This is something I've been thinking about for a while. A list representing Arnor in its might, using the Minas Tirith list as a base.

King of Arnor (haven't decided which yet) with Heavy Armour
6 Royal Guards (GotFC) with Shields
9 Warriors of Arnor with Spears and Shields
8 Warriors of Arnor with Shields
11 Rangers (6 with Spears)
Allied hero: Glorfindel
Total: 500
Don't know if I've tried to cram too much into a 500 point list but this incorporates everything I wanted. Weakness if a lack of cavalry, so it'd be a defensive army, but I hope that with the heavy armour they'll be able to hold out. Sacrificed some troops for a heavy hitter in Glorfindel (Unarmoured, unmounted) but hopefully that works.
So yes, don't know if I'll actually make this list, but any suggestions if I was to?

i have to say i quite like it and using Minas Tirith as your soilders is better as it show the kindom befor ehtye became pussys and ran from anything that went boo.
Glorfindel is a good choice but the Twins are also a good choice as they where very friendly with the Dunadain. I would however suggest maybe gettign a shield for your king but other than that it looks like a really good list. (Keep an eye out for cavalry however)
I would love to take you on with my all Cavalry army with Gothmog and Shadow. Pitty we are too far away.

Looks good to me, even though I feel like Glorfindel is a bit of a gamble with his low D but, other than that, it is quite a solid list
Cheers,
Rad

i haven't really had many probplems with G's low defence. I don't get it from Aragron and when i sued him last (His armoured for tho) he killed 2 Nazgul and a Troll Chieftain!!!!! (Tho Elrond and Radagast and mayeb a bit of luck helped here and there)

Seems like a fairly good list: nice store of might, good avaerage defence, good spread of Fv4, decent shooting and Glorfy to boot.

I'd definately suggest wapping out three spears from your Rangers and equip your King with a shield - its certainly worth it for the D7.

Obviously be wary of cavalry, but realtistically , most forces at 500pts wont have a cavalry contigent that's much cause for concern to an army like this. Compact, heavy infantry and some good shooting - coupled with your might points - will be adequate protection.

I would be more concerned about an army like Isengard or Dwarves; neither have much to worry about from your shooting, both will at least match your spread of Fv4 while loosing little to you on numbers and both will probably have a decent amount of S4 troops. These two armies pose the greatest threat to you in my opinion. Your greatest asset against them will be your Heroes, you will probably out-might anything either force can throw at you although you King barely a match for either army's generic Captin - let alone a named Hero. Glorfy may save the day here but be warned about using him too independantly of the rest of your troops as without any armour he will be particularly vulnerable.

Oops, forgot to say bump the new total up to 500 with the 2 extra spears.
So that would be dropping 5 spears if I wanted a shield on the king. I know from a gaming perspective it's probably worth it, but there's the modelling issue to consider as well. I was thinking that if I made this, the Arvedui model would make a great Arnorian king due to his Arnorian regalia and regal appearance. It would be difficult not only in attaching a shield to that model, but also acquiring one suitably Arnorian (as WoA are metal), though I suppose a round shield like Boromir's could work or maybe an altered Numenorean one. Alternatively, I did briefly consider giving him some special swordfighting ability which allows him to defend himself and count as shielding (in a similar style to wood elves or the twins) and write the additional defence down to increased toughness or exceptional armour.

As for Glorfindel, I added him in as I figured that the king would struggle against tougher opponents like heroes and I had nothing particularly strong to rely on, so glorfindel would e a bit of fun. Used the unarmoured version for 2 reasons: 1) Thematic - I'd imagine that if he was travelling through Arnor he wouldn't be encumbered by heavy armour unless he knew he was going to battle (though he still has light armour doesn't he?). 2) I own that version from BGiME. Likewise I didn't include the twins because 1) Don't own them, 2) Thematically I don't know how old they would have been during Arnor's glory. The two choices are fairly balanced anyway. The twins give me an extra skilled model allowing me to split up and do more damage. Glorfindel gives me an incredibly powerful individual, likely to trump anything the enemy throws at me and causing terror.

Plan against cavalry would be to target them with bows and hope to dismount or kill a few before they can hit my lines. My warriors will form into a shield wall and probably anchor themselves against good terrain unless they need to advance which they'd do in formation. Probably keep the GotFC back behind the front warriors guarding the flanks and ready to wrap around the edges once the lines meet. To combat Glorfindel's low defence, he'll probably be a counter-attacking element, hidden behind my sturdy defences until I reach combat and he can pick his fights. From experience this guy is rediculously hard to take down in low points games (I tried it with Goblins, one 6 and he wins the fight. Rolls a 5 and he has might points to burn).
I figure with Dwarves I can outmanoeuvre them a bit and fight on my terms. My shield wall should be able to hold the Dwarven line. Isengard will be tougher. I figure I'd need to shield parts of my wall while I attempt to swamp opposing areas utilising high fight value where possible to at least force a reroll if tied. My Rangers will either be tied up or can flank the formation and charge the pikes from behind if they're in a phalanx. Of course, these are entirely situational and I can only make generic guesses at what would happen. But one of the most enjoyable parts is playing in character and working with what you have. Victory is sweeter when it's challenging.


Thanks for the feedback all!

Quote :

Alternatively, I did briefly consider giving him some special swordfighting ability which allows him to defend himself and count as shielding (in a similar style to wood elves or the twins) and write the additional defence down to increased toughness or exceptional armour.

Well, if you're playing in a context that allows for you to add special rules, surely your opponent will allow you to use him as though he's holding a shield. Arguably, adding the special rule would amount to more points than the shield - even though they collectively do the same job - and that further complicates things.

Quote :

I figure with Dwarves I can outmanoeuvre them a bit and fight on my terms. My shield wall should be able to hold the Dwarven line.

Although Dwarves having a smaller distance than you is deffinately an advantage, don't overestimate your ability to 'have your way with them'. Yes, in a straight line, you will gain 1" on the Dwarves every turn but this is not the case when we're talking about 'outmanouvering' your opponent. If you're trying to outflank your opponent then you will inevitably have to travell further than they will - depending on how far away you are when you attempt this, it is enough to negate or even reverse your 1" movement advantage. If you're more concerned with simply pulling the Dwarven army appart with movement, bare in mind that 1: you will 9 time out of 10 be taking more damage from his bows than he will from yours and 2: that a Dwarven army is likely to contain a good number of throwing weapons. On the day both things will probably convince you that you can waste too much time out of commbat trying to 'outmanouver' your enemy.


As far as Isengard goes, be very careful when it come to crossbows - facing a large number of these would be one of the only times I would advise your Rangers to use volley fire. If your opponent ues a pure Uruk-hai force you will be on the back foot from the outset - although probably with the advantage in numbers, this pales to the overwhelming effectiveness of Fv+S4 vs a Gondorian army. However, if he chooses a more mixed force, perhaps using orc spearmen to support a frontline of Uruks - you will be i a far better position to exploit this by using you Fv4 troops to outflank and break down his fighting line.

tho remember that Dwarves/Isengard are almos talways outnumbered so by using the "Gang Rape" tactic to kill them. What is "Gang Rape"? (Aside form the obvious pun)
Gang rape as I call it is putting 1 shielded warrior to shield agaisnt 1 or 2 foes often euqal or better than you in combat. This tyes up thoese men for a few turns atleast and then allows your better numbers to attack the rest of there force 2 on 1 and this tactic work very well agaisnt Dwarves as the not only have no spears but also they can't manuver as well.

@jaws - You're tactics are sound but I'd be wary of relying too heavily on individual WoMT to hold up much at all. A single WoMT has less than a 2 in 5 chance of winning against two Fv4 opponents if he shields. Bare in mind that both Isengard and Dwarves have a nice array of S4 troops and you can see that your throw away troops wont hold up for long at all, certainly not long enough for S3 infantry to cause much damage at all.

Also, only a pure Uruk-hai or heavy KG/IG force will find itself heaily outnumbred by Cal's list - particularly as he's bringing Glorfy. So attempting to hold up part of his opponents force in the hope of achieving local superiority elswhere may not be the best option.

ArtificialWinter wrote:

Quote :

Alternatively, I did briefly consider giving him some special swordfighting ability which allows him to defend himself and count as shielding (in a similar style to wood elves or the twins) and write the additional defence down to increased toughness or exceptional armour.

Well, if you're playing in a context that allows for you to add special rules, surely your opponent will allow you to use him as though he's holding a shield. Arguably, adding the special rule would amount to more points than the shield - even though they collectively do the same job - and that further complicates things.

Sorry, I didn't mean a special rule as such. More of a count-as. In that the model doesn't have a shield equipped but still gets all the benefits of having one (and paying the price) due to the justification above. Still fails for WYSIWYG, but if I did do that, I'd hope that people would understand.


As for tactics...
DWARVES
When I say fight on my terms, I don't mean so much controlling all the fights. I play Goblins as well, so I am experienced with the slower movement and I know it doesn't really come into affect once the lines have clashed. What I am more getting at is choosing the battleground and formations of the fight. I figure that I should be able to take up a good position amongst terrain or such like and have a chance to reshuffle my formation to deal with the Dwarves. If he has a heavy KG/IG force, then he'll probably be low on archers and I can hang back and force him to come to me. My archers may have low defence and weak bows but they're hitting on a 3+ (though I don't know whether Dwarven Rangers are as good or not). I still think that the strength of the Dwarves is in combat, not archery though, and even if they have a lot of archers, they'll still be wanting to fight in combat (given that 66% are close combat 'elites'). It would be a difficult list to play givent he defensive capabilities of the Dwarves and would be entirely situational whether you'd be forced to hide and draw them to you, attack the archers or charge the line in general.

ISENGARD
Crossbows are a threat to any list. I think that they key is that they can't move and fire though. If there is terrain you can use to block line of sight or at least get in the way rolls, it goes a lot towards thwarting their fire. It's situations like this though that make me consider putting Glorfindel on Asfaloth (though single horsemne tend to get shot down quickly). As said earlier and restated by Jaws, shielding would be key. If I could break up the Uruk line by shielding with parts while counter-attacking with another (thereby hoping to hold one part in place while my other attempts to break through) maybe led by the two heroes it could be succesful. However there's no point shielding when there's still spears supporting. The best use of shielding though is when wrapping around an Isengard phalanx and using it to draw out and tie up two pikes at the back. It gives the wall a greater chance of victory (enemy counts as trapped as well) while the shielder should hopefully be able to hold on. If there's not too much enemy archers, the Rangers would deploy away fromt he main force and shoot from the flanks before charging in when the lines close trying to pin them.

Dwarves and Isengard can really differ too much though, and it really depends what the specific list is geared to and what terrain you have to work with.

Dwarf rangers about the same only there type of bow diffrers (in terms o0f ranged attack)
Normal dwarves havr a range of 18" and strength 3 shots while Rangers have a range of 24" with strength 2. But you have to remmeber also that unlike the normal dwarves they can go tohugh rocky terrian without penalty and they can have Throwing Axes unlike the normalo dwarves but they also have the lowest defence of all dwarves (5)

Cal585 wrote:

Sorry, I didn't mean a special rule as such. More of a count-as. In that the model doesn't have a shield equipped but still gets all the benefits of having one (and paying the price) due to the justification above. Still fails for WYSIWYG, but if I did do that, I'd hope that people would understand.

That's fine. If you were playing against me I'd have no problem with this - although I'd probably suggest just using the King as though he was armed with a shield, instead of using 'counts-as' as I'd just see it as simpler. But really I see no problem either way.

Anyways...

I agree in your point about being able to dictate the place and manner of the fight when it comes to Dwarves - perhaps not totally but you certainly have the advantage over them. However, although as you say the strength of Dwarves is in combat - don't assume that your opponent will be overly hasty to get into combat if he has the advantage at range. Jaws has summed up the basics of Dwarven archery but it is important to note that both Rangers and Warriors require a 6 from your bows to take down, whereas they wound your D4 Rangers on a 5. You will probably find Dwarf Warriors volleying more due to their shortened range - but at the same time your opponent will be trying to make sure you also have to volley as much as possible, negating your higher Sv. You may find yourself able to abuse their shorter range and movement by staying between 18"-24" of them but don't bet on being able to significantly out-shoot them, even in this optimum situation. Be warned that if your Rangers prove to awkward a target, the Dwarf Warriors may decide to pick on your GotFC, as their S3 bows require only 6's to wound - and you can't really afford to loose those vital (and expensive) Fv4 heavies from your frontline. Dwarf Rangers are less eassily manipulated with movement but are less of a threat to your main body of troops. In a direct shootout however, your Rangers will inevitably come off worse. If you do not have the advantage at range then you may find that it is you, not the Dwarves, who are rushed to enter combat and that they are the ones deciding the terms of battle.

Your tacics for combating Isengard are good but yes, I agree that it comes down to the situation on the day.

ArtificialWinter wrote:

Cal585 wrote:

Sorry, I didn't mean a special rule as such. More of a count-as. In that the model doesn't have a shield equipped but still gets all the benefits of having one (and paying the price) due to the justification above. Still fails for WYSIWYG, but if I did do that, I'd hope that people would understand.

That's fine. If you were playing against me I'd have no problem with this - although I'd probably suggest just using the King as though he was armed with a shield, instead of using 'counts-as' as I'd just see it as simpler. But really I see no problem either way.

That's what I mean. King of Arnor with Shield. This is more background justification as to why his model doesn't have a shield.

As for tactics, every army has its counter. But the game is still fairly balanced and entirely situational so I'll just have to see if/when those situations ever occur.

But in this style of army, do you think it would be worth including a banner? On the one hand it could really aid the playstyle if I'm all bunched together relying on Heavy Armour to hold and elites to win the day. On the other, it cuts out the model count even further... And those extra models might be important in aditional flexibility.

Hmm...although the compact fighting style of you troops certainly lends itself to a banner, and it would definately be an asset I would advise against it. Taking a banner would mean droppin 4 models and I don't think you could afford that, unless perhaps you re-considered taking Glorfy - perhaps it favour of a cheaper Elvish Hero?

Hmm yeah, I don't know who you'd replace him with. Arwen is the only one that comes to mind, and I don't know how old she was and how much Elrond would have enjoyed her riding by herself in a war torn land.

So yes, it's Glorfindel or nothing. I'll keep him in there for a bit of fun though. I am considering a banner, but losing the extra models could hurt. Not to mention the trouble of acquiring one model-wise. So I'll give it a miss for the moment.

Hmm... Would be interesting to convert a cavalry contingment using KoMT...

You could always create a second list using a higher points value - then you could include a banner and make use of some converted cavalry.