Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 118
  1. #1

    Default Druid's Dice - Trying to Stay Competitive in a Small Meta

    Hey all,


    Recently moved from a big, bustling, competitive meta to a teeny tiny one with only two other players going at 75 points. I regularly travel the 2.5-3 hours to the bigger cities around, but I also started a blog (mostly inspired by Olannon's Courage of Caspia) to help keep myself thinking about the game critically when I play.


    First two batreps are up, the second is a highly entertaining read if you get the chance. That game was absolutely silly. I have already realized that my opponent couldn't charge and combust since it's not attached to a weapon, but in the moment we were pressed for time and couldn't find a specific ruling in the 20 seconds we spent looking for one.


    More to come!


    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    Seriously, dude, you need to stop posting. Every time I see that avatar and forum handle it makes me want to binge Chuck again, and I don't have time!

    The batreps have been great reads. Keep them coming!

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraph View Post
    Seriously, dude, you need to stop posting. Every time I see that avatar and forum handle it makes me want to binge Chuck again, and I don't have time!

    The batreps have been great reads. Keep them coming!
    Sorry man, the forum handle is too great to retire. I'm glad you're enjoying the batreps, the encouragement is a great motivator to keep posting them!

  5. #5

    Default

    Yet another batrep up, this time with me taking the reins of a Mordikaar list and my opponent playing Wurmwood! We both thought it would be good practice to get games in with eachothers lists to learn their strengths and weaknesses, and maybe even a few new tricks. Enjoy!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...-wurmwood.html

  6. #6
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Nice reports and thanks for sharing. Having played it both sides now, do you think it has revealed differences and strengths/weaknesses in you and your opponents play styles that are affecting the outcome of the games? It seems your opponent is overly aggressive with his pieces which gets them killed unfavourably when the dice skew hard.

    Any advice for a Cygnar player who has yet to face the tree?

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkangeldentist View Post
    Nice reports and thanks for sharing. Having played it both sides now, do you think it has revealed differences and strengths/weaknesses in you and your opponents play styles that are affecting the outcome of the games? It seems your opponent is overly aggressive with his pieces which gets them killed unfavourably when the dice skew hard.

    Any advice for a Cygnar player who has yet to face the tree?
    Glad you enjoyed it!

    I do agree with you that this particular guy, while we are close in ability, tends to play his models extremely aggressively when he can and then hope that the dice favor him, whereas I tend to play things expecting 5-6 as the average roll for two dice. It lends to me playing with multiple options every turn as things unfold whereas he kind of has to react to what I do a lot more. I've also played drastically more Warmachine than he has and little things like porting Wurmwood too far away from his beasts turn 1 are mistakes that I don't make very often when I'm playing my own faction.

    As for Cygnar, I've found that the things giving me fits are Stryker 1 and potentially Maddox (haven't played this enough yet). The high ARM allows you to sort of just tank through my feat turn if you pop your feat second and I have a hard time removing enough models for it to matter in that scenario.

    Also be careful not to give the tree the zone early, if he can feat and get 2-3 control points and make you run to contest, you've effectively lost.

  8. #8
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Thanks for the tips, particularly on watching out for scenario. I'm not much of a fan of Stryker and haven't got Maddox so will have a think about my options. I was hoping Nemo3 might be a decent choice since he has an upkeep that stops models in his battlegroup and control area from being pushed, placed, knocked down or slammed. His armour buff also gives the model repulser field, which on a centurion is tough to deal with. Problem Nemo has is no pathfinder so I'd be in trouble during Wurmwoods feat turn. (On the other hand Nemo's feat and enough electro-leaps could do a number on the tree...)

    Always feels weird when I hear people talk about Cygnar and armour skews.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkangeldentist View Post
    Thanks for the tips, particularly on watching out for scenario. I'm not much of a fan of Stryker and haven't got Maddox so will have a think about my options. I was hoping Nemo3 might be a decent choice since he has an upkeep that stops models in his battlegroup and control area from being pushed, placed, knocked down or slammed. His armour buff also gives the model repulser field, which on a centurion is tough to deal with. Problem Nemo has is no pathfinder so I'd be in trouble during Wurmwoods feat turn. (On the other hand Nemo's feat and enough electro-leaps could do a number on the tree...)

    Always feels weird when I hear people talk about Cygnar and armour skews.
    Nemo 3 is an interesting option. He has a seriously hard time with LOS issues, but man his counterpunch is brutal. I have a buddy who plays him a lot, I'll try and get a batrep next time I'm over in that side of the state for you.


    In other news, Short and sweet batrep, played 2 games, only one of them was worth writing up. Kromac 2 with a Woldwrath is kinda silly turns out.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...vs-thyron.html

  10. #10

    Default

    New battle report up featuring Tom Guan's Wargames Con winning Tannith list into a Harkevich LOS denying metal mountain of doom! Who will triumph? Read on!


    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...harkevich.html

  11. #11
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Interesting report, although I've more questions about the Khador list than the circle one. I've a friend who has played Harkevich in the past and a couple of times in the new edition. The clam jacks seem pretty awesome with him, steady and sturdy prevent pushes and knockdown, bulldoze lets them clear paths and ARM 23 means they are very difficult to wreck. (They'll still go down with enough debuffs and high POW attacks but it's a lot of work.) Can steady models still activate after suffering an effect that would normally knock a model down? (Previously they could but would have to forfeit movement or action, I didn't notice if that had changed or not.)

    I ask because one of the previous tricks you could do with a steady model was throw it at the thing you wanted dead and then let it activate, forfeit movement and pound away at the now prone target. With the clam jacks being now steady innately it would be a neat trick to use against circle. Assume a line of jacks, first kodiak throws a devastator fowards. It goes exactly 6" forwards, Harkevich casts mobility, second kodiak advances 6" and throws the devastator another 6" at a warpwolf or similar, knocking it down. Devastator activates, forfeits movement and pounds on the beast till it's dead (hopefully). It seems a solid way to get around the defence skew that your list offers. Although I guess the forest tricks circle can supply do make line of sight rather difficult to achieve sometimes.

    Nice write up and thanks for sharing.

  12. #12

    Default

    I feel really bad for that Thyron player. That is definitely something I would have done, even though I've played a ton of doomy2 and done it to others often enough.

  13. #13

    Default

    Darkangel, I have some thoughts for you but I won't be able to get them written out till after work.

    Seraph, yeah I felt kind of bad, but not too bad to try it!

    So this article ended up being really long and hopefully really useful! I present my take on going first vs second, deployment and terrain, and a light touch on reading your opponents game plan from deployment.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...-game.html?m=1

  14. #14

    Default

    I found this article extremely useful. I've been struggling a little bit with trying to synthesize which is the better side now that mk3 has so much more terrain (and my legion beasts don't ignore forests anymore. ) so this came at a perfect time for me. I'll be trying to internalize some of the ideas for my next games. Cheers!
    2016 Play it Painted! 2 Locks/Casters and 73 points to go! : (

    Legion - 1 warlock and 47 points unpainted.
    Cygnar - 1 warcaster and 20 points unpainted.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BurroBoskov View Post
    I found this article extremely useful. I've been struggling a little bit with trying to synthesize which is the better side now that mk3 has so much more terrain (and my legion beasts don't ignore forests anymore. ) so this came at a perfect time for me. I'll be trying to internalize some of the ideas for my next games. Cheers!
    I'm glad it was useful! Please feel free to ask if you have any questions, and I hope it helps you win some games!

  16. #16

  17. #17

    Default

    Well, your H2 wurmwood article better be good, because that last report was super anti climactic! Thanks for the in depth reports on the other games though.
    2016 Play it Painted! 2 Locks/Casters and 73 points to go! : (

    Legion - 1 warlock and 47 points unpainted.
    Cygnar - 1 warcaster and 20 points unpainted.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BurroBoskov View Post
    Well, your H2 wurmwood article better be good, because that last report was super anti climactic! Thanks for the in depth reports on the other games though.
    Yeah sorry about that, I'll be doing a much better job with the article I promise! After the first two games I was pretty much dead and we both needed to work through the match-up so there was a lot of talking and dice rolling but not much game play.

  19. #19
    Combatant
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    8

    Default

    I really like your reports! Two things that got played wrong though, Tanith needs to hit an enemy with her gun to cause shadowbind and Alexia cannot both attack and make a thrall.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maffo View Post
    I really like your reports! Two things that got played wrong though, Tanith needs to hit an enemy with her gun to cause shadowbind and Alexia cannot both attack and make a thrall.
    Realized the Tanith thing yesterday, probably would have cast a rift at him instead in that case but extremely good to know.

    Also thanks for pointing out the alexia rules interaction, I did not know that.

    Glad yew enjoying the reports

  21. #21

    Default

    I FINALLY have new content for you guys. Work (I'm a teacher and the school year just started) plus sickness on both my and my Warmachine Groups' part have kept me from getting any games in lately, but this is the first of four batreps I'll be posting and I hope you enjoy!


    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...butcher-3.html

  22. #22

    Default

    And here's another batrep, this time Tanith into Haley 1, and a demonstration of how terrain can really make gunlines sad.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...s-haley-1.html

  23. #23

  24. #24

    Default

    I've also started an 8 part series on the different SR 2016 Scenarios. Going in chronological order, so Entrenched is first. I would REALLY like feedback on this one, since it will largely determine how I tackle the other 7 scenarios. Let me know what you think of the format, of the content, and whether or not this is actually something that is useful to you.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...ntrenched.html

  25. #25
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Nice effort, the layout and format are fine although as a pedant I'm critical of some of the tactical advice due to my own hubris and experience.

    I think you spend too much time talking about going first vs second at the start. This is largely repeated later on and the initial overview is (for me) missing some words explaining why this is a live scenario and why going second is so favourable. The reader may know but it's worth spelling it out. There are factors that I think are important but not addressed. Namely the strengths/weaknesses of the readers army rather than their opponent. Your only comment here is on speed and ability to fight on two fronts. For me I'd want first turn regardless if I was using a caster like Haley3 or Nemo1 because they want that top of 1 setup so much and can't easily afford the risk of being in enemy threat range at the same time as setting up their usual game plan. Alternatively I'd want second turn, nearly every time if I had a particularly slow army like Rhul or Skorne. To reach the enemy zone going first requires covering a distance of >17", if the bulk of your army is SPD 4 and you've no AD then it's pretty much a non-option to go first since you will struggle so badly to contest on that second turn. (Think the new Karchev jack spam for example.) I know that some of these caster are not ones you would ideally pick for this scenario but sometimes the list pairing you face makes it untenable to put down any other option.


    I am not entirely in agreement with your assessment of the terrain for your example table but I do think that including this is very good and helpful to illustrate particular things you are describing. For myself I would also probably want the bottom table edge most of the time but might well want the top edge under some circumstances. If I have a very fast infantry horde then taking the top edge gives me a zone that is much easier to defend and block with bodies, there is far less terrain that impedes movement and nowhere for models to hide that is completely out of sight. The trench helps against ranged threats but is of no help if the enemy can get within charging range of it in a single turn. With the clutter of pieces of area terrain the bottom zone has plenty of spots to contest that can be awkward to get to unless you army have plentiful access to pathfinder and/or excellent ranged/magic spot removal options. If the bulk of your army can get to or past the halfway line top of one then going for the top edge might well be more beneficial.

    Access to pathfinder is a huge deal for tables like the one you use as an example and to my mind makes the choice of table sides slightly less clear cut when you opponent has a huge base. These things love to see multiple areas of rough terrain because it can severely limit how much force an opponent can leverage onto their colossal/gargantuan.

    I also regard this scenario as one that can favour assassination casters if the opponent doesn't have an excellent means to block line of sight to their caster. Wurmwood (and most circle warlocks) may be all fine and dandy because he can chuck out forests but the likes of Sorscha, Haley or Harby have to put themselves in harms way of assassination if they want to start scoring by dominating their zone. Against say a Caine2 or Kara Sloan list the top zone in your example table is something of a death sentence for these casters unless they can do something about line of sight. However a Caine2 player may want the top edge because the central forest on that side (and the wall higher up) make for great safe spots to threaten from. Whist the trench on the bottom half performs a similar role it's too close to risk your caster and there is nowhere else to hide that will leave you close enough to threaten the top zone.

    This reply has gotten rather hung up on details so I hope I've not gone too far.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkangeldentist View Post
    Nice effort, the layout and format are fine although as a pedant I'm critical of some of the tactical advice due to my own hubris and experience.

