Yeah because the DP is the only unit in the army right? It is trivially easy to land the DP to Purple Sun and land a Chimera defending him simultaneously (or the DP could flame 80% of the skinks to death in the shooting phase after casting Purple Sun). That is the stupidity of the model. He is the most a "toolbox" model in the game, the most maneuverable thing in the game (tied with all other flyers) and one of the most resilient models in the game. Everyone's solutions are either dependent on opponent error or list tailoring. My advise if in the unfortunate predicament of facing an OP WoC army for the next hour is: Utilize Arcane Vassal if you brought the tools like death magic (Amber Spear only works if your opponent doesn't know how dispelling works. That is the only magic threat! Death is the only consistent option because you can cast 2 spells a turn that can wound him). Kill the weak units if your opponent exposes them. Create beaten zones if you happen to take a character/unit that can threaten the DP, if your opponent takes a risk, great you probably win, if he doesn't IMO he will normally be able to find a minor win (because you can't actually chase down and kill any of his other units picking off stuff, because that would open up your defensive posture against the DP).
I've taken him out with tetto before. I hit him with a big cheap block of skinks (cohorts). Hold via steadfast until the comet comes down. I'm shifting away from Init 1 saurus and running more cohort blocks (24 skinks + 3 krox). It's reducing the impact of purple sun, making the 1 spell army wipe out less of an issue. Best of all, any spell from heavens will take out the princes charmed shield with the lore attribute. -Matt
=> I pulled out these two quotes because they are both sort of troubling to me in their own ways. Because this is the internet and meaning can get confused easily, I'll take a moment to say that by "troubling" I don't mean anything negative about the people expressing the ideas, nor do I mean to discount their view. I'm just saying that it sounds so...defeatist and pre-deterministic to me. To put it another way, I just cannot agree at all that the game is over before it starts, that the DP+flying army can only be beaten if the foe goofs up, that competition is jettisoned in these games, or anything remotely similar to this line of thinking. It sounds to me as if you guys (and again, it's nothing personal - just talking about the idea here) feel like you know the game is going to go only one way in these cases and that you don't have the confidence in yourselves to try to overcome a tough match up. I am not willing to accept that I cannot beat these armies. Warhammer has too much luck, too much crazy back and forth (see my most recent battle report for just one of many examples) for me to think there is no chance, that the fight wound not be fun, and that the only way to enjoy the game is to tell my opponent he needs to change to suit me. I've gone into games plenty of times where I felt I knew without a doubt how it would go (one way or the other) only to be massively surprised in the end. Things like mysterious terrain and random scenarios go a looooooong way toward forcing armies (their players, really) to react on the fly. Not getting the spells you want can happen. Getting a miscast or Not Enough Power can ruin a phase. An opposing spell or effect can toss out a wrinkle. A heroic long distance charge, a crazy shot, or even just an illogical action can mess up an opponent. The game has such a diverse array of factors (unlike chess) and so many possible outcomes that I simply can't believe that things are pre-determined. I relish the challenge of a tough fight. That's fun for me. Countering an opponent's best stuff in my next game with him by adding in a surprise or trying a different build or unit is a blast! Speaking of that, I also have to say that list tailoring is fine. It's part of the game. We may all have certain lists we gravitate toward, but our army books surely present us with more options than we usually avail ourselves of. If you don't want to use those options, that's your choice, but it's highly unsporting to then expect your opponent to change his list just because you prefer not to. (Again, not directing that at anyone in particular - just talking about the idea.)
