Which of the two is best?
the only difference between the two is that for 10 points you get +1 strength and +1 armor save yet -1 attack.
My opinion is that you should save the points as typically you would only be buying a 160 point buff to your crumble.
In many cases, 4 attacks at S5 is nearly equal to 3 at S6. There is not much that is T7+ in close combat so worse case you got 4 5+ attacks instead of 3 4+.
What exactly is their role in a VC army? They have very high WS and Initiative for undead, but you pay for it. 80 points seems like the better deal to me. Is it worth investing in more than 2? In a double Mortis list they would become like super crypt horrors.
If you want them as a powerful offense unit then Archai seem more appealing since they have better strength and defense, and harbingers extra weapon is wasted on the back rank. But taking 6 would be 540 points, thats a hefty price tag. But they will travel farther and hit harder and faster than nearly anything else.
Are they better than units we already have? They seem similar to a Vargulf or Vargheists.
Vargulf is rare of course but I only have one TG and ME so I have never had much issue with Rare points. For 5 points less than two Archai you get one less attack at the same WS with S5 but with hatred. This is pretty big since he will probably run off on his own, away from VHDM spells. Sure hes got half as many wounds but hes smaller and vampric, so considerably more mobile. Regen is always huge, id take regen over double wounds any day.
In a double mortis list, (which is also probably the most appealing to add a couple morghast) a Vargulf's Regen doesn't matter anymore, but and Archai become very very hard to kill. Also, Morghast can gain a lot of HP fast around a lvl4 vamp wiz.
I never really liked Vargheists. They are really great versus really bad units. If you are playing against competitive opponents, the number of units these can eat up is slim to none. Against pretty much anything that strikes before them, they are very bad. Since I am most often against things with 4-5I or ASF, I find little I can do with them except slam them into a flank and still get mediocre results. I haven't played with them much due to really sad results so far, but they would be very handy in specific situations like a protected gunline. Still, they are satisfactory, compared to extraordinary results of say, a Casket's Souls ripping though an entire gun line, a skull catapult taking out a warmachine with a direct hit, or a pack of core wolves easily dispatching a crew (all much cheaper & with more rounded usefulness). Worst of all, vargheist being vampric means they are nearly impossible to keep alive. Most of our units are either extremely hard to wound or rase back as fast as they die - Vargheists are neither.
Morghast are a very different role despite similar stats. You want to protect your morghast, and you cant get them very far off on their own anyway. They arent going to drop to shooting very easily. But if you wanted to invest a lot of points and use them like Vargheists, Morghast will do much better in every way except for mobility.
Morghast Summary
+ Minus one to crumble
+ Hardy; arent going to die to just anything. If your opponent wants to shoot at them, its a big investment for them, and thats likely in your favor. More often than not, your opponent will shoot at something scarier. If you are in combat, the -1 crumble helps make them more of an anvil as well.
+ Strong; even only two are likely to cause a few wounds on nearly anything.
+ more than half the time they could screen a cannonball and survive. With their movement and big bases, they excel at this more than any other unit in our army.
+ Very mobile near General
+ Special
+ Easy to heal/raise
- Somewhat Costly
- Non-mobile away from general
Has anyone had really great results with them? Which should I make?
the only difference between the two is that for 10 points you get +1 strength and +1 armor save yet -1 attack.
My opinion is that you should save the points as typically you would only be buying a 160 point buff to your crumble.
In many cases, 4 attacks at S5 is nearly equal to 3 at S6. There is not much that is T7+ in close combat so worse case you got 4 5+ attacks instead of 3 4+.
What exactly is their role in a VC army? They have very high WS and Initiative for undead, but you pay for it. 80 points seems like the better deal to me. Is it worth investing in more than 2? In a double Mortis list they would become like super crypt horrors.
If you want them as a powerful offense unit then Archai seem more appealing since they have better strength and defense, and harbingers extra weapon is wasted on the back rank. But taking 6 would be 540 points, thats a hefty price tag. But they will travel farther and hit harder and faster than nearly anything else.
Are they better than units we already have? They seem similar to a Vargulf or Vargheists.
Vargulf is rare of course but I only have one TG and ME so I have never had much issue with Rare points. For 5 points less than two Archai you get one less attack at the same WS with S5 but with hatred. This is pretty big since he will probably run off on his own, away from VHDM spells. Sure hes got half as many wounds but hes smaller and vampric, so considerably more mobile. Regen is always huge, id take regen over double wounds any day.
In a double mortis list, (which is also probably the most appealing to add a couple morghast) a Vargulf's Regen doesn't matter anymore, but and Archai become very very hard to kill. Also, Morghast can gain a lot of HP fast around a lvl4 vamp wiz.
I never really liked Vargheists. They are really great versus really bad units. If you are playing against competitive opponents, the number of units these can eat up is slim to none. Against pretty much anything that strikes before them, they are very bad. Since I am most often against things with 4-5I or ASF, I find little I can do with them except slam them into a flank and still get mediocre results. I haven't played with them much due to really sad results so far, but they would be very handy in specific situations like a protected gunline. Still, they are satisfactory, compared to extraordinary results of say, a Casket's Souls ripping though an entire gun line, a skull catapult taking out a warmachine with a direct hit, or a pack of core wolves easily dispatching a crew (all much cheaper & with more rounded usefulness). Worst of all, vargheist being vampric means they are nearly impossible to keep alive. Most of our units are either extremely hard to wound or rase back as fast as they die - Vargheists are neither.
Morghast are a very different role despite similar stats. You want to protect your morghast, and you cant get them very far off on their own anyway. They arent going to drop to shooting very easily. But if you wanted to invest a lot of points and use them like Vargheists, Morghast will do much better in every way except for mobility.
Morghast Summary
+ Minus one to crumble
+ Hardy; arent going to die to just anything. If your opponent wants to shoot at them, its a big investment for them, and thats likely in your favor. More often than not, your opponent will shoot at something scarier. If you are in combat, the -1 crumble helps make them more of an anvil as well.
+ Strong; even only two are likely to cause a few wounds on nearly anything.
+ more than half the time they could screen a cannonball and survive. With their movement and big bases, they excel at this more than any other unit in our army.
+ Very mobile near General
+ Special
+ Easy to heal/raise
- Somewhat Costly
- Non-mobile away from general
Has anyone had really great results with them? Which should I make?
