| The One Ring http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/ |
|
| So are warbands the new status quo? http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=23506 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Shieldmaiden [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | So are warbands the new status quo? |
I'm painting up a Rivendell army for display mainly, but I might be tempted back into the game when The Hobbit comes out. Who knows, I might even enter the GT next year! What I wanted to ask was whether Warbands are the new basis for playing games - in store, in tournaments? They feel a little restrictive to me, which kinda takes away from one of the USPs of LotR, which was no 'squad' limitations. |
|
| Author: | BlackMist [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
It is the new standard. In all honestly it doesn't limit you at all because in many scenarios everybody sets up together and it just gives you a few more heroes instead of boring forces like Legolas and 70 elves. On the other hand it gives you unlimited ally options unlike LoME. 1000pts is also the new standard for GT. |
|
| Author: | whafrog [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
BlackMist wrote: 1000pts is also the new standard for GT. Is there an official model limit? Or can you take 120 goblins led by 10 captains? |
|
| Author: | SouthernDunedain [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 5:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
it was 75 models at the last doubles tournament across both armies (which were 500ea) so i'd guess it'd be that. Might change it for the singles though. |
|
| Author: | BlackMist [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 5:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
As far as rumours from good sources go it will now be 1 army, 1000 and no limits other than the ones in the books, so 33% bows and you can have 100+ goblins if you want. |
|
| Author: | SouthernDunedain [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 5:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
BlackMist wrote: As far as rumours from good sources go it will now be 1 army, 1000 and no limits other than the ones in the books, so 33% bows and you can have 100+ goblins if you want. when you say 1 army, is that for singles so either one good or one evil? or is that for the doubles? |
|
| Author: | Shieldmaiden [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
When I said it felt limiting, I think I meant purely to an Elf player... it just got a whole lot harder to mix High Elves and Wood Elves. Example - I was considering my 33% bows to be made up of Wood Elf Archers, as they're cheaper than High Elf Archers, and I'd be keeping them out of combat anyway. I'd have them with Arwen, probably. However, now I can't do that - I have to take Wood Elf warriors and a Wood Elf hero, and reduce my High Elf Spearmen to compensate. I think Warbands really helps tactically, but doesn't do much for Elf players or those wanting to keep within a reasonable lore - if I wanted Cavalry, for example, why would I stay within theme and take Galadhrim Knights when I should be able to take a horse for my High Elf @ 10pts, or failing that, just ally in some Dol Amroth! I was actually considering converting some Cavalry out of Dol Amroth and High Elves, but from what I've heard GW are really strict about using the specific models these days and wouldn't let me use the Galadhrim profile for them. I realise Heavy Cavalry + Galadhrim defence doesn't mesh either, but it'd look a hell of a lot better than fielding Galadhrim Knights with my predominantly High Elf force. |
|
| Author: | GothmogtheWerewolf [ Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Ypu can mix Galadhrim with Wood Elves. Also, Wood Elves and High Elves were nevet in the same list in LoME either. And all armies - except horde armies 9which will be larger) - will be smaller. |
|
| Author: | Sticky Fingersss [ Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Warbands really speed up gameplay as they now deploy much closer to each other. It just means the average army points have to be increased because of so many heroes. |
|
| Author: | theniffrig [ Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Hi, I've been away from the hobby for afew years & the last "big" supplement I got was Legions of Middle Earth. I never bought the War of the Ring or battlehosts. I see GW has released 5 new books this year and people here and in other posts have mentioned "Warbands" alot. When I used to play, the standard points game was 500pts. Afew questions I have: 1)So what exactly are these new "warbands"? Just 1 hero + 12 warriors? 2)If I buy one of these new books to say start a Dwarf army/warband, will I have everything I need rules wise? (considering I already have the Hardback rulebook) 3)Anything else I should know as a returning player? Cheers! |
|
| Author: | Elessar Telcontar [ Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
1) Yes. A warband is any Hero and up to 12 Warriors from the same army as the Hero (these are in the new sourcebooks; Minas Tirith, Durin's Folk, Mordor, etc.). The exception is Independent Heroes (marked with a little flag in the new book), who may not have any Warriors in their warband. 2) Yes. The big rulebook and the sourcebook(s) with army/armies relevant to your models is all you need. 