How many times are you going to play your Lizardmen against that Demon army? I wouldn't tell someone that I don't want to play their army just because they pulled out a Demon Prince. But if every week they play the same army and every week their game is completely one sided and every week their opponent doesn't have fun playing against them... that is when our community will start to nudge them to try something different rather than have everyone else start an arms race towards the cheeziest armies. If the only way for me to win is if you roll a lot of 1's and I roll a lot of 6's then I'd rather play someone else. It's also unsporting to continually play the same dominating list over and over again. There are lots of things in Warhammer that are not quite balanced, and it doesn't take long to find the lists that are mostly Rocks to all the other mostly Scissor books (did Matt Ward write the book? It's probably mostly Rocks.) I don't think anyone is arguing that you should ask someone to bring a weaker army, just asking them to bring something different. We had a guy that only played the same double Hydra list which used every nasty thing in the Dark Elf book. It could be beaten, but win or lose it was never fun to play against. This is pretty much the reason lots of places use some form of Comp. It's basically the equivalent of saying "Don't bring that over-powered, under-priced list" Maybe you don't have any jerks that play in your area so you haven't run into the situation where it's no longer fun to lose to the same list in the same way.... again. If so, you're lucky! (We don't have many of those people here either)
=> As many times as my opponent wants to put it on the table. I'll figure it out eventually, and when I do it will feel...AWESOME! => That sounds an aweful lot like the assumptions that prompted my previous post. You seem to suggest that this is the only possible way for you to win. Have some confidence in yourself! => Not really. Is he cheating? Is he lying to you? Is he doing something dodgy? Nope. He's playing his army within the bounds of the rules to the best of his ability. Have you read my Michael Jordan rant?* => But if your opponent has found the best list (best meaning he does his personal best with it), then asking him to bring something different is asking him to weaken his list. => Just a thought - Could that have had more to do with the player? Like so many people are fond of saying, we all play for fun, right? So if I enjoy the company of my opponents, enjoy the look of lots of beautiful painted toy soldiers on the table, then why does it matter if the action on the table's surface is lopsided? It's still a few hours with friends, right? => I don't want to devolve this into a comp discussion, so I'll just say this one bit - Comp is never about that. It's all about "I would like to change the game to how I want it to be instead of how it is, and I don't care if you don't feel the same way." Comp only ever moves the goal posts, never solves a darn thing. => Ah, so maybe it IS about the players and not the army after all! My regular opponent, by the way, is that guy who brings the best army and beats me time after time after time. His Chaos Dwarfs and VC both regularly thrashed my Tomb Kings, often winning the game in three turns or fewer. Despite that, I enjoyed the games because they were still Warhammer and they were still with a friend. Plus, I got better over time and started winning sometimes. Now we've both switched armies (Lizards for me, Dark Elves for him) and we're still enjoying the games and the time together, even though I win more than I used to. The fun has not changed, only the number of losses. * Here's the nutshell version:
Definitely this. I have no problem losing every game (I currently lose *almost* every game). His Dark Elf army is not a very competitive list (maybe his CD or VC lists were, though). The new book has some dirty things in it, and according to your battle reports he doesn't use any of them. I've read most of your reports, and none of them seem to be against nasty lists... except the Nurgle one. So it doesn't sound like you've experienced someone that brings an abusive list regularly (mostly you bring self-abusive lists ;-P ). And those exist. Warhammer isn't a balanced game (possibly by design) so it is entirely possibly to put a list together that is "allowed by the rules" but is against he spirit of the game or simply not fun to play against. Armies that sit in a corner and shoot at you until you have no models left are no fun to play against. Armies that are only beatable by destroying an uber-death-star are not fun to play against. Sure, play them a few times to see what you can do against them, but if all your opponent brings for 52 weeks in a row is a dwarf castle list... you've already seen that episode. Why watch it again? Maybe this time you'll pass 55% of your armor saves and he'll only hit with 45% of his shooting? That's the situation that I'm talking about. If you make the game unfun for me, I'll just go play a game that is more fun. If that's with a different Warhammer player, then fine. (That being said, the OP of this thread is probably not in this situation) Playing against the kid in this story probably wan't very fun... until the other kid out-rules-ed him. How many times would that game be fun This is a bit of a false equivalence argument. Michael Jordon wouldn't even play you because it would be unfair and unfun for everyone. It turns out that due to the way Games Workshop writes books some armies can make Michael Jordon lists and other armies max out at Kris Humphries. It can be fun playing an underdog list vs a min-max list. But it's not fun if that's all you ever play against. It's perfectly legal to play Bo Jackson's running play in Tecmo Bowl every single play. You'll win the game. Every single time. So everyone made the rule: "Don't play Bo Jackson" so the game was playable again.
if woc was unbeatable you'd see every single competitive player using them. the UK masters is taking place this weekend. the lists are readily available with just the smallest effort. the lists are varied, both in army and type. some are very competitive. some are more fun. many armies are represented. these are arguably some of the best players in the world playing each other to determine who is the best player in the uk during that year. woc are certainly upper tier. but to insinuate they are in some way unbeatable (assuming equal skill) is absurd. maybe unless you are playing wood elves. they aren't a real army.
Alternatively, if Wood Elves, Tomb Kings, or Beastmen were playable you would see at least 1 player using them (with an extra 400 points, no less!). I'm curious how competitive the Lizardmen list will be and how he equipped his Scar Vets/Slann.
the argument was not if wood elves tomb kings or beastmen are competitive. no comment was ever made about them, except for me explicitly stating how garbage wood elves are. wood elves are also using one of the oldest books. TK is unfortuante, but they also aren't in nearly the position wood elves are. several uk tournaments have had TK podiums. doesnt happen often, but it happens. regardless, dont see how thats relevant to the WoC argument. would like to have seen jack armstrong have a serious go with the new lizardmen, but he seems to have moved on. i'd argue some of the strongest lists at the uk masters are the dark/high elves lists. than maybe demons. also, the white scars army shown above was basically the only competitive option for bike squads in a space marine army. space marines weren't very competitive and bikes were trash. it wasn't a cheesy list, nor was it a "hard" list. compared to the hard lists in current 40k meta its a joke. the kid should be applauded for making a garbage unit in a garbage army worthwhile.
The thread has kind of gone off on a tangent. The original post, remember, was: And getting back to that, I think a very honest request from a player that is new to the game would be to play against some less than optimal lists. Some of the better players here come with two lists. A beat-down list to play against other beat-down lists (or jerks) and a friendly list to play against other friendly lists and new people. The friendly lists are by no means weak lists, they just aren't Party-Slann-3-Scar-Vet-Salamander-Skink-Cloud equivalent lists. The GTs around here all seem to have rules like these: So, even in the competitive landscape there are some unspoken rules about what is "technically legal, but not alowed". So even at the Masters level of play there are some competitive builds that you just won't see... because even in tournaments you should be having fun.
I gotta say, hdctambien, this is a fun conversation. Thanks for continuing it and keeping it in good spirits. => Funny enough, others have commented that I can't expect to do well when I am playing a sub-optimal list against his "competitive, full of tricks, all the best stuff" list. As to his old CD list. Ouch. 2 magma. 2 rockets. K'Twf. Caster with Chalice (that he rightly played he could cast and then drain your dice before you dispel). Painful. => I see your point, but for me that's less about not having a chance to beat it than it is about the game itself just being boring. Even in a boring game, though, I'm still playing Warhammer with buddies, so I'm happy. => Maybe, but try to see the concept of the example over the specifics. You have this dude who is better than you by a mile. It could be due to genetics, practice, intelligence, equipment, or any number of reasons. He's just plain on a different level...and yet you ask him to play against you. Why the heck would that person feel like he should toss aside his advantages if he decides to take up your challenge? Why would you want him to? You asked a superior competitor to engage in competition with you - you should expect him to give you his best. => No specific experience there, but I think I get your meaning. Still, without more knowledge, I don't feel up to the task of analyzing the example. Sorry. I would like to be able to. => But that's at the heart of what got us all on a tangent. Why is that a good request to make? Why would a new player want to hear this at the end of the game he just won: "Yeah, you won, but I went easy on you." Talk about totally deflating ANY sense of accomplishment! Nah. Go for it! Bring your best against me even if I am new. I'll start learning how to beat the best from day one! Note that the OP asked, to paraphrase, what tools are available to him in his book to deal with the Demon. Good on him. He was not seeking ways to get his opponent to change. He was looking for ways to raise his own game to a higher level.
I've played 40+ games against the new WoC and have hardly had a problem with the DP. Below are some of the ways I regularly kill the guy. Keep in mind I only play Skink Clouds which means I don't waste my time with Saurus, TG, Stegadons etc. 1. Death Magic - He's only got a 5++, so Death Snipes from the Slann work pretty well, he also probably has no scroll. 2. Metal Magic - Use 4ish dice to cast Final Trans on the DP, he either takes the risk and you get a 1/6 chance to pretty much win the game, or he blows all his dispel dice to stop it, which means you use the rest of your dice to searing doom off chariots, Skullcrushers etc. It puts him in a dilemma with no good choice. Obviously this is not as good as it used to be now that we can't be loremasters of BRB lores. 3. Tetto-eko: Tetto is key to making your magic phases more effective and reliable, furthermore Thunderbolt is a dirt cheap spell that can plink wounds off of a DP, or use Comets/Chain Lightnings. Ultimately though he just pumps your magic up so bad. 4. Saurus Heroes: Build an Oldblood who can solo the DP and standby to countercharge by luring the DP into coming for the Slann. Even your normal Scar Vets can usually manage a wound on this guy and hold him for 1-2 rounds. 5. Shooting - If he's down to 1-2 wounds just shoot the bejeezus out of him and some 1's will show up. I think one of the keys is not to sink thousands of points into units which get owned by Purple Sun, or Soulblight (if you're plan is to actually fight the WoC army). The key is to look at how you control the DPs movement, if you have 15+ units on the table you can literally leave nowhere useful for the guy to land and force him to spend at least 3 turns declaring charges that you just double flee from. That leaves only 3 rounds of combat and there's no way he can kill that much in that space of time. Try to lure him into attacking buildings with your Slann in it to pin him down for Cowboys to come through and hold up. Sure Purple Sun sucks, but you can dispel it most of the time and if he's 6 dicing he's risking miscasts. Furthermore by building an army without Saurus/Stegs etc. you're actually not very vulnerable at all to Purple Sun and if he's trying to line up flank shots on a cloud he's in the wrong place.
Maybe you'll learn something. If anything you'll learn not to get in a land war in the Chaos Wastes. I started playing Warhammer in 5th edition. I was terrible. My friend played Wood Elves, hit Brother played Brettonia (back with the triangle formation) and I played Lizardmen. I don't know which armies were stronger than others back then. But I know the Wood Elves won every game they played. I as 50/50 with Brettonia until the Wood Elf player started building the Brettonia player's lists (they were brothers) then the Brettonia player beat everyone except the Wood Elf player. #1) I never learned anything except it was hard to win a game when my opponent shot me to death and ran from all my charges. #2) The Brettonia player didn't get better. His brother just built him the optimized list. Fast forward to 8th Edition (I didn't play 6th or 7th). I moved to Texas. The people here also kicked my butt. But after each game they would say something like: "You know, you shouldn't move your skinks straight forward. You should put them at an angle so when I charge them instead of over running into your Saurus, I expose my flank" Suddenly I wasn't losing every game by turn 3. I learned something (and could survive until turn 4!). And I've learned something after almost every game I've played here. I've never asked anyone to not bring something (I played for months against the same Chaos Dwarf K'dai Destroyer, Dread Quake Mortar, and other war machine nastiness). It's the experienced players that tend to say: "Your army isn't very fun for anyone". They aren't saying it's too hard, because they can beat it. They say it's not fun and they don't want to play against it. Is a Daemon Prince always not fun? Probably not. But a lot of the Lizardmen tactics against it seem to rely on more luck than skill though (and a few mistakes made by the Warriors player). So, you might win against it... occasionally. And you opponent won't say "I went easy on you" but he might say "I rolled 15 1's out of 20 dice...". Heck, I beat a Warriors army. Because I killed a nearby unit of Harpies and he failed 3 panic checks in a row and all his big things ran off the board (he stupidly started with his General and failed, so the Chimera's had to use their own Ld). Did I learn anything from that game? Not really. I guess he learned to