    I think you spend too much time talking about going first vs second at the start. This is largely repeated later on and the initial overview is (for me) missing some words explaining why this is a live scenario and why going second is so favourable. The reader may know but it's worth spelling it out. There are factors that I think are important but not addressed. Namely the strengths/weaknesses of the readers army rather than their opponent. Your only comment here is on speed and ability to fight on two fronts. For me I'd want first turn regardless if I was using a caster like Haley3 or Nemo1 because they want that top of 1 setup so much and can't easily afford the risk of being in enemy threat range at the same time as setting up their usual game plan. Alternatively I'd want second turn, nearly every time if I had a particularly slow army like Rhul or Skorne. To reach the enemy zone going first requires covering a distance of >17", if the bulk of your army is SPD 4 and you've no AD then it's pretty much a non-option to go first since you will struggle so badly to contest on that second turn. (Think the new Karchev jack spam for example.) I know that some of these caster are not ones you would ideally pick for this scenario but sometimes the list pairing you face makes it untenable to put down any other option.


    I am not entirely in agreement with your assessment of the terrain for your example table but I do think that including this is very good and helpful to illustrate particular things you are describing. For myself I would also probably want the bottom table edge most of the time but might well want the top edge under some circumstances. If I have a very fast infantry horde then taking the top edge gives me a zone that is much easier to defend and block with bodies, there is far less terrain that impedes movement and nowhere for models to hide that is completely out of sight. The trench helps against ranged threats but is of no help if the enemy can get within charging range of it in a single turn. With the clutter of pieces of area terrain the bottom zone has plenty of spots to contest that can be awkward to get to unless you army have plentiful access to pathfinder and/or excellent ranged/magic spot removal options. If the bulk of your army can get to or past the halfway line top of one then going for the top edge might well be more beneficial.

    Access to pathfinder is a huge deal for tables like the one you use as an example and to my mind makes the choice of table sides slightly less clear cut when you opponent has a huge base. These things love to see multiple areas of rough terrain because it can severely limit how much force an opponent can leverage onto their colossal/gargantuan.

    I also regard this scenario as one that can favour assassination casters if the opponent doesn't have an excellent means to block line of sight to their caster. Wurmwood (and most circle warlocks) may be all fine and dandy because he can chuck out forests but the likes of Sorscha, Haley or Harby have to put themselves in harms way of assassination if they want to start scoring by dominating their zone. Against say a Caine2 or Kara Sloan list the top zone in your example table is something of a death sentence for these casters unless they can do something about line of sight. However a Caine2 player may want the top edge because the central forest on that side (and the wall higher up) make for great safe spots to threaten from. Whist the trench on the bottom half performs a similar role it's too close to risk your caster and there is nowhere else to hide that will leave you close enough to threaten the top zone.

    This reply has gotten rather hung up on details so I hope I've not gone too far.
    Dang, I don't check on this thread for a couple of days and I get the most constructive feedback I've received so far.

    I made a conscious choice to keep these articles extremely, extremely general in regards to what specific casters/lists/factions would want when choosing first vs. second. There's a ton of advice out there for playing specific lists or casters, and I don't want these to be novels for people who don't play that specific thing to slog through. While I do agree that there are some that will 100% always want first or second, explaining who those are is not the focus of the article.

    I also have a definite Circle bias since that's what I play constantly, and as hard as I try to scrub that out of my writing, it creeps in. This is especially true in regards to choosing sides thanks to terrain. I'm doing my best to keep it as neutral as possible, but in my mind somewhere I always have a background of "I have a ton of speed 6, pathfinder dudes that can easily navigate this." Whenever I find myself consciously doing this, I go back and re-read/re-write what I've got down already, but sometimes it creeps through still. That's something that I will have to practice getting out of my articles.

    Thank you for your comments, they've been very helpful and I will be considering them carefully as I go forward.

    Scenarios 2-4 are also up, butttt

    Got a battle report as a change of pace from the strategy articles, this time it's a Civil War! Tanith the Feral Song takes on Wurmwood, the Tree of Fate!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...-wurmwood.html

  27. #27
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    I respect your desire to keep the articles as useful as possible to all and for that they need to keep to generalities. In my defence I'm using specific casters and lists to back up my criticisms, so although I use Haley3 as an example of someone who always wants first turn there are many lists (sometimes just because of the player) that will want first turn regardless. (Trolls spring to mind as a faction that can be often like that due to player preference.)

    I think all I really wanted were a couple of sentences in your first summary along the lines of;

    "Going first is a good idea if... Your army has a lot of abilities and spells that require activating to put into play."

    "Going second is a good idea if... Your army is very slow."

    It's easier to have a good grasp of your own force than the opponent's and I'm not good at assessing my opponent's focus as ranged or melee. (Or spell orientated for that matter.) So I prefer tactical advice that is certain to fall within the realms of my knowledge. (I may not know what my opponent does but I really ought to know what my stuff does.)


    Nice battle report between Tanith and Wurmwood, great to see the tree fall down. I have one question about the Wurmwood list, why is there a blackclad there instead of Lanyssa? Unless I'm missing something winter's storm with Wurmwood's feat seems really good.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkangeldentist View Post
    I respect your desire to keep the articles as useful as possible to all and for that they need to keep to generalities. In my defence I'm using specific casters and lists to back up my criticisms, so although I use Haley3 as an example of someone who always wants first turn there are many lists (sometimes just because of the player) that will want first turn regardless. (Trolls spring to mind as a faction that can be often like that due to player preference.)

    I think all I really wanted were a couple of sentences in your first summary along the lines of;

    "Going first is a good idea if... Your army has a lot of abilities and spells that require activating to put into play."

    "Going second is a good idea if... Your army is very slow."

    It's easier to have a good grasp of your own force than the opponent's and I'm not good at assessing my opponent's focus as ranged or melee. (Or spell orientated for that matter.) So I prefer tactical advice that is certain to fall within the realms of my knowledge. (I may not know what my opponent does but I really ought to know what my stuff does.)


    Nice battle report between Tanith and Wurmwood, great to see the tree fall down. I have one question about the Wurmwood list, why is there a blackclad there instead of Lanyssa? Unless I'm missing something winter's storm with Wurmwood's feat seems really good.
    Fair point. I'll go back and edit something in later today. I totally agree that it's very important to know what your own list can and cannot do with regards to scenario.

    As for the Wurmwood list, I believe the blackclad was in there primarily because my opponent didn't have access to Lanyssa. Also, her positioning to get Winter's Storm off under Wurmwood's feat is very tricky, especially when you have to pop feat turn 1. There are a lot of lists that can still kill her before activating the important models. I do agree though that when you can get it to work, it's a beautiful thing.

  29. #29

    Default

    Next Batrep is up, this Time Tanith vs. High Executioner Reznik on Recon!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...-reznik-1.html

    AND!

    And a second game against Reznik, this time rocking Krueger 1 and the STORM RAPTOR!!! Read on to see how Zapdos fared against the fire of Menoth's fury!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...raptor-vs.html

  30. #30

    Default

    I apologize for the long delay between posts, Extraction was a really tricky Scenario to write about since it's so gimmick-less. As a result, a big piece of the article got dedicated to controlling, contesting, and understanding flags. Hope you enjoy!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...xtraction.html

  31. #31

    Default

    I've gotten my good friend Chandler, who many of you know from Crusader's Call, to write me up a battle report from the Menoth point of view, Sevy 1 into Irusk 2.

    Hope you enjoy!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...atrep-1_3.html

  32. #32

    Default

    Scenarios 6 and 7 are up! Let me know what you think, do you agree with my analysis? Are there things that I haven't considered? I'm always looking for new tricks and I'm happy to discuss unexplored ideas!


    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...incursion.html

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...7-outlast.html

  33. #33
    Destroyer of Worlds Darkangeldentist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    The scenario review for Extraction hit on some really good points, the stuff on how to contest with diagrams was particularly helpful and informative. It differed greatly from your first piece since there was no comment on how list construction or design impacts this scenario which I expected to see here since I (personally) feel it's a huge factor in how to approach this scenario.

