So some doom and gloom surrounds the much hated "Ignore all references to Dogs of War in all army books" FAQ. So some of the older army books can't use us and we lose Maneaters and Leabelchers, I still don't think it rules out our list in friendly play at all, but I imagine harder to get into tourneys at this point, especially for some for the anal. But maybe still some out there.
So this thread is to talk about some of the good points for us! I know there is a general 8th edition thread, but it seems to be going on a sour note.
So number one, I have to bring up the magic items and Cannon/artillery rules, and even army complement works in our favour.
Items= great assortment. We'll likely see a rebirth of the Army General as he can use 100 points of some very interesting magical items. You can bring up specific combination's if you like.
Cannon/Artillery Rules are more dangerous for us, our cannons and the Hot Pot are cheaper, and we can take out big wound models a lot easier now
Army complement Our lords/heros are cheap. I can field a lot more 2nd or first level wizards than a lot of armies. If you wanted, you could squeeze a couple lords into a 2250 list I think.
I bought the 8th edition book, love the changes they made. I'm also still a huge fan of our list (a truly unique army), and I wish that GW would put just a tiny amount of effort to keep older options alive. Why release rules, encourage purchases and than destroy it as a legitimate option?
But even if they don't, I still can't be budged from my mercenary urge....
Good points, although not being able to use Ogre Kingdoms stuff is a real blow.
Pistols having a 12" range now makes duellists even better!
The reason the main thread is pessimistic is because the good stuff you mention is all around the edges.
Yes, we have more Magic Items and better Magic, so we're a little less behind those armies with full Army-specific Armories and Lores.
Yes, our Artillery got a little better. Other Arty (Empire / Skaven / Dwarf) got a *lot* better.
Yes, we can field more junk Characters. Of course, we could do that before, via RoRs, so this isn't much of a change. No more Wizard Lord - Asarnil - Truthsayer due to points is a nerf.
Meanwhile, none of our fundamental problems are addressed: unplayable Pike, mandatory dumb boy, etc.
And "ignore Dogs of War" with no FAQ is a slap in the face.
This might seem a little crazy but iv decided to start a Dogs of War army for 8th as i have a few of the models that i collected just for fun but never did anything with them.
So im very interested in any advice from veteran Dogs of War players.
(07-13-2010 02:08 AM)JohnHwangDW Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, we can field more junk Characters. Of course, we could do that before, via RoRs, so this isn't much of a change. No more Wizard Lord - Asarnil - Truthsayer due to points is a nerf.
Meanwhile, none of our fundamental problems are addressed: unplayable Pike, mandatory dumb boy, etc.
And "ignore Dogs of War" with no FAQ is a slap in the face.
I'm not seeing why we can't take a Wizard Lord? I mean 25% lords of 2000 points is 500, that's more than enough for any Wizard Lord we take. So how is it any different from in the past? Other than getting access to some new arcane items and some swanky new lores?
Asarnil and Truthsayer, especially Truthsayer is up in the air on where their points allocation comes from. Honestly, best of all worlds for us would be a 50-50 split (as it won't hamper your characters, or your rare choices). Albion has been disallowed in Australia for ages, so no real loss about the Truthsayer there for me.
Fundamental problems. Well... Pikes got worse, yeah. If a new edition caused something so horribly overcosted to suddenly become ace, I would think there's some huge issues in the edition.
We may have to take the Paymaster still, but his survivability is now upped and he's cheap.
Is it really such 'bad' things if all the new edition bought along was a bunch of pro's, and our crap stuff just stayed crap?
The point is, pre-8E nerf, I'd start by taking *all* 3 as above:
200 pts for Wizard Lord (1 Lord)
460 pts for Asarnil (Hero +Rare)
265 pts for Truthsayer (Hero +Rare)
with Paymaster, that's roughly 1000 pts, or 50% of the 2000 army.
It's really bad that GW appears to have pulled the plug, not even a mention or anything that we still exist.
Personally, I'm not inclined to support Fantasy if GW won't support Dogs of War.
But they separate Lord from character choices. You can have 25% Lord, 25% character slots.
Is there a definite work on how double slotted units cost? Asarnil or Goblin Hewer?
if 25% Lord = 2 Wiz Lords & 25% Heroes = Asarnil, then it might be OK.
Still doesn't fix the rest of the army, tho...