roll his General's Ld last when given the choice. But it was just random chance that I won. If we played 10 times, he'd probably have beat me the other 9. But, like you say, if you're having fun it doesn't matter if you win or lose. It doesn't sound like the OP isn't having fun (and I hope we haven't scared him away) so he should definitely go for some of these Old Blood builds or Skink swarm strategies. And cross your fingers that the DP rolls IF and falls down a hole on turn 1 (another way I've won a game). What really sucks is when your Skink champion trys to buy a turn with a challenge and instead turns a Warrior champion into a Daemon Prince that jumps behind your lines and kills your solo Slann. (how I've lost 3 games). And finally back to Putzfrau: I don't even think there is a WoC argument. It's just the Daemon Prince. Kroxigor01 said: "Full kitted out flying Daemon Princes are broken." And the best ideas on how to beat the DP were "hope he lets you charge him" or "hope he moves into a position where you can shoot him a lot" or "get the right spells and hope you get them off when you need them" and "hope for a bit of luck rolling" olderplayer's first bit of advice was: " he can be vulnerable to being plinked by regular shooting or a magic missile followed by a hit by a cannon, stone thrower, or by multiple massed rbt fire in single shot roles" Which would be nice if Lizardmen had a cannon, stone thrower, or repeater bolt throwers. (He does later go deep into the details of how to kit an Old Blood ... but that requires the Daemon Prince to let you charge with that Old Blood (and getting some magic buffs off). He should 20" fly away from your 14" Cold One range) Nobody said WoC were unbeatable. Pretty much just that the Lizardmen don't have any non-luck reliant strategies to counter the DP and the DP is very effective against the Lizardmen. What's the best way to beat the DP? Play Empire or Dark Elves or High Elves. What's the best way to beat the DP with Lizardmen? Cross your fingers and hope the Old Ones are watching.
I think the equivalence with sport isn't apt (the Michael Jackson thing). I think the equivalent of "mate your army works in a way that makes the game uninteresting I'm not playing" would be "Michael Jackson I'm afraid you aren't allowed a pogo-stick on the field of play". You are personifying the army book as part of player skill. It isn't. I'm not asking a player to be worse so I don't lose, I'm asking him to play a different game. A game were people win due to strategic skill. I read the UK masters rules pack and it looks like a tournament I personally would not enjoy. 30 points for a win 10 points for a draw 0 points for a loss? Terrible idea, lists that are designed to win "11-9" (in the normal scoring system) often make for dull games. They also look like they are playing with hidden magic items!? Gimmicky crap: http://baddice.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/ukwfbmasterslists2013.pdf Only two players took the flying VP denial option (1 DP as described in this thread, 1 Moon Dragon). Unfortunately for them 7 of the other 16 took the counter (mass artillery). That isn't a strategy wargame, that is rock, paper, scissors. I'm in no way implying that these Masters are bad, merely that the tournament is stupid. I'd much prefer to model my game on the ETC rather than vanilla "competitive" warhammer: http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=120430 For the record, the following are the restrictions for WoC and Lizardmen (I recommend you read the general restrictions as well, as they change magic quite a bit): Warriors of Chaos • Exalted Hero on Daemonic Mount/Daemon Prince/1-3 Core Chaos Chariots/Skullcrusher unit, max 4 • Daemon Prince/Chimera, max 2 • Hellcannon/Lore of Death present in the army/Lore of Tzeentch present in the army, max 2 • Third Eye of Tzeentch/Talisman of Preservation/Armour of Destiny, max 1 on the same model • Chaos Armour/Soul Feeder/Dragonhelm/Dragonbane Gem/Wizard level(s)/Daemon of Nurgle/Flying/Lore of Death or Nurgle, max 3 on the same Daemon Prince Lizardmen • Saurus Scar-Veteran on Cold One/Each 3 (or fraction) Salamander models, max 3 • Becalming Cogitation/Dispel Scroll/Channeling Staff and Harmonic Convergence on the same model/Slann with Lore of Death (not including Wandering Deliberations), max 2 • Skink Skirmisher units, max 4 I think these rules are too harsh on the DP though. Death Princes can't have Chaos Armour, Soul Feeder, Dragonhelm, Dragonbane Gem or Flying, so that shows you how OP the writers of these restriction think DPs are.
The lists are closed. I dont know how that is gimmicky... its the standard way to play. You do understand these players got to the masters by winning under a variety of rules packs. You seem to be pretty hellbent on proving that your perspective is the correct one. There is a rock paper scissors component to this game, but the biggest factor in a vast majority of games is going to be the general. You can either play the game knowing you have a chance to beat anyone, or you can whine evertime someone brings filth. The former sounds like a much more enjoyable experience
Lvl. 2 skink priests and get amber spear (yes it is hard 3 priest are necessary to ensure it.) then he blows his head off for boosted go away. YES it is kinda crazy but it works.
Step 1: roll up Amber Spear, which means always taking enough beast priests to have a chance at it. Step 2: get a previous hit on the prince to negate his charmed shield. Step 3: roll lots of dice at amber spear, hoping for box cars (~25% chance) or a higher total that your opponent who's dispelling at +4 vs your +2 to cast. Step 4: wound. Step 5: have prince fail ward save. Step 6: Roll a 4+ for number of wounds. The biggest problem I see with this is that if I'm running a death magic daemon prince, I'm going to do my best to snipe the one wizard you have with a single spell that can hurt me. Odds are good I've got at least 2 spells that can pick out characters, and Skink Priests really don't like Leadership contests, Strength contests or Toughness Contests. I like Death Magic Slaan more, using the flying priests to boost the range and line of sight. -Matt
My L2 Beastie one-shotted Kharybdiss with a Spear on Wednesday night. It was glorious to have a cannon in my army. => We all have our preferences, of course, but I prefer standard Warhammer as it helps me ensure that each game I play builds on a common set of experiences, allowing me to grow better. Also, I don't have to have the Pre-game Phase - You know, that one where you spend time going over all the house rules. Much quicker to just jump into a game with anyone when you are all playing using the same set of rules. Also, as to ETC in particular (I abhor all comp, but this one more than most), keep in mind it's design for such a highly specific format of gaming that it's really a misapplication of the balances they attempted if you use their rules in another format of game.
If only cannons were as unreliable as a Priest rolling Amber Spear and then casting it successfully without blowing itself up or having it dispelled... and as fragile. Sigh.... Cannons wouldn't be so bad if you could pretty much only shoot them once per game.
If cannons were single-shot, players would just max out on them to make sure that the "kill early and easily" element of their battleplan worked. Also, has anyone run the comparison of a 100 point shaman vs a 125 point cannon to see the soup-to-nuts odds of killing a typical monster? I'm sure one is less reliable than the other, but I bet they are not much different. It might be a a little tough to work out since it leads to a point where you have to debate how cannons pick a target point, and I would not want to just assume that the shooter always has LoS to his ideal point on the table top (this is actually an advantage Spear has over cannons). I believe the L2 shaman has a 16 in 36 (4 in 9) chance of getting one single spell he wants, in this case Spear. That's a 44% chance. This is compared to the 100% chance of "getting" cannon if you want one. Both wound the same and do the same number of wounds, so that's a wash. The spell has to see any part of the target model itself, get enough dice, roll high enough (or Total Power), and not be dispelled. That's it, right? The cannon has to see it's target point on the ground, roll for variable landing point (and not misfire), and roll for bounce. That all? There are also the obstacle/interposing beasties to deal with. A Spear does not care that you have two trolls front of your monster or that the monster is behind a wall. It just gets way complicated I guess.