Jump to content

'Competitive' Ironjawz


Malakithe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 965
  • Created
  • Last Reply
10 hours ago, foolsama said:

Black Orcs are Ardboyz. Confirmed. So a unit of Ardboyz can be his Immortalz.
I proxy the Megaboss as Grimgor, because it's a much cooler model.
The Megaboss' 'big fist' to me is not extra attacks. 5s to hit means it's a cool bonus if and when it goes off (which is never). So Grimgor's 5 attacks on 3/3 (with one doing D3 damage) is about equal.
Keep in mind - you have to *roll* to get the Megaboss' command ability! No one else has to do that. Anywhere. That's garbage.

I've used both a few times, and Grimgor outperforms every time.

14642026_1507736069253079_4852101269195059656_n.jpg

On the 'ardboys being immortal's: YA! Dats propa 'ard m8. I can't wait to consider giving these a try since it makes 'ardboys much more accurate then I expected.

 

On the Bosses extra attacks; well they are. Almost every Megaboss takes battle brew if not talisman. As such their fist is usually hitting at +4, or even +3 if they are double swigging. As such the Megaboss will often have 7 standard attacks and 3 fists if his command ability triggers. As such as a fighter I consider Megabosses better (though that fairly unimportant, as good bosses are force multipliers), though 4 rending 2 attacks is awesome.

 

Sure our mega bosses have to roll, and if we were to fail that roll it would probably be one of the most terrible turns. Thing is though, it's really easy to get 6 units in his 10 inch command bubble. Plus certain models, like Brute Captains, tend to get a larger personal benifit, (2/3 claw attacks and 3/4 brute smashers means that the boss is likely to contribute a large slice of damage.). Though on the flipside handing out +1 attack within range makes everything much more reliable. 

 

Your comments are an eye opener though, something that I will consider. That and if nothing else I might take him as a second combat hero to make 'ardboy blobs chainsaws of damage and in lists using mostly 'ardboys as the rank and file I think Grimgor is a superior choice in a 'ardboy list. Just I don't think I can use it in gaming cycles until it's put down in an errata.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello I do not personally play ironjawz but while I have been looking at them how would you deal with a warherd? My buddy and I have played this out quite a few times and it normally seems to be an uphill battle for him. If the minotaurs go first they kill the target or at least maul it enough that almost no damage is dealt back. If the brutes go first they can stand a chance. The mawkrusha has been the only really difficult thing to take down but normally 4-6 minotaurs wipes it out pretty quickly. Just looking for any tips to help him beat the list that I have here:

Bullgor Stampede

Doombull

3 units of 6 great weapon minotaurs

Ghorgon

2 more ghorgons

The games are much closer when I add in gors and such but I prefer to go all bray or all warherd. He has mostly brutes, and a few of the mawkrushas, a few warchanters, and he just got some ard boys.

Again I am just looking to see what things he could do to make the match even closer because so far it just seems easier for me to pick the fights and with such big hitters on both sides whoever goes first normally wins although the sheer wound count of the bullgors helps them survive not going first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does your friend take the Ironfist Battalion to help dictate matchups?  Perhaps Gore Gruntas might even help to tar pit some of your units.

I'm pretty new however so take it all with some salt.  Conceptually, your warherd looks a lot like Ironjawz. Push forward and smash face.  It might just come down to whoever attacks first will have the advantage.

Posting his actual list may allow others to help more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bullgor Stampede looks like fun! There are going to be 2 different (theoretical, I haven't faced them) ways to play this. Can you post his list here? I think that would help.

If my opponent has first turn, I'll deploy as far back as possible and I'll castle up (denied flank). I'm going to screen my Brutes with Ardboyz/Gore-gruntaz, keeping just enough back so that I can potentially pile into a combat after they are charged. Brutes of course will be the main damage dealer, getting the work done! My Megaboss will also be waiting in the eves in the same fashion, screened from a charge but hopefully able to pile in. I run 3+ squads of Brutes, so this method will work for me.  Gore-gruntaz can also be used to screen/tank some of the Ghorgons until the Brutes can get to them or at least tie them up for a turn :)

If I go first, the plan is easy: CHARGE!!! If my opponent deployed on the 12" line, that is. How I do this exactly is determined on how my opponent deployed. If my opponent knows to deploy further back, I will hang back too and go with the plan above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

last time it was 3 squads of brutes with one at 10 and the other 2 at 5, 2 maw krushas, and 2 warchanters. He used 3 gor gruntas once and then he normally drops one of the maw krushas for a walking megaboss and some more brutes. He just picked up some ardboys to use for screening as suggested above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey,

@foolsama - Some interesting opinions over the last page or so. Whilst I can't say I agree with it all, it is very nice to see someone trying out something different, so kudos there man. I enjoyed your posts. Grimgor seems pretty cool and worth trying out for sure. I agree having to roll for the Megaboss' command ability is utter garbage, it really frustrates me. It's worth noting that under the General's Handbook, the fist attack is actually much better as your Megaboss will have Battle Brew making it hit on 4+ and wound on 2+. It suddenly becomes a bit more reliable for an extra couple of wounds, which is nice.

Regarding the Black Orc =/= Ardboyz thing, unfortunately what some fella says on the Facebook page holds zero weight, at least in competitive play. I do agree its a sensible distinction and if your gaming group choose to play it that way, I'd say fair play to that.

Likewise, talking of the Bullgor Stampede is interesting as that isn't currently a useable Battalion due to it asking for Minotaurs to fulfil it (despite its name!!). Shame, as it is a fun Battalion (I've played some smaller games with it myself). Again, I can see some gaming groups just letting it go, which is cool!

As @Dez mentioned, sometimes there is more to a models worth than whether they score back their value in points. I agree Maw-krushas are overpointed, but I don't think they are useless. Having played a tournament without it now (albeit Clash comp), I have to say I kind of missed it, it's a fun model to use. That said, this is the "Competitive" thread and my thoughts remain that the future of the competitive Ironjawz build does not include the Cabbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Likewise, talking of the Bullgor Stampede is interesting as that isn't currently a useable Battalion due to it asking for Minotaurs to fulfil it (despite its name!!). Shame, as it is a fun Battalion (I've played some smaller games with it myself). Again, I can see some gaming groups just letting it go, which is cool!

The norm is that these formations are useable with moderate keyword adjustment - that is what the relevant FAQ answer indicates (not the FB page - although the FB page has unsurprisingly agreed with this). You may have noticed that many people are routinely using the Great Moonclan formation which requires the same level of sensible keyword adjustment to be useable. Pretty much all of the old formations can be made to work in this way.

Obviously a TO could ban these formations as a house rule - which i wouldn't approve of - it kills off many armies for no good reason - regular Ogors, Moonclan, Gitmob, Greenskinz, probably Spiderfang for a start. For some reason, GW basically redid the formations for Order in the Order book, but completely skimped on the Destruction ones for no good reason. An 8th Edition player with an Orc (now Orruk) army should not be told not to bother attending an AoS tournament because his natural battalion is illegal so he has no synergy. Maybe in a year's time this could be revisited, but we should be inclusive when we can.

The same FAQ answer specifically indicates that Ironjawz = Black Orcs. It follows that you could put Ardboyz in the old Black Orc formation - not that there's much reason to do so. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nico - tbh think a lot people hadn't previously realised that the Great Moonclan asks for Goblins and not Grots etc etc. I agree on the face of it it's a bit silly as we all know they transferable and like for like. However at the end of the day, it's just not what the rules say.

I'm not interested in getting into a debate on it really as it purely comes down to whether TO's want to allow it. It annoys me as it's just lazy on GW's part to point those Battalions and then not specifically reference this in the FAQ, thus putting players and TO's in this position unnecessarily.

Putting the onus on us to use "sensible keyword adjustment" is actually ridiculous when you think about it. You wouldn't get this in any other companies ruleset! It's something so simple that GW should've just got right (and can still do so).

There has recently been this big reveal that these Battalions are "illegal" (sorry, I'm not keen on that use of word!), so I can see both TO's and players moving away from these. I'm not saying that's right or wrong (and hopefully GW sort it out before I have to make the decision as a TO myself haha!!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the FAQ is clear enough on the point - it could be spelled out in capital letters (we were too busy to reprint the battalions or create new ones for the 30 page Destruction book because we were doing an ace job on the Ironjawz models and the Sylvaneth Book/models at the time, so just map Grot onto Goblin Orrruk onto Orc etc.. and use the old battalions). I'm taking a few units which require the keyword adjustment to work at Blood & Glory. 

 

Quote

There has recently been this big reveal that these Battalions are "illegal" (sorry, I'm not keen on that use of word!), so I can see both TO's and players moving away from these.

When was this reveal? The US players seem to be firmly of the view that you can do this even to the extent of doing Youtube Videos on the subject. You would have to be a bit of a killjoy to ban the Hooded Villain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I'd add that I played against the Bullgor stampede at Honour & Glory and it was awesome and fun to play. Very much rock to my scissors. The player Wayne had named every Bullgor individually. Rule of cool - this should not be banned for the time being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, N_Watson said:

The discussion on moonclan referenced this. It states that black orcs and Ironjawz are the same keyword, so grots and goblins will be the same I think. This is in the FAQ. 

Screenshot_20161104-110233.png

I'm not wanting to come across as being in the corner of banning all these Battalions, as that's not what I am saying. However, playing Devil's Advocate, are you saying that Ironjaws>Ironjawz, Free People>Free Peoples is equivalent to Goblin>Grots and Minotaur>Bullgor. I guess it's all about where you draw the line.

As I said above, I don't think we as players should be arguing or even debating this. It should just be clear and not up for discussion or interpretation. It's completely unnecessary.

9 minutes ago, Nico said:

I think the FAQ is clear enough on the point - it could be spelled out in capital letters (we were too busy to reprint the battalions or create new ones for the 30 page Destruction book because we were doing an ace job on the Ironjawz models and the Sylvaneth Book/models at the time, so just map Grot onto Goblin Orrruk onto Orc etc.. and use the old battalions). I'm taking a few units which require the keyword adjustment to work at Blood & Glory. 

 

When was this reveal? The US players seem to be firmly of the view that you can do this even to the extent of doing Youtube Videos on the subject. You would have to be a bit of a killjoy to ban the Hooded Villain.

I would disagree that the FAQ is clear enough. Countless topics like this across the internet illustrate that point.

"Big reveal" is maybe the wrong terminology to use. There was some talk on twitter after @The Lost Lighthouse (Gary) brought it up regarding his own event. Following on from that there was some discussion at Clash this past weekend etc. I think the surprising thing for me was people (including myself) not knowing the distinction.

A small group of US players advocating it doesn't make it any more "legal" than a small group of UK players doing the opposite (not saying this is the case). It's all just down to individual player bases to make a consensus until we get something solid.

I absolutely love the Hooded Villain and have grudged Nathan Prescott at RAW with the explicit caveat that he must use this dude against me!

2 minutes ago, Nico said:

 I'd add that I played against the Bullgor stampede at Honour & Glory and it was awesome and fun to play. Very much rock to my scissors. The player Wayne had named every Bullgor individually. Rule of cool - this should not be banned for the time being.

Agreed. That is awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chris Tomlin said:

I'm not wanting to come across as being in the corner of banning all these Battalions, as that's not what I am saying. However, playing Devil's Advocate, are you saying that Ironjaws>Ironjawz, Free People>Free Peoples is equivalent to Goblin>Grots and Minotaur>Bullgor. I guess it's all about where you draw the line.

As I said above, I don't think we as players should be arguing or even debating this. It should just be clear and not up for discussion or interpretation. It's completely unnecessary.

I would disagree that the FAQ is clear enough. Countless topics like this across the internet illustrate that point.

"Big reveal" is maybe the wrong terminology to use. There was some talk on twitter after @The Lost Lighthouse (Gary) brought it up regarding his own event. Following on from that there was some discussion at Clash this past weekend etc. I think the surprising thing for me was people (including myself) not knowing the distinction.

A small group of US players advocating it doesn't make it any more "legal" than a small group of UK players doing the opposite (not saying this is the case). It's all just down to individual player bases to make a consensus until we get something solid.

I absolutely love the Hooded Villain and have grudged Nathan Prescott at RAW with the explicit caveat that he must use this dude against me!

Agreed. That is awesome.

I admit, having never played against any compendium armies or formations I have never been put in this position and was just following the discussion on twitter and saw someone was drawing attention to this FAQ. I am just of the opinion that if GW have at least made an attempt at wanting to include these formations (regardless of how bad an attempt it is), I think it is against the spirit of the game to pull at stray threads to try and get them removed from competitive play.

Not saying that is what you are suggesting as I know you had fun swapping armies and playing with moonclan.   ?

I just know that if I had an army that relied on these formations and this was the only full army I had, I would be upset to see a rule pack for an event I was planning to go to say "access denied" based on misering the gw rules. Fair enough if it is regarded unbalanced and there is no place for it in competitive play, but to base it on bad wording is anti inclusive and against the spirit of the game.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect Nathan will accept with relish.

I understood that @The Lost Lighthouse (Gary) actively banned Legacy Scrolls which kills off the various Destruction armies that haven't seen new books. Completely fair enough as that does make it more narrative/realistic. I suppose middle ground would be to ban only the named characters in the Compendium, which would preserve the Battalions and give death back their Catapult, but keep out Settra, Teclis, Old Alarielle and Volkmar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, N_Watson said:

Do you think the 2 10 man units are better than the cabbage regardless of your experience in clash comp? 

Man, I was so disappointed with how my games went. It was a mixture of Clash Comp and my opponents lists, I really really don't feel like I learnt anything at all.

I can see the potential there, but the lack of immunity to battleshock is a real issue. I ran the Ardnob as General in a couple of games and when his command ability goes off it's huge, however he is pretty easy to kill and it means you need to run the two units tight...I dunno, I kinda think you need him as its such a big investment otherwise.

Sure, its super smashy, but urgh, Battleshock is disgusting for that list.

I really need to play it under General's Handbook tbh.

2 Warchanters though, I expected this to be good, I wasn't disappointed. Can't see me dropping down to 1 in 2,000pts again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played a game tonight and tried Grimgor's ability "Da Immortulz" as described by the users above, making a unit of Ardboyz into Da Immortulz.

It's unclear now as to whether this will work in a tournament.  I personally felt that it tied my army together and I had a great game and took a minor victory.  I eagerly await an official errata on Da Immortulz.  I found it made Grimgor worth his points.

The FAQ that @Dez posted almost convinces me but it will vary by TO.  My initial impression after one game of Da Immortulz is that the ability is great but not overpowering and should be allowed.

Da Immortulz can do serious work when buffed with the Warchanter and Grimgor's command ability.  I took a unit of 20, all armed with rend weapons.  I call them "rendboyz".  This rend was to negate my opponents crypt shields.  It totally negates the 4+ save.  He had a unit of 40 skeletons.  I killed many with the rendboyz.  Also buffed them with mystic shield.

It gave me a clear way to focus in the game.  I coordinated and developed my pieces naturally around da immortulz.  Good for strategy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/11/2016 at 4:17 PM, cranect said:

 

On 05/11/2016 at 4:32 AM, tolstedt said:

I played a game tonight and tried Grimgor's ability "Da Immortulz" as described by the users above, making a unit of Ardboyz into Da Immortulz.

It's unclear now as to whether this will work in a tournament.  I personally felt that it tied my army together and I had a great game and took a minor victory.  I eagerly await an official errata on Da Immortulz.  I found it made Grimgor worth his points.

The FAQ that @Dez posted almost convinces me but it will vary by TO.  My initial impression after one game of Da Immortulz is that the ability is great but not overpowering and should be allowed.

Da Immortulz can do serious work when buffed with the Warchanter and Grimgor's command ability.  I took a unit of 20, all armed with rend weapons.  I call them "rendboyz".  This rend was to negate my opponents crypt shields.  It totally negates the 4+ save.  He had a unit of 40 skeletons.  I killed many with the rendboyz.  Also buffed them with mystic shield.

It gave me a clear way to focus in the game.  I coordinated and developed my pieces naturally around da immortulz.  Good for strategy.  

Thats kinda my thought, this ability basically allows them to rival the combat efficiency of Brutes with a generally better leadership save, a stable anvil on which to hammer your opponents forces again with the reroll on 1 being ultimately better then a extra attack. Maybe. Considering Grimgor can boost everyone in his radius it's possible to support some strong hits in a way extra attacks don't quite make a difference.

 

It also makes units with fewer units, goregrunters, brutes, more valuable simply because they don't get as many extra attacks compared to hardboys, it will be interesting to do the maths.

 

5 hours ago, WSDdeloach said:

I think you'll find ITC and more "official" (GW Supported) events allow legacy and the black orcs as Ironjawz. Because I don't think GW wouldn't want to hurt previous owners enjoyment for the game at least at this moment until we get say a GHB2.0

I don't know. It's one thing to say that Ironjaws is Ironjawz, but it's quite another to claim that 'ardboys are Black Orcs, when Grimgor himself is quite precise on who he gives that Immortals buff too. I 90% believe this ruling, but that 10% of uncertainity means that I might get shafted at an event that I get disadvantaged, because as I've said the Megaboss is still a better fighter and it's really the immortalz perk that gives him a large edge over him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6.11.2016 at 11:16 AM, Lord Biscuit said:

I don't know. It's one thing to say that Ironjaws is Ironjawz, but it's quite another to claim that 'ardboys are Black Orcs, when Grimgor himself is quite precise on who he gives that Immortals buff too. I 90% believe this ruling, but that 10% of uncertainity means that I might get shafted at an event that I get disadvantaged, because as I've said the Megaboss is still a better fighter and it's really the immortalz perk that gives him a large edge over him. 

Strictly RAW there's no doubt Black Orcs aren't Ardboys but at the same time, when GW pass it down that "reasonable" is the bar then I don't think we need to wring our hands over it. The black on white may be blind to the past but we know full well that Ardboys and Black Orcs are the same models, ported between editions. There is no doubt there.

That all being said, it's really annoying GW are still not pulling their heads out of their asses and nipping stuff like this in the bud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/11/2016 at 3:48 AM, Bjarni St. said:

Strictly RAW there's no doubt Black Orcs aren't Ardboys but at the same time, when GW pass it down that "reasonable" is the bar then I don't think we need to wring our hands over it. The black on white may be blind to the past but we know full well that Ardboys and Black Orcs are the same models, ported between editions. There is no doubt there.

That all being said, it's really annoying GW are still not pulling their heads out of their asses and nipping stuff like this in the bud.

Aye, I want to agree but unfortunately it isn't reasonable to assume because unlike the name tags the names are completely different. I asked my local store about how they would rule it and they concluded that 'ardboys could not benefit from Grimgors immortals ability because they are not called Black Orcs. Grimgor references Black Orc, thus this ruling doesn't work for me. Not every store, every tourney will accept that ruling on the basis of intent.

So I guess in most cases it does work, just there are some small exceptions that don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me that next version of the Handbook doesn't have the likes of Grimgor pointed up as they continue to build the AoS world and factions.

Baring in mind there is no actual listing for Black Orcs anymore I'd struggle to say you can use it in an actual tournament. In Open play think anything goes.

In AoS there is no Black Orcs, Ardboyz are their own entity and not a single keyword relates to the term Black Orcs, it's holding onto the past trying to reuse units to fit in with old models. The intent was from the old compendiums when the game dropped for people to continue to use their armies.

I think you'd be pushing it going oh I'm using these Ardboyz for the Ironfist formation in my Ironjawz army but they're also Black Orcs to benefit from Grimgor despite Black Orcs not being in an Ironjawz army.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...