Relying on Warpwolves is bad for druidic business

[the Sugarwolf]

[QUOTE=VOLK;1505677]

This thread's premise is not very well thought-out.

that was actually more my point. what he said. i like wolds and wolves. i like wolves better visually but, well, duh... look at my name....

[Matthaeus]

Yet before he got to share, we're ripping him a new one. :/

Before he got to share ? The opening post wasn't long-winded enough ?
I like to write long posts myself, but not getting your point across in so many words is a legitimate reason for criticism. Usually in such cases, you include at least a "short/TLDR version" in the title and possibly an intro ; I don't see this being the case here.
Another possibility is that he meant exactly what people are criticising him for.
If it's really that long and cannot be written in one go, then using a word processing software to work on it until you're ready to deliver is a good idea.

[VOLK]

i dont knock any of our heavies. i find use for different ones in different lists. i do generally tend to have at least one warpwolf though due to their sheer bag of tricks factor. my point was more that using warpwolves is not a crutch. and trying to act like they dont exist to uncrutch is about as productive for learning circle as not playing circle. use what works. then refine. to wonder if we rely too much on a specific beast, as was once the case with molik karne in skorne, is one thing. to act like you can rely on an entire genre of models too much(especially when it is your flagship beast race), is ill thought out.

This, I think, is the best answer to this thread.

What's next? "Oh no, you shouldn't use warlocks in your army because they are a crutch!"

[the Sugarwolf]

hahahhahahah, indeed, VOLK. and thanks!

[Calcifar]

Has anyone here, considered, that Warpwolfs only sport 25 health boxes or so and that Def will be for naught with just one headbutt ?

Wolds come with as much as, what, 35 health boxes ?


Even Legion beasts are sturdier than Warpwolfes and those do just as much damage. I dont think that Warpwolfes truly play to or represent the strengths of the druid faction.
Wolds seem more geared towards that, then again, kaya or Kromac wouldnt make much sense with wolds.
It seems to me that the Wold beasts are somewhat underrated among many Circle players and i believe that is where the OP's extreme views stem from.

Also, I like to state that people posting their aggressive counter posts here, stating that Warpwolfs are simply better than the other beast options, dont make themselves look anymore reputable in their opinions. Different choices are just that, different, I find both views misguided.

It's just a question of meta and play style, Eldritch just doesnt like flimsy (dies fast) heavies imo

And to be honest, their damage- output or extra rules are not so "out of this world" that 25 health boxes, for 10 points, feel warranted.
Other factions do just as much if not more damage with their heavies, while having them sturdier.
Concluding out of this to drop the all out offensive play therefore and to focus more on the Circle more unique strengths (think blue control deck in magic for example) , sounds somewhat sensible to me.


And all this flaming is childish really, you people should be ashamed, we are all discussing new ideas about the same faction trying to evolve play, why do you feel there is need for conflict ? Just civilly disagree and reason, dont get personal.


just my 2 cent really.

[the Sugarwolf]

And all this flaming is childish really, you people should be ashamed, we are all discussing new ideas about the same faction trying to evolve play, why do you feel there is need for conflict ? Just civilly disagree and reason, dont get personal.

just my 2 cent really.

the entire way the OP handled this thread from moment one, and before that in the other post where he was commenting ineptly to similar effect, pretty much ruled out civil disagreement and invited conflict. he states his views in an inflammatory fashion and has poor and inconsistent backup for them at best. at the end of the day, i dont think any of our heavies are bad. they all have their place. they fill entirely different niches. ive even had the much maligned shadowhorn pull the move that made winning a tournament game possible so there ya go. we do have some clunker lights here and there... or, maybe i just havent found a way to make them work for me. and while i applaud you for trying to douse conflict, i felt the need to point out that much of the conflicts roots start with the OP, not with the people arguing with the OP... or at least the roots of conflict are equally proportioned. point: hes not exempt from it.

[Blaque]

Has anyone here, considered, that Warpwolfs only sport 25 health boxes or so and that Def will be for naught with just one headbutt ?

For a lot of beasts, that's actually a bad idea. You lose-out on possible charge dice, as well as well as most a warbeast's initial attackis. A Scytehan doing this for instance loses-out on about three potential attacks. Now that still may kill the Warpwolf, but ntoe for the head-butt to even hit a Warpwolf with most non-Cygnar warnouns, it is suggested you boost, meaning even less attacks.

Warpwolves are actually pretty varied in healthy. Stalkers have 25, Purebloods 26, and Ferals/Ghetorix have 28. This is the same as a Cryx or Trollblood heavy, more or less. But DEF 14 really means you either waste initial attacks on the aformentioend head-butt, or hope your less attacks hit often.

There's a lot more nuiansce to the stats it has, I think, than you suggest here.

Wolds come with as much as, what, 35 health boxes ?

Megalith and Woldwardens have 35 and Wold Guardians 30. The former are actually pretty soft, especially Woldwardens, which I think have one of the worst defensive lines in the game for a heavy. Wold Guardians are tough, but not so much that dedicated firepower won't cripple it to nearly useless, I have found.

Even Legion beasts are sturdier than Warpwolfes and those do just as much damage. I dont think that Warpwolfes truly play to or represent the strengths of the druid faction.

Warpwolves are fast, are accurate, do great alpha-strike burst potential, take all our buffs fairly well (from warlocks and animi), are agile, and allow for chicanary with stuff liek Lightning Strike, Ghostly, Berserk, Snacking, power attacks, or even just the occassional fury manipulation-screwing. I think they actually represent the faction fairly well, personally.

Legion warbeasts are actually not that tough inherently, as a note. They are barely harder to hit than Woldwardens and have less wounds. Really only the Carnivean has that. DEF 14 is actually quite a swing, this is also especially on things like Ferals with ARM 18 most of the time, or Stalkers which out-threat nearly everything save Scytheans and even then, we have more way sot speed it up.

Wolds seem more geared towards that, then again, kaya or Kromac wouldnt make much sense with wolds.

How so? What does a Construct do that represents Circle as a whole? Pathfinder, and generally magical stuff. The beasts do some terrain generation or become immovable objects. But we we only have two of them, really (Megalith is more a souped-up Woldwarden and doesnt', to me, play especially different from one other than better stats and animus). If anything, I think for most Circle warlocks, it is best to actually run a mix of things, which is often how I do things. Only Grayle, Kaya2, and Kromac I find myself not bothering with Constructs much of the time, and I only run Krueger2 Themed where I have Constructs-only. The Baldurs, I feel, do swimmingly better with livings, partiicularly Warpwolf Stalkers or Ghetorix.

It seems to me that the Wold beasts are somewhat underrated among many Circle players and i believe that is where the OP's extreme views stem from.

Somewhat. His tone seemed to be, to me, overly contrarian. There's not much to "underappreciate" with a Woldwarden. I know full well what it does and what it is for. And it is not for heavy-lifiting and damage output that a Warpwolf does. It can substittue somewhat with Baldur1, and Wold Guardians hit hard, but as the math ehre is showing, they don't do it on their own a lot, and they need help. Constructs are utility beasts, even Megalith or Wold Guardians (the latter of which I see as actual attrition pieces more). And trying to say one should take one over the other is creating a false dichotomy. You take what works with the warlock best. It just may happen to be a Warpwolf, Construct, or Satyr.

Also, I like to state that people posting their aggressive counter posts here, stating that Warpwolfs are simply better than the other beast options, dont make themselves look anymore reputable in their opinions. Different choices are just that, different, I find both views misguided.

I'll be weird on a debate level here: Just because there are two views, does not mean they are equally valid ways to observe the world. Some minority views are worth investigating and seeing what pans out. But these views don't instantly deserve the compelte equal respect that others do. And there are issues of burden of proof and evidence on statements that the OP was not able to address in a satisfactory matter, I and others feel. And on the "Warpwolves are just better", while tone could be an issue, that they are bad for you is something that, once asserted, requires more proof than initially given as well. And even then, at least some posts as shown in this thread have tried to argue that point, while posts to the contrary have not done so in a way I find satisfying.

It's just a question of meta and play style, Eldritch just doesnt like flimsy (dies fast) heavies imo

Everything is glass-jawed in this game. And again, just becuase he's saying something different doesn't mean he is not opening himself to criticisms as given in this thread. If i say X and someone says Y, this doesn't meman X and Y are afforded the same respect by the dint they are options. X may simply be a more correct and better arguable position than Y.

And to be honest, their damage- output or extra rules are not so "out of this world" that 25 health boxes, for 10 points, feel warranted.
Other factions do just as much if not more damage with their heavies, while having them sturdier.

Nothing in the game does as much for 10pts. as a Warpwolf Stalker with the right buffs, I feel. This is shown with Kromac, either Kaya, and the fact it uses its animus best of the three beasts who have it. Looking at 25 wounds on its own is a bit of a misnomer. It's DEF 14. This means if you want to reliably headbutt it like you said, you might not kill it. If you want to reliably hit it the old-fashioned way, yous till might not. It out-threats most everything base save Molik Karn and Scytheans, who it ties with. We trade some durability for sheer utility and flexibility. And for many folks, that's a good trade.

Concluding out of this to drop the all out offensive play therefore and to focus more on the Circle more unique strengths (think blue control deck in magic for example) , sounds somewhat sensible to me.

And dropping Warpwolves pretty much means you open yourself to being screwed-over by the things that screw harder back, such as Protectorate, Cygnar, and some Cryx. Having less, "Can you deal with ARM 20+ reliably? No? You lose" is generally a good strategy.

And all this flaming is childish really, you people should be ashamed, we are all discussing new ideas about the same faction trying to evolve play, why do you feel there is need for conflict ? Just civilly disagree and reason, dont get personal.

just my 2 cent really.

Descenting opinions aren't flaming, and categorically accusing all those who disagree with the OP as such, or critical of his ways to argue on this thread, is not either. I'm trying to be civil myself. That I come accross as harsh is irrelevant to me, though.

And stuff.

[longgoose]

I love lamp....and all things circle so let's hear the man out please.

[Bakemono]

There isn't much to say that Blaque didn't cover far better than I could. There is nothing wrong, nor would anyone discourage, anyone from suggesting new approaches and mixes. I myself have stated that I like to take a Woldwarden (one and no more than one) with Kromac in 50pt or higher lists. I actually find the extra Rift useful and like to surge at the start of a game in Kromac's Beast form forward, drop an Undergrowth Animus, and them leap back behind it. Against many opponents I find it very convenient to block LOS in this way as I move up. I also like providing a guaranteed forest for my Stalker that Kromac doesn't leave home without. It suffices to say that my commentary did not find everyone receptive. Some people find this mix absolutely ridiculous. I find it effective and have continued to utilize it. Many people don't like that I advocate taking Druids with Kromac too, saying that they think it is redundant because he already has great anti-magic. I am of the opinion that it never hurts to have more and I also take Druids for the Vortex, and Push/Pull to make speedy Kromac lists even faster and more deadly on movement tricks.

The issue here isn't about what is a "crutch" or what is "good or bad for Circle." The issue is about making constructive arguments and supporting them. When someone makes such an argument, I respect it even if I continue to disagree with it. I'm of the opinion that Warpwolves should almost always (in the current META of glass cannons) make up the backbone of most of our forces. That doesn't mean I think we shouldn't use our other Beasts. I'm just pragmatic enough to know that in all-comer lists facing a variety of match-ups at a tournament, you need a generalist army with the most options. That is my opinion, and I think it bears out. When I go to a competition I generally have one list I prefer that fights the majority of my battles, and one list designed entirely for killing the ever-popular infantrymachine. My goal, of course is to have two lists that can handle anything equally. That is difficult in an changing META so we do the best we can. I like Constructs for certain jobs. I don't like them as the mainstay because I believe in a game of "glass cannons" you must put more trust in the offensive ability than defensive. LEKaya made some strong arguments to the contrary with E-Baldur based on control and taking advantage of certain aspects of the timed turn aspect of the game. While I disagree (and continue to do so) I respected his arguments because they are strong arguments backed up by facts. We got heated but the quality and content of what he said was on the straight and narrow. The META has shifted again heavily in favor of offensive over defense recently with the gains Legion made. It doesn't invalidate LEKaya's arguments but it does mean the bad match-ups for that style have grown. When things get harder on trying to tank up as a strategy, it is crazy to tell people to double down on it. To LEKaya's credit there was an instant (faster than myself) understanding of this shift and an acceptance of necessary changes. This is how we play the game.

My own irritation and tone was engendered by the OP's implied notion that those of us who use Warpwolves are either idiots or those who need a crutch. This was annoying because both implications are insulting and because they are mutually exclusive insults. Someone who manages to be insulting and form bad arguments is naturally going to illicit a strong response. As Blaque commented, disagreement is not a flame. Calling someone out on statements is not a flame. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that doesn't mean their opinion is entitled to any respect.

[brokennecron]

Is there actually a question in all of this? Does the OP have a specific goal they would like addressed by use of this thread?

[SamOfTheTribe]

If I were the OP, and I was trying to make the point I think he is trying to make... this is what I would have said (see footnote 1):

Warpwolves are great. They lay the smack down with the best and look better while they are doing it. Other factions have elephants (albeit with extra arms), dragon spawn (like dragons I guess... but worse?), and blueish rock... monsters... (our rock men look better), but we get giant warewolves... who are are also freaking NINJAS! (And one of them has a sword!)

However, I can't help but think that the obvious superiority of our SmackDown warbeasts over their SmackDown peers has blinded us in some ways to the awesomeness of our other warbeasts, that being the SmackAround type. We have great warbeasts that were made for manhandling our enemy's heavys into, over, and out of the way. And as much as I enjoy drinking the tears of impotent rage that our warpwolves leave streaming down the faces of our foes, I think that sometimes there may be another, possibly even better, way.

Take the humble Shadowhorn. The cheapest of our heavys, this slightly anorexic looking lightweight can be easy to overlook. In fact the first time I saw him I thought he was a light beast, and when I saw he was a heavy I thought to my self "Why is he a heavy beast... he looks so small on that large base...". It took me some time to realize that the large base is the point. For only two points less than his superstar cousin the feral you seem to end up losing a lot of offensive potential... or do you? You lose a metric tonne of damage, that's for sure, but throwing The Behemoth 5" outside of it's casters control area is pretty offensive too (in the insulting sense at the very least). And he can do it, unaided, generating only 2 fury, from 11.5" away, and jump over people in the middle (Matrix style, I think). No one else in the entire game* can get even close to doing that. (* I don't know if this is true, but it sounds good.) And he can do other things than "just" throws (not damage tho, to be clear).

So I know a thrown behemoth is out of the game only partially, and only for a turn at most. Whereas a dead behemoth gives you salt tears to feed on, but my point comes down to this: No one can move like Circle Orboros does, and if we start looking deeper into what can be done with our three "bad" (is "less good" more fair?) heavys we may begin to see that every faction kills stuff, but that may very well be beneath us. But no one (save Gorten, that %*&@) can move enemy heavys like Circle Orboros can, either. 3 of our 7 (non-chr) heavy beasts are built to handle enemy heavys in ways other than killing them (slams and throws mostly, but wep locks from behind can be great too). Other factions send in their heroes (heavys), kill their chosen targets, then stand there like schmucks waiting for the other guy to take his swing. We laugh at that (HaHA!), and after our killers do their work they sprint off to disappear into the forest like the ninja masters that they are or simply vanish into thin air, whisked away by the locomotive powers of rocks! But maybe we can do even more to show all these young punks that they don't even begin to understand the workings of this world like we do. Have you ever taken on an enemy army of three or more heavy warjacks and trashed the entire enemy force while barely scratching the paint on the 'jacks (but possibly moving them farther then they move themselves every turn)? I haven't. But I think I'd like to try.


(Footnote 1: Since I have yet to play against any colosantuan, and the OP makes no mention of them, for the purposes of this post I am ignoring their existence...)

[MathPasta]

Warpwolves. Pillowfisted? Easy to take out?

Geez man. Try playing with a warjack, where having them max out their attacks uses up half the warcasters focus to have worse effects then warpwolves do by HELPING their caster.

[Calcifar]

For a lot of beasts, that's actually a bad idea. You lose-out on possible charge dice, as well as well as most a warbeast's initial attackis. A Scytehan doing this for instance loses-out on about three potential attacks. Now that still may kill the Warpwolf, but ntoe for the head-butt to even hit a Warpwolf with most non-Cygnar warnouns, it is suggested you boost, meaning even less attacks.

Warpwolves are actually pretty varied in healthy. Stalkers have 25, Purebloods 26, and Ferals/Ghetorix have 28. This is the same as a Cryx or Trollblood heavy, more or less. But DEF 14 really means you either waste initial attacks on the aformentioend head-butt, or hope your less attacks hit often.

There's a lot more nuiansce to the stats it has, I think, than you suggest here.


Megalith and Woldwardens have 35 and Wold Guardians 30. The former are actually pretty soft, especially Woldwardens, which I think have one of the worst defensive lines in the game for a heavy. Wold Guardians are tough, but not so much that dedicated firepower won't cripple it to nearly useless, I have found.


Warpwolves are fast, are accurate, do great alpha-strike burst potential, take all our buffs fairly well (from warlocks and animi), are agile, and allow for chicanary with stuff liek Lightning Strike, Ghostly, Berserk, Snacking, power attacks, or even just the occassional fury manipulation-screwing. I think they actually represent the faction fairly well, personally.

Legion warbeasts are actually not that tough inherently, as a note. They are barely harder to hit than Woldwardens and have less wounds. Really only the Carnivean has that. DEF 14 is actually quite a swing, this is also especially on things like Ferals with ARM 18 most of the time, or Stalkers which out-threat nearly everything save Scytheans and even then, we have more way sot speed it up.


How so? What does a Construct do that represents Circle as a whole? Pathfinder, and generally magical stuff. The beasts do some terrain generation or become immovable objects. But we we only have two of them, really (Megalith is more a souped-up Woldwarden and doesnt', to me, play especially different from one other than better stats and animus). If anything, I think for most Circle warlocks, it is best to actually run a mix of things, which is often how I do things. Only Grayle, Kaya2, and Kromac I find myself not bothering with Constructs much of the time, and I only run Krueger2 Themed where I have Constructs-only. The Baldurs, I feel, do swimmingly better with livings, partiicularly Warpwolf Stalkers or Ghetorix.


Somewhat. His tone seemed to be, to me, overly contrarian. There's not much to "underappreciate" with a Woldwarden. I know full well what it does and what it is for. And it is not for heavy-lifiting and damage output that a Warpwolf does. It can substittue somewhat with Baldur1, and Wold Guardians hit hard, but as the math ehre is showing, they don't do it on their own a lot, and they need help. Constructs are utility beasts, even Megalith or Wold Guardians (the latter of which I see as actual attrition pieces more). And trying to say one should take one over the other is creating a false dichotomy. You take what works with the warlock best. It just may happen to be a Warpwolf, Construct, or Satyr.


I'll be weird on a debate level here: Just because there are two views, does not mean they are equally valid ways to observe the world. Some minority views are worth investigating and seeing what pans out. But these views don't instantly deserve the compelte equal respect that others do. And there are issues of burden of proof and evidence on statements that the OP was not able to address in a satisfactory matter, I and others feel. And on the "Warpwolves are just better", while tone could be an issue, that they are bad for you is something that, once asserted, requires more proof than initially given as well. And even then, at least some posts as shown in this thread have tried to argue that point, while posts to the contrary have not done so in a way I find satisfying.


Everything is glass-jawed in this game. And again, just becuase he's saying something different doesn't mean he is not opening himself to criticisms as given in this thread. If i say X and someone says Y, this doesn't meman X and Y are afforded the same respect by the dint they are options. X may simply be a more correct and better arguable position than Y.


Nothing in the game does as much for 10pts. as a Warpwolf Stalker with the right buffs, I feel. This is shown with Kromac, either Kaya, and the fact it uses its animus best of the three beasts who have it. Looking at 25 wounds on its own is a bit of a misnomer. It's DEF 14. This means if you want to reliably headbutt it like you said, you might not kill it. If you want to reliably hit it the old-fashioned way, yous till might not. It out-threats most everything base save Molik Karn and Scytheans, who it ties with. We trade some durability for sheer utility and flexibility. And for many folks, that's a good trade.


And dropping Warpwolves pretty much means you open yourself to being screwed-over by the things that screw harder back, such as Protectorate, Cygnar, and some Cryx. Having less, "Can you deal with ARM 20+ reliably? No? You lose" is generally a good strategy.


Descenting opinions aren't flaming, and categorically accusing all those who disagree with the OP as such, or critical of his ways to argue on this thread, is not either. I'm trying to be civil myself. That I come accross as harsh is irrelevant to me, though.

And stuff.

I feel like you missed many of my points straight out, though I lack the time right now to follow suite in the "dissecting post" manner.

Many people here seems to garner quite rigid viewpoints and i find it sad that this kind of agressive tone is seen as the only way to put forward opinions, just because the OP is suffering from a language barrier or did not choose his wording perfectly. It is not as if he came to this board an wrote " HERP WARPWULFS SUX COZ ME SAZ SO". He did attempt to explain his thought process but I think it requires some more formatting and structuring.

IDK, many of the replies just read like a Witch hunt to me. Justifying bad manners with the bad manners of others, doesnt make it okay, ymmv.

[Bakemono]

I feel like you missed many of my points straight out, though I lack the time right now to follow suite in the "dissecting post" manner.

Blaque didn't miss any of your points. He answered them one by one in a logical, civilized manner and invalidated them.

Many people here seems to garner quite rigid viewpoints and i find it sad that this kind of agressive tone is seen as the only way to put forward opinions, just because the OP is suffering from a language barrier or did not choose his wording perfectly. It is not as if he came to this board an wrote " HERP WARPWULFS SUX COZ ME SAZ SO". He did attempt to explain his thought process but I think it requires some more formatting and structuring.

I personally have a hard time with the whole language barrier commentary because the syntax utilized by the OP didn't actually demonstrate someone suffering from problems in linguistics. He did not make lots of spelling errors, he utilized colloquial slang, and he used metaphor effectively. In short, we have seen lots of people on this Forum suffering from a language barrier and none of them posted remotely like the OP. What is interesting (and some others commented on it as well) is that the OP was able to post extremely LONG bits of rhetoric without saying anything in particular. Do you know how difficult that is to pull off? He hasn't attempted to explain anything YET. All he did was repeat his earlier, unsupported statements with promises of more to come. The OP even avoided giving us a list with the commentary that he couldn't give away his secret weapons before a tournament. He understands us perfectly well and he has no trouble making himself understood.

IDK, many of the replies just read like a Witch hunt to me. Justifying bad manners with the bad manners of others, doesnt make it okay, ymmv.

A "witch hunt" is not the appropriate metaphor. It is not bad manners to ask people to support, explain, or show evidence of what they post. It is not bad manners to disagree with posts either. Aside from a relative few, the people responding to the OP have been even-tempered and willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Most are doubtful based on their own experience but are interested in seeing how this works. They want to see some steak served with all that sizzle. The cardinal rule of writing, which I commented on at the start, is "show don't tell." We have seen all the previews and heard all the hype. We are still waiting for the curtain to rise and the actual show to begin.

[Patuljak]

I myself have stated that I like to take a Woldwarden (one and no more than one) with Kromac in 50pt or higher lists. I actually find the extra Rift useful and like to surge at the start of a game in Kromac's Beast form forward, drop an Undergrowth Animus, and them leap back behind it. Against many opponents I find it very convenient to block LOS in this way as I move up. I also like providing a guaranteed forest for my Stalker that Kromac doesn't leave home without.

I wanted to keep refraining from replying to the massive display of bad manners that is this thread, but I can't go past this. You're saying you start the game in beast form, foregoing Warpath and such, to advance 6", illegally drop the forest (Undergrowth is Mega's animus by the way) as jumping is part of movement and you can't cast spells in the middle, then jump back 5", gaining a whole inch of distance. Or possibly you do it turn two, which seems to imply feat which is equally baffling. You make a big point to make yourself heard, but you keep giving out not only completely impractical, point-ineffective advice, it's also frequently wrong where rules are concerned. And like it has been said, you then dodge that fact and keep loudly voicing your opinions. I enjoy some of your posts (I read everything, even if I do not reply nearly as often as you), but you're doing a good job on losing not only credibility with your false interpretations, the behaviour you and some other posters are exhibiting in this thread is also making me loose respect and regard for your posts. I'm also bothered by the fact that you seem to turn every thread you stumble upon into your personal notebook, as one poster posting over and over again derails the thread and severly lower the quality of discussion. Nothing is stopping you from being rude and aggressive, unless you actually care how people receive your posts, that is.

I feel sorry for the OP. He admittedly did start it off with a completely wrong approach, but the irony is that people bashing him for it are doing the exact same. I'm not talking about the actual content of the posts, it is good food for thought, but etiquette matters if you want to have rational and civilized discussions, ment to achieve something. A lot of you aren't showing respect towards other opinions, so don't expect to receive it from others.

[Bakemono]

You're saying you start the game in beast form, foregoing Warpath and such, to advance 6", illegally drop the forest (Undergrowth is Mega's animus by the way) as jumping is part of movement and you can't cast spells in the middle, then jump back 5", gaining a whole inch of distance.

The "placement" Kromac makes in Beast form happens after his full advance. Unless there has been a ruling otherwise I missed (possible), you can indeed use an Animus and then place. It was my intention to say I drop the 4" forest provided by the Woldwarden, since that is the Warbeast I stated I take with him. The 4" forest is centered on Kromac and his placement does indeed place him behind it. I do it more often on Turn-2 than turn one, and it is only necessary against shooting.

[PG_LEJKaya]

I have to agree that is certainly legal. I won't comment on its effectiveness as I haven't tried it but blocking LOS to a (Medium based) warlock is never a bad idea, the question is would this be worth not having up bestial and all upkeeps from turn 2 onwards? Personally I use the guardians animus to lessen damage but this can make him totally safe as nobody has LOS, you could even put a tiny sliver of his base into the forest so he's still >3" in and if they do get LOS he has concealment too.

The leap is not "Part of movement", it specifically says after an advance, you have opportunities to cast spells (Well, not with beast form kromac but in general) or animi between movement and action.

[Calcifar]

Blaque didn't miss any of your points. He answered them one by one in a logical, civilized manner and invalidated them.

He seemed to have missunderstood the points I was trying to bring forth, his replies are qualitative, no question about it but dont seem to address my thinking, I just cannot for the live of me be bothered to go through it all and point out what i ment but here some examples :

Wolds come with as much as, what, 35 health boxes ?

Megalith and Woldwardens have 35 and Wold Guardians 30. The former are actually pretty soft, especially Woldwardens, which I think have one of the worst defensive lines in the game for a heavy. Wold Guardians are tough, but not so much that dedicated firepower won't cripple it to nearly useless, I have found.

18 Arm and 35 health boxes can really not be considered soft, in this case I just dont see how this is arguable. That is average armor and above average health for any beast. I fail to see how 10 or 12 def matters much.

Wolds seem more geared towards that, then again, kaya or Kromac wouldnt make much sense with wolds.

How so? What does a Construct do that represents Circle as a whole? Pathfinder, and generally magical stuff. The beasts do some terrain generation or become immovable objects. But we we only have two of them, really (Megalith is more a souped-up Woldwarden and doesnt', to me, play especially different from one other than better stats and animus). If anything, I think for most Circle warlocks, it is best to actually run a mix of things, which is often how I do things. Only Grayle, Kaya2, and Kromac I find myself not bothering with Constructs much of the time, and I only run Krueger2 Themed where I have Constructs-only. The Baldurs, I feel, do swimmingly better with livings, partiicularly Warpwolf Stalkers or Ghetorix.

My opinion on this is, that Circle plays best to it's strengths, when utilizing the gazillion options they bring towards any battle plan. All i can see in the Feral and possible stalker, are great "beat your face quickly, glass cannons". That is what they are and what people like them for. That is not the kind of thing Circle does any better than : Legion, Skorne and even Trolls.
The Woldwarden brings options, geomancy is a frackin godsend in a faction with so many good spells, the tree generation is another unique trick to the bag.
Players seem obsessed with cracking armor and berserking through the battlefield with their beasts. i say, this is not Circles forte, I say Legion does this better.
Yes, use them but they are not what makes Circles Beast line up special. if you disagree, tell me why. I dont see how def 14 makes them so much more amazing than Legion beast synergy.

I recognize that we are talking about two different play styles here : the Feral style of play, with high threat vectors and buffed up beast missles and the Wold- heavy play, which focuses more on control. spell slinging and other things. Im just saying that the latter seems faction specific to me, where the Feral style is somewhat generic among other factions.
Ferals are not outright "better" than wolds, they are DIFFERENT.



Regarding the bad mannerism. There is counter argumentation, backed up by intelligent reasoning and mannered wording and then there is some of the "crap" some people fling around here in walls of text, filled with personal insult towards the Op's intelligence, intentions and experience. Those responses are, to me, much worse than a poorly worded opening post.



Now im signing out of this discussion.

[PG_Draxos]

I think that if you are looking at our beasts soley as fuzzies vs Wolds then you are missing the point and the abilities of the faction, unless you are restricted by a theme list that specifies such IE eBaldur.

[Calcifar]

I think that if you are looking at our beasts soley as fuzzies vs Wolds

To clarify, I certainly do not but in this thread, they are placed on opposing sides.

[Blaque]

18 Arm and 35 health boxes can really not be considered soft, in this case I just dont see how this is arguable. That is average armor and above average health for any beast. I fail to see how 10 or 12 def matters much.

Average is not normal. In fact, Circle has the most ARM 17. Most things out of Circle are ARM 18 or ARM 19, with the exception of the Skorne archosaurs, Angelii and Typhon.

And you seem to pretty much ignore DEF entirely. The average MAT in the game is 6 for heavies, by a fair amount. This means that they hit a Woldwarden about 91.7% of the time. The one point of DEF on a Carnivean-type Dragonspawn, by contrast, means a drop of nearly 8%. Get to DEF 12, which is where those heavies with Tenacity, Titans, Diretrolls, Cygnar heavies, and Myrmidons live, and suddenly it's 72.2%. This goes from more than a less than 1/10 chanced to a less than 1/4 chance to miss the beast. This equates to less damage overall. Note that many of the things above are ARM 19, which over the course of say, five or six attacks from a dedicated heavy, result in negating the one point of ARM difference.

Simply looking at ARM and wounds does not tell the whole story. Every time something misses, that's that many possible times wounds simply will not be lost, period. The Woldwarden has the worst combination of DEF/ARM of heavies in the game at 10/18. Every warjack with DEF 10 has at least ARM 19, which makes-up for the one or three boxes those warjacks have less than the Woldwarden. Most any warbeast has better defensive stats.

You may not see it, but it might just be different valuing or looking at the math. Any attempt to do damage to a warbeast is the combination of two rolls, not one. The odds of doing damage to a beast on average dice is actually two 1/6 chances, for instance. With a MAT 6, P+S 18 weapon, for instance, to do 7 damage to a Woldwarden is 53.4% abouts. The Carnivean is 48.5%. The Dire Troll is 42.0%. We now have an 11% drop. This means that for every ten attacks, on average, one is going to just roll below average. This might not seem like much, but with as many dice rolls as one makes in this game, averages and trends over survivabilty do start becoming apparent.

And as an extra, the Feral with Armored Plates? 24.3% if the opponent doesn't boost. DEF 14 swings things quite a bit.

My opinion on this is, that Circle plays best to it's strengths, when utilizing the gazillion options they bring towards any battle plan. All i can see in the Feral and possible stalker, are great "beat your face quickly, glass cannons". That is what they are and what people like them for. That is not the kind of thing Circle does any better than : Legion, Skorne and even Trolls.

Then I don't know what to say. The Warpwolf Stalker has infantry-sweeping, threat range potential, Reach (for angles, and get-out-of-dodge potential), Stealh, Pathfinder inherently, and after all is said and done, can simply walk away from things due to its animus. The Feral in tandum with it allows things like 8" Sprints, two-handed throws on par with any Satyr, durability as noted, and even in a pinch control.

That you only see them as beatsticks is, I see it, seems bent more on refusal than actuality. The Stalker being lumped her especially is baffling, as it's terrain management, speed, elusiveness, and flexibility is a lot of why it is such a popular beast. That it has the ability to hit like a truck if need be is a bonus. That the Warpwolves (and Satyrs) actually use the buffs we seem to have in faction is a benefit also that implies that, if anything, taking them doens't hurt.

The Woldwarden brings options, geomancy is a frackin godsend in a faction with so many good spells, the tree generation is another unique trick to the bag.

The animus is okay. I use it a lot and find I do like taking the Woldwarden as a Geomancer, sure. But Geomancy in itself doesn't win games. Note I'm one to defend the Woldwarden, but I still think that saying it is something to reach for first is futile as it doesn't do the job you expect a 9pt. heavy to do: take out other heavies.

Players seem obsessed with cracking armor and berserking through the battlefield with their beasts. i say, this is not Circles forte, I say Legion does this better.

Circle massacres infantry. If there's anything over the years I think Circle has gotten better at instead of worse, this is one of them. We're a faction which has as a thematic element god-damend werewolves. What do you expect them to do? And nothing in Legion does what Circle does with berserking beasts. Thematically it doesn't as much work, as dragonspawn are more or less biorobots. And it does work for us since the beast it is on is kind of the "serial killer" beast. And it doesn't make sense not to take beaters since it's a game that rewards aggression overall and thematically encourages violent primal beatings as a whole.

Yes, use them but they are not what makes Circles Beast line up special. if you disagree, tell me why. I dont see how def 14 makes them so much more amazing than Legion beast synergy.

DEF 14 means that to hit reliably, even non-characters have to boost to have a chance better than 50% most of the time. When half your attacks simply don't land, you are not getting much.

Circle does best with single beast cruise-missles. Legion has a lot of little, caster-specific, buffs for their warbeasts. Circle, by contrast, often takes volume effects that either are caster-independent (Primal, Bounidng, Virility, Hunter's Mark), and what casters do have tend to benefit warbeasts in way sthat encourage offense (Alpha, Pack Hunters, Wild Aggression) or doubling-up on defensive buffs that take advantage of both sides of the defensive grid (DEF 14 and ARM 19-22 is actually pretty high in the "hard to kill" range). ANd note that even if we are being aggressive, doesn't mean it's "just Legion but furry." Big factors of Circle have the aftermath in mind. You berserk on that infantry so it can't hit back. And then you walk or are teleported away so that no one can retaliate. You scrap one of their heavies and get out of range so yu don't hae to trade your's. You don't maybe kill their heavy, but are given a chance to walk around or survive to do it again. Circle tends to have less warbeast on thet able (we can't support as much as Legion). So we tend to get a lot more ilage and are trying to make our heavies kill multiple of there's. We can't do it through surviving, so we do it through running and hit-and-run. Constructs dont' facilitate this. This is in part because they don't provide the run, and they don't hit hard enough in general to run anyhow.

I recognize that we are talking about two different play styles here : the Feral style of play, with high threat vectors and buffed up beast missles and the Wold- heavy play, which focuses more on control. spell slinging and other things. Im just saying that the latter seems faction specific to me, where the Feral style is somewhat generic among other factions.

That's a false dichotomy. The best way to run things is a mix. And the way Circle runs best is through high-threat vectors and aggressive beasts, supported with some utility and control. The issue is that if you go all-in on the control, you better have the resources to do it, and I feel maybe three casters actually do that (the Baldurs in Themed lists, which I feel are not optimal, and Krueger2 in a Themed list). It also creates a strawman, as I have noted, Circle's "aggressive" bent tends to have a good amount of fade to it, demonstrated with Kromac, Kaya2, Kaya1, Grayle, and whomever takes the Stalker. And often utilizes very faction-specific elements such as Shifting Stones, Druids, and caster benefits.

Ferals are not outright "better" than wolds, they are DIFFERENT.

But they are better at offensive output, in a game moving towards attrition, and in a world where there can be up to a +3 MAT, +4 STR, +2 attack difference before any warlock benefits are taken into account.

Regarding the bad mannerism. There is counter argumentation, backed up by intelligent reasoning and mannered wording and then there is some of the "crap" some people fling around here in walls of text, filled with personal insult towards the Op's intelligence, intentions and experience. Those responses are, to me, much worse than a poorly worded opening post.

I don't feel I do this. I don't do the method others did of quoting him in other threads either. I, however, will not relent that the OP is probably wrong, and my points as to why.

To clarify, I certainly do not but in this thread, they are placed on opposing sides.

Which I argue is a false dichotomy to begin with. But there's attempts to put square pegs into round holes, when the same gadget has both and needs both most of the time.

And stuff.

[James_Rayner]

Quite a heated topic then........

[PG_Draxos]

To clarify, I certainly do not but in this thread, they are placed on opposing sides.

Thats my point though. We are arguing over something that is stupid and has no purpose because if you follow the arguement of Wolds vs Fuzzies you aren't playing the faction well and lacking options. I don't take a Guardian because its a wold but because of the knockdown fists and animus which.

[the Sugarwolf]

Thats my point though. We are arguing over something that is stupid and has no purpose because if you follow the arguement of Wolds vs Fuzzies you aren't playing the faction well and lacking options. I don't take a Guardian because its a wold but because of the knockdown fists and animus which.

agreed. i dont take anything because its what it is. i take it because of how it performs. the warpwolves perform very well and so i field them. and when i want the knockdown fists, which ive certainly put to good use, i take a guardian. and when i want control and free magic, i take warden or megalith. but the idea that warpwolves arent a circle strength is bizarre and utterly unfounded. so is the idea that wolds arent. they BOTH are. but it is worth mentioning that warpwolves may be a bit more straight forward than some of the caster, infantry and solo trick bags. HOWEVER, it is their straightforward axe to the face that keeps damage on your opponent to buy you the time to utilize the trick bags you have bought. do you always need that? nope. there are some lists where i have no wolves. but its never a bad thing to have access to either. which is why, i usually have one warpwolf at least in a list unless going for theme benefits. baldur 1 is an example of a caster who often rocks out with no warpwolves. he really shows off the awesome of wolds. and there are plenty of casters who show off the awesome of warpwolves. but many of them do best with some from column A and some from column B.

[eLdritch]

There's not going to be any further interaction with this thread on my part due to all efforts being pointless. half the people in this thread had made up their mind beforehand so however many hours I invest in this endeavour it will remain a pointless enterprise.

Cheers

[Mattho2k3]

By not participating anymore you are proving those who doubt you right.

[James_Rayner]

There's not going to be any further interaction with this thread on my part due to all efforts being pointless. half the people in this thread had made up their mind beforehand so however many hours I invest in this endeavour it will remain a pointless enterprise.

Cheers

If you have something to say then say it, don't suddenly back off because of the storm you created. Reap what you sow and all that jazz.

You knew how much of a scene you were going to cause by posting something so controversial. At least have the dignity and the spine to carry through what you started.

[AmonadRodrigues]

There's not going to be any further interaction with this thread on my part due to all efforts being pointless. half the people in this thread had made up their mind beforehand so however many hours I invest in this endeavour it will remain a pointless enterprise.

Cheers

You are right about half the people. But are the other 50% not worth the issues?

[PG_fildrigar]

How about taking some time to finish your article, give it a little time for the furor to die down, and then post it all at once?

[the Sugarwolf]

How about taking some time to finish your article, give it a little time for the furor to die down, and then post it all at once?

probably some of the best advice on how this topic should have been handled in the first place to avoid getting lambasted before you were finished. for the record, i have no faith that the final argument would have been any better or more supported from what the OP has already demonstrated... but the approach suggested by fildrigar would clearly have worked better and at least not allowed for the cop out now being taken by the OP after they created a storm they cant handle. and also, yes, i will go ahead and back the people who said, if you bow out rather than support your argument it simply proves you never had one to begin with.

[eLdritch]

How about taking some time to finish your article, give it a little time for the furor to die down, and then post it all at once?

I might do that, actually... Whenever I get the time to finish all my fancy little Vassal and mspaint graphs... we'll see

[Patuljak]

I just don't understand all this nerdstorming. We are having a debate on the internet, about a wargame. Yes, the OP was a bit arrogant, but is that an excuse for all this merciless bashing? And all this about having no spine and backing down, it's his choice, I'd feel pretty demoralized if I was on the receiving end of all this as well. Honestly, I don't particularly care for the actual argument, in fact I also disagree, but I'll think twice before posting a new thread from now on. And that is not a good thing I think, as any food for thought is good for the community and thinking patterns of players. I think the whole problem came from the original post being a bit on the cocky side, but I find it amazing that a notion you don't agree with causes some people to go into such a rage. Be civil, everyone has the freedom of speech and opinion here and should not be refuted in such a harsh manner. If a bit of arrogance on one's own opinion offends you it is the fault of your own ego.

[CrookyKnows]

we are having a debate on the internet, about a wargame.

serious business.

[ChaosE]

Uh, this is a debate...and if you ask me its a damn good one. Imo, this has been one of the most interesting threads on here lately because you are challenging the conventional way of thinking and people are really breaking down their strategies for how they play circle. Whether or not you convince people of your opinion, this is still serving a good purpose, so I recommend you don't take the rebuttals personally and carry on with the point you're trying to make.

As to everyone else, keeping it civil will mean we get mileage out of this. So dont instigate. Post your rebuttals and contribute your thoughts. I think this is going quite well all round.

[Warcaster Feiss]

I've been watching this thread, I'm keen to see others thoughts' on using non-Warpwolf warbeasts

Some time back people thought Skillt was nuts for challenging the use of Druids, granted Will has come full Circle (pun intended, of course ) and uses them in specific lists, my point is that it takes someone bucking the trend and really questioning the use of certain units. The discussion at the time opened my eyes enough to try without using Druids.

I'm hoping this thread will engender the same thought process in people, to get me to put down the Warpwolves for a bit, double Wold Guardian / Gnarlhorn combo with Kromac is tickling my fancy at the moment!

[PG_Draxos]

I have already already expressed my opinion on the original topic, something I attemepted to do in a way that is respectful to every one. That said I do agree with many who have said that the OP has not defended his thesis properly and that this is why he has been "bashed" if you want to call it that. I don't have a problem with the topic and I am interested in it but if you can't provide a solid and based theory then it isn't worth posting

[Katkiller 5]

Come on guys, the debate in this thread was going pretty good, so can we keep that up please and disregard the commentary in regards to the OP and bickering?



After observing the thread for a while.. I'm going to try and react to what I think are the two core questions..

A; Is relying on warpwolves over constructs bad?
In my honest opinion, no, it isn't. Why should it be? We now have three of them, plus a character, all of which have numerous potential uses and bring a high degree of flexibility to any Circle army. I think an argument is being made that warpwolves exist to be our heavy hitters, and I think this is incorrect. They are our heaviest hitters, and will always fill that role in a given army, but they do have the flexibility to be more than that. The Stalker has been talked about to death in other threads and here, so I'll look at the Feral.

It's defense is high enough to require boosting to reliably hit, and it's armor is just high enough to mitigate most non-boosted/weapon master infantry attacks. With it's three attacks, access to warp strength, and primal, it can most assuredly tear apart heavies. But if warped for speed, with bounding, you can also trample or slam an incredible distance, or walk eight inches and double-handed throw a model out of a zone, etc etc.

When I look at a construct, I see a purpose. A wold guardian exists to weather attacks and to knock enemy heavies out of a zone. A woldwyrd exists to hunt models/units with upkeeps on them. Woldwatchers exist to stand on the defensive. The woldwarden and megalith are far more flexible, but they are generally run for the advantage that either their animus or geomancy can bring, which is primarily their lot in lot.

In summary, when I want a warbeast in a list that does a specific something, and that something is what a wold does, I will grab the wold before a wolf. But if I'm less sure about exactly what the list needs, or if the list needs a bit more flexibility, I'll pick which wolf offers me the best variety of options for the list.


B; Are warpwolves better than constructs?
Calling anything in warmachine/hordes "better" than something else isn't something that I think should be done lightly. Everything has a use, even if it is a situational, rarely seen use. So, are warpwolves better than our wolds? If you're talking about the ability to 'alpha-strike', then I would say yes. Wolves are faster, hit harder, and are harder to hit in return. But if you're talking about the ability to 'brick', then wold's are better. They have far more hit boxes, higher base armor, and generally have some form of a defensive mechanic to make them harder to remove.

Which is 'better' shouldn't be examined in the context of their statlines, but rather how you are using them, and what you are using them against.

[Blackraine]

... half the people in this thread had made up their mind beforehand so however many hours I invest in this endeavour it will remain a pointless enterprise.

So, having established this, please continue with your mad scientist learnings, but please do so without the assumption (even if it WAS validated in a previous thread) that we're all going to dismiss you out-of-hand. Asking us not to say horrible things about you simply invites some people to do exactly that and puts the rest of us on the defensive even before we know what you're saying.

There is a definite cause and effect relationship here. Your original post made up our mind for us and assigned sides before we even wrote our first post. Rather than telling us to not think what we're probably thinking, just simply state what *YOU* are thinking, back that up with appropriate facts, and let the debate continue from there. That's how debates work, and that's how we are all able to benefit from the sharing of knowledge/experience that occurs on these forums.

[TrilliumLT]

I never saw it before. Pureblood's ghostly. Trample with no fear of being smited by those weapon masters.
Duh. That's why I read these threads.
Thank you.

[Bakemono]

I never saw it before. Pureblood's ghostly. Trample with no fear of being smited by those weapon masters.
Duh. That's why I read these threads.
Thank you.

Yep. It is one of my favorite ways of killing infantry. I am particularly fond of doing it with Ghetorix when he is sporting Forced Evolution him because the higher STR ensures an infantry kill even on the higher ARM single wound infantry. Sadly you can't warp for snacking at the same time since you are warped for Ghostly.