Jump to content

What is the best unit size for Ironguts? And what do you think about making them your general?


Walrustaco

Recommended Posts

I love Ironguts. Their 4+ to hit, not so much. After reading in the destruction forum about the much loved Megabrute, I thought, what about some Megaguts? (or whatever they'd be called.)

Making them chuck out 3 attacks at a 3+/3+/-1/3 profile, that sounds mighty good to me. I had been considering replacing them with Maneaters who pretty much have a better combat output - and ranged attacks.

If I was to do this or not, what's the best size for a unit of ironguts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @Walrustaco,

Sorry you never got an answer here! C'mon guys, no post should go unanswered!

Unfortunately I have no experience with Ironguts yet, but am in the midst of a Ogor rebasing project. I actually had the same idea, try to emulate the success of my Megabrute unit with a large Irongut unit! Should work in theory right?

@ChippyRick has had success with them so can problem advise further. To balance the discussion, I know @Gaz Taylor is anti-Irongut, so he can probably give some useful counter points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Tomlin said:

Should work in theory right?

I find myself having 12 Irongut models after rescuing them from eBay, and I find it hard to justify their 220 point cost. There's the inevitable comparison to something like scythe Kurnoth hunters: 4 vs 5 wounds, 4+ vs 3+ to hit, -1 vs -2 rend, 3 vs D3 damage. Kurnoth hunters get rerolls to save rolls at the start of any charge phase, Ironguts get a conditional ability that's once per game that gives rerolls of 1s on hit/wound/charge.

They just feel so barebones and hit or miss. More often it's a miss.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chris Tomlin said:

 

@ChippyRick has had success with them so can problem advise further. To balance the discussion, I know @Gaz Taylor is anti-Irongut, so he can probably give some useful counter points.

Main reason I'm against them is that for 20 points more I can have six Ogors which are a Battleline unit, can re-roll ones to hit, re-roll ones to wound on the charge and have a nice choice of banners (either force another enemy model to flee on a six or re-roll sixes for Battleshock). (Note I'm ignoring Ironfists as I think the extra hand weapon is better).

All Ironguts have over a normal Ogor unit is slightly better save and battleshock and a weapon with better reach and bit more damage. They can get re-rolls but it's only once and only after a Ogor model flees from Battleshock.

So for roughly the same points I think Ogors are better. If Ironguts were cheaper, I would say Ironguts but at this moment in time, it's got to be the normal Ogors ;) 

Also the other issue Ironguts have is that there are a lot better units available to Destruction for the same role.  Just look at Fimir Warriors for example!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a little unit of Ironguts that sometimes I use allied with my generic destruction greenskin army because they are lovely models, but even then I run them as generic Ogors because I think just like Gaz Taylor said, they are much better for the cost. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

So for roughly the same points I think Ogors are better. If Ironguts were cheaper, I would say Ironguts but at this moment in time, it's got to be the normal Ogors ;) 

Do you ever experience difficulties getting all Ogors into striking range? Since they are delivered with 40 mm squares, I assume you put them on 50 mm rounds? That would allow Ironguts with their 2" range to attack in two ranks, whereas the Ogors can only attack in one. What is your experience?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Solaris said:

Do you ever experience difficulties getting all Ogors into striking range? Since they are delivered with 40 mm squares, I assume you put them on 50 mm rounds? That would allow Ironguts with their 2" range to attack in two ranks, whereas the Ogors can only attack in one. What is your experience?

I am rebasing my Ogors & Ironguts onto 40mm rounds as that seemed to be the consensus. They look about right on them. I reckon they'd be lost on 50mm bases. Interested to see if anyone has comparison pics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Solaris said:

Do you ever experience difficulties getting all Ogors into striking range? Since they are delivered with 40 mm squares, I assume you put them on 50 mm rounds? That would allow Ironguts with their 2" range to attack in two ranks, whereas the Ogors can only attack in one. What is your experience?

Nope to both.

I put them on 40mms as mentioned by @Chris Tomlin as 50mm were too big. 

From a range point of view, I have never really had an issue apart from maybe one or two Ogors not quite getting the range to pile in. I have used units size from three models to nine and it's never been an issue. Besides, I have two frostlords on Stonehorns to do the fighting! ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with the above posts and say 40mm would probably be the right size.  I converted some Ogres into Ogryns for 40K many years back (before there was a plastic kit for them) and the 40mm bases are what Ogryns use.  Now that the new kits is out, and having built a few of them, I can definitely tell you that 40mm rounds are perfect for Ogor grunts.

