Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Eevika

How would you fix the horde meta?

Recommended Posts

Honestly I'm not enjoying the meta in AoS currently. I like big trolls and large monsters but the meta armies are always pretty much hordes unless the rules are just completely broken (read Gristlegore) GW did nothing to change the rules in the latests GHB to fix this issue. I would love to play a list with something like 3 behemoths but the best option competitively is to take none and just buff your hordes. I would love to play a Magma Dragon and a Dreadmaw in my army but why would I do that when 60 grots are cheaper and better at everything. Now I wont stop playing I love the game and love my monsters and troggoths but It's still quite annoying that even though GW designs low model count armies the rules dont actually support that play style at all. 

  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t seen gloomspite horde armies doing that well in tournaments. I wouldn’t say the general meta is even horde biased at the moment. 

We’re regularly seeing bloodthirster, keeper, GUO, GKoT, heavy lists in the top of tourneys and outside of that it’s a very good mix of factions and builds. 

So I don’t think there needs to be a fix for a horde meta as in general there isn’t one.  The internal balance of gloomspite may be a bit off though as troggoths aren’t that competitive but can still do okay.  They may even get a points change in the latest July update for new battletomes so wait for that. 

Anecdotally I play with multiple ghorgons in my BoC army and generally do alright and have a great time with them. 

  • Like 10
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

I haven’t seen gloomspite horde armies doing that well in tournaments. I wouldn’t say the general meta is even horde biased at the moment. 

 We’re regularly seeing bloodthirster, keeper, GUO, GKoT, heavy lists in the top of tourneys and outside of that it’s a very good mix of factions and builds. 

 So I don’t think there needs to be a fix for a horde meta as in general there isn’t one.  The internal balance of gloomspite may be a bit off though as troggoths aren’t that competitive but can still do okay.  They may even get a points change in the latest July update for new battletomes so wait for that. 

Anecdotally I play with multiple ghorgons in my BoC army and generally do alright and have a great time with them. 

Skaven is horde, DoK is horde, Fyreslayers to some extent, LoN relies on big units, Gloomspite best lists have 100+ grots. Slanesh is also large units of deamonettes. Even shooty armies like KO rely on 40 blocks of arkanauts to do good

  • Like 3
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally don't think the horde meta is the right term, some very potent top tier armies are using very few models (Slaanesh, FEC) with big very powerful monsters. Fyreslayers don't bring enough models to be a proper horde, Skaven & Gloomspite certainly play the horde game but I don't think it's fair to call the meta "horde" for two armes.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Skaven is horde, DoK is horde, Fyreslayers to some extent, LoN relies on big units, Gloomspite best lists have 100+ grots. Slanesh is also large units of deamonettes. Even shooty armies like KO rely on 40 blocks of arkanauts to do good

I don’t really know what you want from these armies though? These are armies that are heavily based around units of infantry/hordes which are supported by other larger units, not the other way around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

I don’t really know what you want from these armies though? These are armies that are heavily based around units of infantry/hordes which are supported by other larger units, not the other way around. 

No but those are the top armies. Those are what make the meta. Its only horde

  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Knight Scáthach of Fimm said:

Capture points using the accumulative wounds characteristic of eligible models? Hoards would still be superior but it just means you need 13 dudes to beat a standard monster.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would even go for using wounds remaining to make things interesting. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would even go for using wounds remaining to make things interesting. 

Wounds remaining would just hurt the big things when hordes can remove models that arent on the objective when taking damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove points discount for max sized units, seems crazy that bigger units not only tend to get attack/damage bonuses but are cheaper too. 

and/or

Add penalties as well as buffs for max sized units, nothing crazy but from a 'well yeah I guess that makes sense' POV it's easy to justify something like  a +1 to hit against units of 30+ or something (certainly with ranged attacks) to represent the increased chance of just hitting something when attacking a large blob of troops.

Making behemoths better at controlling objectives feels like a no brainer to me. I know a lot of people talk about wounds remaining, personally I'd have zero issue with behemoths counting as 2x wounds remaining as that makes the large model more powerful to start with but weaker the closer to death they get.

Saying that I think the push should always be towards making people create more balanced lists so neither horde or behemoth heavy, but anyway...

  • Like 7
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Skaven is horde, DoK is horde, Fyreslayers to some extent, LoN relies on big units, Gloomspite best lists have 100+ grots. Slanesh is also large units of deamonettes. Even shooty armies like KO rely on 40 blocks of arkanauts to do good

If you play me, yes definitely, I wouldn’t go out to play if a can’t take my 120 meathsields with me.

although the reason behind it is more that I love playing my army after a certain fluff.

The top skaven tournament list sadly doesn’t really come around that many models.

mostly you’ll see a ton of wizards (grey seer, Verminlords) the minimum of our cheapest battleline units (60clanrats in total) and a ton of endless spells/shooting and some monks.

2 minutes ago, Eevika said:

No but those are the top armies. Those are what make the meta. Its only horde

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eevika said:

Wounds remaining would just hurt the big things when hordes can remove models that arent on the objective when taking damage

Still better than just counting as 1, seems OP to have something big counting as 16-30 until it dies. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

Still better than just counting as 1, seems OP to have something big counting as 16-30 until it dies. 

You have a point but shouldnt a massive dragon at 1 wound be scarier than a grot alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Eevika said:

You have a point but shouldnt a massive dragon at 1 wound be scarier than a grot alone. 

aye, though a massive dragon on 1 wound is also be a massive dragon that has been hacked, stabbed, burned, impaled and bludgeoned to within an inch of its scaly life and is a stubbed toe away from being a massive dragon corpse. so scary, yes, but not necessarily more effective at controlling a space than the 2 Gitz that would be required (or in fact 3 if using the patented JPjr formula).

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you understand to be "horde"?

Is it 200 models on the table?

150?

100?

50?

25?

The maximum amount of models on the table at 2k points is 411, the minimum 10 (or 6 with summons to 11). One could say that an average army thus has 210 models. That would also be purely mathhammer, as noone would play a 411 model army.

I think your definition may differ from mine. Anything under 100 for a 2000 points list is not horde, anything under 25 is elites to me.

I do think wounds remaining would be better than models (speaking as Free People, who are a horde army) for objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My solution would be simple, GW just needs to stop giving out large bubbles that ignore battlshock to every army that gets a 2.0 battletome. Make CPs important to use defensively so that you need to pick what unit doesn't take a battleshock test, instead of "I'll use one CP to ignore all battleshock for units within 26" or having a free ability that can be used multiple times to make units immune to battleshock.

Skaven and DoK horde army compositions would be much easier to deal with if they didn't ignore the mechanism already in the base game that is supposed to make running hordes a risk/reward dilemma.

That said, while I really would like to see battleshock become an important phase of the game again, I don't really have to much of an issue with the horde meta in AoS. I think those armies are popular and high performing for reasons other than their use of horde units

Edited by Qrow
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Qrow said:

My solution would be simple, GW just needs to stop giving out large bubbles that ignore battlshock to every army that gets a 2.0 battletome. Make CPs important to use defensively so that you need to pick what unit doesn't take a battleshock test, instead of "I'll use one CP to ignore all battleshock for units within 26".

Skaven and DoK horde army compositions would be much easier to deal with if they didn't ignore the mechanism already in the base game that is supposed to make running hordes a risk/reward dilemma.

That said, while I really would like to see battleshock become an important phase of the game again, I don't really have to much of an issue with the horde meta in AoS. I think those armies are popular and high performing for reasons other than their use of horde units

Issue is that without such a mechanism then nobody uses large blocks as the design choice to have damage carry over between models means big units just explode.

The only sides that tend to have units larger than 20 either have a mechanism for ignoring battleshock or one for recycling units and those tend to be beaten by Verminlord spam Skaven (competitive Skaven isn't currently a horde army and tends to have a maxed out behemoth count) or Gristlegore behemoths that have a decent stab at killing 40 dudes without needing to rely on battleshock anyway.

Personally I think it's quite nice to see armies that deviate from the 'minimum number of minimum strength battleline + monsters' theme. 

Edited by MrZakalwe
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

The maximum amount of models on the table at 2k points is 411, the minimum 10 (or 6 with summons to 11). One could say that an average army thus has 210 models. That would also be purely mathhammer, as no one would play a 411 model army.

 

 

Challlenge accepted!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Challlenge accepted!!

I think I made it in a grand alliance destruction.

Orruk Bully leader

10 Orruks

2*20 stabbas/shootas

6 60 units of grots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There are some points that we could talk in this post:

  1. Stats and impact on the table. This units usually have some weakness that the enemy could use. Problem comes when this “weakness” disappear because of some synergies, buffs, etc… and the unit itself gains new abilities, making them the perfect unit for everything (from killing, to capture objectives, to tank some damage, …). That is what DoK, LoN, Skaventide, etc… are using to compete at the top for Tier S armies.
  2. Objectives and winning points. Objectives are just promoting to have more miniatures on points. If we read Point 1, it’s really easy to understand why this big Horde Units can do everything.
  3. Roles and type of troops. Some (or all) of this Hordes are Battlelines. “Battleline” is not a role, it’s a category that says this unites are “basic troop for this army”. But after Point 1 they can do a lot more... With this ability to “swap roles” as we want, their job becomes a bit ambiguous and so other (non-battleline) units that started with diferent roles become a direct competitor with them.

IMO, to fix Hordes we should re-writte the same points:

  1. An Horde of skavens that tank shoots (and elite units) and don’t run for their lives shouldn’t be capable to destroy all other units. Don’t buff all their stats to 10!!! We need some type of weakness to make Point 3 relevant. First of all, get ride of "inmune to phase X". 
  2. Make some type of interaction between units and objectives. Make more “this unit counts as 20 models” type of rules. From units that could have better attacks vs units near objectives to others that  will be improved if they are defending them.
  3. With weakness (point 1) and an stablished modus operandi to play the game (point 2) we will have a roles for every unit (hybrids too). With all of that, everything will have some type of “soft-counter” (we don’t need perfect counters in this game) that could promote what your units should be doing on the tabletop (we already play like that, just expand and improve this rules to make it clear). 

Competitive Players  will try to have a bit of everything to still be relevant, and that, in my book, is a win/win situation.

Edited by Beliman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you fix the horde meta?

Moar warpfire throwers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Planar said:

How would you fix the horde meta?

Moar warpfire throwers 

It wouldn't have to be more mortal wounds but the direction is the right one.

The game does partly lack units that generate more damage against many model units.

Basicl, when we ignore mortal wound flamers for a moment the 4 units that generate more damage against Hordes are the following

  1. Grot Scraplauncher (Deadly Rain of Scrap)
  2. Decimators (Thunderaxe)
  3. Plagueclaw (Barrage of Disease)
  4. Field Mortar (High Explosive)

An interesting point for those 3 is, that 3 of 4 are catapults. The game would simply need more units that can create more damage against large model numbers without creating more damage against monsters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zilberfrid said:

What do you understand to be "horde"?

Is it 200 models on the table?

150?

100?

50?

25?

The maximum amount of models on the table at 2k points is 411, the minimum 10 (or 6 with summons to 11). One could say that an average army thus has 210 models. That would also be purely mathhammer, as noone would play a 411 model army.

I think your definition may differ from mine. Anything under 100 for a 2000 points list is not horde, anything under 25 is elites to me.

I do think wounds remaining would be better than models (speaking as Free People, who are a horde army) for objectives.

I concider the army a horde army when it has like 70+ models. 

  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

It wouldn't have to be more mortal wounds but the direction is the right one.

The game does partly lack units that generate more damage against many model units.

 Basicl, when we ignore mortal wound flamers for a moment the 4 units that generate more damage against Hordes are the following

  1. Grot Scraplauncher (Deadly Rain of Scrap)
  2. Decimators (Thunderaxe)
  3. Plagueclaw (Barrage of Disease)
  4. Field Mortar (High Explosive)

An interesting point for those 3 is, that 3 of 4 are catapults. The game would simply need more units that can create more damage against large model numbers without creating more damage against monsters.

This is a very good point. We have almost no counter to hordes. All monsters can be killed easily by mortal wounds from spells and such but against hordes there is very little you do basically the most common counter is more hordes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Eevika said:

I concider the army a horde army when it has like 70+ models. 

70+ is quite a small amount for 2000 points.

For Free peoples, many 1000 point armies will have over 70*, granted, that is a horde army, but your treshold is quite low. Their batallion has a minimum of 84 models.

* 40 guards, 30 greatswords, 30 crossbows is 880 points and 100 models, then you have a general, and you have a nice great company army. Meeting Engagements break large model counts, but will also come quite close to 70

 

I myself like armies of regular dudes, if everything  becomes larger than life, nothing is epic, you've just shifted the goalposts (see the human tag on 10 ft tall Sigmarines).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...