April 08 2020 11:25:21
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Marianna Chevaux
· New 3rd Ed. 40K oppo...
· 6th ed rules for 7th...
· Reclaim The Stones!!...
· Destroy The Chaos He...
Hottest Threads
No Threads created
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 2

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 252
· Newest Member: Sherpa1016
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » 6th Edition
 Print Thread
First selection
Just Tony
One of the things I've noticed over the course of my gaming "career" is that people tend to be set in their way when it comes to making army lists. Every person I've met that plays Warhammer or 40K builds their list the exact same way. My friend Shane will fill his Rare slots first, as those appeal to him. My brother goes characters first and themes his list off of that. I tend to go for the Core units first, and typically Spearmen if they are available. I had swung by the store down the road last week and found a box of the Beast Herd on the shelf, the one with a mix of Gors and Ungors. I was considering purchasing these and attempting to get my Beasts of Chaos army playable under both 6th lists AND 7th, since there are apparently options for both systems with gaming in my area. I found myself gravitating towards trying to figure out the best way to make a Spearmen regiment of Ungors for 7th, and use the extra spear arms to repair the Ungors in my Herd. I guess I had never paid attention to this inclination. Does anyone here have the same sort of habit?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Galadrin
I was like this when I was younger, but honestly a lot of it had to do with the limited number of models I owned and had half-painted. My army was just always going to have a Treeman, for instance. These days, I only collect models I like, visually, and design my armies around aesthetics as well. It probably makes little strategic sense to have, for example, one cavalry unit, one warmachine, one infantry block per army, but it allows you to try unusual combos and tactics and it looks great on the table! I remember Wood Elf armies back in the day entirely made up of 100+ little, grey plastic archer models... It was probably effective, but even then I thought it looked rather dumb.
 
Just Tony
I could see that, pretty much every army I build has Core heavy basis where each unit is built around surviving a cav charge as well as possible. Spear blocks, Heavy armor with hand weapon/shield. That sort of thing. If I'm throwing down great weapon or halberd units, it's because I've filled the other types and I need a few flank turners.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
HidaSeku
When it comes to Fantasy, I also build based off the Core. For me, that's usually what got me excited about the army in the first place. In fact, I usually have a "favorite unit" that gets written down first, possibly with a hero. With Empire, it's always been the halberdiers with a warrior priest, who were pretty awful in 7th edition but became amazing in 8th. With Skaven, it's always two Clanrat units that get written down first. That sort of thing.
 
snyggejygge
I usually had a gameplan & then took my choices based on that plan, for example IŽve played a lot of games using the hammer & the anvil tactic. I Always Went for a good anvil which could hold to a charge from cavalry, in my armies it was Chaos Warriors, skeleton warriors & paymasters bodyguard or pikemen (play Chaos, VC & DoW), 1 or 2 of these units automatically get included, then I go for the hammer which tend to be Chaos Knights/ Minotaurs, Black Knights, Knights. Then I add some chaff & finally I add the characters that suit, for hammers I add a killy character, for anvils I add a bsb with a good save or which strikes first, then finally I add mages which I use either to strengthen the anvil (raise dead or protective magic) or to add Power to the hammer (could be by boosting spells or by weakening the target with a fireball etc etc).

I have the same mindset still in smaller games, in a 500 pts game I had 1 unit of Knights, 1 unit of beastmen led by a wargor & then chaff, same principle just about all the time unless I want to try something new or the game doesnŽt support this tactic.
 
foggynight81
I usually find myself building what I feel the army should look like. Dark elves usually are hit and run with something big the back. Orcs are big guys horde, goblins are little guys horde. Chaos is elite units, beasts are squirmishing horde. Lizardmen and are either squirmishing skinks or block Saurus Warriors. High elves, empire, and dwarves feel the same, blocked infantry with some machines. Undead, to me, are made to abuse reanimation. Skaven feel like goblins to me. Wood elves feel like dark elves without the big stuff. Brettonian are Calvary, and Daemons are elite without saves. So when I build an army I usually overbuild the strength so the opponent is overwhelmed by it. My opinion is if the enemy is good at shooting for example, horde is the way to go, make his shots ineffective, or go speed and give him only one turn to shoot.
Edited by foggynight81 on 27-02-2016 08:45
My Hellblaster's catastrophic explosion is always counted as a successful kill.
 
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Member Poll
There are no polls defined.
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

No messages have been posted.
1,332,999 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist