• Roll-up! Roll-up! Come one and all the fantastic Turning the World to Darkness painting competition. Welcome to any skill level, you can find out more here.
  • It's time once again to ferret out those murderous vampires in a new VAU - Vampires Amongst Us. A cross between Cluedo and a roleplay, sometimes gory and often hilarious! Find out more here.

Do Vampire Counts require less strategy than other armies?

Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
74
#1
i've heard somewhere before i cant remember if it was after a game i dominated in or maybe some other discussion board. but anyway someone said that vampire counts requires less strategy than other armies. i was just interested in your collective opinions. i think that that in some cases that is true. What do ya think?
 

ProperGoffic

Bringing Sixy Back
True Blood
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,158
#2
Well, they require less than Warriors of Chaos, largely because the Warriors don't have efficient tools to disable warmachines, deny magic or protect their flanks. They can do all those things, but it requires clever list building, deployment and a defined role for all your units. Not the easiest in the world to play.

Not sure where they stand in comparison to the Orcs and Goblins - the greenies are random enough to make any detailed plan a complete writeoff in half a dozen die rolls, but I'm not sure if the need to wing it all the time requires a better strategist or just someone who can say "the hell with it" and throw things forward as best they can.

I had an Empire army for a while and it felt easier to play but harder to win with (I ain't so good with guns and Panic tests), if you see what I mean.

Haven't played any of the others.
 

N.I.B

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
2,370
#4
Depends on the build. Granted, Undead have an easy time as we can skip the whole psychology section of the BRB, and we don't do the shooting thing. So what's left is the movement phase and the magic phase. Between unbrakable troops and replenishing magic and items like Helm of Commandment, I'd say yeah, VC in general require less strategy than most other armies. At least if we're talking games between newcomers.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
688
#5
As NIB mentioned, the VC take into account fewer 'game-factors' than other conventional armies. Unbreakable and replenishable troops somewhat degrade from the swing of combat, complete immunity to psychology removes the unpredictability of terror/fear/panic/flee and all that jazz, and the (almost) complete lack of a shooting phase removes that entire dedication to strategy.

The removal of all these factors and variables which ultimately control the success of the game could be acclaimed for making VC seem an 'easier' army to play. In fact, I would agree. More than once I've caught myself giving little thought towards charging in with a unit of Ghouls, consoled with the assurance that I could accommodate for any casualties with magic and that I won't loose control of them through psychology. In the past, I've played with Chaos and Asrai and certainly wouldn't make half the risks with those two armies that I often do with my VC now.

However, the removal of all of these petty factors have been substituted for an almighty glass-jaw that Christophe touched upon. We don't need to worry about loosing the game to troops breaking or them not doing what you expect them to do. Instead, it's the death of the general.

That is our overriding 'strategy': keeping him alive.

Is a single, crucially important strategy 'more difficult' than the management of many smaller variables? It's up to you, I suppose.
 

ProperGoffic

Bringing Sixy Back
True Blood
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,158
#6
Christophe von Carstein said:
i think they are one of the hardest strategically because remember if your genral dies your army dies
Bilge on toast. I have won several games where my general has died. I have drawn most of the others and lost less than five (most of the time he and the Grave Guard are the only things left). It's a bit harder in the new book with the lower Ld scores across the board but it's not the death sentence that "everything but the characters drops dead NOW" was back when I started playing this army.
 

MasterSpark

Nostalgian
Staff member
True Blood
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
4,691
#7
I think that another main strategy that needs to be considered with the VC is that you should try to keep the amount of ongoing combats to a minimum at all times. Some time ago I played a game against a friend and his dark elves. My ghouls were being eaten alive by a pair of hydras, my zombie tarpit got demolished by a group of cold one knights and my grave guard got manhandled by his black guard, all in the same couple of turns. My magic simply couldn't reinforce enough to stop them all from eventually crumbling.

It was only thanks to my fighty lord and his black knight retinue that I managed to turn it into a very slight draw in the end. Since then I've started to play more cautiously with my units, heheh.
 

Christophe von Carstein

Vampire Count
True Blood
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
1,015
#8
alright they may seem easier in the sence that we dont have to worry about psychology or shooting and i know losing the genreal is not an automatic death sentance. but what we have to do is remember that especially for begginers out there is not to use him to rashly by throwing him into every single combat going because all it takes is one turn of unlocky dice rolling and "pop" goes the vampire. and you must remember that our core units are very capable of being very poor in combat need i say more than zombies. Which leads me to say if we do not keep replenishing those units they crumble in combat and if not replenished they crumble more and more making it less likely they will win the combat. And i have seen it (and done it) where we rush our best units into combat to soon while the rest of the army is pratically the other side of the board and then get flanked and massacred in the next turn. I'm NOT saying they are THE hardest strategically but they need constant attention as they can be quite fragile
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
238
#9
me and my friends are fairly new to WFB and i'm the only one with vampires. i played against WoC once and his warriors and knights just obliterated my zombies and skeletons cause i'd made the mistake of leaving them with too little support. i think they're easier (strategy and rule wise) in some ways but more difficult in others. due to low stats you have to be careful what you send your units up against and make sure you can support them with magic and if possible a flanking unit. and there's positioning your characters in a way that best suits their abilities
 

Bishop

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
2,887
#10
They are easier to play in the sense that you have a lot of rules that are largely ignored (Psych and shooting).

On the hand, you have to choose your fights more carefully since you have (generally) high cost models with low stat lines. You pretty much have to try and double team and/or out-number, so you can auto-break every fight that you get involved in... chances of actually fighting a CC all the way down to killing everything is virtually ZERO (with a few exceptions). So you have to pick and choose your fights more carefully...
 

Master Vampire

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
2,342
#11
Bishop said:
chances of actually fighting a CC all the way down to killing everything is virtually ZERO (with a few exceptions)
Hehe I've never looked at the VC in that sense, but I guess it's true. The only units that have a high WS are Varghulfs and Blood Knights, both expensive. The rest is WS 3 or lower.

We mostly rely on breaking and catching enemy. Heh, weird. :mrgreen:
 
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
66
#12
I'd say that Vampire Counts have just as much strategy as any other army. Sure we're immune to psych and unbreakable, but we can't flee. That means we can't designate units to bait others with.

Most of our units have horrible weaponskill (although I like to change this up with the Helm of Commandment...nothing like WS 6-7 zombies!) so we have to rely on combat resolution.

Personally, I've always found myself thinking a lot more when I play vampire counts, but maybe this is because I can always raise more units behind someone to get a rear charge or to kill them instantly once they break from combat.

The other army that I play is the High Elves, and for them, the strategy seems a bit simpler (the only thing is that I have to worry about taking too many loses)
 

adrift

Black Knight
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
321
#13
I do think VC are "easier" to play in a lot of the same ways as others have touched upon (unbreakable, replinishable, etc), but there are aspects you have to master or your army will flounder.

For example, keeping vampire types in the vicinity of troops you want to go anywhere in a timely fashion. It takes a while before that becomes second nature. Also, kitting out your characters to be effective and to properly compliment the troops. Early on, there were quite a few games where I realized I had an item that was less than optimal on a character that couldn't make very good use of it. Also, if your army is going to rely on magic to help it out a lot, you have to pay a decent amount of attention to the powers and items you are going to select, or you could end up out-gunned magically.

So I think you need to be reasonably aware where your synergy lies, and take good advantage of it. Otherwise VC struggle. The fact we have no missile fire simplifies things, but it also leaves a huge strategy gap in our capabilities that have to be countered in other ways. I would give my left canine tooth for undead bolt throwers to fire at greater demons! lol
 

Master Vampire

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
2,342
#14
adrift said:
I would give my left canine tooth for undead bolt throwers to fire at greater demons! lol
I'd give them both :!:

I won't deny that this army is a good beginners army. The only thing you have to worry about (as a beginner), is to understand the magic system. Shooting, except for the Banshee, is not prevalent in the army. We can't take DoW anymore too.

Basic combat resolution is a good begin to combat I guess. We're the master of ItP, fear, raising and static CR...

All in all not an elite army (Tomb Kings, Wood Elves, maybe HE and DE... although they got updates).
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
26
#15
Ever wondered how vampires undead army every siege a city? Well According "Wampire Wars", they build corpes ladder and corspe trebuche to bring down the walls, maybe in 8th ed we get screaming zombie head catapult and Corpes ladder...should they decide to expand on the siege battle.

That aside, I think VC requires tactics as much as chaos warriors and other armies, its all depends on your built as someone had already said.
A powered up Chaos warrior built is not alot harder than a cheesy VC built.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
220
#16
VC do require less tactics than some other armies.

The VC magic phase will make up for a lot of mistakes. Van Hels and Invocation makes the VC a very dice dependant army. Sure there is a lot of timing involved, and you have to set your troops up right to take advantage of these tricks, but in the same way these tricks will save you in those situations, where you have been careless.

In the same way the VC aren't able to exploit the most common tactical trick – the bait and flee. This is in some way remedied by the ability to raise units out of the blue, but once again this just becomes a matter of rolling dice.

I wouldn't say that VC is a sure no-brainer army – especially when you go low on magic. But compared to Empire, which is based on static CR and wood elves with their lack of cheesy tricks, I do find the VC to be a very forgiving army. Yet my WoC beats them hands down on simple tactics :)

That said, I find VC quite amusing and with a good internal balance – as long as you refrain from death stars and the power die shower :)
 

Disciple of Nagash

The Perverted One
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
27,916
#18
You would be told right Spartan. If said newbie goes with the normal uber caster build with the Drakenhof Grave Guard it is a very forgiving army. But that's like playing a survival horror game with cheats that make you invincible. Fun the first time, but then you start to get bored.

If you try going to lower magic (lower, not none), so maybe a combat orientated build, staying away from things like teh Drakenhof banner - you suddenly realise that VC can be a very demanding army if you don't have 17 IoN to play with in a turn. But I would suggest to give it a try - if you still win with them then you can be assured you are a good VC general.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
220
#19
Disciple of Nagash said:
you suddenly realise that VC can be a very demanding army if you don't have 17 IoN to play with in a turn. But I would suggest to give it a try
True. VC suffer from having a few cheese builds. This is neither good for the game, nor for for the rep of the VC. Infact if you remove a few critical items, you have a very balanced list. Sadly this reflects on VC generals to be regarded as subpar as they have a 'broken' army list.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
130
#20
I would take serious offense to that statement. Vampire counts are rather tricky to play in my opinion. I play Dark Elves and Bretonnia, and have experience with playing Orcs. From what I've seen when playing the Counts, things either go really well for you, or really poorly. But lets assume super power-gaming army lists.

Vampire Counts require more strategy than:

-All Dwarf armies
-Lothern Sea Guard Lists
-Most Daemons of Chaos armies
-Skaven Gun-lines
-Empire Gun-lines

Vampire Counts require less strategy than:
-Ogre Kingdoms (On the grounds of, {that is not a lot of models on the field.....})
-Pure Night Goblins (I give NG players a lot of credit for the backstabbing trickery they have to accomplish during a game)
-Current Skaven and Tomb Kings (Which imo need some new rules and fast. Hurry up GW!)

And equal levels of strategy to all those unnamed. That is of course my opinion. But just because your army requires less strategy doesn't mean that its easier for you to win. It just means that if you play a difficult army to play, and you get good--you can be extremely lethal ^_^
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
22
#22
IMO the relative strength/weakness of the VC depends very much on the venue you're playing. Meaning:

If you are playing within a small group of people or in alot of one off games VCs can be tough, as clever opponents will quickly grasp upon your armies main weaknesses (general as already mentioned and magic reliance) and build their lists accordingly. Against opponents who have prepared to play VCs with heavy anti-magic lists your tactical options become limited. HEs, Lizards, and Dwarves are all especially good at this, but most lists have access to anti-magic items and all can take dispel scrolls.

Conversely, in large tourneys VCs do well precisely because most people build tourney lists which are either magic heavy (offensively) or balanced for play against all armies. In this case, VCs do well b/c the average VC player will outstrip their opponent in magic and get to use the VC strengths (magic movement, adding troops, thwarting enemy charges) to maximum effect.

My two cents anyway.
 

Swissdictator

Vampire Count
True Blood
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
1,547
#23
I agree with Tal Rasha: It can be a very forgiving army.

It's really dependent on the general. If he rolls poorly once, it can lose you the game. However, horrible rolls with the rest of the army can be made up for.

While we tend to dominate magic rather well, we also have to think carefully about how we go about our magic phase. The emphasis of our tactics is less in the movement phase then for other armies, so it seems like it is a lot less strategic.
 

Trentonator

Crypt Horror
Joined
Dec 1, 2007
Messages
598
#24
Alright, I've browsed this thread multiple times and I keep hearing the 'factors' taken out make it easier theory. Now tell me again how not having shooting makes it easier to play. All it means is, those giant nasties can come and slaughter you before you can do ANYTHING.

I'm talking about Bloodthirsters, dragons, giants, etc. We get DESTROYED from those because of our lack of shooting...

Also, our core choices suck monkey balls for their cost... THAT'S why they're able to be replenished.

Now magic... You all say its our win ticket. But you have to realize, the more magic you have the more you can suffer. What happens when you have those 17 power dice, but your opponent is dwarfs with 10 dispel dice 4 runes of spell-eating and 2 of their 'dispel scrolls.' You = screwed... (This has happened to me before... And I'm not known for going magic heavy...)

So I beleive our major disadvantages are:
We can't flee.
Giant things own us.
No shooting.
General rule.
Crappy Core.
Dependent on magic.
 

N.I.B

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
2,370
#25
Trentonator, I think you need to play more Warhammer...
You think our core choices (Ghouls, Dire Wolves etc) suck balls, you get DESTROYED by Giants and all kinds of dragons (agree about the severly undercosted Bloodthirster, but then again every army struggle with it) just because you can't point a gun at them... :)

Dwarfs have the best anti-magic tools in the game, so an anti-magic Dwarf list taken to the extreme can neutralise any VC magic phase (or anyone elses for that part). To be able to do that they sacrifice combat power and gets steamrolled in close combat. What was your point again? Oh, you lost against Dwarfs once. Therefore VC gets DESTROYED when our magic phase is shut down. You're right of course, the evidence are overwhelming :rolleyes:

Btw, I have a list with 4 power dice, in 10 games I have one loss.

VC are a lot less magic dependant than in 6th edition, and a lot less today than most give them credit for, it's just that people like to go heavy on magic since it's easier and they want to win.
Furthermore, the strenght of VC isn't in the isolated parts, it's in the synergy. It's all about synergy, our "crappy core" doesn't fight in a vacuum.

VC are more forgiving than any other army in the game, except for DoC. Which is more or less the same thing as requiring little strategy. Who need strategy really, when you can spam Vanhels and move your WS7 around your unbreakable and easily replenishable troops?
 
Top