Warhammer-Empire.com

The General Archive => The Tactica Board => Topic started by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 24, 2013, 06:54:35 PM

Title: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 24, 2013, 06:54:35 PM
Tactical Exposition Game 1:  Civil War


This Tactical Exposition Game (TEG) is a modification to our popular Tactical Decision Game (TDG).  In this game, forum members will be able to sit "table-side" to two of our experienced forum members-  Rothgar and Zif. 

Empire normally doesn't face itself on the field of battle-  but there is some benefit to seeing two different list building philosophies go head-to-head.

Just like in a TDGs, a TEG will be a way to explore Empire strategy and tactics as a forum.  The goal is to share ideas and learn. 


The Lists

Faith, Steel, and Gunpowder 2500

Rothgar has a cavalry-based list with lots of 1+ AS.  He has a total of 4 cannons on the field with 2 GC and 2 STanks.  His primary hammer is a decent sized Demi block backed by WAltar buffing love and Lvl 4 Light Wiz.


Arch Lector on WAlatr with Horn Gen  (GW, Armour of Destiny, Van Horst)

10 Archers 
     Wizard Lord, Light Lvl4  (Dispel Scroll, Talismen of Pres)
     Witch Hunter  (Brace of Pistols)

5 Demigrpyhs (FC)

2x 5 Vanilla Knights (Musician)

39 Halbediers  (FC)
     Captain  BSB  (Sword of Might, Ench Shield)
     5 Archer det
     5 Archer det

2x Great Cannon

2x Steam Tank



Men and Magic 2500
 
Zif has an infantry-based list with Halbs and Greatswords.  For arty, he has 2 GC and 2 HVBGs with Engies.  He also has a WAltar for buffing love and a Lvl 4 Light Wiz.


Arch Lector on WAlatr no Horn Gen  (HW, Charmed Shield, Talisman of Pres)

10 Archers 
     Wizard Lord, Light Lvl4  (Dispel Scroll)

39 Greatswords  (FC)
     Captain  BSB  (FPA, Shield, White Cloak)

40 Halberdiers  (FC)
     5 Archer det
     5 Archer det

15 Spearmen

14 Spearmen

10 Archers

Celestial Hurricanum

2x Greatcannon 

2x Helblaster Volley Gun
2x Master Engie


--------------------------------------------------

The lists have similar magic, support, and diverters. 

The two main differences are:  one is infantry-based with more short range arty support; while the other is cavalry-based with all long range arty support. 

As in all games, luck will play a factor...but hopefully the luck is balanced enough so that the true strengths and power of each list is exposed.  We are going to do a straight up Pitched Battle.

May the best list win.   :::cheers:::


The Terrain:

I rolled randomly for terrain and in random locations-  with minor adjustments so the map would look presentable.

In the center is a Wizard's Tower and a Mysterious Forest.  Each side has a building.  Otherwise, there is one Mysterious Lake to the NW, a Mysterious Forest to the SW, and a Anvil of Vaul hill to the east.

Warmachines can be placed on top of either building in the deployment zones-  they are 1 level high (6 inches up).  The Tower is 2 levels high (12 inches) and the hill is 4 inches high.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1TerrainFinal_zps6927ed76.jpg)



Rolling for Magic

[1] 13-03-24 12:40:41 EDT
Zif Magic
4d6
6 + 4 + 6 + 3 = 19

[2] 13-03-24 12:41:47 EDT
Rothgar Magic
4d6
3 + 5 + 3 + 1 = 12


Rothgar and Zif-  I need to know what you want to pick for spells.  Also, Rothgar you need to pick which side you want.  You won the roll-off.

[3] 13-03-24 12:42:25 EDT
Zif roll for side
1d6
4

[4] 13-03-24 12:42:47 EDT
Rothgar roll for side
1d6
6


------------------------------------------------------

Still working out the permissions/thread issues and format.  For now, we will start with this one thread.  I may branch it into two, one for each side, if I can get it all to work.

If you want access to the original dice log, register for an account on https://dicelog.com/logdice (https://dicelog.com/logdice) and join Dice Log 244.

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: b0007452 on March 24, 2013, 07:02:44 PM
This is going to be awesome. Really looking forward to this getting going.

Could even potentially do a series of these if HHG has the time, although that is a big commitment. Would give people the chance to try out different things.

Big respect for volunteering to organise it bro, you are th best of us.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: sammay23 on March 24, 2013, 07:14:32 PM
 :::cheers:::

Looking forward to it!

And thank you three for putting the time in to benefit the rest of us. Very much appreciated.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 24, 2013, 07:50:52 PM
Zif Magic
4d6
6 + 4 + 6 + 3
(3) Light of Battle
(4) Net of Amyntok
(6) Birona's Timewarp
(1) Pha's Protection

With this roll I had one spell that I could take for free and the option to drop one of my spells for a magic missile.  I considered taking Shem's, but I've got a magic missile built in with the War Altar and the Hurricanum comes with a direct damage spell of its own.

Speed of Light is a decent spell, but the choice between that and Pha's Protection is a no brainer.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 24, 2013, 11:10:12 PM
I'll go with the following spells:

(1) Pha's Protection
(3) Light of Battle Shem's Burning Gaze
(5) Banishment
(Choose) Birona's Timewarp

My rationale here is that ASF and +1A gives my Demigryphs plenty of offensive juice. I have the ranged edge, so Shem's will help me enforce it more often, and Pha's can help me try and win the artillery war. I like having 2 castings of a magic missile to clean out light units.

I'll also take the bottom side of the board.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 25, 2013, 01:26:24 AM
I rolled for who starts deployment first.  After several ties, Rothgar places the first unit.

[5] 13-03-24 21:13:10 EDT -
Zif roll for who starts deployment
1d6
3

[6] 13-03-24 21:13:29 EDT
Rothgar roll for who starts deployment
1d6
3

[7] 13-03-24 21:13:46 EDT
Zif 2nd deploy roll
1d6
2

[8] 13-03-24 21:13:58 EDT
Rothgar 2nd deploy roll
1d6
2

[9] 13-03-24 21:14:17 EDT
Zif 3rd deploy roll
1d6
4

[10] 13-03-24 21:14:27 EDT
Rothgar 3rd deploy roll
1d6
5
 
-------------------------------------------

Zif & Rothgar-  I think the easiest thing to do is to PM me a basic idea of the order you want to place the units and where you want to place them.  Also give me some ideas of things that are important to you for placement-  like line of sight, attempt to get certain matchups, etc.

I can send you the Battle Chronicler game file if you have the program and give me an email address-  then you could more easily communicate to me what you want.

Rothgar-  you place first on the south side.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 25, 2013, 09:43:32 AM
Note-  I am working with them over PMs to get the first batch of drops figured out.  I will post that tonight after work, then we will work the next batch. 

Be patient if you are watching in already-  deployment is a big part of the game and we can't just rush over it!

HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Noght on March 25, 2013, 12:01:04 PM
Be patient if you are watching in already-  deployment is a big part of the game and we can't just rush over it!

HHG

It's ultra critical. Take it slow and get it right.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Baluc on March 25, 2013, 06:09:35 PM
What are win conditions?

100 vps as per the book, would be a better indication of GWs internal balance

Might I suggest this setup however, to get a better understanding of the armies full abilities to score battle points and win games in a broader spectrum of games or events.

vps 200 pts minor, 300 points major, 500 points crushing victory

half vps for units, single models reduced to half wounds count as half points

fleeing units at the end of the game count as dead (we want to see how these armies function, most of us know to flee a charge on turn 6 if this condition doesn't exist)

characters at half count for half points (the is to counter act close calls or unlikely situations where a character survies where he/she should not)

must kill character and mount to claim full points just one or the other give half points (an armies ability to retain its abilties and special rules is key. losing vps in this situation represent a loss of utility in the list)

table quarters count as 50 vps at end of the game, you must have more units in a quarter to claim it. We want to see how flexible these armies are in a greater context, and table quarters/ board control are a good way to determine this.

With these conditions the battle will be less about smashing the opposition for as many vp as possible and more an exercise in demonstrating the abilities of each archetype. Which is what we actually want to see.

Of course we can add vps both ways for discussion sake,
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 25, 2013, 06:44:56 PM
I'm under the assumption that victory conditions are as per the BRB. I think most of these alternate VP suggestions are (a) silly (I wouldn't play under any of them, as I am a staunch anti-comp proponent) and (b) outside the scope of this simulation. "Smashing the opposition for as many vp as possible" is exactly what I came here to do.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Noght on March 25, 2013, 07:28:22 PM
I'm under the assumption that victory conditions are as per the BRB. I think most of these alternate VP suggestions are (a) silly (I wouldn't play under any of them, as I am a staunch anti-comp proponent) and (b) outside the scope of this simulation. "Smashing the opposition for as many vp as possible" is exactly what I came here to do.

+1. 100 points is a win. 
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Baluc on March 25, 2013, 08:38:13 PM
I'm under the assumption that victory conditions are as per the BRB. I think most of these alternate VP suggestions are (a) silly (I wouldn't play under any of them, as I am a staunch anti-comp proponent) and (b) outside the scope of this simulation. "Smashing the opposition for as many vp as possible" is exactly what I came here to do.

Yes but this isn't limited to you. Its about a wider Empire experience. Most people play under some sort of comp or win conditions. Who won under ordinary 100 vp win conditions while important, is a) fairly obvious but also b) is of little use to what is likely a large portion of "competitive" players on the internet.

Even for myself I play in a largely no comp environment, but the largest local even uses 500 vps for a win, plus secondary objectives modified blood and glory for its events.

If your premise is that your list is only good in straight from the rulebook hammer, its only a good list in that context and premise of the thread would therefore provide no useful information that couldn't be done with a calculator.

However my alternative vp presents you with ways to prove the inherent flexibility and utility your list may, that the other does not. It also does not supplant the rule book win conditions.

I've, and I'm sure most good players seen enough games to know Demis fluff and break, Stanks can't claim vps in rulebook hammer and that magic is fickle. What good players need to see is that your list has potential beyond that.  If it doesn't then the discussion can stop there, and it can be labeled a powerful but ultimately flawed garage hammer list.

I'm not judging either player or their lists, as we on W-E are patiently awaiting results. But information is vital, and this is as good an opportunity to get as much information as possible. Even if you never play in a comp event in your life what you learn having to deal with these conditions will make you a more thoughtful player for the experience, as you see holes or inefficiencies in your own list that you may not have had to experience yet.

Recently I had to play an extremely defensive player, as my group of friends are all dominant agressive personalities I hadn't had any experience with this sort of set up. That is not to say the army was defensive but deployment and movement were both defensive. And I struggled for a few turns to come up with ideas. My Chaos list has changed to reflect that already, and my Empire list has changed as well after this new experience.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 25, 2013, 08:44:28 PM
If you think it will be useful, perhaps we can run another game with the list with your alternate VP conditions. But first I want to attempt to prove my point using the ruleset as written. I can't speak for others, but that second game will provide me with no real insights, because we never alter the VP conditions in the book.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Baluc on March 25, 2013, 09:56:46 PM
If you think it will be useful, perhaps we can run another game with the list with your alternate VP conditions. But first I want to attempt to prove my point using the ruleset as written. I can't speak for others, but that second game will provide me with no real insights, because we never alter the VP conditions in the book.

Ah ha! You might not have been rewarded in straight victory points. However consider this.

Have you have ever played a game, and just found yourself out maneuvered?

Or found you couldn't get all the wounds off that monster or kill a vital support character?

My suggested vp conditions don't alter the game at all, you will win the game if you straight up kill the opponent, there is no way to alter that. What I want to see is and what I think gives us real thought for discussion is finding where there is room for improvement, or what things we can take from both armies to make a better empire army.

Lets say we find that the war alter too often gives up half points. We can see that while effective there is a good or some chance of the war alter dying, and based off that we will have to confront a possibility of finishing the match without it.

If we see that your army consistently gives up table quarters, we can take from that your army lacks board control, and might find its self stymied, but lists that utilize a lot of fast chaff 3+ van gaurd dogs or units that can get behind your general advance. We could also find that the oppositions army is good as dispersing in the final 2 turns and retaining its VPs (in an uncomped environment), and there for pulling a draw or retaining a win, where your army could in fact draw or lose because of an inability to disengage. A vital ability given the fighty nature of the most recent books and potentially the upcoming elf books, who both are fast and fight with few models as it stands.

A Solid list of all the vps that were collected by both sides will help us have a deeper understanding, which will direct discussion in a more constructive manner than a cod piece measuring contest.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Noght on March 25, 2013, 10:20:24 PM
Even for myself I play in a largely no comp environment, but the largest local even uses 500 vps for a win, plus secondary objectives modified blood and glory for its events.

That's not the rules for Warhammer, sorry Baluc.  I play Wood Elves a bunch in tournaments.  Those that play it straight from the book vp's, I do great.  This win by 400 or more is bullshit.   

However my alternative vp presents you with ways to prove the inherent flexibility and utility your list may, that the other does not. It also does not supplant the rule book win conditions.

There are no alternate vp's.  If you want alternate vp's, you should do it before lists are built.  Besides this just smells of ETC silliness.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 25, 2013, 10:26:14 PM
If you think it will be useful, perhaps we can run another game with the list with your alternate VP conditions. But first I want to attempt to prove my point using the ruleset as written. I can't speak for others, but that second game will provide me with no real insights, because we never alter the VP conditions in the book.

Ah ha! You might not have been rewarded in straight victory points. However consider this.

Have you have ever played a game, and just found yourself out maneuvered?

Or found you couldn't get all the wounds off that monster or kill a vital support character?

But if I win, none of that matters. You do what you have to do in order to win. Full stop. I'm not looking to do trick shots or any other fancy things, just getting at least 100 more VPs than zifnab0 (in this game's case).
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 25, 2013, 10:49:11 PM
The winner of this game will be as per the BRB-  +100 VPs.

I don't mind if we calculate the "winner" via your modified VP calculating system just to see how it is different...

Based on the info I have from Zif & Rothgar here is how I see the first drops going down.  Please let me know if you want different formations or nudged a little to the left or right.

As long as both players are happy, Zif is up next.  I have an idea of what you want next, Zif, but it would be helpful if you could give me approximate locations in relation to the terrain of where you want them it would help.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep1_zpsb37cef8a.jpg)

Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Baluc on March 25, 2013, 10:52:25 PM
But if I win, none of that matters. You do what you have to do in order to win. Full stop. I'm not looking to do trick shots or any other fancy things, just getting at least 100 more VPs than zifnab0 (in this game's case).

But it does matter if you lose the next match because of something you chose to reamain ignorant of because you "won". There is just as much to learn from a win as their is from a loss. Its how the best athletes become better, as generally growing up they keep winning. Wayne Rooney isn't the same soccer player he was when he won the league with Man U years ago, he's won a lot, he's also learned a lot and has a lot to show for it.

This is a tactica board where players presumably come to learn, and get better. Having a scientific way to dissect the match provides a better basis to learn and provide advice.

Call it VPs, talking points, call it tactical points doesn't matter no one is winning an tournament here the Victory point system is already given to us to use so lets us it. I'm not here to advocate for Comp, as I'm pretty ambivalent to it, generally the same people win both events and I've not found either more or less difficult, and I not played in any event with army list comp.

Personally I don't really have anything to learn from this, I can do simple maths, and I have enough experience on how to pick my battles. What I'm trying to provide is a method with which more levels of players will learn something. Win or loss is for new players, experienced players need more to improve their own game and lists.

Feel free to ignore me of course, I just don't see the point of the whole exercise without measuring anything. You can win or lose a game on luck or circumstance. You will win an event through preparation, which is what I have found most players are lacking.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 25, 2013, 11:17:31 PM
Looking good on my end, HHG. :::cheers:::

@Baluc: Sure, but that assumes that I (1) haven't already been preparing myself to play this match and (2) am incapable of dissecting the information without the aid of other metrics, neither of which is the case. If I weren't prepared to put my ideas on the line, I wouldn't have thrown down the gauntlet in the first place. The only thing an alternate set of VPs does is encourage me (or zifnab0, depending on the circumstances) to do things I would normally not do, which in turn tells me nothing about how my following games will go, because I won't do those things unless there are VPs to be collected (and there won't be). You can use your alternate set of metrics to analyze the match after the fact (much like a statistician would analyze a sports game after the fact by collecting numbers on it), but I will not be adhering to them as win conditions, because they don't affect what I have to do to win any of the games I will play using this army.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Baluc on March 26, 2013, 01:20:57 AM
Looking good on my end, HHG. :::cheers:::

@Baluc: Sure, but that assumes that I (1) haven't already been preparing myself to play this match and (2) am incapable of dissecting the information without the aid of other metrics, neither of which is the case. If I weren't prepared to put my ideas on the line, I wouldn't have thrown down the gauntlet in the first place. The only thing an alternate set of VPs does is encourage me (or zifnab0, depending on the circumstances) to do things I would normally not do, which in turn tells me nothing about how my following games will go, because I won't do those things unless there are VPs to be collected (and there won't be). You can use your alternate set of metrics to analyze the match after the fact (much like a statistician would analyze a sports game after the fact by collecting numbers on it), but I will not be adhering to them as win conditions, because they don't affect what I have to do to win any of the games I will play using this army.

Its not about you, its about the community. Play your game, if you don't the information collected will be flawed, and worse will lead to incorrect assertions.

You seem to think to you think I'm asking something of you. I'm not, play the game as best you can and well talk about it after. We're looking for gaps or weakness in both lists. So that people who play in different environments can take from it what they can find useful. For instance if your list is incapable of collecting table quarters, but wins others can use what works and determine for themselves where its worth changing the list to leaving it as it and play with the intention of tabling the enemy.

The idea is to make it more useful, for more people.

Otherwise is just an exercise in math and movement, which is great for new players but less useful for advanced players. Presumably the idea is that you as they would, make the most correct decision most of the time. Which basically does nothing but confirm the "internet list" is superior, but doesn't give us any idea on how to fix any weaknesses or gaps the list might have.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: b0007452 on March 26, 2013, 10:15:22 AM
While I do agree with some of Baluc's points and I want to see these become the great learning tool for the less eperienced players in the community, like myself. I think if it's what the two players want to just play this per BRB. then it's what we should do. It should still be interesting for the majority and at the minute this discussion over Victory Conditions kinda seems like it's tripping up the TEG before it even gets going.

This Tactica Board is still very young and this is only the first TEG, we'll not just learn about the lists from this but will also learn about how a TEG works. If there are any future TEGs I'm sure they will run smoother without us even realising, maybe then we can start introducing other victory conditions and special rules. I think we should see this as a long term project rather than cramming as much in as we can to one TEG, to create something which could potentially ruin the learning experience for some.

In the long term I see the Tactica Board as a place where Empire Generals can go to look for guide's to each fantasy Army; similar to the Lizardman thread. Where there are links to varying Tactical based threads written by different users based on their first hand experience and hopefully if the community was committed enough several TEGs/TDGs running at once (With multiple people running them). If anyone knows of a good guide/would be willing to write one for Battle Chronicler it may be useful to sticky it in here possibly. So that if anyone does have the time to help HHG and Noght in the future, they also have the know how.

Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 26, 2013, 11:06:51 AM
As long as both players like the way I placed these units, we can move on.  Not sure if Roth wants the Demis 5x1 or 3 & 2.

Zif is up again.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep3_zps51afd53f.jpg)



Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 26, 2013, 03:12:36 PM
5 x 1 is ideal, because then I can sneak the War Altar in the back. Good stuff on my end, HHG. :)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 26, 2013, 11:27:24 PM
Here are the next 2 drops:  Zif's Halbs and one Rothgar Steam Tank.

Zif-  need you to confirm you want the Halbs in a horde with the detachments 3x2 on the sides.

Roth-  need you to confirm the Steam Tank placement is where you want.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep4a_zps0e60b7e3.jpg)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 27, 2013, 01:17:05 AM
Looks good to me. :::cheers:::
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 27, 2013, 09:58:49 AM
I think this is more of what Zif is looking for.

Need confirmation from both that this is still good and I will do the next drops.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep4b_zps334508a5.jpg)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 27, 2013, 11:44:17 AM
Horde the halberds behind the archers.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 27, 2013, 11:55:27 AM
Based on what I know of the two General's plans, here are the next two drops.

Just need confirmation that everything so far is okay.  Please send me PMs on any thoughts/changes to your next drops.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep5_zps257f9af5.jpg)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 27, 2013, 12:08:03 PM
Looks good to me.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 27, 2013, 01:14:22 PM
Hm... On second thought, can I get my second Steam Tank to be sitting on the left of my Knight unit? Thanks.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 27, 2013, 10:51:42 PM
Rothgar-  STank moved.

Zif-  I am guessing this is about where you want the Hurri.  Let me know if you want to move it somewhere else.

Rothgar-  once Zif confirms the Hurri placement, your two Great Cannons are up.  Please PM me where you want them.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep6_zps9e2fd789.jpg)

Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 28, 2013, 12:09:55 AM
That's fine.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 28, 2013, 11:07:55 AM
Roth-  confirm those spots are good and you don't want them nudged a bit.

Zif-  your Warmachines are up.

We are almost there!


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep7_zps521d3a6e.jpg)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 28, 2013, 12:06:46 PM
Zif-  confirm you like the placement.  Let me know where your characters are going to go, and where you want the War Altar.

Roth-  let me know if you want to nudge the cannons slightly (he hasn't had a chance for that input yet) and if you like the placement of the War Altar.  I did the rest of your characers, as per your list.

After that-  it is game time.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1Dep8_zpsb46251d3.jpg)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Noght on March 28, 2013, 12:52:08 PM
Dicelog doesn't have Artillery Dice.

You'll have to roll a 6 sided with an agreement ahead of time and Notes on the rolls to avoid confusions.  Example 1 = misfire. 2, 4, 6 might be actual inches.  3 = 8.  5 = 10.  Something like that. 

No idea what to do in the future for Scatter dice.....
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 28, 2013, 01:10:59 PM
Thumbs up on my end. Let's get this show on the road! :)

As far as arty dice goes, the way I've always resolved it if one isn't on hand is to treat the 6 as a misfire, and double any other result.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 28, 2013, 01:18:35 PM
Looks good.  Drop the altar behind the Halbs., wizard lord in the rear 10-man archer unit (SE corner) and BSB in the GS.

If the GS are numbered 1-10, left to right, put captain in position #2.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: b0007452 on March 28, 2013, 03:22:46 PM
Just out of interest how are we going to work the questions to Roth and zif?

Are we going to have a seperate thread so that we don't clutter this one? Or wait until the match is finished? Although I would suggest that would mean the rest of us would be a little uninvolved for the duration of the game.

Cheers
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: zifnab0 on March 28, 2013, 03:40:05 PM
I'd be OK with separate threads where we can explain what we're doing and answer questions.  I promise not to peek ;)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: rothgar13 on March 28, 2013, 04:17:55 PM
Same here. I would assume we'd operate on the same honor code as other head-to-head Tactical Decision Games have.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 28, 2013, 10:09:28 PM
As far as arty dice goes, the way I've always resolved it if one isn't on hand is to treat the 6 as a misfire, and double any other result.

This was my plan-  double the number and a 6 is a misfire.

If we ever have to roll a scatter direction-  my plan was to roll a D24, using 1 as straight north and then going around like a clock.

So....going to update the map to get our final deployment, roll for who gets the first turn, and then start 2 new threads, one for Zif and one for Rothgar.  I will rename this as the community thread.

Stay tuned.
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 28, 2013, 11:00:57 PM
Here is the final deployment.


(http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w495/DaHoffmans/TEG1DepFinal_zpsc74fc356.jpg)



Use this thread to talk to all sides, but you can jump over to Zif's Thread and Rothgar's Thread, which are up now, for specific discussions with each General.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: b0007452 on March 28, 2013, 11:03:33 PM
Great work so far HHG, its running very smoothly.

Good luck you two. Lets hope we get lots of involvement in the question threads.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 28, 2013, 11:09:16 PM
Great work so far HHG, its running very smoothly.

Good luck you two. Lets hope we get lots of involvement in the question threads.

Once each General describes their deployment strategy and we crank up T1 movement, I am going to post an advertisement in the Elector's Forum.

We need to get those opinionated, armchair generals awake and in on the action.....   :wink:
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on March 31, 2013, 08:04:57 PM
Moderating the first Tactical Exposition Game for the forum with two arty-heavy Empire lists going at it made me think-

With all the rolls you have to make to get a cannonball to hit, wound, and kill something....what are the odds of a successful shot?

So I did some Math-Hammer and here is what I got.

First of all-  is it better to take a shot 10 inches off the back of a target at least 2 inches wide (therefore needing a cannonball to travel 8 or 10 inches total), or is it better to go 8 inches from the back, hoping you don't get the first roll as a 10?

The odds are with the 10 inches-  you have a 61% chance of getting a hit versus a 53% chance on 8 inches.

The probability that you will hit and at least wound something with no Ward or Regen save?  Just over 50%....  I have made the comment several times that you need 2 cannons to get 1 successful shot per round.  It appears I was RIGHT on the money!

How about the odds of killing something outright with one shot?

--You will kill a model with 3 wounds 33% of the time.
--Killing a 4 wound model is 25%
--Killing a 5 wound model is 17%
--Killing a 6 wound model is 8%

How about if it has saves?

--You will at least wound a model with a 5++ save 34% of the time.
--You will kill a 3 wound model 22% of the time.
--Killing a 4 wound model is 17%

--You will at least wound a model with a 4++ save 25% of the time.
--You will kill a 3 wound model 17% of the time.
--Killing a 5 wound model is 8.5%

Interesting stuff.

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Big Brother on March 31, 2013, 08:27:34 PM
Interesting. I've been meaning to out together a cannon tactica for new empire generals and put up my targeting numbers. These would go very well in it.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 06, 2013, 06:52:04 PM
Wake up forum!

Zif and Rothgar gave me a few hours of their time today so we could advance the TEG.

We have made it out of Turn 3 and now Rothgar is working his Turn 4.

Lots of crazy action and both great and terrible dice rolls. 

Check it out-  and add in your thoughts on recent events!

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: sammay23 on April 06, 2013, 08:36:45 PM
My thoughts remain as stated before this match up. Zif is outgunned and going to pay for it. Weird dice are nothing new, but from Rothgar's turn 2 on, I think it's curtains for Zif.

Rothgar could just leave his steam tank stuck in, and mop up the rest of Zif's army. Zif's halberds and greatswords aren't going anywhere. Barring some unlikely magical or mechanical catastrophe, this game is over.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Noght on April 06, 2013, 10:50:36 PM
Too many weird Cannon results (Dicelog FTW) early and a shooting deficiency makes for an uphill fight.  I need to go back and read some stuff.

I mentioned to Zif that he needed to pop a cannon or cripple a STank early, he opted for the Popemobile (valid target and reasoning).

I'm not so sure the GS won't smoosh the Halberdiers over the next few turn, Timewarp not withstanding.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: sammay23 on April 06, 2013, 11:18:14 PM
I think much depends on whether Zif can buff his greatswords.

Smoosh? No. Win? Probably- but they won't be combat effective afterwards. I see 15-17 going down in the first round of combat. 8-10 in the second.

I dunno... with the DGs running away (less than 5% likelihood) the game is a bit more open. Still think it's over though.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 07, 2013, 12:17:01 AM
Generating 5 steam points is always risky, especially on a tank with any amount of wounds. It is unnecessary most of he time and cost 250 points in this instance. From my experience, I would say never generate 5 steam. It is the only way to easily lose a stank and the benefit of 1 extra steam is almost never worth it.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 07, 2013, 12:20:47 AM
The chance of that catastrophic misfire was 1/9 in that turn, and 1/18 at any time the Tank is at full Wounds. Those are acceptable odds, I just got unlucky. To be honest with you, this is the first time I lose a Steam Tank in any game to a misfire, so I'd do that over again - the STank is at its brutal finest when you have 5 SP early. I stop trying to generate 5 SP when my Tank is at 7 Wounds or less.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 07, 2013, 12:35:28 AM
That tank had a wound, meaning you misfire on a 10 and a misfire roll. 33% chance of something bad happening. It then dies on a 5 or 6. That's too risky for the payoff IMO. Do that over with 4 steam and you would still have a stank on the field and that one less point would have most likely not altered anything performance wise.

To each his own, but I feel the risk is never worth the reward.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 07, 2013, 12:38:34 AM
It would have significantly altered my game plan, actually. 3 SP in movement would have gotten me within range of the action, while still leaving 2 SP over for a nice cannon shot. 2 SP on movement didn't quite get me where I need to go, otherwise I wouldn't have tried to generate 5 SP. And the 1/9 chance I mentioned is exactly what you were talking about.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 07, 2013, 12:42:50 AM
You sometimes roll just as far with 2 steam as 3. That's the downside of random movement. I hear your arguments but I feel especially in a situation where you were in control and up on points, you didn't need to do it. Sounds like I am more unlucky with my arty dice than you and even though my lucky number is 5, I usually go for 4.  :icon_biggrin:
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 07, 2013, 12:55:42 AM
Well, if you use the dicelog as your guide, I wouldn't have gotten anywhere, no matter how many dice I rolled. :icon_lol:

I took a reasonable gamble in order to try and improve my position to finish the fight as opposed to just sitting on my points, and I lost. It's not the first time, and it won't be the last.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Noght on April 07, 2013, 12:59:18 AM
I think much depends on whether Zif can buff his greatswords.

Smoosh? No. Win? Probably- but they won't be combat effective afterwards. I see 15-17 going down in the first round of combat. 8-10 in the second.

I dunno... with the DGs running away (less than 5% likelihood) the game is a bit more open. Still think it's over though.

Probably right.  Though I suspect that both the GS and Halberds survive.  A good shooting/magic phase makes it closer.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: sammay23 on April 07, 2013, 02:35:25 AM
I took a reasonable gamble in order to try and improve my position to finish the fight as opposed to just sitting on my points, and I lost. It's not the first time, and it won't be the last.

