Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Moderators: KevinC, mattbird

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby Ring87 » Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:37 am

I just read the report. I have to say I think the high magic build is a little ruff. What is that....
2 bounds at 7
2 at 5
1 at 3
That could be 4d6 st5 Flaming and a d6 str4 Flaming every turn. An average magic phase has 5 dispel dice and 2 scrolls. This kind of magic phase will wreck Elves of any source. With thier low model count.
Ring of Hotek-useless
Hydra/Treeman Dead
High Elves not in DA=dead

I guess you have to run the gauntlet of Magic Missles, Blunderbuss Fire and Warmachines to attack the Blocks with chaos Armor. It seems a bit gunlinish to me. With cheap redirectors...

Not to mention the 4 movement spells you could get off.

I like the old magic system. TK Dwarves i don't like.
Ring87
 
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:12 pm

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby mattbird » Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:16 am

first off, realize that I went max magic (and max shooting). The army I tested with was an abusive, very low comp army by any standard, and many armies can do a similar build. Any army that throws down a wizard lord, 2 hero wizards, and a bound can have a similarly effective magic phase, with 4 or more magic missiles. That's what you get with you go max magic.

I played against Kevin's CDs last night with my scroll caddy-led mortal chaos army. He went magic heavy, with 2 bound items, HP, and daemonsmith. I thought the CD magic phase was pretty balanced, and had no complaints.

My second game last night was against a lower-magic Mortal army with Nurgle wizards, and his magic phase was crippling me due to 1 big factor that CDs do not get the benefit of-- IRRESISTIBLE FORCE. You can always toss a scroll at a CD spell, or dice at it; not the case with other armies.

I had massive reservations about this Chaos Dwarf m,agic phase, but having used it, and having had it used against me, I think it's pretty balanced (with a few tweaks)
jer732 wrote:Birdoff makes me want to rage quit life
mattbird
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby Larro » Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:41 pm

Ring87 wrote:That could be 4d6 st5 Flaming and a d6 str4 Flaming every turn. An average magic phase has 5 dispel dice and 2 scrolls. This kind of magic phase will wreck Elves of any source. With thier low model count.


First, with that setup it's only 3d6 S5, because the HP can't recast the same spell twice.

Second, I don't care about Elves being susceptible to magic missiles. What else is new? They've always been vulnerable to missile fire and fireballs because they're weak and expensive. No surprises here.

Third, as Birdoff said, pretty much ANY army who takes 3 Wizards and a Bound or two will put out this much firepower, if not more. Think of what a 2nd Gen Slaan + Engine puts out direct-damage wise if the proper Lore is taken (Fire, Death, Metal). Think about the havoc Tzeentch casters can wreck, or Demons with magic, or High Elves with ring of fury, etc. It's all the same if you pump your Characters into magical support.

My issue with the phase is that the list ends up trading potentially devastating spells like Spirit and Doom and Darkness for a Lore that in my mind has only 3 worthwhile spells, and 2 situational spells, none of which are gamebreaking. Add in that you end up having to change game mechanics to do it, and the phase is basically spamming Fireballs for a few turns, maybe Earthquaking a unit or two here and there, and then possibly using magical movement on M3 infantry if it'll help turn a flank or get a charge. Seems boring.

Yes, I like the Demonsmith fluff and idea as a warrior priest, but the HP could easily become just a regular Level 4 Caster as normal, the Demonsmiths become Fear-causing Warrior Priest equivalents with access to a set list of maybe 4 prayers at Bound 4, and you make that Dispel-Scroll Talisman a hard and fast magic item, which can be spammed in the army like you proposed a few weeks back. That way, you can rock out without the HP and still bring the +1DD item and a few scrolls on Smiths or Slavers, or you can take the Magic-heavy approach but lose out on the tried and true 2 Bound 7s per turn, in exchange for more potent Lores and a more traditional Dice-based phase.

- Larry
"Just being born means you've lost to Larro. Or haven't you gotten the memo yet?" - Nidal

"Larry was right. I know he never gets tired of hearing that." - Canterman
User avatar
Larro
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby Hashuts Scion » Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:36 am

Larry,

you do have a point in that the HP is not more powerful than the DS, except for casting twice at lvl 7, instead of 5 (4 in v.4?). The spell choices are available for all to use. Perhaps a couple of additional spells only the HP could cast that would be more powerful? Would this solve the problem since this magic system is one thing that is certain to stay.

Discussion on a spell that heals initiative has gone on. Perhaps a more powerful magic missile (aka Fireball/Fiery Blast), another template spell (volcano) that can cause immediate damage, and if not removed, could be used to transport units to it (ie teleportation), and so on. Thinking along the lines of Little/Big Waargh lists. Maybe not a full boat on the big side, but one or two more spells. And, because these would be more powerful, maybe an automatic reduction in Initiative?

Comments?
Hashuts Scion
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 4:10 pm

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby DarkbloodSkullpulper » Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:31 am

I glad to hear Kevin & Matt's continued commitment to the bound magic phase. It fits really well with the background of the army. Dwarves are not a spell-casting race in Warhammer, but the Chaos Dwarves have found ways to tap into the daemonic forces of Chaos. I think the bound magic system is a great way to give CD access to magic but keep away from the standard Warhammer spellcasting formula.

(Note here - I do hope that the descriptive text for the spells plays up the daemonic power aspect, rather than implying that the HP/DS is casting spells per se)

I don't think the Lore of Hatshut compares unfavorably to other lists. Most lores have a few offensive spells, a couple of situational spells (one often a potential gamebreaker), and one or two that aren't so hot. Remember that most casters don't have access to a whole lore, either, despite the codex creep that might make it seem that way lately. I think magical movement comes pretty close to the gamebreaker category, especially when multiple casters can potentially try their hand at it.

I'm happily surprised at how well the Lore of Hatshut is coming along. It provides some good compliments to the CD strategy via the movement spell and earthquake, has a potential combat boost for characters, a minor offensive spell, and as Larry notes, a couple of afterthoughts that may or may not be useful.

Hail Hatshut is OK, but only in a max magic list, and then it alo helps to have lots of additional bound items in order to really get good. I'd be perfectly happy to see this one replaced, either with a spell to regain initiative or something else (if the +i spell is made HP only).

As has been discussed elsewhere, the Doomroar spell is not really all that great either, only usable in some circumstances. It also suffers both because this is already a list with intrinsically high Ld and also because rallying in the middle of the phase is less useful than if it happened at the top of the phase. Perhaps if there was an additional effect, such as units within 24" cause fear or become stubborn or something. ITP wouldn't be good, because it could keep weak units from fleeing...

Besides the +i spell, some natural fits for the CD might be a cause fear or stubbornness effect, a Law of Gold-type ability to neutralize magic items, a Drain Magic-type ability to affect enemy casting, or a Rune of Slowness-type anti-charging spell.

Here's a final wildcard idea -when this spell is cast, one earthshaker within 12" will have a 2d6 shaking effect rather than using the 5" template, but a misfire results in an automatic rol of "1" on the misfire chart. Probably better as a bound item choice rather than a spell, since not every CD list will take an earthshaker.

Oh, and those spells had better be REALLY good if the HP loses an automatic point of i to cast them
DarkbloodSkullpulper
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 8:45 pm

Re: Mattbird report #6 vs. Lizardmen

Postby Ring87 » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:16 pm

Good points. A str 5 flaming MM is pretty good. Other races have to roll for their spells so not everyone gets to throw 3 good ones. I guess it's fine by it's self. I was thinking of the over-all army affect.

Wiping a tough Lizardman army off the board is pretty impressive. No one enjoys a game where you get gunned down.

That said, I am not bitching. I have yet to play a game against them and I am sure both Kevin and Matt will do a good job tweaking the lore. I myself would love to start a new army. I would deffinatly try to get as much out of the movement spell as I could. Bull Centaurs in the flank for the win.....

Nothing here seems over the top.
Ring87
 
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:12 pm

Previous

Return to Battle Reports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron