Now that I'm back to writing some content while my work schedule isn't quite so hectic I wanted to do a longer freeform post just detailing some thoughts I've had while interacting with other community members on various platforms. This is unlikely to be a particularly regular thing but I think some interesting ideas came up that I'd like to explore a little more.
Topic 1: Why do Veterans feel like a mediocre upgrade compared to Chosen of Conquest
So now that both units are available and have gotten some table time Chosen of Conquest feel very powerful and a good upgrade over the more basic units like Blooded while Veterans even with their point reduction just feel sort of meh. Not to say that they are actively bad just not exciting. I think for me the answer to this is that Veterans don't offer anything that Blooded can't do they just offer a slight discount while doing it.
What I mean by that is the primary special rule for Veterans - Forged in Battle - basically offers you a free tier 1 chant bonus which is quite nice. Otherwise nothing else they do is a particularly substantial improvement over Blooded. From an Output perspective 5 stands of Blooded (215 pts) slightly outperform 3 stands of Veterans + the Chief upgrade (205 pts) and from a Defensive perspective the Veterans are higher defense on account of their shields but the Blooded will have better resolve from unit size, more wounds (25 vs 18) and require more wounds to break (15 vs 12).
The primary advantage for the Veterans is that you get the tier 1 every round without having to expend resources. It's quire a good special rule but less exciting in that Blooded could do the same thing if you are willing to spend the tokens and are more available. For me I feel like Veterans just don't do anything exciting enough to account for being 180 points base cost and being restricted to basically just a Chieftain. The only time I'd currently feel like reaching for them in a more "serious" build is if I really wanted a Chieftain with Tontorr Rider and I think for the most part the Thunder Chieftain just offers more. It really pushes Veterans to the back of the line for me.
Chosen of Conquest on the other hand are 15 pts more than 5 stands of Blooded but offer a couple of more difficult to replicate advantages. Firstly they have impacts and innate cleave 1 allowing them to actually do more damage than the 5 stands of Blooded especially into higher defense targets. From a bulk perspective you do still give up 4 wounds total (21 for chosen vs 25 for Blooded) but only give up a single wound in break threshold (14 vs 15) and will still have +1 defense (this time not conditional on shield) and equal resolve with the Chosen's base resolve 4.
Lastly Chosen are innate Fanatics with cult of conquest allowing them to chant more and get better benefits from doing so. In particular this makes Chosen of Conquest one of the few regiments in the game that can be consistently taking a third action that is only restricted by normal action rules. This means that Chosen of Conquest have surprising mobility being able to march 8, charge, and then still clash leveraging all of their rules.
To me this is the sort of upgrade that makes for an exciting elite option vs just a maybe slightly more efficient version of the basic unit. It is actually possible to make Blooded Fanatic Conquest as well but it takes a lot of resources and a character staying in the regiment to do so. Chosen are expensive but they feel worth it for the capabilities they bring. It is worth pointing out the Chosen do give up some of the flexibility of chants for this potential power spike but that drawback with Fanatic in general feels reasonable and not crippling.
Topic 2: Is the Tontorr actually that good or are we better off just playing more Thunder Riders
So this one needs some explanation. This is assuming you are using the Thunder Chieftain and the warband consists of an minimum unit of Thunder Riders for him to join. The thought here is it's better to take a 4 stand regiment of Thunder Riders as your second regiment vs taking a Tontorr as your second regiment.
The four stand regiment of Thunder Riders costs 20 pts more than the Tontorr at a whopping 330 but it is quite good. As far as output goes the Thunder Riders will substantially outperform the Tontorr if they can spread out and will slightly outperform the Tontorr if they are in a 2x2 formation to conserve space. They are also much more flexible as far as chants go as they aren't restricted to conquest, have similar wound totals (24 vs 26), similar base defenses (r4 vs r3 oblivious isn't a massive difference), don't take up a restricted slot leaving a few more options, and won't take up your free reinforcement on Turn 3 as they already have Flank.
The downside to doing this is losing out on Monster advantages namely not degrading through wounds. Losing stands of the Thunder Riders will absolutely change the equation on output while the Tontorr fights at full strength on 26 wounds and on 1 wound. You do avoid being punished by fiend hunter regiments with the Riders for a little bit of a bonus. There are a few more niche considerations here such as the Thunder Riders being better base clash and not necessarily needing the Chieftain's supremacy as much as it feels like the Tontorr probably does. Otherwise they end up being pretty similar with the Riders offering additional options.
I'd love to hear more opinons on this as I feel like the Thunder Riders are likely to just be better. They are also notably cheaper to purchase with 2 boxes of riders (6 stands) being about 75% the cost of the Tontorr at the time of this writing. I can certainly understand playing the Tontorr because Big Dino is awesome but in a strict list building sense I'm struggle to see where it is super compelling comparatively outside of the lack of degrading profile.
The above image is a monster stand vs 2x2 cav stands. I put that in there because the mobility advantage of monsters and terrain is not insignificant. The stand isn't that much smaller than the narrow Cav formation. This is also why I looked at running the Thunder Riders in a 2x2.
Here are the output comparisons into a variety of targets. The targets are mostly chosen at random but I think its fairly representative of a wide array of profiles.
That's all I've got for today. If there is a topic you are curious about and would like me to explore let me know. As always thanks for reading
-K