5 More Ways to Waste Might Points

Good morning gamers,

Last time we did this, we talked about the five things that I thought were the biggest waste of Might in MESBG. In October 2020, the Durin Show did an analysis of what was written, so since they seemed to eat it up, we're doing it again! 

Side-note: if you haven't checked out the Durin Show, you should - their discussions are brilliant. 

The situations I'm going to cover might be a bit less controversial this time, but a little controversy is good for getting us to re-think our innate assumptions about this game we love, no? Before we dig in, let's review the principle that we'll be following in this discussion:

Might is too precious of a resource to waste.

If you agree with this sentiment, everything we're going to talk through will make (at least some) sense. If you're like me, though, knowing that something is a waste doesn't make it any less tempting, so naturally, there will be exceptions to everything. :-)

Let's get into it!

#5: Don't "Boost" a Magical Cast That Has Already Been Successfully Cast

As we discussed at-length in our most recent series on magic, casting magic (for everyone except Thranduil with the Circlet of Kings) is a gamble: you can always roll below your casting difficulty and "fail to cast a spell." Spending Might to make a spell work (especially an augment spell that won't be resisted) has its uses, but what happens when you get a roll that's successful to meet the casting value that you need, but you "want it to be harder to resist"? Is it worth it?

No.

But, I mean, it'll be harder -

No.

Walk me through it then.

Fine.

In MESBG, when you wish to cast a spell that targets an enemy model, you walk through the following steps:

• You choose how many Will points you wish to spend to cast the spell (each Will point gives you 1 die to roll);
• You roll the selected number of dice and find the highest value on all of the dice rolled;
• The highest value is compared to the required casting value ("2+", "3+", "4+", etc.) - if the required casting value is met/beaten, the spell is successfully cast;
• The caster may choose to use Might to boost the highest value (even if the casting value was met) - NOTE: this is the part where we're spending Might in this example;
• The target model's player chooses how many Will points he wishes to use to resist the spell (and adds any free dice he gets to the resist attempt from other rules);
• The target model's player rolls the specified number of dice and finds the highest value of all the dice rolled;
• The highest value is compared to the final casting value of the caster - if the casting value is tied/beaten, the spell is resisted; 
• If the casting value was not beaten, then the target may spend Might to boost his Resist roll; 
• If the target is unable to tie/beat the caster's highest value, then the spell is successfully cast; and
• Any dice that were used to resist the spell that were generated by a Will point being spent are returned to the target's Will store if they rolled a "natural 6".

Phew, that was a lot of steps - but all of this happens pretty quickly. As we said previously, spending a Might point to bring a casting roll from a 2+ to a 3+ when you needed a 3+ to cast the spell makes sense (I mean, it's not going to be cast if you don't boost the spell with Might, right?). But what happens when you get a 4 and need a 4+? Is it worth it to boost the spell to a 5+ just to make it harder for your opponent to resist the spell (or cost him Might of his own to resist the spell)?

Like calling a Heroic Accuracy, this risks wasting a Might point on a number of levels. First and foremost, your opponent may get a really low roll (a 1 or a 2) and might not be willing to spend Might to make the resist attempt work (thinking he needs Might for other things). Unlike Dueling rolls in the Fight phase, the caster needs to commit to spending Might BEFORE he sees what his opponent rolls - and if that roll is nowhere close to your original roll (let alone your boosted roll), you may very well waste a Might point. Are there situations where you "really want something to work"? Sure - but for every instance where a spell "needs to work," there are probably several instances that you will need Might points for something else later in the game - and you'll be kicking yourself if you spent it unnecessarily earlier in the game (even if it was to ensure something worked). Save yourself the stress and don't boost spells like this.

A second way you can waste Might points is the opposite extreme: your opponent rolls a natural 6 for his resist attempt. Whether it's from a Will point that was spent (best case for the target model, as you get the Will back) or a free die acquired from Heroic Resolve, Resistant to Magic, or Fortify Spirit (still a good case for the target model, though you don't get the Will back), the spell is going to be resisted and no amount of Might from the caster can do anything about it. Sixes to resist ALWAYS make the spell not work - that's why I like augment spells so much (you skip the resist stage of the casting resolution). Once again, the caster has to commit his Might before he knows what his opponent gets - and your opponent is just as likely on one die to get a 5 or 6 as he is to get a 1 or 2 (and he's MORE likely to get a 5 or 6 than a 1 or 2 as his highest value if he's rolling more than one die).

A third and final way you can waste Might points by boosting a successful casting roll is to boost a spell that your opponent doesn't choose to resist. Because your opponent doesn't have to say whether he's going to try to resist the spell or not until after you've committed the Might point, your opponent could say "Eh, I'm okay being Transfixed for this round because my Defense is really high" or "Well, I'm not likely to get a 5+ on my single die with no Might, so why bother?" In either of these extremes, you wasted a Might point (sort of). One could argue that this isn't an example of a wasted Might point because you wanted the spell to succeed and it did - but your opponent may still have chosen to "just let the spell succeed" without the use of Might.

It's important to note that in two of these cases (not the case where the resist roll got a natural 6), the spell worked! If your opponent doesn't want to do anything about it (or can't do anything about it), you need to capitalize on his choice and make the most of it. Some might even say that the Might point wasn't wasted because the spell worked (but chances are you'll regret spending your Might on this later in the game).

EXCEPTION: Drawing Out Resources. Some spells are so nasty that your opponent will have to try to resist them and will have to spend Might to make sure it doesn't work. While Paralyze is about the nastiest spell in the game, Barrow-Wights have no Might, so they don't count in this discussion. Other spells that will force a resist include Wrath of Bruinen, Sorcerous Blast, Panic Steed, and Shatter - if these spells just barely go off, you could choose to boost the cast to make it necessary to spend more resources to resist. While your opponent could be unable to spend Might to boost his resist attempt, he's likely to spend whatever it takes to beat the roll if he can (and that's why the Might point wouldn't be wasted).

Situationally, Banishment or Chill Soul could do this strategy as well, but the models that have these spells have other needs for their Might. I should also note that we addressed this idea of casting/Channelling certain spells to force your opponent to resist that spell instead of a later spell. If you've already channelled the spell, you probably don't want to spend another Might point to boost a successful cast.

Even in these cases, you should only do this if your opponent is unlikely to resist the spell without Might (like when you boost the casting result to a 6 and your opponent has 1 Will to try to resist the spell). You still might waste a Might point though . . .

#4: Don't Channel a Spell When You Have 1 Might Point Left

We talked last time about not channelling spells that give you a D3 boost because you run the risk of not actually getting anything from it. Today we're covering the problem of channelling something with your last Might point. As we discussed over and over again in our recent series on magic, almost no spells in the game are guaranteed to go off. Throwing an extra Will point when you cast a channelled spell helps to reduce the likelihood of failure, but once you're out of Might, your spells might not work.

The risk that you have of failing a cast is based first and foremost on the casting difficulty of the spell: channelling a Fireball with Kardush (cast on a 3+ with his only Might point) isn't THAT dangerous if you throw 2 Will at it (~11% chance of failure). If you fail to get the spell off in one out of every nine games, you're pretty likely to get it off (but there's still a small chance that it will fail).

If we change our scenario to a channelled Enchanted Blades from Cirdan (assuming you didn't have to channel Blinding Light), throwing 1 Will and your free Will point gives you a one-in-four chance of failure. Not horrible, but that probably will happen in a tournament game (or two).

If we up the difficulty to a 5+, we run a 45% chance of failing by only throwing two dice. At this point we're considering throwing a third die (0.70 chance of success), but we have a slightly BETTER chance of success if we don't channel it and hold the Might point in reserve to boost the spell if we get a 4-high (back to a 0.75 chance of success). 

We also have to mention that if the spell targets an enemy model, channelling a spell that "just barely goes off" could lead to an easy resist roll, so you could find your caster without Might after trying to get a spell off (no boosting later or calling a Heroic Move). Since casting isn't a guaranteed thing - and because you want a channelled spell to go off - don't use your last Might point to channel something (or you might waste it).

EXCEPTION: Spells That Are Cast on a 2+ (or auric spells that are cast on a 3+). There are many spells that are cast on a 2+ (Terrifying Aura, Blinding Light, Drain Courage for many casters, Immobilize/Transfix for some casters). If you throw two dice at these spells, you have a one-in-thirty-six chance of getting two 1s as your final result (or a roughly 3% chance). This is predicated on having 2 Will to throw at a spell - and spells with a 2+ casting value can be reliably cast with a single die (0.83 chance of success). Be careful if you choose to do this - it may not be hard to cast spells like Bladewrath (and the channelled version might be just what you need), but for goodness sake, roll that second die!

Other spells, like Drain Courage, can be NASTY when channelled (though we did discuss last time the risk of getting EXACTLY the same result from a channelled Drain Courage as you do when you cast it normally). Keep in mind, however, that channelling a spell like Drain Courage (or Banishment) can be useful tools for forcing your opponent to make a resist roll and spend whatever resources are necessary to keep the spell from going off (and if you can plumb through their Will, they will be more vulnerable to spells cast later in the game).

There is some debate here at TMAT about the benefits of Channelling Fury. Almost all Fury casters have 1 Might, so to channel the spell, you're taking the risk of failure and trusting that the statistically unlikely won't happen in the game where you really need Fury. As was mentioned previously, throwing two dice at the spell gives you a pretty good probability of success (eight-in-nine), so throw that second dice! This spell is an augment spell that targets the caster himself, so you avoid the resist roll issue (which means just barely casting it is fine).

#3: Don't Boost to Get the First Wound Against an Enemy Hero Who Has 2+ Wounds and 2+ Fate

Okay, so you're fighting the new Cirith Ungol Legendary Legion and Shagrat walks up to your Palace Guard Captain model and calls a Heroic Challenge (shocker, I know - but as I wrote about recently, Shagrat's actually quite good at calling Heroic Challenge). Shagrat happens to be joined in the fight by an Orc Warrior with two-handed weapon and instead of giving Shagrat +1 To Wound (and the two-handed weapon Orc +2 To Wound), you decide to accept the Challenge and "just go for it."

Assuming Thranduil is nearby, you're F7 with D7 and an Elven-made weapon, so you decide that you can take on Shagrat's 3 Attacks and lower Fight Value with your 2 Attacks and higher Fight Value. You get a 6-high in the Duel and you proceed to roll to wound. Shagrat's D7 means you wound him normally on a 6, which becomes a 5+ with the Halls of Thranduil army bonus for being near Thranduil. You roll two dice and get a 2 and a 4. Do you boost the 4 to be a 5?

No.

Why not?

I'll explain.

Whenever you spend Might, there is an opportunity cost that needs to be paid: Might spent to do A cannot be spent to do B later in the game. While some uses of Might are absolutely worth it (calling March in scenarios when you have to get somewhere fast, calling Strike against a monster who can't Strike back, etc.), spending Might to take off the first wound on a hero isn't really worth it - especially if that hero has 2+ Fate points.

In our example, if the Palace Guard Captain spends a Might point to wound Shagrat, he has a very small chance of doing much to Shagrat:

• Shagrat has a 50/50 chance of passing his first Fate save (and trading 1 Might for 1 Fate isn't a good trade in this case);
• Of the 50% of the time that Shagrat fails the first Fate save, 50% of those times he passes on the second roll (we have a one-in-four chance of taking out 2 Fate, which wouldn't be bad I guess);
• Of the 25% of the time that Shagrat fails his first two Fate rolls, 50% of the time he'll pass his third Fate save (which means we have a one-in-eight chance of taking out all of his Fate for the low-low price of 1 Might point).
• Finally, we also have a one-in-eight chance that Shagrat will fail all three Fate points AND suffers a Wound - which, I admit, would be awesome!

While this logic makes sense, we're hoping for the unlikely to get us some real utility out of our hero's Might point. I ignored the possibility of Shagrat just taking the Wound if he not in the Cirith Ungol LL and so isn't the enemy army leader and seeing what happens on the following round. 

Speaking of the following round, we know Shagrat will be calling a Strike and he has a very good chance of getting a higher Fight Value than the Palace Guard Captain. Is it good to spend our Might now on a single wound that could be saved by Fate? Or would it be better to save it for the next round where we can boost a dueling roll or a Fate save?

EXCEPTION: Dealing Multiple Wounds and Army Leaders. In the Cirith Ungol Legendary Legion, Shagrat is the army leader - maybe it's worth it to boost the roll JUST so you can have a chance of taking off a Wound on Shagrat (if not now, then with someone else later). Victory points are hard to argue with, so it's pretty easy to see the benefits there. 

It's also easy to see the benefits of boosting to wound when you have Mighty Blow/Bane Weapons, as Fate points need to be passed in order to not take multiple Wounds. In this approach, you take the gamble that the first Fate point won't pass so that your opponent has to spend his OWN Might to keep himself from taking wounds. It's this choice to force the spending of resources that keeps the Might point from being "wasted." 

But be careful: I once fought Gil-Galad with the Balrog and he took a chance adding an extra wound with a Might point. While that felt good, it meant that Gil-Galad had only 1 Might point left to call Strike on the following round (and he ended up losing the fight because he didn't have Might to boost his Duel roll). Even if he had won the second round, the Balrog would have still been there, and Gil-Galad would have been out of Might. As it happened, Gil-Galad was killed after two rounds with the Balrog . . . thanks to boosting a To Wound roll.

#2: Don't Call a Heroic Shoot

There are some heroic actions that everyone loves (Heroic Move, Heroic March, and Heroic Strike). There are some heroic actions that most everyone loves (Heroic Defense and Heroic Combat). There are some heroic actions that many people like situationally but not everyone loves (Heroic Channelling and Heroic Strength). There are some heroic actions that some people like a lot and some people think are meh (Heroic Accuracy and Heroic Resolve). There is one heroic action that very few people - besides myself - like (Heroic Challenge).

But there is one heroic action - more so than all the others - that players of all kinds find little utility for in games: Heroic Shoot. While it is available to all heroes in the game and affects the cadence/tempo of the Shoot phase (like Heroic Moves change tempo for the Move phase and Heroic Combats change tempo for the Fight phase), shooting before the person who has priority is not often a big deal (and most armies you face won't be over-focused on shooting).

