Warhammer-Empire.com

I think a lot of negative preconceptions are being added to WAAC - some of it well-founded but still wrong.

A WAAC player is simply a person who winning is the most important thing, mainly over their opponent and themselves having fun.

In fact, even that is not true, as a WAAC player finds the fun in winning and not how they fought. A non-WAAC player can enjoy losing a game, a WAAC player will not. This comes to show in army selection, in terms of the book they choose and the units from that book. This does lead to them jumping armies more, but that is not an inherit trait of a WAAC player (indeed, my players who play for modelling jump from army to army because they get a new muse/new models).

The same thing happened a few years ago with RAW players - they were simply who played by how the rules were written. Then came a bunch of negative preconceptions, which whilst true for many RAW players, were not to true of them all.

If I can, I'm always a fan of the Shrieking Blade on my BSB. Fear can be a really useful tool to reduce the number of hits occasionally. Between that the Dragonhelm, you could go for Ratslayer Helm which is 5 points cheaper. However you lose the 2+ against flaming and you give hatred to Skaven.

Thanks for the feedback. I've taken some of your advice on board, other bits had to be ignored. AL has been mounted and the turned into Reiksguard. I worked it out as cheaper than the Crown of Command for Stubborn. The BSB couldn't make it mounted due points, plus it would need me to buy a captain for the core. WP comes in to give the core Hatred. I changed the Halbs to Swordsmen for a couple of reasons. I wanted to go full correct modelled and my Halbs would be half Halbs and half Spears. Second, if these are being left relatively alone, Swordsmen hang around better in my opinion to hold units in place so either the Demis or the Knights can hit them. Fire-banner was needed as I am expecting a fair number of regen beasts. Here is a more precise list.

Lords
Arch Lector
Heavy Armour
Enchanted Shield
Warhorse
Barding
Talismen of Endurance
Relic Sword

Heroes
Captain
BSB
Full Plate Armour
Shield
Dragonhelm
Dawnstone
Shrieking Blade

Battle Wizard (2)
Dispel Scroll

Warrior Priest
Heavy Armour
Great Weapon

Core
Swordsmen (38)
Musician
Standard Bearer
Halberdiers (15)

Special
Great Cannon

Demigryph Knights (3)
Standard Bearer
Musician
Champion
Banner of Eternal Flame

Reiksguard (9)
Standard Bearer
Musician
Banner of Discipline

I presume that is correct based on page 99 of the BRB under Combat.

£60 for £82 worth of models; can't really complain about that. Yes, switch out Greatswords to Cannon does make it less worth it (down from £92), and it isn't going to be the perfect set of models for everyone. Personally, I could do without the extra knights as I already have plenty. However, if you go with the idea that battalion boxes are meant to be starter boxes, it is a pretty darn good box. State troops, Missile Troops (that can easily become combat state troops), Cavalry and a piece of Artillery, is a good starter army to build on.

Link would be a good place to start.
Link has painting blogs in it for some hints.

My army is technically single province but includes units of different colours. I have my swordsmen and spearmen as Stirland River Patrol, along with my general - this was my original core of the army. I then have my Halberdiers, Archers and Pistolliers are in standard Stirland colours. Finally, my knights come from the Order of Perpetual Darkness, along with my Warrior Priests. I'm not sure where my Greatswords will be from, more likely in standard colours.

In the end, it is down to you which you think looks cooler or what keeps you painting. The reason I had different colours because I got bored of painting white and green.

That post of numbers, like this one, was wrong.  Wounding on 3 results out of six over 2 results out of six is a 50% increase in wounds dealt.

3/2 = 1.5.

I don't know how to make it simpler than that.

Multiplying something by 2 is a 100% increase, FYI.

Yes, hit to hit S3 will cause more wounds than S2. However, you are not taking into account the difference in the number of hits caused. The mortar will hit more models therefore cause more wounds. You cannot ignore the strength of the mortar in the comparison. It would be like making the entire discussion about harming T6 models where S2 and S3 become the same.

Units of 35 men are rare, but units of 50 either deployed 10 wide and 5 deep (or a thinner file but more ranks) are common. If you got off the perfect large target shot on the perfect unit (at least 7 wide and 7 deep), 45 men will be hit. However, that is never going to happen hence why I've used 35 models for all my calculations.

I agree that a direct comparison of points is not the best way to compare units. However why do you think an engineer is still a good choice to accompany a mortar? He has to declare which warmachine he's going to help at the start of the shooting phase so either he has better things to do (helblaster) or in the other case, if you get an engineer just for the mortar, you just made your 100pt S2 warmachine 65pts more expensive. Totally not worth it.

And buffing the mortar with magic is all nice, but too situational. You have to use most of your power dice to do it, the opponent has to not dispell it, and then you have to hit with your mortar. So, far too random.

I don't think using an engineer for a mortar is a good choice, however my point was that each unit needs to be priced in mind of the other units in the army. A ranged unit is a lot more valuable to some armies compared to others.

The mortar does get better if you start syncing it with other units/magic, however without the buff it still isn't a terrible choice. Yes, it isn't our best option but it is far from a terrible choice. Compared to other 8th pieces, it doesn't price up too bad.

Linky from Estel's Cult of Ulric thread. I believe they are Thunderwolf Cavalry used for DGKs.

S3 small template is better than S2 large template.  A small template direct hit is going to hit 21 of your infantry in your regiment, barely less than a large template hitting that same regiment, and it's going to deal 50% more wounds.

However, the mortar costs MORE than the rock lobber.

Shooting at hordes? why aren't you taking the new helstorm?

Did you miss my post of numbers? I know mathshammer isn't everyones strong or favoured point, but if people are going to argue about the effectiveness of units then it needs to be taken into consideration. It is not going to deal "50%" more wounds. Even if they hit the same number of models, against T3 units the Rock Lobber wounds on 4+ (50% of models) and the Mortar 5+ (33%). 33 x 2 = 66% not 50%. So thats one point disproven.

21 models compared to 35 (45 if it hits its maximum but it never will). 35 --> 21 is 60% of models (or 46% if ever maximised). That is not "barely less" but quite a bit less. So thats two points disproven.

MarkoV, personally I will trust maths over your superior win ratio. Warhammer is based on maths and tactical skill. Like I've said, I don't think the Mortar is the best unit to take, I do think it lies down there in the bottom half of effectiveness per point. However, it isn't all doom and gloom as some people think.

In addition, T3 units the Mortar is better. T4 the Rock Lobber is better. T5 or higher, the Mortar is better. They will be both be wounding on 6+, and even if you ignore the additional models the Mortar will hit as T5 units will be smaller, the Armour Piercing of the Mortar gives it the win. Rock Lobber only wins against T4 and Monsters (due to higher centre hole and wounds).

I'll look into the Rocket Battery now.

Edit: The Helstorm does look good on paper. The AP gives it the edge over the Rock Lobber - and therefore the Mortar on T4. T3 it would cause 10.5 wounds, which is lower than the Mortar. However, the Helstorm *could* launch more rockets. However, it is less likely to be accurate and get that full hit. Remember, a small target only needs to scatter by 4 inch to miss the unit (obviously, this is worse cause scenario). I'm not going to attempt to work out the likelihood it will miss/models it will hit as that way lies only insanity. However, yes the Helstorm has the potential to kill more models, but I never said the Mortar was our best piece of artillery.

I might be wrong in my calculations but I will work it out again.

Large template = 5 inch = 12.7 cm (radius 6.35 cm)
Small template = 3 inch = 7.6 cm (radius 3.8 cm)
Infantry base = 20 mm = 2 cm

Templates centred on a base means distance from centre:
1st model = 1 cm
2nd model = 3 cm
3rd model = 5 cm (last model on small template)
4th model = 7 cm (last mode on large template)

Therefore, the small template can get five models across and five models up. This would be 25 models, however the corner models are not included so it is 21 models. So I was wrong there which means all my calculations were wrong.

A large template can get seven models across and seven models up. This would be 49 models, however the corner models are not included so it is 45 models. However, as you rarely see units that are either 7 across and 7 deep, I reduced this to either a horde unit (10 x 5) or a large bus unit (5 x 7) so 35 models.

Doing my calculations again:
Against Halberdiers:
Mortar - 12 wounds, 12 dead, 8.33 pts per kill.
Rock Lobber - 10.5 wounds, 8.75 dead, 9.71 pts per kill.

Against T4, 4+:
Mortar - 6 wounds, 4 dead, 25 pts per kill.
Rock Lobber - 7 wounds, 3.5 dead, 24.28 pts per kill.

So, Rock Lobber is slightly better per point against T4, 4+ units but Mortars are better against T3, 6+ units.