| The One Ring http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/ |
|
| Overpowered Harad http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22771 |
Page 4 of 4 |
| Author: | BlackMist [ Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Maybe it's the case of your opponent being better than you, rather than his army being overpowered? I just don't understand why do people assume that an army is overpowered just because they can't beat the player who uses their army? It's a very similar thing that often happens to me with dice - I can't count how many times people have blamed bad rolls because they lost the game, while most of them don't realise or don't want to realise that they're just being outplayed. Last time I moaned about dice was for 30 minutes after my loss to the eventual 2010 GT winner (I was 2nd in that one). But then I realised that I moaned only because I was too arrogant to say that I had been outplayed by a better player. After that I never again moaned about dice or about the army any of my opponents ever used. One has to learn how to lose, only then one can become a winner. |
|
| Author: | mastermanje [ Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
BlackMist wrote: Maybe it's the case of your opponent being better than you, rather than his army being overpowered? I just don't understand why do people assume that an army is overpowered just because they can't beat the player who uses their army? It's a very similar thing that often happens to me with dice - I can't count how many times people have blamed bad rolls because they lost the game, while most of them don't realise or don't want to realise that they're just being outplayed. Last time I moaned about dice was for 30 minutes after my loss to the eventual 2010 GT winner (I was 2nd in that one). But then I realised that I moaned only because I was too arrogant to say that I had been outplayed by a better player. After that I never again moaned about dice or about the army any of my opponents ever used. One has to learn how to lose, only then one can become a winner. I completely agree, looks like we have another veteran here online. |
|
| Author: | The newbie [ Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
I've used a few 'pure dwarf' lists in the new rules and I've yet to lose with them. But then I've not been up against GT style armies. Woodelves are still as competitive as ever. Multiple call winds ruins wraiths on fellbeast and can neutralise threats reasonably quickly. |
|
| Author: | mastermanje [ Mon Mar 26, 2012 7:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
The newbie wrote: I've used a few 'pure dwarf' lists in the new rules and I've yet to lose with them. But then I've not been up against GT style armies. Woodelves are still as competitive as ever. Multiple call winds ruins wraiths on fellbeast and can neutralise threats reasonably quickly. Haha, it's so good to see all that mighty nazgul trying to get to your archers,but then being pulled back by the wind. |
|
| Author: | Valamir [ Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
@mastermanje- Yes, indeed, BlackMist is quite the vet in ME. And it is always interesting fighting armies that are geared for being the best in a given situation. Harad, in this case, is a capable force, but is not, I think, overpowered. |
|
| Author: | MeatBoy1994 [ Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
BlackMist wrote: Maybe it's the case of your opponent being better than you, rather than his army being overpowered? I just don't understand why do people assume that an army is overpowered just because they can't beat the player who uses their army? It's a very similar thing that often happens to me with dice - I can't count how many times people have blamed bad rolls because they lost the game, while most of them don't realise or don't want to realise that they're just being outplayed. Last time I moaned about dice was for 30 minutes after my loss to the eventual 2010 GT winner (I was 2nd in that one). But then I realised that I moaned only because I was too arrogant to say that I had been outplayed by a better player. After that I never again moaned about dice or about the army any of my opponents ever used. One has to learn how to lose, only then one can become a winner. I've never played vs. Harad, but I PLAY Harad; and I just havent lost yet!! It seems, to me, to be simply the best army to play. Thats my opinion |
|
| Author: | Draugluin [ Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
BlackMist wrote: Maybe it's the case of your opponent being better than you, rather than his army being overpowered? I just don't understand why do people assume that an army is overpowered just because they can't beat the player who uses their army? It's a very similar thing that often happens to me with dice - I can't count how many times people have blamed bad rolls because they lost the game, while most of them don't realise or don't want to realise that they're just being outplayed. Last time I moaned about dice was for 30 minutes after my loss to the eventual 2010 GT winner (I was 2nd in that one). But then I realised that I moaned only because I was too arrogant to say that I had been outplayed by a better player. After that I never again moaned about dice or about the army any of my opponents ever used. One has to learn how to lose, only then one can become a winner. He isn't better than me, I've beaten him more than enough to prove that, with the only reason I lose is because they have such high defence+high fight+good courage+great heros+they cost less than an uruk-hai, who has worse stats. Obviously a pt of fight can be be better than a pt of str depending on who you fight, but you still can compare them as being equal in value, you just have to choose which stats would be better in which situation. |
|
| Author: | Valamir [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Excellent analysis, Drauglin. Having used uruks against elves a myriad of times, I find that my fight value tends to be obsolete, except for the captain. but yes, it is a situational analysis. |
|
| Author: | BlackMist [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Draugluin wrote: with the only reason I lose is because they have such high defence+high fight+good courage+great heros+they cost less than an uruk-hai, who has worse stats. So you do realise that Dwarf is better than an Uruk Hai in a vacuum. However you seem to fail to adjust your army accordingly. It is futile to use uruks against dwarves, while you can have warg riders (cavalry is the dwarves' biggest nemesis) and orcs with much higher numbers. You also fail to notice that uruk hai captains are amazing against dwarves: F5 with S5 with a spear and pike support means easily 2 dead D7 models per turn. Combine them with orcs and cavalry and you'll see that you'll have an edge. Basically as it stands it seems like you're trying to beat rock with scissors instead of paper (quite literally orcs can help to overwhelm the rock, while your S4 scissors are wasting their strength). If you were to post an army list then I'd be happy to comment further. Again, dwarves are not overpowered, you just have to learn how to beat them and what tools to use. Just like with any other army. Edited for the purpose of fixing the quote marks |
|
| Author: | mastermanje [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
BlackMist wrote: [Qoute="Draugluin"]with the only reason I lose is because they have such high defence+high fight+good courage+great heros+they cost less than an uruk-hai, who has worse stats. So you do realise that Dwarf is better than an Uruk Hai in a vacuum. However you seem to fail to adjust your army accordingly. It is futile to use uruks against dwarves, while you can have warg riders (cavalry is the dwarves' biggest nemesis) and orcs with much higher numbers. You also fail to notice that uruk hai captains are amazing against dwarves: F5 with S5 with a spear and pike support means easily 2 dead D7 models per turn. Combine them with orcs and cavalry and you'll see that you'll have an edge. Basically as it stands it seems like you're trying to beat rock with scissors instead of paper (quite literally orcs can help to overwhelm the rock, while your S4 scissors are wasting their strength). If you were to post an army list then I'd be happy to comment further. Again, dwarves are not overpowered, you just have to learn how to beat them and what tools to use. Just like with any other army.[/quote] omg, how many good posts of you will we see the coming time?! You're always right imo. |
|
| Author: | Draugluin [ Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
I don't have any orcs because I lack the fundage to buy any. If I could drop one of the uruks strength for more of them, I would. But I can't. I do have a lot of goblins, and they have won several games, however, the fact still remains that dwarves are underpriced. |
|
| Author: | The Horde Lord [ Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
I have always thought the dwarves were underpriced becasue they didn't have a spear option. Similar to have harad used to be underpriced. Also as I have before, the expensive troops need to be underpriced since the cheaper troops benefit more from the fact that the basic 3 3 3 1 1 3 profile is underpriced. Uruks are exceptions, but their captains are 5 points underprice if I remember correctly. Besides, I don't really see the problem, you both need 6's too wound, you have equal fight, but you have access to support and can move longer so you can choose your fights. It's only fair that they are one point cheaper. |
|
| Author: | Pindergorn [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Dwarves are also slower (5" movement). Perhaps movement is an oft-overlooked stat when comparing points values. |
|
| Author: | Draugluin [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
The fact that I can move a mere inch more and support is more than compensated for the fact that he can have more dwarves. And he has more courage, meaning he'll stick around longer. And an inch of movement apperently costs half a point, seeing as Mauhur and Gildor's upgrades cost 1 point for 2 inches of movement. |
|
| Author: | The Horde Lord [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