50mm rounds might work really well for the Ogor Heroes though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2017 at 11:53 AM, Chris Tomlin said:

Hi @Walrustaco,

Sorry you never got an answer here! C'mon guys, no post should go unanswered!

Unfortunately I have no experience with Ironguts yet, but am in the midst of a Ogor rebasing project. I actually had the same idea, try to emulate the success of my Megabrute unit with a large Irongut unit! Should work in theory right?

@ChippyRick has had success with them so can problem advise further. To balance the discussion, I know @Gaz Taylor is anti-Irongut, so he can probably give some useful counter points.

As @Chris Tomlin mentioned i have used them quite a bit before the Generals Handbook and for a while once it was out. I really like them.

I appreciate all the comments @Gaz Taylor brings up and agree with them as well. But for me you cant ignore the rend and damage of the Ironguts, and something most armies that cant have it wish they can.

I used mine in a unit of 6 and would have liked 9 tbh but i was running Ogor monsters so they were a support unit. The main issue is the 4+ to hit, but this can be sorted with Bellowing Tyrant, which you would use. If your general is a Tyrant, you also have his command ability which is worth it to cancel out Battleshock.

The footprint this unit covers, plus the ability to have such a large damage output even staying in a tighter formation is scary for anything in the game tbh. I like the idea of a decent sized unit of these and a decent sized unit of Ogors working together. With the Ogors pushing out larger number of attacks (paired weapons for the re-roll ones) using the Standard bearer for 6 to wound causing mortals and then the Ironguts for the rend you cover both bases. 

Also, 6-9 ironguts with a Mystic Shield on soak up so much damage whilst pumping it out as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I sat down and did some of the math on this. I know some people dislike mathhammer - I don't, deal with it. Here is the average wound output per combat phase for 100 points worth of Ogors and Ironguts:

Ogors with two clubs:
6.48
Charging Ogors with two clubs:
7.56
Ogors with two clubs and bellowing tyrant:
8.64
Ogors with two clubs and bellowing tyrant on the charge:
10.08
Ironguts:
4.55
Ironguts with bellowing tyrant:
6.06
Ironguts with "down to the Ironguts":
6.18

According to these numbers, Ironguts are better against enemies that have a better than 4+ save (unless the Ogors are charging, in which case they hit harder). So there is merit to the idea of bringing some of each, to fill different niches in your army. The different striking ranges (1" for Ogors and 2" for Ironguts) are potentially also relevant, depending on the unit size you bring. Different armor saves are also considerations, although getting a much higher number of Ogors than Ironguts for the same price by far outweighs the better save of the Ironguts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I somehow missed the topic!

I like them: just the idea of armoured elite ogres is somehow appealing, but I agree with all above: they are a bit too expensive, their special powers are next to useless, and 4+ hit is crippling. 

But if they hit, they hit terribly. 6 ironguts may do incredible damage. But that's 440 points...

Only 3 ironguts are almost useless, they usually get zero or one-two hits. In units of 3 I use maneaters (although yes, probably you are better off with 6 ogres). 

However, if you use Bellowing Tyrant on them, they destroy easily any unit. 3 damage per attack is awful... if you hit.

But still, you have to waste 440 points and command trait to make a unit useful... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The math hammer kind or holds true, I've said elsewhere that until Bonesplittas were released point per point the ogors bulls were the most efficient unit for battleline/destruction. 

When you translate that to actual battles though it's not so simple, 6 iron guts can stand in a space 3 models wide and dish out around 12wounds to a 4+ save unit. 6 ogor bulls would need to space out more but even so could dish out around 6-8 wounds (rerollin) to the same unit (on average). 

Now the IG cost 200pts more but those 12 wounds is practically a dead unit of brute, retributors, skullreapers etc... even though they don't clear the unit the return damage shouldn't even kill a single IG back and excluding immunity to BS it's going to be a shaky test (-1 due to bellowed) However on the bulls  the 3 remaining retributors (for example) are going to kill between 1 and 2 bulls. 

Doesnt sound like a bad trade but, lets say no one runs from battleshock (to illustrate a point) and the rets go first next combat round and kill another 1-2 bulls at worst case the 2 remaining bulls might not even kill a single retributors in return, continue this combat to its resolution and you end up most likely with 1 or 2 bulls or rets left depending on dice. 

Okay so a lot of ifs and buts and maybe's however the point is you have a unit in IG that is a able potentially smash thru the lines and with double turns or good play/luck continue this rampage and score points back in far excess of their cost. The bulls on the other hand are a very solid battleline unit that you can get some good damage output from and will even, against tough elites give as good as they get (pointswise) assuming they charge or fight first. 

