Revisiting Play Styles Part 7: The Underdog Playstyle

 Hey Reader!

Welcome back to the blog! Tiberius wrote a blog post recently about list building for beginners, based on a 2015 post I made talking about the seven list building play styles I noticed at the time. Last time we talked about the Min/Max Playstyle, and in today's post we are looking at the last playstyle: the underdog army.

I.  The Underdog Playstyle: "The List Only I Understand"

The name for this style owes its existence to one of the greats of Warhammer Fantasy 8th Edition, OnceBitten360, who referred to the underdog playstyle as, "an army that, because of practice, I think I can win with, but I don't think anyone else can." This list tends to be highly unique compared to others from the same faction, often involving a mix of models that the player likes, regardless of whether they are the "most efficient use of points" or "most powerful models in the faction." They tend to have good utility, but they may not be the first models that catch your eye.

I'm pretty renowned for running lists like this in our gaming group, and it's true: I run lists that most people wouldn't run, but I run them for months at a time, so I know how to win with them. So what follows in the next section will be examples of what I have used, but realize that unlike in other posts in this series we won't be "giving recommendations" for how to build an underdog list: a lot of it is going to come down to personal preference combined with a lot of practice.

Underdog lists tend to work best when you have a wide range of options available, but as you will soon see, that's not entirely true; sometimes you can build underdog lists in armies that have virtually no model choices.

II.  Maximizing the Underdog Playstyle's Potential

To get started, underdog lists require a strong underlying methodology. You need a clear idea of what you want: "strong damage with lots of spear support," or "overload the Attacks stat," or something like that so that you know which models to take. You then look through the options you have and select the models that meet that criteria, and string them along into an army list that meets your criteria.

So classic example for this is how I run Isengard. I want lots of spears with lots of attacks, so I cut corners and economize everywhere to meet those priorities. This means that my first three heroes are Lurtz, Mauhur, and Ugluk, as you get a lot of attacks for pretty cheap, and lots of room for spears. Saruman will never make the cut, because he just doesn't offer enough attacks and his point cost cuts into how many spears we can take, so we leave him on the cutting room floor. 

It also means using orc spearmen instead of uruk pikemen as we get a lot more models in the army, and we have S3 to accompany S4, so we're never "wasting points" by not improving our wounding chances against a model's Defense value. By the same token I tend to run D5 uruk scouts instead of D6 uruk-hai warriors, as S4 is very common and it's now wasted by my opponent against my D5 front line.

I also run 1-2 ballistas instead of archers, as 1) I think they're better value in terms of kills than a dozen uruk bows, 2) you still get a good number of guys, and 3) just in case Smaug or the balrog shows up, you have to have a plan, and these guys are a far better plan than a dozen uruk bows, :P

But since I want a lot of attacks, I also look at models with more than one attack. I favor the feral uruk-hai over the berserkers, in part because their Courage is typically good enough to do the job, but also because if you don't two-hand with the berserker you're getting just as much killing power for cheaper with the feral uruks.

Now this is an Isengard that I don't think you'll find anywhere other than here, and that makes sense: I know how to play it in a way that works against massed shooting, heavy magic, etc. Others may not, and that's fine - it keeps people from stealing the army list. But with enough practice, I think I can make it work, even if it doesn't work for others.

And that is the core of the underdog philosophy: working with models you know and come to rely on to accomplish a specific goal that helps you win the game. 

III.  Factions to Consider 

Some factions play better with specific playstyles, and I'll be honest, this is the only playstyle in this series where this really isn't true. Since the underdog list relies heavily on your comfort level and development of tricks with a specific faction, it has less to do with "factions that lend themselves well to this approach to the game" and more to do with, "how much time do you want to spend working with this army, learning its secrets and executing on them."

So I'll note here some of the tricks I've learned that I prefer with armies I build, but your list will likely look different.

• Isengard: As noted above, I run uruk scouts over uruk warriors because I've discovered that D5 is good enough for me. It's not technically as good as D6, and you learn to be careful around S3 archery, but it's good enough and it saves me points on every guy I field. I couple this with ballistas for fire support (which is why I don't run the legendary legions) and feral uruk-hai for extra attacks in the battle line (also ditto why I don't use legions), backed up by orc spearmen (see, you've never seen this list anywhere other than the TMAT blog, :P ). I've met with great success with this army because you have a high model count, reliable ranged damage to force the enemy to close, and then a lot of attacks at F4 S4 backed up by spears to finish them off.
• Minas Tirith: It's been a while since I've run these guys, but I tend to favor Osgiliath Veterans over standard warriors because 1) I like the C4 standard, which becomes C5 with the army bonus, but also 2) because I run both of the Sons of Denethor, so I'm getting F4 on them at base. I also tend to couple these with Citadel Guard with longbows (so I can get that sweet S3 archery) instead of rangers, and I forego Tower Guard entirely because it's too many points for a model that is still only S3. Add onto this the fact that I tend to ally in Boromir from the Fellowship list to save points and tack on a few siege weapons, and you have a very odd Minas Tirith army that has quite a bit of firepower and a good bit of ranged support.
• Mordor: While I haven't run this, the "Royal Air Force" style of play that just runs nazgul on fell beasts is a great example of an underdog list. The concept is straightforward: every model is a flying monster, every model has high defense, and every model can murder your troops at a given objective to clear them, allowing you to stand a chance at objective missions if you can kill enough of the enemy before the timer runs out. It's a fun way to play, and very difficult to deal with if you can get it running.

Conclusion

If you haven't guessed yet, the point of the underdog playstyle is to have fun. You run stuff that you like, and you run them in enough numbers or with the right models to make it fun for you. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right.

And that wraps up the series! I'm starting work on a new terrain project so I anticipate that my next post will involve the new board, as well as testing out some scenarios for castle sieges, so until next time, you know where to find me,

Watching the stars,

Centaur

"I know that you have learned the names of the planets and their moons in Astronomy...and that you have mapped the stars' progress through the heavens.  Centaurs have unraveled the mysteries of these movements over centuries.  Our findings teach us that the future may be glimpsed in the sky above us." ~ Firenze, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix