11pts...pros/cons?

[deademon]

bane thralls + ua

or bloodgorgers + general

both have tough
banes have ONE more model
gorgers have better mat and damage with gang
one cant be knocked down, while the other stands up automatically.
banes have stealth
gorgers have bigger threat vs living
same def/arm
gorgers have more attacks, but you can fit more banes around a base
gorgers block charges and line of sight

ive only played with banes...anyone have any game experience?

[Barrynstein]

Thralls are weapon masters gorgers are not. Like the gorgers but that kind of is the biggest difference between the two.

[Sheer_Falacy]

You almost always include Tartarus, at which point the Hanes have the same threat range and may vs curse as the bloodgorgers have with gang vs living.

Bloodgorgers have more attacks (and overtake), but banes hit way way harder and debuff the enemy.

Also, it's actually pretty hard to use gang. You have to get two medium bases within half an inch of a small base (most of the time), and ideally one of the bloodgorgers is in melee range of a second model or it's attacks are wasted once the first one kills the charged model.

Maybe some day we'll get a caster with lightning tendrils and bloodgorgers will become hilarious vs infantry, but until that or a good UA I've found that either banes or raiders do the job better. I guess if you have to stop tramples or block LOS to, say, 3gaspy then they're useful.

[syanide]

Banes + BLT = MOAR BANES
bloodgorgers are cool but banes are the core of many a list plus you need at least one unit if your friend ever wanted to play Goreshade

[Scottl1]

Gorgers are better at killing mass infantry due to more attacks and pac man but banes do better vs armor/heavies.

[Drzombieface]

Gang is nice....but... Weapon Master > Gang.


Bane Thralls already hit as hard as Bloodgorgers WITH Gang due to Dark Shroud, plus weapon master = they're doing more damage with every attack that connects. The only thing the Bloodgorgers have over the Thralls is a higher MAT while benefiting from Gang, but the same bonus can be achieved with Tartarus on the board.

All in all, they're both good units, but Bane Thralls are just disgustingly powerful. Bloodgorgers are more of hybrid tarpit/combat unit anyway, and we already have units that do both of those jobs much better.

I've used Bloodgorgers a ton with Denny, Gaspy, pSkarre, Venethrax, even Scaverous. Every time I bring them, I can't help but think that Banes would be doing better.

pSkarre is just about the apex of their performance. 2 P+S 18 attacks with 3 dice to hit from Dark Guidance is nothing to laugh at, but that's only for one turn. Banes bring the pain every turn they're in combat.

[DavidRM]

If you can get both Gang and Charge going, Bloodgorgers outperform Bane Thralls in damage. And since Gang gives +2 MAT, as well as +2 damage, Bloodgorgers can hit more reliably.

With just the Charge, though, and no Gang, Bane Thralls are better in most situations.

If you want detailed numbercrunching, I just posted it on my blog here:
http://www.davidrm.com/rpg/?p=611

I love my Bloodgorgers. I have 2 sets.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Why didn't you include dark shroud for the damage calculations?

[Dragon2439]

Banes can also typically inflict more damage on larger base things simply because you are able to get more models in because they are on small bases. Their aura also helps damage against any other attack at a target they are in melee with. With BLT (auto include) and/or eGoreshade they can also replenish themselves.

[Sanctjud]

Don't forget, being undead is a bonus too, enemies could also collect souls, corpse tokens, heart tokens, have lower threat ranges vs unliving things, etc.

Line of Sight is a double edged sword, it blocks yours as well.

Stealth is a big deal.

Don't forget that Gang requires the commitment of TWO models... and most of the time, it's 2 Models on 1 model with 4 attacks dedicated to kill one model, this can result in alot of wasted potential even with overtake.

[Drzombieface]

If you can get both Gang and Charge going, Bloodgorgers outperform Bane Thralls in damage. And since Gang gives +2 MAT, as well as +2 damage, Bloodgorgers can hit more reliably.