But there are some armies (the Rangers of Ithilien, the Corsairs of Umbar, Azog's Hunters, Wood-Elf-heavy Lothlorien lists, and Mirkwood-Ranger-heavy Halls of Thranduil lists) where archery is everything. And these armies pump out a LOT of archery. When using OR facing these lists (none of which have great Defense themselves), the question is this: is it worth calling a Heroic Shoot in order to shoot them first?

No.

But, I mean, they're going to kill so many -

No.

You see my concern though right?

Yes.

And you still say no?

Yes.

Explain.

Sure.

This principle deserves an example. With the popularity of (and vehement hatred for) the Rangers of Ithilien Legendary Legion as updated in the Quest of the Ringbearer Sourcebook, archery-heavy armies at mid-level points match games are powerful and should be expected when you show up at a competitive tournament. Let's assume you're facing the following nasty army at 700 points:

• Faramir, Captain of Ithilien on horse with bow
• 6 Rangers of Gondor
• 9 Rangers of Gondor with spears
• Madril, Captain of Gondor
• 5 Rangers of Gondor
• 7 Rangers of Gondor with spears
• Damrod, Ranger of Ithilien
• 3 Rangers of Gondor
• 3 Rangers of Gondor with spears
• Anborn, Ranger of Ithilien
• 3 Rangers of Gondor
• 3 Rangers of Gondor with spears
• Mablung, Ranger of Ithilien
• 3 Rangers of Gondor
• 3 Rangers of Gondor with spears
• Captain of Minas Tirith on horse with shield and lance

Photo Credit: Drawn Combat

This list is exactly 700 points, has 6 heroes with 11 points of Might (5 of which can be used for March), has 2 mounted models, 50 bows, and half of your models (25/51) have spears. Sure, your army is D4, but it's also F4 with more models than most armies will have at 700 points - and more models by a LOT. For those of you who were paying attention, we actually could have dropped 8 spears in order to add 1 more Ranger of Gondor to the Captain of Minas Tirith's warband . . . but THAT would just be disgusting. :-P

If you're a "normal" army trying to fight this in a scenario where killing things is how you get points, you're probably going to hate them. So the question is, how effective would fighting fire with fire be (shooting them before they can shoot you)? Let's look at a few lists that show how well you're going to do - because the unstated part of the equation is this: how effective is a Ranger of Ithilien gunline anyway? And does it pay to shoot first?

Let's assume that you've got everyone's favorite army from an aesthetic appeal and everyone's least favorite army from a competitive stand-point, the Easterlings:

• Amdur, Lord of Blades on armored horse
• 2 Easterling Warriors with shields
• 2 Easterling Warriors with pikes and shields
• 2 Easterling Black Dragon Kataphrakts with axes
• 1 Easterling Black Dragon Kataphrakt with axe and War Drum
• Easterling Dragon Knight with armored horse
• 3 Easterling Black Dragon Kataphrakts with axes
• Easterling Captain with shield
• 2 Easterling Warriors with shields
• 2 Easterling Warriors with pikes and shields
• 1 Easterling Warrior with pike, shield, and banner
• 3 Easterling Black Dragons with pikes and shields
• 4 Easterling Warriors with bows
• Easterling War Priest
• 5 Easterling Warriors with shields
• 4 Easterling Warriors with shields and pikes

Photo Credit: Warhammer Community

My dislike of Easterlings is well-documented on this blog - and I know that there are both admins on this blog (like Centaur and Zorro) and readers of this blog (like MinutemanKirk and Paul Bussard) who love Easterlings and think they're pretty good (Zorro did come in second at our most recent THRO tournament with an Easterlings-Shagrat-Black-Numenoreans combo). I've tried to be fair to them, though (using our post in the List Building series as inspiration) and get a little bit of everything. With 35 models at 700 points, I feel this is representative of a fairly standard, pure Easterling list you can expect to see (though admittedly, Khamul is missing - I feared he'd be pin-cushioned against this list).

Most Easterling armies I've seen (from lists provided to podcasts or posted on Facebook) seem to think that bows are not what Easterlings do, so leave them at home. I can understand that (though I don't agree - I think the limited troop choices that they have means you need to maximize your normal war gear options as much as possible), and so I've left only 4 bows in this army (to cover the flanks of the phalanx as it advances). The phalanx itself is a 3x3 square (which I discussed in the list building post on Easterlings), with the Captain and two Warriors with shields in the front, three Easterling Warriors with pikes backing them up (one has a banner), and three Black Dragons forming the third rank (able to lend their F4 supports either to the units in the front or shifting to fight somewhere else).

The other blocks are straight-forward: the War Priest is embedded in a 2x5 shieldwall (since he doesn't have Phalanx), the Dragon Knight is part of a "4s formation" with Kataphrakts to take advantage of the Gleaming Horde rule, and Amdur is also part of a "4s formation" with Kataphrakts and leads 4 random Easterling Warriors (you could give these guys bows if you wanted to - I would personally). I've also given the Kataphrakts axes because they need the killing power (they are your hammer pieces after all).

Most of the units in this army are D5-6, which means they'll be wounded by the S2 bows of the Rangers of Gondor on 6s. With a 3+ shoot value and nothing to modify their shoot values, the Rangers will be hitting with half their bows if they move half their distance or two-thirds of their bows if they stand still. This translates to the following expected kills each turn from the bows of the Rangers of Ithilien LL:

• Moving and shooting (hit on 4+, wound on 6+): (50 / 2) x (1 / 6) = ~4.2 kills/turn
• Standing and shooting (hit on 3+, wound on 6+): (50 * 2 / 3) x (1 / 6) = ~5.5 kills/turn

Well, with only 35 models in the force, losing 4-5 models a turn and starting with a 15-model DEFICIT would be bad odds, eh? The Easterlings do have two things working for them in this scenario: first and foremost, they have a War Drum that grants all of their infantry +3" of movement (and their cavalry +5" of movement). Second, they brought an Easterling Captain (often overlooked in Easterling forces, it seems) who gives the army two chances to call Heroic March (granting an addition +3" of movement to the infantry and +5" of movement to the cavalry). With a potential of 12" movement for the infantry and 20" of movement for the cavalry, you shouldn't have to endure more than two turns of archery (and that could be one turn of full archery if you're willing to charge with your cavalry - a daunting task against so many models).

This speed bonus could be a reason to take Khamul on Fell Beast for 170 points, but since it would probably mean losing our War Priest and his warband along with some of the warriors from Amdur's warband, I'm not sure that he's worth the inclusion here. Perhaps if we ran all Kataphrakts led by Amdur and a Captain we could fight this army better . . .

Still, it's going to be an uphill battle. Do you call a Heroic Shoot to kill a few first? No - and here's why. In this list, we purposefully avoided taking a lot of archery. With only 4 archers, each of which has a 33% chance of wounding a Ranger, we'll be lucky if we kill any Rangers at all. For this faction, we obviously aren't calling a Heroic Shoot. Let's change up the scenario a bit . . .

Suppose the same Rangers of Ithilien list is fighting the following Assault Upon Helm's Deep LL force (which is pretty good at shooting things):

• Uruk-Hai Uber-Captain with shield
• 3 Uruk-Hai Berserkers
• 7 Uruk-Hai Warriors with pikes
• 4 Uruk-Hai Warriors with crossbows
• Uruk-Hai Captain with crossbow
• 2 Uruk-Hai Berserkers
• 6 Uruk-Hai Warriors with pikes
• 4 Uruk-Hai Warriors with crossbows
• Uruk-Hai Shaman
• 1 Demolition Team with +2 flaming brands
• 2 Uruk-Hai Warriors with pikes
• 5 Uruk-Hai Warriors with crossbows
• Uruk-Hai Siege Veteran with Isengard Assault Ballista
• 1 Siege Crew
• 1 Siege Crew with pike

Photo Credit: Pugzly101

With 42 models in this army (only 8 fewer than the Ranger list we're facing) and 14 crossbows (one wielded by a hero with 2 Might) and 1 ballista, we should be able to do plenty of damage with our archery, right? Our units are predominantly D5, so we expect to suffer 4-5 wounds every turn from the Rangers if we leave them unchecked. But how good is our archery in return? Surely if we have S4 crossbows that will wound those pesky Rangers on 4s and a ballista that can kill 1-2 models really easily, we'll see a good reward for calling a Heroic Shoot!

• Standing and shooting with crossbows (hit on 4+, wound on 4+): (14 / 2) x (1 / 2) = ~3.5 kills/turn 

The math on the ballista is far more complicated:

• The ballista hits on a 4+ but can reroll its To Hit roll with the Legion bonus:
• 0.5 chance of hitting with original roll, an additional 0.25 chance of hitting on the reroll, cumulative probability of hitting of 0.75.
• The Ballista has a 0.17 probability of hitting the intended target (front rank model) originally and gets an additional 0.14 probability of hitting on the reroll, cumulative probability of not scattering off the intended target of 0.31.
• With a one-in-thirty-six chance of getting a 1 on both scatter rolls (0.03 probability) and a 0.31 probability of hitting the intended target, the ballista team has a 0.66 probability of scattering onto another target (assume a second-rank model).
•  Each model hit has a 67% chance of being killed by the ballista, which means our expected kills each round is the sum of our probability of hitting, multiplied by our probability of scattering/hitting the intended target, multiplied by the probability of wounding (multiply the wounds by 2 if the initial target was hit): (0.75 x 0.31 x (2 x 0.67)) + (0.75 x 0.66 x 0.67) = 0.31 + 0.33 = 0.64 kills/turn

