Topic: Greatswords ( again;)

[Warlord]

I actually thing it would look fantastic.
It's the historical way greatswords were actually used.

[LGH]

6x4 with griffon banner. BSB with war banner. Add a priest for buffs. Should be good but then again i’ve only played bretonnia so far in TOW

[commandant]

I deploy the 7 X 3 with 2 10 model detachments deployed 8 wide.   They take up a lot a real estate, pack a massive punch and are hard as nails to shift.   I also tend to add 2 level 2 wizards with a wizard's staff between the detachment and the parent unit. 

[Warlord]

8 wide detachments is just too wide IMO. I am curious how that functions consistently in a 2000 point game with the extra units and board space.

[Dazgrim]

Why are your opponents not charging the detachment?

[commandant]

If you place the detachments 4-5 inches back from the front of the parent they are difficult to charge because of wheeling and such increases the charge distance




Assuming at C and D are infantry it is sort of difficult for either of them to charge anything in this setup.   D1 is too far away from C to be within charge range and the wheel that is needed for D to clear A will also mean it needs another wheel to align with D1.   This is a difficulty for C and D because neither can really charge A alone and it is difficult for either to charge D1 or D2.   It seems the best thing to do in this case is for C and D to charge A together and accept the counter charges from D1 and D2.

Admittedly it is difficult for A to charge anything in this set up because D1 and D2 are so far back.   This is why I started putting 2 wizards into this setup to cast magic missiles and force C and D to do something.

So it looks something like this

[drweir4]

Detachments can work vs enemy infantry but it’s very rare to see enemy infantry especially where it’s not supported by something faster. What does that formation do vs anything with swiftstride?

Even in a mirror match vs empire I’m not particularly concerned by such a formation and it’s also very rare that the terrain gives enough space to set the whole thing up

The wizards are also super vulnerable to panic from the detachments dying or fleeing and from mobile shooting

[Dazgrim]

Detachments can work vs enemy infantry but it’s very rare to see enemy infantry especially where it’s not supported by something faster. What does that formation do vs anything with swiftstride?

Even in a mirror match vs empire I’m not particularly concerned by such a formation and it’s also very rare that the terrain gives enough space to set the whole thing up

The wizards are also super vulnerable to panic from the detachments dying or fleeing and from mobile shooting

This. Against infantry I can see where commandant is coming from, but unless all you face are dwarfs and skaven I don't think the argument holds water
The rules favour monsters, monstrous cavalry and cavalry in that order, all of which are fast and I've not seen an army without any of them.

[Skyros]

If you place the detachments 4-5 inches back from the front of the parent they are difficult to charge because of wheeling and such increases the charge distance

It's not difficult for cavalry at all.

Your infantry can charge 10 inches. The cavalry can set up 10.1 inches away from your parent block (or if they are feeling cheeky, 9 inches or something).   This means your parent block is the only one that could charge them. The detachments would be out of range.

If you put the detachments so far back, you are giving up any chance to use them offensively, you can only use them defensively.

And its quite trivial for cavalry with swiftstride to make a 13 or 14 inch charge.

It can be  difficult for slow  enemy infantry line to combat this. Particularly one that is outmatched in the shooting department, has no shooting or magic of their own to counter your detachments, and has to just march slowly forward into you.

But basically no one falls into that criteria. Maybe some really badly constructed Dwarf or Warriors of Chaos lists?

[commandant]

Cavalry can charge.   But remember that cavalry have not that many wounds.   If you set up your cavalry 10.01 inches from my parent block you need to deal with the fact that I'm going to fire 2 magic missiles at you both of which do 2d6 Str 4 with AP -1.   That spell has a 15 inch range.   Its a bit swingy but against units that don't have that many wounds it can be very strong.

I am also considering replacing one of the detachments with handgunners.   If you are in a cav heavy wound light environment then handgunners (likewise deployed 8 wide) could do a fair amount of damage.

