Jupiter
-
Posts
73 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Jupiter
-
-
2 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:
It's written in the StD book and counts for all heroes or abilities where you could have all marks. Pg.67 to be exact.
Right but what if you play khorne army book and not std. Crazy rules these days, I remember the days you could actually read the warscroll and apply those rules. Lol.
-
28 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:
This is not how it works. The reason for Archaeon is seen as overpriced and useless is that he has to chose a mark before the battle.
He doesn't have all marks throughout the battle
It's not my army, but I can't find anything on his warscroll that he has to pick.
-
OK not my army but will let him know.
-
28 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:
Are you guys sure you played it right?
The plus 1 sv is played on Nurgle units. The +1 attack banner is in the Khorne allegiance.
It was a khorne allegiance army. Archaeon has all the keywords so receives all the benefits. With the skull alter you can reroll failed prayers. If the warshrine which is a khorne priest is within 8 inch. With the banner you give Archaeon extra attacks but most importantly skarbrand which has the carnage ability, if you roll a 6 it does 16 mortal wounds, with 2 attacks very common. So yeah I would call that a broken army haha.
-
32 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:
Just out of curiosity, how do you make an Archaeon list op????
I have never seen anything remotely to that
Was not my army(borrowed it) , so don't remember all the details. It used a warshrine with prayers giving archeon 1+ sv and all kind of rerolls, skarbrand with banner for extra attack for max mortal wounds and another bloodthrister.
-
2+ nagash with teleportation and super saves. It's bonkers, played against them yesterday also with a completely op archeon army so it was really fun. But if your army doesn't allow crazy op stuff it's not fun, not even close.
-
2 minutes ago, Eevika said:
You can get +2 bravery quit easily with Troggboss giving +1 normally and +2 with the correct trait in a 12" bubble around him
Awesome, I misread that. Taught it only worked on the gobbos. Does it stack with multiple bosses? Still with LD 6 and perhaps 7 wholly within 18'' makes large units risky to flee.
-
After reading the warscrolls more carefully, it's clear that large units of both trolls are not so great. With bravery 5 and I didnt see any way to improve on that combining with the ruling on healing and even more for the ranged attack of the rock trolls that is per unit. It's a bit of a shame that it really doesn't give any true options to make a unit larger then 3.
-
4 hours ago, Malakree said:
Double
-
4 hours ago, Malakree said:
As a side note, the Battalion only applies to melee attacks so the fellwater puke wouldn't get the buff.
Man I really want to like the Troggherd but it's just mediocre, especially when you start stacking Dankholds in it, they do massive damage with a small number of attacks. On the other hand if you go for mainly Fellwater Troggoths it might actually start to pay it's way just because of the number of attacks you can throw out. Sadly due to Rockguts only having 2 attacks each they get half the effectiveness from the Troggherd while a Dankhold gets 1/3rd the output.
An expected output of 1.57 damage per unit per attack when averaged overtime.
That's the number of extra damage per 3 Fellwater you can expect to get against a 6+ or no save from the battalion.1 damage/unit/attack.
This is the same 3 Fellwater against a 4+ save, if we compare this to the amount of damage that unit will be doing without the battalion buff.6.8 damage/unit/attack.
Meaning that at 7 full units of Fellwater Troggoths attacking at the same time the battalion has a higher expected damage output than just 1 extra unit of Fellwater Troggoths. This is ofc ignoring all the extra details such as the 2.7 D/U/A for the pukes or the CP/Artefact.
Conclusion
The Troggherd really requires you to be running around 6/7 units of Fellwater Troggoths in order to be worth it meaning a minimum sized efficient Troggherd comes in at around 1260 points. 1 x (Dankhold Troggboss) and 6 x (3 x Fellwater Troggoths) below that just take an extra unit of BattleTroggs. Each unit of Fellwaters is equivilent to 2xRockgut or 3xDankhold. Meaning that you are going to need At Least 4 units of Fellwater troggoths to make this battalion worth it.With this in mind I'm think that actually the normal Dankhold Troggoth might actually be a trap for Troggoth lists, it's to expensive, doesn't bring the wounds or attacks and doesn't offer the Command Ability. So it's probably only useful as a +1 in more Moonclan focused lists. That said a unit of 3xDankhold Troggoths has a 43% chance to instikill a 6 wound character or 70% chance vs 5wound character...
For anyone interested in Molog (who is amazing) or the BattleTroggs comparisions.
Final analysis is that a Troggherd list is going to look something like this.
Couple of list building choices here.
- Double Troggboss is mandatory, especially with the extra artefact.
- Fellwaters should be in units of 6, they lose nothing and can now provide Lookout Sir! for your Troggbosses
- 2 units of Rockguts for their huge anti-armour options, this gives you 32 -2 rend attacks across the army and they are ALL multiple damage!
- 2 units of stabbas because they fit the points nicely, they add bodies/chaff, can be resummoned, give you netters and provide Lookout Sir!
- Molog/Troggoth Hag are absent because they don't go in the Troggherd
- No Dankhold Troggoths because they really don't benefit from the Troggherd and are just to expensive to make it efficient with them.
Honestly this seems like a fairly reasonable list, my only complaint is the lack of wizards but I suspect that is inevitable with Troggherds.
You can also get a hag which is a hero and provides magic. It won't benefit from the battalion but iam not sure if a second boss does.
-
I wish the old king also had a place. Recently got the model as a start of a themed troll army for casual narrative play. Could he be used as throgg boss?
-
13 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:
I’ll put my old grognard hat on for a moment and inform you that is not correct.
The fluff that orks are part fungoid and actually come from spores originated in the GorkaMorka offshoot of the 40k universe. They created that fluff to give a good & simple foundation for that game since the Ork civilization were the survivors of a crashed space hulk.
Then they brought that fluff into 40k when they did a big rework of the orks and made them more bestial and less comical. Prior to that the 2nd edition ork codex specifically explained that orks had a symbiotic algae in their blood that made the blood green and also caused their skin coloration. In addition, that algae was primarily what gave them their resistance to pain and injury.
If you go farther back into the various Ork supplements in Rogue Trader such as Waaagh! Da Orks, Ere We Go, and Freebooterz, they had more explanation of Ork society. Remember that 40k began life as a hybrid between a Role Playing Game and a Tabletop Wargame. They spent a lot of effort on worldbuilding in Rogue Trader. I assume that was partly due to the RPG roots, partly due to help make it more than simply Warhammer Fantasy in space (which is pretty much how it began), and partly because it was a new setting and needed a lot of worldbuilding up front. There are a few scant references in those old Ork books to female orks and reproduction which was described more like pig/wolf litters, but it was still quite vague.
In my recollection Fantasy never made an attempt to tackle this topic at all in the older editions. They simply did not bother to mention it at all. My fantasy experience only goes back to 4th edition and I don’t have any books older than that. It may be the case that they described Orc reproduction in older editions or possibly in the RPG materials when Warhammer Fantasy was still just an RPG setting and not a battles war game. It might also have been in an old White Dwarf. Or they could just have taken the Tolkien/D&D route back then and not bother with that sort of thing.
Fantasy eventually brought back the Slaan in 5th editions when they created the Lizardman and started up the Old Ones story. But even then they did not tie the Orcs/Orks to the Old Ones and that edition predates the invention of the Spore-birth fluff. They started to slowly flesh out the Old Ones story between 6th to 8th edition and it was during that time that the definitively said Orcs came from spores. But there was a large limbo period where they did not reconcile that between 40k and Fantasy.
For Age of Sigmar I have not seen definite fluff that continues or disclaims that Orruks come from spores. If they have continued that in AoS then I would be interested to go read it - so if anyone can point me to it I would appreciate it.
Nice write up. Always great to read about the old days. Regarding 40k I believe the most recent fluff was that the forefathers created the orks and eldar to fight the necrons and their gods.
-
Its not an elite unit so pretty obvious 10 per box. With the recent releases if a unit is considered core it always comes 10 per box, only some exceptions here and there. (easy build stuff and ofc 7 plague marines...)
-
The hurricane raptors are decent. Played them a lot in v1 now they got a bit better, however with the new options we got they are kinda shelved for the moment. It's sad they don't count as battle line for vanguard.
-
15 hours ago, Black Blade said:
For sure give it a try but if you work out "the maths" Grandstaves are better in all non rerolling cases except 2+ saves. I'm wondering how they could even out the weapons without clearly overshadowing the other like the Grandstaves do now. Maybe on the swords when rolling a natural 6 inflict one mortal wound seems to make it fair.
Gamewise it's a bit different. Against high armored targets the swords are more consistent damage. The problem when involving statistics so much is that it is easily forgotten it only matters for 1 or 2 combat rounds in which sometimes consistent damage is more valuable then raw mathematical damage output. My advise is to mix by using swords upfront and staves behind with the reach.
-
2
-
Aos 2 - Lumineth Realm-Lords Discussion
in Lumineth Realm-Lords
Posted
Yup, it's really something I dislike about this army. Hope they change it soon, making it more playable. I do not want to spend gametime finicking those long spears in formation. But so far I've been disappointed by most of the book anyway so I will wait for a proper release with tyrion.