What Bonding Squad fits you?

[Schulzy]

I love bonding. No one in my gaming group is quite as in to bonding as I am. I'm not sure is it's because I just appreciate it more, or if it's because I see it as essential to a solid army. The end result is that I always get a leg up on my opponent with the sheer number of attacks/activations I get.

I love bonding with Dwarves. I love bonding with Knights and Human Champions. I love bonding with Marro. My friend loves bonding with the spiders.

Bonding is my favorite thing ever.

And yes, I wrote this reply in such a way that replacing "bonding" with "bondage" would result in horrible, horrible mental images.

[Matthias Maccabeus]

Originally Posted by xraine69

. Have you ever tried or thought of using an army composed of different squads(one each) and one of their bonding heroes? Back when KoW and Blades first came out, I would use a squad of Blades w/Grimnak and a squad of KoW w/Denrick in the same army. What are your thoughts on this strategy?

As a general rule I would say that 1 x any common squad + bonding hero isn't the greatest idea. Though I could see my self taking Knights x 1 + Eldgrim for the last 100 points in certain situations.

I think tchop has done this with mixed results however. He likes to take Tornak + 1 x heavies.

I think the biggest problem is OM management and maximizing your attacks when you start to take losses.

[lefton4ya]

I think the best mixed would be:

• Heavy gruts x 2 + blade gruts x 2-3 and 2+ orc champions.
• 4th Mass x 2-4 + knights x 2 + at least Sir Gilbert. I might to as Matthias suggested with Knights x 1 + Eldgrim, but usually not one common squad.
• Mohicans x 2-3 + Vipers x 2-4 + Venoc Warlord (and usually Brave Arrow and theracus).

There are other mixed ones (feel free to suggest more) but I think these are the best and most common.

[Sgt.Fabian]

Thanks. Ive been trying to come up with some solid info to convince myself to stop using the wolves of badru....

[Dad_Scaper]

Checking in to observe that this thread is about *tourney* 'Scape; casual players should be cautioned that it would be a shame for half their figs to gather dust because MM, dok, etc. don't put them in tourney armies...

[Aldin]

Great, great post. I think for me I split these squads into several groups.

Squads I can win tournament-level games with that fit my style:

Knights of Weston
Axegrinders of the Burning Forge
Marrden Nagrubs

Squads I can win tournament-level games with that don't fit my style:

Heavy Gruts
Roman Legionnaires

Squads I feel I get a lot out of in casual play:

Mohican River Tribe
Wolves of Badru
Grok Riders

Squads I'm still getting a feel for:

Green Scale Warriors
Capuan Gladiators
Fyorlag Spiders

Squads that just never seem to do what I want them to do:

Sacred Band
Blade Gruts
Arrow Gruts
Armoc Vipers
MacDirk Warriors

~Aldin, who has always been a bit bummed that he has never managed to competently field a Beast-bonding army

[Chardris1287]

So you don't consider the minions of utgar + either Taelord or Runa as bonding? Or Kato plus the ashigaru and samurai?

[rshorton]

Nice post! There is a lot of information in it. The Axegrinders of the Burning Forge & The MacDirk Warriors are my favorite melee squads to use!

[dok]

Originally Posted by lefton4ya

I think the best mixed would be:

• Heavy gruts x 2 + blade gruts x 2-3 and 2+ orc champions.

This is generally a bad idea for the same reasons Matthias mentioned - you're complicating order marker management and increasing the possibility of being left attacking with less than a full squad before endgame. There's very little advantage to this army over just having more heavy gruts and, if necessary, some filler figures.

Originally Posted by lefton4ya

• 4th Mass x 2-4 + knights x 2 + at least Sir Gilbert. I might to as Matthias suggested with Knights x 1 + Eldgrim, but usually not one common squad.
• Mohicans x 2-3 + Vipers x 2-4 + Venoc Warlord (and usually Brave Arrow and theracus).

These are both well-designed and playable armies, but they are not mixed bonding armies. In each case there is only one squad that bonds. Those are bonding armies with another squad there for support, to provide a different type of attack.

Now, if I may, I'll try to suggest a couple double bonding armies that actually don't sound that bad to me. First try:

50 Nerak
120 Grimnak
140 Heavy Gruts x2
80 Arrow Gruts x2
50 Swog Rider x2
120 Krug
460, 24 hexes

That's a LOT of moving parts, but only two places to put your OMs. Nerak gets to buff both kinds of Gruts, and the two squads support each other nicely, as one is melee and one is ranged. The big weakness, obviously, is that you only have two sets of each common.

Second try:

120 Venoc Warlord
50 Me-Burq-Sa
100 Roman Legionnaires x2
50 Brave Arrow
210 Mohican River Tribe x3
530, 21 hexes

I actually think this one is quite playable. The Legionnaires act as a screen and glyph-grabbers, and give you a chance to snipe with MBS and run with Mittens in endgame. Meanwhile, the MRTs do their thing.

[Killometer]

Great article, MM. Especially

Originally Posted by Matthias Maccabeus

If you like yelling pounce and like watching Khosumet die take the Wolves.

I've still only used a few of these combos; it must be time to break out some new ones.

Originally Posted by Chardris1287

So you don't consider the minions of utgar + either Taelord or Runa as bonding? Or Kato plus the ashigaru and samurai?

Or Nakitas+G'nators or Glads & Blasts:

Originally Posted by Matthias Maccabeus

(not movement bonding, or “nonding”)

[yamissflash]

Originally Posted by xraine69

MM, since you are the Master of Melee, I would like to pose a question to you. Have you ever tried or thought of using an army composed of different squads(one each) and one of their bonding heroes? Back when KoW and Blades first came w/Denrick in the same army. What are your thoughts oout, I would use a squad of Blades w/Grimnak and a squad of KoWn this strategy?

Fixed.

[BurnyFlame]

I want to put out an alternative opinion to the question: "what bonding squad fits you?" My answer: none.

I personally feel that bonding is the worst power in the game because it is the worst power for the game. I am not saying it is weak, I am saying it is too strong, and makes the game less fun.

Bonding, I think, is the one power that takes the game more towards Squad-scape and farther from Hero-scape. True, most of these bondings let you take a turn with a hero, but that then leads to a power-creep in the sense that it is now silly to take a turn with only a hero. If I take a turn with only Sir Gilbert and you take a turn with knights and Sir Gilbert, how is that fair?

Another point I would like to make is that it is not a real "power." Just for instance, picture what bonding squads would look like without bonding. Knights would only have Coward's Reward, Gladiators would only have Initiative Advantage, and so on. That is pretty bland. I would much rather have another power that does something fun or interesting than have bonding.

Besides making heroes obsolete, bonding squads also make taking non-bonding squads a poor choice. I hate to see a game where units are not on an even playing field, and I think that getting automatic extra attacks each turn is unfair and causes a rift in the game between good units and bad units. If there were no bonding, many more units would see play time.

To fix the problem (other than removing it completely), I would suggest making bonding require a roll. It should not be an automatic power, and should maybe require rolling an 11 or higher, for instance. This would also add more strategy to the game, and require more thinking in order marker placement.

Bottomline:
Bonding = Cheating.