I'm at present running a Lizardmen army, with considerable success, but have realised that what I really enjoy is running around with skinks and generally being extremely aggressive......which Saurus aren't that suited too.

So I'm thinking of starting a Beastmen army, as I really like the aggressive nature of the army and the general synergy between the different components.

So my question is what should I be looking at buying if I want to run an extremely aggressive list (not necessarily a good list! If I merely wanted to win I'd stick to the Lizzies)? Clearly a battalion box, but I'm not that interested in the large gor/ungor blocks that seem to populate most lists: these troops are in essence cowardly Saurus minus 1 attack when used like that (and as I said, Saurus bore me...they are a very predictable unit).

Things that do interest me:
-AMBUSH. Is there a way to really build an army around this rule? There seems to be some synergy with characters, which I like
-Ungor raiders: these are basically like skinks with lamer missile fire but don't actually suck in combat
-Chariots. Lots of them!
-Minotaurs
-Bestigors or buffed Gors, but in smaller numbers (say 20-25).......I know this means my enemies are likely to be steadfast, but I think that's something I can live with
-As many of those cutsie rare units as I can fit in. I don't mind that some of them seem to suck, they just seem fun to play.

Will this kind of list work AT ALL? Am I just insane?
All comments appreciated!

If you take ghorus warhoof you can make centigors core.
There are some (moderate) succesfull lists going with lots of centigors and some pigs/chariots :)

Centigors I'm not that keen on.........if they were Fast Cavalry I'd go for them straight away however.....pity

If you wanna run highly damaging, menacing unit, that has aggression in its nature, you are looking for a Minobus :)

Though the concept of "bus" units is pretty old (dates back to the old Bretonia armybook - which is basically their only viable way to play), it does offer o lot of aggressive gameplay, and our Mino lord is one of the tougher guys, and looks pretty good as well - especially with the right customizations ;)

Also charriots, as random as they might be are pretty bad ass, especially the Razorgor one (those pigs you just have to adore).

Army list centred around a minobuss might be the right thing to satisfy your lust for blood and glory :)

That does sound good, smashing the living daylights out of things as opposed to attrition combat is more my style........but it has a slight deathstar unit feel to it that I'm not a fan of.
As you can probably gather, I lean towards a MSU style army (although I don't go extreme end of the spectrum).

I like running rings around the enemy (the fun in tying a unit up in knots is amazing!) which is difficult to do when you have a massive unit of minotaurs.

Is it possible to combine this with having a pile of stuff in Ambush? I should just build some lists and see how the points pan out, but I'm keen to hear all the experienced Beastmen players take on it before I get too attached to the idea

Then maybe using some Chariots a small unit of Gors for a Great Bray Shaman to hide in and some Harpies to swarm the enemy easily. It might work really well, and many of your units can cause damage for little points while your Minobus is unstoppable killing everything.

That sounds fun, I like the idea of frustrating my opponent :)

But it still sounds a little too deathstar-y. Part of the reason Lizzies are boring me is the Temple Guard + Slann bunker: basically the game boils down to whether my opponent can kill that unit (and win) or fail to kill it (and lose). It's very prone to luck as a deciding factor in the game (both in wins and losses) and doesn't feel that satisfying.

With the Beastmen I was hoping I could have a more balanced approach: no one unit they can beat up on and win the game, and generally to bombard them with multiple headaches rather than one (which with skill they may be able to avoid/deal with)......does that make sense at all? Kinda sounds like I want to have my cake and eat it too :rolleyes:

Before you say nay to the centigor list, look up ghorros warhoof(the user, not the spec char) and learn his teachings. He was simply the most amazing gamer in existence ever. He also wrote kickass bat reps. Just read his stuff. Heres a link to his MSU thread

http://z8.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index...showtopic=22796


Miss that guy :(

The only really big problem with that list though is that you need to be good at playing it, which can be hard to manage.

The problem is that you already said you don't want to take that list.

Because that's the Gor horde + Bestigor list.

Beastmen have a problem in that everything is just expensive enough that you can't really have it all.
All our heavy hitters suffer from being slower than the opposition so needs to be taken in greater numbers to grind since we can't punch with small units. And that means there just isn't that many credible threats the Beastman army can put on the field.

Taking Gor and Bestigor and backing it up with a Herdstone shaman spam does allow us to use more units as credible threats through the augments/hexes.

At the end of the day you either *want* to play Beastmen and take what works that is as close to you want as possible. You won't be able to shoehorn the Beastmen into whatever playstyle you want.

Agressive list would be.

Lots of Gors, ungors for ambush.

Lvl 4 and lvl 2 wild shaman so you can summon a monster in thier back turn 1.
(and use the movment spell).

Flying doombull or beastlord.

Scout with a shaman on a chariot.
Add a huge deep block of gors coming from the front.
Have 2 jabberslythes.
(and a huge group of scouting harpies).

Meens by turn 1 you might have 3 monsters, doombull, chariot, harpies and some scouts inside his deploy.



Just a fun list if you want something really aggressive. But not the best really.

@Charioteer: that looks like more what I was after! I'll have to spend some time in detail to read it and think about it. He talks about a lot of the things I was thinking about when considering Beastmen (although I was thinking of different units to achieve similar but different goals). Biggest issue I can see is that he hasn't outlined how the MSU centigors are going to get around the characters issue (apart from saying that it is an issue, which I agree with).
But I can't deny that such a list looks like a LOT of fun to play!

@Scarr: Only way one gets good with a list is to play a lot of it, so may as well start eh?

@snowblizz: you're not wrong, but at the same time I don't see that many lists on here that use the Ambush rule, and certainly not very extensively. For me that's the clinch: without Ambush a Gor/Bestigor list seems kinda stranded in no-mans land: not a true horde army (not enough units), not an elite army (not good enough), not a Deathstar (spreads it's points) but not a range of threats (only about 1 threat: the Gors/Bestigors getting you in a hammer/anvil situation). These are the kind of lists I (not a gun general by any means) trash on a regular basis with my Lizzies, as they are unable to fit a way past a Temple Guard unit + Slann with Skinks guarding the flanks (and the rear.....in fact everywhere). They simply don't have enough tricks up their sleeve.
Minobus armies trash me all the time, but as I said that's not really my thing.

Arty is thinking more like my list below, and I would love to give his a try as it looks SOOO Fun.....just not sure how the points work out? It might not be very competitive but meh, could work with practice.

Anyway maybe I should just throw out a list I made and see what people think/what improvements they can suggest.

Here's what I came up with:

Lords (Points: 270)
Khazrak the One Eye

Heroes (Points: 270)
Ungrol the Four-Horn (attached to Ungor Unit #1)
Wargor, BSB w/ The Beast Banner, additional HW + Shield + Heavy Armour

Core (Points: 946)
Ungor Unit #1: 30 Ungors, Musician (AMBUSH)
Ungor Unit #2: 30 Ungors, Full Command (Khazrak goes in here)
Gor Unit #1: 25 Gors, w/ Shields, Musician (AMBUSH)
Gor Unit #2: 25 Gors, w/ additional HW, Full Command (BSB goes here)
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #1: x 5 w/ Musician (AMBUSH)
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #2: x 5 w/ Musician (AMBUSH)
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #3: x 5 w/ Musician (AMBUSH)
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #4: x 5 w/ Musician
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #5: x 5 w/ Musician
Ungor Skirmishers Unit #6: x 5 w/ Musician

Special (Points: 236)
Razorgor x 1
Razorgor x 1
Bestigors x 10, Musician

Rare (Points: 275)
Ghorgon OR Jabberslythe

Total: 1997

Idea: with Khazrak to give rerolls to Ambush roll opponent has to assume units are NOT going to be appearing from my table edge. So they have the option of deploying to the flanks (where it is highly likely my units will emerge) or in the centre (and hoping like hell I don't roll too many 6s). The idea then would be to run something scary up the middle which they are then forced to either charge/take a charge from or be flank charged trying to present their front to the units on the flanks (which will flank charge them if they don't)

Ambushing units: Gors with shields (to allow them to survive the spells/missile fire that is definitely coming their way) and Ungors (Ungrol = Ld upgrade, because as I see it lack of access to the general is the biggest issue with Ambushing Ungors) are too big to ignore as they can challenge for steadfast. Raiders are too small to be anything but a nuisance (although arrows can be directed so as to drop ranks below the needed threshold), so they will just get in the way/make units chase them/provide hard cover for the big units behind them.

Non-Ambushing blocks: Gors with BSB have some hitting power (18 attacks @ strength 4 if arranged 4x6) whilst Khazrak leads hitting power to the other block. Idea is that these units will advance up the centre to provide the kills for combat res when they flank/read charge the units that have turned to face the Ambushing units (who's job is mainly to remove steadfast).....from using 60+ scouting Skinks (back in 6th ed Liz, when that was an upgrade on the basic Skink) I've learnt people get VERY uncomfortable about numerous large units appearing behind them (doesn't happen very often in WH, mostly either 1 unit or they are very small).

Razorgors: double-charge for the fear test, or sacrificial to hold up a unit if they have more than me (unlikely, bar Skaven).

Bestigors are there as a counter to high AS units (so only need enough for a single combat phase), but are the part of the list that makes the least sense ("does any of it make sense?!?" I hear some laugh).

Ghorgon/Jabberslythe is for distracting them on turns 1-2 (I assume it will be dead by that point): this will be run up the centre for them to shoot at/charge......as if they fail to kill it, it will make a BIG mess. I'm thinking that the Jabberslythe is the better option, given Fly will get it in their face VERY fast indeed, and the Ld-based attack will be great against horde armies (which are likely to have the unit numbers to deal with a significant number of Ambushing units).......but the Ghorgon is Stubborn, which is handy for trying up a unit for a long time.

Issues: MAGIC. Yep, that's a MASSIVE bummer. This list would work really well with some Bestial Surge/Lore of Beast Buffs, and Ungrol's special ability is 50% wasted by not having any other Wizards. Suggestions there?
Chariots would be heaps better than Gors/Ungors to run up the centre, but in order to get the Ambushing units I have to use them.........doh
Leadership: with close to half the army nowhere near the General/BSB, this list courts disaster. I suspect I'm underestimating the risk due to my Lizzie background (Cold-blooded rule makes even Ld 6 extremely reliable, and 8 is near unbreakable). But everything is testing on 7 or better, which is the magic threshold in terms of mathhammer, and much on Ld 9 rerollable.

This list I fell would eat Gunlines (they don't do well when they are only clearing 5 Raiders every turn and units big enough to roll them in a single combat are appearing out of their firing arc) and DeathStars (going to end up charged on every side, provided Raiders manage to outmanouver whatever chaff they have brought)......but to a balanced list would FAIL miserably.

So there we are. I'm fairly unfamiliar with the army book, so this list may well be illegal for all I know haha.

If you are looking for just a fun list to play, your list will be fine.

We have some advantages and some disadvantages with our army book. In general, our biggest disadvantage isn't that our units aren't good, they are. But, it's that they are over priced compared to units from other army books that are similar. On the flip side, we have the advantage of having some of the best cheap chaff in the game. Take advantage of that.

I ran the following 2400 point list at my last tourney on May 5th and won. It's a fun list to me. But, it does have some of that "death star" feel to it that you said you weren't a fan of. So, going less character heavy while using those points to bring more blocks of gor, ungor and bestigor might be a better allocation of points for your playing style. The concepts remain largely the same though. And, there are 12 units in my list, which gives you a lot of deployment flexibility.

In deployment, you gain a huge advantage being able to put 4+ units of ungor raiders, 3 razorgor and a unit of harpies on the table before you have to place anything else that is important to your win. That means that your opponent has had to place 8 units of their before you're placing a single one you care about of your own. In 2 out of my 3 games my opponent was done placing their units before I got to my ghorgon, minotaur, gor, ungor and character units. Fantastic!

Lords (353 points)
Doombull: Heavy Armor, Shield, Gnarled Hide, Many-limbed Fiend, Sword of Swift Slaying, Dawnstone, Ramhorn Helm

Heroes (600)
Gorebull BsB: Heavy Armor, Shield, Talisman of Endurance (5+ward), Sword of Striking, Iron Curse Icon
Gorebull: Heavy Armor, Charmed Shield, Brass Cleaver
Bray Shaman: Level 2 Beasts, Chalice of Dark Rain

Core (612)
Gor: 30 with full command and additional hand weapons
Ungor: 43 (5 wide tarpit) with musician and standard
Ungor Raiders: 5 with musician
Ungor Raiders: 5
Ungor Raiders: 5
Ungor Raiders: 5

Special (550)
Minotaur: 6 with musician (minotaur characters placed in front rank)
Harpies: 5
Razorgor: 1
Razorgor: 1
Razorgor: 1

Rare (275)
Ghorgon: 1

Doesn't work. Even with re-roll. Ambush is rather kind of " possible threat" than "actual threat" (it forces enemy to consider that it actually may work and has more psychological effect). Never seen it as a game breaker (though I admit it sometimes manages to achieve some effect).

Much lamer fire and they suck in combat. Main role: redirectors and chaff.

Some say they had interesting results with them but I never seen one on tournament scene. Chariots are nice add on, but I wouldn't relay on them.

Already mentioned Minobus. Though not necessarly a death star (begins battle this way but in next turns Doombulls sometimes leave unit to charge on their own).

Hordes!!! That's what beastmen are for! :) Gors are good (and with beast banner very good). Bestigors are good but prefer large numbers (or really deep ranks). Big units are also easier to buff with wyssan's, have steadfast (Ld is issue with Beastmen) and are more durable (shooting attrition, combat loses).

Actually all of them suck but some a bit less than others :) There is a reason why almost all beastmen players skip rare's section...

Mixing everything up? Depends on scale but I would say it doesn't (on large points - 4k+ - maybe). As someone mentiond - beasts are too expensive to take everything. Concentrate your list on main theme (minobus, hordes, even chariots) and then add some flavour / eneablers (strong magic around herdstone, some ambushing gors/raiders to hunt enemy's backoffice, redirectors: harpies, raiders).

PS. Yes, you are. Just a bit... ;)

To be honest with you, I don't think Beastmen really have what you're looking for. You're looking for a MSU-ish, movement-intensive army, and I don't think Beastmen do that very well at all, especially compared to the true MSU/MMU armies such as Wood Elves, Warriors of Chaos, and Ogres (you can talk me into Empire here as well, if they don't bring many State Troops). Our book has some units that seem capable of it on the surface (Centigors with Ghorros and Chariots most notably), but cost-efficiency and reliability just isn't their forte, and you will suffer against anything but the softest competition. We do several things well (re-rolls to hit, buffing/debuffing magic, generating extra power dice, Hordes, chaff, character-stars of doom), but apart from that there just isn't all that much to be had. One major disagreement I have with your post is that you say that we can't be a true Horde army, but I find that is not the case - at 2500 points, I can quite easily field a Horde of Gors, a Horde of Bestigors, and a Horde of Ungors (or a bus, depending on the matchup), while still bringing loads of chaff and a full-fledged magic engine. If that's not a Horde army... well, what is? If your Beastmen opponents haven't been capable of fielding a quality Horde army, they're not trying hard enough.

Ghorros Warhoof's MSU tactica is a rather valiant effort at shoving the square peg into the round hole, but it fails to address multiple critical issues that style of army would have. First, fighty characters negate many of the advantages that combo-charging units that small can have (oh, you got a unit of Centigors in my Horde's flank? That's nice - my Beastlord makes way and murders half of them before they swing). Second, more efficient MSU/MMU armies will DESTROY you - my WoC MMU list (which straight-up struggles against Herdstone + Hordes Beastmen) would be licking its chops to face that squishy Centigor list, and for good reason. Last but not least, even if you do get where you want to go, you have VERY little room for error against return attacks - don't know if you noticed, but most Beastmen aren't into that whole "wearing armor" fad. And let's just skip shooting, because I don't think I have to discuss what would happen to Centigors if they ran into an Empire army with 2 squads of Outriders and a Volley Gun, do I?

One of the big reasons why we don't do this particularly well is that small-sized Beastmen units aren't very independent - we depend on a mix of numbers and muscle to do our damage (we out-number more elite troops, we have better stats than cheap troops), as well as steady Leadership (which just isn't there if you don't have characters in them). That means that you'll be plunking down a lot of points in support characters for your units, or simply accepting the fact that some of the time they won't get the job done. Neither of these alternatives is appealing, because the former takes away precious points you can be using to fuel the buff/debuff engine (as a Lizardmen player, I'm sure you know how effective that is), and the latter means that you're going to lose games because your units simply cannot do what is asked of them.

Last but not least, and I hope I don't come off as rude, but that proposed list is awful. Shield Gors are straight-up inferior to AHW Gors, Ungrol is only any good as an Ambusher (and if you're ambushing Ungors, prepare to cough up some points), and even then he isn't great (majorly squishy, not great at fighting, and he can't even be guaranteed to be at his WS6/S5), none of those units is anywhere near big enough to do what this army would require it to do (especially the Bestigors - 10? Seriously?), the Ghorgon is the only big target right now (so he will come down with a serious case of cannon-to-face), and you have no magic whatsoever (so a magic-heavy list is going to destroy you). How, exactly, does this list propose to beat anyone who fights back? S3/T3 guys in the backfield don't scare many people.

i do share Roths opinion on the fact that what you are looking for you cannot and wont find within the Beastmen armybook. Beastmen are all abou big numbers hoarded, backed up by som serrious magic.
The only other way to play this faction serriously is minobuss and that you declined as you dont like deathstars.
Well thats just about it, you might wanna try some different army, becouse the Beastmen just cant deliver what you might expect of them.

I agree with Rothgar and Myrdin, in that I don't think Beastmen will do what your looking for.

If you don't mind a suggestion, what about a (now) unorthodox Skaven list? like perhaps one that uses MSU style and stacks things like gutter runners, night runners and weapon teams ? sure it isn't going to be playing to the Skaven armie's current strengths...but it would be fast, msu based with the potential for highly mobile and agressive play.

I've used ambush to win a game. I had a unit of 30 gors roll 6 for ambush and spring up behind my enemy, in his desperation he moved forward into charges range of a horde of S5 gors and horde of Bestigors. They wiped out their targets and flank overrun into the temple guard block. annihilated them and he surrendered turn 3.

http://z8.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index...topic=22666&hl=

http://z8.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index...topic=22627&hl=

http://z8.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index...topic=22477&hl=

Some of the centigor list batreps, for you and rothgar who seems unconvinced. :lol:

Oh, I've read them. Most of those lists are awful (15 White Lions? Come on), piloted by players of questionable caliber, or both. The one time he ran into something tough, he lost. And there's no hard evidence as to whether those reports happened, like pictures. I remain unconvinced.

WOW your a tough not to crack aren't you.
Must we all play cookie cutter cheese lists? Themed and left of center armies may be a dirty job but someones gotta do it, and walkertexasranger did say that he(she) wasn't making and army to win. Want a different, aggressive list. This is the one.

True, (s)he said (s)he was making a list to have fun with. Trouble is, I don't think its fun to get smashed in every game, and I dont see much else happening with a list comprising small bestigor/gor herds and no major threat units. It just doesn't play to our strengths at all, and any player playing to their own strengths would have an easy time dealing with it. Maybe winning is not the be all and end all to the OP, but I think you at least have to feel like you're competing or pushing your opponent to enjoy the game, no? Correct me if I'm wrong ;).

p.s. to the OP - despite the fact that beastmen may not fit your needs exactly, I find it hard to discourage anyone from playing beastmen cos they're awesome. If you would be willing to loosen your attitude towards deathstars a little, I think you would have great fun with a minobus list, backed up chariots and lots of ungor raiders. With 6x5 raiders you can ambush with 3 units and still not waste too many points if they fail to show up. I don't think there is anything more aggressive than a minobus! And with his recent tournament win, kris kapsner even proved that a ghorgon can work in this type of list - even more aggressive!

In my opinion agressive play varies on an army by army basis, but I am almost positive that reliability is crucial. Reliability also varies on army by army basis, but I am sure that having reserve/ ambush troops actually show up consistently and show up in a useful place will be vital to playing agressively not to mention have something to accomodate your weaknesses in otherwords something to offset your armie's weakness.

If your playing an army that relies on screens, redirectors, augments/hexxes, and large blocks. Its going to be rough going to play agressively if your mostly butt-naked and average stat-line troops are turning up on the board randomly in random places and have little or no assistance from the rest of the army since they are either on the other side of the board, dead already or not on the board yet, this means your opponent doesn't need to do the divide part of divide and conquer as your army already did it for them.

In my opinion even theme armies (Slayer bands, Scouting parties...etc) really ought to be as functional as they can be, for example why bother making a scouting party army if your not going to use mobility? what is the point trying to play a gun line if your only non-magic ranged option is a single cannon?

Another thing:

"Wargor, BSB w/ The Beast Banner, additional HW + Shield + Heavy Armour"

^ Wouldn't that BSB actually only get to use the shield against shooting attacks? since in melee it would be fighting with both of the hand weapons (since dual wielding hand weapons is classed as a special weapon based on my understanding of pages 88 and 91 of the BRB and as a result there is no choice on the matter as to if the shields gets used or not).

Correct, AHW is a bad idea on this guy - not only do you lose a point of armor save in CC but also that sweet delicious 6+ parry save. Bad times. If you're desperate for an extra attack, cough up for many limbed fiend.

Burb has the right of it - you need reliability for this sort of thing to be effective. Believe me, I'd love for it to have its niche where it could be a recommended, if not quite optimal, tactic, because then I could justify the purchase of some conversion material for Centigors. But it's not.

And yeah, AHW is a bad idea on the 206 - that 2+ save and the parry are critical for giving him a fighting chance against a lot of threats.

I love themes, but let's face it, one of the things that the Beastmen book has a lot of is lack of options, and I mean that literally. How many upgrades for anything besides expensive characters are there in the book? Minotaurs are the most flexible, and they really don't have much.

We do have a plethora of units that do not share unit types and jobs, in many ways, we are the Eldar or Tau of Fantasy that way, but they tend to be quite focused, and what options they do have, aren't generally worth exploring much (Shields, for example).

It's not that we WANT to be cookie cutter, there just aren't a lot of sensible options outside them to fulfill the roles needed on the 8th Edition Fantasy table.

Thanks so much for all the comments guys. I wish I had time to reply to all of them.
I think a lot of accurate things have been said, but I'm actually not yet convinced that Beastmen aren't what I'm looking for. I did consider Skaven, and haven't entirely ruled out that option yet.

But they lack one massive thing that seems like a lot of fun to play: Ambush.
I really don't get why this rule is so bad (note: I'm not implying that my list wasn't terrible, those that said it was are completely right.....I just wanted to show what I had in mind). I really don't. 8th edition entirely revolves around the idea that 2 medium sized units will beat one horde unit......provided you get the flank/rear charge.

The entire game is manoeuvring to get that flank/rear charge. LITERALLY.

No other army has the option to appear an entire horde unit BEHIND or to the side of someone. No-one. Closest you get is Dwarf Miners, but they don't synergise with the rest of the Dwarf army AT ALL.
Other than that you have only small skirmishing units (Gutter Runners, Necropolis Knights, Lizzies can have Terradons appear from the back edge with the use of a special character, etc) pull a stunt like that.
So people are forced to dance the dance at the edge of the board, trying to get behind each other with larger ranked units..........or else use flyers (which are precarious, flimsy and suitable only in certain situations).

To be able to win that dance without them being able to do a thing about it.....how is that not a huge advantage?! If I could do that with my Saurus I would throw hundreds of them off the board in Ambush! Who cares if they are only WS/S 3?! 30 of those in the rear of any unit and they are in all kinds of trouble, which the way the rules for supporting attacks are.

To be honest it also seems one of few clear advantages Beastmen have. Like it or not, you can't complete with the true horde armies: 2 point Goblins/Skaven slaves have you there. The claim that Beastmen are better than her other cheap troops is also extremely tenuous: Empire troops are only -1T, have better equipment built in and amazing special rules, whilst for 6pts Dark Elves get a Spearmen that will wipe the floor with a 7pt Gor in any of about 5 ways.

The flip side of this is that most of the complaints people have about Beastmen apply to other armies as well (Ld = same as Empire/O&G, Variety = more than Lizzies, Low armour/squishy? Elves universally worse off there).

But to not make use of an armies special rules suggests to me that something might be being missed. The best lists I've seen have always been built around the special rules of their army book (Cold-blooded Lizzie bunkers of Indestructibility, Wood Elf Shoot-and-Move army from hell, Skaven Strength-in-CRAZY numbers, Dark Elf Hatred blitzkrieg......I could go on) so that same thinking has me thinking that a Beastmen list with Ambush is not only plausible but could be highly effective.

The key objection that seems to keep getting raised is the unreliability of Ambushing. Seriously, with Khazrak in tow the numbers start to look pretty damn fine:

-Favourable dice outcomes: 4, 5, 6 (50%)
-Unfavourable: 1, 2, 3 (50%)

Reroll. Favourable outcome: 75%

In Warhammer it's hard to find better odds than that. That's pretty similar to your chances of passing a leadership test on Ld 9 (which is about 80%), which most of us would bank on doing a large proportion of the time.

In all honesty, looking at Beastmen as an outsider, it's got to be a near certain bet that the Ambush rules in 8th ed army book will reflect those in the BRB. May as well get used to playing this kind of army now, no?

I cant play with a beastman army till I have a complete army but ambush is something I will look into because you are right. I think people are to busy playing what the net tells them or what has worked in the past to try new things. Everyone says the problem with ambush is that "Its worse than the BRB ambush" but the BRB ambush is given only to a few units, not entire armies, If we could deploy half of our army on the opponents table side turn 2-3 then we would be a broken army, no doubt.

Also Gor are good. Better than the empire swordsmen BY FAR. The extra T and attack and the cheap and easy extra S magic item with hatred 9 times out of 10 make gor pretty damn good, more bang for your buck than ogres.

You can play a corrupted form of MSU But you have t be a very skillful player, and you'll still need 2 big blocks of units. lets start a 25 points. You'll need a flying doombull and a great bray shaman a bsb with beast banner and all the rest of your points in shamen a herd stone and a chalice. Take a huge bus of ungors and gors while at least 2 units of ungor raiders. two units of harpies and a couple razorgor. Finish up with a Jabber and a Ghorgon. this gives you:

6 re directing units

Two "Heavy" fast assault units

4 WM hunters,

3 units that can hold big blocks

One turn to get everything where it needs to be before you get shot.

Lizardmen are a very forgiving army, beastmen are not. You've got to know every unit in your army, know how to counter your weakness and know warhammer 8th edition rules like combat reforms and such. If you can juggle moving units all around the board while managing buffs/debuffs re directing, flank charging and Ld management while avoiding cannons, you'll soon here the "Beastmen are broken" chants I get.

hmm, I like Bossman's suggestion. It's more the kind of list I was after, ie not a real MSU list (as if that's what I wanted I'd be playing some other army) but has elements of one.

I agree with you that LM are forgiving, and that Beastmen have a whole new level of thinking required.........which is why I'd like to give them a shot. Because I've always run skink and small unit heavy lists (Saurus bore me, as I've said. You don't even need to bother with magic buffs, blow up other units and let the pieces try and hack their way through such a solid unit......not that exciting) I have a better idea of what's required than most LM players, but still have a lot of learning to do. That's the way it should be: Synergy should be something hard to achieve, but that should be nigh unstoppable as it doesn't have a single easy counter.

walkertexasranger -> on ambush: competent enemy, expecting you to put heavy unit in ambush (let's say 30+ gors), is going to set up close to one corner (eg. refused flank) and close to back edge of table (tactict widely used against dwarven miners) blocking possible entrances there. Then, in 1st turn, you end with possibility: 2 so-so results, 4 bad results on your ambush roll. Why so-so? Because at the beiginig of game if you put one (even big) unit without support in front of whole prepared army, then you are going to loose this unit (becasue enemy will choose to charge or not and to redirect your charge or not; you have no bsb, character support and so on). If you put your units far from his then you may put them in your deployment zone as well. In furhther turns it won't get better - either enemy stays bunkered (see first turn although your units should be getting closer) or he moved his units forward leaving a rearguard (cheap redirectors) or cheap warmachines which won't be able to shoot anymore due to CC clash in the middle of the table (and you have a few hundred points away from that fight).
But I belive it is possible sometimes to get some great things done through ambush. Look at "luckiest moments" for my ambushing riders performance agianst Tomb Kings. My riders claimed numerous warmachines and even some mages too. But it always are small units of riders - nothing to worry about when sth goes wrong.

PS. Gors are actually one of the best CC core choices in WFB. It's not only their skills (Ld hate, xhw, T4) but it's easy to organise a whole rooster to support them in their task (bsb 206, shadow/beast + herdstone). 30-40 Gors + bsb 206 vs same value of halabardiers with priest (60-70) should eat empire soldiers in 3-4 turns (assuming there is no magic in calculation & no one breakes).

Stonefalcon -> Like I said - it is possible sometimes to achive something spectacular with ambush. But I'm mainly tournament player (although faaaar from any kind of "top") and in my experience relaying on luck is poor strategy :) (rolling 6 in first turn happens once every 6 games, which is every second tournament - so no, thanks :) ) Especially that all tournaments I attend forbid using named characters (rerolls from Gorthor or what's his name).

I took out an ambush heavy list against the new Empire book last week. Though there were several bad rolls by my opponent (basically blowing up his own steam tank), I thought the small units did very well.

Beastlord
GBS (beast)
Shaman (shadow)
Shaman (shadow)
6 x 20 gors with full command (3 ambushed)
4 x 5 ungor raiders with musicians
2 x 1 razorgors
2 x 5 harpies

The ambush units caused all kinds of worries, espcially combined with the chaff that was screaming at him. Using magic buffs, hexes, and missiles, combined with outmanuevering, it turned out to be a massacre for the Beastmen.

It's in no way highly effective. It can work, but that's about it. Nothing in the Beastmen armyboook is really highly effective. And please respect us for the fact that we *have* been playing with this army and variants of Ambush for the now 3rd edition. Most of us know what works for us. Please understand that the position of "I have never played, but I know better than you guys" can be rather irritating for those who have played the army for years. I'm feeling how we are at increasing place heading to a bad place with people yelling each other and leaving the forum, I've seen it before. Right now you are outright saying we don't know how our army works.

Ambush isn't necessarily "the" army special rule either. I'd argue Primal Fury is the main army special rule, considering Beastlords have a better version of that rather than improved ambushing rules.
In the same vein an army special rule need not be beneficial. TKs have a no marching special army wide rule and there's no situation where this is a positive. Nor is the Entombed Beneath the Sands rule (which is similar to Ambush and about as common) particularly good as it ties the units too much.

Two things, 1) special characters are often not available for play. So most advice will be based on that assumption. And also you are then not using the special rule, but a special character "crutch" in a manner of speaking. A similar argument can be made for other armies, e.g. TK and HE where 1 special character, Khalida and Teclis can carry the the whole army. But that doesn't mean that Arrows of Asps and magic is the primary focus of either the TK or HE army.
2) you assume both 4 & 5 will be favorable outcomes. This may not be so at all. It depends a lot on the opponent. But in many cases coming in on the "other" flank will be more or less as useless as hitting your own board. Regardless you are still open to the vagaries of dice as to when and where your units will turn up. When not ambushing I know exactly where my units are going to be.

It may well be that bringing Kazrak is the only viable way to make Ambush work, but that doesn't in any way make Ambushing "the" rule to have or in general a good rule. Just as minotaurs aren't really good just because the Minobus build can be very effective.

I don't really get what you are saying. The BRB book version is much better in all ways. But that has no bearing on the fact that trying to make Ambush work as it is now in most cases (ie without Kazrak) is not a particularly effective way to go.

Maybe you can make it work for you. No one here is stopping you. But why insist on having us talking you into doing something many do not believe will work.

apologies, I didn't realise I was coming across as an arrogant know-it-all. That wasn't my intention, nor do I remember implying you didn't understand your own army (or so I thought). I recognise that I'm speaking to experts, whilst I am nothing of the sort.

My approach to Warhammer is always that of being devils advocate, and I always try new things. I'm always trying to find ways to use units people say are useless......and most of the time people are right, they are useless (still working on Skink Chiefs haha). But hey, I don't mind playing losing lists if it helps me work out why winning ones win.

Hopefully you now see where I'm coming from. I'm looking for new ways to experiment, and the shortage of Ambush-heavy lists made me curious. I'm trying to get my head around how Beastmen work, and I've learnt a lot from peoples responses to my post. I wanted to hear opinions, and that's what I got. I'm a happy man.
Will I try it? Of course, experience is a far better teacher than someone telling me it won't work..........a few massacres to opponents and I'll be right with you no doubt.

Until then can we keep the creative juices flowing? I don't want a debate/discussion to become an argument, but I feel there is more people could say.
I want to explore in more detail what the people see as the strengths and weaknesses of BM. If people are right, and Ambush is basically a gimmick, then my summation of the army is entirely inaccurate.

Would I be right in saying that most here feel the strength is relatively cheap CC troops of above-average standard with magic to back them?

I must add I've mad a 20 year gaming habit of winning with unloved units and armies. Beastmen are Completely unforgiving, this coming from a Tyranid play who went to the final round of Ards boys two years running using Fexes and Genestealers. I fear coming from Coldblooded and Slaan, to beastmen may be a to big of a change. You have to play perfect, and your units have to perform. That said, all it takes is a bad roll in any phase from the Opposing army, and You are all over them in both flanks and rear while crushing them with wildforms and Miasma. That said there is no army we can't take on and win with average dice and great generalship

Yep. I do agree on that. Maybe with exception "of relatively cheap" ;) (Minos aren't cheap in comparison to monstrous infantry from recent books but do their work as "hammer" carriers -> minobus tactics and well beefed Doombulls).

