The Forum Journey, How I've watched the tactics change

I've said it before, (probably even in this thread) and I'm going to say it again... Our army book is strong. Our army lists are poor, especially so in a comped event. See GW (and Cruddy bless 'im!) wrote the books to be used as they are, not in comped events. TK core special and even rare are all lacklustre without the buffs from character, and furthermore special characters. The power of Khalida and Arkhan have been discussed heavily on this forum, not to mention Ramhotep and the SC Tomb Herald, and of course the mighty Setra himself.

Ogres as a prime example of a new hardback 8th edition book by comparison never seem to run special characters, even when the option is there.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the extreme comp that exists in the ETC for big team events where everyone wants to "balance" the game, where they even go so far as to give TK and extra 200 points as we are "so weak" by popular opinion. When I played an ETC comped Team event, I was laughing all the way to the finals with my bonus 200 points that I didn't feel I needed. In fact, I felt a little dirty that I essentially had a sphinx for free... I'm much rather have had the option of Ramhotep and drop to the correct point limits. But I wish that comp (heavy or small - like no Special Characters) was the exception, rather than the rule. I mean, at some gaming clubs in the UK you have to "ask permission" to use Special Characters... when they are right there in the book. Perhaps we should go ultimate comp, and have to ask your opponent if we're allowed to use Skaven.

I'm hoping when all the books are released in sturdy hardback and all armies are updated for 8th, the game will be balanced enough to not have "the community at large" take it upon themselves to say "no special characters," as yes, it does remove that Skulltaker and Teclis, it hurts other armies so much more than others, ours being a prime example.

I agree with what Far2Casual with "The Internet" at large being to blame for our image and popular view. Hell, I've had excellent success with Tomb Kings, I love our army play-style, models and fluff. Yes a few things cheese me off compared to other races, but that is usually their strong point, rather than their weakness.

A good example is our undead counterpart; Vampire Counts. Have you ever tried a healing war of attrition with a vampire army!? They can heal so much more efficiently that us. On paper (or on Da Interwebz) that simply means Vampires are "better" than Tomb Kings. The strength of an army isn't based on comparing one stat/ability. Yes, vampire healing is awesome, focus on what they are NOT awesome at. In my experience, when our Hierophant dies, it not that bad. My Necrosnakes are LD8. with -1 for being a construct and -1 for being near the BSB, they are essentially passing a leadership crumble test on a 10. Max 2 wounds. (which I can heal with a backup TK priest) When the Head-Honcho Vampire snuffs it, their leadership across the board is a lot lower than ours and they suffer more because of it. Not only this, but combined with death magic on their heroes and doom & darkness combined with the casket, you can make short of them before they heal back.

I guess what I'm saying is "Not to focus on where our army is weaker than other's, but to focus on where we are STRONGER." And use magic to augment us where we are weak. Smiting, Speed of Light and Timewarp all on the most important combat unit will turn the tide of any battle. Yes, one or even two might be dispelled, but if you're playing with a casket and hierotitan, and spending power dice cleverly, you should be able to get two of those off, helping where we are weak.

Also with what Maglok said: the number of times people say "I've never played Tomb Kings." "What does the Casket do again?" and my favourite "Tomb Kings are bottom tier"... those are the players I don't hold back on!

:Raises hand:

Ooo, ooo, ooo! I know!

Because the Warriors player is a moron and didn't attacks the weak-ass, low initiative characters first!

Oh Sleb you Devil's Advocate you!

Unless... the clever and handsome Tomb King player cast Speed of Light/Timewarp/smiting on the already WS5 hatred unit.

Then it's not a 450pt unit. It's a unit that has had the benefit of the attention of several hundred more points.


Also, the post was highly misleading. It wasn't "a double charge of 30 Marauders (GW/Tzeentch) with BSB and lvl 4 in the front, and hero on Disk in the rear," after all.

It was, if I read it correctly, a lot less than that by the time combat was joined.

Well, 350 points of wizard lord doesn't contribute so much to the fighting .

It's actually a fairly good match up for skeletons, because maurauders *are* quite vulnerable to strength 3 attacks, and tzeentch isn't doing much for them. Also, great weapons is a bad choice for them here - khorne with flails would be scarier. But, kudos, it demonstrates that under ideal circumstances (and casting dessication counts here) skeletons can be effective.

It's not really fair to make the interwebz a scapegoat - I came to the conclusion the book was subpar before ever finding this forum, when I noticed I'd been doing better with the previous book

Now, this did improve as I adjusted my army, and I'm willing to concede that my reluctance to splash money on shiny new models to some degree hamstrung my play. I'm also not a great player

I don't expect GW will ever really balance the game though - it's just not a priority for them.

Just because a unit occasionally performs particularly badly/well does not mean it is crap/awesome. All that means is that this is a dice based game and nothing is ever certain.

I think people put way too much stock in anecdotal statistical outliers. Just because my Hierotitan has killed a Bloodthirster in close combat (the rolls were ridiculous on both sides, good for me and bad for him) doesn't mean it's suddenly a combat beast who should be out hunting monsters in CC. Just because my level 4 death wizard miscast on 3 dice and killed himself in two games in a row doesn't mean he is worthless and I should stop taking him.

Be careful with this one...

Only a few of us have voiced similar feelings/experiences, which means we don't know what we're talking about. I mean the old book was an unplayable piece of trash under 8E...or so some folks would have you believe. I've said it before and I've said it again, those of us who did well under the old book are at a marked disadvantage with this one that, in my case, time is ever so slowly, sorting out. We weren't looking for the gross change in army philosophy that we received, we just wanted what we already had made marginally better. Instead, we got a completely different feeling/playing army and it's sink-or-swim time.

In all seriousness, I went from getting slaughtered to pretty much breaking even but in order to do so, everything has to go exactly according to plan or I get tabled. This just isn't my experience, this is shared by my group who has also taken turns running our army and we've all come to the same conclusion: A TK army is extremely powerful when things go as they should but is a fish out of water when things go south.

Maybe it's us and how we play which is largely by the book (although we all hate the Watchtower). I still haven't found a way to stop the TK snowball effect and yes I get frustrated at times but that doesn't mean I'm going to give up just yet.

Erm...check out all of mine for the past 6 months. I've been using a unit of 6 chariots (or two of 6) and they destroy what they touch or do what I want them to, time and time again, consistently, etc. I have to admit, I really don't know how people are muffing it up with chariots, because they are pretty easy to use and wreck face on a level basis.

I always find it funny when TK players say this, because it is the absolute easiest one for the TK to win at. My TK, anyway. I honestly don't think I've ever lost in the Watchtower, out of about 6-7 games of it, in tournaments and out of them.

In fairness most players I know think their army is "subpar", the reality is that unless you win all your games (which probably means you're a cheating ass or you play against children/idiots) your army will probably not work as well as you would like it to. I've certainly had that feeling about all 5 of the armies I play at different times.

It's probably fair to say that I'm not enjoying the same degree of success with the current TK army book as I did with the old book in mid-6th edition when it was released, but am I getting better results with the current book than I did with the old one in the first year of 8th? Absolutely I am.

It's not about ease of winning or lack thereof, we largely find it to be the least fun by a mile. Most of us have favorites (mine is Dawn Attack) and the Watchtower is, by far, our least favorite scenario collectively.

We probably should give it another shot in all honesty as our negative opinions of the scenario date back to the beginning of 8th edition. Our Lizardmen and WoC players just ran roughshod over everyone else in this scenario when 8th first dropped and it left a sour taste in our collective mouths.