Warhammer Fantasy Battle Reporter Forum

(a Warhammer forum for Fantasy Battle & Games Workshop products. Sponsored by battlereporter.blogspot.com)
It is currently Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:38 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: ARMY LIST DISCUSSION: General thoughts / suggestions
PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:55 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 2767
Reputation: 28


Location: london uk
Highscores: 1
Please use this thread for any general observations on overall strengths, weaknesses, theme, tactics, problems etc.

Feel free to set up new threads if you feel it's warranted, eg. your suggested Nautican army lists, models you're converting, artwork you'd like included, back ground, short story ideas or anything else you come up with.

_________________
GW news & Warhammer blog
170+ Fantasy Battle Reports
Nautican Warhammer Army list
Nautican Design Notes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 9:45 pm 
Offline
Major
Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:22 am
Posts: 748
Reputation: 11


Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Overall I think the points changes in v3 are good as are the rule modifications. Did mean I had to redo all of my previous army lists as the points had changed on them all *sigh*

_________________
Check out my Wargaming Blog at
Image

Current WHFB Armies
Dwarfs - 3197 pts, High Elves - 3551 pts, Vampire Counts - 2334pts

Current tournament record
P27 W6 L17 D4 - Best Finish 9th (Dwarves)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2009 10:51 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 2767
Reputation: 28


Location: london uk
Highscores: 1
Thanks Kiwi.

I did warn you about jumping in before draft 3.0 ;)

I'm fairly happy right now, the list is receiving mixed reviews on other forums. Generally good.

One recurring theme is some criticism of the amount of special rules. I think this is partyl due to the web presentation, it's easier to jump back and forth when you have the pdf printed out (like I did last night).

I won't be changing the rules in this draft but I might try to trim down the wording at the weekend. I've spotted a load of corrections to spelling and punctuation etc that i need to make anyway.

_________________
GW news & Warhammer blog
170+ Fantasy Battle Reports
Nautican Warhammer Army list
Nautican Design Notes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2009 10:20 pm 
Offline
Major
Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:22 am
Posts: 748
Reputation: 11


Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Number of special rules isnt that large not compared to armies like Chaos and Orcs & Goblins. Just a matter of getting to grips with them.

One issue I did think of last night while working on some list ideas is the minimum number of core units. At present it is only 2+ which means that 1 could field 2 units of Coral Hunters for 60pts in a 2000pt game and then max out on special and rare units. Kind of makes things unbalanced.

How about a rule, like Vampire Counts, whereby certain core units DO NOT count toward the core minimum e.g., Dire Wolves don't. Not sure how necessary it might be but its a thought...

_________________
Check out my Wargaming Blog at
Image

Current WHFB Armies
Dwarfs - 3197 pts, High Elves - 3551 pts, Vampire Counts - 2334pts

Current tournament record
P27 W6 L17 D4 - Best Finish 9th (Dwarves)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 11:05 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 2767
Reputation: 28


Location: london uk
Highscores: 1
Excellent idea Kiwi.

I never thought of returning to the Army Unit allowances after I first wrote them up and there ahev been many changes since then.

I think we can safely say that Coral Hunters do not count towards the minimum number of core units.

I'm not sure if I should include Crest Riders or not.

What do you think ?

PS. I am adding all these changes to my google notes and they'll go online on Saturday.

_________________
GW news & Warhammer blog
170+ Fantasy Battle Reports
Nautican Warhammer Army list
Nautican Design Notes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 10:21 pm 
Offline
Major
Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:22 am
Posts: 748
Reputation: 11


Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Coral hunters should definately not count, but Crest-Riders should as they are slightly stronger.

_________________
Check out my Wargaming Blog at
Image

Current WHFB Armies
Dwarfs - 3197 pts, High Elves - 3551 pts, Vampire Counts - 2334pts

Current tournament record
P27 W6 L17 D4 - Best Finish 9th (Dwarves)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 10:42 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:44 pm
Posts: 2767
Reputation: 28


Location: london uk
Highscores: 1
Kiwi wrote:
Coral hunters should definately not count, but Crest-Riders should as they are slightly stronger.


Yep, I agree. I added the (doesn't count towards minimum core units) text to the Coral Hunter unit.

_________________
GW news & Warhammer blog
170+ Fantasy Battle Reports
Nautican Warhammer Army list
Nautican Design Notes


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: