home

Author Topic: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]  (Read 3762 times)

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« on: February 08, 2017, 11:26:49 AM »
When I returned from my 10-year break, I was happy to find that my contributions were still remembered, that I had left a mark on the community. That said, I got thinking, would a modified Richtmark battalion be capable of working in T9A?

The core of the original battalion is a formation consisting of a steam tank with an infantry block on each side, each infantry block further having a close combat detachment. The idea being that the steam tank can support either infantry block through a combined charge, whereby the tank provides kills and the tank the static CR.

Would the same basic idea work in T9A if you had the tank, two parent units to its sides in deep bus formations of maybe 40 models, and an additional 20-man close combat support unit for each parent unit? With T9A detachment rules being the way they are, you could rack up a load of static CR even with a combined frontal charge of parent and support unit, counting the standards and rank bonuses of both. That, while the tank brings terror and a can of grinding attacks.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Zygmund

  • Pure of Heart
  • Members
  • Posts: 2674
    • https://www.facebook.com/groups/288460758594334
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #1 on: February 08, 2017, 02:09:32 PM »
This is an interesting thought.

As is typical, I reply with problematisation.

Note that supporting units don't get an automatic flank charge. With the parent units in bus formation, even a double charge of a parent & STank might not cover e.g. an enemy horde units full frontage. Even if just a corner is left visible, your supporting unit needs to charge the front. Now I know you're aiming at charging all three central units against the same (horde) target. In general, I don't know if the supporting unit can charge a flank at all, if it's not positioned for a normally legal flank charge. And if you spread the supporting units wide and towards the fore, they will be easy prey for the opponent. It's been estimated and agreed that in T9A, getting reliable supporting charges against a competent enemy is very, very hard.

With Random Movement for the STank, you have to adjust your movement and positioning to that. Doable, but you will lack fine control.

Now, I've played against a Dwarf Deathstar build that essentially tried to pull out this: 2/5ths of the army points in a centre unit, another 2/5ths in flanking, and then some shooters staying mostly back. During the game, I completely destroyed his flanking units and one flank of shooters, and was really close to force him take CR tests with his centre. Only him being super though Dwarf allowed him to survive. Against softer Empire troops, I think grinding armies will do their damage and force this kind of build on the defensive, without relief. Grinding armies probably kill it, maneuvering armies probably avoid & divert & decimate & frustrate it. Then again you probably cannot bring all the three central units against a big enemy unit, and won't even try this, which leaves your other flanking bus free - to take care or threaten the enemy elsewhere, or to act as a rear guard, fighting whatever is left from the bus & STank combo (after it's been destroyed...).


But the big issue I have with this and the other scenario is that your troops thus far represent about a third or at the very most a half of your points (if playing 4,500). The big question is, which characters you would buy, and what other stuff. Something to only support this centre? Or something to distract the opponent? Artillery? Shooting?


There's a tendency among the hard-core sport-maniac gamers to agree that the Empire at the present is an underdog, and that traditional infantry-heavy combined force finds it hard to fight for victory. Recently, one top-tier player made an Empire MSU list (many small units: nearly 30 units 10-30 strong, over 200 models on the table, and minimum characters - Empire gets the minimum units really, really, really cheap). He has now won several other top-tier players, and never got soundly defeated. Time will show if that kind of Empire emerges as the cost-efficient tournament-going style for T9A 1.3.X. They call it the TVI style, although it strictly speaking isn't, mostly because the rules and opposing forces are different now.

Just my 2d

-Z
Live in peace and prosper.

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #2 on: February 08, 2017, 06:39:09 PM »
You are correct, T9A support charges don't allow you to hit the flank unless you are already positioned in the flank zone. Only 6e detachments had the ability to do that. However, T9A support charges have another advantage: On the turn they do the support charge, you get rank bonus CR from both the parent and the support, to a maximum of +6. That's a load of CR right there, I'd say (even if you're very unlikely to get the entire +6, as the max size of a support unit is 20). Oh, and in T9A, support units can have command groups, and every standard gives +1 CR, not just the first. Thus I thought, hitting an enemy horde with the tank, a bus and a support unit, even if all frontally, would hurt it bigly through both kills and static CR. Unless it's an all-out deathstar.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Fidelis von Sigmaringen

  • Members
  • Posts: 9682
  • Attorney-at-RAW
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2017, 07:37:06 PM »
Only 6e detachments had the ability to do that.
It was (at least) 6 & 7th editions. And they had both Counter & Support Charge.
It is not enough to have no ideas of your own; you must also be incapable of expressing them.
Sex, lies and manuscripts: The History of the Empire as Depicted in the Art of the Time (10/07/16)

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • Posts: 10563
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2017, 11:01:35 PM »
Interesting thought to stack static CR like that. Very interesting.
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Fidelis von Sigmaringen

  • Members
  • Posts: 9682
  • Attorney-at-RAW
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2017, 11:33:11 PM »
It is certainly true that static CR in the 8th edition did not go very far...
It is not enough to have no ideas of your own; you must also be incapable of expressing them.
Sex, lies and manuscripts: The History of the Empire as Depicted in the Art of the Time (10/07/16)

Offline Zygmund

  • Pure of Heart
  • Members
  • Posts: 2674
    • https://www.facebook.com/groups/288460758594334
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2017, 08:39:29 AM »
Yeah, 7th ed also allowed the flank charge.

Thus I thought, hitting an enemy horde with the tank, a bus and a support unit, even if all frontally, would hurt it bigly through both kills and static CR. Unless it's an all-out deathstar.

Fair point.

I just doubt a competent enemy would allow you to pull that trick. What I would do is, I'd try to divert one of the main busses, and likely completely destroy or tie up one or both flanking detachments.

But this is very theoretical, as I don't know what else you would bring. It's rather pointless to discuss 20-40 % of your army without the rest.

-Z
Live in peace and prosper.

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2017, 11:36:55 AM »
Well, I was hoping to discuss the concept on a more general level before going into the specifics of lists, but anyways, here goes, an attempt at an army list. Just an attempt, and a slightly radical one at that, I'm sure there are many other compositions that could work.

Marshal [General]: Blessed Armour of Frederick the Great, Crown of Scorn, Great Weapon [268 pts]
Marshal [BSB]: Hero's Sword, Hardened Shield [210 pts]
Marshal: Griffon, Great Weapon, Sprout of Rebirth, Shield [474 pts]
Marshal: Griffon, Great Weapon, Talisman of Supreme Shielding, Shield [494 pts]

Steam Tank [440 pts]
40 Spearmen: Command, Spears [460 pts]
40 Spearmen: Command, Spears [460 pts]
20 Swordsmen: Command [220 pts]
20 Swordsmen: Command [220 pts]
6 Knightly Orders: Command [390 pts]
5 Electoral Cavalry: Standard, Lances, Shields [220 pts]
5 Electoral Cavalry: Standard, Lances, Shields [220 pts]
5 Reiters: Brace of Pistols, Heavy Armour [200 pts]
5 Reiters: Brace of Pistols, Heavy Armour [200 pts]

4476 pts total.

The general and the BSB would go into one bus each, to cover each others' units under their radii of effect. The griffons, well, I thought, I'm running a tank, a prime target for enemy monster-hunters, one that can't feasibly avoid exposure to fire. Might as well go all out for target saturation and present the enemy with two tough, warded flyers. If the entire central formation needs to crash head-on into the enemy line, they can join in on that and lend their killing power and orders to the fray (with 4 marshals, all the infantry units could simultaneously Brace for Impact, for instance). If the situation instead warrants, the central battalion could spread out more, with the griffons where needed to beef up the line, or go on shenanigans of their own. The rest of the force is a mass of screening cavalry, for wiping out chaff and for counter-flanking attempts to flank the central battalion.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2017, 11:38:10 AM »
If 7e detachments were able to flank charge without being in the flank zone, I must be the biggest donkey. I read through those rules rather carefully, I thought, and came to the disappointing conclusion that they can't.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Fidelis von Sigmaringen

  • Members
  • Posts: 9682
  • Attorney-at-RAW
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2017, 12:48:10 PM »
It is on p. 39 of that AB.

"Countercharge: [...]If the detachment can draw a line of sight to an exposed flank of the enemy, and has enough movement to reach it, it can charge the flank, even if it would normally have to charge its front. [...]"


The same applies to Supporting Charge (ibidem).
It is not enough to have no ideas of your own; you must also be incapable of expressing them.
Sex, lies and manuscripts: The History of the Empire as Depicted in the Art of the Time (10/07/16)

Offline Zygmund

  • Pure of Heart
  • Members
  • Posts: 2674
    • https://www.facebook.com/groups/288460758594334
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2017, 09:30:39 PM »
Target saturation! I'd love to see this on table! I'd love to hear how it plays!  :-)

Never seen Empire doing such a list.

What do you think of magic (wizards and buff wagons) and priests (hate, blessings)?
They say magic is weak in the current T9A edition, and it's hard to get blessings through. But hate. Maybe there isn't a unit that would benefit from hate in this list?

-Z
Live in peace and prosper.

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2017, 10:31:02 PM »
Well, the thing is, the tank is a significant part of the combat power of the central battalion, and it doesn't benefit from hatred, so the utility would be partly wasted. Wizards? I really don't know, never been much into that in, well, any edition of Warhammer.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline The Peacemaker

  • Members
  • Posts: 2231
  • Baron Karl von Balombine of Wissenland
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2017, 06:34:56 AM »
In T9A you also get +1 combat res if the flanking units have a couple ranks. ....best to look up tge exact wording.

I found that your plan does need a bit of tweaking.
The steam tank is unbreakable so its best use is going in first and locking the enemy in place. Which lets your other units get into position to flank charge.
Your opponent can still reform, but it doesn't mater because he will be getting 1 unit in the flank.
....provided you clear his chaff and other counters of course.
For Wissenland and the Countess!!!

My Painting Blog
My Entire Gallery

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2017, 08:22:17 AM »
How about the following? It's strayed quite a bit from the, erm, Richtmark battalion due to dropping the stank for a popemobile, but otherwise a variation on the list concept a few posts ago:

Prelate; Crown of Autocracy, Great Weapon, Altar of Battle: 642 pts
Marshal; BSB, Hardened Shield, Aether Icon: 225 pts
Marshal; Great Griffon, Great Weapon, Talisman of Greater Shielding: 438 pts
Marshal; Great Griffon, Great Weapon, Sprout of Rebirth: 468 pts
40 Halberdiers; Command, Halberd (no shield): 500 pts
40 Halberdiers; Command, Halberd (no shield): 500 pts
20 Swordsmen; Standard: 180 pts
20 Swordsmen; Standard: 180 pts
5 Electoral Cavalry; Standard, Lance, Shield: 220 pts
5 Electoral Cavalry; Standard, Lance, Shield: 220 pts
5 Reiters; Heavy Armour, Brace of Pistols: 200 pts
5 Reiters; Heavy Armour, Brace of Pistols: 200 pts
Cannon
Cannon

4493 pts, 39.40% Characters, 40.00% Core, 8.89% Imperial Auxiliaries, 11.56% Imperial Armoury, 18.67% Sunna's Fury

The formation would be the same, with popemobile in the middle, halberdiers to its sides, and swordsmen on the flanks of the halberdiers. The popemobile can combo-charge with the infantry just like the tank would do, and buff it with blessings (and if the halberdiers are edge-to-edge with the popemobile on one side and the swordsmen on the other, the 6'' aura of the blessings reaches the swordsmen too). If I'd cast Ullor (5+ ward in cc) and Volund (reroll to-wound) in the same turn, one would likely be dispelled and the other go through, either would be useful). Also, the popemobile is a towering presence and would extend the Ld bubble of the prelate.

This way I'd max out on the possible synergies that could be obtained. The griffons are already fear-causing, making the fear caused by the tank slightly redundant.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • Posts: 10563
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #14 on: March 19, 2017, 06:34:12 AM »
I reckon it would look good.
The 'Hybrid List' for 7th ed that I worked on had a steam tank and altar, with them being interchangeable between supporting the infantry or the cavalry.

I think the feeling is the volley gun is more effective than the cannon? But more on monstrous infantry / cavalry than big monsters. What is more prevalent in your meta? What is your strategy to deal with each?

The griffons should be a lot of fun. I wonder though, should you save points by not giving them any magical equipment (however i do not know what those do)?

Where are your pistol detachments? No points? Surely you need some chaff?
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2017, 09:23:57 AM »
Those magical items on the griffons are there to give them ward saves, to make them not tip over from enemy shooting. I'd probably prefer warding them up even more, if I wouldn't hit the points cap on characters.

That's also a reason for having two cannons, they could either serve as monster-killers or in a counter-battery capacity to keep my own monsters and my popemobile safe. With this list being offensively oriented, I don't think volley guns would be able to bring their firepower to bear very effectively. Too short range, too much advancing troops of my own who'd likely get in the way.

Not having any pistol militia is indeed an issue, but I really couldn't find the points for them anywhere. Everything that's already there feels quite essential.

I put the Crown on the prelate to enable him to be the general and project a 18'' Ld bubble from the popemobile, but I could instead give that job to one of the griffon marshals. He'd also have a 18'' bubble, but he might be more vulnerable to being taken out.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • Posts: 10563
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #16 on: March 20, 2017, 02:55:19 AM »
Surely good manueavuring should prevent too much enemy shooting hitting your griffons. Are they combined profile in T9A? If so, the armour should soak some of the damage. Either way, i still think saving points in this will afford you some chaff pistol FC.

My worry, like i have said is that I have run a list like this before, and it lacks punch against decently numbered elite armies.
In theory it survives, but ende up getting eaten up by someone's killer combo. i also think it will struggle against Ogres and Chaos Warriors, as well as Dark elves.
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Konrad von Richtmark

  • Members
  • Posts: 3132
  • Marius Leitdorf Lives!
Re: Revisiting the Richtmark Battalion [T9A]
« Reply #17 on: March 20, 2017, 08:12:26 AM »
Another variant on the last list:

Marshal [General]; Great Griffon, Great Weapon, Talisman of Supreme Shielding, Shield: 494 pts
Marshal; Great Griffon, Great Weapon, Talisman of Greater Shielding, Shield: 444 pts
Marshal; BSB, Hardened Shield, Aether Icon: 225 pts
Prelate; Great Weapon, Altar of Battle: 572 pts

40 Halberdiers; Command, Halberd (no shield): 500 pts
40 Halberdiers; Command, Halberd (no shield): 500 pts
20 Swordsmen; Standard: 180 pts
20 Swordsmen; Standard: 180 pts
5 Electoral Cavalry; Lance, Shield: 200 pts
5 Electoral Cavalry; Lance, Shield: 200 pts
5 Reiters; Brace of Pistols: 180 pts
10 State Militia; Pistol, Skirmishers: 150 pts
10 State Militia; Pistol, Skirmishers: 150 pts
Cannon
Cannon

Now, one of the griffon marshals has been turned into the general and warded up accordingly (4++). That saves me the Crown of Autocracy on the Prelate and still retains me an 18'' Ld9 bubble. The saved points, along with some filing off of points here and there (vanilla knights lost their standards, reiters their heavy armour), allowed me to trade one reiter unit for two pistol militia units.

While the altar would be the best-protected general, using it both as a buff wagon and as a general Ld bubble is arguably to put too many eggs in one basket. In this way, the support elements are more dispersed across the army.
The only good thing about 7th ed heads is that they look particularly inbred and superstitious which is perfect for Stirlanders