    A friend (who no longer plays much) throughout Mk2 loved scenarios similar to extraction because it played right into the kind of list he loved to play. Namely one that could be across the halfway line first turn. This approach still holds true for scenarios like this in Mk3. If your army is fast and/or your caster has a strong control/defensive feat you can achieve a huge scenario advantage just through board position. Going first, if you can clog up the area around the flags to deny the opponent a means of contesting then you can potentially win on turn 3. It puts an enormous amount of pressure on the opponent very early on that can lead to poor decisions and tactical mistakes. Certain factions like Trollbloods, Protectorate and Cryx can achieve this with a variety of casters and lists using swarms of infantry to rush up the field and run to engage, physically blocking enemy models from getting past. This approach almost flips the turn advantage of going second because if done right the second player cannot get anything to contest and the first players scores two consecutive turns.

    I'm not a big fan of this type of scenario due to this strategies efficacy and the rapid cascade effect that can happen when you misjudge it. I'm not a big fan of incursion for much the same reason, although at least here you aren't required to split your force quite as much.

  34. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkangeldentist View Post
    The scenario review for Extraction hit on some really good points, the stuff on how to contest with diagrams was particularly helpful and informative. It differed greatly from your first piece since there was no comment on how list construction or design impacts this scenario which I expected to see here since I (personally) feel it's a huge factor in how to approach this scenario.

    A friend (who no longer plays much) throughout Mk2 loved scenarios similar to extraction because it played right into the kind of list he loved to play. Namely one that could be across the halfway line first turn. This approach still holds true for scenarios like this in Mk3. If your army is fast and/or your caster has a strong control/defensive feat you can achieve a huge scenario advantage just through board position. Going first, if you can clog up the area around the flags to deny the opponent a means of contesting then you can potentially win on turn 3. It puts an enormous amount of pressure on the opponent very early on that can lead to poor decisions and tactical mistakes. Certain factions like Trollbloods, Protectorate and Cryx can achieve this with a variety of casters and lists using swarms of infantry to rush up the field and run to engage, physically blocking enemy models from getting past. This approach almost flips the turn advantage of going second because if done right the second player cannot get anything to contest and the first players scores two consecutive turns.

    I'm not a big fan of this type of scenario due to this strategies efficacy and the rapid cascade effect that can happen when you misjudge it. I'm not a big fan of incursion for much the same reason, although at least here you aren't required to split your force quite as much.
    That's a fantastic point, and one I hadn't really considered since I've never seen it pulled off successfully (bias here since usually I'm playing Wurmwood here and he's a champ at unclogging things). I'll go and edit in something about list construction into these, I'd dropped them out since they're a lot harder to write and I've been crunched for writing time of late. I'll probably delay putting my Recon review together for a day in order to get the list selection stuff edited in.

    Thanks for the advice, definitely going to raise the level of the articles.

  35. #35

    Default

    It's here! The finale to my Scenario Set article Series is now live. I'm actually pretty excited to have these out there for everyone to use as a resource.

    As always, I love to get feedback! Please chime in with any thoughts you may have.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...o-8-recon.html

  36. #36

    Default

    First Battle Report from yesterday's Steamroller is up, Wurmwood vs. Helga on Linebreaker! Come see if I can follow my own advice and make this a live Scenario, or if I get exposed as a hypocrite and can't make it work.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...eamroller.html

  37. #37

    Default

    Second round is up, Wurmwood vs. Caine 2 on Entrenched. A really good example of Wurmwood's devastating Scenario play.

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...eamroller.html

  38. #38

    Default

    Game 3 is up, I take on the bane of all Hordes with Tanith in a heated battle between Reznik 2's army of jacks and Tanith's army of Griffons!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...eamroller.html

  39. #39

    Default

    The final game of the Steamroller was into my good friend and excellent Khador player, rocking Butcher 3 and Kozlov. I knew I'd be getting the Butcher, but I was so tired of playing Wurmwood into him that I went rogue and dropped Tanith. Read on to see how it went!

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...eamroller.html

  40. #40

    Default

    Well it's been a few days friends, but I finally have more delicious Druidic content for you to consume! Here are ALL of my batreps from the i5 Team Event in Portland, Oregon. I am the proud captain of Team Deceptively Adorable, and we placed Second out of a field of 14 teams - not shabby considering our total prep time outside of myself amounted to less than 15 games of Warmachine!

    Thanks for reading

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...ournament.html

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...ournament.html

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...ournament.html

    http://druidsdice.blogspot.com/2016/...ournament.html

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •