PDA

View Full Version : Can wood elves ever be fun to play against?



Peachy
03-04-2007, 08:13
I've been thinking of trying wood elves for a while now but am a bit put off by all the complaints (both from my gaming friends and online!) that they're generally an unenjoyable army to play against. So my question is - can wood elves be fun to play against, or is their playstyle always going to make this nearly impossible? I'm thinking a unit or two of eternal guard may help things, as would only taking 2 units max of glade guard, dryads and war dancers in a 2k list, and only ever one treeman. What do others think - would this help?

Sherlocko
03-04-2007, 08:38
Make it a wood elf army then and not a daemon army with a couple of pointy ears, and I guess it will be much more enjoyable to play against. :)

Nell2ThaIzzay
03-04-2007, 08:59
Um, just play whatever army you want to play.

I'm sick of everybody complaining about every single army list imagineable.

I'm not going to be detered from playing an army that I enjoy (Wood Elves, magic heavy Undead, etc...) just because someone else doesn't like it. I play to have fun, and as long as my opponent is a fun player, I don't care what list he is running.

Onisuzume
03-04-2007, 12:10
Imo; it can be a lot of fun to play against; especially when the WE player suddenly finds out that those saurus warriors you got are allowed to march through forests unhindered. (trust me, WE players really don't like that the first time)

I'm not going to be detered from playing an army that I enjoy (Wood Elves, magic heavy Undead, etc...) just because someone else doesn't like it. I play to have fun, and as long as my opponent is a fun player, I don't care what list he is running.
What about skaven gunlines? ^^

DarkLord Of Naggaroth
03-04-2007, 12:14
play what you want, to avoid them getting board just make sure there is some Close Combat which you seem to have covered.

magemanda
03-04-2007, 12:34
I think that there are Wood Elf players out there who have made it fun for their opponents. I would say that this is a combination of the list chosen (i.e. definitely just one Treeman, not two, and some ranked infantry would help) and the play style of the people involved. If all you'll do is fire from a distance and then mop up the remains with your tree spirits I think it would be hard to make it fun. Getting stuck in and providing some combat would help immensely.

Lucifig
03-04-2007, 12:50
Um, just play whatever army you want to play.

I'm sick of everybody complaining about every single army list imagineable.

I'm not going to be detered from playing an army that I enjoy (Wood Elves, magic heavy Undead, etc...) just because someone else doesn't like it. I play to have fun, and as long as my opponent is a fun player, I don't care what list he is running.

He is hardly complaining about Wood Elves, in fact if you read the post he states he wishes to play them. His concern is about the people playing him, which I think is an admirable. And, yes, I believe you should be concerned about what other people do or do not like since this isn't a single person game. People can min/max or powerabuse their armies, this has been proven, but to me the other guy's fun is nearly as important as my own. Sorry for the off-topic, but this argument is growing old to me.

At any rate, I've lost the few times I've played WE because usual army tactics do not apply to them. Not to say that the games were not fun and I did learn from them, but they were unconventional (for an admittedly newer player).

Dorn
03-04-2007, 13:33
Playing against wood elves is hard because most of their army is hard to use shooting against - (skirmishers with ward saves, hiding in woods etc), hard to use psychology against (immune to psychology, high leadership), and very difficult to beat one on one in combat. I've front and rear charged wardancers simultaneously only to find the 12 wounds they did meant they still won combat by a fair margin. Anything you can beat in combat will flee from a charge and rally later (their friends not caring since they are immune to psychology). Even if you are using a bunch of magic, it probably won't help since wood elves are probably the best army at assassinating characters (alter kindred, longbows, waywatchers with killing blow etc etc) and 2 dispel scrolls will cover them for long enough to kill off a couple of wizards anyway.

In fact, anyone know of a decent way to play against wood elves????????

Tutore
03-04-2007, 14:08
My only answer is going heavy magic and trying to eradicate vulnerable units. But I won't play against WE for a while.

EvC
03-04-2007, 14:17
Wood Elves can be fun to play against, it all depends on who's controlling them, the army they take and the other circumstances.

For example, when you place terrain, don't load the table up on Woods. Maybe put two down then your extra but if your opponent keeps placing stuff tell him that's enough terrain.

Keep the army list varied. Don't make it a Daemon army with a single unit of Glade Guard and 90% ItP; but don't just take a unit like Eternal Guard out of obligation.

Be fun to play against! Make some effort to paint your army and actually put riders on horses. You will probably horribly massacre a lot of opponents, and it's always less galling when someone does it with a beautifully painted army. With my worst WE game my opponent had a piece of card as his "free" wood, no riders on his horses, awful painting and was a bit of a rules lawyer and unwilling to compromise even when he was already 1000 VP's in front (And he went on to come near the top of the UK GT). Don't be him. I'd have preferred to play the Thorek gunline on the next table.

ZeroTwentythree
03-04-2007, 14:22
In fact, anyone know of a decent way to play against wood elves????????

Yes.

But that would be a topic for another thread. ;)



He is hardly complaining about Wood Elves, in fact if you read the post he states he wishes to play them. His concern is about the people playing him, which I think is an admirable. And, yes, I believe you should be concerned about what other people do or do not like since this isn't a single person game. People can min/max or powerabuse their armies, this has been proven, but to me the other guy's fun is nearly as important as my own. Sorry for the off-topic, but this argument is growing old to me.

At any rate, I've lost the few times I've played WE because usual army tactics do not apply to them. Not to say that the games were not fun and I did learn from them, but they were unconventional (for an admittedly newer player).


I don't think he was accusing him of complaining, but rather being intimidated by all the people who do complain about WE (or whatever) being cheesy to the point that some people feel they can't play that particular army.

I'd disagree that you have to be worried about the other person's "fun," since this varies from person to person and all you can really worry about is yourself. At the same time, people need to realize that they will run out of opponents if they continue to play armies that are completely unreasonable.

As far as playing against the WE, I've got a limited number of games against them, but find them challenging. That's generally been a good thing, as it's forced me to think up new solutions to fighting a different type of army. I'm sure people can come up with over-the-top armies, but even my recent game against a spirit army wasn't too bad. Granted, if it was the only opponent I had, it would get old, but since that's not the case, I'm not worried.

I think the biggest way for people to enjoy the game is to give up on narrow notions of "well I like ((fill in type))" of games. I keep seeing people say things like "it's supposed to be a game of big blocks of infantry" or "it's a fantasy game, so I want games with lots of fantasy elements like monsters and magic" etc. and only being happy with opponents who do the same. Variety is the spice of... er, fantasy warfare with little toy soldiers.

Briohmar
03-04-2007, 15:07
Yes, I did it this weekend. In Game three, table one, I took on a two treemen army, and won. 6 Mounted Daemonettes got off a turn one charge through 9 wardancers, 2 spawn held up a unit of dryads with branchwraith for three turns, branchwraith died in 3rd round of combat, Chaos Knights and minotaurs chopped down the regular treeman, who with 1 wound left ran, and on my pursuit took me into the spellsinger, and then into a second unit of 9 wardancers. Meanwhile my chosen knights went through 10 dryads like a knife through melted butter, and into the 4 treekin. In essence, you just have to hit the wood elves where and when you can, and it will be alright. I enjoy my games against woodies, as they more often than not end up very close.

Vattendroppe
03-04-2007, 15:53
Every army can certainly be fun to play against, the only thing with WE is that due to their mobility and such it tend to take away a bit of the charm with WFB... But they're darn fun to play against (and with), always have to be open for new tactic options and certainly can't do the ordinary stuff. Except with a gunline, but they cannot do anything but the normal stuff anyway.

Although I'd say that it can be a bit lame since they get at least 3 woods on the board if they want.

xiau
03-04-2007, 19:55
Wood Elves can indeed be fun to play against. This however does depend on whether or not your opponent chooses to use like a thousand archers, that certainly rapes the fun for me. I do however like the way your thinking of using maybe two squads of Eternal Guard, to round the force up, nice of you to think of other players views :) but even archer heavy armies can be beaten down good, a little while back, one of my mates thought it would be funny to have one long line of archers, umm about 28 i think? to pepper me with shots......man you should of seen his face when i cast wall of fire on that unit ;)

Nell2ThaIzzay
03-04-2007, 20:18
What about skaven gunlines? ^^

I'd rather play against a Skaven gunline, fielded by a fun opponent, than some crappy Brettonian list fielded by a crappy opponent.

I have played the crappy Brettonian list fielded by a poor sport of a player. That game was no fun, despite his lack of "cheese".

I haven't played Skaven gunlines, but I have played Dwarven artillery lines, backed by an Anvil of Doom and about 11 dispel dice (along with a couple spell eaters) against my Undead, Necrarch, fully magic, non-shooty list. But I had a great time with that game, because my opponent was a fun opponent, and even though the list could be considered "cheesy" I suppose, I had a great time in that game.

Nell2ThaIzzay
03-04-2007, 20:27
He is hardly complaining about Wood Elves, in fact if you read the post he states he wishes to play them. His concern is about the people playing him, which I think is an admirable. And, yes, I believe you should be concerned about what other people do or do not like since this isn't a single person game. People can min/max or powerabuse their armies, this has been proven, but to me the other guy's fun is nearly as important as my own. Sorry for the off-topic, but this argument is growing old to me.

At any rate, I've lost the few times I've played WE because usual army tactics do not apply to them. Not to say that the games were not fun and I did learn from them, but they were unconventional (for an admittedly newer player).

I wasn't talking about him, I was talking about the fact that he is actually being deterred from possibly playing an army that he would enjoy because so many people have to bitch and complain about every army list out there.

I'm sorry, I am going to play what I want to play. I'm the one spending my hard earned money on the game, and I'm not gonna blow that money on something that I'm not going to have fun with just so someone else has the luxury of playing against a list that they deem acceptable.

There are 16 different armies in this game. Each of them offers something unique. Not a single one of them is any less viable than any of the others. I'm damned well not going to tell my friend that he can't play Skaven because I don't like playing against them. Skaven are a part of the game. If I don't like playing against Skaven, then I don't have to play Warhammer.

And I'm damned well not going to let somebody dictate my enjoyment of the game, because they can't handle magic phases and think my Necrarch Vampire Counts with 12 power dice is cheesy. I'm not going to let somebody dictate my enjoyment of the game because they can't handle whatever it is the Wood Elves have to offer (I'm barely getting into them, and won't have my first game as Wood Elves until later today).

You know what? All that complaining ruins MY enjoyment. You want to talk about a 2 man game. How about how it makes me feel about the army that I field? All I hear is complaining about magic, and how magic shouldn't be a part of the game. Because -you- think that, then my opinion that magic should be a major part of the game is invalid? I don't like the feeling that whenever I go to Games Workshop, the guy across from me might be judging my army, because he deems is "invalid" because it doesn't fit into his preference of gaming.

Guess what? You have your preference of gaming, and you've found your army for that. I have my preference of gaming, and I've found my army for that. Now, are you going to complain about how my army doesn't fit into your view of Warhammer, or are you gonna put your models on the table and go to war?

Luckily, I've never encountered anyone like that at Games Workshop, and all the whining and crying about other people's armies is done on here.

I really hate the fact that this guy has found something that he could very well enjoy playing, but because of other people's views on how this game should be played, he's questioning whether or not he wants to pick up this army.

Not only that, but in this very thread, people are telling him how he SHOULD field that army, so that it suits them.

What if that playstyle doesn't suit him?

It's utterly ridiculous.

Nell2ThaIzzay
03-04-2007, 20:36
I don't think he was accusing him of complaining, but rather being intimidated by all the people who do complain about WE (or whatever) being cheesy to the point that some people feel they can't play that particular army.

I'd disagree that you have to be worried about the other person's "fun," since this varies from person to person and all you can really worry about is yourself. At the same time, people need to realize that they will run out of opponents if they continue to play armies that are completely unreasonable.

As far as playing against the WE, I've got a limited number of games against them, but find them challenging. That's generally been a good thing, as it's forced me to think up new solutions to fighting a different type of army. I'm sure people can come up with over-the-top armies, but even my recent game against a spirit army wasn't too bad. Granted, if it was the only opponent I had, it would get old, but since that's not the case, I'm not worried.

I think the biggest way for people to enjoy the game is to give up on narrow notions of "well I like ((fill in type))" of games. I keep seeing people say things like "it's supposed to be a game of big blocks of infantry" or "it's a fantasy game, so I want games with lots of fantasy elements like monsters and magic" etc. and only being happy with opponents who do the same. Variety is the spice of... er, fantasy warfare with little toy soldiers.

Agreed completely.

I prefer a heavy magic phase, because in fantasy, I have always enjoyed magic (particularly Necromancy). Therefore, I play Vampire Counts, because it fits my preference perfectly.

A friend of mine has always enjoyed Clerics and Paladins, and honorable, noble knights. Brettonians were perfect for him, because they appealed to him perfectly.

Another friend of mine really enjoyed the concept of Skaven instability, and built a Skaven army because their concept appealed to him.

