Topic: Anyone miss Greatswords as detachments?

[pathstrider]

Looking at some leaks, seems Greatswords are parent units only still.

I know it’s been ages, but I kind of miss them being able to be detachments. It made a lot of sense - a smaller unit of expensive troops that can fight better.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

At least in my experience (about 20 years or so), GS could never be taken as Detachments.

[pathstrider]

I think I’m going back to pre 6th ed at least, though I could be miss remembering.

It was about the time Greatswords took the place of foot reiksguard - before then they weren’t elite, just another weapon option.

Edit: just looked at the 4th ed army book - they could be detachments then.

[Rodman49]

In 4e they could be detachments but there were no rules for detachments counter charging or having their own charge reactions.  IIRC however they used the rank bonus of the parent unit which could result in bizarre stuff like 5 guys routing an elf unit.

But I was 12 years old so may have gotten that rule off.

[commandant]

It makes sense for them to be small detachments but it appears not. I hope they keep their full plate

[pathstrider]

It makes sense for them to be small detachments but it appears not. I hope they keep their full plate

From what I can make out from the leaked pictures, they do.

And yeah, it'd be nice for them to be truer to the Doppelsöldner inspiration - small detachments of more elite soldiers.

[commandant]

Well also that you don't need a big block of them. Still with the introduction of Armour Bane, armour is powered up. A 4+ save is a lot better than it used to be. (If full plate is still 4+)

[GamesPoet]

Wasn't playing back in 4th edition.  Seems the path of Greatswords has morphed into being their own unit, and I doubt GW will go back on this.

[pathstrider]

Well also that you don't need a big block of them. Still with the introduction of Armour Bane, armour is powered up. A 4+ save is a lot better than it used to be. (If full plate is still 4+)

It is - it's a general entry in the rule book and quite a few other races get it as well now. I'm not sure how much armour is powered up - certianly it seems ranged has less armour pen but close combat weapons work out the same from a strength 3 base (e.g. great weapons have AP -2 which is what we would have had before). So you get some less extreme modifiers at the top end but it's still enough to take away a 4+ save.

Biggest problem Greatswords have is they're special choices - I was hoping there might be a "Take 1 as core if you have a general of the empire" or something similar. So they have to compete with inner cirlce knights and demigryphs. Meanwhile, non-inner circle knights, which could do a similar job to a small unit of greatswords, are core.

[commandant]

I don't think that Knights can do the same role as greatswords.   greatswords are anvil block that doesn't go away.   I'll need to check to be sure when I get the rules but strength doesn't modify armour anymore.

[pathstrider]

I don't think that Knights can do the same role as greatswords.   greatswords are anvil block that doesn't go away.   I'll need to check to be sure when I get the rules but strength doesn't modify armour anymore.

Strength doesn't modify armour anymore. But a twohanded weapon is S+2 and -2 AP so a human is S5 -2 AP which is exactly what it was before. So it's really only S4+ models where there is reduced AP compared to previously.

[commandant]

Yes but we weren't really worried about models armed with greatweapons because we also have great weapons and they are slow and lumbering.   We were worried about fast models with str 5+, which greatswords now save 1/2 attacks against.   Armour Bane means that somewhere between 1/2 and 1/5 attacks have AP as opposed to all of them.

[pathstrider]

The two handed weapon was an example tbh, it’s the same with lances +2 str and ap -2

My assumption is that Greatswords will fair better vs ranged where it seems to be armourbane rather than AP - but I’m not worried about that as I can always have more state troops for the same points (probably, don’t know how much Greatswords cost).
 

[Dazgrim]

With the change from striking first on the charge to I1 (greatsword) + 3 on the charge, counter charging with greatswords isn't a hugely great option - do it to elves and you might end up all dead before you get to swing.

[Zygmund]

With the change from striking first on the charge to I1 (greatsword) + 3 on the charge, counter charging with greatswords isn't a hugely great option - do it to elves and you might end up all dead before you get to swing.

Against Elves I guess anyone with low I is taking it to the chin. And often has, in other editions too. Striking first is an Elven feat, part of the spirit of those armies.

So the comparison here isn't that informative. Against many other armies, a Greatsword (counter)charge will work still.

Also, charging a flank should reduce Elven attacks from spears, which are a common Elvish choice, but which only work to the front. (Unless this ed changed that.)

-Z

[pathstrider]

Elves have a special rule that lets them support attack to the sides and rear too

[commandant]

Elves are going to be annoying in close combat.   At least they are fairly expensive.

[Dazgrim]

Wood elf characters can get a sprite that reduces the weaponskill and initiative of units fighting them by -1. I don't think playing wood elves is a recipe for making friends.

[commandant]

Was it ever?