No, going from 4 to 5 or 5 to 6 inches definitly costs 1 point seeing as these are the most important ones. "He can stick around longer" You do know that you have accsess to Ugluk, Saruman and Shamans right? I don't really get how numbers can be a problem for you 2x Uruk Hai Captain w/HA and shield 120 points 1x Shaman 60 points 32x Uruk Warriors w/ some weapon 320 points. 500 points 35 guys. No Dwarf player can top that if they include their belowed heroes or dire needed elites and banners. And if they don't include those, they will definitly loose. |
|
| Author: | BlackMist [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
And yet again I will say this: You cannot objectively compare 2 models in a vacuum. If you were then for the price of 10 Uruks you can get 11 Dwarves. Not a game breaking difference to start with. Now look at it practically: a warband of Ugluk and 12 Uruk Hai costs 180pts, which is the same as a warband of Gimli and 10 Dwarves - you already have a 2 model advantage. Of course Gimli is better, but Ugluk has a great special rule, 3 Might and cuts through Dwarves at the same speed as does Gimli. Now have a look at sample army lists in 500pts and you'll see that in reality Dwarves will have by far lower numbers than any decent 500pts Isengard lists: Basic Army lists: Gimli Balin Dwarf Captain 29 Dwarves with shield, bow or 2 handed weapon Total 501 for 32 models. Of course you are free to play with 2 warbands and a model count of 26 (which is pretty terrible for such a slow force with no versatility whatsoever). This can go against the most basic list of: Ugluk Vrashku Lurtz 32 Uruk Hai with equipment That is the simplest example, but while Dwarves can't really do any other combos, here's a bunch of things which Isengard can do: Example 1: Ugluk Vrashku Lurtz 12 Uruks with Shield 18 Orcs with Spears 6 Berserkers 498 with 39 models (advantage of at 6 models) Example 2: Ugluk Lurtz Sharku on a Warg 11 Warg Riders with shields 11 Uruks with Shields 12 Orcs with spears 500pts, 37 models with 12 cavalry that will annihilate the slow unsupported dwarves units. ==================== I hope you see what I mean now. By saying that Dwarves are underpriced, you are saying that they are overpowered, as one is exactly the same as the other. Both terms refer to a model too powerful for its price. Are Dwarves overpowered then given the above lists? Not in a million years. Of course you can also play a following list: 3 Captains 36 Dwarves with equipment 504 points with 39 models But then you're not using any of your good heroes, you're down by 3 Might compared to the Isengard list, your list is boring as hell and your list isn't going to be any good against a bunch of other good or evil lists that you may be facing. Isengard is only one of your problems, there's always a Moria force with 5 warbands in 500pts, aka. 65 models. There's always a Reaver-based Harad force that will outfight you with 3A F5 against your 1A F4 front line. There's a bunch of High Elf lists which die on 6s, kill on 6s just like you, but have higher Fight value, hence win more combats. Then there's a bunch of Mordor combos, each of 39-52 models, including stuff like a Spider Queen. Then there's even a Rohan force with Eowyn, Eomer and about 24 Riders that will give you a horrible time due to their huge movement. Yes, a Dwarf is overpowered in a vacuum comparison to an Uruk Hai. Great, what now? Nothing, since the game has a million other factors that you need to take into account. Draugluin wrote: I do have a lot of goblins, and they have won several games, however, the fact still remains that dwarves are underpriced. So the Dwarves are underpriced, and yet you're beating them with Goblins, but not Uruks... something's wrong here. If they were underpriced then they would have an edge on everybody, not just 1 specific model. |
|
| Author: | The Horde Lord [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Thank you once again BM for your insight. I really dislike the vacuum comparasant, where you don't factor in spear supprt, banners and friendly special rules. |
|
| Author: | GothmogtheWerewolf [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
BlackMist, a little off topic, but they are in the Harad list, what do you think of the newer Half Trolls? |
|
| Author: | BlackMist [ Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
I think it's a close call between Half Trolls and Reavers, it depends on the rest of your army. If you're using a wraith on FB then often Half Trolls won't give sufficient numbers, so I'd go with Reavers. If not, and you have just a bunch of captains leading the army then Half Trolls are definitely worth looking at. Betrayer on FB 6 Reavers 6 Harad spearmen Captain 6 Reavers 6 Harad spearmen Is 1 point more than: Captain 5 Half Trolls 5 Harad Spearmen Captain 6 Half Trolls 5 Harad Spearmen Is the Ringwraith worth the S5, D6, W2 upgrade? Close call. In 1000pts I wouldn't mind both. |
|
| Author: | Strombole [ Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Overpowered Harad |
Harad is not overpowered... period. I dont think I need to add a big explanation, we have had pages of them already. If you can't beat Harad, make a better list or maybe you just are not as good as he is. If a complete noob can take on a bunch of vets in a row, roll mediocre dice and win every game, then I will agree to them being overpowered. But that isn't the case. The haradrim can and will lose games, just like everyone else. |
|
| Page 4 of 4 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|