Its the application of these units by the general that really dictate there worth not the maths as such. 

To really illustrate imagine 2 identical gutbuster armies but one has 2x 6 bulls in place of a unit of 6 ironguts on the other. Everything faces off equally and the IG player manoeuvres his IG to charge the bulls first, they should kill 4, take 2 wounds (on average)  in reply and at worst lose one model in return the 2 remaining bulls are on a 3+ to pop on BS test. 

Then next turn the second unit charges the Ironguts, goes first and kills 2, the IG reply by killing 2 or 3 back, and again by the end of it there will likely be 2 IG left standing. Assuming the rest of the armies are trading blow for blow the IG player has now turned the flank of the enemy and those 2 IG ganging up in nearby combats will quickly turn the battle in the IG players favour, and if you played out until one enemy was tabled and assumed average dice for everyone the IG player should "mathematically" win. 

Now in reality the charge, battleshock, priority, dice spikes really change the flow but the basic concept above is stratagem used in warfare from ancient times. 

Dice spikes btw would be a real good reason to take IG, I have had a unit of 6 hit a Terrorghiest for 28 wounds before it's 5+ death save, and a very dead TG after it didn't save 14 of them :-) I have also seen @ChippyRick 6 ironguts take out my Gordrakk in a single round of combat :-( 

overall though it's more about how you construct your overall army, the way you move and use them and how your opponent responds, in any case there is a use of 3, 6 or even 9 IG you just have to know what you want them to do. 

Hope the rant helps :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Sangfroid said:

Dice spikes btw would be a real good reason to take IG, I have had a unit of 6 hit a Terrorghiest for 28 wounds before it's 5+ death save, and a very dead TG after it didn't save 14 of them :-) I have also seen @ChippyRick 6 ironguts take out my Gordrakk in a single round of combat :-( 

Dice spikes work both ways though Kieran. Before last years SCGT I was running Ogre armies, and at AGOM I put 6 Ironguts into a block of skeleton warriors - and killed a grand total of 3. They then swamped me and took them off. Quite embarrassing really.

I always found that 6 Maneaters do much more consistent damage than 6 Ironguts - and are same cost. The abilities are great and you can choose the ability when you deploy it - so it can change for different situations. The only downside is the 5+ save which is a pain.

I would mention Golgfag's great buff to Maneaters and how good he is as a hero, but I hear rumours that compendium is about to be no more.

I think that many of may be running Bulls as battleline if Savage Orruks get a points hike in GHB2. Plus when you have monsters in the list they fit the fluff much better than the Savage Orruks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Soup Dragon said:

Dice spikes work both ways though Kieran. Before last years SCGT I was running Ogre armies, and at AGOM I put 6 Ironguts into a block of skeleton warriors - and killed a grand total of 3. They then swamped me and took them off. Quite embarrassing really.

I always found that 6 Maneaters do much more consistent damage than 6 Ironguts - and are same cost. The abilities are great and you can choose the ability when you deploy it - so it can change for different situations. The only downside is the 5+ save which is a pain.

I would mention Golgfag's great buff to Maneaters and how good he is as a hero, but I hear rumours that compendium is about to be no more.

I think that many of may be running Bulls as battleline if Savage Orruks get a points hike in GHB2. Plus when you have monsters in the list they fit the fluff much better than the Savage Orruks.

 

Totally agree about dice spikes :-) and also maneaters I wish I owned 6 of them to try out, just after GHB2 dropped I nearly bought some and golfag, wish I had of done now as compendium had a good 9-12 more months in it from then :-) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sangfroid I agree with most of what you say, although your example hinges on the IG player getting the charge. If the 12 Ogors got the charge (and were able to get within striking range), I imagine the situation would be the opposite.

The main thing to take away is that the units fill somewhat different niches. Overall army composition and how the units are utilized is, as you say, far more important than the relative efficiencies of units. In terms of mathhammering, I find it a useful tool. It helps me get an overview of what units are capable of, and what I should expect of them on the tabletop. That can help me in deciding whether they fit into my overall army and give me indications on how the units are best used.

Maneaters are a very interesting alternative to the Guts. They don't need IP if you take the trait, and are much less dependent on getting +1 to hit rolls. I can imagine the 5+ save being an issue though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sangfroid said:

The math hammer kind or holds true, I've said elsewhere that until Bonesplittas were released point per point the ogors bulls were the most efficient unit for battleline/destruction. 

