A Melee Perspective on the HeroScape Power Rankings

[MattserTruckRally]

Adding more fire to the 10th >=< 4th debate. I do find it interesting that the 4th are rated a little low here. While 10th/Raelin/Marcus is Matthias poison wouldn't 4th/Raelin/Marcus be in the same vain if someone tried it? It's a decent option at a lower point format like 460 or even opens up the door at 530 by adding a 5th set of 4th.

 

[jschild]

A slow spread with Knights will corner him on virtually any map. It's worked for me vs. my wife.

 

[Matthias Maccabeus]

Adding more fire to the 10th >=< 4th debate. I do find it interesting that the 4th are rated a little low here. While 10th/Raelin/Marcus is Matthias poison wouldn't 4th/Raelin/Marcus be in the same vain if someone tried it? It's a decent option at a lower point format like 460 or even opens up the door at 530 by adding a 5th set of 4th.

That's an excellent point. I think in today's metagame (sans Ohio) it's mostly about valiant 4th. It's funny that I don't think I've ever lost to 4th with a melee bonding squad and I only know of one loss with just a melee (non-bonding) squad which was an extremely close game. Is that 5th defense and bayonet charge the deal breaker is the question I guess?

 

[The Champion of Weston]

Wow this thread was made for me, I'm love melee units. Almost none of my armies have a ranged unit. Glad to see another Knights of Weston fan. I will definitely keep track of this thread.

 

[yagyuninja]

Quick question, Matthias. Have you played much against Silver Surfer with pure melee? How did it work out? I see you put him down in the Bs so it must not have been too frightening.

I would say probably not, however please remember that a B is a good ranking. Just because a certain unit is not an A doesn't mean it sucks. I was happy to get Bs in College.

Right. Lots of other strong nasty stuff there in the B+ arena. Thanks.

 

[ElvenEnvy]

Adding more fire to the 10th >=< 4th debate. I do find it interesting that the 4th are rated a little low here. While 10th/Raelin/Marcus is Matthias poison wouldn't 4th/Raelin/Marcus be in the same vain if someone tried it? It's a decent option at a lower point format like 460 or even opens up the door at 530 by adding a 5th set of 4th.

That's an excellent point. I think in today's metagame (sans Ohio) it's mostly about valiant 4th. It's funny that I don't think I've ever lost to 4th with a melee bonding squad and I only know of one loss with just a melee (non-bonding) squad which was an extremely close game. Is that 5th defense and bayonet charge the deal breaker is the question I guess?

I find most people play Valiant Mass or Mass+Suicide Unit. Valiant Mass is a no brainer. Mass+Suicide Unit helps in bad match-ups and makes opponents choose between manuevering around a potentially powerful Suicide Unit or playing against Valiant Mass. When you start to play 4th and several other units (eg. Raelin, Marcus, and filler), your completely giving up Valiance and not getting the benefit of suicide units. When Raelin, Marcus, and the filler die, most of your 4th will probably be gone, that's going into Non-Valiant Mass. If you're giving up Valiance for 90% of the game, you might as well be playing 10th.

That said, I suppose it would be interesting to try 4th/Raelin/Marcus at 530. Not having to take the filler and getting the extra squad might do the trick.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The 1 player that fears Theracus more than Stingers it seems. Have to fear that 1 attack per OM and being able to transport 1 figure for 1 turn.

Also, considering there is no ignore button there is a particular irony in the comment

Sure there is, all I do is click your name and voila! Add Devil's Advocate to Your Ignore List is an option.

More to the point, melee has plenty of reasons to both fear and appreciate Theracus more than Stingers. Theracus provides mobility which can be difficult for melee to counter or which can be very appreciated by melee in getting important units into useful positions sooner.

~Aldin, ascendingly

Adding someone to a list is not an Ignore Button. An Ignore Button would be a button with the word Ignore on it.

 

[Killometer]

Adding someone to a list is not an Ignore Button. An Ignore Button would be a button with the word Ignore on it.

We've already had this conversation. Please do not clutter up another useful thread with the same idiotic semantic arguments.

To add something useful to this thread, you've created a very nice looking bell curve, MM. I charted it in Excel along side Jexik's ratings, but I'm to computer illiterate to port it here.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

DA's snark aside, I guess I'm confused as to exactly what perspective you're writing from here.

My comment is not snarkie at all. He is saying that Theracus is more tournament competitive than Stingers, TKN, Zombies, and Red Wyrmlings against Melee armies despite their being literally no results to support this claim and with evidence to the contrary being abuntantly clear.

 

[dok]

DA's snark aside, I guess I'm confused as to exactly what perspective you're writing from here.

My comment is not snarkie at all.

Your comment was snarky. You were trying to make a reasonable point, but that doesn't change that you were making your point in a snarky way.

This reminds me of a line from one of my favorite movies...

He is saying that Theracus is more tournament competitive than Stingers, TKN, Zombies, and Red Wyrmlings against Melee armies despite their being literally no results to support this claim and with evidence to the contrary being abuntantly clear.

I think he explained his point of view reasonably well in his response to me:

It's more (and perhaps I should change the title) from the perspective of a melee enthusiasts players perspective. Does that make sense?

I figured my Stinger rating would be the most controversial with players. In my experiences with melee, especially melee bonding Stingers just lose almost every time. If it weren't for the back-stab of Hawthrone I think my tourney record against stingers with melee bonding armies would be like 15-0 (or something very close to that).

So, he's not saying "armies with Theracus are going to win as many events as armies with stingers". What he's saying is, "stingers don't scare knight and orc armies, and Theracus is handy for knight armies".

I think that's a reasonable viewpoint. I am not sure I really agree, since it seems like a good rats+stingers build could beat a good knight army on most maps a decent percentage of the time. But the important thing to realize here is that Matthias is not using the same approach to make his power rankings as Jexik/spider_poison used to make theirs.

 

[killercactus]

I think all that Matthias is saying about Stingers is that they suck against bonded melée. That's true. They only attack 3 times, have short range and their extra attack is often wasted.

That being said, I'd think that Heavies might be a bit afraid of them since they can potentially kill Grimnak so fast. Of course, one turn of misses and they're probably tied down by heavies.

I don't really get how the 4th are so much worse than the 10th here. Maybe it really is the ability to make better use of Raelin against them, who knows. I'd still think continous WTF attacks from height on the way in would suck. What's the play against that, Matthias? Build up just outside their range so that you can quickly reinforce the charge?

 

[Matthias Maccabeus]

I think all that Matthias is saying about Stingers is that they suck against bonded melée. That's true. They only attack 3 times, have short range and their extra attack is often wasted.

That being said, I'd think that Heavies might be a bit afraid of them since they can potentially kill Grimnak so fast. Of course, one turn of misses and they're probably tied down by heavies.

I don't really get how the 4th are so much worse than the 10th here. Maybe it really is the ability to make better use of Raelin against them, who knows. I'd still think continous WTF attacks from height on the way in would suck. What's the play against that, Matthias? Build up just outside their range so that you can quickly reinforce the charge?

Yes you have to be a tad more careful with Grimnak against Stingers, but much like people have figured out to use the GSW as moving screens for the dragons, the heavies can act in much the same way for Grimnak.

Wy favorite 530 point army is Grimnak, Heavies x4, Nerak, Raelin. When you are rushing your opponent, what do you target first? Heavies that will be in your face on the next turn that have up to 7 or 8 defense each? If so Grimnak comes chomping. Nerak who has 5 or so defense with 3 life? If so Grimnak comes chomping and the heavies are in your face before you have a chance to set-up / recover. Grimnak, who has 7 defense and 5 life? If so the heavies that were threatening you are now in your face on the next turn. Or Raelin, who is giving defense to everybody? If so than Grimnak and heavies are all over you next turn.

The big part is forcing your opponent into making tough decisions that throw them off. When I played K-Boom who is pretty good player at TTO with my orcs vs his knights and 4th. He was constantly going back and forth between attacking Nerak, Grimnak, or the threatening heavies. He kept changing his mind on who he wanted to attack.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

DA's snark aside, I guess I'm confused as to exactly what perspective you're writing from here.

My comment is not snarkie at all.

Your comment was snarky. You were trying to make a reasonable point, but that doesn't change that you were making your point in a snarky way.

Never seen the movie no idea what you are referencing. If you think saying that Theracus being ranked ahead of units that achieved much more success is snarkie then I have no response since it is just your opinion. Even in a Knight army how many Tournament winnng armies has Theracus been in?

Adding someone to a list is not an Ignore Button. An Ignore Button would be a button with the word Ignore on it.

Please do not clutter up another useful thread with the same idiotic semantic arguments.

Aldin was the 1 that began the discussion on the issue, I am merely responding to a point he wanted to seemingly discuss.

 

[wriggz]

I thought It was clear that this was a list that represented the Meta-game rankings if you were skilled/trained to use Melee really well.