With just the Charge, though, and no Gang, Bane Thralls are better in most situations.

If you want detailed numbercrunching, I just posted it on my blog here:
http://www.davidrm.com/rpg/?p=611

I love my Bloodgorgers. I have 2 sets.

With Dark Shroud, Bane Thralls are an effective P+S 13. With Gang, Bloodgorgers are P+S 13. Bane Thralls have Weapon Master, which means, assuming average rolls, they're going to do more damage with every attack, since they're always rolling 1 more die on damage than Bloodgorgers.

Tartarus can also make Bane Thralls MAT 8 with Curse. Dark Shroud + Curse = benefits of Gang are equalized, and all that matters is Weapon Master.


Bane Thralls just flat out do more damage. You don't need a number crunch to see that.

[Sheer_Falacy]

With Dark Shroud, Bane Thralls are an effective P+S 13. With Gang, Bloodgorgers are P+S 13. Bane Thralls have Weapon Master, which means, assuming average rolls, they're going to do more damage with every attack, since they're always rolling 1 more die on damage than Bloodgorgers.

Tartarus can also make Bane Thralls MAT 8 with Curse. Dark Shroud + Curse = benefits of Gang are equalized, and all that matters is Weapon Master.


Bane Thralls just flat out do more damage. You don't need a number crunch to see that.

You are ignoring the second attack, which means bloodgorgers do more damage if an unboosted pow 13 does at least 3.5 damage. So they're better against, say, warpwolves, and that scales up with damage buffs.

[Drzombieface]

You are ignoring the second attack, which means bloodgorgers do more damage if an unboosted pow 13 does at least 3.5 damage. So they're better against, say, warpwolves, and that scales up with damage buffs.

You're ignoring the part where Bane Thralls don't need a second attack. With Denny or Gaspy around, whatever they're swarming is going to die. Period.


I've even had Mechanithralls tear apart Khador jacks faster than Bloodgorgers kill light infantry. Their two attacks are set off by the player wanting to trigger Gang. It focuses too many Bloodgorgers on a single target. Bane Thralls have enough damage to single out targets, or just pour out a can of whoopass all over one big target.

[Scottl1]

You're ignoring the part where Bane Thralls don't need a second attack. With Denny or Gaspy around, whatever they're swarming is going to die. Period.


I've even had Mechanithralls tear apart Khador jacks faster than Bloodgorgers kill light infantry. Their two attacks are set off by the player wanting to trigger Gang. It focuses too many Bloodgorgers on a single target. Bane Thralls have enough damage to single out targets, or just pour out a can of whoopass all over one big target.

Cool story bro...

[Drzombieface]

Cool story bro...

Your comment was so insightful and flawless that I have no counter argument fitting of the situation. Good day, sir.

[Sheer_Falacy]

You're ignoring the part where Bane Thralls don't need a second attack. With Denny or Gaspy around, whatever they're swarming is going to die. Period.


I've even had Mechanithralls tear apart Khador jacks faster than Bloodgorgers kill light infantry. Their two attacks are set off by the player wanting to trigger Gang. It focuses too many Bloodgorgers on a single target. Bane Thralls have enough damage to single out targets, or just pour out a can of whoopass all over one big target.

So what you're saying is you do too much damage, and it'd be helpful if you could split some of it off? Maybe a second attack, something like that?

You said bane thralls outdamaged bloodgorgers. I pointed out that there is a situation where they don't. The problem with bloodgorgers is, without buffs/debuffs, most of the things at that armor (16) don't need that kind of force. On the other hand, with buffs/debuffs...

I'm not a huge fan of bloodgorgers, but completely ignoring their strengths is silly.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Double post.

[Scottl1]

Your comment was so insightful and flawless that I have no counter argument fitting of the situation. Good day, sir.

Your comment of that one time you had mcthralls is pretty useless to the discussion. On average bloodgorgers will do better vs infantry by the numbers. The bg and bt do different things. One kills infantry and one kills heavies. Why would you waste banes on infantry? VS def 13 infantry banes as they are are barely above 50% to hit while bg sit around 80 percent. Gee yesh them banes iz sooo much better cause they hit hard against 1 wound infantry IF they can hit.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Your comment of that one time you had mcthralls is pretty useless to the discussion. On average bloodgorgers will do better vs infantry by the numbers. The bg and bt do different things. One kills infantry and one kills heavies. Why would you waste banes on infantry? VS def 13 infantry banes as they are are barely above 50% to hit while bg sit around 80 percent. Gee yesh them banes iz sooo much better cause they hit hard against 1 wound infantry IF they can hit.

But to get that you're sending two gorgers vs one infantry, which is a waste if they're spread out. Plus banes are mat 8 with Tartarus.

[Scottl1]

But to get that you're sending two gorgers vs one infantry, which is a waste if they're spread out. Plus banes are mat 8 with Tartarus.

Ok so they're better by spending 4 more points. Well done? This discussion was 11 pts to 11 points. Even without gang bg have a 58% chance to hit per attack or the banes 41.7% with one.

Again gorgers out perform at 11 pts not even including pac man into this who is mat 8 all the time and can cleave through infantry easily.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Ok so they're better by spending 4 more points. Well done? This discussion was 11 pts to 11 points. Even without gang bg have a 58% chance to hit per attack or the banes 41.7% with one..

Huh? Banes are mat 6 without Tartarus, so they're also at 60%, but with just one attack.

[Scottl1]

Huh? Banes are mat 6 without Tartarus, so they're also at 60%, but with just one attack.

BG have 2 attacks base though so better odds. I hit the wrong number for that last mat but more attacks=better to hit. lol Not too mention Gerlack can affect multiple squads of gorgers while the UA or BLT affects 1. I still say bg are better vs infantry while bane thralls are better vs arm.

[Sanctjud]

11 points vs. 11 points just doesn't pan out to be a useful comparison.
It is not 11 points used in a vacuum, and then there are personal biases to consider.

For 11 points, you are investing in a mainline unit...what you need as that main line, depends on what else is in the list and the caster that's leading them. It also depends on the meta, what kind of time restrictions, how much money you are willing to spend, etc.

Simply:
Bane Thralls if you like big damage.
Gorgers if you like consistent damage.
_____________________________

BLT only supports one unit of banes? News to me.

[Scottl1]

BLT only supports one unit of banes? News to me. [/COLOR]

Unless you have knights it'd be awful hard to get 2 units into whomever he cursed. lol

[Sanctjud]

I can't curse a unit? Last time I checked, they kinda spread out....benefiting three units of bane knights FTW!

[Scottl1]

I can't curse a unit? Last time I checked, they kinda spread out....benefiting three units of bane knights FTW!

haha true but atm were on bane thralls who lack that precious reach to get that many in.

[Bittersashes]

A few things I've found in the Bloodgorgers favour -

Bloodgorgers have two attacks and Overtake with Gerlack around. For taking scenario zones from Infantry, they are better than Banes, as you can kill twice as many enemy models due to the additional attack and move your troops further into the zone at the same time.

Due to Blood Thirst, the Bloodgorgers outthreat Bane Thralls against living models by 2", and triggering overtake can give them another inch of movement on top of that.

No Knockdown is a lot better than standing up automatically, as it means you are not hit automatically and, more importantly, you maintain a melee range to stop models waltzing past your models.

Also, I have never found it difficult getting Gang bonuses where I need them with Bloodgorgers.

[Chouraku]

IF you are already running Tartarus, go the bane thralls.
IF you are not running Tartarus and cannot fit him in for whatever reason, go the bloodgorgers.
IF you are silly enough to be running all infantry however, bear in mind that bloodgorgers make positioning difficult due to the sheer volume of table space a 10-man medium based unit takes up.

[DavidRM]

...bear in mind that bloodgorgers make positioning difficult due to the sheer volume of table space a 10-man medium based unit takes up.

It does take some getting used. On the other hand, every Trollblood player faces the same problem with their entire army (almost). It's not *that* difficult. Just different.

[deademon]

i forgot about weapon master and not sure if i mentioned darkshroud...

heh...yeaaa

[Drzombieface]

I've been playing Trolls for almost as long as I have been Cryx, so positioning 40mm bases isn't a huge issue for me. Especially if I'm not running a huge infantry horde. But tbh, if I'm running a horde, I'd rather have an entire army of weapon masters than a bunch of fat trolls that need to 2v1 a light infantry warrior to be able to hit it.

Bloodgorgers are overall cheaper, but they waste resources due to positioning for Gang. Sending 2 BG's to 1 squishy model just so they can hit is kind of pointless. True, you can daisy- chain the BG's to benefit from Gang across the front line, but the opponent has to be in an optimal position for it, plus Curse + Banes is much more efficient, even if it's more expensive. On the plus side of that, they can still take down heavy targets, where BG's utterly fail.

[deademon]

I've been playing Trolls for almost as long as I have been Cryx, so positioning 40mm bases isn't a huge issue for me. Especially if I'm not running a huge infantry horde. But tbh, if I'm running a horde, I'd rather have an entire army of weapon masters than a bunch of fat trolls that need to 2v1 a light infantry warrior to be able to hit it.

Bloodgorgers are overall cheaper, but they waste resources due to positioning for Gang. Sending 2 BG's to 1 squishy model just so they can hit is kind of pointless. True, you can daisy- chain the BG's to benefit from Gang across the front line, but the opponent has to be in an optimal position for it, plus Curse + Banes is much more efficient, even if it's more expensive. On the plus side of that, they can still take down heavy targets, where BG's utterly fail.

thanks for sharing experiance

[DavidRM]

Doubling up to get Gang is very much offset by Overtake. And since we're talking 11 points, Overtake is available.

You really notice the 2X melee attacks of Bloodgorgers late in the game. Reduce a unit of Bloodgorgers to 4 and you still have 8 melee attacks charging you. This lets them play attrition in a big way. It only takes a couple of Bloodgorgers to take out a good-sized chunk of an enemy infantry unit.

And there is *some* value to being a Terror. If a non-Fearless unit charges your Bloodgorgers, you get to remind your opponent that they have to make a CMD check. They'll probably pass, but there's always that chance they won't. I treasure those moments.

Bane Thralls are great versus low DEF, high ARM, multi-wound models. They are adequate versus infantry. Since they have small bases and don't have Reach, though, they are Trample-bait.

Bloodgorgers are great versus most types of infantry and are excellent road blocks and screens. Heavily armored warjacks and warbeasts, though? Only adequate-ish, at best. (Still, I've had a charging Bloodgorger put damage on a turtled Devastator.)

Though the two units fill different roles, I'm not sure I'd ever put them in the same list. Whichever one I field, I would want my alternate unit to be faster and ... more different.

[Sanctjud]

The opponent could play a little smart and space his infantry better which would deny the second attack.
I dont know about everyone else, but the only time I bunch up my infantry is only when I am willing to lose all those in a bunch.

[Kommissar Golovko]

I am more with Scott in his assessment of BTs vs arm and BGs vs infantry. The thing with positioning the BG though, you don't have to send 2 against 1 infantry. You try to get 1 enemy model in melee with 2 BGs (not exactly the same in that the primary targets of both models might be different models). Spacing out units are also mitigated to a certain extent with the BGs medium base.

Given the choice at the beginning of this thread, I would go with the BT+UA more than the full BGs.

[Drzombieface]

Doubling up to get Gang is very much offset by Overtake.

True, but doubling up potentially wastes the 2nd model's charge attack. If two BG's charge one model, and the first BG kills the target, you're losing a dice of damage overall when the 2nd BG makes its first attack, and that could save whatever it's attacking. Plus moving around with Overtake could sometimes break the Gang range, in which cases you wouldn't want to move, nullifying the benefits of the ability.

[Kommissar Golovko]

True, but doubling up potentially wastes the 2nd model's charge attack. If two BG's charge one model, and the first BG kills the target, you're losing a dice of damage overall when the 2nd BG makes its first attack, and that could save whatever it's attacking.

Which is why you don't have to target the same model with a charge unless its a caster, solo or jack. If you target a unit spread the charge target around and more importantly get enemy models in melee range of at least 2 BGs to maximize Gang.

Plus moving around with Overtake could sometimes break the Gang range, in which cases you wouldn't want to move, nullifying the benefits of the ability.

It's a 1 in move. You will hardly if ever break Gang.

[Scottl1]

Also aside from the offensive output of the units if a bane passes a tough check he is no longer engaged. A bg who passes is still standing and denying charges, threatening with free strikes, etc.

People would like to bring up stealth but heres the problem vs most armies that are good at shooting like loe and cygnar they ignore stealth anyway and have little trouble hitting defense 12. So in most cases that part separating the 2 is somewhat mitigated. Satyxis seem a better way to stop being shot then stealth does lately in the competitive scene.

So against infantry bg have a higher mat(with gang), higher attacks, terror, cannot be knocked down, and higher spd vs living(which is most infantry). Then to fit in the 11 pt bracket they still have Gerlack who can eat an entire squad by himself.

Bane thralls are better vs armor due to have dark shroud and being weapon masters. Their low mat doesn't matter as much since they easily hit most heavies a few times and it's dead.

The only way to make them comparable to bg vs infantry is to add another 4 pt solo and even then they lack the amount of attack potential. The damage they inflict is overkill vs 1 wound infantry and a waste of resources. Unless I'm running egorshade where most my army is banes there's no need using your armor smashers to hit kriel warriors, etc.

[Drzombieface]

Which is why you don't have to target the same model with a charge unless its a caster, solo or jack. If you target a unit spread the charge target around and more importantly get enemy models in melee range of at least 2 BGs to maximize Gang.



It's a 1 in move. You will hardly if ever break Gang.

That's why I included "sometimes" instead of "every time" Possible, but not plausible.

Also aside from the offensive output of the units if a bane passes a tough check he is no longer engaged. A bg who passes is still standing and denying charges, threatening with free strikes, etc.

People would like to bring up stealth but heres the problem vs most armies that are good at shooting like loe and cygnar they ignore stealth anyway and have little trouble hitting defense 12. So in most cases that part separating the 2 is somewhat mitigated. Satyxis seem a better way to stop being shot then stealth does lately in the competitive scene.

So against infantry bg have a higher mat(with gang), higher attacks, terror, cannot be knocked down, and higher spd vs living(which is most infantry). Then to fit in the 11 pt bracket they still have Gerlack who can eat an entire squad by himself.

Bane thralls are better vs armor due to have dark shroud and being weapon masters. Their low mat doesn't matter as much since they easily hit most heavies a few times and it's dead.

The only way to make them comparable to bg vs infantry is to add another 4 pt solo and even then they lack the amount of attack potential. The damage they inflict is overkill vs 1 wound infantry and a waste of resources. Unless I'm running egorshade where most my army is banes there's no need using your armor smashers to hit kriel warriors, etc.

I'd still rather have Bane Knights dealing with infantry over BG's if my BT's are focusing heavy targets.

[ColonelCurry]

I like Bloodgorgers with Ragman as their pseudu-UA. He can sac pawn them, he gives them dark shroud, and they block LOS to casters like pGaspy and Scaverous. With pGaspy they can throw two POW 19s each against a big target. (Parasite, scything touch, dark shroud, and gang)

Banes have dark shroud naturally, and hit at effective POW 19 weaponmaster, but only once. And they not only don't block line of sight because of their base size, they also don't block LOS because of stealth.

They're both really good. Use Banes and Tartarus in one list, and Bloodgorgers with Slaughterborn and Ragman in another.