February 2024 FAQ Hot Takes

Very grateful that the FAQ dropped on a Saturday so I could immediately write this up

Games Workshop have delivered on their promised February FAQ, and it isn’t even the end of the month yet! It’s not looking quite as impactful as the last one, but it has at least one significant change that will impact the meta across the board.

Speaking of which, this article will start off with some brief analysis of where the meta is at pre-FAQ, at least for large events in the Great British Hobbit League (by far the biggest data source for MESBG around). From there we’ll jump into the FAQ changes, and then have a quick discussion about how this is all likely to play out.

 

The meta before the FAQ

This list was the absolute top of the meta before this FAQ. And (spoiler alert) after it

Last year, the top four armies in terms of podium placements at GBHL 100s (the biggest and most competitive UK events) were Mordor/Serpent Horde, Assault on Helm’s Deep, Host of the Dragon Emperor and some kind of Good soup (normally centred on Lothlorien). Assault on Helm’s Deep obviously took a substantial hit at the last FAQ, and I imagine most of their podiums pre-dated that change. So we have 3 top armies really, with Mordor/Serpent Horde by far the strongest, having nearly as many podium spots as the other two put together.

Turns out a Mordor/Serpent Horde alliance is good, who knew? Credit: Gollum's Gamers

Obviously, MESBG being as balanced as it is, there was also a sizeable contingent of other factions and Legions that placed at big events, including Assault on Lothlorien, Erebor Reclaimed, Arnor, and Azog’s Hunters. At the very top end, however, it seems that there’s a clear top 3 lists to beat.

That's where we were before today; what’s being thrown into the mix to change things up?

The big change (singular)

Imagine spending the hundreds of hours assembling and painting this guy just to see him nerfed

By far the most meta-relevant change is that the Dragon Emperor has been increased in price from 170 points to 200. That’s not a crippling blow, but it straight away reduces Host of the Dragon Emperor lists by 3-4 models. That’s a pretty noticeable hit, especially at lower points values, and probably means the list becomes more geared towards 750+ events.

Overall, this was a good change: the issue with Host of the Dragon Emperor wasn’t really its rules, just that it was a little too efficient overall. Having one full file stripped out of the phalanx means that a lot of lists that couldn’t effectively flank it before will now be able to, and it will be less able to grind out fights through sheer numbers and efficiency. This is a Legion that should feel elite, and previously it had just a few too many models to play with. So, a good change.

In saying that, it is unfortunate that the extra points are associated with the Dragon Emperor’s profile itself, rather than with the Legion. Previously the Emperor was a little too cheap outside the Legion and much too cheap inside it, and this puts a severe dampener on lists like Emperor/Khand or Emperor/Mordor, or even non-Legion Easterlings. Those lists were probably fine from a balance perspective previously, so it’s unfortunate that they’ve been hit in the crossfire here. The obvious option would have been some nerf to the free Black Dragons in the Legion (maybe removing them entirely, or reducing it to a 1-point discount, or only allowing it in Dragon Knight warbands), which would have had a similar impact on that list but without hitting other– more balanced– ways of running the model.

In any case, that’s the only big change, and I’d say it’s probably a good one overall. The Dragon Emperor did need a little tap, if only because the kind of list he leads (a hyper-efficient pike block with efficient and simple heroes) is much more oppressive for newer players than something sneaky and hard-to-use. I wish the change had been more focussed, but I’m glad it happened.

 

The small stuff (don’t sweat it)

I struggle to imagine that this was a frequently asked question

Going through from the top, you can definitely still charge a model if you started your turn within a different model’s control zone. I thought that was RAW anyway, but it’s good to clarify. It does still leave unanswered whether, if you start your turn within Model A’s control zone, you can subsequently move closer to Model A once you enter Model B's control zone to charge Model B. RAI you should be able to, but RAW you’re not actually being prevented from moving closer by the control zone of the Model A (which the charging rules would overrule) but by a different rule entirely that says you can’t move any closer than you started. Pretty niche, but it could come up.

Next up, you have to swap both your weapons if you’ve paid to swap one and have multiple. Previously you could choose before the start of the battle, which I suppose could have given you flexibility if you’d swapped for axes and realised your opponent’s Defence values meant the axes wouldn’t be relevant. Probably a nerf to Dragon Cult Acolytes more than anything else, but a very minor one.

Cavalry definitely get the benefit of Fortify Spirit on their mounts, which I thought we knew already. Well, we definitely do now.

A model with a bow is still unarmed if their other weapons get Shattered. Come on guys, whose gaminess meant this needed answering?

I'm sure the game that provoked this question was fun for both sides

A model can’t deploy somewhere that an opponent can’t physically reach it, which makes a lot of sense. I’d agree with Drawn Combat’s interpretation that you probably could still cheese this by getting models on top of terrain such that an enemy can’t get up while your model is in a specific spot, as ‘impossible’ is a pretty high bar. But at least you now can't deploy models in places they couldn’t otherwise reach, which would definitely have been a fun thing to do previously.

The pairing off fights rules have been clarified, now definitely functioning the way the rules team (and almost everyone else) assumed they did. Basically the player with Priority chooses who goes into every combat, subject to the singular restriction that no model gets left out. Simple!

Otherwise, a couple of FAQs around exiting the board in missions like Reconnoitre clarify that you can’t sneak through enemy control zones to slip off the board, and you also can’t get Sorcerous Blasted off by a particularly silly opponent. Sensible rulings, but the latter is a funny enough mental image that I’m sad it’s impossible.

In Fog of War, you now pick targets after deployment. That’s how I’d always played it, but ‘at the start of the game’ was never the clearest of phrases to use.

Now this looks like a great time

The Dragon Emperor can now be picked up and used to Bludgeon his buddies if he’s fighting an Ent. Technically that’s a third nerf to that Legion in this FAQ, but here the comedy value (and the lack of overall meta relevance) means it’s a big thumbs up from me.  

Sadly, a second ruling does prevent the Ent plucking the Witch King off his Fell Beast and doing the same to him; apparently Ents are too short for that nonsense. This once again raises the question of how flying models work thematically: can the Ent not grab the Ringwraith because it’s swooping down from above when they're fighting? But then why can other models charge a flying monster? The mystery deepens.

That’s a lot of very small changes, none of which have any substantial impact on the game. I’m sure the three Fangorn players in existence will benefit a lot from the added clarity though, and some very silly online debates have been put to bed at last.

Overall meta impact: top 3 becomes top 2?

Pictured: a Witch King/Suladan list slicing through some poor Angmar

Earlier, I mentioned that there were probably three top lists in the game right now: Mordor/Serpent Horde, Host of the Dragon Emperor and Lothlorien-based Good soup.

This FAQ has addressed precisely one of those lists, dropping Host of the Dragon Emperor down to a much more balanced level. However, it hasn’t touched the Witch King/Suladân combo at all, and in fact has made it even better by weakening one of the stronger F5 lists in the game. This list was already the strongest in the game by some margin, and has had two of its natural predators (Assault on Helm’s Deep and Host of the Dragon Emperor) nerfed over two successive FAQs.

That’s not catastrophic, because MESBG has such tight balancing that even the best list in the game is still going to lose its fair share of games. This isn’t 40k, with its periodical excursions into balance-hell. And there are still plenty of lists that give Witch King/Suladân pause for thought, even if it is a little short on properly bad matchups.

It is a bit disappointing, however, that what is quite clearly the best list in the game managed to slide through another FAQ without changes.

Well, disappointing for other people: I was planning on taking variants of it to my next two tournaments, so it’s great for me! I’ll also have an article up sometime this week on how to build and run this style of army, so I’m glad that the FAQ writers have saved me the effort of reworking that.

Expect to see these guys take to the field sometime soon

Big take away from this FAQ: invest in Black Númenóreans, they’re feeling great about the world right now. And if you're looking to find out what to do with them, then check back in later this week!

How would you rate this FAQ? Good changes but not enough? Is Mordor/Serpent Horde actually fine, really, and I'm just just whining because it does nasty things to Angmar Orcs? I'd love to hear your thoughts as ever, here or on the socials.

Until next time, may your current favourite army always dodge its (well-deserved) bullets!

 

Comments

  1. My only critique of this FAQ is that they ignored the questions I had on Fantasy Fellowships again . . . not unexpected, but they've addressed scenario questions before and it's easy-wins for a fun way to play. Sigh . . .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alas, the unanswered FF continue! Maybe next time they'll remember that books other than the last one exist

      Delete

Post a Comment