Topic: (Two topics in one) Is it a new direction of Warhammer? I hope not...

[embir]

There is very funny (or scary- as you like) article on US GW site about tactics against HE. The most disturbing part comes from developer Adam Troke, here is the link:

http://us.games-workshop.com/games/warhammer/highelves/gaming/vs/3.htm

If GW wants gunline to be a common way of playing, then my adventure with Warhammer is done.

By the way:
 In weekend I'll participate in tourney at 1250 pts. I've to decide beetwen two army lists, both are based on three cavalry unit, one outrider unit, one cannon, STank and Battlemage but there are differences with general. I can't decide between Warrior Priest with Icon of Magnus (who will buff main unit of knights) and Captasus (with Doomfire Ring and Sword of Might, since it will be small point battles most enemies will have low Ld, so ring would be handful). What do you think, which one should I choose?

[Northern Storm]

The Gunline reference is in a tactics section specifically against High Elves; I see nothing wrong with fielding a Gunline vs High Elves.

[Eglard]

You don't need a gunline against HE, or against any army. For me the game is all about fun, not winning. Gunlines are boring to play with and against. Did it my self a couple years back (agreed with opponent) wasn't fun. It was boring. Won't do it again.

As for the other Q take the warrior priest. He will be in the middle of your force, boosting the LD. Of course you don't need this if you only got knights, but hatered really rocks.

[Fandir Nightshade]

I just would like to know what the two magic items "the bagpipes of doom" and "The Hellheart" are...seem nice to me.

[embir]

I just would like to know what the two magic items "the bagpipes of doom" and "The Hellheart" are...seem nice to me.

Bagpipes of Doom is an enchanted Night Goblins Item, but I have no idea what Hellhearth is.

The Gunline reference is in a tactics section specifically against High Elves; I see nothing wrong with fielding a Gunline vs High Elves.

I don't want to change this topic into New High Elves bashing thread, as there are plenty of that (and in fact I dislike new ASF rule) but every rule in game that encourages players to take gunlines is not good. I want to win with balanced all-comers list, not some WH40K clone.

As for the other Q take the warrior priest. He will be in the middle of your force, boosting the LD. Of course you don't need this if you only got knights, but hatered really rocks.

Yup. I'll take Warrior Priest. It is time to take up double handed mallet and play in cricket with heads of infidels.

[Tanker]

Of course you don't "need" a gunline to play High Elves, just to be competitive against high elves...provided the HE General isn't a 'tard. I am sure most HE generals won't object to you making it a quick game by getting into CC with them with any infantry in the Empire list. You might be able to handle them if you have a couple of fighty characters and/or the warbanner or griffon banner in the unit.

The bagpipes of doom makes every cav/ monster unit within 24"?? take a panic test. Oh yeah that's effective against LD 8 and 9 cav. 

The most troubling thing to me about the article is that they are reccommending that you take a gunline - for Empire players - meaning that is how they envisioned Empire players beating them from the get go. I am not familiar with all the magic items they reference, but if it takes a unit of Chosen Chaos Knights or Grail Knights to beat a core unit of High Elf Spearmen - there is a serious imbalance here.

[Huntsmen]

Isn't the hellheart a ogre magic item that when launched any roll of a double when casting results in a miscast and the caster roles on the ogre miscast table.

[Ostlands finest]

but if it takes a unit of Chosen Chaos Knights or Grail Knights to beat a core unit of High Elf Spearmen - there is a serious imbalance here.

I think you're giving the elves a little too much credit.  I charged a unit of high elf spears with my heroic swordsmen and detachment and had no problem running them down.  15 elf attacks hitting on 4's, =7 hits, =3 1/2 wounds, =1 3/4 saves.  He got lucky and I lost 2 swordmen on the charge, and then proceeded to cause a wound myself and win with simple static resolution.  They sound a lot nastier than they really are.  The only real unit that is quite devasting is the Swordmasters.  The white lions don't scare me as they have only 1 attack.  Shoot the swordmasters and run everything else down in close combat.

Like every other cavalry unit, the elven cav need to charge to be effective or they hit as hard as our 5 point free company.  The ASF really does nothing for their cav units.  Same for chariots, they were generally striking first anyways with thier 18 charge.

All in all the high elves are quite well-balanced.  Like any other list, they can be cheesed out.  But that gaming.

[embir]

I dont want to sounds like asshole, but if your enemy give you a chance to made a support charge from detachment he was probably an unexperienced player and made a fatal mistake. In normal circumstances I wuoldn't count for it. For all those years I played warhammer I learned that detachments are almost always neutralized by experienced players. I even think about using swordsmen regiments with only one detachment of archers to divert charges and provide cover for shooting.
Problem with elves is that you have to invest in magic or shooting to neutralize them. In Close Combat they are lethal. They are probably not unbeatable but tell that to Dark Elves, Khorne or Ogre Kingdoms players.  

[Ostlands finest]

I dont want to sounds like asshole, but if your enemy give you a chance to made a support charge from detachment he was probably an unexperienced player and made a fatal mistake. In normal circumstances I wuoldn't count for it. For all those years I played warhammer I learned that detachments are almost always neutralized by experienced players. I even think about using swordsmen regiments with only one detachment of archers to divert charges and provide cover for shooting.
Problem with elves is that you have to invest in magic or shooting to neutralize them. In Close Combat they are lethal. They are probably not unbeatable but tell that to Dark Elves, Khorne or Ogre Kingdoms players.  

I don't want to sound like an asshole either, but your inability to utilize the Empire's best rule (detachments) is obviously the problem.  You can't just set your detachments there next to your State Troops and wait for a charge.  You must utilize tactics to force your enemy into your parent units, which is obviously something you haven't practiced a lot.  I don't want to go inot it now, but there are several threads on this site that may help you out.

I would say practice a little more and you'll will discover they aren't as bad as they seem.  As for Ogres, they will eat all but Swordmasters for breakfast in combat.  Just do the math.

[Dendo Star]

GW has proven time and again that their tactical articles are sometimes complete crap.  I can think of numerous examples of them not knowing their own rules.  Case in point - Adam T.  He does not know his own rules.  Be it the S5/S6 White Lion Chariot fiasco or the 2x multiple shots "clarification" mistake on the HE Bolt Thrower he doesn't know his own rules.  The HE book and all it's decomposing crappiness are a testament to this. 

Don't dwell upon it.   GW's writer fucked up with the HE book and that very same writer naturally did a similar resounding job on a related tactica to the said crappy book.

[Lord Etharion]

I especially like the empire strategy article on the GW website recommending a block of 28+ FC with two FC detachments (For 35 attacks!!1).

Quietly forgetting the fact that FC can't be parent units........

As for whether or not you need to stock up on shooting to beat HE, it's been pretty thoroughly canvassed here. Personally, I don't think you do.

[Dendo Star]

Ah!  An example of GW not knowing what the hell they are talking about in this very WD Empire "Tactica".  I use the term loosely.

They recommend to simply give a Wizard VHS then charge him solo into a unit insuring the Empire victory.  Yeah, good job GW!  Suppose the enemy refuses the challenge?!  Hell, based on the article's loose writing (which doesn't mention the fact only challenges allow VHS) what if the opponent's unit has no Characters in it to challenge!  You then have a FREAKING BATTLE WIZARD with his normal stats starring down an entire enemy unit BY HIMSELF.  Good idea!

[Taishar]

GW sucks at tactics.  That's why their battle reports are lame and their books not balanced.


Cheers

[cisse]

I'm sure not all of them suck at tactics. It's just sad that not only they make these mistakes, but especially that they don't proofread their articles and iron these mistakes out.

Books not balanced... Let's just say that I'm not impressed either with the quality of the latest army books either.

[Huntsmen]

The best thing is that they are always mentioned as being great tournament players.

[Slick]

The best thing is that they are always mentioned as being great tournament players.

haha, maybe they're great tournament players in an all GW tournament setting so they can use their bad tactics vs equally bad players 

[patsy02]

GW sucks at tactics.  That's why their battle reports are lame and their books not balanced.

[Gargoyle]

GW sucks at tactics.

Alessio has attended Grand Tourneys and performed quite well, so I think it's only fair to look at individuals in the GW design team rather than coating them all with the same brush.

That's why their battle reports are lame and their books not balanced.

For quite some time now the WD battle reports have been designed to sell their latest army.
Understandable.
It may not make for quality reading from a purchasers point of view but they really are more about showing the new army having a run on the tabletop in all it's eye candy glory and generally winning.

The reason that GW army books are not balanced is a bit more involved.
At the end of third edition GW threw away the points allocation formula they were working on. (See Andy Chambers for a quote or ask him personally if you see him at a convention)

It forms the stat line basis of everything we still see in 7th edition today.
Thats how long it's been since any R+D has been done to the GW game system.

I'm not saying 3rd was balanced because it wasn't, the points allocation formula never was finished and thats why it was tossed out.
Thats why blokes like Gav Thorpe, who came along during 4th edition talk openly about GW design being done by the 'best guess method'.
It's not accurate because the development of the formula ceased between 3rd and 4th edition.

It's a real shame because I think GW would have condsiderably more balance between the Army books if they had successfully created and implemented a points allocation formula.
It would have served the older gaming community very well.

I know I would never have gone looking elsewhere if they could have addressed the disparity in capabilities between armies.
Many of my gaming compatriots feel the same way.

[BAWTRM]

The problem with a balanced points system is that IMO it only really works in a rule set in which no significant special rules are present . It's really hard to incorporate special rules like certain psychological effect (fear/terror/ItP/Stupidity etc.) or army wide rules (undead, ASF, detachments. In the end I don't think it's really possible to make an all encompassing mathemetical model to represent each and every model's point cost.
Even if you would be able to do so it still wouldn't mean that armies would be balanced against each other. A good example is one army causing Fear while the other is ItP. Both are paying the pts costs for their abilities but when facing each other only one of the armies is actually benefitting from it.

On the subject of Alessio, I believe he was quite the power player. He knows what works well as in "this is really nifty and hard". He produced the Skaven and VC, enough said eh?

[embir]

I don't want to sound like an asshole either, but your inability to utilize the Empire's best rule (detachments) is obviously the problem. 

Well, my problem is that I usually play with very good opponents who know how to neutralize detachments.

You must utilize tactics to force your enemy into your parent units, which is obviously something you haven't practiced a lot.  I don't want to go inot it now, but there are several threads on this site that may help you out.

First off: Thx for advice, but after 10 years of playing WFB, having read rulebook, armybooks, erratas, publications and excellent articles from this site I think I am pretty good player, hence I always ranked high in tourneys.

Second: As you also noticed, you have to force your enemy to charge into parent unit. But you already mentioned that you did supporting charge not countercharge with your detachment. If your enemy didn't ordered flee which was clearly only solution in this case, then that tells a lot about his tactic skills or knowledge about rules of detachments, unless there were some exceptional circumstances. 

There are many tools which enemy can use to neutralize detachments. Flying units, fast cavalry, offensive spells, shooting units, proper maneouvring and use of terrain.
If detachments would be such a powerful tool we probably shouldn't saw it in 7ed., should we?

On the subject of Alessio, I believe he was quite the power player. He knows what works well as in "this is really nifty and hard". He produced the Skaven and VC, enough said eh?

Not to mention 6th ed. Empire

Well in WD 227 (under 5th edition) was a report from GW Staff Tournament written by Alessio. He was an overall winner but suprisingly he used very climatic and fluffy Brettonian army.

Overall, he is very good game designer, his only fault was Skaven armybook. In interviews he often mentioned that ratmen are his favourite army and we were unlucky that this blind love is clearly seen on the pages of their armybook.





 

[Patch]

Overall, he is very good game designer, his only fault was Skaven armybook. In interviwes he often mentioned that ratmen are his favourite army and we were unlucky that this blind love is clearly seen on the pages of their armybook.

Your not wrong! Facing the Rat scum this weekend - never really gotten a convincing win against them. Going to have to think about this one...

[redjoey]

Over the last few weeks I have seen a few of our members post about games vs. High Elves and think that most of them have been victories to the Empire, I too have played them and scored a massacre.

A gunline is not needed. Because they are weak yet expensive troops even a single unit of shooters will cause quite a bit of damage.

I don't think the ASF rule is all that impressive. They have a higher initiative and movement than us so should be charging most of the time anyway.

With two balanced lists I would put my money on the Empire.

[jlutin]

What is so annoying about the crap battle reports is how easy it would be to have great ones.  You can go all over the web and find excellently documented, well fought Battle reports generaled by people with outstanding armies.  GW could easily invite some of those folks to battle with at a battle bunker or GW store.  Have a half dozen battles like this a month, put them on the website and put the best of them in the White Dwarf.  People would fight for this honor, GW only has to organize it and let it happen.

OR

Go to INDY tournaments with a still photographer and a video camera.  You could get dozens of good battles to choose from most months.

Heck, I would create some tables at the battle bunkers that taped the battle for posting online.  It would let new players see a fight, showcase the real stars of the hobby (that would be us) and create a venue for ongoing excitement.

I would buy the White Dwarf at it's current price and quality if it only had one single good fantasy battle report each month.  That is all it would take to get me back.

[BAWTRM]

I would buy the White Dwarf at it's current price and quality if it only had one single good fantasy battle report each month.  That is all it would take to get me back.

Count me in as well!