Metagame for 2015

I would like to start the probably most crucial discussion for the ETC, namely the Metagame that we are going to use for 2014.

First of all, I would like to point out that last year our greatest problem was that we were lacking offensive players able to bring a 15+ when need be.
We we usually all making a draw sort of, with luck going eaither way (meaning a 12-8 or a 7-13 depending on dice)
We have to face it, we do not have the capacity to compete offensively with great teams.

I would like to use a comparison with football. It's really rare to see the underdogs playing an offensive gamestyle and defeat the opponent by attacking them constantly. Imagine that FC Sion would be playing Barcelona FC (  ), it would clearly result in a very defensive strategy for Sion, hoping to be able to defend well and maybe force the attacking team to make mistakes and exploit them.
Likewise, if one of use, let's say Paul for instance, had to play against Cocofreeze from France, I think his best chances would be to defend and wait for a mistake of Cocofreeze to maybe win the game. All other strategies would suffer from a lower mean final result without any doubt.
It's imho common sense in Warhammer, defending is easier than attacking.
Offensive gamestyle requires a lot of skills, and imho not many players can pretend to have the level to be competiting in ETC environment. It requires a complete understanding of risk-reward trade-offs, a flawless tactic and one must admit, some bit of luck.

The fact that we are lacking these players (especially since Buchi, and probably Alan, won't make it to the ETC) and so it is difficult for us to play an offensive metagame like some countries such as Denmark   

BUT, we have a great program (thanks Dim!) that allows us to have superiority during the pairings, and my advice should be to exploit that in a more appropriate way. Last year we tried to act like that in the last minute, with Alan having only good matchups and so priority during the pairing over others.
However, the rest of the team was not build accordingly, and hence sacrifices had to be made for players that were not ready to face them (Pulp, that would have build his list way differently if he knew he would be sacrificed every round)

So in my opinion these are the points on which we have to draw our attention this year:

1) select the players that can play offensively and train them accordingly (namely to attack and bring points)
2) decide of the sacrificed players and train them accordingly (meaning playing against good players that are going to try to crush them with superior lists)
3) build our list to fit the categories to which players, keeping in mind that they should be safe


For instance, imagine that I am captain and I select a team of 8 people (Xavier, Bob, Fritz, Charles, Heinrich, Angelo, Fred and Martin)
I myself consider that only Bob and Fritz can play offensively, we therefore give them Deamon and High Elves, with the goal of building specific lists to score points against the armies we'll expect to see the most at the ETC (whichever they are), they'll put 15+ and 5- results in their matrix in order to have only good match-ups.
Secondly we have a bunch of players that can attack but they're at their best when they defend (Xavier and Charles) so they build list to avoid some armies, but they need to stay versatile.
And lastly, we have less experienced players (Heinrich, Angelo, Fred and Martin) and we'll give them super solid team. We know they can be the weak points during the round, so we give them super solid armies so it will be very hard for the opponent to score points (their goal is to secure 10 points at least)


In the end, to build lists this year I would like to:

-have safe armies (no dragons or crazy 600pts casters without earthing rod...etc)
-have armies against which it's hard to take points without taking risks (ex deathstars)

In conclusion, before I write an useless 5 pages book, I would like to hear your comments and opinion, before going any further   

I think we have to build a defensive team without any crazy "all-in" army this year and here is some arguments:
- Like you said, the lack of offensive players
- This kind of play, even manage by good players, often requires to take lots of risks which can end up by severe defeats.
- I think AR is doing a good job (maybe I'm wrong), hence I don't think we'll find armies like 2012 OK. or 2013 DoCh to fillful this role.
But If we have the player and the army I'm ok.

We need armies that can still score and some with very few (even 0) bad match-ups.

We need good lists and an overall knowledge of which are the top armies who need to be countered or blocked.

Then with Dim's program, we get good pairings and win 2014 ETC   

And we need death lores

Or 100% death lore proof lists   

Both !

Isn't the idea behind the new AR-Draft to reduce the Deathlore-problem?

I think, the Idea of Xavier is a good start. We should give the players clear tasks to concentrate and focus on it.

Maybe we should make a list with the players and the armys, were we wright down the tasks of these armys. So the possible players of the army can allready start a bit with the training of this task? Or atleast start to make some thoughts about it.

Yeah, the idea behind the drafts is to reduce this problem, BUT it is not efficient in my opinion.

The FAQ maybe nerfed a bit the 0 spell, but spells 23456 are still extremely good. Of course some armies have to pay a bit to have some death, but at least

-Vampire counts (some price to pay)
-Dark elves (not really restricted)
-High elves (almost not restricted)
-Chaos warriors (almost not restricted)
-Chaos dwarves(? I don't know much this army)

can pay a really resonnable cost to get it. It is not restricted for

-Empire (with restriction on light coven, it will appear)
-Ogres
-Wood elves (if there is some)
-Tomb King
-Beastmen
-Lizardmen

Maybe only demons can't pay for the GUO death caster. So having 4-5 good lists with death is still quite possible.

In my opinion, the armies that can pretend to play offensive are
Vampires, Daemons, Chaos

The armies that can do both: Brets, Ogers, Orcs

Good Defending armies:
Empire, High elves, Dark elves (Wood elves, waiting for new book), skavens

Not of use for us or subpar for the moment: Tomb king, beastmen, chaos dwarves, dwarves, Lizardmen

But again, offensive ok, but against who? That is more important. We should have at least 2 armies that can deal with any other army.

Like
orcs --> daemons vampire counts
brets --> orcs, high-elves full cav
Dark-elves --> brets, ogers full leadbelchers

Concerning the pairing matrix, I don't think we should "trick" too much the program by entering wrong values.
It is clear that it should be our best player that gets the best opportunities, but you should not write -5 when it is in fact a 10. You can maybe add +1 somewhere.

Because then the program then has the wrong cost in mind. If to make Daemons play against orcs (say +5) either than Vampires (0 real), (-5 in computer)
you decide to sacrify 2 others armies which will get real -4 otherwise, it is a bit silly. You paid 8 to get 5, but computer think that you made a good deal (+2).

I think we should try to let the pairing tool work on its own, and try to plug values that are as correct as possible (even +10, -10).

I agree with Dim on many points.

Although, we have to be careful that a full death lore meta be optimal; we saw last year that it's not always the case.
Death relies a lot on luck, it can be game breaking, but it can also do nothing at all.
For me, it is crucial that armies with death lore do not only rely on death to inflict damage. We should never expect death to bring points with snipes and purple sun.
We can use death lore, when doom and darkness and soulfeeder are necessary (ex: shooty armies or CC armies).

Using a hide and seek Lizardmen army with Death Lore is for me not optimal.
Although a shooty HE army with death and shadow/heaven lore might be very effective   

So having 4-5 good lists with death is still quite possible.

But is that optimal? I'm not sure (see the result of Austria)

But again, offensive ok, but against who? That is more important. We should have at least 2 armies that can deal with any other army.

Totally agree.
We must think about that very carefully, and be able to propose at least 2 counters (better 3) to any army we could meet.
This way we can force the opponent to make mistakes during the pairing process.

Concerning the pairing matrix, I don't think we should "trick" too much the program by entering wrong values.
It is clear that it should be our best player that gets the best opportunities, but you should not write -5 when it is in fact a 10. You can maybe add +1 somewhere.

Because then the program then has the wrong cost in mind. If to make Daemons play against orcs (say +5) either than Vampires (0 real), (-5 in computer)
you decide to sacrify 2 others armies which will get real -4 otherwise, it is a bit silly. You paid 8 to get 5, but computer think that you made a good deal (+2).

I think we should try to let the pairing tool work on its own, and try to plug values that are as correct as possible (even +10, -10).

Agree again, we should not force the program.
The only way to achieve what we want, is to create specialized armies that will be forced to write down such results in the matrix (goal to achieve for our offensive players).
For the rest, we'll have to spend waaaaay more time in june-july to test the armies to be able to write down correct results.
In this regard, it is also important that we keep the armies we are used to play. For instance about myself, I have gained a solid knowledge in Bretonnians and it would be sad to loose this benefit by starting another army 2 months before the ETC.
Imho it's the only way to be competitive, play the things we are used to play. It's more important than the metagame.
We'll know better what to do, and also our forecasts will be better and will yield more accurate pairing matrixes.

Bonjour à tout le monde et BONNE ANNEE

Je voudrait juste dire que je suis tout à fait d'accord avec ce qu'as dit Xavier, il est très important d'avoir des armées pour mettre le 20-0 et d'autre pour faire 10-10.

Après au niveau du metagame, je ne suis pas un expert:

-Est ce qu'il faut beaucoup de sorcier qui joue la mort???
-Est ce qu'il faut beaucoup d'armée très agressive???
-Est ce qu'il faut beaucoup d'armée défensive???

C'est quand même très compliquer et si on ce rate à une armée prêt sa peut être une catastrophe.

Personnellement ce que conseil, c’est de regarder quelle joueurs nous avons (je veut dire disponible pour l’ETC) et qu’elle sont leurs capacité et avec qu’elle armée.
Ensuite trouver genre deux/trois très bonne liste, qui peuvent être jouée de 3 manières bien différentes, genre agressive ou défensive, avec la mort ou pas.

Par exemple pour les démons il y as pas 36 listes possible : (Alan peut corriger si je me trompe)
Mais la liste sera surement (avec les restrictions du 2ème draft)

1 Duc, don exalté, don mineur 570
1 Bsb de nurgle, avec régénération ou bannière perforante 160
30 Portepeste EMC + bannière +1 au mouvement 435
10 Horreurs EMC bannière à 5 pts 165
5 gargouilles de Tzeentch 70
5 gargouilles de Tzeentch 70
4 bête de Nurgle 240
4 bête de Nurgle 240
4 mouches à merde, attaques empoisonnée, bannière, bannière enflammée 260
3 mouches à merde, attaques empoisonnée, champion 190

Pour un total de 2400pts
C’est la liste la plus autiste possible mais c’est une liste juste horrible à affronté 

Je propose aussi deux listes totalement différente pour les Ogres mais qui sont très forte.
P.S dans les restrictions il y as un truc pour les ferox ou c’est marqué (or fraction) je le prend comme si c’était une fraction en français pour la seconde liste.

1 Désosseur, talisman préservation, épée de puissance, baguette tellurique (Cieux)
1 Cogneur, GB, Bannière enflammée
7 Ventre durs EMC bannière discipline
6 Ventre durs, Musicien
3x1 Croc de sabre
6 Craches plomb, musicien
5 craches plomb, musicien
5 craches plomb, musicin
2 Ironblaster

Sa fait dans les environs de 2400pts il faut juste adjuster un peu
Elle est super balèze cette liste (elle peut juste pas jouer contre démon)

Une seconde liste c’est avec quelques ferox

1 Désosseur, talisman de préservation, baguette tellurique, épée puissance (gastromancie)
1 GB équipé cac
7 Ventre dur EMC bannière discipline
7 Ventre dur, musicien
3x 1 Croc de sabre
5 Ferox, arme de poing, armure lourde EM 370
5 Ferox, arme de poing, armure lourde EM 370
5 Ferox, Arme de poing, armure lourde EM 370

C’est drôle 

Personnellement pour un ETC je verrais plus la première liste Ogre mais la seconde reste très très balèze.

Les deux listes sont jouée de deux manière totalement différente mais la seconde comme vous pouvez vous en douter et faite pour massacrer.

J’essaye d’aidé un maximum sur les armées que je connais, mais pour moi c’est comme sa que je vois la chose.

A++

@Xavier

I mean death lore is intersting and complementary for high elves, dark elves, empire, vampire, warrior of chaos and chaos dwarves. All of them have an interest in doom and darkness + -1F -1E spells. So without going into bad combos, there will be 3-5 death lore out of 8 armies.

So maybe it is not an optimal build but we have to be prepared to play against such stuff.

As victor proved by playing skavens, it is possible to train correctly to handle new armies. Best players should go for the lists that go offensive and put 20's.
Maybe you want to keep up with brets, but maybe it is better if you can go with something more agressive.

@Murglud
Alors la liste 1 des ogres va être restreinte: pas de niv 4 si 2 ironblaster. Les listes que tu proposes sont grosso modo ce que j'avais en tête pour les démons et ogres (offensif, défensif). Merci d'avoir pris le temps de les écrire.

  Après relecture ce que je veut dire par la

C'est que lorsque l'on auras trouver plein de bonne liste, on peut les ajuster pour le metagame :-)

Par exemple on as 3 très bonne listes offensive et 5 très bonne défensive. Il nous faut disont 4-4 de chaque type (c'est un exemple

On modifie une liste en fonction.

Genre l'Empire de Dimitri en général c'est tout le temps les même listes
1 Gros pack de la mort qui tue avec niv 4 de la vie
1 x demi poulet
1 tank
2 canon et pif paf

C'est à mon avis une superbe liste pour du 10-10 prendre des match difficile (ne me crier pas dessus si c'est faut :-) c'est mon humble avis   

On peut la modifier pour la rendre plus rush pour prendre des point, genre mettre deux unité de demi poulet avec le gros pack et foncer dans le tas :-) peut être changer le domaine par le domaine des cieux,
Etc etc

pareil pour O&G, un bon pack de Kostos orquesa sauvage c'est dur à prendre et sa pique

Enfin je ne sais pas si vous me comprenez, peut être que je me trompe, c'est juste pour aider un peu :-)

A++

@Dim
Pour la liste Ogre, je pensais bien que sa n'allais pas passé :-)
Mais c'est pas grave lol le deuxième Ironblaster peut être remplacé par 2 ferox qui passe toujours très bien
la liste sa donne la la même chose en perso et unité de base mais en spécial sa donne
4 craches plomb musicien
4 craches plomb musicien
5 craches plomb musicien
2 ferox
2 ferox
1 Ironblaster

Et Paf sa fait des chocapic :-)

Xavier wrote:it is also important that we keep the armies we are used to play

The most important think for me. It require just to much trainig to learn a new army. Player should conentrate on 1-2 armies for now and try the maximum of different builds because or now, we can't really say what will gonna be good or not.

We can't say now if we'll need a lot of death or not. But I agree, now death is really strong and very good in team turnament.

@Murglud: Tu trouve vraiment fort la liste tir avec 1 seul canon? Bcb de mauvais match-up non? je pense aux CVs, Démons, guerriers du chaos, haut elfes dragon+fenix, vulnérable a la mort aussi, au nain du chaos, ... (peut être je les sous-estime un peu^^)

Ben j'ai gagné 1 tournoi avec cette liste elle est autant bien. les ferox retiennent pas mal.
C'est pas une liste clé en main mais elle est vraiment bien.
2 canon c'est mieux je suis d'accord mais bon :-)

sinon il y as la liste 15 ferox mais il faut les fig :-)

Est ce que quelqu'un pourrait m'expliquer ce que veut dire le truc or fraction dans les restrictions d'armée? Je comprend vraiment pas le Principe.

I completly agree with the most sayd here.
I also think that we should select our army to the players that they are used to play most.
Or set it as soon as possible to train as much as possible if its needed to play a new army.

I agree with Dim that there are lots of Army that should play Death even if they have to play for it. Maybe Death is much about luck. But if you are lucky you win, and if not so be it. The enemy would never let you cast D&D or the Sun even if you lack Luck in that match.

For me now we can set the Army in 3 Groups and discuss if we all think the same.

Group 1 (Scoring Armys)
Demons: I still think Demons are way to strong and they go like unresticted out of it. You go 8 beasts, Skill Cannon, Bird and like 5 Flies. Stupid
Dark Elves: Here i dont see it why everyone thinks this is a defensive Army. You build a Stupid Death Star with like 4 Pegas and as many Dark Riders as possible and crush everything.
OK: I think a list with like 13-15 Moronfangs is to hard to handle for a lot of armys.
WoC: Here we can play the Nascar List: 3 Chaos Chariots, 3 Gorrila Chariots, 2 times Crushers, BSB on Demonic Mount and LvL 4 Death.

Group 2 (Defensive - "Normal" Armys) Armys that can play against a lot of Armys and can score if they get the chance.
Vampires: I think Vampires fit here because they have a lot of potential to block almost everything and if the time comes to score some nice points
Skaven: Here same as Vampires, they play good against the most armys but against the right armys they can score pretty well.
Bretonia: Super solid Army with the possibility to rush the enemy if needed.
Empire: Can block very well and also can score high with enough Demis, Tank and stuff.

Group 3 (sacrificial Armys)
O&G: I play a lot of O&G recently and i think they can block like every Army exept Vamps (or Demons) Since you have a block that is immun to panic, non lethal magic and lone Flying heros there is much potentioal for you to corner out everyone.
Highelves: For me Highelves have like no bad matchup and can be parried against everything.


The other Army im not sure. Lizards, Chaos Dwarfs and Woodelves (new book) may be playable. But i think there is like no space for Dwarfs (exept they get a new book) TK or Beasts.


What do you think?

New draft out (http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=120430)

My vision

Specific armies (builded to crush some lists and die to others)

Woch, the 6 chariots + lvl4 death (or tzensch) is also the list I was thinking about.
DoCh: of course
High elves! : maybe less with draft 2 actually, but still, 2 frosties and dragon is strong
Dark elves: Yep, some lists can be played really agressivly
Skaven: Bell lists can score
Vampire too: 2 time 10 hexwraiths, 8 horrors, terrorgheist, Blender lord, 30-40 ghouls, bsb
OK: why not

Normal armies

elves, skaven, ... well pretty much every one^^

Blocking armies:


Dark elves: 2lvl4, 3times riders, 2x harpies, pegs, shades, Hard to loose
High elves: of course
Vampire's Meatwall
Bretts
Skavs
Empire
O&G (not sure now because of 2 really bad match-ups witch are DoCh and VC + death/treason problem)
Lizard maybe

So here is the draft3.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12RRxK0At_SuhVTrEIlEcVWYXHM8nYd_gUbmmfODzt20/pub

First of all, the main difference with last year is the max 2 on death lore (except beastmen and TK and solo lvl2)

So we need to choose 2 armies.

Great choices:

• Doch: I really liked the list of Allan with lvl4 death and 4 level of tzensch. It improves the mirror match up a
  lot and the one vs skaven too.
  

• HE: Lists with BoWd, phenix and lvl4 death seems strong.
  

• (WoCh: I consider a list with Lvl 3-4 death + lvl 2 (with 3 spells) tzensch really strong. Howewer, to not use the
  pick, it's also possible to take lvl2 death and lvl4 tzensch.In both cases with hellcannon of course. Anyway we don't have
  the player right?)
  

Ok choices:

• WE: great with death but not sure of the army
  

• ChDw: Same
  

• VC: great with death, but not sure if you can build a correct list with it.
  

Other choices:

• Dark elves can't really use it, because you need warlocks.
  

Other than the death issue, here is quickyl what is my opinion about armies:

-Brettonia, and 2500 now
-DoCh and VC, still REALLY solid
-HE and DE, alway good for me
-Skaven, so solid, and even better than last year (3*5 gutters ^^)
-Empire, ok with a solid list
-OK, with less death, they become more interessting too
-WE, why not. Maybe new book?

-WoCh and O&G and Lizzies, no player but GREAT armies in my opinion (Actually Paul could play one of them)



What do you think?

First of all.

When the restrictions will be the lasts...?

I think that we are really close to what restrictions will be for 2014. We can be sure that the death restrictions will stay (I agree with it).

SO when we ll have choose our 8 armies, I think that it s really important to choose which if there will use death lore. Or perhaps, as Victor does. We can check which armies will not use lore of death.

See you.

Normaly, if captains agree, it's the final one. Except maybe for dwarves or new WE.

I propose that everyone starts making lists, post them and, if possible, with a match-up table.

If captains don't agree (mostly on the rule changes), then their will be some other modifications to avoid them, but normally this would affect only daemons, beastmen, wood elves.

For the death issue, I agree mostly with Victor but I want to point out some options Victor may not have thought about:

For Dark elves, the restriction on death is only for mounted sorceress. You can use a lvl4 death on foot + 3 x 5 warlocks if all your characters are going to be on foot, or lvl4 death on foot + 2 x 5 warlocks + 2 pegasus, or if you really want a nasty magic phase, lvl4 death on foot + sacrificial dagger + 5 warlocks + some mounted characters.

So yes, you can use death with dark elves! With the hit they get on fast cav build, It might be the best way to go.

For High elves, the dragon prince death star is also strong and it needs (only) high magic to work best I think.  But it is one more lists in trouble with orcs and goblins.

My opinion is that the -3ld spell combines best with vampire. First because there is also the vampire ability that can make it -4ld and because of the howls (2x banshee + terrorgheist is possible). Second the vampire lord has ld 10 for the signature.

For Vampires, death cost quick blood (but there is beguile+nightshroud) and the inability to play more than 10 hexwraiths or to double crypt horrors.

If we go for double vargheist (it is no more restricted now, but I have no idea if it is worth it), it means nothing, and we can also play squelletons bus + 2*5 hexwraiths + 8 crypt horrors + terror gheist in addition with death.

I think that among the options we have for Paul, orcs and goblins are the best one.
Wood elves: for me it is a no until there is a new book ---> too many bad match ups (daemons, vampires, warrior of chaos, brets, ...)

I pretty much aggree with what you say.

Just dagger+death is not possible.


After reflexion, indeed vampires are a great choice with death. Maybe even without vampire lord but with 2 lvl4 ?

Paul in O&G, is a great idea   

Yes, saccrificial dagger + death is possible

6 or more Doomfire Warlock models/mounted Supreme Sorceress with Lore of Death or Dark Magic/Sacrificial Dagger, max 1

If your sorceress is not mounted, it does not count in the line.

my bad    but you cut in warlocks

@ dim: Only two units of warlocks dim, they are rare...

you are right, only 2*warlocks possible, so in that case it seems that

death + 2*5 warlocks + 2* pegasus
death+ sacrificial dagger + 5 warlocks + more mounted characters

are the 2 options left.

Having potentially +2dice /phase might be better than 5 warlocks, in my opinion. Additionnally you sacrify after seeing results of the other dices, so you can use less dice for each spell (if you fail, you sacrify). Of course this needs a cheap unit to kill