[king ink]

Greatswords with drilled might be able to delivery a surprising punch on the charge. Or maybe not, really, since redress the ranks only lets you add 5 models to the frontage.

I do not agree.
The drilled special rule says: "Unless it is fleeing, a Drilled unit may perform a free redress the ranks manoeuvre immediately before moving" (page 167 rulebook).
The rulebook (page 125) when describing redress the ranks rule also says verbatim: "Units can redress the ranks by moving models to or from their rear ranks to decrease or increase the number of models in their front rank. A unit may use half of its Movement characteristic in order to deduct up to five models from its front rank or to add up to five models to its front rank".
This means that if a unit sacrifices its entire movement it can increase the number of models in the front rank up to 10.

The Redress The ranks rule therefore place a limit of ten on the number of models that can be moved to the front rank in a turn or vice versa.

In any case, I believe that the Drilled special rule is not even subject to this limit because unlike the Redress The Ranks rule, it occurs before moving and therefore does not consume any movement.

[drweir4]

Hang on, 2 lv2s?

Do you have a battle report of this actually working?

I’ve only seen lv2 twice and they were unusable as they easily got dispelled by lv4 and had no response every time

And per your diagram only 1 would have los at a time vs a cavalry unit going for one detachment. If it’s lv2 I assume you are using daemonology to get the summoning in which case you are going to get one shot with it at best which is easily dispelled. Then the cavalry charge, beat your detachment and either run them down or reform in the flank of the parent and maybe panic the wizard all for a very low cost compared to your whole set up

I have tried detachments in many real life games and every time I wish I had spent my points on anything else

[Skyros]

Cavalry can charge.   But remember that cavalry have not that many wounds.

Yeah but monstrous cavalry (the most dangerous kind) does.

If you set up your cavalry 10.01 inches from my parent block you need to deal with the fact that I'm going to fire 2 magic missiles at you both of which do 2d6 Str 4 with AP -1.

I mean, sure, but maybe the enemy mage is casting a 5 up ward save vs shooting or something on his unit. Or maybe both mages are just dispelling each others efforts and accomplish nothing. Or maybe he is casting magic missiles at your halberdier detachment.

Let's check the impact of 2d6 S4 AP-1 attacks at

(a) demigryph knights
(b) detachments

Vs demigryphs:
7 hits, 3.5 wounds, 1.1666 get through armor save.

So if you do it twice, you likely haven't even killed a single demigryph. If you roll slightly hot, you do.

vs halberdier detachments : 7 hits, 4.6666 wounds, no armor save. That's a panic check for the detachment.

If you do it twice, you've reduced the detachment to combat ineffectiveness. If you roll slightly hot, the unit is destroyed and everyone nearby takes panic checks.

Magic missiles aren't something that equalizes the playing field with cavalry vs detachments. Magic missiles are something that makes detachments almost worthless. Detachments are like the single best thing in the game to throw magic missiles at after fast cavalry.

They are ASLO a terrific target for otherwise fairly unimpactful BS3 S3 shooting.

[commandant]

If you put the detachments so far back, you are giving up any chance to use them offensively, you can only use them defensively.

Sure but the entire point is to use them defensively.   The wizards and other shooting make up the offensive part of the list.

[/quote]
And its quite trivial for cavalry with swiftstride to make a 13 or 14 inch charge.
[/quote]

Yes but a cavalry unit that is 10 inches in front of the parent unit is not 13/14 inches in front of the detachment.   



Admittedly you opponent is not going to be smack bang in front of your parent unit but the point still stands.

Cavalry can charge.   But remember that cavalry have not that many wounds.

Yeah but monstrous cavalry (the most dangerous kind) does.

I tend to focus my cannons on Monstrous cavalry.   The more I think about it the more I think that cannons are there for monstrous cavalry and other such 3/4 wound targets.

Hang on, 2 lv2s?

Do you have a battle report of this actually working?

I’ve only seen lv2 twice and they were unusable as they easily got dispelled by lv4 and had no response every time

And per your diagram only 1 would have los at a time vs a cavalry unit going for one detachment. If it’s lv2 I assume you are using daemonology to get the summoning in which case you are going to get one shot with it at best which is easily dispelled. Then the cavalry charge, beat your detachment and either run them down or reform in the flank of the parent and maybe panic the wizard all for a very low cost compared to your whole set up

I have tried detachments in many real life games and every time I wish I had spent my points on anything else

The diagram is kinda rough to give you a general idea rather than precise placement.   

If the level 2's have the wizard's staff they do reasonably well against level 4's because they win all draws.   

[Skyros]

There are two concepts here to consider when thinking of detachments.

One is action efficiency, which I believe commandant has  mentioned before.

The ideal is to remove an enemy unit from the table with a single activation. It's almost impossible to do this with shooting against a big knight unit with good armor save. But it's VERY easy to do vs detachments. If you activate your mage, and you throw two magic missiles into a 3-4 unit strong unit of demigryph knights and do 2 wounds, or even 3 wounds....you actually haven't accomplished anything yet. You still have a big threat to deal with. If you activate a mage and throw two magic missiles into a 10-12 strong halbderdier detachment, you wipe it out and you've earned poiunts and removed an enemy maneuver piece from the board.

Taking detachments vastly improves your opponents action efficiency. This is generally  not a good thing.

The other concept is target saturation. Namely - you take lots units with a similar profile, and no units with a different profile, in order to limit the effectiveness of some portion the enemy shooting. Suppose the enemy brought a lot of mortars, but you only brought single wound models with good armor deployed in small units. The enemy mortar is going to be almost worthless. The blast hits almost no one, and the central hole never gets more than a single wound. Or suppose the enemy brought tons and tons of S3 shooting, and then you brought only big blocks of guys that really don't care if they lose a rank or two in the back. The goal is to make enemy shooting not impactful.

In general, small units of S3 shooting like many armies bring to satisfy their core, or come incidentally on fast cav, etc, is not impactful to the game at all. There are simply no good targets where their shots matter.  But it is VERY impactful to empire detachments, because they have low armor save and low toughness and low unit size. Every hit has a decent chance of being a wound, and you only need a couple wounds to possibly force a panic check. And just a couple wounds can dramatically decrease the unit effectivness. By bringing empire detachments, you are increasing the value of otherwise valueless enemy shooting. This is also in general not a good thing.

[Skyros]

If the level 2's have the wizard's staff they do reasonably well against level 4's because they win all draws.

It depends on what you mean by reasonable.

An L2 with the wizards staff trying to cast the summoning has a 38% chance of success

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerFantasy/comments/199qwd2/a_statistical_analysis_of_wizard_levels/

If you're relying on casting two such spells your chance of success is 14%.

[The Peacemaker]

Due to 'no step up', large units of infantry with low initiative are very bad if you do not plan to keep going wide.
With stubborn, you can start with small width to get in good position. Drilled can get you to 10 wide and charge. But give ground + drilled can let you go another +5 wide, same with FBIGO. Pretty much only tactic is to go very wide. If you trying to chase static combat res then it's best to switch armies.

But the there is the fact that enemy MSU can just multicharge and wipe out your front rank.
If this game didn't have 'no step up' then perhaps large units of low initiative units could work. But everyone amd theor dog loves that rules but then still get sad when it ruins the gameplay for blocked infantry....but they still love the rule for some crazy reason. ...like Stockholm syndrome or something.

[Tiberius]

Due to 'no step up', large units of infantry with low initiative are very bad if you do not plan to keep going wide.
With stubborn, you can start with small width to get in good position. Drilled can get you to 10 wide and charge. But give ground + drilled can let you go another +5 wide, same with FBIGO. Pretty much only tactic is to go very wide. If you trying to chase static combat res then it's best to switch armies.

But the there is the fact that enemy MSU can just multicharge and wipe out your front rank.
If this game didn't have 'no step up' then perhaps large units of low initiative units could work. But everyone amd theor dog loves that rules but then still get sad when it ruins the gameplay for blocked infantry....but they still love the rule for some crazy reason. ...like Stockholm syndrome or something.

Yeah, I don't love the "no step up rule" either but I didn't play 8th so I don't have that PTSD like many people do.  I find it incredibly stupid that spears can't even attack because of step up.  Seems to really defeat the purpose of spears, since they only work the turn you have been charged, and generally you don't be striking first in that scenario.

[Rodman49]

You all are chumps for being in love with step up.  Step up reduced counterplay and was shit game mechanic.  Now people have counters for large low initiative units.

Also @Tiberius - spears are fine - basically you fight with the first two ranks - they have to kill all of your first two ranks to remove your attacks (when charged).  Honestly they are the best infantry weapon in most circumstances.

[Athiuen]

You all are chumps for being in love with step up.  Step up reduced counterplay and was shit game mechanic.  Now people have counters for large low initiative units.

[Skyros]

Step up was bad for the game but I enjoyed it, because it was nice to actually be able to attack with empire state troops.
I attacked with them more in 8th than all other editions combined

[Warlord]

You all are complaining about step up, however it served a purpose for the meta of 8th edition.
It didn’t serve a purpose in 6th and 7th because static CR was king.

In TOW static CR isn’t as powerful, like in 8th edition. Killing power is more important. However without step up, we cannot kill anything. And with static CR not important, we can’t win combats.

Thats half the reason why our infantry suck this edition.
Overpriced is s big part of the other half.

[drweir4]

CR is super important in TOW, it’s just that infantry blocks don’t reliably give as much and tend to lose more guys and therefore counteract any limited benefit in static CR over cavalry or monsters

The fact that now each unit with us5 gives +1 and infantry mostly only give a max of 2 rank bonus means the average msu unit only has to have 2 more cr from kills to be equaling infantry cr

For most enemies they are way more likely to kill 2 more state troops that knights for example and that’s not even factoring in that the knights will usually be charging and so are more likely to do damage and take less (just as a comparative example for empire)

[The Peacemaker]

You all are complaining about step up, however it served a purpose for the meta of 8th edition.
It didn’t serve a purpose in 6th and 7th because static CR was king.

In TOW static CR isn’t as powerful, like in 8th edition. Killing power is more important. However without step up, we cannot kill anything. And with static CR not important, we can’t win combats.

Thats half the reason why our infantry suck this edition.
Overpriced is s big part of the other half.

You explain it the best.

8th edition was bloody, scored of troops getting slaughtered just like in the stories. I enjoyed it. Even though it was a bit too killy. ...especially after the 8th edition army books came out.

6th edition had combat res which I liked but units panicked and broke too easily. With no step up, I found it too chess like with auto deleting units. It wasn't killy enough!  This made me quit after 2 intro games.

ToW I do enjoy but that's because I embrace the Line formation(with drilled mechanic) And I embrace MSU(can't step up if all models are already in the front rank).
This means that very few infantry can go in blocks. Only ones with access to drilled or very high initiative, or very good anvil stats. And I don't expect to field an entire army of these infantry, max 25% of my list.

All of this means that many units are dead entries. And that's just how gamesworkshop games are.

[Minsc]

The charge was almost completely irrelevant in 8th due to step-up, which removed alot of tactical aspects from the game. (That the charge actually matters again is one of my favorite aspects of TOW.)

Of course, Steadfast and Horde didn't exactly help either, it's evident at this point that 8th focused on pushing big units = GW sells more models, because all of a sudden you didn't want 20-25 spearmen in a unit, you wanted 40-50, and the tactical aspects of the game got diminished as combats just turned into a slog where the only thing that mattered was who could buff their units the most and/or rolled the best and who ran out of models first.