Topic: Results from a tournament.

[Dazgrim]

I'm away that it's one event. I'm aware that we don't have the army lists, but when there are 2 Empire players in a pool of 25 and they come 24th and 25th it is at least suggestive.

https://woehammer.com/2024/05/01/top-three-old-world-lists-for-the-square-based-gt-2-2000pts/?amp=1

[Sir Falo]

On the other hand last two weeks:
Squares@TTW                                     An Empire player came second of 14  (with quite alot of infantry)
Battles in the Border Princes                 7th of 56 (demi heavy with a war altars, no wizards)
Fantasia fanatic                                    12 of 28 (my result, not fantastic but not bad)
OLD WORLD RTT by SQUARE HAMMER   Empire player won, 24 players (Balanced army with a focus on the knights side)


Then there is a lot of bad results from the empire, not saying we are a strong army. But you can play the empire and get good results.

[Dazgrim]

I'm not saying that the Empire can't win, demonstrably they can. But to win you have to be using a small fraction of the list, primarily DGK.

That's not good for the health of the army.

[Footpatrol2]

You could use knights with greatweapons instead of dgk. They serve the same role but are not as costly effective and has less AS but can get better character support.

[commandant]

I'm not saying that the Empire can't win, demonstrably they can. But to win you have to be using a small fraction of the list, primarily DGK.

That's not good for the health of the army.

Or state troops and magic.

[ChaosReigns]

On the other hand last two weeks:
Squares@TTW                                     An Empire player came second of 14  (with quite alot of infantry)
Battles in the Border Princes                 7th of 56 (demi heavy with a war altars, no wizards)
Fantasia fanatic                                    12 of 28 (my result, not fantastic but not bad)
OLD WORLD RTT by SQUARE HAMMER   Empire player won, 24 players (Balanced army with a focus on the knights side)


Then there is a lot of bad results from the empire, not saying we are a strong army. But you can play the empire and get good results.

Is it possible to see these lists, or at least to see approximate summaries of them? It would be very helpful to me as a new Empire player.

[Warlord]

You could use knights with greatweapons instead of dgk. They serve the same role but are not as costly effective and has less AS but can get better character support.

This is a just plain bad idea IMO. Knights with great weapons, IMO are our worst core choice.

[Minsc]

Yeah I wouldn't compare GW-knights to DGKs.

One has 1 S5 attack at I1 and 1 S3 attack at I3 and a 4+ save.
One has 3 S5 attacks at I4 and 1 S4(6) attack at I4 and a 2+ save (and +1 T).

I see GW Knights more akin to mounted Greatswords in Core. Not that it really says much.   

[PowerSeries]

I mean compare 3 GW knights to a demigriff.  Same wounds now.

6 GW knights is 126 points. 
6 st 5 attacks and 6 st 3, with 4+ armoursave
2 demigriffs are 126 with full plate.
6 st 5 attacks and 2 st 4 (6) with 2+ armoursave

Same wounds, and same points.
But the demigriffs have much better saves, and also initiative and fear.

So yeah.  The demi Griff's are probably undercoated.  But they are not core.

[Footpatrol2]

You can take priest of Ulric with gw knights. The reroll 6 for enemy prayer adds a little to their survivability which the Demi's can't get.

[Minsc]

You can take priest of Ulric with gw knights. The reroll 6 for enemy prayer adds a little to their survivability which the Demi's can't get.

True, but if your opponent hits you on 4+ that prayer is just the same as having -0,5 to hit on them (even worse if they hit on 3+) + it only works 58% of the time + the priest costs more than than an extra DGK would.

I get trying to get subpar units to work, but we truly have become masters of polishing turds on this forum. 
A direct consequence of our army being filled with them I suppose...