fishwaffle2232

I have some games planned for tomorrow at my gaming club and Im thinking of testing out a few of your ideas in a different style of Deck. Most of the guys I play against at the moment are running aggro decks, so I have kept that in mind when making my deck. In theory Im hoping it will play out as mixed tempo. I have taken both supremecies and lots of movement shennanigans to try and get at least one off on turn 1 and to also help getting units inspired. Ive also included both sigmars finest and dauntless as a bit of a failsafe is ****** hits the fan or if I miss supremecy, in which case I play more aggressively to ensure try to get my opponent activates them. Ive got hero of one and second in command (may drop this) to try and at least keep one guy up and score destiny to meet and chosen champion. There are a few pretty easy to acheive instant scores and some really passive ones too. I think I will be going for a defensive setup in most situations. What Im not sure about is if i'm trying to do too much rather than having a single focus. Let me know what you think. Also I dont yet have orruks or guard sets to pick cards from (got a few randoms).

Katophranes seem pretty hard to justify after the cost increase. If you start slow and dont get a bunch of turn one glory you are going to be a bit starved and I definitely think damage boosting or defensive upgrades are more useful early on than katophranes especially if they are going to net you an early kill or prevent one of your guys from being one shotted. The relics are pretty average on their own in my opinion. I will definitely be giving those other cards a run in my list though. I love the synergy of Army of one, second in command and dauntless + sigmars finest. @Malakree Are you consistently scoring dauntless and sigmars finest? What matchups are you struggling to score this on? My meta seems to be running a lot of aggro such as skaven and magores so im thinking scoring these could be relatively easy.

I love the look of that deck looks like a lot of fun. I especially like that shattering terrain combo, I hadn't considered that, but an extra 'trap' with the potential to do 2 extra damage with overcharged boltcharge is nasty! Daveman you also make a good point about the shadeglass weapons and I wouldnt mind testing this a bit more too. As i have had the problem of wasted upgrades many times. Have you guys tried out dauntless and sigmars finest? I feel like they could be very strong in aggro decks on paper but im not sure how often they would score in reality especially if you are killing lots of things. Also how often are you scoring denial? Seems like its a really easy objective to deny. Would an tac supremecy be easier to score in the final round when the board is a bit clearer? Also these could be scored any round giving you more versatility for early to mid game scoring. Again things I am just thinking about trying out but I like the versatility of farstriders to be able to shift their tactics midfight based on the matchup. I wonder if trying a more mixed approach is a better way to play these guys than pure objectives or pure aggression?

I love the sound of these aggressive decks, have people tried them without relics? If so what objectives were you running and what upgrades. My issue with aggressive farstriders is that against other aggressive decks you are risking a lot by pushing with just 3 models. Farstriders arent particularly punchy in comparison to others and against warbands like orruks and magores they can definitely be one shotted when pushing up. Even with dauntless and sigmars finest it seems like it is a high risk strategy against an aggressive opponent. Losing 1-2 models in the first phase puts you in a very compromised position to prevent your opponent having free reign of the board to score easy objectives. On the flipside if your opponent isnt killing your guys or you kill too many that 4 potential glory you arent able to get. As someone who is yet to try the aggressive deck, how do these matchups tend to go against other aggressive decks? I run a 'mixed tempo' objective list with both supremecies and both tac supremecies and I like the balance this list gives. If your strategy fails at first (not getting supremecy and eternal supremecy) and you lose an early casualty you still have the 2 glory supremecies to work with. In addition being able to focus on defensive ploys/upgrades, and movement shennanigans also makes it easier to weather the storm of an aggessive deck to starve them of early glory. Are people having more success with aggressive lists or more conservative defensive lists.