.jpg)
This is a post to get you. Yes you. And now you're here. My lil honey trap worked. This my friends is a community project. One of those things that usually don't work on the blogosphere. Those things that only the giants like 3++, YTTH and such can pull off. Ok then, but based on how much activity my poll has gotten in the past few days, I'm guessing a lot more of you visit this site than you let on.
Ok so what's the point of this post, I'm getting there. It's somewhat related to the title. I understand a lot of my readers are new to WHFB, haven't started, are considering starting and suchlike. You folk are more than welcome here as well. See, I'm putting on my elitist (sort of, more englightening) cap and bringing the light to the masses. "Mate, what are you on about?"
Like, I said, getting there. And here we are. Competitive WHFB. What is it? In 40k everyone can tell you it's mech. Bzzzzzt. Nap it's mobility (most often) or the ability to get from A to B while managing your opponent. By managing I mean suppressing and destroying as necessary. Sure, mech is the usual outlet for this playstyle but it certainly isn't the only one.
So in WHFB, what is it? What makes a good list? What do you need in WHFB? Considering the new missions and suchlike, and the new system. What are those essentials that every good list has or should have? I'd like to see some opinions.
I'm going to leave this up a few days before posting my own thoughts. I'm testing the waters, if you will.
Thanks folks, especially if you take part.
Like, I said, getting there. And here we are. Competitive WHFB. What is it? In 40k everyone can tell you it's mech. Bzzzzzt. Nap it's mobility (most often) or the ability to get from A to B while managing your opponent. By managing I mean suppressing and destroying as necessary. Sure, mech is the usual outlet for this playstyle but it certainly isn't the only one.
So in WHFB, what is it? What makes a good list? What do you need in WHFB? Considering the new missions and suchlike, and the new system. What are those essentials that every good list has or should have? I'd like to see some opinions.
I'm going to leave this up a few days before posting my own thoughts. I'm testing the waters, if you will.
Thanks folks, especially if you take part.
IMO, winning WHFB is having the ability to dominate several phases of the game. If you're just good in the shooting phase but suck at magic or combat you will lose. If you are fast and maneuverable but can't shoot or combat, you lose. You have to be able to dominate 3 of the 4 phases in order to have a competitive shot.
ReplyDeleteI think Nikepheros is right, for any edition of WFB. I haven't played enough WFB8 to really work out if there's a defining factor to it, in the way that 40K5 turns on mech and mobility and WFB7 - to me, at least - turned on board control and positioning.
ReplyDeleteBe interested to see what you come up with.
@Nikephoros, I agree with your intent, but really there is no army that can dominate in 3 of 4 phases in an all-comers situation. You can build an army to compete in 3 of 4, but not dominate.
ReplyDeleteI think a much more achievable goal is to dominate in 1 or 2 phases and compete in 1 or 2 phases with a total count not less than 3.
I mean if you think about it, your statement means that WoC are never competitive. They cannot dominate movement, and they cannot dominate shooting. They can, however dominate CC and compete in magic and movement.
This may just be my definitions of dominate vs. compete. I consider domination to be when you are in almost complete control of a phase. This is what an MSU list does to the movement phase
I consider compete to mean you have credible threats that make the opponent change his tactics to react to your threats, but not complete control. This is what a couple of units of archers do for a flank.
Teclis.
ReplyDeleteThat is all.
;)
Yeah I think its just our definitions.
ReplyDeleteBut you're right, WoC are not competitive in 3 phases. Which is why I think they aren't a top tier army. They are good enough in two phases to win some games, but they aren't at the level of the armies that can do it in 3 or 4.
TECLIS IS A WANKER!!!!!
ReplyDeleteThat said i think your both right in a way. Its quite easy in the new rules for most armys to atempt to dominate in at least two phases. And thats all you need really.
Ok the down side to having only one dominate phase is if your enemy is dominate in that phase then it will meen you'll be compete. Also it will be an out right loss if there dominate in two phases.
On the other hand if you compete in 3 or 4 phases then you may end up delaying a phase that someone dominates or just get down trodden in that phase and lose the game.
So as I said i think that having two phases that you dominate in which should compliment each other. Like for example combat and magic or movement and shooting.