Pangu

I think FEC is the easiest army for conversions in the history of GW. The delusion theme lends itself to almost anything. Carnival, Circus, Missionaries, Robin Hood, vampire hunters, etc.

In a Mordants list its very unlikely that a AGKoT since you are most likely need a courtier general to unlock a knight unit as battleline. If your general is an infernal its probably fine with his movement 12.

The movement is impressive, but without a hero within 12" to give them feeding frenzy its not very effective. Maybe its good for sending 3 flayers around the back of the army to pick off support?

Bullgors have a sheild option getting them a 4+ in combat. The default axe option is the same as a horrors attack but with rend -1. I was thinking bullgors where 140, but its been a while since I looked at their cost.

Ghoul patrol while not ideal has the lowest cost of entry of any of our battalions. I think its justifiable do to the Cp, artifact, extra mount trait.

I agree with most of this, however the number of actual players willing to take advantage of hordes are pretty rare. Most of the meta is still made up of moderate model count lists. It's expensive and time consuming to build and paint 120+ model lists. In a 5 game tournament you simply aren't going to run into that many horde armies so i dont think its that big a deal.

I think it will be viable to go all monsters just because the gristlegore traits are just that good. However, I think the most optimal list runs gristlegore with a couple ridden monsters, Minimum ghoul battleline, and spend the remaining points on arch Regents and a battalion.

There is no doubt that all of our potential battleline options are pretty bad, especially the knights. Compare Horrors to any other medium sized infantry, like Bullgors. Bullgors are considered a mediocre unit and they are better in almost every way, they are cheaper, do more damage, do mortal wounds, have a better save and a better heal. People are excited for Flayers thinking they are going to be this amazing alpha strike unit with deadwatch and blisterskin. There damage output is still really poor, they are completely reliant on Feeding Frenzy to do any work. That doesnt meld well with them flying off away from your army since you need to be completely within 12" of a hero to get the buff off. They are also so squishy that they are unlikely to survive the retaliation from your opponent to get to use the Deadwatch ability. This is easily the most overrated unit in the book and I feel people are going to be incredibly dissapointed when they get them on the table. They are best at hovering around the edges of the battlefield playing cleanup and picking off isolated units, they are not a hammer. Even ghouls are aweful if you compare them to similarly classed units. They are inferior in every way to Plague Monks and are vastly more expensive. All of our non-hero units are 30-40pts overcosted. This puts us in a situation where we are incentivized to max out on our overly efficient characters and minimize our other units. I actually think the podcast gives more credit to some units than they deserve. Anyways, they are very correct in that we have very limited competitive options. Either you go monster mash or you focus on abusing Archregents. Anything focused on knights cant get enough wounds or damage output on the table to be effective.

I think always strikes first is so powerful for any list running a monster that it outweighs any other option available to FEC. Everything else in gristlegore is just icing.

I largely agree. All of our battleline options are too poorly costed to be worth buying straight into lists. I also believe that our healing is basically a trap. The whole system is taxed too heavily to be viable. However, Gristlegore with 3 mounted heros and an Archregent is going t be an incredbly effective list that doesn't resemble anything LoN can do.

Imo none of the Courts address the core issue with knights and serfs, and that's thier points cost. They are still absurdly overcosted. Modern armies have no issues dealing with >100 wounds armies, especially when they only have a 5+ or 6+ save. Knight/serf armies also need more character support bringing their drop count up and eliminating the option of the alpha strike. The whole setup is just incredibly inefficient and don't see a way around this other than spamming archregent which is exactly what i want to avoid.

Well, play testing is meaningless if it isn't effective. It doesnt take a brain surgeon to see that the archregent as written is too efficient. I'll hold off until the faq before saying much more about the book.

I completely agree with this assesment. As a player who likes the aesthetic of knights + serfs the book comes across as such a disappointment. Instead of making balanced lists viable they just pushed even harder into the monster mash list. Then there is the archregent... It's fairly obvious they didnt do much play testing or deep analysis of this book.

I don't know if i agree with this. I feel that big blocks of serfs or knights still wont be a viable option. In fact, abilities like feeding frenzy or the archregent spell push you harder into monster mash lists.

I'd be very surprised if his summon ability doesnt get faq'd so that the ability can only be used once per game instead of once per archregent, to prevent the ability from being spammed.