EDIT: Bossman is right. It's not forgiving army. Some bad rolling and you're in trouble. More than once I've seen attack stopped by heavy shelling by magic &/or warmachines. But when you get to CC... :)

@Bossman Maybe you're right, but the only way to know is to give it a go.....man, Lizzie players don't get a lot of credit on warhammer forums......that's ok, I get that though :D

My question is: when you say "perform" what do you mean? Without the benefit of some way to easily outmanouver foes (which I took Ambush to be) I'm still unclear what your plan of action would be. For example, against LM (the only force I've played much with, sorry!) I'm unclear what the idea would be: magic is not a safe bet for buffing Gors to be competitive with Saurus (Slann very good at debuffing, preventing casts getting made + magic items to grant extra dispel dice), can match in terms of chaff (which BM lack missile fire to get rid of....again magic is the assumed solution, but any casts getting off is going to require considerable luck).......and even assuming you were a brilliant general and were able to use the extra inch of move BM have over Saurus I can't see that resulting in that many flank charges.
As I said before, I can see minobus lists trashing LM totally......but that's not what most play correct?

So can you run me through what you would do? Obviously it's a very open ended and general question, but principles is more what I'm after than specifics. In essence: what makes BM tick? I honestly assumed it was Ambush, but that's clearly incorrect.

@Fafa: same question as above really. Coming from a LM background I'm unclear how Gors (only 3 points less than Saurus once you give them hw) can reasonably be expected to go toe to toe with Saurus without magical support (which I can't see as being reliably forthcoming if the opposition is fielding a Slann)......Bestigors are a better comparison, being the same price......but again the match-up doesn't seem that favourable.

To be honest I don't think many armies can tolerate bad rolling. A turn 1 miscast sucking your Slann into the void and LM don't seem that resilient either. Not that I'm here to spruik LM, I'm here to learn about BM :)

1. Primal Fury -> If passed (bsb&ld!!!) against Saurus 1A=0,89 hit. For Saurus 1A=0,5 hit.
2. Beastmen are quite capable of throwing large number of dice in their magic phase: herdstone (+1PD per shaman & then channelling), jagged dagger... -> so it's quite possible that Saurus will hit on 5+ (1A=0,33 hit) or Gors are +1S&+1T
3. That's why "206" BSB is so popular -> +1S (so both Gors & Saurus wound on 4+ and Saurus have only 6+/6+ save - taking into account larger number of hits & higher I of Gors...)
4. Numbers: per 10 Saurus (w/o spears) you have 15-16 Gors. Eg.: per horde of 35 Saurus you have horde of 40 Gors & smaller unit of 15 looking for side charge (or at leasts increase no. of models in combat)
5. Beast are quite mobile - MV5 is not MV7/8 but still it makes outmanouvering a bit easier.

PS. Matchaup of Saurus vs Bestigors is hopless for lizzards :) If you have 40 vs 40 (let say Saurus have spears; both no command groups) than result is ~8 in favour of Bestigors (assuming point no. 1 -> once again Ld&BSB!!!). Saurus 50A ending in 10,4 wounds and Bestigors 29-30A (29,6 ;) ) ending in 18,3 wounds.

[[EDIT: massively ninja'd :) jolly good.

Point to add to the below:Beastmen are very good at adding extra dice to the power pool. Herdstone and three level one shaman gives you +3 power dice every turn plus a fighty level 4 beasts shaman (common build) gives you an extra power dice for every model that the shaman kills. Our standard magic phase is aimed at spamming spells that can be easily cast on two dice (miasma that can be one diced if necessary, wyssans - easy two dice for a level 4, savage beast of horros - same, flock of doom - handy for skinks and can be one diced, panns pelt - easy two dice, curse of anraheir - reasonable two dice spell) that puts a lot of pressure on dispell dice. ]]


If you're looking for the core mechanics of the beastmen and what makes them work and work better than other armies, I'd agree with Snowblizz and say that primal fury is your best bet.

The chance to get permanent hatred is huge. The fact that you can get permanent hatred on WS4 core troops who have the option for additional hand weapons makes it even better. This is where the comment that gors with shields are just plain worse than gors with additional hand weapons comes from by the way. Our core mechanic is rerollable attacks, not rerollable parry saves therefore maximise that rather than attempting to get a shield save.

Gor will hit most other core on a 3+ anyway. If you then make that rerollable 3+ then that means that only 1 in 9 of your attacks are going to miss. Thats turned an average/decent combat unit into a very good combat unit. And that reroll can be gained every game turn rather than just on the charge.

Power builds for beastmen lists involving gor and bestigor are therefore designed to maximise the potential of this rule, making them stronger, tougher, increasing their likelihood of passing the primal fury leadership check etc etc.

The posters above have actually summarized Beastmen and the pitfalls of Ambush quite well, so I won't repeat what they have said. The strength is that Beastmen Hordes are absolute blenders - I can just wade through units of lesser troops, especially when they have a buff or an enemy debuff going.

As far as the plan of action vs. Lizards... Beast Bannered Gors and Bestigors actually beat Saurus and Temple Guard pretty handily head-to-head in a default scenario (as was described above), and we can battle LM magic better than most (there's no overwhelming reliance on 6-dicing stuff for Becalming Cogitation to exploit). The plan of action here is to clear out the chaff with our own (Salamanders die a messy death to Razorgors, and Raiders should at least keep Skinks occupied), and run right up to those Saurus and duke it out - that's a fight we expect to win.