I was thinking the Ignore Dogs of War was just so the 6th edition books came in line with 7th edition (which all removed Dogs of War as a Rare Choice). I believe that the Ogres when their book gets updated the armies will still be allowed as mercenaries in other armies.
(07-13-2010 09:55 PM)BilboBaggins Wrote: [ -> ]I was thinking the Ignore Dogs of War was just so the 6th edition books came in line with 7th edition (which all removed Dogs of War as a Rare Choice). I believe that the Ogres when their book gets updated the armies will still be allowed as mercenaries in other armies.
I could have sworn I saw some 8th edition promo materials featuring Ogres marching with some Empire State Troops. Perhaps it doesn't mean anything, perhaps it's reflecting the Ally rules, or perhaps it means that, as you say, this is just an interim issue between books.
One other change in 8th that I'm very interested to play with is the ranking rules for shooting. While I'm not a tactical genius and it may be worthless when the math is done, blocks of Braganza's Besiegers and the Marksmen of Miragliano suddenly look much more tempting than they ever did in 7th. Since we can now take a handful of mages without worrying about slots, buffing those blocks in the event of imminent combat should be much easier, as well.
I've already based some more of my old skink archers to use as proxy "half-skink" archers, similar to what Tribun did I think with his halfgoblin unit
. Block of 20 is pretty cheap and a good BS should give some wounds out.
And reading the fluff in the 8th edition rule book, they still mention Ogres as a race that loves gold and sells themselves out a lot. I looked specifically for that to see if they wanted to change it to fit their new rule. I assume something else will come down the pipe as well.
And again, if not, no big deal. I can handle the basic Dogs of War Ogres as my "shock trooper unit." Might even try going horde for a spell with the cheap-O bastards!
Our list is still cool because we can put out Dwarves, Halfings, Ogres, Regiments of Renown of all sorts, and some solid basic troops (Cav choices, Duelists, crossbowmen). No army will top the uniqueness of our lists.
(07-13-2010 10:38 PM)Gwyddyon Wrote: [ -> ]I could have sworn I saw some 8th edition promo materials featuring Ogres marching with some Empire State Troops. Perhaps it doesn't mean anything, perhaps it's reflecting the Ally rules, or perhaps it means that, as you say, this is just an interim issue between books.
Hired Swords scenario. Basically a portion of your force are supposed to be mercenaries, and bad stuff happens occasionally as they may betray you.
Ogre Man-Eaters are there alongside an Empire army, although it's not really specific as it may have been an allied force (But maybe it was that the Empire were taking them as Dogs of War, who knows).
(07-13-2010 01:24 PM)JohnHwangDW Wrote: [ -> ]The point is, pre-8E nerf, I'd start by taking *all* 3 as above:
200 pts for Wizard Lord (1 Lord)
460 pts for Asarnil (Hero +Rare)
265 pts for Truthsayer (Hero +Rare)
with Paymaster, that's roughly 1000 pts, or 50% of the 2000 army.
It's really bad that GW appears to have pulled the plug, not even a mention or anything that we still exist.
Personally, I'm not inclined to support Fantasy if GW won't support Dogs of War.
The fact that your SPECIFIC army build no longer functions in no way nullifies the fact that, as a whole, the Dogs of War gained a fair amount of ground in their level of competitiveness in this edition. Any SPECIFIC army build which heavily relies on a few specific units will suffer when a new edition comes out. It happened to the High Elf Silverhelm army in the change from 6th to 7th, and the MSU Demon force from 7th to 8th.
(07-15-2010 10:01 AM)Shane Wrote: [ -> ] (07-13-2010 01:24 PM)JohnHwangDW Wrote: [ -> ]The point is, pre-8E nerf, I'd start by taking *all* 3 as above:
200 pts for Wizard Lord (1 Lord)
460 pts for Asarnil (Hero +Rare)
265 pts for Truthsayer (Hero +Rare)
with Paymaster, that's roughly 1000 pts, or 50% of the 2000 army.
It's really bad that GW appears to have pulled the plug, not even a mention or anything that we still exist.
Personally, I'm not inclined to support Fantasy if GW won't support Dogs of War.
The fact that your SPECIFIC army build no longer functions in no way nullifies the fact that, as a whole, the Dogs of War gained a fair amount of ground in their level of competitiveness in this edition. Any SPECIFIC army build which heavily relies on a few specific units will suffer when a new edition comes out. It happened to the High Elf Silverhelm army in the change from 6th to 7th, and the MSU Demon force from 7th to 8th.
I'd second this and add that just about every army that wanted a character mounted on a big, flying, terror-causing critter feels the same pain in this edition.
It's legitimate to ask if you still need two lord choice wizards and a hero choice fighter on a dragon in the new environment.
Quote:It's legitimate to ask if you still need two lord choice wizards and a hero choice fighter on a dragon in the new environment.
Unless you REALLY need that one particular spell for your strategy to work, two lord-level wizards in the new edition, for most armies, just isn't even remotely necessary.
(07-15-2010 10:01 AM)Shane Wrote: [ -> ] (07-13-2010 01:24 PM)JohnHwangDW Wrote: [ -> ]The point is, pre-8E nerf, I'd start by taking *all* 3 as above:
It's really bad that GW appears to have pulled the plug, not even a mention or anything that we still exist.
Personally, I'm not inclined to support Fantasy if GW won't support Dogs of War.
as a whole, the Dogs of War gained a fair amount of ground in their level of competitiveness in this edition.
Any SPECIFIC army build which heavily relies on a few specific units will suffer when a new edition comes out.
Are Dogs of War generally "competitive"? The lack of usable Dogs of War block Core or horde options is a resounding "No!" As I see it, Dogs of War appear to be less uncompetitive. That's not something I'd be crowing about. Now, if Dogs of War turn out to be on equal footing with Empire, I'll retract. But I don't see it.
Too bad Dogs of War don't even exist in this edition, didn't even warrant a FAQ. And you're saying I should accept that GW couldn't spare a single page out of that 500+ page Rulebook monstrosity to confirm that Dogs of War still exist as an army?
There's a rather large difference between not "accepting" or being happy that GW didn't update the Dogs or even reference them and claiming (very possibly erroneously) that the army has been negatively affected by rules changes. I don't think anybody is happy about the former, but I don't really see that position being argued here.
I never said that Dogs of War were affected negatively (overall).
I am saying that Dogs of War plusses aren't enough because they don't address core competitiveness concerns.
Also, that I'm *hugely* unhappy with what GW has done, because it appears that we've been effectively Squatted.
I think that if you want your Dogs of War to be competitive, you've always been out of luck and it isn't realistic to expect it to change.
It has never been designed to be a competitive army. Almost all of the parts have always been overpriced, by intention, to prevent possible abuse when mixing with other armies.
From what I can tell, Dogs of War look to be more fun to play under this addition. The benefits of an expanded magic item selection, more freedom in rare and special slots, improved magic lores, and more flexibility in characters seems to outweigh negatives like losing maneaters and other ogre units.
There's not really a great core horde option, but it seems like dwarves, marauders, and ogres (maybe halflings?) could work reasonably well. I know I'm seeing chaos marauders and dwarf warriors described as good choices on other boards.
I'm just going to shut up now.
I wish you guys the best in making Dogs of War work in 8E, I really do.
Right now, I'm just too mad at GW to enjoy WFB for the foreseeable future.
Sorry guys. I really shouldn't have let this get to me like it has.
I apologize to all of you, and look forward to the day when Dogs of War are fully-supported again.
Another potentially interesting rule I've just come across in 8th is that it appears Fast Cavalry can have rank bonuses like any other unit in the new rules and they get the free 12" initial move (though can't charge in turn 1 if they do that). Perhaps that might make our Light Cavalry and some of the not normally used previously RoR usable? Oglah Khan's Wolfboyz might have their uses now and Al Muktar's become less bad.
Pop quiz: How the heck do you beat High Elves now? Their ASF + re-roll to hit is shredding my units before I can even strike!
Throw rocks at his models? They are quite spindly, should break easily
Failing that, crossbows, pistols and more crossbows.
(08-12-2010 04:27 PM)M4cR1II3n Wrote: [ -> ]Throw rocks at his models? They are quite spindly, should break easily
Failing that, crossbows, pistols and more crossbows.
Might work if White Lions didn't have 3+ against missile weapons (as well as their ASF great weapons which combined with their initiative means re-roll to hit, Str6, and on the remote chance that by some miracle you beat them in combat? Stubborn.)
Remember it's not re-roll to hit, it's re-roll failed misses. So Rule as Written means he has the choice to re-roll those hits (failed misses) to see if he misses the second time.
