Jump to content

Ossiarch Bonereapers, hideously overpowered?


HollowHills

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Carnelian said:

Talking of game breaking allegiance abilities, as a Tzeentch player, I'm not saying anything.... Hahaha destiny dice literally break the most core function of a dice game. And I love it! 

and arguably Scions of the Storm breaks deployment rules. There is a valid point in there about a lack of interactivity but this one isn't it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand this point of discussion (as a beginner): How is breaking a core rule relevant as an argument for something being overpowered? Aren't armies good because of their efficiency in what they do? When I played against OBR they seemed to be (too) strong because their unit profiles don't commensurate* with my warscrolls after they apply a plethora of bonuses. There are similar things I can do with my army, but with restrictions and preconditions, primarily range and command points, which I need to consider strategically. I couldn't identify such restrictions and preconditions in the OBR army I faced.

*I hope this is the correct word.

  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2019 at 9:41 AM, Scurvydog said:

As I new player I can understand this but can't agree either, as this is basically the norm for every new tome to break some core rule. In fact besides how CP work, the reapers "break" far less than many other armies. The trademark of the top armies currently is to mess with the order things happen in phases, especially the combat phase, where you will see the strongest armies being able to dictate the flow, like fighting first no matter what you do. The Reapers do not do this and they do not limit YOUR gameplay and options in the same degree.

People need to discard the thought that OB just get free CPs. They completely discard one mechanic for another. Their battleline litterally have no abilities at all besides these discipline triggered abilities, so GW has made this a different economy, it is not like any other army has 0 rules for their units and need CP to activate those. It needs to be understood their entire allegiance abilties are centered around this mechanic, the nexus and the discipline points is what this army is all about. 

Maybe as a new player you are not aware of all the allegiance abilties floating around, but many armies can summon completely new units to the tabe, force you to fight last no matter what in combat, teleport at will and so on and so on. GW made something new with the system, which is an economy that replaces something else, so it is a tradeoff too. Orruks for example in Big Waagh get both their Waagh points and CP as normal, but that is all part of an overall design, you can't just cherry pick pet peeves here and there.

Armies like Khorne and Fyreslayers already "broke" endless spells by having judgements and invocations doing the same thing, but with 0 risk at all. Slaanesh is also entirely immune to their own endless spell effects, the reapers can control their predatory spells, but suffer a -1 cast pentalty as long as they have it active. 

The only thing this thread should be concerned with might be the Petrifex Elite legion which is insanely poorly balanced, it is too strong and gives the entire army a bad rep, which the Mortek Guard reroll ability magnifies. Any other legion is far from as oppressive. Against other legions games will be "regular" warhammer most of the time, they are one of the new tomes breaking the least rules, while just being strong in general. 

Take this, a single Keeper of Secrets alone breaks far more rules of the core game than all of the OB book. 1 model can manipulate the fighting phase order, fight twice, auto hit with traits, summon more units by just killing and taking damage, force you to take mortal wounds or possibly die, heal itself from both attacks and spells.

Even regular legions of nagash can have entire units wiped out and replace them, recently with the reapers with 4+ unrendable saves in 30 man blocks which could be entirely replaced for 1 CP. Yet these lists fell from grace due to the above.

If GW just erratas petrifex with some nerfs, that should mostly fix the tome, and at that point it will just be a good tome but not a top 5 tome compared to others out there. They are certainly not the only ones in need of being brought in line.

This is very well-thought out, and everything is fine on paper. But I want to make sure of something first: have you fought the Bonereapers yet? 

So much can be said about virtually any army just talking about them, so you actually have to play against it to determine if they're broken or not. I'm not doubting that you have, I just want to make sure there's creedence to your statement.

On 12/6/2019 at 9:50 AM, Scurvydog said:

I am curious of what you find fun to play against?

Slaanesh who wipes you out before you can strike?

DoK with 10 pt battleline with  5++ rerolling save and 4 attacks? Morathi who cannot take more than 3 wounds per turn?

Lords of the lodge fyreslayers striking first and 2 times with hearthguards? 

Deepkin with all of the army striking first in turn 3?

