How Should High Elves be Played?

[Wildling04]

You sum up the weaknesses pretty well, but I think there is one to add that causes the high elves to lack reliability necessary for tournament play:

No real defense against psychology with the exception of two magic banners, one chariot choice that is very expensive, and a dragon (again very expensive). Dark elves are the weakest of the the three in this regard you listed but even they have 2 units that are immune: witch elves and black guard. In addition they have the hydra for terror, cold one knights and a chariot that are fear causers. Mount a lord on a cold one and you have another inexpensive way to make another unit immune to fear. All of this is without dipping into their magic item allotment.

All that said, I agree with much of what you said regarding high elves and the fact that they are more effective than people complain. I just point out the dark elves because they face some of the same difficulties that we do but have some major advantages.

[Lord Anathir]

Anyone who thinks that high elves are a 'bottom tier' army are just trying to make excuses for their poor play or trying to make their good play more than what it is.

I cant speak for anyone else, but I think I'm a damn good general and I am 100% convinced high elves are severly handicapped.

What exactly is your game plan against 2 steam tanks and war alter, 4 units of knights and 4 cannons?

against 40 jezzails, 2 cannons, 3 ratlins hiding behind hills and 4 mages?

against 3 stegadons, engine, slaan, mounted solo scar vets(with t5, 1+ save, bsb, 1 time 2+ ward), 10 terradons that fly from wood to wood and drop rocks on chariots and stuff?

against dragon+unkillable lord, 2 hyrdas, manticore, 40 harpies, dark riders, coldone knights, chariots?

against 8 chukkas, 2 doom divers and 4 mages?

and finally, how do you get the same army list to do okay against most of those setups, and vampires/daemons as well?

[Marinero]

Thats okay marinero, we can agree to disagree.

Good, let's do some arguing

But I'd like to add a few more points in here.

1) Marinero you are mistaken. I have been comparing extreme high elf builds to extreme builds of other armies. [The dragon is still probably the best build, but lizards, skaven and dwarfs take it down easily, and vampires and tomb kings can tie it up easily. Empire and dark elves also have the missile fire to kill it with a little bit of luck based on their lists, and magic high elves can beast cowers it every turn.] I have to compare the most extreme army builds of every army because that is what I see in tournaments around here. I am jealeous of gamers with tournament environments that have restrictions or penalties on these types of armies.

Well, here I again do not agree with you. A typical stardragon list that I run has 2xlvl 2 with the banner of sorcery and 3 scrolls, 2-3 chariots, 2-3 dragon princes, rbts and eagle(s). With this set up, my magic defence is more than adequate to protect me for at least 3 turns, by which time the dragon, dragon princes and chariots have usually made short work of his army.

I have lost my stardragon only once legally and two times illegally - legal death:
* I got overly confident and and allowed a brettonian lord on hyppogriff, who was tooled for challenges and killing large beasts to charge me, and he killed the dragon, then the prince. This was at the time that I fealt the stardragon is immortal and I was testing its limits

Illegal deaths:
* In a torunament, a cheating daemon player had skulltaker do 3 wounds on the dragon before the prince slew him (which he could not normally do, as his attacks a flaming and the dragon was immune to flaming attack because of the dragon armour), and because of these wounds, the prince lost combat by 1, failed his Ltd test, and was run down by a unit of daemonettes (that had skulltaker in them) - as you see a very unlikely situation indeed.
* A VC player from my club, who has the habit of bending the rules creatively. In this particular case, I had my prince charge his lord's unit in the back, and with the ToL my prince and dragon did 8 kills. I won combat by 11, the VC player had 8 models before crumbling, and he decided to transfer more wounds on his lord, rather than the rank and file first, gambling on this ward save, something that he is not allowed to do, as it turned out after tha game- he managed to keep one model alive, next magic phase he resurrectec the champion, challenged my lord, bogged him in combat until his reinforcements arrived, and I lost the prince and dragon. Had it been played by the rules, I would have challenged his lord the next turn and killed him.

As for the dragon being shot to death, yes if you parade him infront of every enemy with a gun, cannon or MM, for a couple of turns, he will be killed. In my experience though, the enemy has a very limmited opportunity to hit my dragon before he slams into combat. Usually 1 turn, and usually from a flank, thus limmitting his line of sight, and ability to fire at the dragon.

Finnally, I preffer non-composition tournaments, as they allow greater flexibility and options. However, I gladly participate in comped environments, as long as the restrictions are reasonable. I.e I would not go with my HE in a tournament that has 40% min core, but would take my wood elves there instead.

So, no, the stardragon does not really struggle against the armies that you mentioned. Of course, if you do a foot slogging army and put a stardragon in it, then you might suffer. However, stardragons work best in fast armies.


2) There SHOULD be an ultimate army list, or at least an ultimate style of play, that does well against all opponents, providing the high elf players all the tools to defeat anything. Most other armies can generate lists like these. These lists are not point or click, they still require alot of skill, but at least they provide the tools to defeat any opposition, provided the general has the skill to weild it.

I do not think that I would want this. I have a friend, who playes O&G, and while he is very successful with them at tournaments, he is really annoyed by the fact, that any competitive O&G build seems to revolve around a black orc warboss, black orc BSB, 2xlvl2, min 4 chukas and at least 1 doomdiver. So this example illustrates, that when an army has a 'mainstream' way to be built, played and won with, players tend to get bored. Thank god, that our army is not like that and provides for numerous successful builds, that allow for very different styles of play.

cheers all.

I've been having some success with a lvl4/lvl2/mounted bsb tank, 20 spears, 10 spears, 20 pg, 2x5 helms, 6 dp, lion chariot, 2 rbt, 2 eagle army, went 4 wins before losing to dark elves, which is okay but not great. PG provided a nice tanking ability, and helms are great at guarding warmachines (they are better then archers or spears for doing that). I'm not sure the loss to the dark elves is the fault of my playing, or because of deficiencies in the list. He had a lvl 4 on dragon that I could not kill and just picked off support units.

