This is the second video from a tournament at Darkside comics in May of 2012.
The Vampires had a rough time in crumbling versus the Bloodletter hordes and a really severe hit from Pit of shades on the first round decimated one of the VCs key units.
Hope you enjoy the report.
http://youtu.be/i3E4zF7DPmE
The report was good, the game was bad.
Ultra-power super doom death Daemons vs a VC player trying something a bit inventive? I think one of the youtube comments suggested if you played that out 10 times it would end the same way 9/10 times, and I agree.
As usual you reported well, but in this case there was very little to report, I'd like to see the VC army against a less tuned army in the future.
I only have one camera so I get to record a single match up each round. I wanted to video the Vampire Counts to get a game that used the Coven Throne.
I doubt I'll ever pick the one that people actually want to see. Our weekly games are getting more balanced but we usually play horde armies that people also don't want to see.
Eh, someday....
My comment wasn't intended as snide or rude, just pointing out the unfortunate situation that resulted from two army lists where one had a clear (huge) advantage.
I do want to see your battle reports, no matter how bad / imbalanced the situation is.
I subscribed to your channel a while ago and as soon as I see a new video from you in my subbox it is simply impossible for me not to watch immediately. You established a new level of quality for video batreps and you and your crew are miles above anything else we can find on the net. I've already said it and I'll say it again, thanks for these beautiful reports. So when I comment on the game itself, please do not take it for yourself as it is not my intention.
That said I made a comment on Youtube along the lines of what Razakel said and it seems it irritated people, and maybe I shouldn't have pointed the obvious, but it was true nonetheless. Of course this was a tournament so it is indeed the VC player's fault for not taking a list that could compete well, but this game was still "my characters gives me a 2+ rerollable chance to win the game" vs "have you seen how well I painted the spirits of my throne ?" So yeah, the game was bad, but it has nothing to do with you or the way you post reports. You can't pick interesting matches every game !
I still enjoy them, so keep it up !
Now this has almost nothing to do with the above, but I noticed a trend in many of your matches or tournaments, is that you almost never use any kind of meaningful terrain pieces. Never more than 5 or 6 terrain pieces and rarely things that play a role in a battle (like hills or woods in opposite corners, and occasionally something in the center of the battlefield). That alone in my opinion contributes to the fact that all armies are just 3-4 hordes that clash in the middle of the battlefields hoping for the best rolls.
It has taken me some effort to convince my local gaming club but we're now playing with the full D6+4 terrain pieces as described in Warhammer base rules, including things like rivers, villages , swamps and rocks. We often use Avian's system (http://www.avianon.net/scenarios/terrain_generator.php) to place the terrain and it has led to many more interesting games where mobility and placement plays a bigger role in the match than the size of the horde. Of course it's still D6+4 so we sometimes have clear boards, but when we draw 10 and get 2 builinds, a river and a swamp, things get tough for armies that only use hordes.
Maybe a small idea of something to try in your weekly games for example !
Last edited by Far2Casual; 31-05-2012 at 12:03.
No worries, I know you weren't putting me down. Just explaining my side of it. I've gotta choose which one to video before I record it so it's a bit of a guessing game.Originally Posted by Razakel
My comment wasn't intended as snide or rude, just pointing out the unfortunate situation that resulted from two army lists where one had a clear (huge) advantage.
I do want to see your battle reports, no matter how bad / imbalanced the situation is.
"Looking at the cake is like looking at the future. You wont know what's in it till you've tasted it, and by that time...it's to late."
Props to whoever can identify the quote!
I do want to try more terrain and elaborate scenarios because they make people shy away from mass horde formations. Trouble is, I have to convince two people that are long time horde enthusiasts.
Wish me luck.
Me eating cake?
thanks for the BRs, some of the match ups are a bit one sided .. yes. But its also nice to watch the good, the bad and the ugly at Tournaments.
.......... alittle more ....... a little more.
Merlin, in Excalibur ! (from John Boorman)
You Da Man! Yep!
Gents, as one of the horde enthusiasts, it's hard to go away from them. They are like crack. They can beat monsters and many other hard units. We used to play with the d6+4 roll for terrain, but EVERY tournament we go to has 5-6 pieces of terrain on the boards. At the last tourney, several boards were covered with buildings and/or impassable terrain. It made it harder to maneuver, but still my hordes took a licking and kept on ticking. I did lose one game vs an ogre army, by 230 points. However, the hordes kept me in the game.
What kind of terrain and scenarios are you gents seeing that is so different from what we play? I am not saying anything bad, but would like to know.
8th Edition Armies: Orcs & Goblins, Vampire Counts, Ogre Kingdoms, Lizardmen, Beastmen, WOC. Working on Wood Elves, Dark Elves, High Elves, Dwarves, Empire.
40K Armies: Ultramarines, Tyranids Working on Orks, Chaos Space Marines, Imperial Guard.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote