Page 1 of 1

Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:43 am
by Mungo the Ringbearer
Coming back into the hobby after a while, and I see they've changed the way armies are built. I believe it's now 1 hero for every 12 warriors? I can see advantages and disadvantages to this, but I was curious as to your opinion.

Do you generally use the old LOME rules, or the newer 1 hero to every 12 warrior warband rules?

Re: Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:55 am
by Kalle
I use the new war band system more or less even in my own scenarios; it some how helps to balance the forces and having more might and special rules, instead of just having a lot of dice to throw, makes to game more interesting.

Re: Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 11:45 am
by Coën
Although I had my doubts at first, I've come to very much prefer the warbands now. More emphasis on heroes (after all, LoMe generally saw one field a single hero and then fill up on troops) makes the armies and games more interesting, as it's the careful use of Might points that really allow for fantastic and strategic events to occur. Having groups of soldiers led by a hero looks nice too, and makes for natural units for deployment in certain scenarios.

The one downside is the potential restrictions, noticeable in particular armies (generally those with expensive troops and heroes, such as Eregion and Dwarves). The requirement to have at least 1 hero for every 12 warriors can at certain points levels mean you'll have selected X full warbands, but are then left with enough points to just select another hero. You are then forced to either shuffle troops around to have X+1 small warbands, or instead spend that fairly substantial amount of points not on the additional hero, but on upgrading troops, swapping previously selected heroes for more expensive ones or just spending it on a banner or two. Mostly an issue for Eregion, where the choice to take some more elite troops also isn't an option.

The loss of somewhat thematic alliances that were required in the LoMe days can also be troubling, but new bonuses for armies purely taken from a single list or part of a historical alliance will help here (currently just for the later Hobbit lists found in the latest expansion, but to be incorporated in more armies when they are revised in months/years to come).

Re: Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:08 am
by Mungo the Ringbearer
Looking at the rules, I can see what you mean regarding having more might available. Having more heroes around does look a lot more dynamic than just giant numbers of troops.

I do worry on the other hand that it makes very expensive heroes even less likely to be taken than previously. When Aragorn or Gandalf can cost 1/4+ of your army by themselves, and you have to have other heroes as well, it makes it an even more difficult choice to make than before. Is that actually the case?

I've not spotted the bonuses to taking a list purely from a particular list. Could you point it out to me?

Re: Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:37 pm
by Coën
I think the main issue some expensive heroes face is their inability to lead troops. While in the old days this may have meant you took e.g. Gandalf and some Wood Elf hero in your Elven army, you are now forced to take the required number of Elven heroes, on top of which you then add Gandalf. At the same time, that does mean those heroes (from e.g. the Fellowhip or White Council) aren't as easily included as would otherwise be the case - often a good thing from a thematic point of view. Competitive lists still often include allied-in spellcasters (as well as a seperate Legolas) however, they simply are so good that they're still worth it. Where thematically logical, some heroes may also appear in multiple lists in the future - Gandalf the Grey was added to the Lake-town list in the latest book, and the idea/hope is that his White alter-ego may similarly appear as an option in Minas Tirith, making him a more viable choice.

As for the the pure-list bonuses, they are currently only available to lists in the There and Back Again book. For example, a pure Radagast's Alliance list will mean all models in it gain Resistant to Magic, while a pure Army of Thror list makes Thror count as 6" banner.

Re: Do you all prefer army building with Lome or Warbands?

Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:09 am
by hixont
It depends on the force for me. In general Warbands removed the worst of the offenses that I and others were guilty of when building forces, but at the same time it makes some models pretty much unplayable. They or their supporting heroes are too expensive to field in a competitive force, where as under LOME they were still viable.