|
Post by Anaris on Apr 9, 2017 15:20:59 GMT
That's the great thing about 8th edition! Any army truly can beat any other army! Sure some armies/army lists may be underdogs but they can absolutely pull it off! Even the most 'uncompetitive' or 'weak' unit can occasionally pull of a miracle and that's what makes this game of ours so great! Best summary of 8th edition warhammer fantasy ever! Wish I could like this post 100+ times
|
|
|
Post by Anaris on Apr 9, 2017 15:38:02 GMT
Regarding dice, I have a very solid win/loss record with my Tomb Kings despite running some crazy 'uncompetitive' lists. I don't know what it is but whenever I play them it's like like the luck (dice) are with me! For example my Sepulchral stalkers (terrible choice according to the 'internet') have never, ever failed to appear in over 20 games and I can only remember a single severe misfire with their shooting. Exactly! Because it's "uncompetitive" it's not in the same league as a competitive list. Competitive lists are meant to deal with other competitive lists, at least theoretically & ideally. So an "uncompetitive" list may have the edge. In warhammer 40k this was the case (I know different game, but 40k is broken af.) I took a pure fluffy and fun Space Marines Raven Guard list, not dark angels raven wing . Anyways I faced off against Elder. I tabled him. He brought the Avatar thing. He brought Dark Eldar Allies as well. His list was OP af. He is a great player too. As raven guard I bring scouts and jump pack assault marines. He even congratulated me on being the 3rd person to beat him, out of 50+ games. I know it's not fantasy, but I've never had a bad game in fantasy. Yeah I know I got tabled on turn 2 against that Skaven player, but that was do to poor planning and playing and dice rolls on my part. It's not that it was impossible or hard. Some games just go that way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2017 18:48:45 GMT
haha I play Raven Guard in 30k and eldar in 40k!
I'm actually working on getting rid of my eldar though. I have no desire to play 40k anymore so I'd rather have more fantasy armies to choose from/demo.
8th really was a fantastic game though (still is). It finally made fantasy battles into what I always pictured them being (no more MSU knights maneuvering for that charge! I sat that entire edition out).
And yes, all armies have balance against each other.
|
|
|
Post by hiportes on Apr 12, 2017 12:14:57 GMT
I agree with all of the above posts, I love and still play 8th. I have a decently large collection, so I have converted a few board gaming friends of mine (especially one - he is hooked) into playing and we just use my models. The momentum swings are huge, and that's what makes it fun. Epic Break test passes, those pesky 1s on 2+ Wards, and units of Gnoblars that JUST WON'T DIE! No army has stood out above the rest thus far, and that's how we like it.
As far as my original Skaven/Beastmen/Bretonnia question, I followed the advice and used the Glottkin book for Beastmen and I think that handles them just fine. We play with the adjusted points and upgrades from the Storm of Magic book for the monsters, and that helps a bit as well. We also created a Lore Attribute for the Lore of the Wild (each successful cast gains +1 on next turn's Beastmen Ambush rolls).
I largely left the Skaven as is, we added in the End Times units and made Lore Attributes for Plague (affected unit takes T test or suffers D3 Wounds with no AS), Ruin (unit within 8" takes D3 S5 hits), and the Dreaded 13th (Verminlords can cast it on MI and create Rat Ogres, also a 13 is IF but causes two Miscasts rolls). Note that the first two can hit friendly units (very Skaven-y).
For Brets, we actually use the Armies Project list (by request of players), but I still plan on piloting the list from here as well at some point.
We also added in Storm of Magic and End Times units/monsters to certain lists so that the models will actually see play.
So far, it has rekindled my 8th love (played 3 games last week!) and has reminded me why I collected so much of it in the first place!
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on May 16, 2017 14:56:09 GMT
My two cents on Beastmen are that in the main they don't need many updates. Characters, core and special are pretty good. The 5 things that need tweaking are: The cost of the rares (though I like the regen option mentioned). Jabberslythe rules (I'll be looking at the changes mentioned elsewhere in this thread too). The Beastmen magic Lore (perhaps just removing it). Making Beastmen ambush in line with the core rulebook. Making Beastmen common magic items in line with the core rule book (some are cheaper and others more expensive, it should be consistent).
