Topic: 8th Edition Detachments Good or Bad

[Skyros]

They aren't really worth it.

They don't count for core. Big mark against them. They really should, with the new system, which is based on points of models, rather than number of units

Redirecting is basically dead

Steadfast is in, and detachments don't break steadfast

Before, your detachments could redirect very easily, and could countercharge and break ranks, almost certainly winning you the fight on the rare occasions you pulled it off. Now they can't redirect worth anything, and even if they do countercharge, the enemy will have all his guys in one block and so be steadfast to your two smaller blocks.

The way enemies can declare a charge against your detachment, butcher it, then reface your parent unit OR charge your detachment, you flee, and they redirect into the parent, has basically removed melee detachments as a force from the battlefield, even assuming you have an advantage in the number of units so the opponent doesn't just charge both.

My army got way better once I took 3 30 man blocks instead of two 30 man blocks with 2 15 man detachments. the 15 man detachments were too small to hold up enemy combat blocks and too big to throw away as a speed bump/redirector.

[LegionsofOdin]

i have had a good exsperiance with detachments, i usually only run 2. 1 with my halberdeir hoard and one with my greatsword bus the one with the halberdeirs is 20 models and the one with the GS is 15.

i keep them between 4-6" back crom the parent unit, close enough to beable to counter/suport charge and far enough away for my opponet to not want to risk failing the charge. 

they may not stop stead fast but you guys are forgeting one key element. if an enemy unit is reaching an empire line at full strength then you are doing something wrong. even if they make it to your line at 3/4 strength then your 40 halberdeirs with their detachment of 20 should be plenty to break the unit. not many other armys can run units as large as we can. 

as for shooting detachments. i dont use them, i dont really use BS shooting anymore but i am thinking about running an army with about 15-20 out riders in units of 5 with hochland rifle with the hochland rifle on my engineers jsut so see how it does.  but thats something for another day.

personaly if it wasnt for my detachments being able to get a supporting charge in i dont think i would have made it to the next round of ard boys, the detachment gave me the extra umph needed to keep my main unit winning combat against a large high elf spear unit. 
the 10 extra str 4 attacks and breaking his ranks were invaluable, also you need to remember that he does not get supporting attacks to the side, so say he has 5 ranks so thats 5 attacks on your detachment even if he kills 5 he needs to do that 2 more times to keep you from negating his rank bonus ( assuming your detachment is 5x4).

not causing panic is pretty huge too

and

i dont know about you guys but i run about 900-1000 points of core anyways so not getting the points for them doesnt really bother me i just use some flagellents as core to make up the differance and then some.

[Odominus]

As long as I can make my core percentages, I like detachments as well. I like to run mine about 6-8" back.

[TexasYankee]

4) Delay and shoot!:

Of course you can always use a pair of throw away detachments to bait-&-flee.  The enemy can only ever redirect a charge once and maybe not even pass the LD to do so!  You can gain an additional turn of shooting by simply having 2 smaller detachments of maybe Crossbows/Hanguns/Archers to shoot for the first couple turns (or go cheap with Halberds/Freecompany).  These detachments should be fairly small maybe 5-10 max and only in 1-2 ranks.  Deploy both detachments 1" infront of the other and the rear detachment should be 1" infront of the parent block.  When the enemy charges the bait detachment you simply flee, if they pass their redirect, flee again; they will now be forced to fail their charge as you have a 3rd unit blocking the 1st & 2nd.  Now the enemy has faild their charge and you can fire your awesome artillery an additional turn before the parent units have to accept the fight.  An extra turn to kill an Abom or thin out a Horde of GW-Marauders will make a huge difference.

Dirty! I like it . . . 

Still, Brother Ambrose brings up a good point; have you had any negative experience with the parent unit being so close to the table edge in a standard 12" deployment?

[commandant]

Steadfast is in, and detachments don't break steadfast

The enemy will have all his guys in one block and so be steadfast to your two smaller blocks.

I'm not sure if this is true for the following reason.   Steadfast requires you to have more ranks than your foe.   Now the advantage of detachments is that you are bringing more killing power to the battlefield.   A 15 man halberd detachment hitting into the flank of an unit 5 deep is another 10 attacks.   Which means that the foe must suffer the attacks that it is suffering from the front and also the attacks that it is suffering from the side (against which it will not be able to use a shield or attack back in two ranks)

Also I think a fifteen man detachment is too small.   Just as parent units are getting bigger so too must detachments.   We need to move away from the HE position that the 25% is something that is there to be filled so we can move on to our cool stuff.   Most of our cool stuff is in our core anyway.   If you are not filling your 25% you are doing something wrong.   Allow me to look at the maths for a second.

50 halberd (plus full command)   270 points.
20 halberd detachment               100 points.
20 halberd detachment               100 points.
Unit total                                     470 points.

470 points will give us 90 halberd plus full command.   As they are both the same they go together I think.   If both parent units are in horde formation and the detachments manage a successful strike on both flanks.

Combat phase one.
50 halberd = 30 attacks, = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)   (Working off the hitting on 4/wounding on 2)
20 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)
20 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)
Total              50 attacks     25 hits  16 wounds (none saved)

90 halberd = 30 attacks = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
Total              38 attacks    19 hits     12 wounds (none saved)

90 Halberds are steadfast and we will assume they pass their L7 roll.   Both detachments redeploy to horde formation.   We assume only one passes its leadership 7 roll.

Combat phase 2
40 halberd = 30 attacks, = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)   (Working off the hitting on 4/wounding on 2)
19 halberd = 19 attacks, = 9.5 hits = 6 wounds (none saved)
19 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)
Total              59 attacks     29.5 hits  19 wounds (none saved)

74 halberd = 30 attacks = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
Total              38 attacks    19 hits     12 wounds (none saved)

We will assume that they will pass their leadership 7 steadfast roll again.   We will also assume that our other detachment managed to pass its leadership 7 reform roll.

Combat phase 3
30 halberd = 30 attacks, = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)   (Working off the hitting on 4/wounding on 2)
18 halberd = 18 attacks, = 9 hits = 6 wounds (none saved)
18 halberd = 18 attacks, = 9 hits = 6 wounds (none saved)
Total              66 attacks     33 hits  22 wounds (none saved)

55 halberd = 30 attacks = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
Total              38 attacks    19 hits     12 wounds (none saved)

Again we will assume that they passed their leadership 7 steadfast roll, which is not certain by any mean at this point.   Leading us to.
Combat phase 4

20 halberd = 20 attacks, = 10 hits = 7 wounds (none saved)   (Working off the hitting on 4/wounding on 2)
17 halberd = 17 attacks, = 8.5 hits = 5 wounds (none saved)
17 halberd = 17 attacks, = 8.5 hits = 5 wounds (none saved)
Total              56 attacks     28 hits  17 wounds (none saved)

33 halberd = 30 attacks = 15 hits = 10 wounds (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
4   halberd = 4 attacks   =  2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)
Total              38 attacks    19 hits     12 wounds (none saved)

Again we will assume that they all pass their steadfast leadership test.   At this point both the detachments revert to 5 wide.   At least one will manage

Round five

10 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)   (Working off the hitting on 4/wounding on 2)
16 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)
17 halberd = 10 attacks, = 5 hits = 3 wounds (none saved)
Total              30 attacks     15 hits  9 wounds (none saved)

16 halberd = 15 attacks = 7 hits = 5 wounds (none saved)
1   halberd = 1 attacks   =  1/2 hits  =  1 wound   (none saved)

Total              16 attacks    7.5 hits     6 wounds (none saved)

Not only this but the 90 has lost its steadfast and therefore is rolling to hold on a -3 all other things being equal.
Disclaimer.   I rounded a bit to try and get even numbers.   Also I remembered at the end that I had forgotten to include the champion.   However what I wanted to make clear, working in a vacuum (which of course none of us are) is that the greater amount of attacks that can be brought to bear by the detachment system means that in a one on one the same number of points (even the same troop type) the detachments system is better.   Not once through 5 rounds of combat until it was left with only 8 models did the block of 90 win combat.   Not only that but both my detachments are still in reasonable shape, yes my parent unit is destroyed but I am only loosing 270 points and you are loosing 490.   Also because of the stupid GW points system as long as the handful of men are still in my parent unit you don't get anything for it.

Just a point to ponder

[MrAbyssal]

Should I be finding it worrying that people seem to be focusing more on the charge reactions part of using detachments instead of supporting charges? As far as I'm concerned as long you pick your targets there's no reason not to be aggressive with our parent units and detachments.

[Odominus]

Should I be finding it worrying that people seem to be focusing more on the charge reactions part of using detachments instead of supporting charges?

Because a savvy opponent knows how to negate detachments. Charge them instead. If you hold, you will probably be rolled and the enemy over runs into your back field or does a quick reform facing your parent unit, out of it's charge arc. If you flee, then the enemy redirects into your parent unit, while your detachment is running. Neither scenario supports bringing detachments.

You have to keep detachments back far enough to make your opponent really gamble if he wants to charge them. Remember, on your counter charge, you only need to touch the corner of your opponent's unit to close the door and get the flank charge. If you set your detach back 8-10" then that means on the counter charge, you only need to roll a 4-5 on 2 dice to reach them. Not difficult to do.

there's no reason not to be aggressive with our parent units and detachments

There are a multitude of reasons to play defensively with Empire big blocks. Points denial. If my opponent, for whatever reason, came up and parked his units well withing my charge range then yea I would get aggressive and charge out. But that is very rare.

There are tons of ways to play Empire. In 8th, it seems the pound pound engage strategy is a winner. The Pound Pound Engage strategy, not to be confused with the American courting ritual, really works well for the Empire.  Warmachines to soften them up, then state troop big blocks to finish the game and deny points.

[Michael W]

I haven't quit on detachments and, by and large, I'm happy to have them around.  Panic-free missile troops?  Yeah, I'm cool with that.  I usually keep my melee detachments 15 strong and back from the front, so that they get the counter-charge when the parent gets hit.  That said, they're tactically flexible - great for encircling elite armies like Chaos and Elves - and they compel the enemy to plan around them, which means that I'm dictating the flow of the battle and my opponent is the one reacting to my actions.  They're also quite expendable, so I can shamelessly move one up to a few inches from an enemy unit (to compel it to fight the Detachment in the subsequent round and buy me some extra shooting time) and then drop Mortar rounds into the area.  Finally, redirecting may be weak but it ain't dead.  I've managed several times to move up a detachment and place it at a steep angle, close to the advancing enemy unit (with larger, and thus fewer, units, this works wonderfully).  The enemy charges, cuts the detachment to ribbons, and is left with the awkward choice of either reforming (in which case it has managed to use a turn to advance maybe 4-5" instead of 8-10") or pursuing/overrunning, but only by pulling a New Orleans and running in front of my line instead of at it.  In either case, as long as I've got some shooting and magic to pour into that target, the benefit is all to me.

[Ricardo-PB]

I really want to hear some reports of this double-stacked detachment in-front of the parent unit idea... This needs a better name
But, is it true you can only re-direct once? This seems like a great idea!

[Holy Hand Grenade]

One thing you need to be careful about with the new random charge distance rules in 8th Edition is actually giving your opponent more movement because you dangled a detachment in front of your lines to slow your opponent down but your opponent succeeds in a nice long distance charge. 

Granted, he still hasn't made it to your lines if he demolishes the detachment, reforms, and is now parked in front of your lines... but instead of getting a total movement of 8' for a M4 block, he could easily achieve 10-12' or greater.  We need every inch of the battlespace so we can drop more shrapnel on the enemies head.

I also find that too many little units/detachments running around in front of my lines actually reduces my tactical options.  Your opponent knows those units are going to flee or be used to get in the way and so he moves and plan accordingly.  I hate it when I want to charge in a spot but am prevented from doing so because I have a unit/detachment sitting in the way preventing the juicy charge.

I run 5 man detachments off some of my State troops for some flexibility, but I not a fan of spending too many points on detachments.  I can barely squeeze in what I want to in my lists; I usually don't have any spare points left to dump into core-less troops that are not working like they used to with the new ruleset. 

[galrion]

You could park a detachment of handgunners in front of your line, fire a couple rounds, then flee in reaction to the charge.  Causes no panic and now your enemy either failed the charge right in front of your main unit or redirected into it.  The melee detachment swings up and now the enemy unit is in a vice.  Handgunners, hopefully, make the rally test, and now can do whatever the heck you need to do with them.  Not sure how it'll work on the board, have to try it once I get some slippers on the ground.