So 4wins 1 loss is accounted for a weak army? Please.. With the list that you have provided, I feel that you definitely have a very good chance to deal with a lvl4 sorceress on a black dragon, even if she had the pendant of Khaleth. Btw, HEvs DE is a difficult and bloody match up, you are not supposed to with 90% of the times against them. And he had a dragon, which in many cases is a big obstacle for players, who are not accustomed to deal with one.

In my experience, successful army lists that I have used so far have revolved around these character set ups:

* Lvl 4, lvl 2, BSB
* Lvl 4, DM lvl2, (BSB)
* Stardragon, 2xlvl 2
* Stardragon, BSB, lvl 1
* Stardragon, DM (lvl2)
* lvl 4 on moon dragon, DM lvl 2
* Prince, BSB, 2xlvl2

All these builds are viable by the way. The difference is the specific appeal to the player very personal and irrational sence of satisfaction from the game with the specific list.

I am following your blogs and reports, Anathir, and I can tell you that you expect an army using heavily spears and with limitted ( the rambling blog) or no (your nagarythe army) fast units to be very successful and competitive. This is a legit approach. However, complaining that based on your experience with handicapped armies, vs fairly competitive armies the Asur are week, is not a very fair statement.

To recapitulate, HE are not about spears only. They can do much more than that.

[Keith]

I agree, Though leadership 10 does help against panic and terror and fear.

There is the matter of weight by fear causers requiring insane courage to stay. This is our biggest problem as we will not have weight very often. A strong endorsement for phoenix guard.

The thing that really makes Dark elves 'better' in tournament play, is they have more viable options for an 'aggressive' list. Their magic is very effective and much more offensive than ours. That and the hydra is amazing for its points. I have found aggressive armies to be better in tournaments.

[Wildling04]

The thing that really makes Dark elves 'better' in tournament play, is they have more viable options for an 'aggressive' list. Their magic is very effective and much more offensive than ours. That and the hydra is amazing for its points. I have found aggressive armies to be better in tournaments.

Agreed here, and their shooting is the most point efficient in the game.

[Keith]

Anyone who thinks that high elves are a 'bottom tier' army are just trying to make excuses for their poor play or trying to make their good play more than what it is.

I cant speak for anyone else, but I think I'm a damn good general and I am 100% convinced high elves are severly handicapped.

What exactly is your game plan against 2 steam tanks and war alter, 4 units of knights and 4 cannons?

against 40 jezzails, 2 cannons, 3 ratlins hiding behind hills and 4 mages?

against 3 stegadons, engine, slaan, mounted solo scar vets(with t5, 1+ save, bsb, 1 time 2+ ward), 10 terradons that fly from wood to wood and drop rocks on chariots and stuff?

against dragon+unkillable lord, 2 hyrdas, manticore, 40 harpies, dark riders, coldone knights, chariots?

against 8 chukkas, 2 doom divers and 4 mages?

and finally, how do you get the same army list to do okay against most of those setups, and vampires/daemons as well?

Oh, my mistake... You are clearly asking a different question.


As an army, we are fine.... You are talking about how our most OTT build compares with other armies OTT builds.

I am not talking about trick armies, I am talking about warhammer.

If you want to play games where the outcomes are almost predetermined based on matchups, you are welcome to, but that doesn't have anything to do with what i was talking about.



Are you really unsure of how to beat the DE lord on a dragon?

KILL THE DRAGON, then he runs away.

The best place for the unkilliable DE lord is in a blackgaurd unit with ASF banner.


Book balance is not determined by what the stupid trick armies can do.

If that is really your game, why don't you just buy one of the most powerful armies and make the best list. Helves aren't in the top three, so why even bother?


Against Skaven, all of the scary shooty units are on a 7 leadership AT BEST. You cause terror. besides, if someone really wants to spend 480 dollars on their jezzails... let them.


just use teclis to pit of shades those engines... what is there initiative again?




But the point is, if you are going to play against stupid lists, and that is how you value books and grade 'balance' why are you even on these forums. What makes high elves even relevant. The faction you are playing shouldn't matter, just make the best list EV4R with what ever book you need to make it with, then make another one in a few months when the next book comes out.

When you take the stupid lists out of the game, then things are far more balanced. I understand that lists like those will show up at tournaments, and if you want to be one of those guys, more power to you. I am not, and i don't really care if you don't like that High elves are Rock and Paper just got a lot better. Deal with it.

Good luck in ard boyz in a few months or whenever it is.

[superhighelves]

If some of you can take your time and think more, you'll see the pattern. No, it's not an excuse for playing poorly. Look at the picture.

When HE first came out, we were #1. After VC and Demon came out, we were # 2 and # 3. After DE came out, we are # 4. It seems to me that we are always one step behind a new book.

Some of you may argue that it happens because HE book is 'old'. My counter-arguement is why do some 'old' army books still stay where they are at?

At this point, we are not sure how WOC and lizzardment armies are because they are brand new. We'll know the result this summer. What will happen if we can't compete with WOC and lizzardment?

IF HE continues trailing behind a new book whenever it comes out, HE is going to be the WEAKEST book in the 7th edition. Please don't compare ourselves to Org because they are not '7th' edition book.

[Lord Anathir]

Oh, my mistake... etc

You are new here so I forgive your [CHOP] oh behave...

If you didnt know before, I am one of the biggest spear toting fluff bunny high elf players on this site.

I'm not sure what country you are from, but where I live there is 0 composition, and everyone brings the most downright nasty and competitive list they can to every game, even friendlies. I don't really have a choice in this matter. The alternative is to not play the game at all, which is not something I'm willing to do.

What I have been trying to do, is find a high elf list that can defeat the min/maxed power lists without going down that same road myself.

[superhighelves]

where I live there is 0 composition, and everyone brings the most downright nasty and competitive list they can to every game, even friendlies. I don't really have a choice in this matter. The alternative is to not play the game at all, which is not something I'm willing to do.

You and I live in a tough neighborhood. When it comes to tournament or friend games, our composition score system doesn't exist here. My local GW store allows it to happen.

Even if somebody try to tell us to score our opponent army list, we always give everybody A+ whether we win or loose because it's an issue that we 'understand' that it's legal if it's in the book. It's a punisher: war zone movie if you know what I mean.

I don't mind it at all when everybody in my club is doing it. However, a small problem which I have with some of these cheesy aholes is they never acknowledge that their list is the worst when somebody say something about their lists.

For example, there is a guy who writes a hard core and SUPER CHEESE army list for EVERY ARMY which he HAS his hand on. It's fair to say that if he can't create a cheese army, he won't buy it. It's that simple. He's known for doing it in the league and friendly games.

When you want to play a game with him, he always tells you how nice he is and he gives you an option to choose which army list he is going to use. You don't know that you have a choice, do you? Whatever choice you make, he is going to CRUSH you.

What I have been trying to do, is find a high elf list that can defeat the min/maxed power lists without going down that same road myself.

In the past, some HE players probably criticized me for using certain X units because it was not cool. I realize that these units are necessity.

You do what you got to do to keep your hobby alive.

[Wildling04]

What I have been trying to do, is find a high elf list that can defeat the min/maxed power lists without going down that same road myself.

No offense meant, but it's a bit counterintuitive isn't it? We call the lists that can do this "cheesy" or "broken" especially when those armies do then min/max their list.

I understand your pain here, and count myself lucky that in my area we have very competitive gamers but very much hate "net-decking" or winning the game in the army builder phase. I'll freely admit that if I were in your area and worried about those lists constantly I wouldn't be playing Warhammer.

Lord Anathir, I do appreciate your efforts to try and make the list better and find what works; I think what I find frustrating is that some simply complain every chance they get about the list and it doesn't really do anything constructive.

[Wildling04]

If some of you can take your time and think more, you'll see the pattern. No, it's not an excuse for playing poorly. Look at the picture

IF HE continues trailing behind a new book whenever it comes out, HE is going to be the WEAKEST book in the 7th edition. Please don't compare ourselves to Org because they are not '7th' edition book.

I think that this discussion, regarding who has the better army book, etc. is pretty much worthless at this point. We should probably all agree to disagree and just move on to discussing strategy and tactics we find effective or specific problems we are running into.

[Keith]

Oh, my mistake... etc

You are new here so I forgive your insolence.

If you didnt know before, I am one of the biggest spear toting fluff bunny high elf players on this site.

I'm not sure what country you are from, but where I live there is 0 composition, and everyone brings the most downright nasty and competitive list they can to every game, even friendlies. I don't really have a choice in this matter. The alternative is to not play the game at all, which is not something I'm willing to do.

What I have been trying to do, is find a high elf list that can defeat the min/maxed power lists without going down that same road myself.

I've been around for a while, I just take breaks from forums.

I just think you should mean what you say, and say what you mean. You were not talking about 'balance' and power comparisons of the army book. You were talking about one narrow window of the game. 0 comp armies are often all about matchups. This army can beat that army which gets beaten by the next army. The trick with a lot of them is, if you can counter them, or lure them into a trap, they are completely done for. I have noticed a lot of 0 comp players don't bother thinking 2-3 turns ahead, because they assume you will be off the table by then!

That is not to say that everyone who plays a total cheese army is not a good general, i just have to imagine that the good players would get bored with playing a completely over the top army. Where is the challenge?

A good way to get around this in freindly games is to try to play different point values. Often you can force someone to try to figure out what to take out or add. When it isn't just cut and past some past UK GT winner's Dragon list (which i see on these boards a lot) they don't know what else to put in or take out.

If you really are such a fluff bunny, why are you complaining that our broken stuff isn't as broken as other broken stuff.

My freinds and I generally play 'hard but fair' lists. For example, my freind's empire list is 1 steam tank, archlector on the pope-mobile, 1 unit of knights, 2 cannons, and infantry. Hard, yes. Broken, not even close.

He only switched to the arch lector and flaggelents because he was having trouble beating bad players playing vamps.

My basic high elf list is as follows.

3 bolt throwers
2 units of 18 spearelves
1 unit of 12 sword masters, FC, banner of ellyrion, amulet of light
1 unit of 18 phoenix guard, FC, banner of sorcery
1 lion chariot (sometimes 2)

1 lvl 2, silver wand, dispell scroll
1 lvl 2, seer staff
Eltharion (on foot)

I have a few things to swap in and out. But that was my 'basic' list.
Hard, I think so, I have three bolt throwers, and 3 lvl 2 mages, but hardly over the top. The only hesitation i had about it was that eltharion is a special character, but i love his fluff and i broke down his points. He is a prince with 100 points of equipment, plus the cost of being a level 2 wizard. so point wise i think he is right on the money.

I don't have any fliers or terror causers, nor any cavalry. It is an infantry army and I have done very well against Vampires and deamons with that list. Just two weeks ago, i played a 2000 point version of the list against a VC with two units of 5 wraiths and banshees and 4 vampires.

I lost half points on one wizard due to a miscast causing a wound and that was all.

I don't like the high elf trick armies. They don't do it as well as other armies. That is a fact. It isn't that it isn't powerful enough, it is that it is too expensive for what it does. The best high elf lists are not terribly offensive in nature, that is the sad truth. Dark elves are, Demons are, VC is. That is the difference.

We are the defenders of Ulthuan, start acting like it.

You are warhammer players, start acting like it. Stop baiting.

[Tirrith]

praising bait is'nt a worthy praise

[Greenkrieg]

I think there are a lot of problems with our book compared to others. A few that I think really hurt us is our lack specific tools to counter the new books. Which is natural because those specific threats weren't around when our book was written. However every army since then has had something in it to deal with our list. For example the ring of hotek and the tzeentch spell pandemonium which are obviously counters or book of hoeth. We just dont have anything in our arsenal to make a powerful part of a new book completely useless like they do to ours. Another main thing is I believe that our magic defense is weak. They gutted our two best magic defense spells, old Drain Magic and Fortune is Fickle, and gave us nothing to replace it. Not only that gave those spells to other armies.

[babalubeaga]

We are the defenders of Ulthuan, start acting like it.

Props Keith, you make a lot of sense.
I too have been toying around with going all infantry and leaving the Dragon at home. The Eltharion on foot is a nice character and none too cheesy, I might try him myself, but I do love the home-made prince on foot: GW, AoC, VoD....hard as nails and hits like at truck....first.


Greenkreig: I can hardly agree with you on our magic defense being weak. The old drain magic spell was way overpowered, the new on is more reasonable and stacks. +1 dispel is extremely handy and our scrolls are 5pts cheaper than most. I tend to think our power dice generation and spell defense capabilities mentioned above are way above the norm out there right now. Coupled with some of our good caster items we can have a very effective magic phase, it just takes a couple of mages to do it, but there is nothing wrong or underpowered about that.

[Keith]

Really, I use Eltharion because he gives me two characters in one slot.

I don't find that High elves should be fielding 4 characters in 2k-2250. 2500 sure, but i just think points are at such a premium in our army.


Now a lot of people don't like that our army in defensive in nature. But lets take a look at what that means.


Defensive does not mean that we sit back!!!

With strong shooting and good magic support, I am not suggesting we play our armies like we a dwarves. Which would mean we sit in our deploment zone and don't even move certain units.


Defensive (ASF) means that we do not care if we are charging or not most of the time. This means our main advantage is that we can align our troops for maximum benefit. This is the strongest part to our army! We can set up the battle line the way we want to.

Generally, I advance on turn one, making sure i am in range for spells, and ensuring that if the other player is defensive, that I will certainly get to him. I have no problems retreating from this advance should the opponent commit to coming at me full steam.

[Ramesesis]

You are painting stuff too black, SHE.

First, HE cannot be the weakest book in the 7th ed. cause that place is taken by Orcs & Goblins.
I would also say that Empire per see is weaker, but Empire can compensate with flexibility and firepower. Still, HE is stronger, but way narrower.

[Lord Anathir]

You were not talking about 'balance' and power comparisons of the army book.

Thats is exactly what I'm saying.

You were talking about one narrow window of the game.

While this may not be the case in other parts of the world, around here that IS the game. There is no alternative. If you are not playing competitively, why even bother tweaking your list, why even care about what you take! Just take the nicest models, the units you think are coolest, or whatever you have painted the best. Go out and try sure, but win or lose you're just having fun and not playing seriously.

But remember this. Part of being a good general is the army list you take. The list you take and how you use the list are equivalents, parts of the final product that is your game result. There are army lists that can NEVER defeat other army lists, no matter who is using them. Whose fault is that? Well its the losing general's fault, because he took an army that didnt have the tools to beat all comers lists. And once lists are edited it starts an arms race that usually culminates in power gaming lists.

Even with your composition rules the concept is the same. If there is a max 10 power dice rule and there is an army that has a certain reliance heavy magic how many power dice will he take? Well, 10 of course. Anything less then the cap means the phase isn't as effective is it can be and the army will suffer. If dwarf players were limited to 3 warmachines would they take 2? or 1? No! They'd take 3 (setting aside the offensive lists).

So, by using that logic the players around here can not be faulted for the armies they use. It is primarily the problem with the army books written, that allow for such options, and secondarly the tournament rules that don't provide any restrictions.

0 comp armies are often all about matchups. This army can beat that army which gets beaten by the next army.

Thats right, they often are. But what is the alternative? Having a balanced army that is a jack of all trades that doesnt have enough of a 'counter' to the achilles heel of a 0 comp army because their points are spread around all phases? I don't think thats a better method.

The trick with a lot of them is, if you can counter them, or lure them into a trap, they are completely done for. I have noticed a lot of 0 comp players don't bother thinking 2-3 turns ahead, because they assume you will be off the table by then!

A trap? What are you talking about? You can't trap a gunline. Not army lists can be trapped completely.

That is not to say that everyone who plays a total cheese army is not a good general, i just have to imagine that the good players would get bored with playing a completely over the top army. Where is the challenge?

The challenge is when 2 good generals play each other, with both understanding there is no holding back and everything is legal.

If you really are such a fluff bunny, why are you complaining that our broken stuff isn't as broken as other broken stuff.

If everything is at even power level nothing is broken. Think about that.

My freinds and I generally play 'hard but fair' lists. For example, my freind's empire list is 1 steam tank, archlector on the pope-mobile, 1 unit of knights, 2 cannons, and infantry. Hard, yes. Broken, not even close.

I see, like the lists we used in Canada.

My basic high elf list is as follows.

3 bolt throwers
2 units of 18 spearelves
1 unit of 12 sword masters, FC, banner of ellyrion, amulet of light
1 unit of 18 phoenix guard, FC, banner of sorcery
1 lion chariot (sometimes 2)

1 lvl 2, silver wand, dispell scroll
1 lvl 2, seer staff
Eltharion (on foot)

This list does not work because it can not defeat dwarfs, even balanced dwarf lists can destroy 1-2 rbt a turn and then pound your infantry. Your units don't have the speed the get there and the magic is not enough to get around the 7dd+2 scroll defense.

Tomb kings also hurt your list, your poor magic defense means hes going to get 4 catapult shots a turn. If you advance with your troops you leave rbt vulnerable to scorpions and carrion. Only 1 unit in army can take a charge from his bus unit if he charges the front. With all the magic hes got he shouldnt have any problems getting the flank.

That army also doesnt work against brettonians, who have enough armor to take the rbt damage (only an average of 3-4 knights a turn at close range). Their average lances break spears on the charge, add in a hero and they break the swordmasters. Grail knights with a lord break the PG. You've got no speed to threaten pegusii knights, and absolutely nothing to kill the 50 skirmishing bowmen shooting your swordmasters every turn.

Even the other armies that it doesnt have a such bad matchups against can pose problems, empire with cannons and xbows that take our your rbt leaving the steamtank free, dark elves with hydras and lizardmen stegadons and mounted bsb's that can solo charge your spears and swordmasters and consistently win combat. (t5, 0+ save 4st5 attacks, +1 combat res from the flag and immunity to fear because of cold one. Even if flanked by Pg hes got a good chance of sticking around thanks to coldblooded.)

I don't like the high elf trick armies. They don't do it as well as other armies. That is a fact.

Thats right

It isn't that it isn't powerful enough, it is that it is too expensive for what it does. The best high elf lists are not terribly offensive in nature, that is the sad truth. Dark elves are, Demons are, VC is. That is the difference.

I'm not entirely sure what the best high elf lists are so I can't comment on that. Thats sort of what I'm trying to find out.

------------
Wildling: I know what you mean, but a problem, as keith mentioned, is that high elf power lists are not as good as other army's power lists, which leaves me search for balanced list alternatives.

Green: Good observation on weak magic defense. I've noticed for a while, and it really hurts because even with 2 overpriced mages the best we can do is 4dd and 4 scrolls, and they are just dead weight against dwarfs. 1 mage is very risky and all we left with if we take 3 combat heros or a dragon and bsb.

[Keith]

You were not talking about 'balance' and power comparisons of the army book.

Thats is exactly what I'm saying.

No. It is not. Elaborate next time please

You were talking about one narrow window of the game.

While this may not be the case in other parts of the world, around here that IS the game. There is no alternative. If you are not playing competitively, why even bother tweaking your list, why even care about what you take! Just take the nicest models, the units you think are coolest, or whatever you have painted the best. Go out and try sure, but win or lose you're just having fun and not playing seriously.

That is what I did. I decided that Eltharion was to be my general, which meant a Tor yvesse force. They are renowned for their spearmen, so i took two units. Saphery is right nearby and sent two mages along with a contingent of their body gaurds (sword masters). The phoenix king sent some of his personal gaurd since Tor Yvesse's defenses have been depleted by battles, (phoenix gaurd). Bolt throwers are going to be in any defensive force. Also, I like lion chariots and chrace is also right nearby. But you know what? It works, pretty effectively too.

But remember this. Part of being a good general is the army list you take. The list you take and how you use the list are equivalents, parts of the final product that is your game result. There are army lists that can NEVER defeat other army lists, no matter who is using them. Whose fault is that? Well its the losing general's fault, because he took an army that didnt have the tools to beat all comers lists. And once lists are edited it starts an arms race that usually culminates in power gaming lists.

I agree, the list you bring is part of your generalship, it should be effective, it doesn't need to be made to pound everyone else in the least about of time possible. But be careful here, are you seriously suggesting that it is the guy who brings the weaker list's fault that he lost? Not the guy who completely forgoes everything else and takes a WAAC list? If so, I think i know why there is no comp in your area, and you are part of the problem.

Even with your composition rules the concept is the same. If there is a max 10 power dice rule and there is an army that has a certain reliance heavy magic how many power dice will he take? Well, 10 of course. Anything less then the cap means the phase isn't as effective is it can be and the army will suffer. If dwarf players were limited to 3 warmachines would they take 2? or 1? No! They'd take 3 (setting aside the offensive lists).

Wow, interesting, I don't recall posting 'my' composition rules for you to take apart. But nice to see you made some up. The best way to do composition is to say 'Bring what ever you want'. Then the TO or a group of fantasy vets not playing will score the lists on a 1-20 scale. painting is another scale of points, then there is also sportsmanship. And of course, Battle points.

Most good tournaments end up with about a 50-50 split, Battle is half of your overall score, and the other half is painting, composition, and sportsmanship. I do not believe in setting limits for what people can and cannot take, and i agree with you that it doesn't work either, it only makes everything less fun.

But in the above senario. Lets say you and I end up with the same painting score. You brought a 13+ PD Vampire list, and received a zero for your comp score. I brought a pretty infantry heavy empire list with a warrior priest, two level 2 wizards, and a captain, one steam tank, one unit of knights and two cannons. Not even close to the same level. You score a 1/20 because you didn't take the helm of commandment. I scored a 14/20. (I am just making these up for now as an example).

each game is on a 15-10-5 scale for battle points with 15 to the winner, regardless of margin of victory, there are also 5 bonus points in every game, with objectives, ect... This system makes for a better game, as you do not need to run your opponent off the table to score max points and there are other objectives availible to make for a more tactical game.

Due to our difference in comp scores, you could go undefeated and I could lose one game, and it would come down to who scored more objective points overall. Lets say i barely edge you out going 4-1 and you go 5-0. Do you think that you had the more challenging task or i?
But don't worry! You went undefeated and scored the most battle points, so you win best general instead of best overall. [CHOP] manners please...

So, by using that logic the players around here can not be faulted for the armies they use. It is primarily the problem with the army books written, that allow for such options, and secondarly the tournament rules that don't provide any restrictions.

No, that is a strawman argument and you made up what i said. The books are written to allow things. People around here will actually give you a hard time if you play a total WAAC army. A freind of mine bought tzeench DL and it was insane. I had no interest in playing it. I would play against him in a tournment if it came down that way. But I am not going to play it in a friendly game. I simply do not own the models to beat it. So why waste my time? If you want things to change, you need to change them, not talk about how you want to make a list that is good enough to beat WAAC lists, without being a WAAC list, not that there is anything wrong with WAAC lists. You are trying to have it both w
ways and you just need to stop.

0 comp armies are often all about matchups. This army can beat that army which gets beaten by the next army.

Thats right, they often are. But what is the alternative? Having a balanced army that is a jack of all trades that doesnt have enough of a 'counter' to the achilles heel of a 0 comp army because their points are spread around all phases? I don't think thats a better method.

This is exactly where my problem with no comp tournaments are. It is luck of the draw. If you are playing rock and you draw scissors, rock, scissors. you are going to do far better than the rock that drew paper, scissors, paper. IT doesn't matter how good of a general you are.

The trick with a lot of them is, if you can counter them, or lure them into a trap, they are completely done for. I have noticed a lot of 0 comp players don't bother thinking 2-3 turns ahead, because they assume you will be off the table by then!

A trap? What are you talking about? You can't trap a gunline. Not army lists can be trapped completely.

you seem so obssesed with gunlines. Yes, they are the high elf weakness, but they are hardly the best lists overall.

That is not to say that everyone who plays a total cheese army is not a good general, i just have to imagine that the good players would get bored with playing a completely over the top army. Where is the challenge?

The challenge is when 2 good generals play each other, with both understanding there is no holding back and everything is legal.

no, then i just depends on which army you bought. there isn't that much of a challenge.

If you really are such a fluff bunny, why are you complaining that our broken stuff isn't as broken as other broken stuff.

If everything is at even power level nothing is broken. Think about that.

That is irrelevant, it is not now, nor has it ever been GW's intent to 'balance' every army. Certain ones will work better against others. That is just how it is.

My freinds and I generally play 'hard but fair' lists. For example, my freind's empire list is 1 steam tank, archlector on the pope-mobile, 1 unit of knights, 2 cannons, and infantry. Hard, yes. Broken, not even close.

I see, like the lists we used in Canada.

That does not seem like what you described at all. adding a second steam tank and then dropping the infantry for more knights seems to be what you guys play.

My basic high elf list is as follows.

3 bolt throwers
2 units of 18 spearelves
1 unit of 12 sword masters, FC, banner of ellyrion, amulet of light
1 unit of 18 phoenix guard, FC, banner of sorcery
1 lion chariot (sometimes 2)

1 lvl 2, silver wand, dispell scroll
1 lvl 2, seer staff
Eltharion (on foot)

This list does not work because it can not defeat dwarfs, even balanced dwarf lists can destroy 1-2 rbt a turn and then pound your infantry. Your units don't have the speed the get there and the magic is not enough to get around the 7dd+2 scroll defense.

Tomb kings also hurt your list, your poor magic defense means hes going to get 4 catapult shots a turn. If you advance with your troops you leave rbt vulnerable to scorpions and carrion. Only 1 unit in army can take a charge from his bus unit if he charges the front. With all the magic hes got he shouldnt have any problems getting the flank.

That army also doesnt work against brettonians, who have enough armor to take the rbt damage (only an average of 3-4 knights a turn at close range). Their average lances break spears on the charge, add in a hero and they break the swordmasters. Grail knights with a lord break the PG. You've got no speed to threaten pegusii knights, and absolutely nothing to kill the 50 skirmishing bowmen shooting your swordmasters every turn.

Even the other armies that it doesnt have a such bad matchups against can pose problems, empire with cannons and xbows that take our your rbt leaving the steamtank free, dark elves with hydras and lizardmen stegadons and mounted bsb's that can solo charge your spears and swordmasters and consistently win combat. (t5, 0+ save 4st5 attacks, +1 combat res from the flag and immunity to fear because of cold one. Even if flanked by Pg hes got a good chance of sticking around thanks to coldblooded.)

That is funny. Why even bother mentioning dwarves? They are not a top competitive army, you shouldn't consider them when making your lists and just hope not to draw them, there shouldn't be many anyways.

I have done fine against tomb kings. You don't need to stop every spell my friend.

It is laughable that you think i will have a hard time with bretts... I guess, yes, if i let him do everything he wants to i will lose. But I won't. Bolt throwers do great against all knights. Yes, they have an armor save, but we aren't talking about a 25 model unit, there are only 6-9 models.

Besides, you seem to be assuming i won't be getting magic off. Which is rediculous.


My list isn't made to go toe to toe with the super rediculous armies. I never claimed it did. But I do damn well with it and i don't sit at home wondering how i can make it the best. Nor to I blame my army book when i lose.

I don't like the high elf trick armies. They don't do it as well as other armies. That is a fact.

Thats right

It isn't that it isn't powerful enough, it is that it is too expensive for what it does. The best high elf lists are not terribly offensive in nature, that is the sad truth. Dark elves are, Demons are, VC is. That is the difference.

I'm not entirely sure what the best high elf lists are so I can't comment on that. Thats sort of what I'm trying to find out.



Well, you can listen, and I'll explain the best lists to you, but i suppose you'll have to suffer my insolence a bit longer if you want the final answer.
Had you just written "manners" ...please.

[superhighelves]

I think there are a lot of problems with our book compared to others. A few that I think really hurt us is our lack specific tools to counter the new books. Which is natural because those specific threats weren't around when our book was written.

They actually were but nobody bothered to address the issues because they thought that we had enough 'tools' to deal with them as we go even though they were limited.

Even if you find a tool which you want to use, the point cost is OVER the top.

In the HE army book, things either cost too much or are limited.

We are the defenders of Ulthuan, start acting like it.

It's easier said than done. It's the life of Elf.

[GobbladasSquig]

In the HE army book, things either cost too much or are limited.

Well, if you go and have a look at the O&G -armybook, you'll find that everything is relative. Also, I'm not sure which of your "things" are limited, I'd actually say HE have one of the armybooks with the least limitations.

And people, calm down, no use fighting over this topic. I've seen people with balanced lists doing well in and even winning tournaments with no comp and tournaments with comp scores. I've also seen lists that exploit and abuse the tournament environment, be it with or without comp, and win all their games. I've seen people try to exploit it and fail, losing half of their games.

Apart from list building, the tournament road is always also about match ups, dice and skill. My philosophy in all the tournament jazz is that taking a balanced list and playing fair will give you enough karma points to ensure you do pretty well. And if you don't win the tournament, there's often a fair play prize to be won.

[Lord Anathir]

I agree, the list you bring is part of your generalship, it should be effective, it doesn't need to be made to pound everyone else in the least about of time possible. But be careful here, are you seriously suggesting that it is the guy who brings the weaker list's fault that he lost? Not the guy who completely forgoes everything else and takes a WAAC list? If so, I think i know why there is no comp in your area, and you are part of the problem.

Thats right, it is the fault of the general who lost. He didnt have the tools in his list to deal with the trick army.

The whole country plays without composition. When I lived in Toronto we played with composition.

Wow, interesting, I don't recall posting 'my' composition rules for you to take apart. But nice to see you made some up. The best way to do composition is to say 'Bring what ever you want'. Then the TO or a group of fantasy vets not playing will score the lists on a 1-20 scale. painting is another scale of points, then there is also sportsmanship. And of course, Battle points.

Settle down, I was just making up a hypothetical composition guildeline to illustrate that people will take as much of a good thing as they can. The arms race is natural regardless of what composition setting you play in.

But in the above senario. Lets say you and I end up with the same painting score. You brought a 13+ PD Vampire list, and received a zero for your comp score. I brought a pretty infantry heavy empire list with a warrior priest, two level 2 wizards, and a captain, one steam tank, one unit of knights and two cannons. Not even close to the same level. You score a 1/20 because you didn't take the helm of commandment. I scored a 14/20. (I am just making these up for now as an example).

each game is on a 15-10-5 scale for battle points with 15 to the winner, regardless of margin of victory, there are also 5 bonus points in every game, with objectives, ect... This system makes for a better game, as you do not need to run your opponent off the table to score max points and there are other objectives availible to make for a more tactical game.

Due to our difference in comp scores, you could go undefeated and I could lose one game, and it would come down to who scored more objective points overall. Lets say i barely edge you out going 4-1 and you go 5-0. Do you think that you had the more challenging task or i?
But don't worry! You went undefeated and scored the most battle points, so you win best general instead of best overall. Isn't that what you and your WAAC freinds want anyways?

I agree with you 100% I would never bring a cheesy army list to a composition tournament. Certainly the empire player who went 4-1 deserves to win the tournament.

Let me try to make myself perfectly clear.
a) There are no scores for anything around but battle points
b) The gamers have no say in how the tournament is scored.
c) Please dont call me a WAAC gamer. I use 10 silver helms in my army ffs.

No, that is a strawman argument and you made up what i said. The books are written to allow things. People around here will actually give you a hard time if you play a total WAAC army. A freind of mine bought tzeench DL and it was insane. I had no interest in playing it. I would play against him in a tournment if it came down that way. But I am not going to play it in a friendly game. I simply do not own the models to beat it. So why waste my time?

Thats a good point, and when I moved from Canada I had to adapt my list to the gaming environment.

If you want things to change, you need to change them, not talk about how you want to make a list that is good enough to beat WAAC lists, without being a WAAC list, not that there is anything wrong with WAAC lists. You are trying to have it both ways and you just need to stop.

Here is where we disagree. First of all I have tried without success to have the rules changed here to allow composition. Second, I think there is a way to make a list handle WAAC without it being WAAC. I try partly because I like fluff lists and dislike playing the WAACy stuff, and partly because I don't think the high elf power lists are all that great anyways.

This is exactly where my problem with no comp tournaments are. It is luck of the draw. If you are playing rock and you draw scissors, rock, scissors. you are going to do far better than the rock that drew paper, scissors, paper. It doesn't matter how good of a general you are.

Maybe, yet I look at the UKGT finals and the same names are in the top 20 or so every year.

you seem so obssesed with gunlines. Yes, they are the high elf weakness, but they are hardly the best lists overall.

Well I seem to draw one every tournament...

no, then i just depends on which army you bought. there isn't that much of a challenge.

I've been around the hobby for a very long time and I have never seen a gamer guy a book and spend time painting and collecting models just because its the strongest list out there.

That is irrelevant, it is not now, nor has it ever been GW's intent to 'balance' every army. Certain ones will work better against others. That is just how it is.

Hence my constant complaining about the low tier high elf book.

My freinds and I generally play 'hard but fair' lists. For example, my freind's empire list is 1 steam tank, archlector on the pope-mobile, 1 unit of knights, 2 cannons, and infantry. Hard, yes. Broken, not even close.

I see, like the lists we used in Canada.

That does not seem like what you described at all. adding a second steam tank and then dropping the infantry for more knights seems to be what you guys play.[/quote]
I don't live in canada anymore dude. The lists I've been describing are ones I see here in Malta.

That is funny. Why even bother mentioning dwarves? They are not a top competitive army, you shouldn't consider them when making your lists and just hope not to draw them, there shouldn't be many anyways.

They do fine around here. 60 missile troops, 10 warmachines and anvil does well against pretty much everything.

I have done fine against tomb kings. You don't need to stop every spell my friend.

Then you aren't playing against a competent general. Does he not have a priest on horse, a flying priest, a combat lord + prince on chariots? Does he not keep them within 12 of one another, with the casters in a fast cav unit and the heros in the chariot bus with the +1 to hit banner? Does he not cast a game winning movement spell with every mage and with the jar on that unit turns 3/4? Does he not cast that movement spell with every mage on carrion for turn 1 charge on your mages or rbt? The very essence of tomb kings is defined by capitializing on not dispelling every spell and making you pay for it.

[CHOP] Your post was fine, and constructive till this end part... Don't do such things in the end L_A...

[Keith]

Look man, I think we agree on more than we disagree.

As to flames, [CHOP] As for flames, you do not point out what you consider another player doing when its not constructive, that is in turn flaming. Keep it civil or I will keep an axe to your post.
Yes, the TK player i play has the jar, yes he tries to cast the same spell over and over again.

But as you mentioned, turn 3-4. and which unit is he charging? I will give up certain units to win a game. Any unit actually. I generally (hopefully) have dealt with some of the threats i am facing at that point.

I do not play tactically inept people. I commonly play in a group of about 8 people and 2 of us made it to the final round of US 'Ard Boyz which is the most OOT no comp tournament that they have. I missed the cut of the final round by 2 points and finished fourth. Tough luck for me.

Yeah, it is the same 20 names at the top of UKGT, but you will probably notice that they get shuffled around. The Draw affects this. Just as in any tournament. Do you think of those 20, that there is a huge disparity in the skill level? I don't. Who they play, and what army they draw is a huge factor in the outcome.


Dwarves are generally considered to be one of the weakest armies in Warhammer right now. So you know you are facing dwarves and cannot beat them, I don't see how you can claim you are a good General.
See, I left the above part intact to give you an example of what NOT to write in the future. Do not claim a person to be a bad general on something as untrustworthy as "general consensus". If you wish to critize someone for being a bad general, point to the mistakes they may make NOT to that "you can't beat X with Y then your a bad general. Thats just flaming. Cut it out.

The current consensus is that Deamons and vampire are on top. I don't think anyone will argue. Third is dark elves. Some people are already saying lizardmen are 4th, but i think it might be a little early to decide that. The general thought is that high elves and empire are next.


This is the opinion of US GT players, not my own.

This is an example of "hearsay", quit it, "US GT" players are not equealing the truth or even an valid opinion, if you write something then write what you believe and why you believe it. Not what you think that a select group believes.

That you believe something to be true, does not make it so

You post lists all the time on this site. I see them. I don't think any of them are WAAC. And yet... you seem to do well, very well in fact. In the WAAC environment of Malta, how exactly is your shadow warrior army winning? Are you the one playing people without skill.

You claim that people only play insane lists where you live, who are you testing these soft, well themed lists against? I don't see how both statements are true. I have never insulted your skill, it is your attitude that bothers me. You can request whatever you want of the lore-masters, but this isn't your 'private' thread, it is in a public forum, and plenty of other people who have posted on it seem to think i have things to say worth listening to.


It is you insulting me and the people i play against. Why is it that I am telling you, 'here is the list i play, I do very well with it' I never claimed it would beat a OTT army. Though I am sure I can, depending on which one we are talking about. You can't even consider that maybe I outplayed someone. I never said 'i beat tomb kings every time i play' I said i don't have trouble with them. Meaning that I don't worry about them, I have good games, I see no reason to change my list based on my experiences against that army.

You seem to infer a lot of extra meaning from what i say. A lot of it is wrong. Please stick to what I am saying.

I like to win, I don't try to crush people unless the point scale of a tournament encourages it.

[Marinero]

[CHOP] Please do not tell any specific poster to do something emotionally laden, that will just cause more flames. Thank you.

[Ruerl Khan]

ATTENTION

Now that I have your attention ladies and gentlemen:

Keep the insults down, if you don't start playing better with each other i'll let you cool off outside the forum till you remember the code of conduct.

Here is the simple thing:

1) Attack a persons arguments, not the person.
2) Don't use "it is the general belief that" write what YOU think and WHY you think it. Be constructive.
3) Don't follow the "i'd accept being treated like this so..." logic, we have different standards, if I for example feel insulted and ask you to cease, then cease, even if you think i'm touchy. Same goes for going at any other poster. We have different standards.

Got that? Good *tosses the ball back into the game*

Have fun.

[Gondarion]

Dwarves are generally considered to be one of the weakest armies in Warhammer right now. So you know you are facing dwarves and cannot beat them, I don't see how you can claim you are a good General.

Tournaments are the entire reason for this viewpoint and its propagation, and even the tourney veterans will say its not that Dwarves are weak, its that they struggle to win big (and thereby amass major battle points). They're unlikely to either win or lose big, and unles you're Daemons or VC I'd bet the latter is more likely.

[Wildling04]

Dwarves are generally considered to be one of the weakest armies in Warhammer right now. So you know you are facing dwarves and cannot beat them, I don't see how you can claim you are a good General.

Tournaments are the entire reason for this viewpoint and its propagation, and even the tourney veterans will say its not that Dwarves are weak, its that they struggle to win big (and thereby amass major battle points). They're unlikely to either win or lose big, and unles you're Daemons or VC I'd bet the latter is more likely.

Definitely agreed on the dwarves, but most people are looking at this from a tournament mindset, or playing the same exact list against a variety of armies. Whether this is good or bad is entirely perspective. For me, only about 5% of my games (if that) are tourney games, so I'm realizing my perspective on the HE list is probably far different as my lists are often tailored to some degree to my opponents'. Of course, the same is true for them.

[superhighelves]

You are painting stuff too black, SHE.

First, HE cannot be the weakest book in the 7th ed. cause that place is taken by Orcs & Goblins.

Well, if you go and have a look at the O&G -armybook, you'll find that everything is relative. Also, I'm not sure which of your "things" are limited, I'd actually say HE have one of the armybooks with the least limitations.

The truth really hurts! We need to accept the reality. It's what it's.

Orcs has always been the 'weakest' army in the game even though it's fun to play them. If you truly want to compare HE with another army, it doesn't make us feel any better when you tell us that we are behind Orc.

Who would have thought that an army with Star Dragon and ASF rules could be the weakest army in 7th edition? Nobody sees it coming.

And people, calm down, no use fighting over this topic. I've seen people with balanced lists doing well in and even winning tournaments with no comp and tournaments with comp scores. I've also seen lists that exploit and abuse the tournament environment, be it with or without comp, and win all their games. I've seen people try to exploit it and fail, losing half of their games.

Apart from list building, the tournament road is always also about match ups, dice and skill. My philosophy in all the tournament jazz is that taking a balanced list and playing fair will give you enough karma points to ensure you do pretty well. And if you don't win the tournament, there's often a fair play prize to be won.

The results of different tournaments tell us that HE army is not competative as some HE players claim because HE isn't being pushed down whenever a new army book comes out if we are that good.

When you celebrate a HE victory here, please remember that it's a minor one because one victory isn't good enough to change the status quote.

[Tirrith]

Lord Anathir,
I think, looking at your playing environment, that magic is the way to go.
I would use a level 4 (Silver Wand), Level 2 (Seer Staff), Level 2 and Banner of sorcery, maybe add bound items as well.

The Dragon is a Rock/Paper/Scissor option IMO. The magic flexibility we have is our best shot at an "all comer" list.

Yes, magic is fickle but we have to live with it.

Against a Dwarven gun line, such that you described, I would hide the bulk of my army behind terrain and let magic do the work. Ok, he has 7 DD and 2-3 scrolls, but you will get spells through. If the opportunity appeared I would stack one flank, trying to kill his "softer" troops and play for the minor win.

Take Metal against Brets and WOC, High magic against TK's and VC's. You know which lore's best suit opposing armies.

But as I said, I believe magic is the way to create an all comer list.

Cheers.

[Wildling04]

The results of different tournaments tell us that HE army is not competative as some HE players claim because HE isn't being pushed down whenever a new army book comes out if we are that good.

When you celebrate a HE victory here, please remember that it's a minor one because one victory isn't good enough to change the status quote.

OK, SHE, I think that most of us understand your perspective and that we need to move on as this discussion has run its course. I'm not sure what you are wanting from us at this point. Even if we agree with you (and I am not saying we do), where does that get us? More complaining? That seems a very productive use of this site

I'm not saying that you have to agree with those of us that consider high elves competitive, either, but move on and try to be more constructive. Otherwise, I think those of us that are trying to be constructive will tire of the whining and hyperbole (Star Dragon part of the weakest list? Come on...)and move on.