|
|
| Author: | Ukfreddybear [ Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
theniffrig wrote: 3)Anything else I should know as a returning player? You can take as many warbands as you wish, provided they all have one hero and 12 or less warriors, upto whatever points value game you are playing. |
|
| Author: | Beowulf03809 [ Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Sorry to threadjack. I've been away from GW for a while enjoying Flames of War and some other historicals. But I'm itching to get back to Middle Earth in SBG. I'm just trying to get a grasp on some of the changes from the last several months...knew this is the place  and it looks like this thread is already on the same topic so...I looked at one of the new books at our LGS. Part of my cringed a bit at some of GW's new creations but I've come to live with that  . It doesn't seem like the warband lists are very hard to get a grasp on. I'm REALLY let down that they took so many steps back though and opened up the whole ally-anything flood gate. I can happily say our local players will still probably stick to LoME (or at least use it as alliance guidelines with warbands).Are there any other significant SBG rule changes with these new books as well or is it just the new profiles and army lists but all the same core rules (movement, spells, MWF, fighting, etc.)? As always, thanks in advance! |
|
| Author: | whafrog [ Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Welcome back Beowulf! No other changes than the army configurations, and if you have a good gaming group you can easily keep alliances thematic. The really big deal are the new scenarios, you will find this thread incredibly useful: http://www.thelastalliance.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4723 |
|
| Author: | Beowulf03809 [ Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Thanks for the link whafrog (and good to see you again, so to speak). It was a good read. I'm at least encouraged that the core rules didn't change and it seems once the deployment phase is done the 'warband' concept isn't enforced any more. Was concerned we were seeing a move of SBG to a formation/squad based game. This does seem to make games faster. That was never our biggest concern nor was arrow-spam. But for tournaments and getting more friendly games in on an evening this looks like a reasonable change. And it helps shake up tactics a little which is always nice. I do wish they kept some Tolkien theme to warband allies but you can't expect too much from GW on that front. They started SBG with pure GvE, and went back to that for WotR. LoME was the one shining example. I look forward to reading more experiences from "old timers". |
|
| Author: | Beowulf03809 [ Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
Trying to catch up on messages I'm seeing a couple comments about things being nerfed under the warbands (Erkenbrand was one example that came up in a couple posts). So there are some profile changes with the new books too? Is there a list here that I haven't found of at least what had significant changes? Edit: never mind...don't know how I missed: http://www.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22352 |
|
| Author: | NotLegolasJustTipsy [ Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
I'm new to Warbands, and have painted and collected quite a few armies, which armies are good in this SBG game? |
|
| Author: | Telchar [ Sat Sep 01, 2012 3:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
I actually quite like the good-versus evil alliance system, as it allows you to pick profiles from other factions that suit your models (for instance, I'd use Haradrim raider profiles for my Dunlending Riders), and if you want a themed force, make one, there's nothing to stop you. |
|
| Author: | Raspberrygoop [ Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So are warbands the new status quo? |
"Lothlorian and Mirkwood" is an army list. It is found in "The Free Peoples" rulebook. I could legally use Haldir or Celeborn to lead a warband of Mirkwood elves or have Legolas lead a group of Galadhrim. But as "Eregion and Rivendell" is a different army, I cannot pick Glorfindel to lead Mirkwood elves. Keep in mind that the 33% limit on bow-users applies for each contingent separately. Where each contingent is made up of one or more warbands from the same army list. For example: I want a United Elven Realms army, I pick Legolas to lead a warband of elves from Mirkwood and Arwen and Glorfindel to each lead a warband from Eregion. I cannot have all of Legolas' elves wield bows—even if none of the Eregion elves have bows, because the 33% limit applies to each army separately. At most, 33% of Legolas' elves can have bows, and at most 33% of Arwen and Glorfindel's elves can have bows, distributed however you like between their warbands. Also, the new format looks pretty cool. (Though I find it less easy on the eye) |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|