Unit Strategy Review: How to use the Zombies of Morindan

[Owlman]

Love these guys; best moment of all time happened a few years ago. My opponent had a Deathwalker 9000, I had one Zombie adjacent to him. He decides, what the hec, I'll use my explosion SP attack on him. He rolls 1 Skull. I roll 1 shield. Deathwalker rolls...0 shields. My buddy stares in disbelief. LOL!! Bye bye, tin can...

 

[OEAO]

Love these guys; best moment of all time happened a few years ago. My opponent had a Deathwalker 9000, I had one Zombie adjacent to him. He decides, what the hec, I'll use my explosion SP attack on him. He rolls 1 Skull. I roll 1 shield. Deathwalker rolls...0 shields. My buddy stares in disbelief. LOL!! Bye bye, tin can...

Why would he ever do that? You get 1 less attack die plus you have to defend.

 

[Owlman]

Love these guys; best moment of all time happened a few years ago. My opponent had a Deathwalker 9000, I had one Zombie adjacent to him. He decides, what the hec, I'll use my explosion SP attack on him. He rolls 1 Skull. I roll 1 shield. Deathwalker rolls...0 shields. My buddy stares in disbelief. LOL!! Bye bye, tin can...

Why would he ever do that? You get 1 less attack die plus you have to defend.

Lol I have no freakin' clue...But it was still memorable! He just underestimated himself badly! Haha

 

[mtl1998]

One army I have found extremely successful is:
Airborne Elite-110
Raelin-80
Isamu-10
Zombiesx5-300
Total: 500/21 spaces
This army is very similar to the first sample army.
Basically, use the Airborne to get rid of your opponent's range. I think ranged figures are the largest counters to zombies, so that's my reasoning on targeting ranged figures first (Krav would be a problem). Other primary targets would be the counters listed in the review. After the ranged units/ biggest threats are assassinated by the Airborne, 15 zombies backed by Raelin should hold their own, munching along the way to victory.

 

[eMCee64]

Against squad figures or 1-life heroes:

• Onslaught will cause more kills on average than three attacks of 2 against figures with 4 or more defense.
• Onslaught will cause more kills on average than two attacks of 2 and one attack of 3 against figures with 5 or more defense.
• Onslaught will cause more kills on average than one attack of 2 and two attacks of 3 against figures with 7 or more defense.
• Onslaught will cause more kills on average than three attacks of 3 against figures with 8 or more defense.

Against multi-life heroes:

• Onslaught is always better than 3 attacks of 2.
• Onslaught is stronger than two attacks of 2 and one attack of 3 against heroes with 2 defense or better.
• Onslaught is stronger than one attacks of 2 and two attack of 3 against heroes with 3 defense or better.
• Onslaught is stronger than three attacks of 3 against heroes with 4 defense or better.

Asking for help here ... probabilities are not my strong suit.
What is the math supporting these conclusions from Sisyphus' tables?

Is there ever a scenario where the probabilities would ever suggest that you not use Onslaught? (please show your work)

For example ... three zombies on high ground against a 1-life squaddie with 2 defense dice each have a 62.5% chance of scoring a hit with the average damage being 0.958 each. It's not bad, but ... if they use Onslaught their chance jumps to 90.6% with average damage of 2.354.

I just can't find a situation where Onslaught isn't ALWAYS the right choice.
Thanks in advance for the help.

 

[Dysole]

Math Time

Sure. So with a 1 life figure, average damage isn't useful to you. The way to calculate the odds of killing it is 1-(probability it survives). Attack of 3 vs 2 kills the figure 62.5% of the time. So it has a 37.5% chance of surviving 1-(0.375^3) equals ~95% so this means 95% of the time the figure dies to 3 attacks of 3. Onslaught being a 6 vs 2 will kill the figure 90.6% of the time. So it's better to not use onslaught there.

~Dysole, hoping the explanation helps

 

[kevindola]

I just can't find a situation where Onslaught isn't ALWAYS the right choice.
Thanks in advance for the help.

3 zombies against 3 vipers

 

[dok]

For example ... three zombies on high ground against a 1-life squaddie with 2 defense dice each have a 62.5% chance of scoring a hit with the average damage being 0.958 each. It's not bad, but ... if they use Onslaught their chance jumps to 90.6% with average damage of 2.354.

Since we're talking about a squad figure average damage is irrelevant. All that matters is the chance of getting a kill.