When you translate that to actual battles though it's not so simple, 6 iron guts can stand in a space 3 models wide and dish out around 12wounds to a 4+ save unit. 6 ogor bulls would need to space out more but even so could dish out around 6-8 wounds (rerollin) to the same unit (on average). 

Now the IG cost 200pts more but those 12 wounds is practically a dead unit of brute, retributors, skullreapers etc... even though they don't clear the unit the return damage shouldn't even kill a single IG back and excluding immunity to BS it's going to be a shaky test (-1 due to bellowed) However on the bulls  the 3 remaining retributors (for example) are going to kill between 1 and 2 bulls. 

Doesnt sound like a bad trade but, lets say no one runs from battleshock (to illustrate a point) and the rets go first next combat round and kill another 1-2 bulls at worst case the 2 remaining bulls might not even kill a single retributors in return, continue this combat to its resolution and you end up most likely with 1 or 2 bulls or rets left depending on dice. 

Okay so a lot of ifs and buts and maybe's however the point is you have a unit in IG that is a able potentially smash thru the lines and with double turns or good play/luck continue this rampage and score points back in far excess of their cost. The bulls on the other hand are a very solid battleline unit that you can get some good damage output from and will even, against tough elites give as good as they get (pointswise) assuming they charge or fight first. 

Its the application of these units by the general that really dictate there worth not the maths as such. 

To really illustrate imagine 2 identical gutbuster armies but one has 2x 6 bulls in place of a unit of 6 ironguts on the other. Everything faces off equally and the IG player manoeuvres his IG to charge the bulls first, they should kill 4, take 2 wounds (on average)  in reply and at worst lose one model in return the 2 remaining bulls are on a 3+ to pop on BS test. 

Then next turn the second unit charges the Ironguts, goes first and kills 2, the IG reply by killing 2 or 3 back, and again by the end of it there will likely be 2 IG left standing. Assuming the rest of the armies are trading blow for blow the IG player has now turned the flank of the enemy and those 2 IG ganging up in nearby combats will quickly turn the battle in the IG players favour, and if you played out until one enemy was tabled and assumed average dice for everyone the IG player should "mathematically" win. 

Now in reality the charge, battleshock, priority, dice spikes really change the flow but the basic concept above is stratagem used in warfare from ancient times. 

Dice spikes btw would be a real good reason to take IG, I have had a unit of 6 hit a Terrorghiest for 28 wounds before it's 5+ death save, and a very dead TG after it didn't save 14 of them :-) I have also seen @ChippyRick 6 ironguts take out my Gordrakk in a single round of combat :-( 

overall though it's more about how you construct your overall army, the way you move and use them and how your opponent responds, in any case there is a use of 3, 6 or even 9 IG you just have to know what you want them to do. 

Hope the rant helps :-)

Great comment mate, and kind of covers what i was thinking but in more detail and better :).

As you said, it clearly depends on the full army build, but if i was taking full Ogor army i doubt i would be leaving home without them. The clear potential of the unit also plays a big part in what your opponent dies as well, the Ironguts unit cannot be left alone.

Haha, there is nothing like a realm gate travel and smash into Gordrakk :) (Sorry bro). TBF i have played him twice now and still done really know how good he is, never left him alive long enough to find out thank god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Solaris said:

@Sangfroid I agree with most of what you say, although your example hinges on the IG player getting the charge. If the 12 Ogors got the charge (and were able to get within striking range), I imagine the situation would be the opposite.

The main thing to take away is that the units fill somewhat different niches. Overall army composition and how the units are utilized is, as you say, far more important than the relative efficiencies of units. In terms of mathhammering, I find it a useful tool. It helps me get an overview of what units are capable of, and what I should expect of them on the tabletop. That can help me in deciding whether they fit into my overall army and give me indications on how the units are best used.

Maneaters are a very interesting alternative to the Guts. They don't need IP if you take the trait, and are much less dependent on getting +1 to hit rolls. I can imagine the 5+ save being an issue though.

I disagree with this, as if you have 12 ogors charging the Ironguts, you wont be getting them all in. No player running the 6 Ironguts is going to openly spread out to let them in. They dont need to with their range, so they take hits from one unit and then punch back the other unit before it fights. 

I honestly think you should try running this unit (6-9 Ironguts and as your general if you want) @Walrustaco, there will be some games when they just dont give you enough, but i doubt many. When they do hit and smash stuff up, you will be smiling, its awesome!!

And i would even consider this unit in a mixed list as well, look at the buffs you can find for them as i dont think it is a waste at all. As if/when this unit does go down, the buffs can go on to the next unit. If you have units of Ogors as well, they can join in, hit other units or mop up what the Ironguts left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...