To that end I think it is a solid list. I like seeing the 10th higher (for one I like using them) since in diverse tournament setting, in the hands of a skilled player they are awesome.

 

[yoyomansizzle]

Kozuke need to rank higher!

 

[MattserTruckRally]

If you're giving up Valiance for 90% of the game, you might as well be playing 10th.

Well it's more about the points if anything. In some point formats 460-475 (or even 400!) for instance, 10th/Raelin/Marcus isn't possible without using some kind of filler, while 4th/Raelin/Marcus is possible while sacrificing Bayonet and Melee defense to pull off the combination. I do agree I'd almost always rather play 10th/Raelin/Marcus instead of 4th/Raelin/Marcus due to versatility as long as points allowed it. Regardless, the armies almost have similar damage output with Marcus+WTF for massive skulls.


Stinger Sidenote
I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

 

[dok]

I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

I agree with this, but stingers are among the nastiest options available to put behind the rat screen. The only options that can deliver more damage are Braxas, Nilfheim, Airborne, and the WTF squads, and those are all rated B+ or better in this scale.

And to look at this from the other side - I don't see why Q9 would be considered an A+ in these rankings if we're not taking into account the rat screen. Q9's offensive output is almost strictly lower than the stingers - he'd be better off with a range 6 triple attack of 3 than his special against melee squads. And his toughness is not that great when knights+gilbert or heavies+Grimnak start dropping attacks of 3 and 4 on him each turn. Granted, Q9 is a beast against melee when fronted by rats and backed by Raelin, but as you say, so is any range.

I've always considered Q9 more of a ranged figure counter than a melee figure counter, because Q9 by himself can take out waves upon waves of 4th or 10th.

 

[Matthias Maccabeus]

I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

I agree with this, but stingers are among the nastiest options available to put behind the rat screen. The only options that can deliver more damage are Braxas, Nilfheim, Airborne, and the WTF squads, and those are all rated B+ or better in this scale.

And to look at this from the other side - I don't see why Q9 would be considered an A+ in these rankings if we're not taking into account the rat screen. Q9's offensive output is almost strictly lower than the stingers - he'd be better off with a range 6 triple attack of 3 than his special against melee squads. And his toughness is not that great when knights+gilbert or heavies+Grimnak start dropping attacks of 3 and 4 on him each turn. Granted, Q9 is a beast against melee when fronted by rats and backed by Raelin, but as you say, so is any range.

I've always considered Q9 more of a ranged figure counter than a melee figure counter, because Q9 by himself can take out waves upon waves of 4th or 10th.

The biggest difference here is Stingers eat up start zone hexes therefore limiting the number of rats that they bring with them (usually). Very seldom do you see more than 2 squads of rats with stingers. Most melee bonding armies can handle 2 squads of rats.

Q9 on the other hand can have 3 or 4 or even 5 squads of rats depending on how girly you want to be. That many rats is nigh impossible for a melee army (other than heavies + Grimnak) to contend with.

 

[quozl]

I just want to say thanks for making this ranking. We need more perspectives!

 

[Tiny Timmy]

Okay; here is my opinion of your rankings Matthias.

A+ I will agree with you.

A - I however do not agree the list is so short; the reason why is because most of the other 4 member melee bonding squads can also be up here; the only reason why one keeps seeing heavies and knights is because they were the first ones to emerge from the smoke of the 4th Mass Era. I having recent experience with both the Romans and the Sacred band; I could do nearly the same with those two as I could with either the Knights and the Orcs.

A- - First; Cyprien should be up here. You know the stories I have with him against Knights; and your record with your knights vs my Cyprein are only because of your Jesus Dice. We found that out the last time we did the Undead vs the Knights. Second: Even though this will contradict what I said about the Romans and the Sacred Band; I believe they both should be as A- even when you start looking at the recent tourneys. TTO - I tied for 3rd with you using Romans while having to face Zelrig THREE TIMES and once having to face both Zelrig and Nilfhiem in the same army and only losing to an Orc army because of 2-3 mistakes i figured out 10 minutes after the game. Also did you see my Gencon Record with the Sacred band? (I took Einar at General Wars at Gencon '10 with the SB and tied with Matthias at TTO with Romans for 3rd) However the reason why neither would stand up against both of them are because of their two limiting powers; Shield wall and the Discipline defense Bonus; which limits Romans attack attrition and which units to put in the SB's army (much like the 4th mass.)

