PDA

View Full Version : "Sub-par" Units and building armies around them



Lord D'Mim
18-10-2014, 22:03
After getting bitten with the idea of converting the new Blightkings into Bullgryns for a Traitor AM army, it has lead me to wonder if it is really worth it.

As far as I can tell Bullgryns have as little need to be in the army than Ogryns did, so would building an army around them be a waste of time and money?


I wonder what other units people view as sub-par, that is worth building an army around.

Lord Damocles
18-10-2014, 22:37
Surely a unit/model's worth isn't measured purely in how powerful they may or may not be rules-wise?

If it would be a cool project, or make an awesome model, go for it, and screw being less points efficient than whatever this edition's go-to unit is.

Inquisitor Kallus
18-10-2014, 22:40
Surely a unit/model's worth isn't measured purely in how powerful they may or may not be rules-wise?

If it would be a cool project, or make an awesome model, go for it, and screw being less points efficient than whatever this edition's go-to unit is.

Heed his words, for Lord Damocles speaketh the truth!

Lord D'Mim
18-10-2014, 23:19
Surely a unit/model's worth isn't measured purely in how powerful they may or may not be rules-wise?

If it would be a cool project, or make an awesome model, go for it, and screw being less points efficient than whatever this edition's go-to unit is.

its not that it isnt the go-to unit, its just it doesnt fit in with Guard. I mean even tau are better at melee.

the choice to have a 5+ Inv or a potential 3+ save doesnt fill me with joy to field.

HelloKitty
19-10-2014, 00:23
I wonder what other units people view as sub-par, that is worth building an army around.

One of the things that I enjoy are playing with and against this concept, and watching people do well fielding something that the internet says is "subpar".

If your goal is not to win a grand tournament then I would say go for it.

Ravening Wh0re
19-10-2014, 01:22
Well, I *did* field pure coven for years...

Snake Tortoise
19-10-2014, 01:46
It's one of the aspects of 40k I love. Find the best possible role for the non optimal unit and make sure the rest of the list is as solid as possible and facilitates any job you want your favourite unit to pull off.

I can see a valid role for ogryns/bullgryns. IG lack units that can push up and clear opponents off of their objectives, but these seem like they could be decent for that purpose. Unlike other IG units ogryns don't have to fear combat so much so aren't depending on completely wiping out a unit with shooting. Put four in a chimera and move up to finish off whatever survives the rest of the army's bombardment

The unit is expensive for what it is but I imagine the satisfaction when they finish off one of the opponent's OS units and claim their objective would make it worthwhile

Althenian Armourlost
19-10-2014, 02:31
If you absolutely must use bullgryns, buy a crassus to transport them in.
You'll lose every time, but it's the style that counts.

Lord General Armstrong
19-10-2014, 06:49
Pretty much the entire Imperial Guards elites section is subpar, all overpriced for what they give.

Losing Command
19-10-2014, 06:59
Unless your local meta consists of top-tier cheesed up armylists, go for it. Many units that are considered 'sub-par' on the interwebz don't spontaneously combust when used in a game :p And the fact that nobody considers them a threat because the internet decreed it is a useless unit can actually make opponents underestemate them heavily.

Latro_
19-10-2014, 09:54
The new imperial armour book has chaosy ogryn rules and tis unit called mauraders who have the option for big mutants called brutes which are pretty cool and would suit those models.

The list also offers chaos spawn (which you can take as troops) or ofc you can ally in CSM for some spawn. I think spawn are now one of those hidden gems for chaos based armies, i rock 5 min my new army and they have not let me down yet! only TH/SS termies have smashed them and that still took them 2 turns! - so you can always proxy em as spawn!

Vipoid
19-10-2014, 10:25
I think it's ok to include some sub-par units with nice models/conversions or because they fit a particular theme.

However, it would be a lot nicer if there were no sub-par units at all.

Snake Tortoise
19-10-2014, 10:26
^ True, and it shouldn't happen at all with units that have existed for several editions and were designed for the current set of rules. With bullgryns you'd expect to wait for the next codex for their price and abilities to be more in line with the meta, but as we know that isn't always the case. I really wish GW would hire an experienced, well known competitive player as a sort of final consultant for codices to make sure everything is as it should be. I couldn't do it myself but there are people out there who can and it would do a lot for the game. A casual player new to the hobby isn't going to walk away from the hobby because every codex has good internal and external balance

But then the conspiracy theorist in me wonders whether GW truly want balance. Or is it better to have everyone buying bikes one edition then swapping them all for jump infantry the next...


Unless your local meta consists of top-tier cheesed up armylists, go for it. Many units that are considered 'sub-par' on the interwebz don't spontaneously combust when used in a game :p And the fact that nobody considers them a threat because the internet decreed it is a useless unit can actually make opponents underestemate them heavily.

It often surprises me how people completely write off units- as if being slightly over priced renders them entirely harmless. I feel like the trygon is an example. It's not what it was and there are better units to take, but saying 'It's going to get shot off the table on the turn it arrives' suggests to me opponents respect it and don't want it anywhere near their own units

Muad'Dib
19-10-2014, 10:37
Taking sub-par/inefficient units is playing with a handicap, if we assume you are playing against an opponent who only takes the most efficient units.
Depending on how large is the power/efficiency disparity, you can win with more or less problems; however, you give your force a weakness that a smart and/or prepared opponent can very easily exploit/leverage. It's easy to say that Warp Talons are fine if you keep them out of range of shooting and don't assault into cover etc...but remember that your opponent will/may also work to exploit this weaknesses.
As long as sub-par units aren't underestimated, their inefficiency can be exploited. They also give you less room for personal mistakes and bad luck, and your opponent more room for those.

= I really wish GW would hire an experienced, well known competitive player as a sort of final consultant for codices to make sure everything is as it
They already know (or at least knew years ago) how to balance army lists/point costs. Fantasy during 6th edition had several army lists that were - more or less - internally balanced, with all characters, core, special, rare units and magic items priced reasonably. The lists were alternative lists like Cult of Ulric or Barrow Wights. At the same time 6th edition WFB had units that were so overcosted that taking them was crippling your army.
They know point costs matter and that the game is better if everyone is around tier 2-3 power level-wise. (If you look at Cult of Ulric list, this becomes especially blatant - the list has no wizards, but instead are given three fairly costed repeatable magic items that reproduce a magical defense of similar/exact strength that having dispel scrolls would give.)
They just don't do it, for whatever reasons. (see my posts in GW General forum for more about the conspiracy :>)

It is also a gross misconception that you need to be highly/uber/really competitive (whatever it is that 'competitive' means anyway..) to want and understand balance. I had a friend who is a textbook case of player who plays to hang out with friends and is a big fluff-bunny...but he can tell you which units are under/overcosted after browsing a new book for 45 minutes. -_-

A.T.
19-10-2014, 10:51
I wonder what other units people view as sub-par, that is worth building an army around.Under the old WH rules I used to run 9 penitent engines supported by waves of zealots, repentia, arco-flaggelants, a couple of small units of arbites, priests, and karamazov.

It was terrible, and with the compulsory actions your opponent basically played your army as well as their own. But it was an interesting looking army and I actually won a game against a CSM berzerker army when the player misunderstood what I meant by a 'penitent/zealot' army and turned up without any anti-tank.


Two types of 'sub par' however, units that do a job the rest of your army can't and do it poorly/inefficiently, and units that do something that you have a better alternative for. It's possible for the latter type to actually be quite good broadly speaking and still have no redeeming features in an army.

Spoik
19-10-2014, 21:54
Generally, if you have an idea for something that looks cool, go for it. Both you and your opponents will have a richer gaming experience for it.

Specifically, Bullgryns aren't bad. There are doubtless more efficient ways to spend your points, but I've found them useful alongside armour: they can protect your tanks, either by simply standing in the way when they're being shot at, or counter-charging encroaching enemy units. They won't be a high-priority target as the ogryn-killing heavy weapons will be aimed at your tanks, and, if not, at the very least they'll buy your big guns some extra shooting time.

Actually, I field them because I have an irrational love of ogryns in all their guises. I can think of no better reason.

Lord D'Mim
19-10-2014, 22:50
I have settled on adding melta vets and a squad of bullgryns with mauls in drop pods to go with my space wolves.

Though anyone know what colours Wolf Brothers would run?


Now to convert up some blightkings C:

Flayed One Tastic
20-10-2014, 12:11
If you're desperate to use Bullgryns, instead of focusing on close combat with them you could abuse their Slabshields and get +1 cover save to the models behind them, for at least a 4+ cover.

Chem-Dog
21-10-2014, 03:23
I have settled on adding melta vets and a squad of bullgryns with mauls in drop pods to go with my space wolves.

Though anyone know what colours Wolf Brothers would run?


Now to convert up some blightkings C:

So, you wanted renegade Guard input to justify using converted Nurgle models as Ogryn to ally with a loyalist Marine force?!

My brain hurts, possibly as a direct result of that tiny soul-death I just suffered. :(

Lord D'Mim
21-10-2014, 14:32
So, you wanted renegade Guard input to justify using converted Nurgle models as Ogryn to ally with a loyalist Marine force?!

My brain hurts, possibly as a direct result of that tiny soul-death I just suffered. :(

That was an afterthought.

As I stated above, I saw them as an opportunity to make Plague Ogryns, without using the ForgeWorld models. While the FW stuff isn't bad, I want Nurgle Specific models, not ones that can be painted 5 different ways and be confusing what God they support.


Looking over my SW list, I noticed a lack of ObSec and AT/AMC from turn one, so thats why i settled on just adding them to the list, while i raise funds to get Lost and Damned's new book and sort out a renegade list.


It is only a stop gap measure. I don;t see why you are getting so offended by it?

Harwammer
21-10-2014, 19:08
Unless your local meta consists of top-tier cheesed up armylists, go for it. Many units that are considered 'sub-par' on the interwebz don't spontaneously combust when used in a game :p And the fact that nobody considers them a threat because the internet decreed it is a useless unit can actually make opponents underestemate them heavily.

My Mutilator always pleasantly surpassed my expectations in 6th. Not played much seventh yet but I'll keep plugging away with him. I can't help think having more than one will be pushing it too far but my mind keeps turning to more possible mutilator conversions so inevitably one day I will succumb and try fielding more (still as single model units, mind you).

Chem-Dog
21-10-2014, 19:22
Nah, not offended really, just confused.I just thought that allying Ogryn with other Imperial armies was just about as easy as it gets (glossing over the fact that Astartes aren't at all fond of Abhumans).
And any plan to permanently ally chaos dudes with loyal marines seemed entirely surplus to requirements.

Lord D'Mim
21-10-2014, 20:51
Nah, not offended really, just confused.I just thought that allying Ogryn with other Imperial armies was just about as easy as it gets (glossing over the fact that Astartes aren't at all fond of Abhumans).
And any plan to permanently ally chaos dudes with loyal marines seemed entirely surplus to requirements.

Also why i asked for Wolf Brothers paint scheme.. only known successors of Space Wolves, turned to Chaos and ironically ended up helping The Thousand Sons at Battle of The Fang