Topic: Grand Battle 10k: Empire Tactical Thread

[Forumite]

Anyone here?

[dseevers1854]

I think a 10,000 point game is intriguing, but it's a lot to chew. I think we would do well to break this large army up into contingents and have 3 or 4 people working on different aspects of our army with each having an allotment of points with the grand goal being synergy between each contingent. Just off the top of my head I'm thinking an artillery group, a 1+ armor group, and a foot soldiers and support group. Thoughts on going this way?

[dseevers1854]

As an example, here is a rough sketch artillery line I worked up.

Battle Wizard (LVL 2) Fire

Master Engineer X4

10 Archers Battle Wizard goes here

10 Handgunners X2

Great Cannon X4

Helblaster Volley Gun X 4

Steam Tank X4

Grand Total: 2570 points

Again, this is just to give an example of how the idea in my previous post would work. Not every contingent would necessarily require an equal number of points. In the end, though, each contingent combined would need to meet the points requirements for the full army.

[Forumite]

Would that artillery line be able to hold their own? They will most likely have fast troops that will be up in our lines T2, you need something to stop them. Also the list has 3 problems, lots of small units (hard to deploy and move), it steals all the cannons from the other 2 flanks, and it only has 1 wizard. With 3 separate winds, we must be able to use those precious PD and DD in all parts of the battlefield. I think we need a minimum of 2 wizards in each flank, with one or two extra mobile long-range support mages in the middle that can take over a side in case one flank loses all their wizards.

[Forumite]

Draft of the Cavalry side, mobile, horde of knights, Beasts and Metal

General, barded warhorse, FPA, shield, lance
Wizlord, lvl 4 Beasts, barded warhorse, MR3
Warrior Priest, barded warhorse, HA, shield
Wizard, lvl 2 Metal, barded warhorse
Captain, Pegasus, FPA, lance, shield, Dragonhelm

38 IC-Knights, FC, lance+shield
18 IC-Knights, FC, lance+shield
10 Outriders, Mus
10 Outriders, Mus
5 Pistoliers, Mus
5 Pistoliers, Mus
Stank
Stank

3330p

[dseevers1854]

Forumite, I don't think the contingents have to be separated out necessarily, though they certainly could be. I think the artillery contingent would be an exception, though. It would definitely need to be dispersed among the other units on the battlefield.

Also, I'm sure we can do better than the list I put up. I just threw that together to give an example of how the contingents would work. Each would focus on a certain element of the battle. In this case, the artillery focuses on shooting.

[dseevers1854]

For those of you interested, let me attempt to better articulate what I'm thinking with the contingents as there may still be some confusion. The contingents are a way for us to better manage the otherwise overwhelming task of creating a 10,000 point army. Each lieutenant would focus on creating one of the various contingents. Examples that we may use include artillery, cavalry, and foot troops. Each contingent would need to provide synergy with the others. And combined all the contingents would need to fit within the points distribution rules.

Other points of clarification include: 1) The contingents would not have to be fielded in separate zones unless we felt it best to do so. 2) There would still only be one General and one BSB for the entire army as per the rules of Warhammer. 3) Each lieutenant would be responsible for the actions of his/her contingent during the battle though advice on those actions should be gladly accepted. 4) As much as possible, each contingent should try to stay within its particular specialization with minimal overlap in order to ensure that each aspect of our army is maximized.

[Forumite]

I think it might be a good idea to build parts of the list, then put them together in the end, because building a 10k list is quite a big task. However, I think it´s better for the general responsible for an area to control all aspects of that area. He´s got the task to kill the enemy in front of him as best he can, and his plan to do that will require magic, artillery, melee, cav, all of it. I don´t want to take away that control from him. He´s probably got a better idea about which unit is a problem each turn, which one needs to be shot NOW in order for the magic, charges and combat to work out correctly.

As for the different parts of the army, how about this separation? The last one is there to coordinate magic items.
Infantry
Cavalry
Artillery+Shooting
Diverters+Vanguard
Lords+Heroes

[dseevers1854]

Well, as it stands, you and I, Forumite, seem to be the only ones still interested in holding the Empire together so I think this will likely turn into a joint venture between you and I. I like the division you've created except I'm not quite sure about separating out the Lords and Heroes from their respective contingents. As an example, I tend to think that Pegasus Captains are a pretty important element within the Cavalry division, and they should be accounted for as part of that. Same for Master Engineers with artillery.

Why don't we just break out the divisions in terms of Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery & Shooting, and Diverters & Vanguard and add heroes and lords into each division as necessary. Once we bring the different divisions back to the table, we can tweak if we've over spent or acquired the same items on a particular hero or lord.

Next question is which two elements do you feel most comfortable building? Second question is what do you think are comfortable points allotments for each division? When I had initially started thinking about splitting the army up like this I hadn't included a Vanguard division. My thought had been 2500 points of Artillery, 3500 points of Cavalry, and 4000 points of Infantry with the General and BSB included in that allotment. Do you think stealing 500 points from the Infantry would be enough for Vanguard and whatever wasn't used there could be added back into the Infantry?

[dseevers1854]

Another approach to consider, given that you like the idea of having complete control of all elements of a particular zone would be to simply divide the points in half and have each of us create an army. If we wanted to go that route, we could look for synergy between two distinct, Empire builds, perhaps a cavalry based list and and steadfast infantry list.

[Vamoose]

Well, I'm very rough around the edges, but I would be happy to contribute what little I can! We can't have dseevers and Forumite doing all the heavy lifting, now can we?

I think a solid infantry center followed by a heavy cavalry flank and big guns and light infantry on another is a good plan. While we're going to be operating all under one banner, it makes sense that each flank needs to be able to handle itself. Accordingly, possibly consider assigning STanks or even possibly (gasp, shock) Flagellants to the artillery's flank, so as to hold up the Chaotic goonies as long as possible?

Alternatively, we could field a solid infantry center, then rather than stacking one flank with cav and the other with artillery, we split it up, so we don't run the risk of letting the enemy just try and ignore the flank with the guns. Granted, they've got a long range, but from the sounds of it we're considering a big board...

I think in regards to Lords & Heroes we should all be drafting up our lists here in this thread, so we can coordinate who gets what. So we treat it like we're building three separate armies, but with one core requirement, special limit, rare limit, and so on and so forth. Separating all characters out seems like a bit of a hassle.

From my understanding there's some pretty titanic generals against us, lads. It's gonna take everything we've got!

[dseevers1854]

Well, whatever we're going to do, we need to get on with it. From the sound of things, you (Vamoose) and Forumite seem a little more comfortable running three coordinated but well rounded zones. If we want to run that route, I do suggest, and I think there is agreement that the center flank be comprised primarily of steadfast infantry blocks supported by wizards, wagons, and maybe some light shooting. Both flanks could provide mobile cavalry and artillery.

Our only problem with this method is that we're locking ourselves into a deployment plan before we've seen where they will be going. If they drop heavy in two of the three zones and ignore the third, then a good sized portion of our army will spend the game gobbling up easy points and not having a strong impact on things. I guess that's the risk.

If we follow the plan, as scratched out above, does a 3000, 4000, 3000 point system seem right? I'll be happy running any of the three but would probably be most comfortable with one of the flanks.

[dseevers1854]

Riders of the North

Core: 1002 Points
6 Knights w/ Lances & Champion

10 Knights w/ Lances & Champion & Musician

23 Inner Circle Knights w/ Lances & Full Command w/ Standard of Discipline

Special: 940 Points
5 Demigryph Knights w/ Musician & Standard bearing the Standard of Eternal Flame

2 X 5 Demigryph Knights w/ Musician & Standard

Heroes: 266 Points
LVL 2 Battle Wizard w/ Lore of Beasts & Scroll of Shielding on a Barded Warhorse

Captain of the Empire w/ Full Plate Armor, Lance, Shield, Potion of Foolhardiness & Dragonhelm

Lords: 787 Points
Arch Lector w/ Shield, Armor of Destiny, Crown of Command & Luckstone on a Barded Warhorse

Grand Marshal w/ Shield, The Other Trickster's Shard & Runefang on Barded Warhorse

LVL 4 Battle Wizard Lord w/ Lore of Life & Powerstone & Tailsman of Preservation on a Pegasus

The Arch Lector and Grand Marshal ride out with the Inner Circle Knights. The LVL 2 and LVL 4 ride solo behind the other forces, providing their spells where needed. Hoping to use maneuverability to pick the battles I want and avoid the ones I don't. Weaknesses come in the form of no Stanks, Cannons, or HBVG, but that's also what makes it fluffy; these guys are from a wasteland near the edges of chaos. Gunpowder isn't in high supply there, but there's no lack for courage or the desire to die and honorable death on the battlefield.

[swampsheep]

I'm not totally out of this one though I did have a few days inactivity.

I still think there is something to be had in a strong, offensive flank and a weak, defensive flank and think that venue is more interesting to explore than a balanced battleline (I'm thinking 2500-3500-4000). I could come up with suggestions for the army collectively, but I actually think the proces should be something like this:

1) Appoint general.
2) Distribute zones between captains (and also roles; defensive flank, offensive flank, normal center - or if the general prefers some other, overarching strategy, then distribute according to this).
3) Captains come up with wishes for their zone.
4) General come up with suggestion for army list based on wishlist.
5) Dialogue and adjustments in relation to the list.

[Forumite]

I´d prefer 1000p of diverters/chaff/outriders, and leave the Cav, Infantry and Art groups free to focus on their main role. Diverters can then be assigned as needed.

dseevers, I like the addition of DGs, but I think 22 and 10 knights won´t cut it. I expect them to bring units of 8+ Skullcrushers and units of 20 Chaos Knights, we can´t stand up to something like that with small units of knights and DGs.

PSBs, the BSBs with range of one unit, I think both of them should be in the cavalry detachment, with the army BSB staying with the infantry in the middle.

[Forumite]

On second thought, I think we need more diverters. I considered units of 10 archers with 2x5 detachments, very cheap, but they will quickly get rolled, and gets in the way of our cav and infantry. Instead I´d like these vanguarding ahead and making life difficult for the advancing hordes.

Diverter Contingent
4 units of 10 Outriders w/ Musician
6 units of 5 Pistoliers w/ Musician

Lands at 1480p Special

[Forumite]

For Infantry, I included General, BSB, two wagons and 2 spare wizards. The plan is to send forward the Halberdiers and buff them while they fight, then when they break, send forward the Greatswords with characters. Wizards are meant to stay out of the fighting.

Infantry Contingent

Arch Lector (General), Armor of 2+ Armor Save, MR3, Shield
Wizard Lord, lvl 4 Beasts, Pegasus, Staff of Sorcery, 4+ Ward

Captain, BSB, FPA, Shield, Sword of Anti-Heroes
Wizard, lvl 2 Fire, Warhorse, Power Stone
Wizard, lvl 2 Shadow, Warhorse, Dispel Scroll

60 Halberdiers, FC
60 Halberdiers, FC
60 Greatswords, FC, Standard of Discipline
60 Greatswords, FC, AP-banner

Celestial Hurricanum
Luminark of Hysh

Total 3381p
519p Lords
392p Heroes
780p Core
1440p Special
250p Rare

We need to make sure the Core is filled with knights and handgunners/crossbowmen. I consider Crossbowmen, might be a good idea, since they have 30'' range, over 24'' AP of the Handgunners. Depends, we start 30'' across from eachother the first turn, they WILL move their full move towards us, which should put them at 22'' either way.

[dseevers1854]

Okay. Let's get this thing cooking. It sounds like we're all pretty much in agreement on the steadfast center and having at least one aggressive flank. So does anyone particularly want to lead this thing? I will, if no one else is really passionate about it, but if someone has their heart set on it, I don't want to steal the thunder.

Either way, let's get rolling.

[Vamoose]

Well then I suppose if this is the way we're dividing things up, what's left is a big nasty gun battery then, right? Where we are so far is, assuming we're roughly using the lists posted above:

1306p Lords
658p Heroes
1782p Core
3860p Special
250p Rare
7856p Total

Leaving 2144 points for the big guns, of which 718 points needs to be Core. I'll have a draft up and running in a few minutes.

[dseevers1854]

I don't know that the lists above are confirmed. As far as I was aware, they were just up for consideration. There were some items duplicated amongst those lists, and I think we need to consider the overall synergy between them. We've still got a good bit of work to do, but first things first...does anyone want to lead this army? I'll do it if no one else feels confident stepping up and would rather just offer feedback.

[Vamoose]

Well I wouldn't feel comfortable leading the entire operation, but I'm definitely up for flank command if that's what we need. (Empire generals, where are you?)

Edit: That being said, we really do seem to be the only three (or four, counting swampsheep) running this. We'll see how things pan out today I think - you never know who pops up late. But the situation does seem to be that the command is yours, dseevers.

[Forumite]

I want us to have a strong battery of cannons, HBVG and Stanks, so feel free to expand the artillery department. We can cut down on other units, like Vanguard.

I'd like to change the Cav part though, bigger units of knights and DGs.

[Vamoose]

Well, trying to squeeze in all the guns we want, AND trying to take some things to bolster the line a little so the guns aren't completely overwhelmed, ends up being pretty expensive. As an example...

The Gaze of Nuln

Lords - 200p

Level 4 Wizard, Lore of Shadow

Heroes - 213p

Captain of the Empire, Personal Standard, full plate armor, shield, Helm of the Skavenslayer
Master Engineer x2

Core - 420p

20 Swordsmen, 2x5 Archer Detachment x2

Special - 920p

Great Cannon x6
Mortar x2

Rare - 1230p

Steam Tank x3
Helblaster Volley Gun x4

Total - 2993p

Also, for the diverters, I'd like to see some Captasi make it into the mix. They've got a lot more mobility than our Fast Cav, are cheaper, and can be kitted out pretty nastily.

[swampsheep]

I don't think we will make a coherent and functioning army list like this. The ideas are nice in themselves, but they don't take into consideration our tactics or who is to play them and have duplicate items across lists. I do not think we will get a working 10.000p army out of this.

Let's break down the task of creating the army in the same manner as we intend to break down the actual running of the battle and do something along the line of what I suggested above.

I would like to repeat my suggestion above; let's start by picking a general and assign captaincies (is that even a word?). Let the general set out an overall strategy based on what he thinks would work and give the captains their overall assignments based on that. Then let the captains make "wish lists" for armies and then let the general make an army lists that is coherent and try to take into consideration these wishes. From there on we can make adjustments.

On a side note, it would also help tremendously to have a stronger knowledge about how the objectives are going to work. It is a bit hard to hand out assignments when the objectives and how to achieve them is not known.

I would support dseevers1854 for general. I would prefer leading a flank myself.

[Vamoose]

Agreed with swampsheep. We need to coordinate everything together.