[PuffPuffSlash]

I used detachments for the first few games of 8th and dropped them quickly. 2 detachments of 15 soldiers is just not as good as one of 30 for multiple reasons in this rule set.

[TexasYankee]

I really want to hear some reports of this double-stacked detachment in-front of the parent unit idea... This needs a better name
But, is it true you can only re-direct once? This seems like a great idea!

Yes, you can only re-direct once, and only allowed one wheel on a charge, and if you can't reach them (due to distance or a unit/impassable terrain in the way), it's a failed charge. However, after reading the BRB (again) last night, odds are the opponent charging you will be able to see the parent unit beyond the two detachments in front (damn TLOS); that being so, he will be able to declare a charge against it (if they are in range), and then by default have to declare a charge against the two detachments since he will come in contact with them before he reaches the parent unit. This is still a legal charge because there is the possibility the two detachments may move before the charge is completed (they may flee). So now all three of your Empire units (parent and detachments) must declare a charge reaction. You can declare your reactions in any order you wish, but if your detachments flee, there is a good chance he is going to hit your parent unit, and if he breaks you, probably overrun into your fleeing detachments, and then they are dead too! If you decide to hold, he'll most likely blast through your 1st detachment and overrun into the second. Depending on how you angle your detachments, this may be a good thing, so your parent unit can get in a flank charge on your next turn. Also, if he overruns into the second detachment, you will not be able to shoot them with arty since them are engaged in close combat.

[Ricardo-PB]

In other words, the two detachments would have to be at an odd angle to ensure that the enemy unit wouldn't be able to use it's full charge distance/wheel twice?

Still seems possible... archer screens?

[galrion]

I really want to hear some reports of this double-stacked detachment in-front of the parent unit idea... This needs a better name
But, is it true you can only re-direct once? This seems like a great idea!

Yes, you can only re-direct once, and only allowed one wheel on a charge, and if you can't reach them (due to distance or a unit/impassable terrain in the way), it's a failed charge. However, after reading the BRB (again) last night, odds are the opponent charging you will be able to see the parent unit beyond the two detachments in front (damn TLOS); that being so, he will be able to declare a charge against it (if they are in range), and then by default have to declare a charge against the two detachments since he will come in contact with them before he reaches the parent unit. This is still a legal charge because there is the possibility the two detachments may move before the charge is completed (they may flee). So now all three of your Empire units (parent and detachments) must declare a charge reaction. You can declare your reactions in any order you wish, but if your detachments flee, there is a good chance he is going to hit your parent unit, and if he breaks you, probably overrun into your fleeing detachments, and then they are dead too! If you decide to hold, he'll most likely blast through your 1st detachment and overrun into the second. Depending on how you angle your detachments, this may be a good thing, so your parent unit can get in a flank charge on your next turn. Also, if he overruns into the second detachment, you will not be able to shoot them with arty since them are engaged in close combat.

If the detachments don't flee it counts as a failed charge, as per "Unexpected Problems" in the upper left hand corner of page 20 of the BRB.  Also pg 22 "Unusual Situations" "...under no circumstances can a unit use its charge move to move into contact with an enemy it has not declared a charge against."  At least that's how I read it.  So if I have a shooty unit up front, you declare a charge against my parent unit, I declare a stand and shoot (per detachment rules), get my free shots, and your charge fails because you can't make contact with my detachment.

[SmokinBrown]

If youre taking a ranged unit and aren't bothered about a marksman then it seems to me that there would be no reason to not make it a detachment. It can act independantly as normal but has the added benefits of being able to stand and shoot for the parent unit without the -1 to hit modifier, and also won't cause panic. Additionally, you get to set it up at the same time, meaning you have less units to set up and will hopefully get the +1 to your first turn roll.

[PuffPuffSlash]

If youre taking a ranged unit and aren't bothered about a marksman then it seems to me that there would be no reason to not make it a detachment. It can act independantly as normal but has the added benefits of being able to stand and shoot for the parent unit without the -1 to hit modifier, and also won't cause panic. Additionally, you get to set it up at the same time, meaning you have less units to set up and will hopefully get the +1 to your first turn roll.

If you're trying to meet your core %.

[commandant]

If youre taking a ranged unit and aren't bothered about a marksman then it seems to me that there would be no reason to not make it a detachment. It can act independantly as normal but has the added benefits of being able to stand and shoot for the parent unit without the -1 to hit modifier, and also won't cause panic. Additionally, you get to set it up at the same time, meaning you have less units to set up and will hopefully get the +1 to your first turn roll.

If you're trying to meet your core %.

Then IMHO you are not playing the Empire the best way possible or playing the game right

[SmokinBrown]

If youre taking a ranged unit and aren't bothered about a marksman then it seems to me that there would be no reason to not make it a detachment. It can act independantly as normal but has the added benefits of being able to stand and shoot for the parent unit without the -1 to hit modifier, and also won't cause panic. Additionally, you get to set it up at the same time, meaning you have less units to set up and will hopefully get the +1 to your first turn roll.

If you're trying to meet your core %.

It's not difficult to make your core %. I always go more than enough over my % for it to matter whether some of them are detachments. Thats a pretty small con in comparison with the benefits IMO.

[SmokinBrown]

It's true that detachments don't break steadfast, but negating the enemies rank bonus and providing cr for a flank charge can help to tip the combat to your favour, meaning that they are testing on their leadership (even if it is unmodified) as opposed to you taking the break test.

[Walls]

Man, I can't bring myself to leave home without detachments.  They negate charge bonuses and give you a flank as well for CR.  A good sized swordman detachment, for example, in the side is only take one rank worth of attacks back usually without unit champs or characters.  They are potentially getting armor AND parry saves.  And that is without buffing them up. 

So you negate possible CR and even gain some both when charged and charging. A good sized block (like 15, since you probably aren't taking a ton of wounds back or enough to take you lower then 2 ranks) negates their rank bonus.   You get less attacks back on you then the front unit does.  You can still buff them up with magic.  Halberd detachments can still get Okkams or Miasma and be a big threat.

Yes, they can be tricky to deploy but with longer charge ranges you can keep them fairly far back if you want.

Missile detachments?  Meh, other then archers not so hot.  I've had some success with 20 handgunners and 2x10 gun detachments.  You can keep the detachments way out of charge range and then get 40 shots on a charge.

I also take archers or handgunners as detachments and let them go on their own simply so they don't cause panic when fleeing.  It's not like their statline is any different.  I even do this with free company on occassion.  50 man unit of whatever, take 25 free company as a detachment.  You can then put them wherever you want and they don't cause panic.

Other then perhaps pts, I see no disadvantage to detachments.  They seem fairly integral to an empire army.

[Delthos]

I have to say I don't find them integral to the Empire way of battle. I've stopped using them and I'm doing much better than when I tried using them. I never was a proponent of the small units either. I always went with at least 15 minimum, well except my Greatswords who could only have 12 man detachments. I have more flexibility in deployment now and I don't have small units that restrict my movment and give my opponent easy points. As I said, they have their uses and good points, but I think those good points are far outweighed by their drawbacks. Maybe I've just not figured out how to use them, but for me they don't work.

[Ambrose]

Thanks for all the responses guys, it has been very helpful.

Quick question; If detachments don't count towards the core of an army, do they count towards victory points if they are completely wiped out?
My understanding is that if completely destroyed, they would count towards victory points for the enemy.

Ambrose

[Nexus]

Yes, they are counted separately from their parent units points in that regard. Army builder doesn't quite recognise this which can make it a bit of a pain to calculate VPs after a battle.

[Athiuen]

I've had some success with larger detachments.  I've fairly commonly, in 2500 point games, taken a unit of 50 Halberdier in horde formation with a detachment of 25 free company.  With the free company deployed only an inch behind the halberdiers a charge against them will likely not rout them due to high leadership of the the parent unit and the extra ranks leaving the halberdiers free to charge the opposing units flank in the next round (due to the horde formation more of the models are in the flank). If that enemy unit is in bus formation, which it usually is, the flanking horde unit gets an uncanny amount of attacks.

This has been successful for me on many occasions. 

Also, i'm not entirely convinced that detachments don't count towards core points.
I suppose it comes down to semantics.  What is the difference between 'Core troop choices' and 'Core units'?