Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Ok, I would just like to know a answer to the question, how has 6th edition warhammer screwed the beasts of chaos list (not taking into account Hoards- just the BoC)?
On many forums I have had read loads and loads of comments about how they are now ruined, and to be honest through all the time I have played them in the new rules I can honestly see no evidence to support this.
So if possible could LO members get together to point out as many reasons why the list has been ruined, or not ruined depending on your opinion
wow. now that was interesting
This is a part where i'm ment to 'big up' my clubs forum-
Marvel at its brilliance
Marvel at its sheer scale
Marvel at the 6 core posters
I think what most people are upset about is how the Beastmen rank up when they attack. In the Army Book, it says that they must rank up a minimum of four wide against a target that they can't use more ranks against (say, a lone character, or the flank of a two rank unit)). The problem with that is, you need ranks of at least five models to count as ranks now, ranks of four won't give you extra rank bonuses for your combat resolution in 6th edition rules. Four wide ranks were good enough in 5th.
You mean 7th ed.
7th ed hasn't ruined BoC. It does make them more vulnerable to being charged by narrow units (i.e. 50mm) units, but the 5 wide rule solved a number of issues with horde armies and their over-reliance on narrow units denying opponents attacks (and winning through static combat res alone).
BoC suffered, of course. But they were hardly screwed - the online community does so love its over-emotive analysis of any given situation. Against normal units Beast herds work pretty much as they always did, although they need a few more models to get their ranks Gors and Ungors are hardly the most expensive models out there.
So while BoC took a bit of a hit, herds are still a pretty good unit and the army as a whole is solid.
Cheap core chariots, anyone?
Having an army and not owning a rulebook is like owning a car with no steering wheel.Originally Posted by amishcellphone
While I'm hardly an expert, I hardly consider Beasts to be ruined, regardless of the changes between 6th and 7th editions...
While the lack of ranks is rather annoying when fighting the side of units etc, you should still be getting more attacks and the flank bonus, which is essentially leaving the fight down to casulties...
However, from my experiences playing, throwing a single Herd into combat will generally achieve very little. The army as a whole works by using several units together to outmanoeuvre and surround your enemies, giving you charges from several directions at once, which means that I very, very rarely end up with my game relying on me beating a unit with a single beastherd...
What I'd like to see is an FAQ saying that we rank up at a minimum of 5, to get rid of those pesky occasions, and to bring the book up to date (assuming the writers original intent was that beast herds should always get ranks), but it isn't really game-breaking.
minus_t's painting log! Now with: More Wolves and Blue Robots!
Last updated 09/01/11
"Never before has another man made me want to go out and buy vasaline"~The Paint Monkey
"All I can remeber is Hazard stripes and -T's dusty brushes. ~danjones87
I would say that having the Gors and Ungors in a single unit ruins it, I might consider using BoC in my Mortal army if I could have a unit of just Gors rather than having pointless cartoon devils with spears following them
I kind of like the idea of Ungors in the beast herd. They provide a nice meat shield when being shot at. And if neither you or the enemy breaks on the first round of combat, you'll have a few extra attacks on the second round if you have few enough Gors.
No, I don't have any wool.
We have a house rule where I play that beast heards rank up 5 across. The initial intent of the rule was to give them ranks when they were charged by a narrow front or charged a narrow flank. Granted it doesn't work for tournies... unless we run a tournie and we play with our house rules, which are few and are all for the spirit of the game.
I wouldn't say they were ruined, but there are some annoying nerfs:
-We've already touched on the 4 wide minimum being useless against single models. A beastlord with Great Weapon helps in this situation though, esp if it's a chariot...
-Ambushing took a huge hit, with the stupid way that skermishers re-enter the table. It's now far too unweildly to ambush bigish herds like i used to, say 18-20 strong. 20 models in in long line on the board edge just leave no room for toher ambushers...
-Even though the change to skermisher movement was a good one, Beasts hurt the most from it, again with ambuhsing. They just can't get very far from that board edge once on...
It's a real shame what GW are doing to such a cool army at the moment. First the 7th ed nerf, now the same thing with Daemons and Mortal seperate armies. An FAQ would be great, esp if it contained all the Hordes magic items, still useable by Beasts. Extremely wishful thinking i feel, though.
That said, Beasts are still quite playable, just to be competetive, there's going to be a streamline of certian builds. For one, no Beastlord will enter play without either Crown of Horns, or Rune of the True Beast, of you'd be silly. Slughterer's Blade and Chaos Armour become no brainers as well. Except for a few more, not much else will see use in a competetive list.
Lucky for me, though, I'm going to get to play with my shiny new Mortals and Daemons for a while.....gotta finish painting my darn beats still!
So BoC herds now get no rank bonus when charging?