PDA

View Full Version : Horde formation



vinush
15-04-2012, 12:14
Who uses horde formation?

Seriously, who uses it?

I've not come up against a "horde" yet in any of my games. I know we normally only play 1000, 1500 or occasionally 2000 point games, but even the O&G and Skaven players don't run their uber cheap troops in Horde formation.

I see all of these posts on here saying that a hordee of this means such and such, or this particular build won't work against a unit in horde formation, and it got me to wondering how often people actually see horde formation in their games?

THE \/ince

Rosstifer
15-04-2012, 12:20
I run my 24 Chosen 10 wide fairly often. Not really a horde, but they hit like one. I've also run Marauders, Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Chaos Warriors (Once for silly fun), Gor, Bestigor and Corsairs in Horde. I don't often start a game in Horde. I much prefer bieng able to choose the moment I go horde, as being in horde isn't always an advantage.

You don't often see cheap stuff as hordes, funnily enough. It's often "Elite" troops like Black Orcs, Bloodletters and Bestigor that can have a single high strength attack.

Gazak Blacktoof
15-04-2012, 12:26
I've only been using empire recently and I've used spears, halberds and great swords in horde. None of my opponents has used a horde formation yet, preferring instead to pin the horde with a deeper unit if possible. Myself and another empire player had great success in a 2 v 2 battle using an army of mixed unit sizes. He had small deep delaying units and I had fewer, larger horde units. In that way we could hold our opponents and not give up VPs using his units then concentrate force using horded up units to punch other parts of the line.

Ponge
15-04-2012, 12:45
I never use them, I prefer to increase my chances of being steadfast so I play with deeper units.

warplock
15-04-2012, 13:10
I've not come up against a "horde" yet in any of my games. I know we normally only play 1000, 1500 or occasionally 2000 point games, but even the O&G and Skaven players don't run their uber cheap troops in Horde formation.


Thats because theres no point running cheap rubbish troops in horde, because they'll lose combat anyway so you want them to be steadfast for as long as possible. Sacrificing ranks for an extra 7-10 mediocre attacks isn't worth it. And as you play small games, you're unlikely to see elite units big enough to warrant hordeing.

Undead might be an exception, since they don't care about steadfast. But as soon as you start talking about grave guard equivalents or white lions, it's clear to see that an extra rank of accurate S5 or 6 attacks is worth it.

The Low King
15-04-2012, 13:15
I used a horde of slayers the other day, quite a threatening sight.

Other than that the only horde i ever use is Dwarf warriors with GWs

Valaraukar
15-04-2012, 13:17
As previously mentioned most cheap troops aren't good enough fighters to be worth hordeing given the reduced ranks for steadfast but any offensive rather than defensive unit benefits from being in horder formation to maximise the damage output from a given frontage, hence it tends to be high strength mid cost units such as bloodletters, bestigor even halberdiers, stormvermin that are most commonly seen in horde formation as most truly elite units such as Chaos warriors and elven and dwarven elites tend to be cost prohibitive to horde properly although in larger games these will also show up.

I regularly field hordes with my offensive units and deep defensive units for steadfast to maximise the traits of each, I have also had significant success running monstrous infantry hordes such as troll and minotaur hordes which if sufficiently protected by chaff to avoid tarpitting and flank charges can cause people real problems as they tend to destroy anything they touch.

Djekar
15-04-2012, 13:22
I run my dark elf troops 10 wide quite frequently, though they are generally only 20-30 in number, so it isn't a true horde. For them it's all about maximizing the number of attacks from the front rank.

As far as Orcs go, I always horde my Savage Orc Big Uns (economical "elites" for the Orcs), I have frequently horded Black Orcs (though that may be changing soon), and I also frequently horde Squig Herds and/or Night Goblins. Yes, even the lowly night goblin with a spear can be scary given enough green bodies.

Finally with Warriors, like Rosstifer I have run units of Warriors or Chosen 10 or 12 wide to maximize attacks, though only once have I run a true horde of these (1 of each, actually - 30 chosen is pretty stupid, really), I generally try to fit in a horde of greatweapon Marauders because they are pretty dang cheap and I have tried the Chaos Troll Horde led by Trogg once too.

thesheriff
15-04-2012, 13:43
I usually run a horde of bloodletters, but beyond that, I dont eally own anything eligable for hording.

thesheriff

Sunner
15-04-2012, 13:50
Love talking hordes. Always take them when I can fit them in my goblin army, a unit of 50 with the banner of the spider god. Or if the points allow a 10x10 unit with a general straight up the middle, its dangerous in a 1500 point game. For fun, I took a horde of 50 Maraurders Great Weapon, Mark of Khrone and Wulfrik the Wanderer coming in behind the enemy. The person I was playing had no idea what was happening.

dwarfboy
15-04-2012, 14:14
For fun, I took a horde of 50 Maraurders Great Weapon, Mark of Khrone and Wulfrik the Wanderer coming in behind the enemy. The person I was playing had no idea what was happening.

My brother does that quite often, is quite annoying but looks impressive on the board and hits like a ton of crazy bricks. I generaly horde GW dwarf warriors and quite often GW quarrellers and slayers (when I use them), bloodletters too. I think blocks of 40+ in ranks of 10 really look a lot better than in ranks of 5 or 6, looks menacing, and is a great target for war machines :D

Haravikk
15-04-2012, 14:23
I think in smaller games it's hard to fit in a truly useful Horde, as its very easy for them to just get stuck not doing much, especially if your opponent has a fast army. Plus with the points of a Horde your enemy can probably gang up a load of stuff onto them, so the numbers don't last long. You really need a bigger game where a Horde can have more protection (possibly from another Horde!) at which point they can work extremely well.

In larger games (over 2,000 points) I like taking a Great Weapon Horde of Dwarf Warriors, and a deep formation of 30-40 with hand weapons and shields, as it gives me flexibility when combined with the rest of my army. The Hand Weapon and Shield unit can of course reform into a Horde if their Toughness and armour are enough protectional i.e - no need for them to ensure Steadfast if they could be doing more damage instead. With the Great Weapon unit though it basically has to stay in Horde, as even if it's fighting a narrow unit, it gets more damage out by allowing the third rank to fight, which is what usually wins their combats.

Slayers in a Horde are also good, but then they have no need for Steadfast.

yabbadabba
15-04-2012, 14:26
I've run Horde GSwords, Swordsmen, Spearmen and Halberdiers. All good fun, yet with the new Empire rules I might choose to go for steadfast instead.

Morkash
15-04-2012, 14:33
I find the Horde is one of the things most dependant on your metagame. I suppose Malorian will jump in soon and praise it, while many people, myself included see only limited sense in it.

I fielded only two different sorts of horde until now: the Gutstar and the Savage Big Unz horde. The latter has incredible damage potential, good resilience with T4 and a 5+ Ward yet it is large, frenzied (not much of a downside, but still) and quite unwieldy. But it looks awesome on the table and that's usually the main reason I field it. Don't get me wrong, it is powerful but rather easily avoided and very dependant on a) winning combats and b) keeping the Great Shaman alive. Mine usually dies to either a miscast or because he's focused and the reduced ward makes them more vulnerable.

