Cerve Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 4 minutes ago, Aezeal said: 3 mortal wounds on 9 waywatchers means 1/3 damage gone. 3 mortal wounds on 20 GG... not so much that is what I meant. 17 hits at 4+/4+ vs 15(13+2 on two six) hits at 3+/4+, not a great deal anyway (: I know, it scares at the first sight but is not a great threat at all. Sounds better 3x3 anyway, just for avoiding annoying battleshock tests. But I'm considering to using both GG and WW. Once -3 still useful for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracothjay Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share Posted May 10, 2017 Personally, I prefer GG. Even after bodkins are used they still force save rolls, but I mainly use them for that niece per game bodkin strike. And when it hits it hits hard. I love them to be honest, overcosted though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popisdead Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 On 5/10/2017 at 5:54 AM, Dracothjay said: Personally, I prefer GG. Even after bodkins are used they still force save rolls, but I mainly use them for that niece per game bodkin strike. And when it hits it hits hard. I love them to be honest, overcosted though. I'm trying to come around to them for that. I'm looking at your 20/10 configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerve Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 53 minutes ago, Popisdead said: I'm trying to come around to them for that. I'm looking at your 20/10 configuration. I was thinking about 20-30 GG and 2x9 WW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popisdead Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Cerve said: I was thinking about 20-30 GG and 2x9 WW I'm thinking,. 20 makes use of the ability, 30 is a commitment you want long term to do well. with WWs I'm thinking 6 are good, you could run 3 x 6 WW with 18. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerve Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Popisdead said: I'm thinking,. 20 makes use of the ability, 30 is a commitment you want long term to do well. with WWs I'm thinking 6 are good, you could run 3 x 6 WW with 18. What do you think? The thing about GG's is that you need 20 of them for that +1 to hit. 30 makes me more comfy. 30 GG and 2x6 WW seems fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavy Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 the real dealbreaker when it comes between Glade Guard and Waywatchers imo is the real-world price and scarcity of waywatchers in comparison to Glade Guard. Ive got 60-80 Glade Guard sitting around my apartment that will never all get used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popisdead Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 18 hours ago, Lavy said: the real dealbreaker when it comes between Glade Guard and Waywatchers imo is the real-world price and scarcity of waywatchers in comparison to Glade Guard. Ive got 60-80 Glade Guard sitting around my apartment that will never all get used. With the hoods and fancy cloaks, and Deepwood Scouts being removed I don't feel you can't make them work as WW. In which case a single box gets you your BL. The other option I thought was good for Scouts was Shadow Warriors but I don't know if that's a worthwhile warscroll for its' points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aezeal Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 On 2017-5-11 at 7:21 PM, Popisdead said: I'm thinking,. 20 makes use of the ability, 30 is a commitment you want long term to do well. with WWs I'm thinking 6 are good, you could run 3 x 6 WW with 18. What do you think? Why 6 ww.. Just go MSU and max champ bonus and max enemy overkill and max not getting much battleshock losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popisdead Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 On 5/13/2017 at 2:39 PM, Aezeal said: Why 6 ww.. Just go MSU and max champ bonus and max enemy overkill and max not getting much battleshock losses. Objectives. The first scenario says 5 models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aezeal Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 On 2017-5-15 at 10:55 PM, Popisdead said: Objectives. The first scenario says 5 models. 2x3 still > more than five models. It's actually exactly the same number as 1x6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAAAGHdogg15 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 How many times have we seen that (mis)reading of the first scenario? Five models is all it says. Those five don't have to be part of the same unit. You could have five separate heroes surrounding it if you wanted. I'd agree with the 2x3 setup. 2 x 3 can act exactly the same as a unit of six except they have the extra champ, they don't suffer battleshock as heavily and they can't both be targeted at once - a thundertusk could easily mop up a unit of six but, if you get your positioning right, he'll only be able to kill three if they are two units instead of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aezeal Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 28 minutes ago, WAAAGHdogg15 said: How many times have we seen that (mis)reading of the first scenario? Twas the first time I saw this.. it says models and I've never seen it interpreted that way. 29 minutes ago, WAAAGHdogg15 said: 2 x 3 can act exactly the same as a unit of six except they have the extra champ, they don't suffer battleshock as heavily and they can't both be targeted at once - a thundertusk could easily mop up a unit of six but, if you get your positioning right, he'll only be able to kill three if they are two units instead of one. Yes those where my arguments indeed. The only reason to go 1x6 I think is if you intend to buff them with a single unit targetting spell or ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAAAGHdogg15 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Aezeal said: Yes those where my arguments indeed. The only reason to go 1x6 I think is if you intend to buff them with a single unit targetting spell or ability. I play regularly vs a Stormcast player who runs fulminators as 1x4 instead of 2x2 for exactly that reason. In the WW example though, I'd agree that 2x3 is almost certainly preferable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzy128 Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 On 29/4/2017 at 0:01 PM, Aezeal said: I do not understand this. Thought waywatches only were battleline in pure wanderer armies. My mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popisdead Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 A couple other choices open up when your general is a Wayfinder or Waystrider. Rangers are good, I've been looking at how to ambush them with the formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalandor Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 there appears to be an agreement that you can field waywatchers in units of 3. But as far as I know, they have a minimum unit size of 5. Just saying, dont want to build any illegal armies, do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerve Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Thalandor said: there appears to be an agreement that you can field waywatchers in units of 3. But as far as I know, they have a minimum unit size of 5. Just saying, dont want to build any illegal armies, do we. Mmm nope, they are 3-12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aezeal Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 4 hours ago, Thalandor said: there appears to be an agreement that you can field waywatchers in units of 3. But as far as I know, they have a minimum unit size of 5. Just saying, dont want to build any illegal armies, do we. GHB overrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.