B+ - I am surprised for the 4th Mass to be here; after all the WTF is a deadly thing against melee. Did I mention Cyprien should be an A figure? Like I said before about the Romans needing to be in the A category; however I did forget to mention about the Dwarves. As almost winner of the HoB at Gencon '10 I did have to face tough matches all rounds (minus one of them) They did show their worth to me at Gencon 10 to me. First beating me when I had Zelrig and the Sacred band (though Two bad mistakes that cost me the game against Fomox T^T) and coming down to initiative and dice rolling against an orc army when the orcs had the advantage most of the game. (The possible key turning points that could have lead me to win was due to my dice not liking me.) Dwarves should be rank in the A category as well; A because of their flexibility or A- due to their flexibility with their bonding/movement power. I'm also surprised you put Mogrimm as a B+ hero when he is proving to be a very powerful warlord.

B - I would agree with the majority of here except I'd have the MoU and the SoJ ranked the same; as the atlaga/ Realin / 3x MoU or SoJ work just as great with either one. Both being just as deadly as the other.

B- - Atlaga and Realin V2 should be together in rankings; Atlaga and Realing V2 can work well with armies that tend to be spread out more; also atlaga's special have won games (Like EternalThanos's games in Dragon wars at Gencon '09)

C+ I was about to disagree with you on Brunak till I realized you misspelled Roles. I will dissagree with you on the Drones; they should get bumped up; as my first HoB with them they were nearly unstopable with the way I rolled for them. When I mean roll i meant the swarm I constantly was between the 6 figure move and the 9 figure move.

C and C- I have had little experience with these or I Agree with you with their rankings.

D+ - I truely disagree with you on the Wolves of Badru being a D+ with the Werewolf lord. I know they are expensive and the only decent hero they bond with is the WL; however they're bonding with the WL can break aggressive Bonding armies; plus they have that special attack when you need it (though it is based on luck). Wolves of Badru should be on the "C" category with the Anubians; that and the only reason why you think anubians are C+ is because of my skillzors with my Twilight army. (Cyprien; Sonya; 4x Anubians) I also believe with their WL bonding that they are better in the tournament scene then the Anubians.

With the Rest save for Deathwalker 9000 and the Marro Drudge I am quite content with your rankings...

Deathwalker 9000 should be ranked with his brother 8000. His Explosion does keep armies from clumping together and with the right support he can be just as nasty as 8000.

The Drudge should follow the way of the Romans; They are swamp map dependent.

After thought; Zettians should be D-. They're better then the drudge and can handle mostly everything in the F category and half of the D-.

Jeez I dislike long posts that keep me from sleeping.

 

[Matthias Maccabeus]

A - I however do not agree the list is so short; the reason why is because most of the other 4 member melee bonding squads can also be up here; the only reason why one keeps seeing heavies and knights is because they were the first ones to emerge from the smoke of the 4th Mass Era. I having recent experience with both the Romans and the Sacred band; I could do nearly the same with those two as I could with either the Knights and the Orcs.

Good experiences don't deserve A rankings. Winning tournaments consistently does. I believe the SB and Romans are both good melee armies and can go toe to toe with heavies and knights, however they can't go to to toe with other builds as well as knights and heavies can.

[quote =Tiny Timmy]
A- - First; Cyprien should be up here. You know the stories I have with him against Knights; and your record with your knights vs my Cyprein are only because of your Jesus Dice. We found that out the last time we did the Undead vs the Knights. Second: Even though this will contradict what I said about the Romans and the Sacred Band; I believe they both should be as A- even when you start looking at the recent tourneys. TTO - I tied for 3rd with you using Romans while having to face Zelrig THREE TIMES and once having to face both Zelrig and Nilfhiem in the same army and only losing to an Orc army because of 2-3 mistakes i figured out 10 minutes after the game. Also did you see my Gencon Record with the Sacred band? (I took Einar at General Wars at Gencon '10 with the SB and tied with Matthias at TTO with Romans for 3rd) However the reason why neither would stand up against both of them are because of their two limiting powers; Shield wall and the Discipline defense Bonus; which limits Romans attack attrition and which units to put in the SB's army (much like the 4th mass.) [/quote]

Cyprien loses to melee bonding almost every time.

B+ - I am surprised for the 4th Mass to be here; after all the WTF is a deadly thing against melee. Did I mention Cyprien should be an A figure? Like I said before about the Romans needing to be in the A category; however I did forget to mention about the Dwarves. As almost winner of the HoB at Gencon '10 I did have to face tough matches all rounds (minus one of them) They did show their worth to me at Gencon 10 to me. First beating me when I had Zelrig and the Sacred band (though Two bad mistakes that cost me the game against Fomox T^T) and coming down to initiative and dice rolling against an orc army when the orcs had the advantage most of the game. (The possible key turning points that could have lead me to win was due to my dice not liking me.) Dwarves should be rank in the A category as well; A because of their flexibility or A- due to their flexibility with their bonding/movement power. I'm also surprised you put Mogrimm as a B+ hero when he is proving to be a very powerful warlord.

4th Mass had their day in the sun. They are being passed over with the emergence of melee and the redcoats. Dwarves are good. Give them more time, they will probably work their way up.

B - I would agree with the majority of here except I'd have the MoU and the SoJ ranked the same; as the atlaga/ Realin / 3x MoU or SoJ work just as great with either one. Both being just as deadly as the other.

With all the defensive bypassing abilites around double skulls is more useful than double shields.

C+ I was about to disagree with you on Brunak till I realized you misspelled Roles. I will dissagree with you on the Drones; they should get bumped up; as my first HoB with them they were nearly unstopable with the way I rolled for them. When I mean roll i meant the swarm I constantly was between the 6 figure move and the 9 figure move.

HotB by no means encompasses the whole tournament spectrum.

D+ - I truely disagree with you on the Wolves of Badru being a D+ with the Werewolf lord. I know they are expensive and the only decent hero they bond with is the WL; however they're bonding with the WL can break aggressive Bonding armies; plus they have that special attack when you need it (though it is based on luck). Wolves of Badru should be on the "C" category with the Anubians; that and the only reason why you think anubians are C+ is because of my skillzors with my Twilight army. (Cyprien; Sonya; 4x Anubians) I also believe with their WL bonding that they are better in the tournament scene then the Anubians.

The Werewolf Lord has only recently come out and I have yet to see anything decent come from him and the WoB. Maybe you should prove me wrong at the Skirmish in a few weeks.

With the Rest save for Deathwalker 9000 and the Marro Drudge I am quite content with your rankings...

Deathwalker 9000 should be ranked with his brother 8000. His Explosion does keep armies from clumping together and with the right support he can be just as nasty as 8000.

The Drudge should follow the way of the Romans; They are swamp map dependent.

After thought; Zettians should be D-. They're better then the drudge and can handle mostly everything in the F category and half of the D-.

Jeez I dislike long posts that keep me from sleeping.

8Ks possibility of multiple attacks IMO is far superior to 9Ks explosion in most cases.

 

[dok]

I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

I agree with this, but stingers are among the nastiest options available to put behind the rat screen. The only options that can deliver more damage are Braxas, Nilfheim, Airborne, and the WTF squads, and those are all rated B+ or better in this scale.

And to look at this from the other side - I don't see why Q9 would be considered an A+ in these rankings if we're not taking into account the rat screen. Q9's offensive output is almost strictly lower than the stingers - he'd be better off with a range 6 triple attack of 3 than his special against melee squads. And his toughness is not that great when knights+gilbert or heavies+Grimnak start dropping attacks of 3 and 4 on him each turn. Granted, Q9 is a beast against melee when fronted by rats and backed by Raelin, but as you say, so is any range.

I've always considered Q9 more of a ranged figure counter than a melee figure counter, because Q9 by himself can take out waves upon waves of 4th or 10th.

The biggest difference here is Stingers eat up start zone hexes therefore limiting the number of rats that they bring with them (usually). Very seldom do you see more than 2 squads of rats with stingers. Most melee bonding armies can handle 2 squads of rats.

Q9 on the other hand can have 3 or 4 or even 5 squads of rats depending on how girly you want to be. That many rats is nigh impossible for a melee army (other than heavies + Grimnak) to contend with.

It is rare to see 3x rats with stingers, for sure. I'm surprised how rare the ratsx3/stingersx3/Raelin/(pick a hero that fits the points) army is.

That said, if Q9's ranking here is based on how nasty he is against non-Orc melee with 12+ rats in front of him, then shouldn't Braxas, Nilfheim, and the Airborne Elite be just as high or higher than Q9? They're all easier to kill once you break the rat screen, but they all kill faster than Q9 while the screen is in place.

 

[kolakoski]

I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

I agree with this, but stingers are among the nastiest options available to put behind the rat screen. The only options that can deliver more damage are Braxas, Nilfheim, Airborne, and the WTF squads, and those are all rated B+ or better in this scale.

And to look at this from the other side - I don't see why Q9 would be considered an A+ in these rankings if we're not taking into account the rat screen. Q9's offensive output is almost strictly lower than the stingers - he'd be better off with a range 6 triple attack of 3 than his special against melee squads. And his toughness is not that great when knights+gilbert or heavies+Grimnak start dropping attacks of 3 and 4 on him each turn. Granted, Q9 is a beast against melee when fronted by rats and backed by Raelin, but as you say, so is any range.

I've always considered Q9 more of a ranged figure counter than a melee figure counter, because Q9 by himself can take out waves upon waves of 4th or 10th.

The biggest difference here is Stingers eat up start zone hexes therefore limiting the number of rats that they bring with them (usually). Very seldom do you see more than 2 squads of rats with stingers. Most melee bonding armies can handle 2 squads of rats.

Q9 on the other hand can have 3 or 4 or even 5 squads of rats depending on how girly you want to be. That many rats is nigh impossible for a melee army (other than heavies + Grimnak) to contend with.

It is rare to see 3x rats with stingers, for sure. I'm surprised how rare the ratsx3/stingersx3/Raelin/(pick a hero that fits the points) army is.

That said, if Q9's ranking here is based on how nasty he is against non-Orc melee with 12+ rats in front of him, then shouldn't Braxas, Nilfheim, and the Airborne Elite be just as high or higher than Q9? They're all easier to kill once you break the rat screen, but they all kill faster than Q9 while the screen is in place.

You could say the same, perhaps, for the Kozuke, NotNW, and Brutes, too?

 

[dok]

That said, if Q9's ranking here is based on how nasty he is against non-Orc melee with 12+ rats in front of him, then shouldn't Braxas, Nilfheim, and the Airborne Elite be just as high or higher than Q9? They're all easier to kill once you break the rat screen, but they all kill faster than Q9 while the screen is in place.

You could say the same, perhaps, for the Kozuke, NotNW, and Brutes, too?

I'm not following you. None of those figures can do damage while protected with a rat screen.

 

[Matthias Maccabeus]

I also agree with the rankings about Stingers. From a melee perspective Stingers aren't that great. Their range is terrible against melee and as a three man squad they quickly get overwhelmed by a bonding squads superiority in attacks. Sure you can add Deathreavers to the mix but usually Deathreavers/Any Range is a nightmare for most melee builds.

I agree with this, but stingers are among the nastiest options available to put behind the rat screen. The only options that can deliver more damage are Braxas, Nilfheim, Airborne, and the WTF squads, and those are all rated B+ or better in this scale.

And to look at this from the other side - I don't see why Q9 would be considered an A+ in these rankings if we're not taking into account the rat screen. Q9's offensive output is almost strictly lower than the stingers - he'd be better off with a range 6 triple attack of 3 than his special against melee squads. And his toughness is not that great when knights+gilbert or heavies+Grimnak start dropping attacks of 3 and 4 on him each turn. Granted, Q9 is a beast against melee when fronted by rats and backed by Raelin, but as you say, so is any range.

I've always considered Q9 more of a ranged figure counter than a melee figure counter, because Q9 by himself can take out waves upon waves of 4th or 10th.

The biggest difference here is Stingers eat up start zone hexes therefore limiting the number of rats that they bring with them (usually). Very seldom do you see more than 2 squads of rats with stingers. Most melee bonding armies can handle 2 squads of rats.

Q9 on the other hand can have 3 or 4 or even 5 squads of rats depending on how girly you want to be. That many rats is nigh impossible for a melee army (other than heavies + Grimnak) to contend with.

It is rare to see 3x rats with stingers, for sure. I'm surprised how rare the ratsx3/stingersx3/Raelin/(pick a hero that fits the points) army is.

That said, if Q9's ranking here is based on how nasty he is against non-Orc melee with 12+ rats in front of him, then shouldn't Braxas, Nilfheim, and the Airborne Elite be just as high or higher than Q9? They're all easier to kill once you break the rat screen, but they all kill faster than Q9 while the screen is in place.

His ranking is not based off that. I was just responding to what had been posted.

His ranking is based off the fact that a 7 year old has an actual chance of winning a tournament if Q9 is in his army. That's how easy it is to use him. He has very little weaknesses and you can even screw up pretty bad with him and that 7 defense / 4 life can get you out of all sorts of jams. Even without a screen he takes some punches before he falls. Braxas and AE don't. Plus I've found many people still play the AE wrong and go for the grenade waaaay too much. Nilf is tougher to use because a lot of times you have to make tougher decisions (placement and do I disengage or not).