My Skaven friend and I both also have secondary armies (and as of last Saturday, I now also have a 3rd army; Wood Elves), and they all appeal to us in different ways.

I would never imagine to tell my friends, or any of my opponents, that I didn't approve of their armies because they don't fit into my style of gaming. The whole point of the game to me, is to have different players, with different playstyles, and different strategies, put those strategies and styles to the test, head to head, and see who comes out victorious. It's not about "This is a war game, so I say that it has to be about close combat!" It's about taking what aspects of the game appeal to you most, and making your army and strategy around it, and having a good time.

I think it's ridiculous that I have seen more than one person on this site questioning if they should get an army they'd love because of the complaining about it. There is this thread, where the original poster is questioning getting Wood Elves because people think they are broken. In the Skaven thread, a Skaven player questioned getting a Skaven army that he'd enjoy because of people calling Skaven cheesy. And I think that is utterly wrong, that people complaining about a particular army could actually influence people NOT to get those armies, when they very well could completely enjoy that army.

To me, that says that -you- aren't worried about your opponent's enjoyment, you are only concerned with dictating the game to your standards. I hate to break it to you, but everyone's standards are different.

ZeroTwentythree
03-04-2007, 21:00
I wonder if part of this is that many people come up with their army list and then it's set in stone, more or less.

Same goes for strategy. Many people seem to come up with a general strategy that the above mentioned set-in-stone army will use, and then pursue it without any thought to what sort of army they are facing.

For example (of the opposite), I usually play a pretty aggressive Skaven army. "My style of play" involves moving lots of figures around the table and rolling lots of dice. :evilgrin: But that's just the ideal. Against WE spirit army that doesn't seem like such an idea. I figured that would just help him roll around my flanks, etc. So in that case I'm more likely to play my army in one tight cluster (don't need to worry about mortar shells, etc!), possibly pivoting if I've got some solid terrain to hold a flank, etc. The important part is to not let my opponent dictate how the game will be played (i.e., doing what they want me to), even if that means switching to "plan B." If my forest spirit WE playing opponent wants me to start chasing him around so he can surround my regiments one at a time, I'm sure as hell not going to march right out and let him do just that!*





* OK, so I lied. I can't help it. Plague monks are frenzied. They have to charge out of line. I'm reconsidering the use of frenzied troops in a truly flexible army.

alenui
03-04-2007, 21:19
Well said ZeroTwentythree!
I never understand when people put up lists with already worked out tactics, deployment and have chosen their magic lores. Tactics should be made in response to your opponents army and their tactics.

Personally i think the main problem with playing against wood elves is it takes a different strategy i my mind this makes the game challenging and has lead to my games against wood elves being very fun (including against a drycha army with 15 units of dryads).

I often come away from loses against wood elves wondering why i didn't stick to my game plan that i had worked out against the army. When i have beaten them it tends to be by playing a different strategy than usual. I find that against both beasts of chaos and wood elves i often struggle with my high elves but i have always put this down to a weakness in my tactical abilities against armies with manouverability and lots of skirmishers rather than anything else.

MadJackMcJack
03-04-2007, 21:36
My only gripe about WE players is about the type who's only charge reaction is "Flee". It's no fun slogging through a hail of arrows only for the few units who do actually make it across the table to end up swinging in the breeze because their target legged it. Mind you, I just have a hatred of playing against 40K-wannabe armies with my Greenskins. Dwarves, I just sit back and pound the crap out of them until they're forced to come to me.

alenui
03-04-2007, 22:40
I don't think many players like combats where there troops get beaten up so badly they need double 1's to hold. Fleeing charges is a legitimate tactic with it's own risks.(i.e the unit failing to rally, causing panic etc.)

Llew
03-04-2007, 22:55
I recently played a good friend's WE army with a dwarf army. Both were 1500 points.

I had the Strollaz rune, the rune that gives a 5+ ward save vs. missiles to all dwarves in 6" on banners. Warriors, Ironbreakers, Warriors and a small unit of Thunderers.

Now, to be fair, he didn't take any of the stupid sticks. But he had tons of shots. I advanced with the rune, got the first turn and made it a pretty good rout. I didn't even play particularly well, but if you can pack him in and cut off some of his retreat lanes, you can do really well in close combat on them.

So, try dwarfs. I'm usually a pretty bad player and they did a nice job for me.

Sanjuro
03-04-2007, 23:09
I think it's ridiculous that I have seen more than one person on this site questioning if they should get an army they'd love because of the complaining about it.

'Dammit, you'll play against my Tzeentch Dragon Lord and Chariot army, and you'll like it!'

;)

Frankly
03-04-2007, 23:09
I've been thinking of trying wood elves for a while now but am a bit put off by all the complaints ...

I say don't be put off over few stuffy complaints.

They're an interesting army to play against.

As an opponent, WE's make you think differently while playing, they make people think about tactic's in a different light than just rank and file conflicts and make people consider army construction and supporting elements in army lists a little bit more.

I really enjoy playing against lists that are challenging and mix it up a bit on the battle field.

The Old Scholar
04-04-2007, 02:18
If I may...
I think that the rather newness of the Wood Elves is what is frustrating a lot of players. The more you expose your enemies to a specific tactic they will eventually figure out a way to overcome this threat. If they do not, that's their failing.
People who have posted above that tell you to make your army the way you want to make it are exactly right!
There is a difference between gamesmanship and bullying.
Don't let people bully you. These people who do so are playing a different tactic outside of the game and it can be funny from some and meant in a good natured way but altogether rude and unsportsmanly from others. These others are to be avoided at all costs.
Hey, everyone can have a bad game--I've had my share--and sometimes let stress from the real world turn them into ass-hats, but if you game with your friends, and they're your true friends, then they will support your army choices, help you come up with the best list, and play with you to have fun. If you come to play me and choose not to make the best, most deadly list only to avoid hurting my feelings and utterly destroying me, then I will be a bit insulted. I should be a challenging enough veteran to demand your best game and nothing less--unless, of course, you're trying something silly for fun.
Just remember that the game is a costly one. Don't buy something that may be fun for your opponents because they're crushing you. Buy something that wins. It's an investment. If you can afford to buy everything in the wood elf line, then you can have the luxury of changing your army around from game to game, otherwise invest in something that will do well. Why undermine yourself?

spacedwarv
04-04-2007, 02:26
I've been thinking of trying wood elves for a while now but am a bit put off by all the complaints (both from my gaming friends and online!) that they're generally an unenjoyable army to play against. So my question is - can wood elves be fun to play against, or is their playstyle always going to make this nearly impossible? I'm thinking a unit or two of eternal guard may help things, as would only taking 2 units max of glade guard, dryads and war dancers in a 2k list, and only ever one treeman. What do others think - would this help?



If they are not playing a cheesy list they can be very, very fun and tactical to play against. They do suffer the problem that Eldar suffer in BFG which is a very poorly done army list which does not lend itself to being non-cheesy/lame.

Alathir
04-04-2007, 03:23
Yes of course they can, and usually are alot of fun to play against.

I'd much rather take on a Wood Elf army than another supposed 'horde' of chaos...

Az_Barag
04-04-2007, 06:51
Dwarves have the advantage, high toughness and good armour, then use a gyro to burn the hippies, and use rune of burning on anything that moves in the woods. If the person u play is a fun person youll have fun playing him, just because he does what the book tells him to do in the way of retreatin from fights, hes not an idiot, hes trying to win, you areny going to fight a 50 strong unit of chaos knights with 20 swordsmen are you? you would flee to then shoot alot of lead at the unit, that is all the woodies are trying to do, whittel down the opponent as long as he can get away with then charge into the unit to finish them off.

Az

balthier
04-04-2007, 21:42
I am just starting up a WE army and i have been strongly advised to get a unit of glade guard, dryads and glade riders to start. The best thibg to do after that is to get a hero or lord then probably a wardancer waywathcer etc and work on feom there.

And they arnt boring in my opinion, and my playing buddy who i play with every week doesnt think they're boring. They could be boring if you have a very "shooty" army and kill most of the other armys men before they get to your units of dryads and glade riders. You could have a WE army that dpends more on its forest spirits and magic to stop this drawback though.

Riegod
05-04-2007, 04:54
Do you loose most your game that sound bad. only the forest spirits are annoying

Sauron90
05-04-2007, 09:55
I have played Wood elfs since the White Dwarf list, and none has ever complained about Wood elf being boring. The White Dwarf list was a little cheesy with only shooting and magic. But using the army book list (which you do now) generates fun games. There are a few lame things:

Several Treemans none likes that.
Too many Glade Guards thats also hated.
Too many Dryads. many people complains on the point cost now. (but its not much complaining).

I use a fairly balance list and has lot of succes and no complains either. So go for wood elfs they are the best.