Topic: It's been nearly a year - are we happy?

[phillyt]

@PhillyT, I still use dragon ogres far more than I do minotaurs.  A couple of reasons for this.  Minotaurs are only average as monster units go.  They are nothing special but are worth the points upgrade from chaos ogres.  Dragon Ogres simply rock.  I use four of them in my slaanesh army and they tear apart anything in hand to hand.  Normally I give them great weapons, but occasionally its additional hand weapons.  Minotaurs have less wounds, no save really unless you go nurgle and not being able to flee is a crippler [for slaanesh marked ones].  Special slots are more competitive in my army which embraces all 3 chaos lists, so i have daemons and beast units in my mortal army, and they mostly come from special.

Our halberdiers are probably at best poor.  At 4 points they would be acceptable as fodder units and I would take them more often.  As it is I normally do take one unit as it lessens the crys of cheese when a tank rolls onto the table as well.  Free company are not quite the same as halberdiers in that they cannot be a parent unit.

I can understand why you would use them if you run Mortals, since those special dry up fast.  I run beasts, so I get all my herds and chariots as cores then take a chosen unit for special (sometimes) and/or 2 Daemonettes units and a pair of Minotaur unirs (or take 4 if I ave the Slaanbull).  That being said, I actually don't use my Minos that much in my Slaanesh list, mostly just in my Khorne one.  Dragon Ogres are tanks, but I just don't find them worth their point cost.  Yeah they get a good armor save and can legitamatly use additional hand weapons since they have a natural S5 (I see S5 as the gateway stat to using Additional hand weapons), but they are too expensive for the roles I usually give to my multi-wound units: Soft Target mop up.  I know they work well as flankers, but I prefer chariots... like 7 of them... and about 120 beastmen...

As far a 4 point Halberdeirs that would never happen.  As far as whatever formula GW claims they use, baseline humans are 3 points, with additional HW being 2, lightarmor being 1, halberds and spears being 1.  Then you get the point costs we know and love.  I again ask why people are so against Halberdiers but are fine with Free Company who I think are abysmal.

Dendo: I would think if you were fielding halberdiers you would want them wider than 3, since the only thing they are good for is their S4 and the 3x3 is a defensive deployment.

Phil

[Dendo Star]

Dendo: I would think if you were fielding halberdiers you would want them wider than 3, since the only thing they are good for is their S4 and the 3x3 is a defensive deployment.

No, they are also able to get a 4+ AS, just like any other State Troop.  They can use their H/W+Shield for this.  3x3 minimalizes contact so they are as effective as Swordsmen.  And, if you are going against Elves or Gobbos or humans the you have 3 S4 attacks ready to go.

[Johan Willhelm]

No, they are also able to get a 4+ AS, just like any other State Troop.  They can use their H/W+Shield for this.  3x3 minimalizes contact so they are as effective as Swordsmen.  And, if you are going against Elves or Gobbos or humans the you have 3 S4 attacks ready to go.

By Sigmar you're right! I appreciate I'm probably the last to notice this . . . You just take the hit on the WS4 and mosey on. Just checking you choose weapon usage at the beginning of combat and you keep that option for the est of that combat (untill one's slaughtered or legged it) and then you can choose again for the next combat? Hmmmm . . .

[Helgrund]

5/10

I agree with most on the good new additions and minor fixes but also missed opportunities and the huntsmen and EC topics.

The changes in fluff are not great. Downplaying the other empire gods. And engineers.

[Dendo Star]

No, they are also able to get a 4+ AS, just like any other State Troop.  They can use their H/W+Shield for this.  3x3 minimalizes contact so they are as effective as Swordsmen.  And, if you are going against Elves or Gobbos or humans the you have 3 S4 attacks ready to go.

By Sigmar you're right! I appreciate I'm probably the last to notice this . . . You just take the hit on the WS4 and mosey on. Just checking you choose weapon usage at the beginning of combat and you keep that option for the est of that combat (untill one's slaughtered or legged it) and then you can choose again for the next combat? Hmmmm . . .

That is correct Johan.  It is also mighty effective on Ogres, believe it or not!

[Captain Tineal]

I think people accept Free Companies as fodder, because that is what the fluff dictates PhillyT.  If fluff said Swordsmen were the most used troops of the Empire, nobody would have any problem with the Halberdiers any more.  The problem comes from the contrast between fluff and rules/stats I believe.

I don't really dig the fluff... I just want to make little platic men and monsters die.  It would be nice if the list had a little more internal balance though.

[Eglard]

I would give 6/10. I would have rated it to 8 or 7 if there was no war altar or if it cost 75 points more. It is just too powerfull. The greatswords loosing their magic banner sucks also. About halberdiers I have allways found them usefull. I take allways a block of 25. Strength 4 is quite good and when you take shields also you have a good multipurpose unit. I agree that greatswords or swordsmen do the job better but halberdiers are quite good in dealing damage and can also take it when used correctly.

[Davros]

I rate it has 8/10 as mentioned before the new toys make it nice  .I'm not happy with what they have done with the Middenland fluff and army lists .

[Big Time]

I think people accept Free Companies as fodder, because that is what the fluff dictates PhillyT.  If fluff said Swordsmen were the most used troops of the Empire, nobody would have any problem with the Halberdiers any more.  The problem comes from the contrast between fluff and rules/stats I believe.

As far a 4 point Halberdeirs that would never happen.  As far as whatever formula GW claims they use, baseline humans are 3 points, with additional HW being 2, lightarmor being 1, halberds and spears being 1.

Fluffwise, it makes sense the Empire is falling all over itself to develop gunpowder weapons. If you lived in a world where your standard foot soldier was out classed by 95% of all other enemy foot soldiers, you'd want guns too.

I thought the average human fighter, at WS3, S3, T3, I3 was the standard by which other troops are measured, with half rising above and half falling below as far as effectiveness being the goal. Or if not, at least being on the same level as the average human. But this is not the case. In fact, the standard soldier in the Empire has lost it's "standard" rating, with Swordsmen (with superior stats) becoming the standard in a competitive army.

For the book, a solid C (7-7.5). It is a pretty balanced list (though I thought 6th Ed. was too), we'll se how it stands up when more Armies get re-worked.

[Crimsonsphinx]

It would have been better if halberdiers had gained the swordsmens statline and heavy armour and swordsmen being cheaper with a standard human statline.  That may just have balanced them out with each other.

The problem with us having a pile of handguns is it isn't terribly fun to play against, and is IMO a failure in our list.  We get dinked in all tourneys that involve comp score as soon as we bring half of our warmachines and gimmicky units.  We are nearly forced to pick fluffy poor units like halberdiers and engineers to try to swing our score back.

[dabber]

I thought the average human fighter, at WS3, S3, T3, I3 was the standard by which other troops are measured, with half rising above and half falling below as far as effectiveness being the goal. Or if not, at least being on the same level as the average human. But this is not the case.

When was it ever the case?
Goblins and skeletons are worse than humans, but nothing else of significance is, and those are only worse on the insignificant stats of Ws, I.  Nor do I think you can claim a skeleton is worse than a human soldier on the overall effectiveness scale.  I didn't play before 6th edition, but in my time a human soldier has never approached average among basic troops.

[Big Time]

When was it ever the case?

It isn't, and hasn't been for a while. That is what I am bitching about.

Goblins and skeletons are worse than humans, but nothing else of significance is, and those are only worse on the insignificant stats of Ws, I.  Nor do I think you can claim a skeleton is worse than a human soldier on the overall effectiveness scale.  I didn't play before 6th edition, but in my time a human soldier has never approached average among basic troops.

I apologize for not making myself clearer, but you and I are saying the same thing, methinks.

It would have been better if halberdiers had gained the swordsmens statline and heavy armour and swordsmen being cheaper with a standard human statline.  That may just have balanced them out with each other.

Yes, a quick fix, but would be contributing to the overall problem (of army creep) rather than being a solution.

[Crimsonsphinx]

Goblins are worse, but are no longer a viable army given the points hike on them and the improvement of orc troops via chopper upgrades.  So you wont see any serious competitive armies comprising of goblins around any longer.  However we are stuck with our infantry.

Skeletons are poorer than our men, but a lot stronger due to their rules.  Arguably marauders are worse than our infantry due to base size and there are a number of armies that possess worse troops [goblins, gnoblars, skaven slaves] than us.  Its just they are not common within the lists or don't provide the same role as our line infantry.

[dabber]

It isn't, and hasn't been for a while. That is what I am bitching about.

Guess I should have been more clear on the question part - when was that ever true?
Elves and Dwarfs and Chaos are pretty central to the Warhammer world concept, so I assume they have been around forever.  I think it would be difficult for their basic troopers not to always be better than human basic troopers.  That is enough to outnumber (by army/type) any wimpy stuff (ex goblins) that falls below humans.  So how could humans have ever been average?

I think humans being average was never part of the Warhammer world concept.  Far as I can tell, it was invented by players and our natural bias towards humans. Most earth-bound warhammer players claim to be human, after all .

[steveb]

but why do so many orcs play with bretonian armies?  steveb

[cisse]

The problem with us having a pile of handguns is it isn't terribly fun to play against, and is IMO a failure in our list.  We get dinked in all tourneys that involve comp score as soon as we bring half of our warmachines and gimmicky units.  We are nearly forced to pick fluffy poor units like halberdiers and engineers to try to swing our score back.

That's something I've seen happening too. Bring two cannons, a helblaster, and a few handgunners, and you've got a gunline. Right.

Bret players can come with 5 fully decked out lances and claim they're playing according to fluff, Dwarf players do the same with the anvil and just as much shooting. And I expect HE players will do it too after the new book comes out: I can already see HE armies with two small core units and 6 special and 4 rare units. But if we bring a WA or a STank, even if it's in a balanced list...

[Crimsonsphinx]

2x10 archers, special full of dragon princes.  All characters on dragons.  Look a fluffy Caledor list

We suffer because shooting lists are very 1 tricke and not accepted as fair and balanced as they do either very well or very badly against most armies.  We needed to get a bit more to aid our foot soldiers and less warmachines really.

[McKnight]

2x10 archers, special full of dragon princes.  All characters on dragons.  Look a fluffy Caledor list

We suffer because shooting lists are very 1 tricke and not accepted as fair and balanced as they do either very well or very badly against most armies.  We needed to get a bit more to aid our foot soldiers and less warmachines really.

Arent warmachines aiding our foot troops?..

Yea i notice this as well.. If we bring a steam tank its cheesy...

[phillyt]

2x10 archers, special full of dragon princes.  All characters on dragons.  Look a fluffy Caledor list

We suffer because shooting lists are very 1 tricke and not accepted as fair and balanced as they do either very well or very badly against most armies.  We needed to get a bit more to aid our foot soldiers and less warmachines really.

I would agree with that assessment, though we can drop alot of shooting and still have a core full of infantry (three units of it).  3 or 4 Cannon, 2 Helstorms, and a couple handgunner detachments along with spearmen and swordsmen blocks led by war priests.  Could get nasty... especially with some flagellants...

Phil

[Lindemann]

Boy oh boy has this subject gotten a lot of replies - too many for me to read so I apologize in advance if I'm repeating what's been previously written...

NEB gets a 6/10 from me.

In short I feel that nothing got better, many things got worse and the reduction in points cost for various units wasn't enough to offset those units that got hit. I am still amazed that Huntsmen have to be 10 men strong, do not get the use of longbows now and still have a BS3. What kind of huntsmen are they?? If by trade you're a huntsmen it must mean that you're better than a regular bowman, and so why not give 'em BS4 and a longbow? I never use them now.

Making IC knights Special choices really hurt - and with all the other great choices in that slot I have recently found myself deploying 2150pt armies with either no knights or maybe just a small 5 man unit of 'nilla knights to act as a support for a large foot unit.

Dropping the flaggies to T3 was awful and unless they get into combat quickly they're frequently 200pts of freebies to any shooty army. That said, I have to admit that with the new rules and sacrifices etc, they often perform very well in combat if they get their charge off.

The Helblaster has been retired from my army - too expensive for the amount of times it self-destructs - 11 Handgunners are way more useful for the equivalent cost.

Mechanical Horse = ass.

Pigeon Bombs = ass.

Halberdiers - now just used as detachments.

Where oh where are pikemen for the Empire? If this army is supposed to echo the feel of a Germanic army circa 15th/16th century then where are the freakin pike? This makes no sense to me.

Greatswords missing banners = ass.

etc etc etc

I'm not happy about what happened to the Empire and what really ticks me off is when I hear all the juicy stuff the HE are getting!!

I used to work for GW back in 2000 when 6th edition was being released and I distinctly remember the concept of moving away from Herohammer being touted in favor of large Core armies...but when I look at the new army books there seems to be a strong leaning back towards expensive heroes, special characters and less and less core troops.

OK - that's my 10 cents worth.

I feel better now - 

[Duke Igthorn]

I'm pretty happy with the new book. Maybe 6.5 out of 10. What would I change??

1-Halberdiers still arent going to be that common. They should have done something...heavy armor, WS4,LD8, 1 point cheaper, make them a mandatory 1+ choice..... something...

2-Huntsmen should be allowed to be bought in groups of 5. It makes sense, a small "hunting party".

3-One unit of Greatswords should have been allowed a magic standard.

4-Master Engineers should have been 10-15 points cheaper. A Master Engineer should be BS5. The Empire should have "apprentice" Engineers like the Dwarves. That option could have fixed the Helblaster too, by giving it a BS4.

5-Pistoliers need their special fusilade rule back.

6- Steam tank should have a 5+ ward save.

7-White Wolf cavalry hammers should be +2S on the charge.

[Reynard_of_Bogenhafen]

I know -whinge whinge-

now thats thats done and i've weighed up every pro and con as everyone else has before me,

And at the end of the day I'm doing better in tournaments, feeling a lot more confident with my army and the new book functions better to my style of play than any of the old ones did, and my WALTER is still on the painting table and has been for 10 months lol.

For me the viable usage of warrior priests out weighed the cutting of a lot of things, as i said my list benefitted most from these changes, I use my tank with a heap more thought now as opposed to just throwing it willy nilly across the table, some say nerfing I hate to say it but i prefer the new incarnation, the ability to face the sucker any direction i want with out use steam points has killed me many chaos knights and various monsters.

for me 8/10