So, onslaught gives a 90.6% chance of getting the kill. Each individual attack of 3 only gives a 62.5% chance... but you get three tries. The chance of at least one of the three of them hitting is 1 - (1-.625)^3 = 94.7%, which is higher than onslaught.

And that's only the relevant analysis if you only have a single target available. If you had 3 targets available, then onslaught kills .906 squaddies on average, while normal attacks would kill 1.875 on average - more than twice as many. It's not even close.

 

[Brewster]

Sounds like this is another army that can be played by a flow chart in all seriousness I love zombies.

 

[Brewster]

Father of Julian gave me a run for my money with this squad! Do not underestimate the zombies! Play it smart and never let them get height on you. Prioritize whittling down groups of 3 into groups of 2 so they can't onslaught you. Most importantly, remember you haven't beat this army until -all- of the zombies are dead!

 

[flameslayer93]

Father of Julian gave me a run for my money with this squad! Do not underestimate the zombies! Play it smart and never let them get height on you. Prioritize whittling down groups of 3 into groups of 2 so they can't onslaught you. Most importantly, remember you haven't beat this army until -all- of the zombies are dead!

Or until time is called. The Zombies are slow, so if your units are fast you can outpace them. Just remember to get kills lol.

 

[Champion_of_Ullar]

I am coming back to this article with the advent of AoA and attempting to try a unique approach to the zombie build. I’ve never used or played against them in a competitive format but I’m always wanting to mix up the meta and keep my builds fresh.

With a couple new cheerleaders I’m trying to see if my build is viable. Not sure if anyone will even see this on such an old thread, but here is my current build:

- Loviatäk
- Raelin (AoA)
- Zombies x5
- Isamu
490 points, 18 figures

The main thought with this build is that the cheerleaders help overcome the zombies’ main weaknesses. Adding both Loviatäk and Raelin boosts the zombies move to 5, Raelin can lower enemies defense, and Loviatäk gives a zombie a chance to reroll an attack.

However, there are a couple of issues I’m running into while play testing. The main thing is OM management. I don’t want to send in my Kyrie too early because I need to protect both for the 5 move. But, like pointed out in this article, I don’t want to move them up too late and start losing activations with my zombies. On top of that, there are TWO cheerleaders to move into position.

I think Raelin is the better of the two to move up first. Terrifying Aura helps the zombies a lot more statistically than Brutality does and she has better survivability in case she does take a couple of early attacks. But Loviatäk’s aura is beneficial too, especially for a zombie with height or one attacking a prime target for a replacement zombie, which brings up the main question: when do I bring her up to get her secondary benefit, but so she doesn’t get squashed early or make me miss vital zombie activations?

Do I move Loviatäk up on turn 2 of round 2 or 3 so I can use 1 and 3 to position zombies especially in case of an initiative switch? If I move Raelin in round 1, is round 2 too soon to move Loviatäk up? Will she just get squashed if I move her up that early or late because I don’t have enough zombies to screen her AND Raelin?

A couple other issues with this build are: no range and, other than being a fun army, is it tactically viable to spend 180-200 points to boost the zombies in the ways it would? I think the fun aspect is more important than things especially with 5 move zombies.

So, it’s mostly a question of OM’s and the best way to position the army. Moving 6 zombies 5 spaces each each turn means I can get them in place quicker to set a screen for my cheerleaders, but needing to position two cheerleaders poses an interesting challenge with timing. What are your thoughts?

 

[itsbuzzi]

This is basically the idea I had at this event here: Zombies at a Local The main idea was to bring up Raelin end of Round 1 and set her in place. Since I might get an inti switch moving her at the end burns the least amount of markers and you really want the zombies up before she gets there anyway so moving her first isn't the play. Don't forget the move bonus applies to both Raelin and Lovi. With that being said you are correct that Rae is a bit better than Lovi for the aura and she is beefier so it is fine leaving her stationary. Lovi, on the other hand, is much harder to gauge. If the opponent can attack past your screen or you don't have it set up yet do not move Lovi. This means you really don't use her when facing range that can shoot by. You really only want to move the both of them up once if possible. I am more trying to protect Lovi than underestimating her aura. It is very good for zombies as you have stated. I have noticed that in most cases at my event all I really needed was Rae's aura but against something like KoW or some other small or medium with higher defense (against large squads you just die) you would prob need both and you can reasonably protect both Kyrie here as well.