How would you fix the horde meta?

[Dead Scribe]

Is the problem the "horde meta"?  Or is the problem that some people want low model count forces to be dominant because low model count forces are easy to collect and paint and are therefore the most desirable of all formats to win with?

I personally haven't seen the horde meta dominate everything else to the level where I feel it needs fixing, but I also see a horde army as being about 150 or so models or more.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Dead Scribe

[zilberfrid]

17 minutes ago, Eevika said:

When have I said all high model count armies need to be nerfed. This post is mostly about breaking the horde meta and making low model count armies viable at a competitive level. 

You are asking for counters against hordes, say there is a horde meta (according to your definition of horde, being 70+) that needs breaking, and have suggested no specific unit fixes.

Edited July 8, 2019 by zilberfrid

[Eevika]

1 minute ago, Dead Scribe said:

Is the problem the "horde meta"?  Or is the problem that some people want low model count forces to be dominant because low model count forces are easy to collect and paint and are therefore the most desirable of all formats to win with?

I dont want dominance. The games balance should be that every army falls between 45-55% winrate. Currently hordes are most likely around 60%+ while low model count is around 40% if that

[Kasper]

15 minutes ago, Eevika said:

When have I said all high model count armies need to be nerfed. This post is mostly about breaking the horde meta and making low model count armies viable at a competitive level. 

But isn't this the point? The current meta armies don't just do good because they bring a lot of bodies, otherwise all horde armies would do great. I don't think anyone denies the fact that bodies in general win games though, but that is not why the top meta armies are "op".

I have yet to try the Purple Sun, but having it tag multiple 30/40/60 model units does sound rather crazy. There are things in the game to target hordes, but the meta isn't really adapting fast enough. Perhaps the ways of dealing with horde units aren't efficient enough.

[Dead Scribe]

3 minutes ago, Eevika said:

I dont want dominance. The games balance should be that every army falls between 45-55% winrate. Currently hordes are most likely around 60%+ while low model count is around 40% if that

I haven't seen that either.  At least where I am, there are three guys in particular that are running 50-70 model count forces that always do very well.

[Eevika]

2 minutes ago, Kasper said:

But isn't this the point? The current meta armies don't just do good because they bring a lot of bodies, otherwise all horde armies would do great. I don't think anyone denies the fact that bodies in general win games though, but that is not why the top meta armies are "op".

 I have yet to try the Purple Sun, but having it tag multiple 30/40/60 model units does sound rather crazy. There are things in the game to target hordes, but the meta isn't really adapting fast enough. Perhaps the ways of dealing with horde units aren't efficient enough.

Yeah the hordes are good becouse battletomes are just made to buff the ****** out of hordes and giving nothing but ****** warscrolls and high points to behemoths and high wound models. I get that but it sucks. Doesnt remove the fact that meta armies rely on hordes and I want that to change 

[XReN]

14 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

You have stated that that is a problem for another discussion.

One that may never come. Battletomes would help, but it's not here, so we cannot take it into consideration.

If there are no other fixes, breaking them further as a byproduct of fixing a few high performing armies is not an option. So come up with specific fixes for the specific overperforming armies.

The risk of collecting an army without proper support is always there, I would feel great for people who play those armies if they get battletome, especially a good one, and I would feel bad for them if they won't. 

I took the risk when started collecting FEC about 17 month ago, most of my old SCE units become worse choice then new Sacrosanct units that were released a year ago. 

Also hurting weak army to fix a strong one is what GW are willing to do - instead of removing GG Reapers from LoN they increased their point cost, which hurts already weak Nighthaunts.

Edited July 8, 2019 by XReN

[XReN]

23 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Is the problem the "horde meta"?  Or is the problem that some people want low model count forces to be dominant because low model count forces are easy to collect and paint and are therefore the most desirable of all formats to win with?

Why do you think it's not a valid reason? I want my SCE to be the elite army they are in lore and being fully capable to operate on Chamber by Chamber basis like in the lore, not a cadaverous mix of Sacrosanct punchbags, Vanguard DDs and Strike Chamber support heroes. I also have around 13000 points of SCE and that makes me feel fully entitled to wish for such things. 

Edited July 8, 2019 by XReN

[Qrow]

15 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Yeah the hordes are good becouse battletomes are just made to buff the ****** out of hordes and giving nothing but ****** warscrolls and high points to behemoths and high wound models. I get that but it sucks. Doesnt remove the fact that meta armies rely on hordes and I want that to change 

FeC, LoN, HoS are all 'meta' armies and are performing just fine without being forced to run massive hordes. That is 3 of the top 5 performing armies that are not reliant on spamming hordes.

I want to see battleshock immunity become much less prevalent, which would cause horde armies to play smarter and make spamming horde units become a risk/reward mechanic.

However, to claim that every top army relies on spamming massive hordes is being disingenuous.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Qrow

[Eevika]

1 minute ago, Qrow said:

FeC, LoN, HoS are all 'meta' armies and are performing just fine without veing forced to run hordes. That is 3 of the top 5 performing armies that are not reliant on spamming hordes.

I want to see battleshock immunity become much less prevalent, which would cause horde armies to play smarter and make spamming horde units become a risk/reward mechanic.

However, to claim that every top army relies on spamming massive hordes is being disingenuous.

Slaneesh does well becouse of large deamonette units right? Lon becouse of massive Reaper units.  FeC has about 80 ghouls per list

[Dead Scribe]

Quote

Why do you think it's not a valid reason?

My personal reason is that if elite low model count armies were the dominant force, that that changes the game entirely from a mass battle miniatures game to a low-model count skirmish game along the lines of Infinity or something only with a lot less crunch in the rules.  

Because nobody would want to spend the money and time collecting a larger army if the 15 model count elite army could just smash it every time.  It makes no economical sense.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Dead Scribe

[Eevika]

Just now, Dead Scribe said:

 

 

My personal reason is that if elite low model count armies were the dominant force, that that changes the game entirely from a mass battle miniatures game to a low-model count skirmish game along the lines of Infinity or something only with a lot less crunch in the rules.  

Why not just like add depth to low model count armies. It would also definitely not change it like that as many people still like their massive armies. 

[Dead Scribe]

Note I am using the word "dominant force".  Indicating that if low model count was the easiest path to victory, it would be a dominant force.

Though if you could wave a wand and make low model count armies on par with horde armies, I have a feeling the economic impact would move the barometer to highly favor low model count forces since a lot of players would take the easy way to collecting.  The only reason people play with a lot of models is because of the mathematical bonuses they get.  Give the option to play with 10-15 models and do just as well, you will make that what is normally seen across the board barring the people that just like to play with a lot of models, which I have a feeling is really not that many people.

[XReN]

5 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Because nobody would want to spend the money and time collecting a larger army if the 15 model count elite army could just smash it every time.  It makes no economical sense.

While there are people who choose armies based on it's price, there are just as many people who choose army based on the lore and the looks. 

[Eevika]

1 minute ago, XReN said:

While there are people who choose armies based on it's price, there are just as many people who choose army based on the lore and the looks. 

This. I collect troggoths for the look and lore they arent good they arent that cheap but i love them

[XReN]

 

11 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Give the option to play with 10-15 models and do just as well, you will make that what is normally seen across the board barring the people that just like to play with a lot of models, which I have a feeling is really not that many people.

Also most armies do not support 10-15 model lists and those that do will get countered, unless it's some sort of steam mechs that deal a ton of damage on incredible range 

[XReN]

12 minutes ago, Eevika said:

This. I collect troggoths for the look and lore they arent good they arent that cheap but i love them

Hey, there is a player in my city who have 15 or something river troggoths and a Hag, but he played 12 and a Hag max with a bunch of stabbaz as the backbone of the army cuz it's the way

[Eevika]

2 minutes ago, XReN said:

Hey, there is a player in my city who have 15 or something river troggoths and a Hag, but he played 12 and a Hag max with a bunch of stabbaz as the backbone of the army cuz it's the way

Dude who are you? I have 15 fellwaters, Hag and most of the time run 60 grots with them 

[Smooth criminal]

Well, you're in luck, because in 2019 game rapidly went into direction of monster mash meta. Aside from some obvious horde factions like gobbos and skaven (and even they can bring some overtuned monsters).

[zilberfrid]

I think the answer to the people wanting to play lower count games is simply Meeting Engagements, it harshly punishes armies reliant on high model count units, so should do exactly what you need.

[kuroyume]

4 hours 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.

This. It boggles the mind that this is not a rule yet.

[XReN]

2 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Dude who are you? I have 15 fellwaters, Hag and most of the time run 60 grots with them 

I'm from Saint-Petersburg, Russia, we probably haven't ever met)

[zilberfrid]

17 minutes ago, XReN said:

 

Also most armies do not support 10-15 model lists and those that do will get countered, unless it's some sort of steam mechs that deal a ton of damage on incredible range 

So maybe the expectation of 10-15 model lists on 2000 point armies isn't a very good one? Neither are 400+ model lists a reasonable expectation, even though it is possible to make such a list.

[Eevika]

Just now, XReN said:

I'm from Saint-Petersburg, Russia, we probably haven't ever met)

Well still pretty close im from Finland 

[zilberfrid]

21 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Well still pretty close im from Finland 

Ah Finland, the land of lots of metal, heatwaves, strangers coming over to have a chat, and people giving you rum*.

 

*Based on one solo-kayakking trip.  Others may have other data points, but this is the only one I verified, except for the metal bit, that I have extensively verified.

Edited July 8, 2019 by zilberfrid