I really want to know what is "fun" and why can't OB be fun? Is it just the people you have fought only owning buckets of Mortek Guards making a wall? The army can make many builds, and comparing it to the variety found in many other tomes, they are doing quite well with multiple units and could field both cavalry and monster armies, a Nagash list or Arkhan with his explosive friends. I also own Ironjawz and Nighthaunt and they are far more one dimensional, either having only 3 units to choose from in total or every single thing being a 1 wound ghost with 4+ ethereal save.

 

While this is true, this is only 5 armies out of 20ish.

Slaanesh and DoK are admittedly not fun to play against, but Fyreslayers could be. Who doesn't like smashing a Magmadroth in the face?

And if you alpha strike Deepkin before turn 3, you can significantly weaken them before they can attack.

In these scenarios, you at least feel some progress, not to mention hope of winning. With OBR, it feels like you're going nowhere. Though technically a difficult to kill unit of Mortek is the same as an easy to kill but reviving unit of Skeletons, I would take Skeletons any day because I would feel progress.

OBR strengths ( being tanky, sniping your heroes, etc.) are beatable in terms of being overpowered but just terrible to fight. While Slaanesh may make you outraged and depressed over how broken their own units are, OBR makes you feel that your own units are useless, and that is far worse.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MKsmash said:

This is very well-thought out, and everything is fine on paper. But I want to make sure of something first: have you fought the Bonereapers yet? 

So much can be said about virtually any army just talking about them, so you actually have to play against it to determine if they're broken or not. I'm not doubting that you have, I just want to make sure there's creedence to your statement.

While this is true, this is only 5 armies out of 20ish.

Slaanesh and DoK are admittedly not fun to play against, but Fyreslayers could be. Who doesn't like smashing a Magmadroth in the face?

And if you alpha strike Deepkin before turn 3, you can significantly weaken them before they can attack.

In these scenarios, you at least feel some progress, not to mention hope of winning. With OBR, it feels like you're going nowhere. Though technically a difficult to kill unit of Mortek is the same as an easy to kill but reviving unit of Skeletons, I would take Skeletons any day because I would feel progress.

OBR strengths ( being tanky, sniping your heroes, etc.) are beatable in terms of being overpowered but just terrible to fight. While Slaanesh may make you outraged and depressed over how broken their own units are, OBR makes you feel that your own units are useless, and that is far worse.

A ton of armies do that against different armies. It’s rock papers scissors. Play Ossiarch against deepkin or skaven, play daughters against nagash and 60 grimghast, play kharadron against anyone other then kharadron (I kid, maybe)

 

some armies they will do well against, others they won’t, it is what it is. 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MKsmash said:

So much can be said about virtually any army just talking about them, so you actually have to play against it to determine if they're broken or not. I'm not doubting that you have, I just want to make sure there's creedence to your statement.

I have both played with and against them. I have a few 2000 point games with my own force now too. I will absolutely agree that they are in the absolute top tier of armies, maybe somewhere in the new top 5 even and rankings will depend on matchups. 

This only goes for Petrifex though, I think the army without that single legion would sit at a pretty happy middle ground, although then it would probably not be able to compete with the "top armies". Unfortunately all these top dogs create problems for many other armies, we have both some older books floating around, and some forces are clearly not on par with some other on a fundamental level.

Now the problem with a new book is, should a new army be at the level of a pure Troggoth army? The game as a whole would probably be better if everyone were at that power level, and you could somehow get away with far more thematic lists, while still not being completely obliterated outside of a lot of luck against 50% of armies out there.

My personal "fix" to not get everyone to hate playing my Reapers is to make a 3 loss petrifex rule for myself. Unless a lose 3 times in a row to someone, I will play another legion and try to keep the peace in the gaming group that way.

  • Like 7
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2019 at 3:03 PM, Galdenistal said:

I was going to say something similar, it feels like it was written by someone who hasn't read any of the other battletomes and / or playtester feedback was ignored as the direction of the army was already set in stone by that point.