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on May 16, 2017 17:39:09 GMT
I think cost of most things in the beast list is a little too much for what you get. For just a few examples. Beastmen chariots vs goblin chariots. Gors vs Orcs (both of which aren't that cost efficient) Minotaurs or Razorgors vs Beasts of Nurgle or Ogres or Kroxigor. Head to head it's hard to argue you are getting value for your points even with ambush and primal fury added in. Rares of course you've already discussed. But compare a stank or hydra to a ghorghon
|
|
|
Post by oldmandan on Aug 7, 2020 10:48:43 GMT
I'm liking the thoughts here, and I agree in particular the thoughts on Skaven I'd only add in lore attributes to the Skaven magic which now I know exist in the end times book. But I would organise the magic items and change some of them to be standard equipment options for characters.
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Sept 10, 2020 14:42:14 GMT
I’ve been reading a PDF of the 7th Edition Beastmen book of late as I’m considering them as another army (I just wanted to make my number of armies a nice round six and am considering them, Bretonnia or Tomb Kings as the sixth). I agree that Beastmen do work better with the revised Ambush rules and the ability to take Marks from Glottkin, but I want to avoid using the Eye of the Gods and Reign of Chaos tables because those are for the other (less interesting) Chaos Factions. Additionally, I think Beastmen should be allowed to take Dragon Ogres and Shaggoths as those were originally included in their 6th Edition Book and then thanks to GW’s bias towards Warriors of Chaos they were moved to the WoC book, and possibly Chimeras and Cockatrices too. AoS has given Beastmen all these creatures as part of their army list and removed them from Warriors of Chaos - given WoC are just so broken they deserve to have some units removed from their roster, and these units fit so much better as part of the Beastmen army. Does anyone else agree?
|
|
|
Post by tileag on Sept 10, 2020 15:01:11 GMT
Warhammer armies project has done a pretty decent job on an 8th ed beastmen book, check it out.
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Sept 10, 2020 17:21:08 GMT
Warhammer armies project has done a pretty decent job on an 8th ed beastmen book, check it out. Just had a look at it now, and I agree that it’s a good one. Some of Eliasson’s works aren’t so good but others, like this one and the Norse book are very well-done. I especially like how you can choose to give the core units Ambushers, Skirmishers or both to make use of the 6th Edition and 7th Edition rules in 8th (though I’m surprised both of those are free - I would have costed them at an extra point per model or something). My only other quibble is that the Lore of the Wild is virtually the same except for the Lore Attribute, though it isn’t much of an issue as you’ve also got Beasts, Shadow and Death to choose from anyway.
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Sept 11, 2020 0:47:08 GMT
I’ve been reading a PDF of the 7th Edition Beastmen book of late as I’m considering them as another army (I just wanted to make my number of armies a nice round six and am considering them, Bretonnia or Tomb Kings as the sixth). I agree that Beastmen do work better with the revised Ambush rules and the ability to take Marks from Glottkin, but I want to avoid using the Eye of the Gods and Reign of Chaos tables because those are for the other (less interesting) Chaos Factions. Additionally, I think Beastmen should be allowed to take Dragon Ogres and Shaggoths as those were originally included in their 6th Edition Book and then thanks to GW’s bias towards Warriors of Chaos they were moved to the WoC book, and possibly Chimeras and Cockatrices too. AoS has given Beastmen all these creatures as part of their army list and removed them from Warriors of Chaos - given WoC are just so broken they deserve to have some units removed from their roster, and these units fit so much better as part of the Beastmen army. Does anyone else agree? I use Beastmen with Glottkin marks but ignore the Eye of the Gods and Reign stuff. It's still a beastmen army using the standard book but with the Glottkin additions. I know there are others that do the same....add marks and ambush from Glottkin but ignore the other stuff. Regarding Dragon Ogres I'm mixed. Thematically they fit with either Beastmen or Warriors imo. Physically they are closer to Beastmen being a mix of races but location wise they are mountain rather than forest based so closer to WOC. I've actually started using Dragon Ogres as their own weak mini faction. r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic?url=https%3A%2F%2Feefl%2Efreeforums%2Enet%2Fthread%2F2154%2F&share_tid=2154&share_fid=1033149&share_type=t&link_source=appI don't generally add dragon ogres to Beastmen but would have no issue if anyone wanted to.
|
|