Page 1 of 1
sacrificial warriors
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:38 am
by Ozzkoz
pretty basic question here.
When choosing a unit of warriors for a sorceress to use the dagger on, how big a unit is best to take? Is 19 enough, or should it be bumped higher. Should they have shields for protection form shooting or just go bear bones @ 6 pts a piece?
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:02 am
by Kinslayer
questions on how to build units normally have a vast array of possible answers, it all depends on the rest of your army really. If i told you it was best to take 20 and leave them bare, because thats how i ran it in my own army, your list would be different and it possibly would not work as well for you.
In general though, the shield part depends on what protection you can afford them apart from shields. Have you plenty of harpy units in the army? If so, you can screen them with 5 of the beasts and this protects them more than a shield would. So what if it costs more, you were taking the harpies anyway. If your not going to have a screen available for them, then i would give them the shield because it gives them survivability both at shooting and if they get into combat.
You may think they wont be in combat as shes a magic, after the sorceress dies or leaves the unit for whatever reason, they become a combat unit dont forget, she could miscast and die or something similar. So it would pay to leave them with shields anyway.
As for unit size, i run warriors in 20s or 25s normally, going higher is too much for me, whilst going any lower (unless something like 18 with 2 characters, 19 with sorceress) doesnt normally prove its potential. Especially if your killing a few of them each turn yourself! The more you have, the more you need to sacrifice before that vital 25% limit you do not want to see.
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:34 am
by Ozzkoz
hmm I have no harpies and plan on killing off a few with the dagger so I guess I probably do want to go with 23 + shields. Thanks
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:37 am
by Crawd
I think that 25 is the optimal numbers. If there's no casualties, you can sacrifice 3 warriors from turn 1 to 5 and 2 on the final turn without having a single panic test from the 25% death.
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:04 am
by [llct]kain
There are many options how you do this :-)
I would go for the shield option through it costs you one point but could give you some serious advantage later in the game. First off all it makes the unit a effective combat unit when the sorceress leaves the unit (by horseback or by death). Or if the unit is charged while being with her then it is most crucial to win the combat and get rid of the attacker - each round of CC gives him the chances to kill your mage.
Second point is, if you run more than one unit of warriors and they are equal your opponent does not know where your sorceress will be placed when the units are deployed. Otherwise if you go with 25 naked warriors and 20 warriors with shields even a dump Ork may know where your mage will be later on.
If you run your warriors wihtout shields you make the unit a single proposal unit - only to be sacrified. With shields they become much more felxible - if you are short in points save on the command or the numbers...
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:54 pm
by Dangerous Beans
Excellent points there Kain and Crawd. I personally take 30 - because I expect to use the dagger for every spells of the wiazards every time: this means 3 spells a turn and thus 3 dead men. I normally keep my unit way back (depending on the sorceresses spell ranges: I often take metal with the sac-dag sorceress to keep well back. Even so, as the fellas say - your unit will likely still see combat by turn 3: I still want a full fighting CR unit of 5 (ranks, standard etc) when they hit: killing off a maximum of 9 men will not only (IMHO) have given me a good use of the dagger but mean that my unit still has 21 men: still effective fighting force for the role that warriors play in our armies. The wizard will try to hop out the unit before a charge and she can always hop back in after the combat (assuming the warriors survive!) to keep using the sac dagg.
Oh and yes, I give my warriors shield when in units of 15+ men.
- Beanz
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:34 pm
by Ozzkoz
Thanks for the replies. y ou've convinced me to go with the shields and err on the side of large units
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:59 pm
by Dangerous Beans
Let us know how it goes for you dude - can always suggest and discuss some more advice for you if you'd like 
I wish you luck in your magic phases: may the miscasts miss!
- Beanz
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 2:13 pm
by Vagi
I prefer the dagger in combination with the Itp-item in a unit of 10 naked warriors.
You want to stay out of combat to be able to sacrifie 1-3 elves in every round. You have to calculate the risk of miscast, if you throw a first 1 and you want to use the dagger. This is why i often abstain from using the dagger in this case.
Sometimes the range for your spells isnt given, so that it's not possible / meaningful to cast.
In conclusion 10 warriors should be enough for one game.
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:11 pm
by [llct]kain
In conclusion 10 warriors should be enough for one game. Rolling Eyes
Sorry for only a short reply - 10 would be only sufficient if you only want to sacrify one warrior a turn. Otherwise you will get realy fast to the size of unit (4 models) where the look out madamé does not work anymore.
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 5:46 pm
by Crawd
Vagi wrote:In conclusion 10 warriors should be enough for one game.
Nope, 10 naked warriors will do nothing but die.. If I see a sorceress in a 10 naked warriors, I'll shoot at them to negate the sacrificial effect which will screw you.
I prefer, like I said, 25 warriors FC with Shield, so in addition to the sacrifial effect, you can use them to help your army as well.