The Gutstar on the other hand is at least as hard hitting as the Savages, but has more wounds and constantly high strength. Give them Regeneration and they're quite unkillable. Unless you fight the Legion of Azgorh that is. Ever lost 11 Ironguts in one shooting phase? They deliver, you suffer --> Just. Don't. :shifty:
But besides evil stunties there is little which can face a Gutstar and hope to survive more than a few turns of combat. Over 50 S6 attacks, Impact hits and Stomp leave little to be mourned. Still I prefer units of 10 or 11 Ogres with characters. Their front is less wide, they stick deliver a truckload of wounds and I do not have to rely on a single tool of warfare to win my fights.

If you fight against horde armies all the time I'd horde more as well, but on the last 3 tournaments I saw exactly 2 kinds of hordes and that were my own Savages and the Khorne Marauder horde. Against the latter you do not want to be in horde formation anyways and against the former...well, it was my own army.

underscore
15-04-2012, 14:35
I never do. I'd love to be able to say that's for a particularly intelligent, tactical reason - but in reality I have no real interest in painting so many of the same models!

Duke Ramulots
15-04-2012, 14:35
Been playing orcs n gobbos lately, so hordes a pleanty. With my brets I horde up my S5 T8 men at arms quite often and smash things with them, but thats situational.

Haravikk
15-04-2012, 15:02
I suppose my "rule" for it is; Horde anything with high Strength but low Attacks, or anything really cheap, as you get most damage out this way and shouldn't need Steadfast as a result. Otherwise, if in doubt; go deep! Narrower means easier to fit through gaps and less damage from enemy Hordes (since they can't make their full attacks) plus Steadfast means you're going for time rather than damage.

I think the main point is that you want to use a Horde if the purpose is to destroy something quickly, while deep, Steadfast blocks give you the time needed to bring other units to bear. Both tactics can work well.

I voted for using Horde all the time, but I'd really say I use it a lot of the time (since I usually play 2000+ point games), but I really use a mixture as while I favour a Horde + a deep unit as noted above, I vary my list quite a bit each time I play; sometimes I'll go for the two big units like that, other times I'll go for one deep, survivable unit, with smaller (20-25 model) great weapon units, where Horde wouldn't help them since their purpose is manoeuvrability to get their damage where it's needed (flanks).

Also, even against horde type armies you don't necessarily need to Horde your units, as deep can be better if your units are tough enough, since your aim to wear down their numbers with as little risk to yourself as possible.

Boreas_NL
15-04-2012, 15:02
I usually field at least two hordes in my Empire army: 40 Halberdiers and 40 Greatswords... In larger games (3000+ points) I can field another horde of 40 Greatswords. I sometimes field a horde of 40 Free Company, too (my Sisters of Sigmar)... These large blocks are always supported by smaller units to protect their flanks...

BigbyWolf
15-04-2012, 15:08
I use it on my Ghouls, GW Grave Guard, dual choppa Orcs and Marauders with flails. Basically anything that can put put out a lot of damage that isn't Chaos Warriors.

Andy p
15-04-2012, 15:08
I often horde even cheap troops like night goblins, purely because if I am to hold someone up I usually make sure a good LD and bsb reroll is nearby for steadfast, which means that I can charge in or be charged, take the hits pass steadfast on a rerollable 9 and then reform into deeper ranks if it is suitable.

Besides, it's easier to get a 10 wide unit of 100 gobbos on the table without breaking the usual 12" deployment rule; rather than 5 wide.

Ville
15-04-2012, 15:09
With the previous book, I used Ghoul hordes all the time.

Lately, I've been experimenting with my Zombiestar: one hundred Zombies in 10x10 formation, supported with all kinds of buffs and other tricks. So far it has been unstoppable, but it also hasn't encountered anything tougher than basic Empire troops.:rolleyes:

Gharnukk
15-04-2012, 16:54
Same here.

Lord Inquisitor
15-04-2012, 17:00
I rarely see an army that doesn't have at least one horde. I myself will typically run at least one horde, for daemons a horde of lesser daemons, for undead everything in hordes except Mage bunkers at the back, empire everything in hordes (last game I ran a horde of 30 inner circle knights! :) ). The only army I don't regularly run hordes is ogres. Even then I've done it a few times.

It's extremely rare that I see opponents who do not have at least one unit in horse formation.

Mr Ogre
15-04-2012, 17:01
Always field my Ogres in a horde. It's fantastic for Monstrous Infantry, as few units remain steadfast for long in the face of that many attacks!

For lighter troops it seems to be 50/50. Frenzied stuff always shows up in Horde, as does stuff with Hatred. But you more bog standard unit tends to wind up going for Steadfast (which is great. Until I shred your ranks, drop your general and pinch your BSB!)

danny-d-b
15-04-2012, 17:06
It's extremely rare that I see opponents who do not have at least one unit in horse formation.

Horse formation- that sounds painfull

my halbader block with witch hunter, warrior priest, BSB, and level 4 light wizzard spaming pha's and timewarp is feard at my local club- and I've still got to buy, build and use my celesteral chariot

BlackPawl
15-04-2012, 17:23
I use horde formation very often. Slaves with spears, Ratogres Horde, Stormvernin or Plague Monks etc. works good for Skaven.

And sometime a horde of White Lions is very effective ... :evilgrin:

The bearded one
15-04-2012, 17:24
Every. single. game.

My dwarf have a horde of warriors, my skaven a horde of stormvermin, my lizardmen a horde of templeguard (26 with slann, about the bare minimum you can get away with ;) ). In the majority of games my opponent has at least one horde too. Ghoul hordes, graveguard hordes, halbedier hordes, hammerer hordes, spearelf hordes, white lion hordes, ogre hordes, you name it.

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
15-04-2012, 17:58
Most of my games I field a horde from 50-100 night goblins

Dreadlordpaul
15-04-2012, 18:10
I only take a horde with my warriors if im taking wulfrik and even then its just 35 marauders with MoK Flails and full command

Jind_Singh
15-04-2012, 18:42
I play Orcs & Goblins (well goblins) and now Empire - and I haven't had reason to run hordes. I would run hordes for:

Empire Greatswords
Vampire Graveguard
Tomb King Tombguard
Daemon bloodletters
High Elf Spears
High Elf White Lions

Anything else I don't bother. The main reason I don't like hordes:

1) Deployment - they have a huge footprint and make the deployment zone cramped
2) They move like a barge - even a basic wheel eats up half their move - and they get trapped by other units, terrian, etc - very hard to adjust
3) BIG thing for me - the enemy unit in combat. If you're going to beat them you beat them without the extra attacks anyway. If your going to lose to them you STILL lose to them even with the extra attacks! So very rarely would the extra attacks come in handy!
4) Most times I find that the other players don't run horde - so basically only 7-8 models get to attack in the 1st rank - so I lose out on 3-2 models per rank anway - what a waste!
5) Steadfast - either you lose yours fast OR the enemy keeps their steadfast for much longer - so hard to break lines


I don't like hordes

vinush
15-04-2012, 18:47
Hordes of greatswords would cost soooo much to buy though. At 25 a box you're looking at dropping around 100+ for a decent horde of them.

THE \/ince

Askari
15-04-2012, 18:52
Greatswords prices are fine... if you get them as part of the Battalion with 25% off, or on their own at 35% off.

Yeah, I run them in horde, as well as Vampire Grave Guard. Halberdiers and Ghouls can get horded, dependant on enemy (yes vs. Goblins and Skavenslaves, no vs. Warriors of Chaos...)

decker_cky
15-04-2012, 18:55
Hordes are great for things that you use to win combats, but are cheap enough to have large units. Cheap stuff that's intended just to hold gets done 5 wide. It's more the units which hit relatively hard in the 6-12 pt range that tend to be ideal horde units. Generally, it's on units at least S4.

Great weapon marauders, empire halberdiers, bloodletters, gors with the beast banner, bestigors, greatswords, stormvermin, graveguard, dwarf warriors w/ GW, etc..

White lions are on the high end of the range, being ASF and stubborn, so not worrying about ranks.

However, the reason you haven't seen too many hordes is that you're playing smaller games. At 2000 pts, it's limited to 5-7 pt units you can afford in those numbers. Stormvermin, halberdiers, marauders with GW, etc.. If those units aren't popular, then hordes will be rare. At 2500 pts, you can fit hordes into a lot more armies.

althathir
15-04-2012, 18:58
@Jind_Singh and everyone else - What do you see as the advantages of hording TK TombGuard? I'm just getting back into warhammer, and the're the fraction I like, but their community seems really down on.... well everything (though other players seem to think their solid, and I'm getting sick of the i win eighty percent of my games but the books a failure posts :shifty:). I was planning on running Tomb Guard, but more traditionally (I think they're more of a dangerous tarpit, then a deathstar if that makes any sense?)

DaemonReign
15-04-2012, 20:08
We normally play 4k+ sized games so yeah, we use them.

Leogun_91
15-04-2012, 20:20
I do it with goblins and with arrer boyz.

I have also bought (but not painted) 60 warhounds to play as an ineffective but fun horde formation (mainly due to my slight dislike of marauders).

pluch87
15-04-2012, 20:22
I horde my 50 night goblins with spear and shield. Extra rank of attacks, gobbos need it!

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Crovax20
15-04-2012, 20:29
I usually have some sort of horde in my Night goblin army. In my tombkings I haven't really ran a horde as of yet.

Wildchild200
15-04-2012, 20:45
I use a horde of 100 zombies, thats always fun. And i am currently building up two hordes of 50 skeletons.
For my High Elves I sometimes use a horde of 50 Sea Guard. 35 Bow shots and 51 ASF Spear attacks is quite nasty. haha

Mr Ogre
15-04-2012, 20:57
I like Skellie hordes! Got two of 50, all armed with Spears. When your troops are poop, might as well squeeze out every attack you can! Plus, a spell here, spell there and you've got a horrible little army all of a sudden!

Urgat
15-04-2012, 21:46
I'm currently completing my 100-strong horde of common goblins. 460pts (full command, bows, shields, 3 nasty skulkers). Woosh!

Rapahatsutt
15-04-2012, 21:57
I start deep with my Halberdiers usually, then reform to horde either before or during combat to swing it my way, otherwise i stay deep for the steadfast.

Liber
15-04-2012, 23:41
Never used it. My friend uses it with his big ole block of Marauders all the time though. They hit pretty hard.

Souppilgrim
16-04-2012, 00:00
I constantly use horde formation. Giant units of halberdiers, and greatswords. Greatswords are stubborn so you don't really need to go deep. If I ever need to go deep, because I'm losing and need steadfast, or I'm winning by a lot and want to cancel their steadfast, I will do a thing called combat reform, or a swift reform the turn before I get into a fight. Really there is no reason to not do this.

Empire swordsmen are my ghetto anvil, and I usually just keep them deep in bus formation, but Halbs go horde for sure. Especially with a warrior priest in there to give rerolls.

Minsc
16-04-2012, 00:50
Depends on what army I play.

Wood Elves: Never.
Dark Elves: I occasionally horde Executioners.
Empire: Unless I play all/mostly-cav lists, I always have a horde of Halberdiers in my list, and possibly Greatswords.

Gop
16-04-2012, 06:04
In my 2500 dwarf list I run 50 hammerers and 50 GW warriors. A fair few die, but they sure hit back HARD!

Warlord Gnashgrod
16-04-2012, 07:15
i play Skaven, and see absolutely no reason for horde units, since ranks are vital for Skaven for both LD and steadfast. The only time I ever would is with units with a screaming bell or plague furnace, since they're unbreakable.

Askari
16-04-2012, 07:50
i play Skaven, and see absolutely no reason for horde units, since ranks are vital for Skaven for both LD and steadfast. The only time I ever would is with units with a screaming bell or plague furnace, since they're unbreakable.

Not even with Queek's Stormvermin? An extra rank of attacks from them should mean you don't lose combat in the first place, thereby negating the need for Steadfast.

Metacarpi
16-04-2012, 07:51
As a Skaven player, I tend to run my Plague Monks in Horder formation. Give 'em the Plague Banner, and they tend to destroy whatever they come into contact with, and after that's done, I can reform them into a more survivable formation.

redben
16-04-2012, 09:47
I always Horde up a unit of Bloodletters.

The Clairvoyant
16-04-2012, 10:39
I always run hordes.

My all-goblin army has units of 60 NGs in hordes, my vampires always run a 50-strong horde of skellies and a 40-block of ghouls. My TK always have a 70 strong unit of skellies.

boli
16-04-2012, 11:50
As a general rule of thumb you horde if you expect to win combat; well... unless you reach 75+ models in a unit when the 12" deployment zone means you cannot do deeper than a 5x15 formation.

I try to horde my stormvermin if possible... although I am still annoyed in my last game "Flames of the Phoenix" took out 36 of my 50 SV and I lost my entire flank due to panic in the first turn :/. If they were in a 5x10 formation I would have held. :(

oldWitheredCorpse
16-04-2012, 13:52
@Jind_Singh and everyone else - What do you see as the advantages of hording TK TombGuard? I'm just getting back into warhammer, and the're the fraction I like, but their community seems really down on.... well everything (though other players seem to think their solid, and I'm getting sick of the i win eighty percent of my games but the books a failure posts :shifty:). I was planning on running Tomb Guard, but more traditionally (I think they're more of a dangerous tarpit, then a deathstar if that makes any sense?)

The Khemri forum can be depressing sometimes, I agree. As for TG, hoarding them with halberds is a new tactic since 8ed and the new book. It works, but is a big point sink. The "old way" is still valid, run them sword and board 5 wide as an anvil. Running them with halberds 5 wide seems odd, though.

pointyteeth
16-04-2012, 16:18
I run my great weapon marauders in horde formation. My TK buddy always runs 2 hordes of halberd tomb guard (with 2-3 characters each). My VC buddy runs a horde of great weapon grave guard and a horde of ghouls (no characters in either. My Dwarf buddy runs a horde of great weapon dwarf warriors. We play at 2500 points. It may be that you don't see many hordes used below 2500 due to the points investment usually related to purchase a large enough unit to put in horde formation.

Petey
16-04-2012, 16:29
For VC skellie warriors 40 or 60 man hordes
For High Elves, on occassion w seaguard
For my wolfriders never
for dark elves never
for brets men at arms 40-50 man unit

IcedCrow
16-04-2012, 16:37
The irony is that the horde formation rules were written with trash troops in mind getting more attacks, and the complete opposite seems to be what happens with them lmao.

I think "horde" should be a special rule applied to units like slaves, skeletons, etc (trash troops) and that normal units shouldn't get it, but that's just my opinion.

Mr Ogre
16-04-2012, 16:42
As a general rule of thumb you horde if you expect to win combat; well... unless you reach 75+ models in a unit when the 12" deployment zone means you cannot do deeper than a 5x15 formation.

I try to horde my stormvermin if possible... although I am still annoyed in my last game "Flames of the Phoenix" took out 36 of my 50 SV and I lost my entire flank due to panic in the first turn :/. If they were in a 5x10 formation I would have held. :(

Sure, units going for Steadfast can be a pain, but a Horde can strip ranks like nobodies business. Plus, Horde ranks tend to last a lot longer, as you have to slot 6 guys just to strip the first....

vcassano
16-04-2012, 16:42
It is good for some units - Marauders, Gor of all kind, Ghouls perhaps, Bloodletters etc. - and in certain circumstances. It is a pretty well-designed rule - it is effectiv
e enough to get used but isn't obvious or so good it is mandatory.

Drongol
16-04-2012, 16:49
Every army that I build includes at least one horde.

Ogres? Guthorde. Absolutely brutal, as mentioned, and (practically) immune to (most) enemy magic.

My wife's Night Goblins run at least a single Squig horde (chicks dig Squigs) and typically two or three.

Really, anything with high strength but low attacks is doing well to go in a horde formation. And anything that you expect to buff is well-served in a horde as well, since the buff affects a larger amount of points per cast.

Petey
16-04-2012, 18:11
The irony is that the horde formation rules were written with trash troops in mind getting more attacks, and the complete opposite seems to be what happens with them lmao.

I think "horde" should be a special rule applied to units like slaves, skeletons, etc (trash troops) and that normal units shouldn't get it, but that's just my opinion.

not really. historically, units except for a few armies, units tended to longer rather than square. The square formation was used by the romans, and columbs of troops were almost never used, except in troop movement. The game designers and players at the studio ahve often been historical gamers and like it when the fantasy looks like reality did.

The wide formations allowed troops to make enemies feel overwhelmed, allowed for more troop allocation to combats, and was easier to move for commanders.

I feel that the horde rules for fantasy are intended to give players an advantage for using armies the way they looked during the pre renaissance periods

vcassano
16-04-2012, 18:26
The irony is that the horde formation rules were written with trash troops in mind getting more attacks, and the complete opposite seems to be what happens with them lmao.

I think "horde" should be a special rule applied to units like slaves, skeletons, etc (trash troops) and that normal units shouldn't get it, but that's just my opinion.

A unit points cap is more effective (from a comp POV). Means elite troops can't be taken in horde-size units.

The bearded one
16-04-2012, 18:40
A unit points cap is more effective (from a comp POV). Means elite troops can't be taken in horde-size units.

I think that if such a cap were to be implemented, it should be determined on a unit-by-unit basis. Maybe just make a minor addition to unittype. "Infantry" can't horde, while "Infantry (h)" can horde. etc.
After all, would it be fair if wood elves can't horde any unit at all, while O&G could horde pretty much anything short of black orcs?


In the end I think the very pointcost itself should be enough to deter taking a horde of a certain unit. If a unit is cheap as heck, it's easy to take a horde of them (halbediers, stormvermin, marauders). If it is more expensive, it will automatically cost you a significant portion of your total pointcost to take it. It doesn't take a lot of thought to take a horde of halbediers, but you don't take a horde of greatswords or flaggelants on a whim, because that's nearly 500pts.

Lord Inquisitor
16-04-2012, 18:58
The horde rule itself is flawed. Why is 10-wide the magic number? Is it meant to represent "lapping round"? The issues that seem to crop up with horde formation are due to it being an arbitrary rule which forces units into these arbitrary 10-wide formations and adds to the tendency to make giant units (since you want ranks and attacks!).

There are a number of ways this could have been better implemented. Just flat out let all units fight in three ranks (forming up wide is still advantageous since you get those corner-corner attacks). Allowing all models in the front rank to attack, even if not in base contact (up to some limit, say, within 2" of the enemy) would more accurately show an advantage to having a wider formation and lapping round. And so on.

IcedCrow
16-04-2012, 19:02
I think that if such a cap were to be implemented, it should be determined on a unit-by-unit basis. Maybe just make a minor addition to unittype. "Infantry" can't horde, while "Infantry (h)" can horde. etc.
After all, would it be fair if wood elves can't horde any unit at all, while O&G could horde pretty much anything short of black orcs?


In the end I think the very pointcost itself should be enough to deter taking a horde of a certain unit. If a unit is cheap as heck, it's easy to take a horde of them (halbediers, stormvermin, marauders). If it is more expensive, it will automatically cost you a significant portion of your total pointcost to take it. It doesn't take a lot of thought to take a horde of halbediers, but you don't take a horde of greatswords or flaggelants on a whim, because that's nearly 500pts.

Points costs do not deter people from hording. This is what causes the, IMO, boring games of death star vs death star. Anything that kneecaps deathstars is a plus in my book. This is why we play with disruption cancelling steadfast. It takes away a couple of incentives for deathstarring and showing up to the table with a mega horde, a smaller horde, and a support unit or two for lulz.

The bearded one
16-04-2012, 19:17
The horde rule itself is flawed. Why is 10-wide the magic number? Is it meant to represent "lapping round"? The issues that seem to crop up with horde formation are due to it being an arbitrary rule which forces units into these arbitrary 10-wide formations and adds to the tendency to make giant units (since you want ranks and attacks!).

Why is a rank a minium of 5 models wide? Why is 5 the magic number. It's an arbitrary rule which forces units into these arbitrary 5-wide formations and adds to the tendency to make giant, very deep units.

I can do it too :p

Lord Solar Plexus
16-04-2012, 19:41
Both questions are easy to answer: 5 wide forced people to buy more models than 4-wide. 10 is 2*5 and guess what, it makes people buy more models.

In general, a horde can be good for every unit. It triples the number of single-attack models, and still significantly increases the number of attacks from multi-attack models. Those people who say that it is detrimental to multi-attack models because of some abstract lesser gain, percentage-wise, forget that it is overall damage that matters.

Even cheapish, weakish units will win fights that would otherwise drag along endlessly when in horde instead of something else against a similar opponent.