This. Exactly how I like to play the game. It's like poker. You play the odds. Know them. Take your gamble. Don't get upset when the odds don't go in your favor. An 8/9 chance of moving forward 3d6 and cannoning 24" is well worth the risk. Although, to be fair, there were also 1/9 odds that you'd lose a few wounds, and gain more SP - in this case an excellent outcome.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 07, 2013, 02:52:08 AM
Shooting updated on the threads.

Damn, that HBVG just doesn't want to go down.

I will do all the combat except the GS/Halb fight-  not sure if Zif wants to challenge yet.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 07, 2013, 11:46:09 AM
This. Exactly how I like to play the game. It's like poker. You play the odds. Know them. Take your gamble. Don't get upset when the odds don't go in your favor. An 8/9 chance of moving forward 3d6 and cannoning 24" is well worth the risk. Although, to be fair, there were also 1/9 odds that you'd lose a few wounds, and gain more SP - in this case an excellent outcome.
If you guess 10" from the cannon, your odds of hitting it are 55%.  You then have a 1/6 chance of wounding and 2/3 chance of doing enough wounds to kill it.  The result is roughly 30% chance of killing the cannon in one shot.  For a 120 point cannon, the expected value of the shot is 36 points.

With 1/9 chance of exploding on a 250 point chariot, it costs you 27 points to generate 5 steam on a wounded tank, and that's just the risk of exploding.  You also have a 1/9 chance of losing D3 wounds, which costs you another 11 points.

Value: 36 points.  Cost: 38 points.

Over many turns, you're more likely to lose more points than you gain from generating 5 steam points and shooting enemy cannons.  You'll lose roughly one steam tank for every two cannons you blow up.  In my opinion, that's not an effective trade.  Your opinion may vary, obviously.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: sammay23 on April 07, 2013, 01:48:06 PM
I like the math, Zif. It's a nice way of thinking about the value.

I know you meant 5/6 odds of wounding, not 1/6.

I'm thinking through your reasoning, because it seems incomplete to me. Much, I think, depends on how important it is to remove those cannon. However, as a rough heuristic for calculating the cost of an action, I do like your reasoning. A lot.

I do think there is value in losing 1d3 wounds but gaining 1d3 Steam. I'm not sure I'd value it as a loss, with 7 wounds still on the tank.

Again, I really like this form of reasoning, but I think there's a little more nuance to it.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 07, 2013, 02:09:06 PM
I have always generated 4 Steam max.

After watching this TEG, I think the risks are worth it to pump out 5 Steam on an unwounded STank in the early rounds.  At least that is my risk/reward I am willing to take.

I played a game last night against an opponent I play all the time and he was surprised when I dished out 5 Steam in the first two turns.

I also like Zif's line of reasoning.  But I will say that straight up, simple math-hammer doesn't account for all the little variables and situational context for the risk/rewards.  If you were cranking out some complex math with weighted variables based on the situation than maybe....

Tactics is both science and art.  A General that seizes the right moment and takes the right risks reaps the best rewards.  Going back to my Tao of the Empire article-  recognizing the shih and forming node.

Great discussion.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zakalwe on April 07, 2013, 03:21:31 PM
I play cautious with Steam points too, 4 is the usual. Unless i think its a make or break time. This is partly due to the odds and eliminating risk but mainly due to sods law being taking affect.

I think it is going to be a closer game now, both sides have points they can gather at range, be it magic or artillery etc.

The combats could be close, especially given the dicelog's reputation ^^.

I would not like to call a winner as it stands even at 66 - 1 odds.


Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 07, 2013, 07:49:11 PM
Just don't like the first turn 5 steam exploding tank. It happened to me shortly after the book came out and I am more cautious now. Especially since that extra steam would not have mattered.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Noght on April 07, 2013, 08:13:43 PM
Just don't like the first turn 5 steam exploding tank. It happened to me shortly after the book came out and I am more cautious now. Especially since that extra steam would not have mattered.

This.  First time ever, 5 steam points, misfire, boom.....
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Krokz on April 08, 2013, 10:01:36 AM
I work with 4 steam points 95% of the time. It's more then enough for a 3 point move and one steam point shot. You can shoot 12" away and when you add overshot its enough to hit what you want. Or you move for 2 points and shoot for two.
Loosing STank is just to much for Empire tactics. 250 points isn't really something I would cry about but loosing my central offensive/tarpit unit is. That extra steam point is not worth it.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 09, 2013, 02:57:41 AM
I just played a double stank game and misfired 3 times. Each time was 3 or 4 steam. Nothing bad happened. I'm sticking to my guns. I am not good at 5 steam. One of my tanks almost killed the 3++ ws chaos lord. At least it pinned him for 5 full turns and did not die. 11 rounds of combat. Long live the stank!
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 09, 2013, 04:38:58 AM
The battle is over and TEG1 is in the books.  View either thread for the details.

Please post your thoughts on the battle.  I will post my thoughts later-  it is late and I need to go to bed!

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: George on April 09, 2013, 05:13:50 AM
Great work HHG, roth and zif. Congrats to zif.
I was following this from roth's perspective and thought he had the game won at around turn 3. I think the main play that lost him the game was sending the knights in to support the tank. This brought the greatswords into the match and let them deal with both the knights and halberds.
I fthe knights had been held back either zif had to commit the greatswords to a combat against the halberds with knights support or keep them back from the battle....the latter being an option that wouldn't have scored him enough points for the win.
That said with how roth played it kept it interesting throughout the final turns where each dice roll mattered rahter than a boring points denial finish.

I enjoyed watching this play out so a big thanks guys!
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Krokz on April 09, 2013, 07:03:38 AM
Heh, I am used to units with less then 25% of starting models giving 50% of points to the enemy :) That way Roth would have won. Now I see why this rule is here (ETC) - to prevent rank&files winning like this.

Gratz to both players. I was looking at Roths perspective since I wanted to see how someone else plays army composition like that and I have to say it was played completely different. Sometimes I was just (negatively :P ) surprised by some of his actions.

Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zakalwe on April 09, 2013, 10:25:34 AM
A close game indeed. The dicelog gods were fickle again.

Thanks for both sides and HHG for putting on the show.

AS rothgar has already mentioned the light magic was underwhelming, though it did affect the game, it never game that decisive edge.
I take a level 4 and a level 2 in 2000 games because i prefer magical flexibility, Shadow lvl 2 scroll caddy mainly. And i think that a timely little hex would have been beneficial to both sides over a harder to achieve buff.

The artillery was under performing for both sides really. With 4 cannons i would have thought Rothgar would secure ranged dominance earlier, but the ground was obviously boggy in patches. If Rothgar had been boring and sat back with everything how would it plan out? A gunline /counter attacking army is quite reasonable with the list.

I think zif was right to close asap, he could surely not win the artillery duel. The halbs got bogged down by the Stank, but also got out the gun sights.

I think deploying a volley gun or cannon unit near the lake could have worked, the lake protecting it from counter battery fire somewhat. Perhaps a spear unit to help redirect too. 

Having said that, the need for rothgars western forces to move to get into the action was a help to Zif.

Luck played a massive part of the game. Both sides had their share of good and bad rolls. This game highlights that warhammer is a dice dependent game and that all you can do is stack it in your favour as much as possible and hope.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Noght on April 09, 2013, 10:48:18 AM
Well done HHG, Roth, and Zif!  Thanks for the hard work.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: TCWarroom on April 09, 2013, 11:13:01 AM
Nice report and fun to follow. Thank you.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 09, 2013, 11:23:10 AM
Apologize to all.....forgot the Demi Stomp in the Halb fight.

It changed everything....as you will see.  I updated both threads.

Regardless, excellent fight.  I was honored to put it on.  The key takeway:  this battle was close and could have been won by either side in Turn 6.

Zif informed me that the Archer wasn't in combat before the turn so all that damage wouldn't happen.  I have to run off to work and will update it when I come home.

Long story short-  the game is a draw.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 09, 2013, 11:32:30 AM
Why I lost: Dice rolls.  Every flippin' time.

His halberds charged and lost combat, weren't stubborn, and had to test on Ld. 5.  Even with a reroll, the odds were stacked against him.

Magic dice consistently went against me as well.

Although, as you'll see in the other thread, my wizard and archer bunker should have survived.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 09, 2013, 12:45:20 PM
So I just re-did the VPs, and by my count I'm up 101 points (I'll repost them here now).

Zif:
100  General
25    Halb Standard
264  Halbs
70    2 Archer Det
120  Vanilla Knights
250  STank
--------------------------------
829 Total

Me:
25    Halb Standard
270  Halbs
70    2 Archer Det
75    Spears
240  2 Hellblasters
120  Great Cannon
130  Hurricanum
--------------------------------
930 Total

A win by the slimmest of margins to me! :::cheers:::

Either way, heck of a game, zif. You've been a good opponent, and you've given me a couple of things to think about with regards to my army composition.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 09, 2013, 01:32:12 PM
So I just re-did the VPs, and by my count I'm up 101 points (I'll repost them here now).
I was getting different numbers using HHG's list, then realized he forgot the Halberd standard.

Things certainly could have gone either way at different points of the game, and I'm glad I was able to pull out a draw.  As I pointed out in the other thread, I think I was at a serious disadvantage in this game.

I think we brought two of the toughest Empire lists, and found out that in competent hands the game really does come down to dice.

If someone wants to run another game in this forum, I'd love to see one (or both) of these armies put against an equally tough list, perhaps Warriors of Chaos or Dark Elves.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 09, 2013, 08:46:28 PM
I would also be interested in some games against WoC, mainly because I have been promised to play against them, and the people in quesiton haven't delivered. :eusa_wall:
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: SevenSins on April 09, 2013, 09:57:19 PM
Very interesting thread (s) a nice break from the tdg's

And a big  :::cheers::: to the participants and organizer
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: librisrouge on April 09, 2013, 10:58:36 PM
I wish more of us here could run games like this. It was possibly more informative than the TDGs even, getting to see are particular players thoughts and feelings on a list and its use.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 09, 2013, 11:15:13 PM
Okay all-  I apologize for the snafu in my original posts.  I stayed up late burning the midnight oil to get it all posted. 

Mistakes happen, just like they do in a real game, but it is important that I go back and get everything right to maintain the integrity of the process.  Games like this need to be won/lost based on the participants, not the moderator.  Anyway, thanks for all the patience.  The good news is that I know I have a whole forum to see and spot mistakes and make sure I get everything right!

The original threads have been updated with the correct ending to the battle.

Based on my calculations, Rothgar won by a mere 101 points.  I went back to double-check if he killed the 14 or 15 Spear unit...and the Battle Chronicler shows the unit that he killed was the 15 man one.  Amazing how 1 Spearmen could be the different between victory or a draw!

There has to be a winner and a loser...but I think one of the key messages from this battle was how tight some battles can be.  Generals with the right tools and tactics have to have some luck go with them.  I bet there probably at least 10 rolls late this game that were critical to the outcome.  When you have small blocks of infantry fighting for their lives after several rounds of battle with no hope of reinforcements....every blow counts. 

As far as future TEGs...I think we have stumbled upon a popular, successful format.  I am leaving this weekend to go on a military exercise for three weeks but want to crank up TEG2 right when I get back.

My original thought was something like this:

--I run a Griffon Formation list of mine, either 2500 or 3000 points, against the best list the forum can come up with to throw at me.  People can submit lists from any army besides Empire that they think is the toughest list to beat me.  The forum will vote and the list winner will be the General, backed up by the forum.  I would probably run 3 threads-  one with the complete dicelog for all to see, one for the enemy general and the forum to discuss strategy outside my eyes, and one for me to explain why I made the moves I did.

--I am also open to the forum picking an army they want to fight and an Empire list they want to test and picking Generals for each side.

--Last-  I am all about grudge matches.  If two forum members really want to go at it on the forum then I am all about it.  The only stipulation is that one needs to field Empire and the other something else.  I think TEG 1's Civil War is enough for Empire versus Empire.

Anyway, give me your thoughts. 

Don't forgot to post your thoughts on this battle as well!  The best part of TDGs and TEGs is when we can look at it with 20/20 hindsight and give our opinons!

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 09, 2013, 11:19:16 PM
That was a hard-fought W, that's for sure. Many props to zif for giving me one heck of a tough game. I'd also like to thank everyone who commented on my thread, both for (and against) 5-SP generation, and for double-checking my strategy. I have a couple of tweaks to my approach and my list already mapped out thanks to this game.

If the next TEG will be against your vaunted Griffon formation list, HHG, I'd like to propose a WoC list for it to fight against, as many of us have expressed interest in seeing the new book in play, and I have a MSU/MMU list that I've been itching to try out. We'll talk once you're back from your exercise, perhaps? Be safe, and thanks one more time for making this happen. A virtual hand :eusa_clap: and a virtual pint :::cheers::: for you, sir.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 10, 2013, 12:03:47 AM
I agreed to this game a little hesitantly, as I said in the other thread.  While I believed that the dual-horde list (with lots of chaff that I threw in at the last minute to keep my "no knights" promise :D) was one of our stronger lists, I was a little nervous about facing the cannon firepower that Rothgar brought to the table and the improved mobility of a mounted list.

I brought the scissors to his rock.  He is a also much more serious tournament player than I am, and probably has a lot more games under his belt against competitive lists.

While Rothgar did end up with the victory, it was very narrow, and I think I proved my point that the dual horde + buff wagon list is a competitive option.  Demigryphs are good, but there's no substitute for a horde of Greatswords.  If I had to do it over, I'd definitely drop the spearmen for some knights.

Many thanks for Rothgar for the game, for HHG for running it, and for everyone that commented and read the threads.  It was a great learning experience and taught me a lot about the game, and I hope someone learned from my mistakes.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: mrth0msen on April 10, 2013, 07:32:27 AM
I agreed to this game a little hesitantly, as I said in the other thread.  While I believed that the dual-horde list (with lots of chaff that I threw in at the last minute to keep my "no knights" promise :D) was one of our stronger lists, I was a little nervous about facing the cannon firepower that Rothgar brought to the table and the improved mobility of a mounted list.

I brought the scissors to his rock.  He is a also much more serious tournament player than I am, and probably has a lot more games under his belt against competitive lists.

While Rothgar did end up with the victory, it was very narrow, and I think I proved my point that the dual horde + buff wagon list is a competitive option.  Demigryphs are good, but there's no substitute for a horde of Greatswords.  If I had to do it over, I'd definitely drop the spearmen for some knights.

Many thanks for Rothgar for the game, for HHG for running it, and for everyone that commented and read the threads.  It was a great learning experience and taught me a lot about the game, and I hope someone learned from my mistakes.

You are right, but just remember that Rothgar chose to charge in with first his knights, and then his halberdiers. I think that in s more competitive setting, he would have stayed back and conserved points, which would have meant that the only combat your greatswords would see wa trying to beat up that steam tank or run after the halberdiers. Thats what I think at least, but I would like to hear Rothgars oppinion on what he would have done in a tournament setting! Rothgar?
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: rothgar13 on April 10, 2013, 01:04:19 PM
In a tourney? I'd walk the knights back and flee if charged. That would then free me up to look for the flank once the Greatswords were engaged, or even slip around the back and try to hunt down the Archer units/war machines. I'll admit I was a bit overly aggressive with them this game, but then again I didn't figure they'd be slain to the man, having a 3+ save and all.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: sammay23 on April 10, 2013, 11:31:05 PM
I like the list idea, HHG. Also, I would certainly love to take an all-cav Empire list out for a spin after you demo the Griffon.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: librisrouge on April 11, 2013, 02:29:18 AM
I wish we had more people qualified to run things like this, other than HHG. I'd love to try going up against a fellow here in a grudge match but I doubt my middling talent is worth his one person when he could be showing off the talents of our expert tacticians. I do though like the idea of somebody taking on his Griffon formation. Knowing the style of list he plays ahead of time could be instrumental in us seeing the best manner to beat it.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: librisrouge on April 11, 2013, 06:52:44 PM
Am I the only one that would like to see the Griffon formation go up against a dedicated Empire gunline, with 5 or more warmachines, engineers, and even some BS based missile troops. A bit of wizard support (Lvl 4 fire wizard with +1 Dispel Staff and Lvl 2 fire wizard with Dispel Scroll perhaps.)
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 11, 2013, 10:25:25 PM
Am I the only one that would like to see the Griffon formation go up against a dedicated Empire gunline, with 5 or more warmachines, engineers, and even some BS based missile troops. A bit of wizard support (Lvl 4 fire wizard with +1 Dispel Staff and Lvl 2 fire wizard with Dispel Scroll perhaps.)

If a gunline is what the forum wants to throw against the Griffon, I would much prefer a Dwarf or Skaven one. 

Anyway, this battle here was a pretty good showcase of an arty heavy list versus a more infantry-based list!
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 11, 2013, 11:13:41 PM
Yes, dwarf or skaven gunline would be better.  I'd prefer dwarves, but skaven would be more of a challenge.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Aineias The Scarred on April 12, 2013, 03:22:35 PM
I have a question for zif. You decided to put spears on the field because you didn't want to take mounted units at all, how would your list have been using knights instead of spears? Do you think it would have been better for you or knights simply don't match with your strategy?

I have to say that I really enjoyed the game and you guys have shown us some great pieces of tactics. Thanks a lot to both of you and to HHG for his effots!
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: zifnab0 on April 12, 2013, 07:14:31 PM
I have a question for zif. You decided to put spears on the field because you didn't want to take mounted units at all, how would your list have been using knights instead of spears? Do you think it would have been better for you or knights simply don't match with your strategy?
I would've taken knights instead of spears.  If I dropped both spears + the second archer unit, I could probably take 2 units of 5 knights.

I think that choice would have been much better - I didn't need all the diverters I had and the knights could have provided some much needed CR against the Demigryphs.
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 12, 2013, 08:51:05 PM
FYI-  I started the intro thread for TEG2 so the forum can pick the opponent while I am gone for a few weeks.

Get to list building!

 :::cheers:::
HHG
Title: Re: Tactical Exposition Game 1: Civil War Community Thread
Post by: Holy Hand Grenade on April 12, 2013, 09:36:55 PM
I like the list idea, HHG. Also, I would certainly love to take an all-cav Empire list out for a spin after you demo the Griffon.

Yes, I think this would be a great idea for TEG3.    8-)