with it.

I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't take that long before it disappears from tables altogether. I think it's an awesome model but already I'm starting to think I'd rather use those 300 points to try out quite a lot of other stuff from the list. Stuff that might actually do something for my army.

Storak
13-03-2011, 08:27
It's probably a great flanker. It doesn't exactly need to test on its Ld any time it has to do something, it's protected by its terror rule, and is fast and nimble enough to get away from most things that would be dangerous to it. The rest will run away from it instead.


In my oppinion, it is the perfect OnG flanker, and an especially golden choice in pure goblin armies.




I think the Arachnarok is amazing, both in model and stats. True, I haven't used it a whole lot but the result is very positive! It, along with numerous fast cav, pump wagons and other fast movers (well, fast moves on a regular basis :P) provide a lot of different targets for the enemy to shoot- too many, even.


One trick is to teleport the Arachnarok 5d6 away :D Now you're behind any redirecting/delaying units. Stab the enemy in the rear.
Gotta combine Big and Lil Waaaghs!

multiple people on this topic alone claim that it is a good flanker (or used in a similar role behind the enemy lines) and even more do so on other topics.

i do not think that it is a good flanker, simply because of the low leadership value. i also think that it is significantly overpriced.
but i might still use it, because i need stuff that generates kills and doesn t die easily. (like black orcs, i am forced to use units that simply are bad in comparison to what other armies field, because they are the best units for a certain purpose, that our book has to offer.

snottlebocket
13-03-2011, 08:28
Hey it's probably better at flanking than anything else. Mostly that just means it sucks at going in frontal though.

Spiney Norman
13-03-2011, 08:53
i do not think that it is a good flanker, simply because of the low leadership value. i also think that it is significantly overpriced.

That is probably because you're comparing it to overpowered monstrosities like HPAs and hydras. Compared to other more balanced monsters like the Stegadon ancient; its only 15pts more, has twice as many attacks, but no impact hits, has more crew, but they can't be hit in combat and crucially has more wounds than the steg and its Ld value is the same. It circumvents the primary weakness of the steg (crew can be killed in combat which easily breaks it).

I'd say it is balanced fine, its just not the next hell bit abomination, which is a good thing, the cycle of power creep has to end somewhere.

Morkash
13-03-2011, 08:57
Sadly, but you may be right. Right now I'm just like "Oi! Of course I take my Arachnarok to the tournament, no matter what!", but that could change afterwards based on the experience I'll gather there. For casual games it is an awesome model of course, so we will hopefully see a bunch of them there... but for really competitive games it will be to vulnerable, I'm afraid.
Our rare selection has a nice variety of choices, so you can always swap to something different, if you have no love for spiders. With a spider, you need a chunk of your rare percentage, and the River Trolls would be so lovely models as well...
Time will tell, I suppose...let's play a few more games with it to begin with. :)

drear
13-03-2011, 09:07
its the points cost that puts me off more than anything, 90 points less and id take it every game..but for that 90 points i could get so much crammed into special or even take 2 pump wagons extra!

i do see it as our stegadon, its tough, and its scary in combat if used correctly. however even comparing it to a stegadon is weird..impact hits? no poisoned shots ? no
so its got 8 short bow shots a turn ..its low bs and mostly long range/moving penalties, and a very low str.

in combat, its not dealing impact hits, which is why the stegadons so fun, its got 8 attacks..which are a highish str attacks..but then its a low initiative. which isnt as bad as it could be, as all those wounds mean things wont genrally kill it in 1 go, especially if you run it like a fat chariot and only engage corner to corner.

for what it does i can see a giant doing it better. giants can get wardsaves now, and can decimate combats with jump up and down , or by just dying and falling over! and a giants cheaper, more wounds, and can flee from a charge.

Kalandros
13-03-2011, 16:45
The one thing I'm looking at is using it for a shaman - because +2 Channeling is incredibly powerful, 4+ to get an extra power AND dispel dice? and for ALL shaman within 12"? That makes for one massive powerful Magic phase and very efficient Dispel phase - plus add a Lv 1 with the +1 channeling staff for a 3+ dice every turn.

You'll get high dice even without rolling high and you'll be getting extra dispel dice with ease.
And what better way to protect an Arachnarok from cannon balls than with another Arachnarok in its way? ;P

But yea, we all dismissed the Giants very fast because - 200 pts for 6 wounds T5 isn't that awesome, but its combat potential is definitely still there. (and who would pay 20 pts for a 6+ ward on the giant, seriously?)

isanti13
14-03-2011, 00:54
no, my approach is right, yours is wrong. we are not talking about months. we are talking about years until a new skaven book and at that moment, 8th edition will be over again.

balancing the 8th edition monsters means making them more similar to the hydra than to the giant. with attacks from the second rank and hordes of high strength attacks, monster take damage from units. they also can t break units that easily any longer, because of steadfast.

and this is not about tournament play, but about competitive games.

the point cost of the arachnarok should be much closer to 200 points than to 300 points. (so our point costs are not all that different. 220-230 might be my first try to balance it)

Ha. You're logic is so bad its unbelievable.

Kalandros
14-03-2011, 02:31
The only problem with its point costs is that regen monsters cost much much less and regen is immensely more powerful.


Ha. You're logic is so bad its unbelievable.

As bad as what I'm quoting?

Turtleking
14-03-2011, 02:55
I don't feel like it hits harder enough to justify the points.

And regen lack makes it... high in cost.

ThrowN
14-03-2011, 12:08
Ever looked at 40k? Mostly you'll find lists with an all-or-nothing approach on vehicles.

With the overall point decrease it should be pretty easy to fit the following in to a 2000 pts army:
Warboss on Wyvern, Arachnarok, Giant, 6 Trolls. In a 2000pts army you'd still have more than 1000 pts for cheap rank an file, fast cav, magic. With so many targets for cannons (mind, only 2 armies out there have them anyways) a monster that needs at least 2, on average even 3, hiting and wounding cannonballs to be stopped becomes a serious thread. It will NEVER be killed with one lucky shot! How many single models in the game offer this?
Maybe the whining O&G players just aren't used to the concept of reliabilty :D

The book offers us so many army builds. If you only put one cannonball magnet on the battlefield you wrote a bad list to beginn with.

And, as others have pointed out, one might be happy that GW learned from their hydra/HPA failures...