Lord Inquisitor
16-04-2012, 19:54
Why is a rank a minium of 5 models wide? Why is 5 the magic number. It's an arbitrary rule which forces units into these arbitrary 5-wide formations and adds to the tendency to make giant, very deep units.

I can do it too :p

Indeed, aren't you clever :p I agree that minimum 5 for ranks is arbitrary but there's no mechanism in the game that would otherwise prevent people from forming columns. And indeed, with stubborn or unbreakable that's exactly what people do. If there was an inherent disadvantage to forming thin built into the rules (beyond less attacks) then there wouldn't need to be an arbitrary minimum. But let's concentrate on arbitrary formations tacked onto the game in 8th rather than arbitrary minimums built into the core of the game. ;)

And as it happens, I'd like to see minimum frontage be a bit more logical. 5-wide for 20mm infantry, 4-wide for 25mm infantry/cavalry, 3-wide for 40mm models, 2-wide for 50mm models/chariots. There would be a pleasing logic to it (all of which have 100mm per rank other than the 40mms, which have 120mm).

Urgat
16-04-2012, 20:26
It used to be 4 wide. I like it better now, looks better.

Lord Inquisitor
16-04-2012, 20:37
It looks better for 20mm infantry but 25mm infantry and cavalry are frustrating as they now don't fit in a default sized movement trays, both for infantry and cavalry. 25mms looked better 4-wide as a minimum.

Urgat
16-04-2012, 20:57
Different opinions. 4 orcs side by side looked silly imho. It's symmetrical now, too.

willowdark
16-04-2012, 21:36
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I see the Horde rule being a lot more effective on units that get rerolls, like Dark Elves with Hatred, High Elves with ASF, and Beastmen with Primal Fury, as well as any Lizardmen or Empire units buffed with rerolls from one of the book Lores.

oldWitheredCorpse
16-04-2012, 21:59
In general, a horde can be good for every unit. It triples the number of single-attack models, and still significantly increases the number of attacks from multi-attack models. Those people who say that it is detrimental to multi-attack models because of some abstract lesser gain, percentage-wise, forget that it is overall damage that matters.

Apart from the desire to make Warhammer more "killy", it's also an equalizer between single-attack and multi-attack troops, a difference that got harder and harder to balance with the 7ed armybook creep. Its also a general rule that works better for infantry.

The bearded one
16-04-2012, 22:19
Plus larger numbers of dice rolled, amounts to results closer to averages.

And I think large blobs of infantry on the field look ace.

Confessor_Atol
16-04-2012, 23:07
Plus larger numbers of dice rolled, amounts to results closer to averages.

And I think large blobs of infantry on the field look ace.

QFT! Big blocks of toys rule!

wilsongrahams
17-04-2012, 01:28
I just want to add in that I like the Horde rule, but probably because I and my group use self-moderation and don't take death star units. We have discussed the unit size limit of 10% of army size but we haven't had to implement it yet.

I have four main fantasy armies, High Elves, Vampire Counts, Night Goblins and Skaven. I do not run my High Elves in hordes as that would require too many points in each unit so fewer units and I'd have to choose what not to take. All my others include hordes in some fashion or other. My night goblins have three hordes with three smaller units of archers, my vampires run only skeletons in hordes and my skaven field clanrats and stormvermin in hordes. For all these hordes it is units of 40-50 models. Anything less and it's just a thin line that would feel wrong to gain an advantage by deploying wider. For skaven in particular as casualties mount, I tend to reform to keep the +3 rank bonus which matters more than the extra attacks. For the rest, I don't tend to bother as they're usually bound to flee anyway (goblins) or not going anywhere fast (skeletons).

Taking 30 grave guard and putting them in a horde feels wrong to me so I don't do it. I field them 6 wide and 5 deep. The unit looks right. I am viewed as a fair opponent in my group, and enjoy all games no matter the result. I guess it's because we play for fun in a friendly atmosphere rather than a tournament atmosphere - whilst we obviously want to win, we don't go all out to achieve that, but ensure that we have a list and formation that will provide a fun game. I have seen rat ogres in a horde before which just made me think I wouldn't want to face that opponent...

GodlessM
17-04-2012, 01:58
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I see the Horde rule being a lot more effective on units that get rerolls, like Dark Elves with Hatred, High Elves with ASF, and Beastmen with Primal Fury, as well as any Lizardmen or Empire units buffed with rerolls from one of the book Lores.

Everything is better on units with re-rolls.

Brotheroracle
17-04-2012, 02:23
The only unit I have that I haven't horded or plan to horde are my Black Guard.... I wish I could take a unit bigger then 20! But for my dark elves I have ran my most my units 7 wide since 6th, back when MSU was king!

FashaTheDog
17-04-2012, 03:31
I know it would be terribly silly and just plain terrible, but I have this burning desire to deploy a Skaven Slave unit 90 wide and four or five deep; a unit that spans from one side of the table to the other. I mean, seriously, who would be able to look at that deployment and honestly not be at least a little impressed? The movement tray would need two people to use! I already see how to make it; I take a sheet of galvanized steel (since I have plenty of it handy at home), cut it to a 6' by 6" (yes, feet by inches), spray it black, then go to the hardware store and get a pair of handles, and bolt them to the far ends. I could even get fancy by taking a thin strip of long wood, hit one side with a spray adhesive and run it through a sand box and spray it a dark brown before finishing it with a simple dry brush of a lighter brown and using epoxy to affix it to the edges of the tray. It shall be the king of movement trays! :D

As to using the horde rules, I see it fairly regularly as it tends to be situational. There are clearly times when you've got the killy advantage and several units that need charging in a turn or two or want to ensure that overrun hits another unit, like that unit waiting to hit your flank when you overrun. You also may want that extra rank to join in to ensure you win the combat on kills, especially if you're an Ogre. I've also seen them pop up as a means of protecting other units; increase the frontage of a unit that will still hold to save the war machine or whatever behind. Overall not the default mode in my group, but certainly well used, both in frequency and competency.

dimetri1
17-04-2012, 23:40
I run hordes but I never run a deathstar. They are really boring to play against. I do not have any fun win or lose against them and refuse to face them anymore.

danny-d-b
18-04-2012, 06:37
I know it would be terribly silly and just plain terrible, but I have this burning desire to deploy a Skaven Slave unit 90 wide and four or five deep; a unit that spans from one side of the table to the other. I mean, seriously, who would be able to look at that deployment and honestly not be at least a little impressed? The movement tray would need two people to use! I already see how to make it; I take a sheet of galvanized steel (since I have plenty of it handy at home), cut it to a 6' by 6" (yes, feet by inches), spray it black, then go to the hardware store and get a pair of handles, and bolt them to the far ends. I could even get fancy by taking a thin strip of long wood, hit one side with a spray adhesive and run it through a sand box and spray it a dark brown before finishing it with a simple dry brush of a lighter brown and using epoxy to affix it to the edges of the tray. It shall be the king of movement trays! :D


would love to land my helstom on that- or buffed motar

but you haveno way of killing that in combat!


then again you prob get beaten in the painting phase!

The bearded one
18-04-2012, 14:12
would love to land my helstom on that- or buffed motar

but you haveno way of killing that in combat!


then again you prob get beaten in the painting phase!

pha, killing it would be easy. Take a unit with as many ranks as the slaves, beat them in combat, watch the entire thing explode.

danny-d-b
18-04-2012, 15:30
true- just hope they don't reform 1st turn- or have a caracter with the stubbon crown at the back (if skaven still have the lead from the back rule, not sure don't play that much skaven with non-combat caracters)

boli
18-04-2012, 15:43
true- just hope they don't reform 1st turn- or have a caracter with the stubbon crown at the back (if skaven still have the lead from the back rule, not sure don't play that much skaven with non-combat caracters)
Skaven can only lead from the back if they've been challenged in combat.

Awilla the Hun
18-04-2012, 16:05
I use both for my Red Guardsmen. Both have their uses. Columns are useful, I find, against gunlines, when you have to move quickly through terrain and will probably defeat the enemy in close combat anyway. Forming a wider target for their missile troops to open up at is also a poor idea. When I really have to hold the enemy up (often a role given to my smaller units), then forming column is also useful. On the other hand, when I really have to start inflicting casualties (against small units of Chaos Warriors, for instance, when I MUST get kills or they'll chop up enough peasants to cancel my static res anyway), or face an enemy horde (the sheer weight of attacks often chews through my steadfast), I often form horde myself.

Odin
18-04-2012, 17:09
Thats because theres no point running cheap rubbish troops in horde, because they'll lose combat anyway so you want them to be steadfast for as long as possible. Sacrificing ranks for an extra 7-10 mediocre attacks isn't worth it. And as you play small games, you're unlikely to see elite units big enough to warrant hordeing.

Undead might be an exception, since they don't care about steadfast. But as soon as you start talking about grave guard equivalents or white lions, it's clear to see that an extra rank of accurate S5 or 6 attacks is worth it.

The other exception is GW marauders who are easily cheap enough to field several hordes in 2000 points.

Odin
18-04-2012, 17:10
I use horde formation on my Marauders of Khorne, and in my new Empire army I use it on my Flagellants, and intend to with my Halberdiers when GW get around to making a decent State Troops kit.

Deff Mekz
18-04-2012, 17:20
I know it would be terribly silly and just plain terrible, but I have this burning desire to deploy a Skaven Slave unit 90 wide and four or five deep; a unit that spans from one side of the table to the other.

Imagine how big the "explosion" would be, when they flee, if you deployed them 5 wide!

But this is of course a horde thread. I think I'll be using hordes in my new empire army. Just for looks really, I find hordes always look really impressive on the tabletop.

The bearded one
18-04-2012, 17:34
Imagine how big the "explosion" would be, when they flee, if you deployed them 5 wide!

90D3 str3 hits! That's about 180 hits!! That's simply going to wipe units out! xD

Lord Inquisitor
19-04-2012, 02:20
With sufficient density of slaves a critical mass is created, resulting in a chain reaction of terrifying power harnessed in ... the RATOM BOMB!

FashaTheDog
19-04-2012, 03:03
Hmmm...deploy the RATOM BOMB! of 540 Skavenslaves five wide and 90 deep facing a flank and side step them towards your enemy daring him to charge. This tactic says yes to my insanity!

Urgat
19-04-2012, 07:11
Awww man, I had an awesome pun on that, but upon googling Hillary Clinton, South Park and nuke, it turns out it only works in French >< Rats!


Hmmm...deploy the RATOM BOMB! of 540 Skavenslaves five wide and 90 deep facing a flank and side step them towards your enemy daring him to charge. This tactic says yes to my insanity!

And then it collides with my backward walking unit of squig herders? :p

Sexiest_hero
19-04-2012, 10:25
I use it when I'm sure I'm going to win, or know i'll be wiped out Combat reform is your friend.

Andy p
19-04-2012, 10:56
How about that slave idea.....but try it on squig herds instead. Although not as easy to destroy.....plus you can do stuff to your own slaves cant you?

Athlan na Dyr
19-04-2012, 11:53
1000 slaves in 100x10 with 10 warpfire throwers deployed right behind :eek:
Mother of God...

Djekar
19-04-2012, 12:15
I have a ...

(•_•) , ( •_•)>⌐■-■ , (⌐■_■)

... burning need to try that now.

The Low King
19-04-2012, 17:38
1000 slaves in 100x10 with 10 warpfire throwers deployed right behind :eek:
Mother of God...

Hits unit with something that causes panic, unit failes panic check, unit goes off the table, gg

Mr Ogre
19-04-2012, 18:12
Plus, you'd need 10 units of Clanrats or some such to bag all those Warpfire throwers. And Sods Law dictates one good shoeing, and the Slaves detonate :P

FashaTheDog
19-04-2012, 18:39
I don't think anyone here is advocating for the unit being effective, but rather amusing. A unit of 91 Skavenslaves deep is almost 6' long, making it impossible to actually advance with that rank bonus except by moving sideways and the unit cannot ever charge unless loses all of those ranks and becomes a massive horde. The minimum cost of the unit is also going to be 900 points (provided you run 90 deep instead to make room for the handles on your movement tray), which is a rather substantial joke portion for an army. Yet the sight of it alone would be worth the many looks of utter disbelief. And to see them get charged by an overeager enemy who hits it with most of his army would be nothing short of hysterical when the unit breaks in combat and inflicts a whole bunch of S3 hits on everything nearby. Being a steadfast Ld10 until it suffers no less than 411 casualties would be the only drawback to that hilarity. Still, having a massive wall you can shoot into is kind of cute too, but yeah, it is one of those epic ideas that will really get you nowhere in a game, but would probably be a talking point in any store it shows in for years to come.

sulla
19-04-2012, 18:39
A unit points cap is more effective (from a comp POV). Means elite troops can't be taken in horde-size units.I think a wound cap is probably a better way to go. If most units can only go wounds strong, and even the cheapest, poorest troops can only go 50 strong, you not only reduce the power of hordes and ridiculous sized chaff units, but you also make normal bs based shooting and magic missiles more relevant because every kill they do actually matters. Even knights come back into prominence because units are not so huge that they will tie them up for the rest of the game.

Mr Ogre
19-04-2012, 18:41
I don't think anyone here is advocating for the unit being effective, but rather amusing. A unit of 91 Skavenslaves deep is almost 6' long, making it impossible to actually advance with that rank bonus except by moving sideways and the unit cannot ever charge unless loses all of those ranks and becomes a massive horde. The minimum cost of the unit is also going to be 900 points (provided you run 90 deep instead to make room for the handles on your movement tray), which is a rather substantial joke portion for an army. Yet the sight of it alone would be worth the many looks of utter disbelief. And to see them get charged by an overeager enemy who hits it with most of his army would be nothing short of hysterical when the unit breaks in combat and inflicts a whole bunch of S3 hits on everything nearby. Being a steadfast Ld10 until it suffers no less than 411 casualties would be the only drawback to that hilarity. Still, having a massive wall you can shoot into is kind of cute too, but yeah, it is one of those epic ideas that will really get you nowhere in a game, but would probably be a talking point in any store it shows in for years to come.

That, and some git is bound to Gateway it first turn!

On the subject of limiting hordes - Why? What does that achieve, other than limiting people's choice in making their army.

Sure, a horde of heavy infantry is pretty revolting in terms of potential, but it's all a massive points sink, so really, it should be capable of pasting a great number of units. Just because a unit is hard, doesn't mean it's unfair.

IcedCrow
19-04-2012, 18:51
That, and some git is bound to Gateway it first turn!

On the subject of limiting hordes - Why? What does that achieve, other than limiting people's choice in making their army.

Sure, a horde of heavy infantry is pretty revolting in terms of potential, but it's all a massive points sink, so really, it should be capable of pasting a great number of units. Just because a unit is hard, doesn't mean it's unfair.

For me it's not about unfair. It's about boredom. Mega blob units make the game very one dimensional. You kill the blob. You win. You can't kill the blob. You lose. It's all about the blob. That, to me, removes the reason I got into this game... to field armies of units facing off against armies of units and to use tactics and strategy to win the game... blob units enforce metas where both sides field a blob... and then the blobs meet in the middle and a lot of dice are thrown. Whoever rolls highest comes out on top.

Yes that is a bit of hyperbole but it summarizes my issues in general with super hordes.

I like mass infantry. A unit of 60 goblins looks awesome. Several units of 60 goblins would be awesome. Two units of 200 goblins crosses that point for me and makes it about killing the blob and winning.

Or the ogre players that field the massive 30 ogre unit crammed full of five or more characters on top of that with a couple support units to the side and the gnoblar unit behind them to catch the redirected spells from the maw banner. Very one dimensional. Deal with the main unit... win the game. Fail to do so... likely lose the game.

My same issue with special characters really. Kill the special character and win. Don't kill it and lose. One dimensional.

Unit caps would prevent mega blobs. I think for trash troops like slaves, goblins, skeletons... a cap of 60 or so is more than adequate to "horde out". I don't see the need for 200 slaves in one unit. It takes away the army aspect of the game to me to take advantage of meta.

Mr Ogre
19-04-2012, 19:21
Fair enough I guess.

Has anyone here ever actually faced such a Megablob?

I find my hordes of 18 Ogres are risky enough ta!

Malorian
19-04-2012, 19:41
Biggest unit of regular infantry I've run is 150 night goblins. Biggest monster infantry was 24.

GodlessM
19-04-2012, 19:45
Are people really going to argue that hordes are only point sinks and decide the game? My horde of Marauders is neither expensive nor game deciding. I think some people's views are too shallow here to see the wider tactical application of them (plus, the whole point of the scenarios is to balance these things out; plenty of scenarios where you don't have to kill a big horde at all).

Urgat
19-04-2012, 19:52
A(plus, the whole point of the scenarios is to balance these things out; plenty of scenarios where you don't have to kill a big horde at all).

That. People don't realize they're not optional, it seems. They don't like them because it prevents them from going overboard with some choices and then, they complain exactly about that. Funny, I posted almost the same thing in another post a few minutes ago. Half the scenarios are nigh unplayable if you only field one big horde and almost nothing else. You might autolose before you even start if you get Blood and Glory.

The bearded one
19-04-2012, 20:47
That. People don't realize they're not optional, it seems. They don't like them because it prevents them from going overboard with some choices and then, they complain exactly about that. Funny, I posted almost the same thing in another post a few minutes ago. Half the scenarios are nigh unplayable if you only field one big horde and almost nothing else. You might autolose before you even start if you get Blood and Glory.

My Life Slann pointsink-bannerprotection does quite well in blood&glory :)

Sexiest_hero
19-04-2012, 21:10
Life slaan Lizardmen are a special kind of "BS" :). there isn't a slann setup that doesn't make me go Ugh, lol. The point is the issues are 7th edition books more than the rules. Time will fix these issues.

IcedCrow
19-04-2012, 21:43
I don't see blobs of huge size often. We had an ogre player run the large ogre deathstar of 40 bulls plus four characters, and he did so so that you couldn't get the VPs out of them. Granted certain scenarios would screw that over and one of the thigns we're doing now is random scenarios so you don't know what you are doing when you show up and have to keep that in mind for your army build.

I have seen a pair of 200 skaven slaves on the table before. That was the game where the player didn't care about his flank because steadfast would keep them alive. I have also seen 60 chosen in a unit.

So they aren't common, but they exist. I will note my group is just now getting into competitive play so I expect blobs to start coming out a little more this upcoming season as before we were doing fluff and softer lists that didn't exploit the game as much.

Urgat
19-04-2012, 22:30
So all that for a couple games?
"shrugs"

Sexiest_hero
19-04-2012, 22:56
Skaven and WoC will get redone, Dark elves and lizardmen too. All of them bar Skaven (Kinda) have hard counters. 40 ogres in a unit, is so bad, I'd love to play against it. Eat a purple sun then 100 ungor, hit flanks for fun. 200 skaven slaves take a single Miasma to stop the in their tracks, double flank them with razorgors also. I'd just fly over them. Slaves only work when everything is in the 12" bubble. Slow it down in anyway and you put a stop to the whole scaven battleplan. 60 chosen doesn't leave points for anything else, and will be gone by years' end. Things will get better as the BS is phased out.

The bearded one
19-04-2012, 23:26
Those blobs are exceptionally extreme anyway. Generally our blobs are either 40ish models at the most for models between.. 7 and 12'ish points, and a couple of 50 for slaves, goblins and such. 40 bulls, 60 chosen and 200 slaves are truly at the very extreme of the scale, but certainly those 60 chosen can be avoided all game long.

dimetri1
20-04-2012, 01:17
Twice. Very boring. If it is a friendly game I just refuse to play against it anymore.

The bearded one
20-04-2012, 02:20
Twice. Very boring. If it is a friendly game I just refuse to play against it anymore.

Because someone brings a horde? Were these decently sized normal hordes (30-40 models) or absurdity hordes like those 60 chosen icedcrow faced?

MrCarbohydrate
20-04-2012, 03:52
Have seen the 100 Horror Horde a bit. Nobody else runs hordes. The Elf player runs Teclis though, which is just as annoying.

I play Dwarves. I run deep, but not horde. And lots of warmachines.

IcedCrow
20-04-2012, 03:54
Yech Teclis. {spit} He's going to be present in our league.

Sexiest_hero
20-04-2012, 04:22
Ban him, if the player is a real friend he'll understand, if not no loss. Him and Kairos go too far. Only for hard core tournies, I'm starting to feel bad for you IcedCrow, You should com play at Art of war. We,re right outside of Kentucky and good players who do't need crutches.

IcedCrow
20-04-2012, 12:17
Our group is mostly new guys. They want to use special characters because they feel they are part of the game. Not really for crutch purposes. I'm just not a fan of teclis ;) I tweaked him so that he can only ignore the first miscast, not one per turn. That combined with our houserule of double 1s taking priority should hopefully tone him down to tolerable.

