Librarium Online Forums banner

Runesword vs. Axes of Khorgor

2K views 9 replies 6 participants last post by  jONESIE 
#1 ·
I'm quite sure this has been handled before, but...

Has anyone done the math on this? I have a Doombull led army and used the Runesword on SEVERAL occassions. I know it's expensive, but it works and if Doombulls were allowed Magical armour people would be using the whole 100 points anyways, so in my mind I'm 30 points to the good. Lately I've started using the Axes of Khorgor, because it's a game and you should have fun with it. I noticed though that I actually like the axes better! I don't miss the extra WS, strength 5 is usually enough and I still have the extra attack. But, I'll tell ya, the look on my friends faces when I rarely miss because of re-rolls is pretty darn good. There must be a way to figure out if these are better or worse against X unit, statistically speaking. Can someone figure this out? I play against Dwarves, DE and WE, by the way.
 
#2 ·
Well, for my part I think the runesword would be more helpful against tough and armored opponents (i.e. dwarves), but not as useful against low or medium toughness troops who are lightly armored (i.e. wood elves).

Hopefully DotR will be along soon to hit you with some mathhammer, but I think the rerolls will serve you well enough most of the time. The extra WS won't matter a bit against most opponents, and the extra strength would mostly be helpful in negating armor saves. The lower strength may hurt from time to time, but being able to reroll to hit could be very helpful.

In the end, I usually leave the decision down to the coolness factor - a doombull swinging axes just seems cooler than one with some dwarf-forged blade
 
#3 ·
Assuming that you're hitting on 3's vs rank and file troops, average rounds for:

Runesword:
4 hits
3.33 wounds vs either T3 or 4
Elves will get no save, so 3.33 wounds
Dwarves will save on 6+ (only if they're in full tank mode), taking 2.78 wounds


Axes of Khorgor:
5.33 hits
4.44 wounds vs elves, with a 6+ save they take 3.7 wounds
3.55 wounds vs Dwarves, with a 5+ save at their tankiest they take 2.37 wounds


So Cyric was right. But the differences are so minor you're likely to never notice. Take the Axes, less points and ++cool factor
 
#5 ·
I say it depends on what you want your character to do (and who your character is) The axes cost quite a bit more. When I take the Rending sword, I feel I can still challenge anyone and make some serious overkill points even if he saves one of the wounds because of the D3 wounds. I can also take some other things like shield,armor of damnation and crown of horns so my guy is protected. You can't do that with the axes. Reroll is awesome, but that 65 pts of reroll. I would only take the Axes with a doombull, not a beastlord.
 
#7 ·
Where is the fun in using mundane weapons? With all due respect, this is a FANTASY game! As I said earlier, if a Doombull could take anything with that 100 points, you would see some pretty maxed out Doombulls stomping around. A Doombull, or ANY General for that matter, shouldn't be caught dead with a regular weapon.
 
#10 ·
To be honest, I never used Axes due to Decievers statement. I like to go with the Slaughterers Blade and Helm of Many eyes, and keep the Rune Sword (Axe:p) for a Mortal Lord. No tjust his chariot option, but because of his better 'rank file' killing stats for anything better than stock standard infantry. He breaks whole units!

Slaughterers Blade and Helm is usually sweet. Then again, a doombull with Killing Blow is no cup of tea either:p Going really cheap can be to just take Helm of Many Eyes and Great Weapon, with risks of course:D But I dig Slaughteres Blade for walking peeps of Lord status:p
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top