I think heroic channeling should always give you a +1 to the cast roll, as if you used the might to improve it. It is so bad if you channel and then have a unlucky roll.
Great video! I completely agree with the legendary legions, the best ones to me are the ones that let you create an army that you wouldn't usually be able to create and have it be flavoured and fun, rather than taking an existing army list and just giving it new rules because they can (Riders of Theoden, Army of Dale etc.)
I enjoyed listening to you guys chat about my take, especially the distillation of the take since I was such a long ramble. I thought you guys did a great job of giving relevant examples for my hot take. Listening to this would suggest that the price you pay for the model (points) and the value provided (actual or forecasted) aren’t always reflected by the 1-1-point comparisons players give. Since a considerable part of this argument against the hot take is about list building and forecasting value, I was thinking about Richard’s comments and my own take, and it made me think of changing the value of chess pieces (relative value) depending on position and board state in a chess game is a pawn worth one point in value if it becomes a Queen (maybe the MESBG equivalent of holding an objective). I think Kardush is an excellent example; you have a model whose value can change depending on the situation. Is he his base points or the points cost of himself + how many trackers you turn into will points, or does he give +15 points of will point value by sacrificing himself? If that stopped Ringwrath from fading out and losing harbinger on a broken enemy, it would potentially be worth 50+ points - forecasting points is tricky.
A couple "lore" takes: Morannon Orcs should be S3. They're D6 which already differentiates them enough form Mordor Orcs, and this way Mordor Uruks would have the spot their lore deserves. Also: Lothlorien and MIrkwood Elves should have normal armor, not heavy (I think it was like that when they first came out). Make silvan elves less tough than the high elves from Lindon's glory days
That would be nice differentiation, but the Ghaladhrim do look quite heavily armoured with the current models and those are not up for replacement anytime soon as they are basically the best elf plastic warrior models
On the first thing, about warbands, size really isn't the issue since back then there was a model limit of 50 at up to 500(and 75 at 501+ if I'm remembering correctly). Meaning lists aren't that much different in size nowadays because for some reason people are playing at over 600 points now. If anything armies like Sharkey's rogues are gonna be massive compared to a Legions period force than anything but I digress. More than anything it seems the warband system was made to ease scenarios that rely on deployment because I still remember having to roll for each individual orc to show up and that's a lot longer than three or four warbands.
HOT TAKE: Fell beasts are criminally underused. People tend to voice how monsters with might are much stronger than without, but somehow seem to forget that a Nezgul on Fell Beast not only has might, but also a ton of will to resist magic. And has compell (in the case of the WK super reliable) to move models for the perfect hurl. And fly in order to achieve the angles for the hurls. They are SO GOOD. And so iconic too. It's crazy that we don't see them everywhere.
You think Gwahir is good for 150 points? Guess what else costs 150... WK on Fell Beast with 3 might and 3 fate. And this is with a mediocre build, for a few more points you get the crown for better casting and an extra attack... It's just insane.
They are good, but most Nazgul are not that great in combat, even the ones that have some combat ruels. They just die to fast with only 1 wound and 2-3 Fate to invest the 50p. I would like if the fell beast have a meele in the way like a chariot. Does not have to be 5+ but even a 3+ in the way would make them much better.
I think most shooting is at a good place but id like to see more interestimg bows/rules on heroes. Lurtz for example: i love lurtz, but i almost never shoot his bow because it is str 3 and im not incentivized to most of the time. It would be cool if his bow was str 4 or had some special rule to make me actually consider using it. Specially since it is factored into his points already and id rather just drop the bow and the points to make him a little cheaper.
Hot take - the implementation of chess clocks with a death clock, i.e. loss at time run out, timer should be the norm for tournament play. Too often, games are not played to scenario completion. There should be a "cost and risk" of someone monopolizing round time. Waiting for an opponent to commit to a line of play is a negative play experience. I acknowledge that the match play guide would need formal writing for the vp counting in the case of a loss by death clock. EDIT: lol jk, how tf would that work for the combat phase.
For whatever reason my phone and computer have different settings in terms of what my name displays as when posting. But as the individual who made the case for Ingold over Hurin I did so for a few reasons. 1. Hurin has burned me badly far too many times, and Ingold never has. Yes, that's dice, but I think everyone has a model or two that seems to consistently over or under perform against the odds 2. I like taking Ingold with Boromir so I can ensure he has a F5 spear support behind him. Then, with some warrior friends next to him, he goes to D8 and has defense and strike. He's excellent at tanking and burning opponent's might that then cannot be used to handle Boromir Otherwise, thanks for reviewing my comment! You guys put out great content and although I can't currently support you as a patreon I wanted to say we do our best to get the word out about your channel in the southeast US
Haha fair enough! Yes I agree, we do all have models that just seem to perform (or underperform) regardless of how they are perceived. We appreciate support of any kind and that's very kind of you :)
My hot take is that I think Rataghast on Eagle is better than Gwahir. He has “Fell Sight” so he can charge thru walls, transfix so he doesn’t fear other heroes with Strike, Resistant to Magic, +1 attack with Sebastian, is a Cavalry which is a double edged sword, can be Valour or Legend, and has Aura of Dismay to boot. I’ve gotten 1st place in a GT with him as well so I’m surprised when I hear people say he isn’t good, because I think he’s great!
Idea for trolls I like to throw around: they should have some kind of chariot rule like the Troll Brute but just a lesser one. Dunno what exactly it should be but even a single S4 hit on charge would immediately give them something. Some reason to exist. And it makes sense, an armoured Mordor Troll crashing into a battleline should crush a model or two underfoot on the way.
Could even give them a pseudo throwing weapon. Call it Savage Blow or something and it’s a 1in range s6 throwing weap. Means they can do damage on the charge without running the risk of flattening an entire flank and becoming a balance problem.
I feel like the "Top Table(s)" at events should have sets of dice at them where the balance of all the dice was checked before the event, and the players have to use those dice sets for the game. To ensure fairness and credibility for winning the event.
Bad take because it’s feasibly impossible. It’s also conceivable that a person plays the system to get to top tables and just swaps put their dice to others. It’s not about playing the top tables most tournaments it’s about getting to them in the first place especially in big tournaments
@@CTA12356 I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to say the dice sets would just sit on the table. A ref/organiser would have to give each player their dice sets right before the match and collect them afterward, so that people couldn't tamper / swap them out between rounds. But I do agree it wouldn't stop people from cheating to get to the top tables it would be more about trying to stop someone from cheating and winning the whole tournament.
and i ride to the defence of durin. he is not meme tier. great stat line (except fate), good killing power, excellent heroics, has survivability, army buffs both in list building and battle, priority manipulation, terror, chance to ignore wounds. he has so much good stuff. but you pay the points for all of it and it makes him too dang expensive for an army below 750-800. a lot of tournaments run below that. its like if none of the witch kings stuff was optional, and he was always 200+ would you see him nearly as much? but being pricy doesnt make him bad, and at those higher points durin's great. real centrepiece model that you can throw into combat vs just about anything.
Love the value of a hero take. I have an army I'm very fond of and won an event with recently where none of my heroes don't exist to make they're points back in killing models. Most of my heroes acted as utility peices that lead troops rather than troop munchers. I had a slayer of men as my leader who offers cracking power and strike but most importantly a very tuff leader to kill. I also had fimbul and yazneg who brought Bows and allowed me to threaten big heroes with strike and good mobility to have them where I needed them. I then had a gundabad Captain who can act as a road block with d7 and provided march and might for moves. Finally I had a Mercenary Captain who was amazing for objective play but never killed anything that was the same value as his points. Most my heroes existed to allow my warriors to get them where they need to be and to let the munch the enemy line while my heroes annoy their's, I also had warbats which are professionals at that.
The Merc Captain is a great shout for that argument... Imo, one of the best heroes in the game just due to how many scenarios this cheap model and it's warband can win you! Very cool triple alliance!
angmar is balanced atm but the strongest way to play them is pretty unfun for the other guy. im hoping the LL in the new book doesnt just buff what we see in tournaments but instead lifts different styles of play to that level. something like Bbuhrdur's raiders with an emphasis on the trolls instead of spirits, or a great pack that rewards taking wargs warg riders and wild chieftains.
You want monsters to be more threatening with a strike back, which is a cool idea but I would rather them have the negatives of their large base sizes be turned into strengths instead. Making their large base an asset that improves their value in comparison to just a half dozen warriors in the same area should be the goal. This is a game where model count proximity to objectives is important. Models with larger bases like monsters should simply not be able to be trapped by models with smaller base sizes. Make smaller based models must always back away after a duel with a larger based model by default. Most of the truly massive models in the game already have some version of this added in their rules specifically, but it should just be the general. If a monster can do the job of taking up space, boxing out warriors and wasting the resources of heroes for a couple turns then they could serve a much more distinct purpose. But currently, them getting surrounded and cut down instantly but a small group of multiple models worth often much much fewer points, is just dismal. One hero, a spear support and an Infantry warrior standing just on the other side of that massive base to get a trap on it should not be a near certain lethal threat in one turn. The difference between 5 attacks at 6s or 5s to wound and 10 attacks at 6s or 5s (especially if those 5s have Might behind them to make it 4s) is the difference between likely dealing 3 wounds or having to commit the hero to a duel to make another Heroic Strike to hopefully finish the job. These ents and the trolls wont go "oh no, spooky small person with sword won combat. I better take a big step back, wouldn't want to get poked." Sure the winner of the duel gets a hit in, but they are never REVERSING THE MOMENTUM of that monster that wants to barrel through them, they are getting that hit in as they step to the side like a bull fighter or dart backwards to avoid a tree trunk swinging through them. Any monster that is "surrounded" by enemies 1/8th of it's mass only needs to spin on the spot as it dies or even just turn scarily while holding a weapon and all of those smaller attackers are going to have to back up or risk being squashed by accident. An Ignorant to Pain on Ents and the bigger trolls is probably also justified. But I think not being trapped and forcing the infantry to back away is more valuable.
100% about the value of a model/hero. It is all about what wins the game. Really does not matter if they do not kill a single model, if they win they game they were of value. We know this, too, we've all said that we would make a captain out of a particularly warrior because they were valuable in winning the game.
Hi guys, honesty didn't expect you to use my comment! I can see why having more heroes makes the game more interesting which why I think this game works better at a smaller scale. My main issue is when building an army and I pick a hero and units then I'll need to buy more heroes in order to field any decent sized force. It adds more admin, not to mention cost, which gets in the way. At the end of the day it's personal preference. I like to just grab an army and start playing without too much work, I do appreciate how the heroes work and their impact on the game itself as there isn't another game with hero's standing out the way they do.
Totally understandable how warbands can limit the way you build an army. That is part of list building which a lot of players enjoy as part of the game, but makes sense that it’s not for everyone. I’ll say that narrative way is the one game mode that is somewhat reminiscent of the pre-warband system, where you don’t have to worry about hero requirements as lists are all laid out for you. -Charles
The Gundabad Troll (with Club) acctuly is way better than a Mordor Troll and mayby even the Cave troll. His stats stats are just so high that he gets scary for most heros to fight, especially with the club. The D8 and 4 wounds make him really hard to kill and with the club he can kill even big heros in one combat with a little luck as he does d3 wounds BEFORE Fate! His Problems are Magic (transfix) and that everything else in Azog legion is so expensiv and you kind of have to take Azog or Bolg. So most of the time you don't have the points to get him.
Hot takes : Priority should be alternate not 100% random. Random for the first turn then alternate. It would help elite lists that do not have a million might to spend on HMove
Hello, I have a rules question since I think my friends got it wrong. Are Elbenbows "Elven-made Weapons" for the purpose of determining if the Goblinking from Goblintown gets his fat Belly save? I am sry for putting something like this in your comments, but we have no expirienced Middle Earth players here.
i 100% agree that heros shouldn't be looked at by how much they can kill for there points. there are quite a few heros that bring much more then killing power. shades and barrow whites are two examples they bring utility to there armies. the balrog majority of the time prevents the opponent of claiming VP on killing the leader. lindir gives elrond free will, for monsters i do think they need to redo them a bit. both a buff and a nerf. dont agree that all monsters should be able to rend/hurl only certain ones like i dont think a cave drake should be able to hurl like the rules have it, but there needs to be a buff that off sets it that makes monsters more appealing to take.
Hey guys love the channel. What are your thoughts on using clansmen of lamedon vs mounted DA knights for objective cappers? I’m going back and forth having 2 mounted knights or a handful of clansmen to save points. Thanks!
The KDA is pretty expensive so I personally wouldn't take too many of them but if you're running pure Fiefs you probably want 1-2 just for the speed as sometimes infantry is just not quick enough. For certain scenarios though where you aren't as much in a rush for the objectives in early game the Clansmen are great for just sitting there with their high courage. So short answer, I'd grab a few of each! -Richard
You know what, I'm going to argue for Ingold. Why is Hurin so highly rated? F5 S4 +1 to wound. Why is Goroth so badly rated? Because he's a worse option than a named capitain because he only has 2 attacks and costs 80 points. Hurin has the same weaknesses as Goroth, just more so due to lower strength and much lower survivability and being required to take that friggin horse to do anything. On the flip side, Ingold is cheap, still with strike, much tankier and still 2 attacks and provides quite a nice buff. He is also in a faction that, if built with Boromir, doesn't really have a need of a 2nd mounted hero. Now, I do understand his purpose in some armies as a cheap, high damage mounted hero, especially at low points (what I always play), but at that point you have a wonderful green ally to place into your minas tirith in the form of Forlong, who also has S5 AND a 3rd wound AND a warhorn, but of course haas no strike. Ingold supplements this making him better at bith low and high points. Because of this, Hurin is overrated, not very useful and worse than Ingold.
That's definitely an interesting point, I see where you are coming from but the mounted part is a pretty big deal imo - it's not like MT has an endless amount of mounted hitters at that points level. Also, I've said in the past, if Hurin can't utilize his special rules, he's probably not worth taking either. -Richard
@@intothewestpodcast I took 3 barrow wights at 500 points so I guess I deserved this. Failed 4 paralyses against him and he resisted the other 2 then killed my orc cappy. I actually managed to kill Denathor with a warg rider but line of command obviously denied me those VPs! (It was to the death)
My hot take is that competitive events should have a more aggressive ban list than the normal smaug / tom bombadil / maybe one other datasheet that we see now. With this game never really getting significant balance changes it feels like it would be good to reign in some of the real outliers or even just unfun models in the game. Some examples of things i would ban are host of the dragon emperor and perhaps some other pure upside LLs (obviously one of the strongest armies, probably the strongest & it is very uninteresting that its just strictly better than normal easterlings), siege weapons (or at least limit players to max 1 in their army) and a few exteme outlier characters like cirdan.
I’ll speak on my communities behalf. I think as a Northern America group, we are challenged with the other systems being so popular. We do a lot to encourage participation. Banning armies is counterproductive to that. You ban a faction and that might be the only army a player has. You just lost a player in your regular gaming circle. For the more established communities, I see tons of creative ideas to keep these models out. Varied points levels, hero of fortitude only tournaments, etc.
@@Competentetyler Yeah, bans alone I wouldn't say are the best way to deal with more 'problematic' parts of the game; there are plenty of other ways to force other lists to be brought like the ones you mentioned to where bans aren't THAT necessary. Although I will always be happy to see siege weapons be banned haha, but that's just me.
30:36 Thanks for considering my take guys! I’ve come to the point where I understand the game won’t be perfectly balanced and that’s okay. Neither will every match up. Maybe in those match ups, where you have the skill upper hand, you try those niche things in the game that never see use in competitive play (Channeling, Trolls, Feral Uruk-hai, Men of the West LL). Be the change you want to see! Cheers!
@@GaspardSavoureux01 And all thoae sectiona were under Théoden's command. In the movie he had, Eomer, Grimbold and Gamling. So only being able yo lead 18 men is ridiculous. Just look at this secion in the movies. The riders of Théoden were a big group.
@GaspardSavoureux01 They should give you the choice. The issue is that they take away your choice and dictate how to play. Why not have one hero of legend leading 30 troops? They are all about list building and playing your favourite scenarios, etc. But limit you with warbands that make no sense lore wise. Eomér leads a eored but can only lead 16 guys in the game. Aragorn basically leads the Deeping wall's defence. Later the army at the bkack gate and still gets 18 guys in his warband. In Moria the Fellowship gets attacked by a whole bunch of 'faceless chaps'. Not even one hero to lead the goblins. The Balrog only shows up at the end.
@ArchangelTyrael lore wise and game balance should not always be hand to hand. Play another game or return to playing the previous edition if that's your stick. Saying that Eomer shouldn't be restricted to only 15 dudes because in the lore is a general is not a good argument. For a game balance perspective, having that tier of heroes leading 15 out of your 40 models is fine. It's like saying Azog shouldn't be F7 because in the lore, he's an orc. Game balance wise, it's a good thing that he's at F7 because his faction is made with the fact that everything revolves around him, and if he's lacking, his faction sucks. Again, if you find the warbands system too restrictive, play another game with a different way to make your list
Durin's great, he allowed me to make every Easterling player's wet dream come true. Trapped Durin vs Emperor with channeled Enchanted Blades. 18 attacks, chef's kiss. Also, incidentally: Emperor is overrated.
Coming in a bit late to say thanks for including my hot take there fellas, and also thanks for getting the jist of what I meant by it as far as fight value being the big one; discussed the idea some more with the folks in my local group and realized I might not have articulated my point well enough. With regards to S and D also being included, that comes more from a sense of the numbers for those stats (along with fight value) being some what clumped now due to GW's game design philosophy - FV is most of the time 3-5, S is either 3 or 4 most of the time, D is usually between 4 and 6 - so stretching the scale for S and D as well would encourage them to maybe flavor up the armies some more stat-wise (and just generally flatten the bell curve somewhat), but that's more of a personal preference and a much bigger rework, whereas as far as the game is as right now, the fight value power creep is the biggest point to address.
Great points, especially about Fight Value being clumped. There aren’t many profiles in the F8-10 range currently; moving some of the F5/6 heroes up could help with the power creep issue.
I find shooting is hit or miss. Most armies shooting is completely garbage and low impact, 4+ with power 2 bows not including in the ways. Then, some armies shooting is completely cracked and oppressive and will mow models every turn.
How about this for a hot take, objectives should be contested/captured based on the points of the model. Contesting a objective when you have one orc and one Boromir is ridiculous.
for the shooting i agree, im glad it was nerfed i would even try and go further, i always thought that a shield should act as an in the way roll against shooting
Shooting does feel a little weird. It's quite week, but as you all said, getting shot off the board sucks. Two ways to solve it could be: One - A possible buff for shooting that adds some lesser effect, other than making kills easier. Maybe a chance to knock enemy to the ground instead of killing them? That's a fun mechanic in Necromunda. Two -just make everyone move faster and make difficult terrain less punishing. Close the gap and make those archers fear for their lives!
Kinda hot, most people acknowledge that the way maelstrom is done now has issues but there's usually suggestions for tweaks rather than just scrapping the entire idea.
@@intothewestpodcast yeah a tweaked version could be fine, but right now it feels like we are playing a Call of duty deathmatch due to the spawn points, I feel it's a weaker rule even from a lore /fluff perspective
Angmar has 3 of the best models in the game, if not 4. Multiple being top 5 in my opinion. The barrow wights are the biggest discrepancy of points to value in the game. Paralyze is one of the few magic spells that does not belong in its current state.
Many top tier competitive lists dont run any Barrow Wights. Witch King, Gulavhar and Orc Captain is the usual hero core up to 700p. Barrow Wight is a zero might non-combat hero whose only value is bringing a small terror bubble and realistically throwing out two paralyze attempts (with no might behind them). Paralyze has a pitiful 6" range so it is extremely predictable and avoidable. Bringing them means you are guaranteed to be outmatched in terms of Might for Heroic Moves. Barrow Wights are oppressive IF the opponent relies on beatstick heroes who first get drained of their Will by Witch King. Its a great model still and in the right matchups very oppressive but you're vastly overrating him. Angmar is mainly strong due to WK+Gully combo.
@@Corppi22 I think its less of a slight against the barrow wight and more how potent the WK gully combo is. Despite access to the model they don't use it because those two plus terror, plus spectres does so much who cares? But if you take that model each cast is a must resist for any hero or they must expect to die. Even in the case of Sauron taking the spell will likely end in ring saves after 1 turn. You brought aragorn? Well, he now really can never go into combat, as soon as he does, he hits dirt and likely doesn't get back up. It has to have a short range but, you control when it gets used. Its even more powerful as a terror line means might is less important because who needs might when your opponent can't charge. And typically you want the opponent to move first anyway so the WK and gully can have max impact, so moves are even less useful for Angmar. One kill on a multimight hero or making them burn to resist paralyze makes it not having might the only way its close to balanced.. All of this on top of it just not being a fun army to play against is just absurd to me. So I think its the opposite and its being undervalued due to the exceptionally high power level of everything else.
@@DFGEmporium Angmar isnt dominating the competitive scene in some absurd way. Its a solid army that shines in experienced hands that has plenty of counters. So clearly these super powerful models are in reality pretty well adjusted. Terror is a nifty trick but in many matchups just doesnt come into play. Even armies without say bodyguard spam are perfectly happy to sit still and shoot forcing the orcs to engage. Angmar doesnt have the biggest model count and their troops are bottom of the barrel tier. Gully and WK arent capable of simply cutting through armies on their own before their own army disintigrates. Neither has free Might mechanics. Their Might is precious and thus using Barrow Wights in conjunction doesnt benefit the army as much as just some captain who can March and call Moves. And your argument about say Aragorn getting shut down is in my opinion moot since you already have Witch King. Aragorn was already hardcountered. There's a reason why few competitive armies rely solely on magic vulnerable centerpieces. There's plenty of reasons why you dont want to take Barrow Wights with WK+Gully. I think you're vastly overselling Barrow Wights and Angmar in general. It can feel like an oppressive list especially when played by an experienced opponent, and certain popular types of list do indeed struggle hard with Angmar. But that sentence can be levied against many armies and Angmar's performance in tournaments doesnt stand out beyond it being a very very solid army.
@@Corppi22 my reply would then be I believe most people don't play it because of the play loop the army creates. Its good but whats the point of playing angmar? To shut down the opponent from doing what they want. When angmar does what it wants to there isn't even a point for the opponent to sit down at the table. I think the army is too oppressive when its good but useless when its countered which isn't a good place to be. Also you likely wouldn't bring WK gully and barrow wights, but its a tool they get that when fielded is too cheap that a 50 point model can just shut down a 400 point model. The model would be completely fine if it weren't for paralyze. But I just don't think an army that when it works the opponent isn't playing the game and when it doesn't its the other way around. I think its one of the best armies but also the most abysmal to play against as a stomp either way isn't fun for anyone.
@@DFGEmporiumslippery slope to go down here. There is already some chatter about the game feeling stale and very repetitive (hence why some tournaments are changing the points totals a lot, NOVA 1k). If every army has to fit into the cookie cutter template, that can lead to more of the same. I will challenge by posing this question, how is Angmar different than any other faction? You note it can be oppressive. Can’t walking into an Elven Gunline be oppressive? How about a horde army against an elite in objectives? Rohan when it skirmishes? Super tanky dwarves against S3? The beauty of the game is the variety. Angmar won’t match well against every list across a two day tournament. You even noted that some games will go the complete opposite, non oppressive, slaughter of Angmar. Sounds balanced to me.
@@intothewestpodcast it would add some risk, and fun if you hit your own model! Also I feel like line of sight for magic gets ignored often because you don’t need to check for in the way
I think heroic channeling should always give you a +1 to the cast roll, as if you used the might to improve it. It is so bad if you channel and then have a unlucky roll.
Great video! I completely agree with the legendary legions, the best ones to me are the ones that let you create an army that you wouldn't usually be able to create and have it be flavoured and fun, rather than taking an existing army list and just giving it new rules because they can (Riders of Theoden, Army of Dale etc.)
I enjoyed listening to you guys chat about my take, especially the distillation of the take since I was such a long ramble. I thought you guys did a great job of giving relevant examples for my hot take.
Listening to this would suggest that the price you pay for the model (points) and the value provided (actual or forecasted) aren’t always reflected by the 1-1-point comparisons players give.
Since a considerable part of this argument against the hot take is about list building and forecasting value,
I was thinking about Richard’s comments and my own take, and it made me think of changing the value of chess pieces (relative value) depending on position and board state in a chess game is a pawn worth one point in value if it becomes a Queen (maybe the MESBG equivalent of holding an objective). I think Kardush is an excellent example; you have a model whose value can change depending on the situation. Is he his base points or the points cost of himself + how many trackers you turn into will points, or does he give +15 points of will point value by sacrificing himself? If that stopped Ringwrath from fading out and losing harbinger on a broken enemy, it would potentially be worth 50+ points - forecasting points is tricky.
A couple "lore" takes: Morannon Orcs should be S3. They're D6 which already differentiates them enough form Mordor Orcs, and this way Mordor Uruks would have the spot their lore deserves.
Also: Lothlorien and MIrkwood Elves should have normal armor, not heavy (I think it was like that when they first came out). Make silvan elves less tough than the high elves from Lindon's glory days
That would be nice differentiation, but the Ghaladhrim do look quite heavily armoured with the current models and those are not up for replacement anytime soon as they are basically the best elf plastic warrior models
I would really love any reason to take Mordor uruks (outside Cirith Ungol)
I have a greatest hot take of all time, give Balrog a "fly" special rule for memes if anything other. HE HAS WINGS
@@kangaroo8858 fly 6"? I'm down for that!! Its perfect!
On the first thing, about warbands, size really isn't the issue since back then there was a model limit of 50 at up to 500(and 75 at 501+ if I'm remembering correctly). Meaning lists aren't that much different in size nowadays because for some reason people are playing at over 600 points now. If anything armies like Sharkey's rogues are gonna be massive compared to a Legions period force than anything but I digress.
More than anything it seems the warband system was made to ease scenarios that rely on deployment because I still remember having to roll for each individual orc to show up and that's a lot longer than three or four warbands.
HOT TAKE: Fell beasts are criminally underused.
People tend to voice how monsters with might are much stronger than without, but somehow seem to forget that a Nezgul on Fell Beast not only has might, but also a ton of will to resist magic. And has compell (in the case of the WK super reliable) to move models for the perfect hurl. And fly in order to achieve the angles for the hurls. They are SO GOOD. And so iconic too. It's crazy that we don't see them everywhere.
You think Gwahir is good for 150 points? Guess what else costs 150... WK on Fell Beast with 3 might and 3 fate.
And this is with a mediocre build, for a few more points you get the crown for better casting and an extra attack... It's just insane.
They are good, but most Nazgul are not that great in combat, even the ones that have some combat ruels. They just die to fast with only 1 wound and 2-3 Fate to invest the 50p.
I would like if the fell beast have a meele in the way like a chariot. Does not have to be 5+ but even a 3+ in the way would make them much better.
I think most shooting is at a good place but id like to see more interestimg bows/rules on heroes. Lurtz for example: i love lurtz, but i almost never shoot his bow because it is str 3 and im not incentivized to most of the time. It would be cool if his bow was str 4 or had some special rule to make me actually consider using it. Specially since it is factored into his points already and id rather just drop the bow and the points to make him a little cheaper.
Hot take - the implementation of chess clocks with a death clock, i.e. loss at time run out, timer should be the norm for tournament play. Too often, games are not played to scenario completion. There should be a "cost and risk" of someone monopolizing round time. Waiting for an opponent to commit to a line of play is a negative play experience. I acknowledge that the match play guide would need formal writing for the vp counting in the case of a loss by death clock.
EDIT: lol jk, how tf would that work for the combat phase.
For whatever reason my phone and computer have different settings in terms of what my name displays as when posting. But as the individual who made the case for Ingold over Hurin I did so for a few reasons.
1. Hurin has burned me badly far too many times, and Ingold never has. Yes, that's dice, but I think everyone has a model or two that seems to consistently over or under perform against the odds
2. I like taking Ingold with Boromir so I can ensure he has a F5 spear support behind him. Then, with some warrior friends next to him, he goes to D8 and has defense and strike. He's excellent at tanking and burning opponent's might that then cannot be used to handle Boromir
Otherwise, thanks for reviewing my comment! You guys put out great content and although I can't currently support you as a patreon I wanted to say we do our best to get the word out about your channel in the southeast US
Haha fair enough! Yes I agree, we do all have models that just seem to perform (or underperform) regardless of how they are perceived.
We appreciate support of any kind and that's very kind of you :)
My hot take is that I think Rataghast on Eagle is better than Gwahir. He has “Fell Sight” so he can charge thru walls, transfix so he doesn’t fear other heroes with Strike, Resistant to Magic, +1 attack with Sebastian, is a Cavalry which is a double edged sword, can be Valour or Legend, and has Aura of Dismay to boot. I’ve gotten 1st place in a GT with him as well so I’m surprised when I hear people say he isn’t good, because I think he’s great!
Idea for trolls I like to throw around: they should have some kind of chariot rule like the Troll Brute but just a lesser one. Dunno what exactly it should be but even a single S4 hit on charge would immediately give them something. Some reason to exist. And it makes sense, an armoured Mordor Troll crashing into a battleline should crush a model or two underfoot on the way.
Could even give them a pseudo throwing weapon. Call it Savage Blow or something and it’s a 1in range s6 throwing weap. Means they can do damage on the charge without running the risk of flattening an entire flank and becoming a balance problem.
Make them able to move models up to 1" when they charge or move 1" even when engaged so they can fight more enemys.
I feel like the "Top Table(s)" at events should have sets of dice at them where the balance of all the dice was checked before the event, and the players have to use those dice sets for the game. To ensure fairness and credibility for winning the event.
I would love this at competitive events!
Bad take because it’s feasibly impossible. It’s also conceivable that a person plays the system to get to top tables and just swaps put their dice to others. It’s not about playing the top tables most tournaments it’s about getting to them in the first place especially in big tournaments
@@CTA12356 I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to say the dice sets would just sit on the table. A ref/organiser would have to give each player their dice sets right before the match and collect them afterward, so that people couldn't tamper / swap them out between rounds. But I do agree it wouldn't stop people from cheating to get to the top tables it would be more about trying to stop someone from cheating and winning the whole tournament.
and i ride to the defence of durin. he is not meme tier. great stat line (except fate), good killing power, excellent heroics, has survivability, army buffs both in list building and battle, priority manipulation, terror, chance to ignore wounds. he has so much good stuff. but you pay the points for all of it and it makes him too dang expensive for an army below 750-800. a lot of tournaments run below that. its like if none of the witch kings stuff was optional, and he was always 200+ would you see him nearly as much? but being pricy doesnt make him bad, and at those higher points durin's great. real centrepiece model that you can throw into combat vs just about anything.
Love the value of a hero take. I have an army I'm very fond of and won an event with recently where none of my heroes don't exist to make they're points back in killing models. Most of my heroes acted as utility peices that lead troops rather than troop munchers. I had a slayer of men as my leader who offers cracking power and strike but most importantly a very tuff leader to kill. I also had fimbul and yazneg who brought Bows and allowed me to threaten big heroes with strike and good mobility to have them where I needed them. I then had a gundabad Captain who can act as a road block with d7 and provided march and might for moves. Finally I had a Mercenary Captain who was amazing for objective play but never killed anything that was the same value as his points.
Most my heroes existed to allow my warriors to get them where they need to be and to let the munch the enemy line while my heroes annoy their's, I also had warbats which are professionals at that.
This is the list for those interested.
Dark Powers of Dol Goldur & Azog’s Hunters & Azog’s Legion
Warband 1:
(Leader) The Nazgul of Dol Guldur (The Slayer of Men 1): (75)
5x Hunter Orc (40)
2x Hunter Orc: Two-Handed Pick (18)
1x Fell Warg (8)
Warband 2:
Fimbul The Hunter: Fell Warg (60)
5x Hunter Orc: Orc Bow (45)
1x Hunter Orc: Orc Bow, War Horn (39)
5x Hunter Orc (40)
1x Fell Warg (8)
Warband 3:
Yazneg: Fell Warg, Lance (60)
6x Hunter Orc: Orc Bow (54)
5x Hunter Orc (40)
1x Fell Warg (8)
Warband 4:
Gundabad Orc Captain: Shield (55)
9x Gundabad Orc Warrior: Shield, Spear (90)
1x Gundabad Orc Warrior: Shield, Spear, Banner (35)
2x War Bat (50)
Warband 5:
Goblin Mercenary Captain: (50)
5x Goblin Mercenary (25)
The Merc Captain is a great shout for that argument... Imo, one of the best heroes in the game just due to how many scenarios this cheap model and it's warband can win you!
Very cool triple alliance!
angmar is balanced atm but the strongest way to play them is pretty unfun for the other guy. im hoping the LL in the new book doesnt just buff what we see in tournaments but instead lifts different styles of play to that level. something like Bbuhrdur's raiders with an emphasis on the trolls instead of spirits, or a great pack that rewards taking wargs warg riders and wild chieftains.
This video did not include a "Gildor Inglorion of the House of Finrod with a full complement of exiles is legend tier" because that is a normal take.
You want monsters to be more threatening with a strike back, which is a cool idea but I would rather them have the negatives of their large base sizes be turned into strengths instead. Making their large base an asset that improves their value in comparison to just a half dozen warriors in the same area should be the goal. This is a game where model count proximity to objectives is important.
Models with larger bases like monsters should simply not be able to be trapped by models with smaller base sizes. Make smaller based models must always back away after a duel with a larger based model by default. Most of the truly massive models in the game already have some version of this added in their rules specifically, but it should just be the general.
If a monster can do the job of taking up space, boxing out warriors and wasting the resources of heroes for a couple turns then they could serve a much more distinct purpose. But currently, them getting surrounded and cut down instantly but a small group of multiple models worth often much much fewer points, is just dismal.
One hero, a spear support and an Infantry warrior standing just on the other side of that massive base to get a trap on it should not be a near certain lethal threat in one turn. The difference between 5 attacks at 6s or 5s to wound and 10 attacks at 6s or 5s (especially if those 5s have Might behind them to make it 4s) is the difference between likely dealing 3 wounds or having to commit the hero to a duel to make another Heroic Strike to hopefully finish the job.
These ents and the trolls wont go "oh no, spooky small person with sword won combat. I better take a big step back, wouldn't want to get poked." Sure the winner of the duel gets a hit in, but they are never REVERSING THE MOMENTUM of that monster that wants to barrel through them, they are getting that hit in as they step to the side like a bull fighter or dart backwards to avoid a tree trunk swinging through them. Any monster that is "surrounded" by enemies 1/8th of it's mass only needs to spin on the spot as it dies or even just turn scarily while holding a weapon and all of those smaller attackers are going to have to back up or risk being squashed by accident.
An Ignorant to Pain on Ents and the bigger trolls is probably also justified. But I think not being trapped and forcing the infantry to back away is more valuable.
Some interesting ideas here!
100% about the value of a model/hero. It is all about what wins the game. Really does not matter if they do not kill a single model, if they win they game they were of value.
We know this, too, we've all said that we would make a captain out of a particularly warrior because they were valuable in winning the game.
Hi guys, honesty didn't expect you to use my comment! I can see why having more heroes makes the game more interesting which why I think this game works better at a smaller scale. My main issue is when building an army and I pick a hero and units then I'll need to buy more heroes in order to field any decent sized force. It adds more admin, not to mention cost, which gets in the way. At the end of the day it's personal preference. I like to just grab an army and start playing without too much work, I do appreciate how the heroes work and their impact on the game itself as there isn't another game with hero's standing out the way they do.
Totally understandable how warbands can limit the way you build an army. That is part of list building which a lot of players enjoy as part of the game, but makes sense that it’s not for everyone. I’ll say that narrative way is the one game mode that is somewhat reminiscent of the pre-warband system, where you don’t have to worry about hero requirements as lists are all laid out for you.
-Charles
You can play the Dead of Dunharrow haha they have leaderless warbands
Minas Tirith is a top tier faction. It’s just to vanilla for most players!
The Gundabad Troll (with Club) acctuly is way better than a Mordor Troll and mayby even the Cave troll.
His stats stats are just so high that he gets scary for most heros to fight, especially with the club. The D8 and 4 wounds make him really hard to kill and with the club he can kill even big heros in one combat with a little luck as he does d3 wounds BEFORE Fate!
His Problems are Magic (transfix) and that everything else in Azog legion is so expensiv and you kind of have to take Azog or Bolg. So most of the time you don't have the points to get him.
Hot takes : Priority should be alternate not 100% random. Random for the first turn then alternate. It would help elite lists that do not have a million might to spend on HMove
Hello, I have a rules question since I think my friends got it wrong. Are Elbenbows "Elven-made Weapons" for the purpose of determining if the Goblinking from Goblintown gets his fat Belly save? I am sry for putting something like this in your comments, but we have no expirienced Middle Earth players here.
No, only weapons that say “Elven-made” count.
@@intothewestpodcast Thank you very much!
I think the armies need a rework, some new additions and some tweaked changes. for example i think dunand should be an army not a LL
i 100% agree that heros shouldn't be looked at by how much they can kill for there points. there are quite a few heros that bring much more then killing power. shades and barrow whites are two examples they bring utility to there armies. the balrog majority of the time prevents the opponent of claiming VP on killing the leader. lindir gives elrond free will,
for monsters i do think they need to redo them a bit. both a buff and a nerf. dont agree that all monsters should be able to rend/hurl only certain ones like i dont think a cave drake should be able to hurl like the rules have it, but there needs to be a buff that off sets it that makes monsters more appealing to take.
Especially the warrior monsters, I want there to be more trolls in games because they are so awesome in the films and have nice models
Hey guys love the channel. What are your thoughts on using clansmen of lamedon vs mounted DA knights for objective cappers? I’m going back and forth having 2 mounted knights or a handful of clansmen to save points. Thanks!
The KDA is pretty expensive so I personally wouldn't take too many of them but if you're running pure Fiefs you probably want 1-2 just for the speed as sometimes infantry is just not quick enough. For certain scenarios though where you aren't as much in a rush for the objectives in early game the Clansmen are great for just sitting there with their high courage.
So short answer, I'd grab a few of each!
-Richard
HOT TAKE: Imrahil isn’t useful as a hero of legend, being forced to be the army leader is a huge crutch
You know what, I'm going to argue for Ingold. Why is Hurin so highly rated? F5 S4 +1 to wound. Why is Goroth so badly rated? Because he's a worse option than a named capitain because he only has 2 attacks and costs 80 points.
Hurin has the same weaknesses as Goroth, just more so due to lower strength and much lower survivability and being required to take that friggin horse to do anything.
On the flip side, Ingold is cheap, still with strike, much tankier and still 2 attacks and provides quite a nice buff.
He is also in a faction that, if built with Boromir, doesn't really have a need of a 2nd mounted hero.
Now, I do understand his purpose in some armies as a cheap, high damage mounted hero, especially at low points (what I always play), but at that point you have a wonderful green ally to place into your minas tirith in the form of Forlong, who also has S5 AND a 3rd wound AND a warhorn, but of course haas no strike. Ingold supplements this making him better at bith low and high points. Because of this, Hurin is overrated, not very useful and worse than Ingold.
That's definitely an interesting point, I see where you are coming from but the mounted part is a pretty big deal imo - it's not like MT has an endless amount of mounted hitters at that points level. Also, I've said in the past, if Hurin can't utilize his special rules, he's probably not worth taking either.
-Richard
@@intothewestpodcast
I just had a game against Hurin and I've come to realise the correct answer to what I have said is: Wrong
@@lutzeichmeyer9338 😂 did he go off?
@@lutzeichmeyer9338😂
@@intothewestpodcast
I took 3 barrow wights at 500 points so I guess I deserved this.
Failed 4 paralyses against him and he resisted the other 2 then killed my orc cappy.
I actually managed to kill Denathor with a warg rider but line of command obviously denied me those VPs!
(It was to the death)
I need Hurin lessons cause whenever I use him he dies so fast 😂 he usually gets a couple kills then dies horribly
😅
My hot take is that competitive events should have a more aggressive ban list than the normal smaug / tom bombadil / maybe one other datasheet that we see now. With this game never really getting significant balance changes it feels like it would be good to reign in some of the real outliers or even just unfun models in the game. Some examples of things i would ban are host of the dragon emperor and perhaps some other pure upside LLs (obviously one of the strongest armies, probably the strongest & it is very uninteresting that its just strictly better than normal easterlings), siege weapons (or at least limit players to max 1 in their army) and a few exteme outlier characters like cirdan.
I’ll speak on my communities behalf. I think as a Northern America group, we are challenged with the other systems being so popular. We do a lot to encourage participation.
Banning armies is counterproductive to that. You ban a faction and that might be the only army a player has. You just lost a player in your regular gaming circle.
For the more established communities, I see tons of creative ideas to keep these models out. Varied points levels, hero of fortitude only tournaments, etc.
@@Competentetyler Yeah, bans alone I wouldn't say are the best way to deal with more 'problematic' parts of the game; there are plenty of other ways to force other lists to be brought like the ones you mentioned to where bans aren't THAT necessary. Although I will always be happy to see siege weapons be banned haha, but that's just me.
Ingold is definitely the best "mid tier" hero for Gondor
Respectfully disagree! 😄
@@intothewestpodcast I should say, I say this confidently say with my grand total of 0 games using him, just seeing him being used 😅
30:36 Thanks for considering my take guys! I’ve come to the point where I understand the game won’t be perfectly balanced and that’s okay.
Neither will every match up. Maybe in those match ups, where you have the skill upper hand, you try those niche things in the game that never see use in competitive play (Channeling, Trolls, Feral Uruk-hai, Men of the West LL). Be the change you want to see!
Cheers!
Well about the warbands, it’s weird that a hero legend can only lead 18 models. I mean Théoden lead 6000 Rohirrim to the Pelennor Fields.
He doesn't lead them alone. Even in a big army, it is divided in multiple sections with officers that lead their own section of the army
@@GaspardSavoureux01 And all thoae sectiona were under Théoden's command. In the movie he had, Eomer, Grimbold and Gamling. So only being able yo lead 18 men is ridiculous.
Just look at this secion in the movies. The riders of Théoden were a big group.
@ArchangelTyrael i mean at the end of the day it's a game so if you want to play a horde of faceless chaps with 1 hero then play something else
@GaspardSavoureux01 They should give you the choice. The issue is that they take away your choice and dictate how to play. Why not have one hero of legend leading 30 troops?
They are all about list building and playing your favourite scenarios, etc. But limit you with warbands that make no sense lore wise.
Eomér leads a eored but can only lead 16 guys in the game.
Aragorn basically leads the Deeping wall's defence. Later the army at the bkack gate and still gets 18 guys in his warband.
In Moria the Fellowship gets attacked by a whole bunch of 'faceless chaps'. Not even one hero to lead the goblins. The Balrog only shows up at the end.
@ArchangelTyrael lore wise and game balance should not always be hand to hand. Play another game or return to playing the previous edition if that's your stick. Saying that Eomer shouldn't be restricted to only 15 dudes because in the lore is a general is not a good argument. For a game balance perspective, having that tier of heroes leading 15 out of your 40 models is fine. It's like saying Azog shouldn't be F7 because in the lore, he's an orc. Game balance wise, it's a good thing that he's at F7 because his faction is made with the fact that everything revolves around him, and if he's lacking, his faction sucks. Again, if you find the warbands system too restrictive, play another game with a different way to make your list
Shout out to OGeeTomo!!!
@@andrewpalmieri2902 Gday mate.
@@OGEETOMO my friend, you bow to no one!!!
Durin's great, he allowed me to make every Easterling player's wet dream come true. Trapped Durin vs Emperor with channeled Enchanted Blades. 18 attacks, chef's kiss.
Also, incidentally: Emperor is overrated.
Coming in a bit late to say thanks for including my hot take there fellas, and also thanks for getting the jist of what I meant by it as far as fight value being the big one; discussed the idea some more with the folks in my local group and realized I might not have articulated my point well enough. With regards to S and D also being included, that comes more from a sense of the numbers for those stats (along with fight value) being some what clumped now due to GW's game design philosophy - FV is most of the time 3-5, S is either 3 or 4 most of the time, D is usually between 4 and 6 - so stretching the scale for S and D as well would encourage them to maybe flavor up the armies some more stat-wise (and just generally flatten the bell curve somewhat), but that's more of a personal preference and a much bigger rework, whereas as far as the game is as right now, the fight value power creep is the biggest point to address.
Great points, especially about Fight Value being clumped. There aren’t many profiles in the F8-10 range currently; moving some of the F5/6 heroes up could help with the power creep issue.
Hot Take: all heroes should have an innate resist to magic to stop oppressive casters.
heroic strike should only be D3.
And just to compliment that, it would mean we would see play from the lower tier heroes we never see due to them not having heroic strike
Great ideas, I wouldn't be opposed to those changes!
Heroes should be able to benefit of a last stand firn another hero.
There's some heroes that give that effect like Saruman!
I find shooting is hit or miss. Most armies shooting is completely garbage and low impact, 4+ with power 2 bows not including in the ways. Then, some armies shooting is completely cracked and oppressive and will mow models every turn.
How about this for a hot take, objectives should be contested/captured based on the points of the model. Contesting a objective when you have one orc and one Boromir is ridiculous.
for the shooting i agree, im glad it was nerfed i would even try and go further, i always thought that a shield should act as an in the way roll against shooting
Shooting does feel a little weird. It's quite week, but as you all said, getting shot off the board sucks.
Two ways to solve it could be:
One - A possible buff for shooting that adds some lesser effect, other than making kills easier. Maybe a chance to knock enemy to the ground instead of killing them? That's a fun mechanic in Necromunda.
Two -just make everyone move faster and make difficult terrain less punishing. Close the gap and make those archers fear for their lives!
Is a hot take to considered maelstrom deployment etc the most stupid thing I ever saw in a wargame?
And I came from 40k
Kinda hot, most people acknowledge that the way maelstrom is done now has issues but there's usually suggestions for tweaks rather than just scrapping the entire idea.
@@intothewestpodcast yeah a tweaked version could be fine, but right now it feels like we are playing a Call of duty deathmatch due to the spawn points, I feel it's a weaker rule even from a lore /fluff perspective
Angmar has 3 of the best models in the game, if not 4. Multiple being top 5 in my opinion. The barrow wights are the biggest discrepancy of points to value in the game. Paralyze is one of the few magic spells that does not belong in its current state.
Many top tier competitive lists dont run any Barrow Wights. Witch King, Gulavhar and Orc Captain is the usual hero core up to 700p.
Barrow Wight is a zero might non-combat hero whose only value is bringing a small terror bubble and realistically throwing out two paralyze attempts (with no might behind them). Paralyze has a pitiful 6" range so it is extremely predictable and avoidable. Bringing them means you are guaranteed to be outmatched in terms of Might for Heroic Moves.
Barrow Wights are oppressive IF the opponent relies on beatstick heroes who first get drained of their Will by Witch King.
Its a great model still and in the right matchups very oppressive but you're vastly overrating him. Angmar is mainly strong due to WK+Gully combo.
@@Corppi22 I think its less of a slight against the barrow wight and more how potent the WK gully combo is. Despite access to the model they don't use it because those two plus terror, plus spectres does so much who cares? But if you take that model each cast is a must resist for any hero or they must expect to die. Even in the case of Sauron taking the spell will likely end in ring saves after 1 turn. You brought aragorn? Well, he now really can never go into combat, as soon as he does, he hits dirt and likely doesn't get back up. It has to have a short range but, you control when it gets used. Its even more powerful as a terror line means might is less important because who needs might when your opponent can't charge. And typically you want the opponent to move first anyway so the WK and gully can have max impact, so moves are even less useful for Angmar. One kill on a multimight hero or making them burn to resist paralyze makes it not having might the only way its close to balanced.. All of this on top of it just not being a fun army to play against is just absurd to me. So I think its the opposite and its being undervalued due to the exceptionally high power level of everything else.
@@DFGEmporium Angmar isnt dominating the competitive scene in some absurd way. Its a solid army that shines in experienced hands that has plenty of counters. So clearly these super powerful models are in reality pretty well adjusted.
Terror is a nifty trick but in many matchups just doesnt come into play. Even armies without say bodyguard spam are perfectly happy to sit still and shoot forcing the orcs to engage.
Angmar doesnt have the biggest model count and their troops are bottom of the barrel tier. Gully and WK arent capable of simply cutting through armies on their own before their own army disintigrates. Neither has free Might mechanics. Their Might is precious and thus using Barrow Wights in conjunction doesnt benefit the army as much as just some captain who can March and call Moves.
And your argument about say Aragorn getting shut down is in my opinion moot since you already have Witch King. Aragorn was already hardcountered. There's a reason why few competitive armies rely solely on magic vulnerable centerpieces.
There's plenty of reasons why you dont want to take Barrow Wights with WK+Gully. I think you're vastly overselling Barrow Wights and Angmar in general. It can feel like an oppressive list especially when played by an experienced opponent, and certain popular types of list do indeed struggle hard with Angmar. But that sentence can be levied against many armies and Angmar's performance in tournaments doesnt stand out beyond it being a very very solid army.
@@Corppi22 my reply would then be I believe most people don't play it because of the play loop the army creates. Its good but whats the point of playing angmar? To shut down the opponent from doing what they want. When angmar does what it wants to there isn't even a point for the opponent to sit down at the table. I think the army is too oppressive when its good but useless when its countered which isn't a good place to be. Also you likely wouldn't bring WK gully and barrow wights, but its a tool they get that when fielded is too cheap that a 50 point model can just shut down a 400 point model. The model would be completely fine if it weren't for paralyze. But I just don't think an army that when it works the opponent isn't playing the game and when it doesn't its the other way around. I think its one of the best armies but also the most abysmal to play against as a stomp either way isn't fun for anyone.
@@DFGEmporiumslippery slope to go down here.
There is already some chatter about the game feeling stale and very repetitive (hence why some tournaments are changing the points totals a lot, NOVA 1k).
If every army has to fit into the cookie cutter template, that can lead to more of the same. I will challenge by posing this question, how is Angmar different than any other faction?
You note it can be oppressive. Can’t walking into an Elven Gunline be oppressive? How about a horde army against an elite in objectives? Rohan when it skirmishes? Super tanky dwarves against S3?
The beauty of the game is the variety. Angmar won’t match well against every list across a two day tournament. You even noted that some games will go the complete opposite, non oppressive, slaughter of Angmar. Sounds balanced to me.
Magic should have in the ways
Ooh that's an interesting "nerf" to Magic, a huge change... It would make the FB essential on wraiths I think!
@@intothewestpodcast it would add some risk, and fun if you hit your own model! Also I feel like line of sight for magic gets ignored often because you don’t need to check for in the way