Read likes it’s written by the same rules writers as Slaanesh but now from the ground up. The flavour of the allegiance abilities is changing mechanics. The armies like cities, sylvaneth & ogors for example seem written by writers who build upon said core rules instead of changing them. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I’ve played none reapers in a tournament environment 2 times now and 3 times casually. Broken. The only time they’ve lost is if the realmscspe heavily hurt them or the player was literally (I mean literally) a 10 year old child. 
 

my friend played them this weekend at beachyhead and didn’t even lose a total of 1K in kill points over the entire weekend of a 5 game tournament. I hate them. Nice players who I would usually enjoy playing had me sat down after turn 1 or 2 when we used to have fun. It’s not just that they are broken they are also boring to play against and frankly look boring to play also. 
 

in my opinion they are essentially an auto win. If this is the way AoS matched play is going to be. I’m out. 
 

sorry for the extreme salt.

 

i hate these kind of rules and will flat out refuse to play them. 

  • Like 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2020 at 8:18 PM, Customgrot said:

I’ve played none reapers in a tournament environment 2 times now and 3 times casually. Broken. The only time they’ve lost is if the realmscspe heavily hurt them or the player was literally (I mean literally) a 10 year old child. 
 

my friend played them this weekend at beachyhead and didn’t even lose a total of 1K in kill points over the entire weekend of a 5 game tournament. I hate them. Nice players who I would usually enjoy playing had me sat down after turn 1 or 2 when we used to have fun. It’s not just that they are broken they are also boring to play against and frankly look boring to play also. 
 

in my opinion they are essentially an auto win. If this is the way AoS matched play is going to be. I’m out. 
 

sorry for the extreme salt.

 

i hate these kind of rules and will flat out refuse to play them. 

I'm sorry to hear that... I've been playing bonereapers since release and took them to throne of skulls last weekend... 4 wins and 2 losses, with one of those wins being a minor I scraped at the end of the last turn against spiderfang.

There are weaknesses to the bonereapers, I don't have the time or inclination to list all of them here but I can safely say they were a challenge to use at the top tables, where my opponents were aware of those weaknesses and how to exploit them.

So, a couple of pointers.... which are good things to know for any army...

1) unless you are packing a bunch of high damage, rend-2 (or better)... you are not realistically going to kill a supported unit of mortek guard - spend your efforts elsewhere

2) like most unread armies, they rely HEAVILY on their support stuff to make them efficient. See a harvester? That thing needs to die, even if it costs you more than you'd like, it will make cutting through the infantry around it several times easier.

3) as with 2, any boneshapers should be an easy target (stop them repopulating/healing stuff)

4) bonereaper armies are, by design, going to have small unit counts... this, along with their generally slow movement, makes them terrible at objective games. Get used to movement blocking and playing the missions.

5) the rules assume you're using the realm rules, so use them!. The bonereaper can't make use of the command abilities in the realms, but you can (fancy fighting first in hysh? Or healing your genreral to full wounds each turn in shyish? - an advantage you have that they dont)

6) across 6 games at the weekend.... my soulreaper (terrible combat mage guy) did more damage than my catapult - and the soulreaper was only in 3 of the 6 games!. If you have anything fast enough to catch it - you can render the catapult 100% useless by tagging it in combat. Plus make use of any kind of bonus to your saves, cover etc... the lack of rend on that catapult really affects how reliable it is.

 

 

That's all I can be bothered to type out atm... but I hope it in some way helps 🙂

I'll leave you with the knowledge that not all bonereaper players started them to wreck their opponents... I thought they were cool looking, now I'm having to dodge the glare of people who haven't ever played against me thinking I'm some kind of powergamer.... the state the hobby is in atm I guess 😓

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Mr Spadge said:

you are not realistically going to kill a supported unit of mortek guard - spend your efforts elsewhere

Why is this even a thing in AOS?

I am still puzzled about the statement that this army has slow movement. Kavalos Deathriders have movement 12", can add 1 to run and charge rolls and even pile in 3" further. I don't consider 6" movement for Necropolis Stalkers awfully slow and they can ignore terrain, just like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bayul said:

Why is this even a thing in AOS?

I am still puzzled about the statement that this army has slow movement. Kavalos Deathriders have movement 12", can add 1 to run and charge rolls and even pile in 3" further. I don't consider 6" movement for Necropolis Stalkers awfully slow and they can ignore terrain, just like that.

Tanky units you have to avoid and kill the support first? It's been a thing since the early days of whfb, why is it an issue now all of a sudden?

I don't see people claiming fyreslayers are the new cheese, despite hearthguard being both tankier and harder hitting than mortek (with better movement and deployment potential) same thing for so many other units. The only difference is mortek are new and as such are under more scrutiny. Give it a few months and people will have moved on to complain about the next big thing.

Been a while since I saw anyone whine about grimghast... I remember when bringing those meant you were the scum of the earth as well... but they are cool and I still use them, even if people have found all the ways to get around them now.

^This sort of reaction^ comes across (to me at least) as people not wanting to adapt and change their approach

Edit: I didn't mention deathriders as nobody seems to have an issue with them. Same with stalkers. Everyone seems to hate the mortek, so I mentioned them

Edited by Mr Spadge
Added info
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bayul said:

Why is this even a thing in AOS?

The end all and be all of AoS shouldn't be to just max move all units across the table and hope you roll better dice than your opponent. I think it is perfectly OK some armies pose different questions that you have to answer. It makes for a much more fun game IMO if your strategy/plan alternates depending on what army you fight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"in my opinion they are essentially an auto win. If this is the way AoS matched play is going to be. I’m out.   sorry for the extreme salt.  i hate these kind of rules and will flat out refuse to play them."

Those are the rules that we've been given and they sell extraordinarily well so there's no reason to see why they will change anytime soon.  They are not an invincible army, but they do require a hard counter, and if you are not willing to build the hard counter, you will likely lose every time and you need to be ok with that.  Or find a different game that does not have something like that present and be ok that there are hardly any players because few people play anything other than GW games in most areas.

Edited by Dead Scribe
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr Spadge said:

Tanky units you have to avoid and kill the support first? It's been a thing since the early days of whfb, why is it an issue now all of a sudden?

No, I mean 60 supposed non-elite units with Unstoppable Juggernauts, which can't be removed from objectives.

There isn't much to adapt for me, because I started AOS a couple of month ago. Everything was new to me. You need to get some perspective. New players starting with a SCE or NH army from Soul Wars have to face OBR aswell and must be confused about the stronger warscrolls and their Relentless Discipline Points system. OBR in particular very soon stood out to me as extreme compared to my warscrolls and my meager CP (which Katakros can deny on a 4+ on top of that).
 

2 minutes ago, Kasper said:

The end all and be all of AoS shouldn't be to just max move all units across the table and hope you roll better dice than your opponent. I think it is perfectly OK some armies pose different questions that you have to answer. It makes for a much more fun game IMO if your strategy/plan alternates depending on what army you fight. 


I would agree if AOS had a roster to choose from or a sideboard like other games.
 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone sold  you the game as a balanced experience, especially based off of armies from Soul Wars box, you should have some words with them.  Take that as a lesson learned.  You have to do a bit of research in the AOS/40k world on what you should field first, as there are a great many trap units that you should never take (unless you are playing in a for-funsies group that will self regulate what they will take - which is not common).    

Very little of the game is viable in the environment you are describing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Bayul said:

New players starting with a SCE or NH army from Soul Wars 
 


I forgot that I left on notifications for this thread and my phone has been blowing up this past hour. Thanks guys......

Anyway, I wanted to focus on this bit in particular, because I picked up AoS with these two armies as well and I want to give you a bit of context as to why you may feel your warscrolls are a bit weaker, beside the usual "power creep" discussion. I'm not going to go into power creep because whilst on the face of it I do agree books now are stronger than before, on the other hand this may be an intentional GW move to make factions more unique and older tomes will get the same treatment along the road (i.e. SCE and NH). 

Like I said, I started AoS with the Soul Wars stuff and loved both armies. I loved the SCE Seqs and the Evos, the reapers from NH and just generally liked both armies (still do). Then as a result of a lot of whining and moaning from people about how "broken" Sequitors are and how "OP" Evos are from FB pages and generally from people that refused to think for 5 minutes about how to counter them. People would simply either refuse to play against SCE, or ****** and moan about how broken Evos were and basically anyone who used SCE were noobs, meta chasers, or somehow both! Then GW eventually nerfed the newer SCE units into the ground, nerfed the Grimghast Reaper points, simply because people made better use of them IN ANOTHER ARMY (this one still triggers me). Even now, for some reason Libs are still 100 points. Then look at Chaos warriors. 

Basically you are complaining about the very thing which others did in the past that led to the nerfs of the armies you are playing (hope that makes sense). Maybe, just maybe you should be asking GW why they nerfed SCE and NH and ask them to bring them both UP to the level of others. 

Edited by Heijoshin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Bayul said:

I would agree if AOS had a roster to choose from or a sideboard like other games.

But pretty much all armies have options. Some matchups are clearly favored, but that doesn't mean you can't win at all.

As an Ironjawz player I could field a full melee army, then cry about Fyreslayers or OBR etc. because I have no shooting to take out their heroes. Alternatively I could go a more balanced approach and field a couple of casters that would allow me to snipe the heroes or soften up the units from a distance. Would likely increase my overall win rate.

Even then, you should always have to think about how you are going to win in the matchup. Every game can't just be face-first with little to no thought.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well one, OBR are much less powerful then the hypotheses found earlier in this thread, I actually find them much weaker than even I thought they would be. I find their movement game to be extremely poor, and their offence extremely predictable and ponderous. They have none of the shanangins of an Orruk army, they lack a cutting edge like an Aelf faction, are pretty weak generally in places of power, and aren't very reactive once armies have clashed. Worse still you can measure out exactly their movement for the next 3 turns and call the winner or loser pretty much on the first combat phase. Catapults are just as swingy as everyone with some discipline expected them to be

They are extremely tough to remove, and in a heavy Slaanesh meta I can see why they would be dominant, and a smart player builds a list so that he isn't reliant on RDP so their recourse management is actually not as difficult as you might imagine. That being said if I was building an OBR build to last more then one event it would be radically different from what we have been seeing so there is a lot room for growth competitively if people want to stick with them.

As to power creep, there are two mutually true affects happening. One is that some factions are straight up easier mechanically to learn. Because they have limited mechanisms, SCE are a great example, they have one strange mechanic, their alternative deployment and other than that they basically play in all the phases to some degree at the base level, with a hero based synergy or two. This is a great way to learn the game, and it will provide pretty consistent results. It looks like power creep against factions which have complicated mechanics with less direct risk/reward results.

HoS are a great example of this, at launch they were basically impossible to alpha unless your army was fast, and had a lot of wounds, they however didn't have any natural durability. That durability was generated through depravity and summoning, this isn't a basic mechanism as it has a lot of moving parts, but the better you are at using it the exponentially greater the rewards are. I think the table at launch was probably a little to easy to use, in regards to how fast you got a KoS back. The new table is closer to what I would call advanced play, where you get a powerful tool, but misusing it will lose you the game. There are many situations where even in ideal depravity and summoning locations, summoning a KoS is the wrong choice, but there are also many situations where summoning a KoS is the right choice. And, there are situations where it doesn't matter what you have the points to summon the opponent has killed the right things, moved to the right spots and the game is gone. 

IF a faction is in a starter box it is almost always going to be closer to SCE then it is to HoS, it just doesn't make sense to do otherwise. So it will always look like the armies that come out after starter boxes are strong than before. And, in a lot of ways they are, but they are also more difficult to get their maximum potential out in each individual game then say a Hammers of Sigmar build. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Spadge said:

... mortek are new and as such are under more scrutiny. Give it a few months and people will have moved on to complain about the next big thing.

^This sort of reaction^ comes across (to me at least) as people not wanting to adapt and change their approach

So true, especially the last. People build an army, perhaps to counter a friend's army or to succeed at an event, and are pleased. Then time passes and new (not better, new) things come into the game. Most players adapt, don't. Of the ones that don't, some are more won't than don't. When those folks struggle against the new thing, that's on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Mr Spadge said:

 

I play Gloomspite. I have no real shooting to deal with a harvester. 

Any opponent knows this and will just make a wall around their harvester and move that mortek Death Star forward. Which has the potential to heal as each model as it’s slain.

so even if I throw my high damage glass cannons into that thing (which is always either currently sitting in an objective or going to be sitting on an objective the next turn. It’s not reachable and the screen in front of it is extremely hard to kill even with rend 2 weapons. 
 

Then they are also usually supported by arachan or Nagash who are non comparable to Skragrott magic wise. So I can’t challenge there unless it’s with endless spells for fear of my most valuable unit getting flattened by superior magic or the shooting of a crawler. 
 

Bone reapers are not slow. That discipline thing that makes them +7 movement is what separates them from Fyreslayer. I played Fryslaters this weekend also and they are similarly tanky but they are actually slow, have very limited access to magic and unbinds compared to Nagash And Arachan.  ALSO IF YOU KILL A FYRESLAYER IT ACTUALLY STAYS DEAD. 

I’m aware Gloomspite are not a competitive choice and accepted that this was always going to be a up hill battle. Part of why I enjoy them so much, people enjoy playing against them, they have very obvious weaknesses which every army could exploit. I never felt I had to apologise to any of my opponent. However all bone reaper opponents felt the need to apologise to me multiple times for their army’s rules. 

You’re right though. They aren’t invisible. But as far as my faction is concerned they are. 

 They are currently 9% of the meta with a %60 win rate; %10 higher than the following faction.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The long term enjoyment part of the game suffers the most when extreme armies like OBR and Fyreslayers come out. They're like deathballs that I can't even get close to or they'll melt me. I bank on superior mobility to try to win on objectives but if I can't fight them properly that gets old, fast. GW has created these armies where my offense isn't good enough to do anything, yet they also hit back unreasonably hard. Compare them to the staunch defender Sequitor block - similar defense but massively increased offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TMS said:

The long term enjoyment part of the game suffers the most when extreme armies like OBR and Fyreslayers come out. They're like deathballs that I can't even get close to or they'll melt me. I bank on superior mobility to try to win on objectives but if I can't fight them properly that gets old, fast. GW has created these armies where my offense isn't good enough to do anything, yet they also hit back unreasonably hard. Compare them to the staunch defender Sequitor block - similar defense but massively increased offense.

I'll agree that I don't think stuff like Fyreslayers is a good design for casual games or the average skilled guy. It creates situations where people will feel super helpless. Gotrek is kinda the same tbh. Both might be fine at the top end and for tournament players, but I don't think the game should be made for them. It requires a bit to figure out how to deal with an army after realising you have no chance in a close combat fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kasper said:

I'll agree that I don't think stuff like Fyreslayers is a good design for casual games or the average skilled guy. It creates situations where people will feel super helpless. Gotrek is kinda the same tbh. Both might be fine at the top end and for tournament players, but I don't think the game should be made for them. It requires a bit to figure out how to deal with an army after realising you have no chance in a close combat fight.

Indeed and, just speaking personally, figuring out a way to win through avoidance or some other trickery wouldn't be enough for me. There's supposed to be a war aspect to the game as well, with both sides rolling dice and removing miniatures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Customgrot said:

I played Fryslaters this weekend also and they are similarly tanky but they are actually slow, have very limited access to magic and unbinds compared to Nagash And Arachan.  ALSO IF YOU KILL A FYRESLAYER IT ACTUALLY STAYS DEAD. 

I’m aware Gloomspite are not a competitive choice and accepted that this was always going to be a up hill battle. Part of why I enjoy them so much, people enjoy playing against them, they have very obvious weaknesses which every army could exploit. I never felt I had to apologise to any of my opponent. However all bone reaper opponents felt the need to apologise to me multiple times for their army’s rules. 

I've always felt like OBR were Fyreslayers +1 rather than Fyreslayers being stronger due to OBR's aforementioned spellcasting, ressing, and lets face it, HBG might hit harder than Mortek Guard fully buffed but if you're face planting either of those things you're losing.

As you admit Gloomspite aren't a competitive choice. Welcome to the uphill battle. Maybe try fanatics if Mortek Guard are giving you problems since they fight at the start of the combat phase (before MG get their rerolls in your turn)? GG are one of the worst armies at the moment, especially if you aren't playing the meta spell spam list.  You're going to be struggling horribly and running into problems for which you won't have an answer. I've found online that people love to play the underdog faction but in real life, well every single Nighthaunt player in my area has quit or switched to a different army.

 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...