[WM Norse]

[raia]

Hi,
anybody here with experiences with Norse trial army ?

I have played them for an year and half and I have problem with shooting armies. It seems as whole Norse army tactics is about throwing dices.

So here are my suggestions for correction:

Berserkers : up to 2 units per 1000points (now it is only 1 unit per 1000pts),
Mammoth: costs 150pts ( without siege rule ) + 50pts upgrade for siege (howdah).
Giants: costs 125pts (from 150) or
Lobber Giants: costs 150, but have shooting ability ( cannon but only for 40cm range ?)

What do you think about current Norse army and my nominated changes?

[Lex]

Raia,  what is the problem you face ?   Inability to get to grips with a shooty army ?

[Bel]

The friend of mine plays Norse 5 years and he is completely satisfied with current rules (frankly speaking I have suggested him to test some changes bearing in mind to weaken his army bkz he is constant winner and he still wins with all changes .

Berserker - why not? Try to play some games (more than 2) and share your impressions.

Mammoth - if it costs as Giant and has no GGW table I think it is too powerful for this points value even if the characteristics (hits) will be redused to 8 (as Giant has).

The changing of Giant stats from my point of view is highly undesirable.

[raia]

Raia,  what is the problem you face ?   Inability to get to grips with a shooty army ?

Unfortunately, Yes.
At first - shooty army are for me Dwarves and Araby. With Dark Elves I have mainly win. We do not have in our gaming group High Elves and Orcs. I have played only games between 1000 and 2000 points.

I have tried cavalry to beat flanks (empty, with banners, with Heroes, with Were kin heroes) and they seem to me too weak. After first round (with reduced stands) they do not ability to break an flank. All other units are too slow to make an flank attack.

I have tried berserk formations to divert shooting. It was ok, but I hadn't have enough power/luck to reduce flanks to destroy centered shooty formations.

I have tried shamans to send a Thunder of Fowor at formations. But confusion does not affect shooting units :-/

And I do not used hunters (shooting), because I cannot imagine how can I use them. Valkiries are same.
Giants are too unpredictable and it is hard to me to command them separatedly from main huscarls strike forces. And with Mammoth I do not have luck - if he charge, he usually lost half wounds in first round, so after that he is useless.

As I see, huscarls are strike force in Norse army. Other elements are only for support. (Ulfewereners are '"must have" against "horse armies").

Here is last report from battle against Dwarves. Sorry, only in Czech

The friend of mine plays Norse 5 years and he is completely satisfied with current rules (frankly speaking I have suggested him to test some changes bearing in mind to weaken his army bkz he is constant winner and he still wins with all changes .

Hey, I would like to see his games really! Is he on net? I need some advices probably.

Mammoth - if it costs as Giant and has no GGW table I think it is too powerful for this points value even if the characteristics (hits) will be redused to 8 (as Giant has).

But compare him against Araby elephants. They are more powerfull for same price.

The changing of Giant stats from my point of view is highly undesirable.

Yes. But what can I imagine as second shooting unit in Norse army it is Giant throwing rocks. But Giant with this ability is not combat focused. So Lobber Giant will have same price as actual Giant. And actual Giant will have reduced points.
I think that it is allright in shooting context of Norse army. Orcs have more options to shoot.

[calmacil]

I've no experience with Norse, but at first they appear to be a strong army. The main weakness is lack of cavalry and chariots.

Huscarls are very good for 95 points!!

The mammoth seems OP to me.
200 points for a 8/10/5+ is great

You say you're playing games that are 1,000 to 2,000 points. Your problem could be that you are taking expensive units. I personally would take a mammoth or a giant only in a 3,000 point army


If i ever decide to get another warmaster army, i think i'd chose Norse

[jchaos79]

nice battle report.

I have no experience with norsca army. Never played with or played against.

But seeing your battle report the thing that caught my eye is the non-traditional formation of norsca brigades. They are playing regular common 's battlelines.

I am curious, could you explain why you choose those brigade configuration and formation?

[Aldhick]

I am curious, could you explain why you choose those brigade configuration and formation?

I guess it's anti-cannon formation so you don't get shot through the ranks.

[raia]

I am curious, could you explain why you choose those brigade configuration and formation?

I guess it's anti-cannon formation so you don't get shot through the ranks.

Yes, that's true.

If I built strike formation (column by column), cannons would split the formation.
If I built line formation ( line behind line ), cannons will reduce all 4 units.
Regardless on units type - don't forget that against cannon units don't have save. Huscarls are useless.

I've no experience with Norse, but at first they appear to be a strong army. The main weakness is lack of cavalry and chariots.

Without experience with/against Norse army please do not comment, it is meaningless.
Huscarls are good, but they are not good against all (cavalry, cannons, things that reduce saves).
Mammoth don't do enough work for this price. As I said - compere him with Araby elephants.

Main weakness is lack of long range shooting units.

[calmacil]

Without experience with/against Norse army please do not comment, it is meaningless.

Wow

[raia]

Without experience with/against Norse army please do not comment, it is meaningless.

Wow

I'm, sorry. I did not want to be austere.
But what can be seen strong on paper, don't have to be good on battlefield. I'm looking for advice from experienced Norse player, or I would like to adjust actual rules for Norse army to be playable more ways.
I have tried many army lists and tactics already, but unsuccessfully. 

[empireaddict]

@raia.  Norse is an uncommon army.  I have never played with or against it.  I guess most members of the forum will be the same.  So, if you only want advice from those with experience of that particular list, you might be waiting a very long time. 

But if you are happy to take advice from people who have played with or against similar armies – for example, Ogres or Albion – then you might get some (hopefully) helpful suggestions.

If you don’t want one from me; stop reading now.

When looking at your written comments and photographs of your battle report, my question was: why does he not use cavalry to charge the gun lines?  Yes, the cavalry will probably lose the combat but they will kill some or all of the guns.  A command 9 general has a pretty good chance of striking gun lines with cavalry from 60cm away with 2 orders.  And normally the cavalry are striking from behind a screen of cheap infantry units that are in single lines to take the cannonballs.  That has been my experience of many games involving Dwarves and Empire against armies that have hard-hitting infantry and ‘medium’ cavalry.

Overall, my impression of the Norse list is that compared to a similar list like Albion it is as strong, if not stronger.

[raia]

When looking at your written comments and photographs of your battle report, my question was: why does he not use cavalry to charge the gun lines?  Yes, the cavalry will probably lose the combat but they will kill some or all of the guns.  A command 9 general has a pretty good chance of striking gun lines with cavalry from 60cm away with 2 orders.  And normally the cavalry are striking from behind a screen of cheap infantry units that are in single lines to take the cannonballs.  That has been my experience of many games involving Dwarves and Empire against armies that have hard-hitting infantry and ‘medium’ cavalry.

Thank you for response. I will try this strategy. But I'm afraid that last similar attack ended massacre on my side. My opponent usually playes two formations with handgunners (with warrior in support), flame cannon and cannon. So first charging unit usually entirely die. And second, and third... may be I don't have enough luck for it

[Leonida]

Hello, I recently joined this blog, I read your comment about NORSE, I fully agree with you. Surely the NORSE army need some structural change, played against them so many times, they have never won even against other players of our club.

Their biggest flaw is a lack of speed and some units sincerely to change, cost too high for their effectiveness (ULFWERENER). In addition the army a congenital weakness against shooting weapons. Also spells are to be reviewed!



Leonidas

[raia]

Hello, I recently joined this blog, I read your comment about NORSE, I fully agree with you. Surely the NORSE army need some structural change, played against them so many times, they have never won even against other players of our club.

Their biggest flaw is a lack of speed and some units sincerely to change, cost too high for their effectiveness (ULFWERENER). In addition the army a congenital weakness against shooting weapons. Also spells are to be reviewed!

Hi Leonidas,
I am not sure with changing rules. But rules comitee for WMR has prepared something. We will see in next release of WMR Armies.

By the way, last tournament in Poland Norse army won.

[raia]

Their biggest flaw is a lack of speed and some units sincerely to change, cost too high for their effectiveness (ULFWERENER). In addition the army a congenital weakness against shooting weapons. Also spells are to be reviewed!

look here: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=6257.msg75722#msg75722

Lot of cavalry and also ulfewereners...