At least they're better than Demon Princes! I think we can all agree on that one.
At least they're better than Demon Princes! I think we can all agree on that one.
Originally Posted by Dr Zoidberg
Only if dinner and the movie were both of a high quality...
Other than they don't have access to Gateway or other #6 spells that nuke units, what other points are they inferior to wizards at?
For campaigns, battle reports, and other events check out http://www.louisvillewargaming.com
Well, it isn't just access to the #6's, but having a level 4 in general (ie better dispel attempts, easier to cast all spells) is currently better than the additional combat res a lord may be able to put out (which may be somewhat worthless in today's streadfast world). Making the lords combat "superstars" (but I might add not any more superpowered than vamps can be) brings the chaos lords back into the fold as a potential use of points for the lord spot.
True for the most part but consider this:
If I am taking a chaos lord I am largely fielding an offensive striking army. I need to be able to weather two or so turns of magic. The opponent will have +2 to cast. I can make things more fun by taking scrolls that potentially remove his nasty spells and feedback scroll which can kill him on his six dice attempts.
This is largely what I do. Once in a while I do get drilled with a nasty spell but I usually have enough units on the table that if one goes down, another can take its place and then I can get into combat.
re: The combat res vs the steadfast world we live in - If your group likes to horde out to maximize steadfast then that means they will largely only have a couple of units (barring horde armies like skaven or goblins). My strategy always lies in #1) removing the battle standard first. This gets rid of the re-rollable stubborn. #2 - remove the general so his leadership bubble is gone.
I still have to deal with steadfast but steadfast on a 7 or an 8 with no re-rolls has tipped many times in my favor considering that my chaos lord in the unit or supporting on a monster typically more often than not wins and forces many leadership checks on my opponent.
So without altering my army roster other than removing the level 4 and giving me a chaos lord in its place and following that general strategy (the tactics employed to accomplish #1 and #2 above vary from game to game) I have been able to largely mitigate the magic phase ending my day early. I can't stop IF #6 spells, but when they do go off without IF, they either get scrolled, destroyed, or fed back into the face of the caster. Not always... again I have had them go off in my face as well... but enough that the above has worked very well for me (and maybe that's because when I play against people who haven't played me before they guffaw and get over confident at my lack of level 4 and the fact that I'm also marked with slaanesh instead of tzeentch so they feel they have a leg up and play sloppy, but that's just speculation on my part)
Playing that way has influenced my meta a little though. Last year out of 16 or so regular players only three of us went without a level 4. This year we have double that. So we shall see. I'm attempting my old tomb king list without a level 4... this shall be interesting.
EDIT: If I know my opponent has a #6 spell primed OR mindrazor I hold my scrolls and feedback for those. Typically they will chuck 6 dice at them and if they don't manage an IF, I can negate it fairly easily the first couple turns without having a level 4 due to my scrolls, breaks, or I take it in the face and then feedback on him and often that kills the caster or leaves him dangerously close to death for my fliers and other fast attack to get back there and try to finish the job. I let the other spells largely go off.
Last edited by IcedCrow; 10-05-2012 at 18:52.
For campaigns, battle reports, and other events check out http://www.louisvillewargaming.com
I think the main issue is that you can't take both in games less than 3000 points. Most other armies can take both a combat lord and wizard lord at 2500 pts. Vampires can take a lord that is both wizard and combat lord. We unlike most other armies have to choose. There is also the fact that exalted heroes are as good or better than most other armies combat lords, which means a combat lord isn't as necessary as they can go toe to toe with other lords and win. Basically the issue is combat lords aren't that much better than exalted heroes and they prevent you from taking a sorcerer lord which is better than a hero sorcerer (+4 to dispel is much better than 2 guys with +2). Disc lords are fun and I have fielded them before but my disc exalted is almost as good and doesn't prevent me from fielding a level 4 sorcerer. Combat lords need something to either a) a point drop in order to be able to field with a sorc lord and/or b) some ability that distinguishes them significantly from an exalted hero.
