Warherds

[tupavko]

I think your excellent score is pretty relative as a scale reference of how well balanced Warherds are:

- you could be a tactical genius, or you could play in a very relaxed environement.

Compared to the overall level and the amout of potential threats the other factions can field Warherds have a lover performance, but then again a good player, is a good player and eventually will beat a "stronger" army.

If I played your list (the one from above) against let's say a mid ranged Arcanite player from my group or myself (I'm most certainly not a tactical genius ) on turn 1-2 I would find myself without the Doombull or without the Cygor because my opponent would snipe them down with his Skyfires, and then either I lose my magic defence and that's really bad against Tzeentch, or I lose most of my melee potential and Inspiring presence that I will need because those tzaangor hit hard and they will tear down my Bullgors...

A Fully kitted Tzaangor with a Greatblade in a unit of 20 (not even 30) makes the same damage as a Bullgor except he has more wounds (because of the unit 40 vs. 24) and a better save(shields from those behind 6+ ward save).

20 Tzaangors will chew trough the Bullgors like butter even if they get to attack second:

On avarage 6 Bulls with GW make 13A at 4+/3+ -2 damage 3 that's about 3,6wounds so let's say 4 so 12 wounds (6 tzaangors die)

On the other hand you have 12 remaining tzaangors hitting back:

8 Tzaangors with GB (+ champion) with 17A at 4+ 4+ -1 damage 2  ---- 3,5 hit (damage 2) = 7 wounds (1 Mino KOd)

4 Tzaangor Mutants with 16A at 3+/4+ ------- 3,6 wounds (another mino KOd)

2 Tzaangors with Shield with 4A at 4+/4+ ------- 0,7 wounds

+ 12 beak attacks at 4+/5+ ---- 1,3wounds

 TOTAL: 12,5wounds (3minos dead)

So this is math hammer but it's a honest comparaison between two units with the same cost and same role: HtH. 

You should consider there is most certainly going to be an Arcanite hero (any hero) within the range of the Tzaangors, so they get a +1 to wound and they most likely have the Warscroll Battalion boost (Tzaangor Coven)... That's why synergies are important, you do pay for the Battalion but the Hero boost is "free", cause anyway you woudl use that hero (shaman, magister, Ogroid...)

I even rounded up the minos output, and let them hit first...  If Tzaangors hit first it's a disaster I believe around 18-20 wounds that's 5 minos dead before even getting to attack....

In the meanwhile my big guys will eventually arrive in HtH but the question is how many wounds would they have left and how much power they lost in the process because of the 4-5spells dealing mortal wounds or shooting?

The fact is Warherd are super predictable and their weeknesses are too evident:

- you need HtH to win bu you're not Khorne, no missile, no magic except by using allies but still 400pts are not enough. 

- a massive boost to melee comes only from the General who is naked 8w model with no means of healing

- toooooooo low body count to present multiple threats to the opponent: 

Do not get me wrong this is not a sarcastic comment and I trully do not want to doubt your playing skills, and this post has nothing to do with power-creep or saying AoS i a buggd game. The fact is that the Warherds today are a "compromised" faction, that has nothing to do with the power level of the well ballanced ones( old like Seraphon or new like Arcanites or Kharadron).

Normally I'm not very keen on lamentations but on the other hand I do belive that criticizing doesn have postitive outcomes when done with some common sense and logic. I love both Breyherds and Werherds, and I do love AoS, but while the game as well as many factions are trully great, inspiring and well conceived, some other factions such as (unfortunatelly) those above are not, and as a player and a big fan of both beastmen and GW I want them to be as good as possible so that the overall experince for all of the hobbists is at the very top without upper-calss products and lower-class ones..

[Dracothjay]

I completely hear what your saying. Warherds/breyherds are so underwhelming, but I have just watched a 1k tournament on YouTube. An individual filmed and documented the whole 3 day tournament and one of the players had warherds. The warherd player placed in the top 3 finalists, bearing in mind there were strong kharadran overlord lists, seraphon etc...

but as you said, warherds/breyherds are completely underwhelming, but it's good to see that the faction DOES have hope for it. 

[decker_cky]

Tupavko - your calculations ignore how limited tzaangor can be due to 32mm bases. I don't think there's a hope in hell of getting 14 tzaangors into 3 bullgors. 

Bullgors can be good against combat armies, but they lose so much to shooting armies that they really struggle (doombull is a huge lynchpin and is very soft to shooting).

[cranect]

It could be helping my experience that around here they tend to have 1-2 larger prices of LOS blocking terrain in the middle of the table as well. The pure warherd list definitely will struggle against stuff that requires you to have a screen as well. While I don't win every battle I do win enough and the warherds normally make it at least a closer match just due to hitting power. People normally target the ghorgons first so that buys some time and the doombull is normally hiding behind some sort of LOS blocking terrain in the middle since he always fails to hit anything in combat. I wouldn't say I am a tactical genius or anything or even that the area is relaxed tournament wise but it definitely isn't the toughest either. If id have gone against the double kunnin rukk id have been in trouble. The tournament top 3 ended up being the KO (who hilariously had lost 7x in a row to the herd XD), then mixed destruction, and I was able to take 3rd with warherd and skarbrand. I always see this math hammer for them always being beat but it almost never works as clear cut as that. Maybe my dice just like the herd I don't know. I definitely was sad to see the battalion go though.

[tupavko]

11 minutes ago, decker_cky said:

Tupavko - your calculations ignore how limited tzaangor can be due to 32mm bases. I don't think there's a hope in hell of getting 14 tzaangors into 3 bullgors. 

Bullgors can be good against combat armies, but they lose so much to shooting armies that they really struggle (doombull is a huge lynchpin and is very soft to shooting).

12 Tzaangor will 100% be able to attack all against 6 Bullgors... That was my calculation, since I compared 20 Tzaangors to 6 Bullgors... 360pts vs 360pts

 

10 minutes ago, cranect said:

It could be helping my experience that around here they tend to have 1-2 larger prices of LOS blocking terrain in the middle of the table as well. The pure warherd list definitely will struggle against stuff that requires you to have a screen as well. While I don't win every battle I do win enough and the warherds normally make it at least a closer match just due to hitting power. People normally target the ghorgons first so that buys some time and the doombull is normally hiding behind some sort of LOS blocking terrain in the middle since he always fails to hit anything in combat. I wouldn't say I am a tactical genius or anything or even that the area is relaxed tournament wise but it definitely isn't the toughest either. If id have gone against the double kunnin rukk id have been in trouble. The tournament top 3 ended up being the KO (who hilariously had lost 7x in a row to the herd XD), then mixed destruction, and I was able to take 3rd with warherd and skarbrand. I always see this math hammer for them always being beat but it almost never works as clear cut as that. Maybe my dice just like the herd I don't know. I definitely was sad to see the battalion go though.

 Putting Skarabrand is not a bad idea at all actually............

26 minutes ago, Dracothjay said:

I completely hear what your saying. Warherds/breyherds are so underwhelming, but I have just watched a 1k tournament on YouTube. An individual filmed and documented the whole 3 day tournament and one of the players had warherds. The warherd player placed in the top 3 finalists, bearing in mind there were strong kharadran overlord lists, seraphon etc...

but as you said, warherds/breyherds are completely underwhelming, but it's good to see that the faction DOES have hope for it. 

At 1000pts i believe that the power gap is a lot less accentuated, because at 1000pts you have to make choices and drop something in most armies, while in a Warherd you get all there is a Doombull, bullgors and Ghrogons, you just lack numbers but all the synergies you can field are there, while others can't and have to pick what is most important to them.  At 1000pts most armies will drop their mages and play without them, but as you increase the level, they get to pick mages, shooting, HtH specialists and so on, while Warherds are still the same as at 1000pts.

[cranect]

3 minutes ago, tupavko said:

12 Tzaangor will 100% be able to attack all against 6 Bullgors... That was my calculation, since I compared 20 Tzaangors to 6 Bullgors... 360pts vs 360pts

 

 Putting Skarabrand is not a bad idea at all actually............

At 1000pts i believe that the power gap is a lot less accentuated, because at 1000pts you have to make choices and drop something in most armies, while in a Warherd you get all there is a Doombull, bullgors and Ghrogons, you just lack numbers but all the synergies you can field are there, while others can't and have to pick what is most important to them.  At 1000pts most armies will drop their mages and play without them, but as you increase the level, they get to pick mages, shooting, HtH specialists and so on, while Warherds are still the same as at 1000pts.

Ya I got the idea for skarbrand from the realmgate wars book with the blood schorched bulltribe. He fits in well. I am tempted to drop the second doombull for a blood sectrator to make skarbrand hit even harder and have a potential 16 auto wounds.

[cranect]

It also definitely helps that skarbrand and the ghorgon generate so much hitting power that everyone shoots them instead of the puny bullgors and doombull. Skarbrand helps even if he doesn't fight anything he wants to just by being big and scary looking.

[decker_cky]

What does 1000 pts of warherd with skarbrand even look like? Aren't bullgors still only battleline in warherd allegiance? Skarbrand costs to much to ally in at 1000 pts.

Something like this?

Doombull

2 x 3 bullgor

Skarbrand

2x10 ungors

[cranect]

I use skarbrand at 2000 not 1000. At 1000 I take 2 doombulls, 3x3 bullgors and a ghorgon. That list with skarbrand at 1000 sounds fun though.

[Popisdead]

On 8/26/2017 at 3:37 AM, tupavko said:

To be honest, this is just my personal opinion, 

Everything here posted is personal opinion.  Stop believing this excludes you from sounding negative and confrontational.

Why do you want to make this thread only about your displeasure in Warherds?  Other people, and I have found Warherd fairly effective and ways to make them work.  

 

[Popisdead]

On 8/26/2017 at 3:37 AM, tupavko said:

To be honest, this is just my personal opinion, 

Everything here posted is personal opinion.  Stop believing this excludes you from sounding negative and confrontational.

Why do you want to make this thread only about your displeasure in Warherds?  Other people, and I have found Warherd fairly effective and ways to make them work.  

 

[tupavko]

5 minutes ago, Popisdead said:

Everything here posted is personal opinion.  Stop believing this excludes you from sounding negative and confrontational.

Why do you want to make this thread only about your displeasure in Warherds?  Other people, and I have found Warherd fairly effective and ways to make them work.  

 

Because I'm not! Criticizing is very different from being negative! 

AoS is a great game, and GH17 made it even better, thanks to GW's effort to balance things, solve rule issues and so on. This however doesn't mean everything is perfect and since GW did a good job they reached godly perfection so criticizing them is a blasphemy, or naysaying.

I'm glad you an many others, such as myself found a way to play Warherds, but again this proves nothing besides our will to play with an army we love. But emotions, good vibes and love for something should not prevent anyone from seeing the truth, or lose all impartiality! As many have said, it's not just me, Warherds are a "weaker" army (as the Breyherds especially since the last blast from the recent updates) which is a shame, not because I'm aiming at some super-power level or a top tier army, but because I trully believe that all armies should be at the same level. Some will always be easier to master, others a bit harder, but that's one thing, having "issues" is completely different matter.

So sir, I'm sorry i offended you with my "displeasure" for Warherds, but in a discussion it can happen that someone doesn't feel like praising the great efforts of GW, but istead prefers to point out some issue, so that maybe one day, those who want to praise, can praise it even more!