For many of them, this upcoming league is their first taste of competitive gaming. We've been doing mostly campaigns, but many are very pro-special character and so it's one of those just deal with it things. In our preseason if Teclis is too dirty, I'll talk to the high elf player about having him removed but I am hoping our changes fix him for the most part. So nothing to feel sorry about =) they are by and by a great group of people to play with, I very much like my group.

Where is Art of War?

Lord Inquisitor
20-04-2012, 18:26
My Life Slann pointsink-bannerprotection does quite well in blood&glory :)

I once saw a Life Slaan miscast with both Cupped Hands and Throne of Vines up. Rolled dimensional cascade, failed Cupped Hands roll, failed Throne of Vines roll, sucked into the warp. And it was blood and glory so lost the game.


Ban him,

Na. Just run ogres (borrow an army if you don't have ogres) and take a bunch of sniper scout maneaters. After a few games of him dying turn 1, that should put him off playing Teclis.

GodlessM
20-04-2012, 18:32
Skaven and WoC will get redone, Dark elves and lizardmen too.

According to who? From what I've heard and read only 50% of that is correct.


My Life Slann pointsink-bannerprotection does quite well in blood&glory :)

Dwellers.

The bearded one
21-04-2012, 03:55
Dwellers.

Becalming cogitations.

Rosstifer
21-04-2012, 04:22
Becalming cogitations.

Hence why you target the Temple Guard, not the Slann, cast it on the TG on the corner, from 24inches, and don't suffer the Cogitation. Unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing.

Urgat
21-04-2012, 06:35
I have no lizardmen opponent, so it's a non-issue for me :p

The bearded one
21-04-2012, 13:27
Hence why you target the Temple Guard, not the Slann, cast it on the TG on the corner, from 24inches, and don't suffer the Cogitation. Unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing.

The regular dwellers only has 12" range. The large version has 24", but it is most likely going to require a very manoeuvrable wizard (generally a flying one) to get into that exact range when it can reach me, but cogitations can't reach him. I tend to shove my templeguard forward quite fast though, because what else are you gonna do with 26 templeguard? Thus I can corner the enemy and get into cogitation range where any walking wizard couldn't get far enough away anymore unless it were off the table.

artisturn
21-04-2012, 17:53
It all depends on the size of the game if I bring a horde and when I do bring a horde it will be Night goblins with spears ( a block of a hundred) but I face a lot of shooting so they are trimmed down in size pretty quick.
When I play my VC I prefer to bring the unit deep instead of horde since CR is really an issue with Vampire Counts.

Dreadlordpaul
21-04-2012, 17:54
I don't see peoples problem with cognition and stuff tbh. A slann of the 3rd generation plus should be powerful.

Now I dont see the problem with hordes as the only hordes i ever take are Marauders (if ive taken wulfrik) or zombies and skellies

IcedCrow
21-04-2012, 18:00
My only issue with hordes really is that people horde up elite troops. A horde of marauders, zombies, skellies, etc... I feel look pretty cool horded up. It's the horde of chosen warriors, greatswords, ogres, etc... that I have personal quibbles with.

Duke Ramulots
21-04-2012, 20:22
My only issue with hordes really is that people horde up elite troops. A horde of marauders, zombies, skellies, etc... I feel look pretty cool horded up. It's the horde of chosen warriors, greatswords, ogres, etc... that I have personal quibbles with.

Why? It seems you equate hording up with poor tactics...

IcedCrow
21-04-2012, 21:49
No. Hording up does not mean poor tactics. Hording up elite units means that you have units that are 800-1000 points a pop and your army is two or three units total, which removes the aspect of armies battling on the table and turns it into two or three large units smashing into each other. (so instead of having many units with low model count, you have few units with large model count) and in essence ripping one apart means you win the game, thus promoting one-dimensional games of rock/paper/scissors.

The bearded one
21-04-2012, 21:57
But I thought 30 chosen of tzeentch , 2 warshrines of tzeentch and 2 units of 60 marauders with flails and mark of khorne was really tactical :(

Rosstifer
21-04-2012, 23:01
No. Hording up does not mean poor tactics. Hording up elite units means that you have units that are 800-1000 points a pop and your army is two or three units total, which removes the aspect of armies battling on the table and turns it into two or three large units smashing into each other. (so instead of having many units with low model count, you have few units with large model count) and in essence ripping one apart means you win the game, thus promoting one-dimensional games of rock/paper/scissors.

I agree with this completely, and it's why I love LIGHT comp. All it takes is 400-500pt unit cap, a LOS against Dwellers etc and the game becomes sooooooo much better for it. No need to go too overboard, just trim the sillyness off.

Duke Ramulots
21-04-2012, 23:07
I agree with this completely, and it's why I love LIGHT comp. All it takes is 400-500pt unit cap, a LOS against Dwellers etc and the game becomes sooooooo much better for it. No need to go too overboard, just trim the sillyness off.

To me, that sillynes is why I play the game. Sometimes I like taking 50 savage orc big unz with BSB and gret shaman with lucky shrunken head.

But, playing with the rules as they are in the book, I have to protect those units against uber spells.

Rosstifer
21-04-2012, 23:15
In a club situation, I'd say fill your boots. We'd never dream of putting comp on Casual games. What's the point? If someone's constantly bringing 40 Chosen and no one can deal with it, ask them to cut it out, no need to comp it.
I just don't want to pay for a Tournament and have half my games, that I paid my hard earned money for, ended by someone throwing 6 dice at dwellerz every turn whilst pushing 100 Bloodletters in my face.

Duke Ramulots
21-04-2012, 23:22
Understandable.

I dont like the tournament scene anyway, so many people just not having fun.

selone
22-04-2012, 09:48
Typically I use a horde, sometimes 2 and infrequently none. It does become a little bit whose horde beats each others, though not always :)

vcassano
22-04-2012, 10:15
Understandable.

I dont like the tournament scene anyway, so many people just not having fun.

That's really not true! People wouldn't spend all that travel, accommodation and food money if they didn't have fun.

Awilla the Hun
22-04-2012, 10:49
Strangely, I find countering that sort of thing an interesting tactical challenge. I have weak but numerous troops. The enemy has a few massive blocks. How to divide, weaken and break through them? Similarly, how is the enemy going to keep his troops together when he's being enveloped and harassed on all sides?

Duke Ramulots
22-04-2012, 16:59
That's really not true! People wouldn't spend all that travel, accommodation and food money if they didn't have fun.

What's not true? That I don't like tourneys, or that Ive seen a lot of people not having fun at them? Paying for something does not mean it's enjoyable.

The Odor
23-04-2012, 07:44
I usally run marauder hordes and in my nurgle army a Warrior horde. With festering shroud.

Souppilgrim
23-04-2012, 18:14
But I thought 30 chosen of tzeentch , 2 warshrines of tzeentch and 2 units of 60 marauders with flails and mark of khorne was really tactical :(

While not the same level of rage inducing that some stuff in 7th was, THIS list makes me want to barf. Add a lvl 4 on disc... It's dumb, not fun to play with, or against.