Except they aren't. The tussle in the Lord section aside, compare a Chaos Lord to an Exalted Champion and see what you get. Two more mount options, the usual magic item allowance, and 5 stat increases (some of which are usually trivial). Yet you pay 100pts more for it. And that's where they have a problem, is that in 9 times out of 10 an Exalted can do the same job just as well for a much lesser price.
Access to Arcane Items, +4 to dispel enemy magic, and there's also the other 5-6 spells on their lore; don't let your tactical scope go so narrow, there's a lot more to the game than killing things straight up, especially for an army as one dimensional as Chaos. All we do is combat, and if we ever find ourselves unable to win that then we can't win the game. Lion hordes are a good example; you need a good Treason, Miasma or Enfeebling Foe to stand toe-to-toe with them, and a Level 2 doesn't cut it enough when they only have to stop one or two spells with a bigger bonus to dispel than you have to cast. In theory a Level 2 can stand up to a Level 4 with the right army around him, but it very rarely happens, and in my experiences, it never happens with Chaos.
Last edited by GodlessM; 10-05-2012 at 22:32.
I must have been very fortunate these past couple years then to be able to fend off enemy magic so well. I understand they get the arcane items but typically i'm engaged in combat by the third turn at the latest and most of my units no longer become valid targets, and my fast units have already engaged with the light machines and other wizard hideouts by then as well.
For campaigns, battle reports, and other events check out http://www.louisvillewargaming.com
What I don't get is why people are complaining? Us as dwarfs need to take runelords in games over 2k to stand any chance of surviving the magic phase. We don't get these all powerful mages that can destroy units if they roll well. Your complaint seems to be that you "can't" take chaos lords because chaos lvl 4 mages are too good, doesn't sound like a reasonable argument to me.
I'll tell you what mate; the fact that you've gotten 100% positive replies on Warseer of all places is as sure a sign as any that you should start the army.
Knowledge: Know your own and opponents armies rules and units.
Experience: Good grasp of tactics and how rules impact on this.
Luck: At least getting an average deal from the dice.
Psych: Sometimes you can convince the opponent they are facing an uphill battle.
One Chaos Lord costs only 10pts more than two exalted heroes and the hero versions are allready very powerful, although the Lords hits even harder there is no need to take him, two heroes are always superior. This works in the same way as putting magical weapons on cheap heroes is inferior to just taking more heroes except that in this case it makes an armybook choice useless. Drop the sorcerer lord from the list and the chaos lord is still inferior to other options.
Dwarfs on the other hand doesn't need a runelord at all, more runesmiths will do the job, the runelord mainly gives the option of an anvil but is also an equally viable choice to two runesmiths. A Chaos Lord is a bad choice the same way a daemonslayer is, there are better things to take, he doesn't fill much of a function and the hero version is (almost) always a better choice.
That said I still plan on using a chaos lord even though I know it's an inferior choice.
There aint nowt a cannon can do that a determined dwarf with a hammer can´t achive.-Old Redmane
Visit my dwarfs at http://kazad-grund.webs.com/
Its rare I use a Chaos lord, when I do I think the key is to keep him as cheap as possible, I find a wardsave and a great weapon is enough along with a mark if I'm being fluffy. Like others have said the main issue with the chaos lord is Exalted champions will do exactly the same job just as well for less points, his only real advantage being the higher Toughness value making him slightly harder to kill, I do think the eotg rule is what kinda kills him, more often than not your 300-400pts killy lord is going to be fighting unit champions most the game making him a waste of points.
I think the daemon prince is the one that needs more attention.
I think the issue isn't just restricted to chaos lords, but fighter lords in general when compared to level 4 wizards. Fix that, and chaos lords should fall into line.
Just because the horse is dead is no reason to stop flogging it.
they see me trollin, they hatin
DESTINY IS CALLING!!! but beer is on the other line.....
What about a rule that lets the Chaos Lord roll on the Eye of the Gods table at the start of the game?
The Arena of Death, where I write the duel you imagine.
The Coming Apocalyse, my blog for 40k and FB rules development.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote