PDA

View Full Version : Tomb Kings and Vampire counts what are the similarities and differences in playstyle?



Erikjust
11-01-2012, 06:06
(im a bit split if it should be put in General or Tactics but im putting it in tactics to play it safe)

Okay if my Warhammer history is up to date (so to speak) Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts was at one point one army the Vampire Counts since they have split in two the Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts.

Well my question is, in a sense, how clean was that split between the two, do the two armies work on same basic play style or is the "winning conditions" I.E the optimal strategy you can successfully use with the two armies completely different.

An example (that may not be true but in a sense serve to highlight the question) Tomb Kings rely on mainly their speed and magic to win a fight. This is something you cant do with Vampire Counts, as they are not nearly as fast or strong in magic as tomb kings.
Instead what you must count on is superiority in numbers and the ability to raise cheap units to hold of the opponents stronger units and warmachines until you can get in with your stronger units and finish off his before he can do anything to prevent it.

So in short whats the differences and similarities in play style between the tomb kings and Vampire counts?

Asuryan's Spear
11-01-2012, 10:19
i think theyre play style is extremely similar.
they both rely heavily on magic and killing the hierophant (general for VCs) is a death knell. however, if your opponent has an ounce of tactical nuance, this is harder in VCs. Both rely heavily on tar pits and a few heavily hitting elites.
However TK basic infantry can be nastier with MWBD and Chariots can really pack a punch whereas the VC basic infantry is there solely to die which is why they are easier to raise with magic
VCs tend to be more difficult to use as they have a wider range of special rules to exploit

theshoveller
11-01-2012, 10:39
For better or worse, Tomb Kings have a wealth of shooting options that Vampire Counts lack. As a result, a viable TK strategy is to whittle away numbers with shooting attrition before delivering a big punch late in the game (through chariots, constructs, whathaveyou). I'm not sure how a VC army would do the same thing.

Spiney Norman
11-01-2012, 11:23
i think theyre play style is extremely similar.
they both rely heavily on magic and killing the hierophant (general for VCs) is a death knell.

Well it used to be, current rumours suggest this is no longer an issue for VC as long as you have at least one wizard using the vampire lore left on the field. Tk dies like flies as soon as the hierophant is dead though, the one advantage that TK do have however is that they still have their general's bubble Ld to mitigate some of the losses due to crumbling.

Also I don't get your point about few heavy hitting elites, the TK army is full of them: chariots, halberd TG, Necro Knights, GW Ushabs, sphinxes and Colossi. From the looks of it the new VC book has plenty of heavy hitting elites as well, GW Grave guard, vargheists, terrorgheist, hexwraiths, zombie dragon etc.

Erikjust
11-01-2012, 13:22
For better or worse, Tomb Kings have a wealth of shooting options that Vampire Counts lack. As a result, a viable TK strategy is to whittle away numbers with shooting attrition before delivering a big punch late in the game (through chariots, constructs, whathaveyou). I'm not sure how a VC army would do the same thing.

The very problem with such strategy is that in the old armybook (dont know if they can still do it though) All the VC would really have to do was summon several skeletons directly in front of your warmachine and archers.
They would then hold you for an entire round of combat thus making it impossible to get a single shot in.

Maybe they have limited that in this one so that its no longer possible to keep your army tied up round after round so all they really can do is sit there and wait.

Crovax20
11-01-2012, 14:50
Imho the armies are quite a bit different. Tomb Kings pack a load of high toughness monsters first of all and have acces to chariots. On top of that Tomb Kings has units that can come up out of the ground starting turn 2.

Also if the Tomb Kings Hierophant dies, it isn't as bad as the general in the VC army. Tomb King leadership overall is quite a bit higher, with a lot of units packing leadership 8. One of the benefits of having souls that pledged their lives to the king, instead of just being forced to fight by some foul vampire/necromancer.

Imho Tomb Kings are a far more interesting army to play, much more choice on how you want to approach the battle.

skirder
11-01-2012, 17:55
Similarities:
cheap, crap core that can be buffed and brought back to life (VC are much better at bringing their units back to life)
need to protect characters or the army fails (VC are MUCH better at this, as they can easily have a 2+/3++ on a t5 model that can be healed, vs TK 4++ on a t4 model that can't be healed)
hard hitting elites (the VC elites can generally survive better, with 2+ armor saves, etereal, etc)
Unstable weakness and strength
Really strong magic potential

What the TK have:
range, ssc's and archers are pretty awesome
chariots

What VC have:
Speed, they can march on top of having one of the best movement spells in the game
GW's Love... never underestimate being more favored by the creator.

Asuryan's Spear
11-01-2012, 19:16
Sorry Spiney norman, you are right about the heavy hitters,
however i'm not to sure about sphinxes and colossi they tend to bounce in my experience but then that might just be me

skirder
11-01-2012, 22:45
i had 2 colossi go through 40 black orcs and ended up dying to the warboss and bsb in the unit. yes, he rolled poorly, but it wasn't entirely bad rolls. they can chew through quite a bit if you get them on the flank

Doommasters
12-01-2012, 00:59
They really are very different and the 8th edition books really show this.

The only really similar thing is that they are both Undead and share some fluff. Otherwise not much else.

TK players will tell you they are underpowered, however VC 8th seems around the same power level from a first glance.....time will tell.

Erikjust
12-01-2012, 03:37
They really are very different and the 8th edition books really show this.

The only really similar thing is that they are both Undead and share some fluff. Otherwise not much else.

TK players will tell you they are underpowered, however VC 8th seems around the same power level from a first glance.....time will tell.

I hope so i really do.
It would be a sad thing if Vampire Counts once again could sing the song Anything you can do i can do better to the Tomb Kings.

herohammer
12-01-2012, 06:19
Tk are are the dead guy jack of all trades army. They can run very heavy shooting lists, have some of the better monsters from out of the last 4 books, and have a pretty wide variety of good elite units (and ushabti which just suck).

VC are extremely close combat focused, the only ranged attack they have are things like the hexwraith's moving through stuff to do hits and the banshee and terrorgheist screams. They have among the strongest combat characters in the entire game with wight kings comparable to most armies lords down to W3 in heroes and vampire lords able to be geared with 200 pts of combat items pretty much on top of a base statline like a chaos lord.

Both armies have crap core overcome by the TK via my will be done and the arrows of asaph rule and by VC via more efficient raise dead spells.

Both armies depend upon magic and have a variety of magic boosting effects.

TheKingInYellow
12-01-2012, 17:10
I hope so i really do.
It would be a sad thing if Vampire Counts once again could sing the song Anything you can do i can do better to the Tomb Kings.

I just don't see that happening.

VC will likely have a better magic phase. TK have a much better shooting phase. TK core (Chariots) are better. VC specials look better. Rares are pretty even.

Ville
12-01-2012, 18:22
VC are MUCH better at this, as they can easily have a 2+/3++ on a t5 model that can be healed


3+ Ward save? Is that something in the new book?

Snowflake
12-01-2012, 19:07
Imho the armies are quite a bit different. Tomb Kings pack a load of high toughness monsters first of all and have acces to chariots. On top of that Tomb Kings has units that can come up out of the ground starting turn 2.

Also if the Tomb Kings Hierophant dies, it isn't as bad as the general in the VC army. Tomb King leadership overall is quite a bit higher, with a lot of units packing leadership 8. One of the benefits of having souls that pledged their lives to the king, instead of just being forced to fight by some foul vampire/necromancer.

Imho Tomb Kings are a far more interesting army to play, much more choice on how you want to approach the battle.

Thank you. I get really tired of people stating that killing the Heiro is bad for TK. LD 8 plus the constructs taking 1 less means that about the only thing that will crumble is Archers.

Snowflake
12-01-2012, 19:09
Both armies have crap core overcome by the TK via my will be done and the arrows of asaph rule and by VC via more efficient raise dead spells.



TK chariots are not crap, they're awesome.

NitrosOkay
12-01-2012, 19:28
Vampire Counts have always been about outrageously strong characters and terrible core.

Enigmatik1
12-01-2012, 19:37
TK chariots are not crap, they're awesome.

I just mentally inserted infantry into his thought to make it complete/true. :D

skirder
12-01-2012, 21:36
3+ Ward save? Is that something in the new book?

not sure if it's there, but the vc player i know almost always has a 3+ ward somewhere

Lord Zarkov
12-01-2012, 22:55
not sure if it's there, but the vc player i know almost always has a 3+ ward somewhere
In the 6th and 7th Ed VC books there was a 3+ ward vs ranged attacks, but there's no general 3+ ward for VCs

Spiney Norman
13-01-2012, 07:24
Sorry Spiney norman, you are right about the heavy hitters,
however i'm not to sure about sphinxes and colossi they tend to bounce in my experience but then that might just be me

The thing about the TKarmy is that aside from maybe large units of chariots or necropolis knights no unit works well independently, they need to be supported by others.

Colossi or sphinxes work well in support of tomb guard, or even each other, although my colossus has done me proud on its own once or twice. One time I remember specifically was against ogres,he managed to put 9 unsaved wounds on a unit of bulls before he ran out of steam while only taking one in return, then promptly ran down the unit including the butcher and BSB that were in there too.

A sphinx is probably tough enough to do a single round of combat on its own, but it certainly depends on what its facing. A combination of the crews attacks, a thunder crush, thunder stomp and a breath weapon discharge can put a lot of wounds on a target.

valle
15-01-2012, 12:00
I really do feel for TK players, things must be really hard for them since threads like this always ends up in whines and fears about what VC can do... I guess they wont feel better till its concluded that "Anything VC can do, TK can do better" a bit sad, since there are a few OP armies out there that deserve much more whining imo, but i guess all that dosnt matter, skaven and demons can clear the table with our armies and not a bad word said... They aint undead you see.

Tuttivillus
15-01-2012, 22:56
The thing about the TKarmy is that aside from maybe large units of chariots or necropolis knights no unit works well independently, they need to be supported by others.

Well, VC units, many of them actually also won't work without the support. Same applies to many other armies, if not all of them actually :shifty:.

theshoveller
16-01-2012, 05:41
Well, VC units, many of them actually also won't work without the support. Same applies to many other armies, if not all of them actually :shifty:.
You're not wrong, but it's only in recent books that this is becoming apparent (Tomb Kings and Beastmen being examples) - since "the internet" can't find a one-trick-pony strategy to win with them, it's claimed that they're underpowered.

Spiney Norman
17-01-2012, 10:55
I really do feel for TK players, things must be really hard for them since threads like this always ends up in whines and fears about what VC can do... I guess they wont feel better till its concluded that "Anything VC can do, TK can do better" a bit sad, since there are a few OP armies out there that deserve much more whining imo, but i guess all that dosnt matter, skaven and demons can clear the table with our armies and not a bad word said... They aint undead you see.

Dude, theres really no need for sarcastic gloating, the VC army book has outclassed Tomb Kings for the last 3 editions, we're used to it by now.