zilberfrid

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.

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.

Ah, there you have me, I did not re-state that I do think remaining wounds is better than model count, and that is a general rule.

And still, destroying the weakest armies because some units in some armies overperform is not the answer, that GW did not give them enough love is no reason to dig their ditch even deeper. Just go for specifics, not generics. There are units with a very low model cost that have an ability to deal massive damage? Fix that unit, perhaps by removing discounts, or even making the unit more expensive when stacking, or higher base cost, or a changed warscroll, but general rules are not the solution.

But you are talking about a general nerf to high model count units. Not a specific nerf to the specific units that currently overperform. Why are you disagreeing that there are specific units in specific armies that need fixing, and instead come up with blanket nerfs to high model count units?

I vehemently disagree. High unit count advantage is the only thing keeping quite a few armies afloat. Some armies that happen to have high unit count, perform better than they should. If you break unit count advantage, you break a lot more armies than you fix. It's better to fix the broken armies than to destroy armies GW still sells. The main problem, is that you think 70+ is a horde. Lower than 70 is a low-model count/elite army, 25- is a monsters&heroes army, the lowest treshold that could defensibly be called a horde army would be 100 at 2000 points.

You may think so, but many horde armies are near the bottom of lists, Free People, Disposessed, Wanderers, Slaves to Darkness etc. Having some armies with a lot of people in it rank high does not mean there is a problem with all of them. I saw a high scoring Deepkin list with 20-odd units, for instance.

I don't think you'll find me on your end of the argument. If you really don't like to construct or paint minis, that's fine, but why should that be inherently better than armies that look like, you know, armies? Now there may be cases where units receive a buff that is unbalanced, like Gristlegore or Skaven, or changing how objectives are claimed to wounds remaining, but that's a case by case thing instead of a horde "Let's destroy the game by making horde armies useless" like removing point reductions and large unit buffs. I did not hear any way of compensating that from the people saying horde armies are OP.

70+ is quite a small amount for 2000 points. For Free peoples, many 1000 point armies will have over 70*, granted, that is a horde army, but your treshold is quite low. Their batallion has a minimum of 84 models. * 40 guards, 30 greatswords, 30 crossbows is 880 points and 100 models, then you have a general, and you have a nice great company army. Meeting Engagements break large model counts, but will also come quite close to 70 I myself like armies of regular dudes, if everything becomes larger than life, nothing is epic, you've just shifted the goalposts (see the human tag on 10 ft tall Sigmarines).

I think I made it in a grand alliance destruction. Orruk Bully leader 10 Orruks 2*20 stabbas/shootas 6 60 units of grots

What do you understand to be "horde"? Is it 200 models on the table? 150? 100? 50? 25? The maximum amount of models on the table at 2k points is 411, the minimum 10 (or 6 with summons to 11). One could say that an average army thus has 210 models. That would also be purely mathhammer, as noone would play a 411 model army. I think your definition may differ from mine. Anything under 100 for a 2000 points list is not horde, anything under 25 is elites to me. I do think wounds remaining would be better than models (speaking as Free People, who are a horde army) for objectives.

That's not too bad, I'll be able to get it from Germany easy enough, the banshees are nice enough and I can cut up the Sigmarines for basing and parts.

I haven't read the price, is it significantly lower than Nightvault? I do need more boards though, I have an order, destruction, death and chaos army, and it would be nice to be able to play with more players. Together with the not terrible Nighthaunt, some 35-40 euros (instead of the 50 for Nighthaunt) would be low enough to consider it.

Probably Stormcast vs Nighthaunt?

Dreadfane if released as in the picture, is a big step back in Underworld quality. Apart from gripes that it's another SC vs NH starter, the sets they include are a lot cheaper than in previous editions. The Sigmarines are the ones that get tossed to your head every time you enter a GW shop or buy something online, and the banshees are a 12 euro set (though rather nice looking). It probably will not be cheaper, because GW, there is just less value in it.

I would like that very much. Free Peoples battletome is, of course, preferred, but the RPG is also eagerly awaited.

Since you state example and use Free Peoples, I'll give my opinion: For Freeguild, a few things are needed. * More batallions * More heroes (with spell interaction preferably) *Some terrain This could be done with using Devoted, Ironweld or College as conditional includes (that would benefit allegiance bonusses and keywords with certain generals and/or batallions) Disposessed: just give them back their cannon and organ gun, and a Steam Tank while we're at it. Also better batallions and prayers, some terrain, and at least one good new unit, something that worked like heavy cav would give them more mobility to play objectives. Wanderers and aelves: Give them a way to include other aelves like the Archmage in certain batallion and/or general options, new endless spells and perhaps new terrain.

As I understand it, a batallion can be set up all at once, yes? 2000 points: 2: Regiment consisting of 3 Great companies, Excelsior Warpriest. 1000 points 5 40 guard 280 30 crossbows 300 40 guard militia 280 General Witch hunter

I do have a question about the Magewhath Throne, where can I find current rules for them? They are not in the GHB, and the warscroll seems ancient.

Former Freeguild soldier? Excelsior warpriest? Rules to play at the lowest levels? More info on Free Cities? Sold! Please, GW, bring at least the Excelsior Warpriest model back into production. I need a few of those.

Tried it on a space marine for my girlfriend, this paint would work wonders with good zenithal highlighting, but I don't really like the texture. She, however does, and if this paint convinces her to go from thinking about painting to actually painting, it's worth it.

Sorry about raking it up, I only joined yesterday, so wasn't able to ask sooner. I mostly hope we get meaningfully different ways to play, with new sculpts and heroes second (thoigh these could tie into it). Then terrain, and spells a distant last. Perhaps batallions, generals or heroes that let you take Devoted, College OR Ironweld and give them Free Peoples keyword (and add Free Peoples keywords to their buffs).

So, about the price increases, what do people rate the chances Free Peoples will be hit as well? As webstore exclusives, they would not be in the communication to the shops.

That sounds awesome! I hope I'll have a chance to do a narrative campaign soon

I like humans going to to toe with unspeakable horrors, and occasionally coming out on top. Actual humans, not 10ft tall semi-angels cast in Sigmarite with ridiculous shoulderpads. I also have a weakspot for flashy looking soldiers. Freeguild it is!