|
Post by Mr Blank on Aug 1, 2020 11:46:58 GMT
In all the game I've played so far we've been sticking to the 25% lords allowance from the original rulebook rather than the 50% from the end times faq, is this what you guys generally play or do most people use 50%? Has anyone found switching to 50% making characters too overpowered? If I paint Malekith on his dragon I'd like to actually be able to use the 810pts worth of model at some point! Also poor old Horace has Thorgrim Grudgebearer sitting around gathering dust as he can't be used in our usual 2500pts games!
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Aug 1, 2020 12:19:58 GMT
I don't have an issue with the 50% Lords/Heroes rule. Like you said, it allows you to use some of the expensive characters that you would not normally be able to use.
I have not truly played against an opponent where I thought their army was too powerful because they had too many characters.
|
|
|
Post by Lizards_of_Renown on Aug 1, 2020 13:24:21 GMT
So I have been playing 50% Lords and 50% Heroes.
I thought it was just a standard 8th edition errata / revision...
I'm kind of anti-end times...
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Aug 1, 2020 13:28:51 GMT
So I have been playing 50% Lords and 50% Heroes. I thought it was just a standard 8th edition errata / revision... I'm kind of anti-end times... --------Correct, it's technically an official errata / revision.
|
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Aug 1, 2020 15:11:41 GMT
I like the idea that a penalty to overpowered lord monster combos would be limited by having to take a level 2 mage. However, most of those lord monster combos are not very good in the current version of the rules.
With 50% lords and 50% heroes, I worry about power combos that would be opened up. Some armies can make them now, like the Ogre bus with three super powerful characters in the front to ensure for many turns you have 9 irongut attack while not getting many wounds in return for combat res. How much worse would that be if you did it with one of the tier one armies?
Of course it could be a completely unfounded fear.
|
|
|
Post by Lizards_of_Renown on Aug 1, 2020 15:47:47 GMT
I like the idea that a penalty to overpowered lord monster combos would be limited by having to take a level 2 mage. However, most of those lord monster combos are not very good in the current version of the rules. With 50% lords and 50% heroes, I worry about power combos that would be opened up. Some armies can make them now, like the Ogre bus with three super powerful characters in the front to ensure for many turns you have 9 irongut attack while not getting many wounds in return for combat res. How much worse would that be if you did it with one of the tier one armies? Of course it could be a completely unfounded fear. I’ve been working out my Lizardmen army lists for an upcoming battle. You could do something like that, but the chances of getting mullered (Messed up) due to combat resolution or a single spell going through for me is too high. You also end up with FA units... I think it’s a dangerous gamble and is not a sure fire win scenario. Could go either way if you have a smart opponent.
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Aug 1, 2020 18:45:12 GMT
We play 25% but I don’t have any problems with running 50% if anyone wanted too. Opens up for new builds for me to tailor with. Also don’t think we get that many more power builds from it but as i have not tried it i cant really say.
I think people put too much into deathstars. Just ignore them if you cant beat them. Soon your opponent finds out its more fun to play when you get combats with less powerful units then chasing combat with a deathstar.
The gut bus is powerful enough with just one lord and two heroes to be called a deathstar.
|
|
|
Post by mrbaldrick on Aug 1, 2020 19:00:57 GMT
I stick with the 25%, things are much more balanced that way. I say if you want to take more/bigger lords play bigger games. Playing a 4K plus game every now and then is a lot of fun. Having 50% lords in games feels too much like herohammer back in 5th ed.
|
|
|
Post by Naitsabes on Aug 1, 2020 20:48:11 GMT
pretty much in agreement with mrbaldrick . locally we do occasionally let somebody run with the 50% so they can field their dragon even though the game is small. but it does invite ridicule.
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 1, 2020 21:12:52 GMT
We’ve run 50% at the club, pretty much since the errata dropped. It’s never been an issue as it gives people the freedom to try fielding things they normally couldn’t. Yes you could have some very filthy Lord combos but that just detracts from troop choices and the club comp always uses custom scenarios which mainly require units to score objectives. I do love the option of taking a Doombull, Beastlord and Great Bray Shaman with the beastmen. It never normally pays off but that’s possibly down to my generalship 😁. As a general rule though, even with the increased limit, it’s rare it’s used to the maximum by players, it just gives a bit of leeway in the hero or lord ‘slot’
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Aug 1, 2020 21:54:52 GMT
Generally, the more cannons you have the less you mind 50% lords. It's more of their army you can cannon snipe before it does anything meaningful.
|
|
|
Post by dannytee on Aug 2, 2020 1:24:48 GMT
What my group does is pretty similar to what Knoffles says above.
Since the update came out we have allowed up to 50% lords/heroes. My personal opinion is because armies are generally taken to the same agreed upon limit for both sides things self balance themselves. In a 2,500 point game if someone takes 1,500 in characters between lords and heroes that doesn’t leave them much in the way of rank and file, warmachines, etc.
So I personally haven’t had any issues with it. But my group is also not hyper competitive. I’m sure the system could be broken in order to win more often with certain armies/combos due to the increase in allowable lords/heroes. But that hasn’t been my experience.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Blank on Aug 3, 2020 13:07:47 GMT
So I guess it's only really a problem if you use the extra allowance to make cheesy combos? I tend not to make power-lists anyway, or at least the fact I've lost the last 4 games in a row suggests I don't!
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 3, 2020 22:20:27 GMT
So I guess it's only really a problem if you use the extra allowance to make cheesy combos? I tend not to make power-lists anyway, or at least the fact I've lost the last 4 games in a row suggests I don't! I think that about sums it up and most of us playing 8th (or perhaps those who’ve not stopped playing), do so for the love of the game rather than because we desperately want to win (don’t get me wrong I’m as competitive as the next nerd but it’s all about a good fun, close game).
|
|
|
Post by Lizards_of_Renown on Aug 4, 2020 0:20:11 GMT
So I guess it's only really a problem if you use the extra allowance to make cheesy combos? I tend not to make power-lists anyway, or at least the fact I've lost the last 4 games in a row suggests I don't! I think that about sums it up and most of us playing 8th (or perhaps those who’ve not stopped playing), do so for the love of the game rather than because we desperately want to win (don’t get me wrong I’m as competitive as the next nerd but it’s all about a good fun, close game). Exactly. I couldn't agree with this more. When I play with my friends I am obviously trying to win, but above that I want us both to enjoy it. As a character in Patrick Rothfuss' book Wise Man's Fear said, I want to play a beautiful game. Why would I want to win any other kind? I've never played in a competition and imagine that I would make a more broadly effective army if I did so. Overpowered characters would not be on this list as you don't know what you're going up against.
|
|