So between 14 crossbows and 1 ballista, we expect to kill ~4.1 models each round. With 4 fewer models, the Rangers are now doing the following damage to us:

• Moving and shooting (hit on 4+, wound on 6+): (46 / 2) x (1 / 6) = ~3.8 kills/turn
• Standing and shooting (hit on 3+, wound on 6+): (46 * 2 / 3) x (1 / 6) = ~5.1 kills/turn

With a previous damage output of 4-5 wounds/turn, we're now down to . . . 4-5 wounds/turn. Why didn't the output of the Rangers change very much? Because their archery volume is so high that they're STILL going to do a bunch of damage to your army with their bows! Sure, we've deprived them of an estimated half-kill each round, which is to say this may not do ANYTHING to their archery. Wow.

Now the Rangers of Ithilien are, I admit, an edge case - no one pumps out that level of archery. But let's take a look now at how well we could do with this Helm's Deep army against an army that has a bit more "reasonable" shooting numbers:

• Bolg on Warg with Orc bow and Morgul Arrows
• 2 Fell Wargs
• 1 Hunter Orc on Fell Warg
• 1 Hunter Orc with two-handed pick
• 1 Hunter Orc with Orc bow and banner
• 5 Hunter Orcs
• 5 Hunter Orcs with Orc bows
• Narzug on Warg with Morgul Arrows
• 2 Fell Wargs
• 2 Hunter Orcs on Fell Wargs
• 1 Hunter Orc with two-handed pick
• 7 Hunter Orcs with Orc bows
• Fimbul on Warg with Morgul Arrows
• 2 Fell Wargs
• 2 Hunter Orcs on Fell Wargs
• 1 Hunter Orc with two-handed pick
• 7 Hunter Orcs with Orc bows

Photo Credit: Slashfilm.com

This list has 42 models and 23 bow-armed models (thanks to all three of our heroes having Orc bows). As bad as Orc bows are, the niggling damage that Morgul Arrows in this list can do to multi-wound models is annoying (if not dangerous). With a 4+ Shoot value on these guys in this list (3+ for Narzug), your damage output is not as stellar as the Rangers, but still quite good (we're going to compute Narzug separately, since he's a really special case). So how well would these guys do against the Assault Upon Helm's Deep Legendary Legion?

• Moving and shooting (hit on 5+, wound on 6+): (22 / 3) x (1 / 6) = ~1.2 kills/turn
• Standing and shooting (hit on 4+, wound on 6+): (22 / 2) x (1 / 6) = ~1.8 kills/turn

Narzug, like the ballista, requires some special care to compute:

• Narzug when he moves hits on a 4+ (0.5)
• Narzug wounds on a 6 +(which becomes a 5+ with his free Might point, 0.5 x 0.33 = 0.17)
• If Narzug misses, he can spend his free Might point to hit if he got a 3 (0.17)
• He wounds on 6s (0.17 x 0.17 = 0.06)
• Therefore, when he moves, Narzug does 0.23 wounds a round
• If Narzug doesn't move, he hits on a 3+ (0.67)
• Narzug wounds on a 6 +(which becomes a 5+ with his free Might point, 0.67 x 0.33 = 0.22)
• If Narzug misses, he can spend his free Might point to hit if he got a 2 (0.17)
• He wounds on 6s (0.17 x 0.17 = 0.06)
• When he doesn't move, Narzug does 0.28 wounds each round

While the Rangers of Ithilien are a nasty prospect, pretty much any other heavy-archery army in the game is looking at doing remarkably little damage in a given round with their archery. An Azog's Hunters list with 50% archery is only supposed to kill 1.5-2 models each round if you have high Defense (and D3-4 armies will suffer 3-4 kills each round). If the Uruk-Hai crossbows kill 4 models in their Heroic Shoot, the Hunter Orc archery doesn't change very much (1-1.5 kills/turn). The very marginal savings you get against ANY shooting army (whether it's the Rangers of Ithilien or 50% archery armies) just isn't going to get you much.

Okay, last scenario: let's say that you were taking the Helm's Deep army from above and you faced an army with 33% bows that looked like this:

• Elendil, High King of Gondor and Arnor on horse with shield
• 5 Warriors of Numenor with shields
• 2 Warriors of Numenor with flails and shields
• 4 Warriors of Numenor with shields and spears
• 1 Warrior of Numenor with shield, spear, and banner
• 2 Warriors of Numenor with bows and spears
• Captain of Numenor on horse with lance, shield, and heavy armor
• 5 Warriors of Numenor with shields
• 5 Warriors of Numenor with bows and spears
• Captain of Numenor on horse with lance, bow, and heavy armor
• 5 Warriors of Numenor with shields
• 5 Warriors of Numenor with bows and spears

Photo Credit: Me

The Uruk-Hai shooting changes a little, since the Numenorean player is playing defensively and gave all of his bowmen spears (so they can hide behind D5 warriors). Here's how the Uruk-Hai shooting has changed (the ballista remains the same, 0.64 kills/turn):

• Standing and shooting with crossbows (hit on 4+, wound original target on 4+, wound in-the-way target on 5+): (14 / 2) x (((1 / 2) x (1 / 3)) + ((1 / 2) x (1 / 2))) = ~2.9 kills/turn

Numenor's base shooting is surprisingly good, considering they are average shooters - 12 Warriors and 1 Captain:

• Moving and shooting (hit on 5+, wound on 6+): (13 / 3) x (1 / 6) = ~0.7 kills/turn
• Standing and shooting (hit on 4+, wound on 6+): (13 / 2) x (1 / 6) = ~1.1 kills/turn

If the Uruk-Hai call a Heroic Shoot to shoot before Numenor does, you would kill ~3.5 models. If you manage to kill 2 bowmen (and 1-2 shield guys), the Numenorean archers are reduced to killing 0.6-0.9 models in the return fire. Again, we see the output archery NOT being reduced by very much. Why? Because dealing wounds with archery is hard in this game - even when you have a lot of guys shooting! Is Heroic Shoot worth calling to keep your opponent from shooting you to death? Actually no . . .

EXCEPTION: Protecting An Exposed Gunline Hero From An Exposed Gunline. While I don't think leaving your gunlines in the open is a good strategy, players who don't have a lot of terrain on the map (either because they're just getting into the game or "because you want to make the game less complicated") will feel like their archers are going to get torn to shreds before they get to shoot. So is it worth it to go first if you know your opponent is going to mince up your battle line?

This is probably the only reason you call Heroic Shoots in the game - to let your archers try to tear through someone else before they tear through you. Spending Might to shoot first is really only worth it to guarantee that shooting heroes can do "something" before they die. If you have a vulnerable hero (Duinhir, Vrasku, Haldir, etc.) embedded in a gunline that is about to be pounded by crossbows, call a Heroic Shoot before your hero gets killed. Otherwise, don't waste your resources (remember, Might spent by a hero with a shooting weapon to call a Heroic Shoot COULD be used to boost a roll instead)!

Note: I thought about including out-shooting the Iron Hills Ballista as an exception, as it's one of the most hated models in the game for shooting armies. With the ability to keep any archery that's not fired by an enemy siege engine from being able to do a thing (if you get your angles right - and if you hit with the ballista), maybe you call a Heroic Shoot to shoot first, right? Well, the Iron Hills Ballista gets to call a free Heroic Shoot every Shoot phase - which means you're looking at a 50/50 chance of not wasting that Might point (and I you know how I feel about having a 50/50 chance of winning a roll-off).

#1: Don't "Escalate" a Combat When You Have 1+ Fate Left

Okay, to understand what I mean by this principle, I need to take you back to when I first started playing MESBG (then LOTR SBG) ten years ago. Back then (the "Legions of Middle-Earth" days), there were only three Heroic Actions: Heroic Move, Heroic Shoot, and Heroic Combat - all of which work EXACTLY like they do now (don't change what ain't broke, right?). Without Heroic Strike or Heroic March (to say nothing of the other specialized heroic actions), combat heroes called a lot of Heroic Combats, but if you were up against a big hero/monster, you probably saved your Might points for boosting To Wound rolls OR to boost a Dueling roll.

Let's assume that Balin the Dwarf, Lord of Moria was fighting Lurtz (who was a lot worse back then): Balin was F6 (as he is now) and Lurtz was F5 (as he is now), so Balin really wants that 6! If Balin and Lurtz both get a 5 high on their dice, the player controlling Lurtz would probably pay a Might point to make his die a 6, prompting Balin to boost his high-die to a 6 with a point of Might as well. We called this "escalating a combat" - spending Might on a dueling roll to force your opponent to spend Might in response.

The concept is sound: if you have to lose a duel, you might as well drag down some of his Might points along with you. While this view of Might points CAN have a beneficial impact in the game, it ignores one critical thing: Might can be used for more than just boosting the Dueling roll - it can be used to make a Fate point work.

We've all had a hero who was dealt so many wounds that it didn't matter whether he passed his Fate rolls or not - they were dying that round. Perhaps it's the fear that this result is going to happen that causes us to spend Might - and LOTS of it - to desperately claw at the elusive 6 required to win/tie a Fight. While losing a hero outright can certainly happen (especially against the likes of Aragorn, Azog, or Bill the Troll), most heroes are going to wound other heroes on a 5+ or a 6+ - and THAT means that a 2-3 Attack hero might only do 1 Wound against your hero. Heroes who get +1 To Wound (or that very-rare +2 To Wound) might be able to do 2 wounds to you - and THAT could be really bad, I admit.

In response to those 1-2 Wounds you might take, you have one reprieve for most heroes: Fate points. The thing about Fate points that we often forget is that they're not guaranteed saves: perhaps you've looked at two enemy heroes (Elrond and Gil-Galad for example) and said, "I'll try to kill Gil-Galad - he has less Fate." While Gil-Galad kills stuff better than Elrond (for the most part), Gil-Galad is a more vulnerable hero with his single Fate point compared to Elrond with his rerollable 3 Fate points. 

Most heroes can't reroll their Fate points - and most heroes also only have 1 Fate point and 2 Wounds. This means that, for most heroes, we might think we can take 3 Wounds on our hero, but in reality, we're looking at having the CHANCE at 3 Wounds instead of ACTUALLY having 3 Wounds. So how does Might come into this picture - wouldn't making your opponent burn more Might BEFORE getting to wound be better?

It certainly can be better, but consider the following: if you suffer 1 Wound and your Fate point doesn't work, you are one accident away from dying with most heroes! Saving your Might point(s) to boost a Fate save makes it more likely that you actually pass the Fate roll, which makes your hero last longer. This is particularly applicable when facing heroes who have Mighty Blow or Bane Weapons, since their multiple-wounds are generated AFTER Fate has been spent - so passing that Fate point is really important!

But there's another reason to not waste your Might escalating a combat: if you don't die in the ensuing To Wound roll, you'll be gearing up for another fight the following round. Are you able to call a Heroic Action like Heroic Strike/Defense that could keep you from becoming a shish-kebab? Or maybe you'll luck out and have Might available to boost a roll just above an opponent's roll if he chooses to escalate. Gotta have Might around to survive as long as possible - don't just spend it!

EXCEPTION: Big Game Hunting. I predicated the discussion above by saying that most heroes (S4-5) wound enemy heroes (D5-7) on 5s or 6s - and in the most part, that's true. Some heroes can get +1 To Wound, so you might be wounded on 4s or 5s. Still other heroes are base S5 with a two-handed weapon (like Dain) - and THOSE heroes can wound really weak heroes on 3s. Other models (mostly of the monster variety) have REALLY high Strength values, which means they might be wounding you on 3s or 4s no matter what your Defense is - and THAT will hurt a lot. Against these heroes, you become less and less likely to survive a one-turn kill (a "flash-bang-kill" in Green Dragon parlance), regardless of whether you pass your Fate roll. When this happens, escalating a combat is worth doing (make them pay because it's all you will probably do for the rest of the game)!

It's important to note that if you're facing a monster who doesn't have Might (like a Cave Troll) that boosting your dueling roll isn't escalating a combat - it's just winning it (because you're not trying to make your opponent spend Might in reply). This isn't wasting Might points - those guys are horrible and you need to kill them before they kill you!

OTHER EXCEPTION: The "Unnecessary" Hero. When I was writing up this post, I played a practice game with the Breaking of the Fellowship Legendary Legion against an Isengard army that Centaur had. At one point, Gimli was engaged in a Fight with an Uruk-Hai Scout Captain and Ugluk (with a Shaman supporting and a banner in the same fight). Ugluk and Gimli had both called Heroic Strikes, with Ugluk getting to F6 (sad day) and Gimli getting to F10. Gimli had already spent a Might point, so he was sitting on 1 Might point left against 2 Might on each Uruk-Hai hero. With Gimli getting a 5 high and the Uruk-Hai Scout Captain getting a 6 which got reduced to a 5 thanks to his two-handed weapon, Centaur chose to escalate the fight with a Might point from the Uruk-Hai Scout Captain. 

This wasn't a wasted Might point because a) the Uruk-Hai Scout Captain was wounding Gimli on a 4+ thanks to doing Piercing Strike with his two-handed axe, and b) because Ugluk was still poised in the next round to call a Strike if needed (and Gimli was out of Might). Escalating a combat with the "unnecessary hero" isn't a bad option - your opponent will still need to deal with the more important hero on the following round and if they choose to escalate against you now, they're giving you the upper-hand later.

Conclusion

Hopefully you've found this post intriguing and it's caused you to think about how you spend your Might points. Next week, we start a new series on Legendary Legions, where we'll delve into what each LL gives you over its normal factions, what it takes away from those factions, and different ways you can build the army at different point levels. Our first stop is one of the first Legendary Legions that was released (and one that is rarely ever taken): the Men of the West. Is this list just a cheap, side-show version of Minas Tirith and Rohan? Are the Dol Amroth guys even worth taking? Would you ever run Gandalf, Legolas, or Gimli? Find out the answers to that next week - until then, happy hobbying!