• 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.

Thoughts about pitched battles (matched play)

Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
179
#1
So, now I have several pitched battles under my belt, and the time has come to share my thoughts about army building and playing the six battleplans.

First of all, all the six pitched battles batteplans are supposed to be won (major victory) by scoring objectives and earning victory points. The cost of destroyed enemy units matters only if the players are tied on victory points, and even then player with the highest total scores only a minor victory.

The objectives themselves require the scroring units to be 5+ models in some cases, or the player to have more models aroud the objective than the enemy.

Finally, one battleplan, "the Three Places of Power", requires heroes to score points.

What does that all mean for us?

1. In Pitched Battles, scoring is more important than killing.
2. Units that are supposed to score should be big, with 20-40 models
3. Speed is important.
4. Tarpits are very useful.
5. Any army should have at least 3 heroes, ideally fast-moving (mounts, flight).
6. Summoning is viable in Pitched battles.

So, 2+ big blocks of infantry (zombies/skellies/ghouls) is a must, with heroes like flying/mounted vamps and Wight Kings. Having a summoning reserve of 200-280 pts is also very useful, since you can summon infantry (zombies)/heroes (wraiths/banshees) precisely on objectives and score them.

For example, during my last AoS tournament, I won a game against Stormcasts (despite heavy losses on my side and few losses on enemy's) just because skeletons were more numerous than stormcasts, scoring objectives while being slowly destroyed in melee.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
52
#2
For Flesh Eaters, this is the utility of ghouls, ghast courtiers, and varghulf courtiers. The ghast courtier keeps the ghouls alive as they move up the field, the varghulf courtier gets into position to continue to keep them alive once they get on the objective, and the ghouls themselves just sit there being damn near impossible to fully wipe out.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
179
#3
Yesterday, I played 3 more games of AoS during a tournament. So, I want to add a bit, and correct myself.

In tournament meta, people are optimizing their lists for obvious reasons.

Some armies have acess to units with 2+ saves, sometimes even ignoring Rend of -1 (or even -2). Examples are Seraphon and Sylvaneth.

Many armies have acess to "heavy infantry" (2+ wounds, 4+ save, sometimes re-rolling 1s or having 5+ "ward" save).

That all means that units with "Rend - " attacks are not that effective, actually. Surely, 40 skeletons can be scary, making 60-100 attacks, devastating other light infantry with ease.

But against 3+ and 2+ save, or "heavy infantry" units like Blightknights, Kurnoth Hunters or Stormhosts, their efectiveness is greatly reduced. Meeting such a unit will spell certain doom to zombies and skellies.

So, the idea is that scoring uits (i.e., infantry blocks) should not be really big, contrary to what I said before.

10-20 per battleline squad is all that you need for scoring, I currently think. This will save you points. Use those extra points to buy real beaters, with rend of -2 and greater, or mortal wounds dealers.

What do you think? Share your pitched battle expirience, please. Maybe one day we will compile a handbook/tactica
:)
 

Oppenheimer

Crypt Horror
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
556
#4
I think that needing infantry blocks to score is a great way to encourage blocks of infantry. On the other hand matched play battleline requirements infuriate me. Whoever created that rule should be flayed.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
179
#5
I think that needing infantry blocks to score is a great way to encourage blocks of infantry. On the other hand matched play battleline requirements infuriate me. Whoever created that rule should be flayed.
What exactly your problem is? Do you think the requirements are too harsh or too easy?
 

Oppenheimer

Crypt Horror
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
556
#6
Arbitrary and restricting.
I don't want to be forced to buy and field specific models. I should buy to buy them because I want to play or paint them.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
54
#7
On the contrary matched play rules were what got me and a lot of our friends to AOS in the first place. The game as it is now has a few problems but it is a lot of fun.
 
Top