Auretious Taak:
Anyone who posted on dakkadakka for a while a year back will have come across Stelek in the 40k section of those boards. this chap comes across as a rude and crude arse but infact is a damned fine player of 40k and better then most infact as the U.S. 'ard Boyz attests though he didn’t manage to get to the nationals last year due to lack of transport there and rl issues (though he qualified as far as I know). lol, his 7 Land Raiders of Doom army list was epic, or was it 8, haha, anyways good chap when you talk to him. People have been badgering him on his blog to do a similar thing that he did for the 40k armies and provide a tiered ranking system of what he thought was the bizniz and what wasn’t and do it for WHFB, so he did, and CD’s were mentioned as good in his understanding of the game et al. Fantasy isn’t stelek’s best game but he is up on the tournament metagame and has a solid bout of knowledge anyways and solid CD love is appreciated (as I’ve said in my comment when it gets put up, along witha link here heh). have a gander, nice run down in all:
http://yesthetruthhurts.blogspot.com/2009/03/fantasy-rantand-list-revealed.html
Auretious Taak.
two_heads_talking:
Well, forgive this American for not really give a rats arse about stelek or his blogs…
BilboBaggins:
He seems to like armies that are very powerful in Magic, Shooting, and CC. So Daemons, Chaos Dwarfs, Dark Elves and Lizardmen are his favorites.
Empire needing tanks to be competitive? What is he smoking? I’ve run a very competitive non-tank Empire army in the past.
Were the DOW armies not very competitive in the tornaments they were allowed? I heard they were.
Dwarfs not good in CC but Chaos Dwarfs are? Huh? I do agree the CD’s are great but listing the Dwarfs as bad is confusing to me.
Groznit Goregut:
@BilboBaggins: The tournaments that I’ve heard about and from general scuttle butt put the lowest tear armies as:
- Dogs of War
- Ogres
- Beast of Chaos
- Orcs and Goblins
Border Reiver:
I’m not too impressed with his analysis, especially with dwarfs.
However his criteria completely ignore mobility which is how we set up favourable combats. This is the one area where Beasts shine (an army that skirmishes, and can get rank bonus, plus the ability to suddenly appear in your backfield?) Mobility is nice.
He is right about one thing with Empire - they are the average army. But like many sports teams with average players - it’s all about teamwork in the end baby, and that’s where Empire shines.
BilboBaggins:
I haven’t played against Beasts in a while, but that Khorne BOC I did wiped the floor with me. Need the old Helblaster rules to help against all them skirmishers.
Orcs and Goblins are fun, but I can see them not winning all the games and still getting overall.
Orges are a tough but can be beaten, I lost overall in a small tournament to them. You need ranks of troops to go after them.
Dogs of War are another Average Army. I seem to think average overall armies can be tough, as you said when they all work together.
two_heads_talking:
I'm not too impressed with his analysis.
Border Reiver
That pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter and stelek in a nut shell.
TLTG:
Actually I think he’s (mostly) right. Keep in mind his definition of competitive is quite a great deal different from most players’ definition of competitive. I think some of his generalizations are pretty off base, and his understanding of Vampire Counts is just plain wrong, but aside from the VC getting a bad ranking I think he did it right.
A couple things people seem to have possibly missed:
1) A single competitive build does not make for a competitive army. TRUTH.
2) A one dimensional clobbermaster does not make for a competitive army. Having major soft spots (like, say, auto-rolling to a gunline army) will make you lose at least one game in a major event, and probably more.
Also keep in mind that in higher level events, everybody is trying to cheeseball as hard as they can. My well balanced Chaos Dwarf list might crush the local tournament scene, but if I take it to something bigger I’m going to get my head smashed in by people who take 10 chariots, or tzeentch players with 20+ power dice, or a Vampire Counts player rolling deep with Blood Knights and a Regen banner. I have options that aren’t terrible for winning these types of games, but my odds suck.
Willmark:
Meh his points were mostly on. He’s a bit snarky but I’m fine with that.
TLTG:
I get the feeling if he wasn’t trying to be humorous or acidic for the sake of it, he’d be making some very good points. As it stands, again, the only thing I think he’s wrong about is Vampire Counts. However, there is definitely an argument in that if you can’t generate a quick massacre, you won’t be able to be competitive because SOMEONE in the room is going to get all massacres all day and you’re trying to win, not just end well. The only really devastating units they can throw at you, aside from tooled out characters, are things like Blood Knights which are super pricey and easily led off track.