Topic: Forget Bretonnia, what about using Chaos instead of Empire?

[Warlord]

So I was looking at the Warriors of Chaos list, and comparing to my current Empire list.... and the unit functions are pretty similar, but there are strengths and weaknesses, so wanted to open it up for discussion.

My current Empire list is:
Wizard Lord
General and BSB each on a Demigryph
2 x 15 Spearmen
2 x 14 Greatswords
2 x 5 Scouts
2 x 4 Knights
2 x 5 Outriders
2 x 2 Demigryphs
Steam Tank

A lot of these have close equivalents in the Warriors of Chaos List...

Such as Marauders being very similar to our state troops
Chaos Warriors similar to Greatswords
Chaos Knights similar to Empire Knights
Marauder Cav similar to pistoliers
Dragon Ogres similar to Demigryphs

Universally, Undivided is great for psychology tests, and most of my units will be Undivided to get that reroll panic, fear and terror.
I was taking a General and BSB to help with Panic in my units anyway, and this way its built into the instead.

[Minsc]

Go ahead, but this is absolutely not something for me.

Bretonnian Exiles and Empire are quite similar in most aspects; human armies with infantry, cav, shooting, warmachines, almost no monsters, etc.
Basically (almost) every unit has a very easy human count-as that can easily represent something in either army without confusing your opponent: That Yeoman Guard with spear and that Foot Knight with Greatweapon can easily be represented by a Empire Spearman and Greatsword, etc.

But using a Greatsword to represent a Chaos Warrior with GW? A Dragon Ogre to represent a Demigryph?
Now the lines are starting to get blurred, and I can easily see opponents getting very confused about what's what.

Warriors of Chaos and Empire are also vastly different on an armylist basis;
One has many monsters and monstrous units, one doesn't.
One has alot of shooting, one doesn't, etc.

[Warlord]

Lets look at comparing my army list in particular first.

Most of these are undivided, so layer the benefit of reroll panic, fear and terror on them.

INFANTRY

2 x 15 State Troops w Spear & Shield, Musician - 110 pts each
VS
2 x 15 Marauders w Undivided HW&S w Musician - 125 pts each

Better WS, Better leadership due to Warband, Shieldwall, however less attacks when charged.

2 x 14 Greatswords w Standard - 160pts each
VS
2 x 10 Chaos Warriors w Undivided, Halberd w Standard & Musician - 152pts each

No stubborn, lower AS. Higher WS, I, T. Strike at initiative because halberds and magic attacks. Larger base size, and less models

CHAFF

2 x 5 Scout Archers - 40 pts
VS
2 x 5 Hounds w Vanguard - 35 pts

No shooting or scouting, lower leadership, higher mobility and WS

CAVALRY

2 x 4 Empire Knights w Lances, w Musician & Champion  - 100 pts each
VS
2 x 4 Chaos Knights w Lances, w Musician - 122 pts each

Higher WS, S, T, I and Magic attacks. 1 less attack because no champion, no Counter Charge.

2 x 4 Outriders w Musician - 82 pts each
VS
2 x 5 Marauders Horsemen w Spear, LA&S, and Throwing Axe w Musician & Champion - 82 pts each

Higher WS, +1S on charge, no repeater handguns or Vanguard
One of the biggest changes in unit function - but think of these guys more as the pistoliers we used to have, who can also charge in and do some damage if needed to War machines and the like.

2 x 2 Demigryph Knights w Lance & Full Plate  - 126 pts each
VS
2 x 2 Dragon Ogres w Halberd & HA  - 124 pts each

Demi's have higher I & AS, an extra attack from the rider, Dragon Ogres have 1 higher strength w Armour Bane, 1 extra wound, Magic attacks and immune to psychology.
Pretty comparable, but with a few extra benefits

RARE

1 Steam Tank
VS
2 GoreBeast Chariots

Very different units - Steam Tank is VERY hard to kill, shoots a cannon and steam gun. It DEMANDS attention, but also not very killy
The Gorebeast chariots instead are quicker, and more deadly on the charge.

I could arguably take a Hellcannon instead, which is comparable, but there you go.

CHARACTERS

General on Demigryph w FPA, S, L, Talisman - 178 pts
VS
Exalted Champion on Demonic Mount w HA, S, L - 166 pts

Higher M, I, WS & S, Magic attacks. Only Ld8, not 9.

L4 Wizard Lord on Pegasus - 190 pts
VS
L4 Sorceror Lord on Demonic Mount - 260pts

I was taking Illusion, this has to be Battle, Dark or Demonic.
However get all the stats of a Empire Captain, plus good AS.

BSB
VS
No BSB

My Empire army has a BSB, but I don't have points for it in the Chaos army, but I don't think I need it with all the panic, fear and terror rerolls.
Interestingly, this list has over 1000 pts of core.


Thoughts?

[Warlord]

But using a Greatsword to represent a Chaos Warrior with GW? A Dragon Ogre to represent a Demigryph?
Now the lines are starting to get blurred, and I can easily see opponents getting very confused about what's what.

This is an issue. But its an issue for any army that heavily leans on counts as models - which is one of my preferred ways to play, rather than just generic run of the mill models. In particular, I am not going to be using my Empire puff and slash models to represent this army.
That said, Dragon Ogres and Demigryph knights are actually VERY similar stats and rules wise.

Consider a Full Plate equipped Demigryph knight with Halberd VS a Dragon Ogre with Heavy Armour and extra hand weapon.
Demi Gryph stats:

M	WS	BS	S	T	W	I	A	Ld
7	4	3	5	4	3	4	4	8

Dragon Ogre stats:

M	WS	BS	S	T	W	I	A	Ld
7	4	2	5	4	4	2	4	8

Almost identical. The knight has higher initiative, and the Dragon Ogre has an extra wound. BS doesn't matter here.

Their armour is the same (FPA + Barding VS Heavy Armour and Armoured Hide (2)) both equal 3+AS.
They also have 2 of the same special rules (Close Order and Fear).

Their attacks affects vary a bit:
The Demi has Wicked Claws and a Halberd
-2AP on 3 of the attacks, -1AP and AB on 1 attack

The Dragon Ogre has Armour Bane (1) on all 4 attacks

Its just their other special rules that differ a bit more.
Demi's get cavalry bonuses such as Counter Charge, First Charge, Swift Stride.
Whereas Dragon Ogres instead get Stomp attacks (2), Magic Attacks, Immune to Psych and Quickening Storm.

Demi's used to have stomps in 8th ed, and I'm not entirely sure why they don't this edition.
Magic attacks and 5+ WS vs magic missiles could be imbued on Demi's from a Warrior Priest prayer, and Immune to psych could be given by a Chapter Master or GM.

Its not as different as you think.


Regardless, I'm not using traditional Empire models anyway, but heavily kitbashed, conversions, or a few alternative models.
https://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=56778.0
The list I am using will be using elephants counting as Demigryphs anyway.

Warriors of Chaos and Empire are also vastly different on an armylist basis;
One has many monsters and monstrous units, one doesn't.
One has alot of shooting, one doesn't, etc.

Who takes small arms shooting in Empire lists now? I understand the argument for war machines.
Just because the Chaos list has monsters, doesn't mean you need to take them.
Their core is full of just as many human options as ours. Its only the chaos warriors that are on 30x30 bases instead of 25x25 now.

[Warlord]

Maybe lets look at the analysis a different way.
Often, when comparing State troops, we also compare to Men at Arms and to Marauders.
Marauders have similar rules to Men at Arms, except their WS is 4 rather than 2.

If we make a Chaos army, based around marauder infantry, could that not play similar to a TVI army? Why could that not use Empire models?

[lcmiracle]

Base state troops should be the absolute "average" statline at WS3 and not 2 nor 4. Simple.

[Sir Falo]

Why not just play with chaos models if you like to play chaos? Just sounds like an advanced proxy otherwise. Like the gamy guy at the club thats just followed the meta but never committed to anything. Nothing wrong in friendly games, but not ok otherwise.

You could make quite the cool "traitor" Empire army is you like to convert them. Would take quite the time, but could be nice.

[Gorim]

Chaos can work as "Cult of Ulric" list, I already thought about that, CoU even had warhounds:P In Wfrp there was an white Wolf inner circle that was corrupted by Khorne, so that would be my fluff for such army, but guess I would need some conversions / dedicated paintjobs to feel good about it.

Overall bret exiles seem much better "proxy" empire.

[lcmiracle]

Chaos can work as "Cult of Ulric" list, I already thought about that, CoU even had warhounds:P In Wfrp there was an white Wolf inner circle that was corrupted by Khorne, so that would be my fluff for such army, but guess I would need some conversions / dedicated paintjobs to feel good about it.

Overall bret exiles seem much better "proxy" empire.

"The Brotherhood of the Axe" IIRC, 4th edition expanded on the Khornate cult they followed, the Crimson Skull and had them infiltrate military units across the Empire. So an khorne-themed empire army can be made I guess.

[Warlord]

The stats are so similar though… I don’t want to play Chaos. I’m not suggesting taking all the Chaos-y things like Chosen or monsters. Rather I’m suggesting that the ‘weak’ chaos choices are all above where the ‘strong’ Empire choices are in a lot of ways. Basically its no wonder that our win rate is so low.

I am just frustrated that there isn’t really a lot that makes Empire feel special at the moment.

[Sir Falo]

The stats are so similar though… I don’t want to play Chaos. I’m not suggesting taking all the Chaos-y things like Chosen or monsters. Rather I’m suggesting that the ‘weak’ chaos choices are all above where the ‘strong’ Empire choices are in a lot of ways. Basically its no wonder that our win rate is so low.

I am just frustrated that there isn’t really a lot that makes Empire feel special at the moment.

Well if you compare the Empire to Chaos for close combat they have always had stronger regiments. Just look at Empire soldiers vs Mauruders i 6th cost wise. So if you like a pure close combat army you have always played Chaos over The Empire. Chaos is just strong now because of their dragon rider. Otherwise Empire is fine vs Chaos.

[commandant]

I am just frustrated that there isn’t really a lot that makes Empire feel special at the moment.

Not being special is (and always was) what made the Empire special

[Skyros]

Well, they used to have cheap, reliable line infantry that were more well trained than the infantry in any other army and could make use of really good detachment rules, bolstered in leadership by inspiring warrior priests who granted hatred of humanities enemies.

Now our infantry is more expensive than other armies, less reliable than other armies, and detachments are very weak, and not even exclusive to empire. And of course warrior priests no longer grand leadership benefits or hatred.

[Tiberius]

If your hobby friends are down with it, do it.  Fluffwise, the Old World is such a sandbox anyways, and those all seem like very reasonable comparisons. You ought have to keep a marker around each unit to remind you both what they are though.

I absolutely get wanting to play with reasonable close combat without going evil. I always had a dream of making a “good” chaos army that were chosen or embodiment of some other god in the Old World.  But then they made Sigmarines and it wasn’t cool anymore.

I am just frustrated that there isn’t really a lot that makes Empire feel special at the moment.

Not being special is (and always was) what made the Empire special

Faith, gunpowder, and steel made us special!  But now the faith sucks, gunpowder is mediocre (great cannons are worse than bombards!?) and steel is over priced. 

[Warlord]

Faith, gunpowder, and steel made us special!  But now the faith sucks, gunpowder is mediocre (great cannons are worse than bombards!?) and steel is over priced.

Exactly.
I feel like no one at GW gets why Empire were good and interesting anymore. Its why they didn't make any human models for AOS until just last year despite the game system existing for 8 years already.

I am not going to play as Chaos. I got a bit excited / interested today when I noticed how closely costed their troops were that we could make a lot of our army from their Core choices.

But I don’t quite get why you are all poo-poo-ing the idea when you were ok with Bretonnia. Much of a muchness in my view.

[Sir Falo]

But I don’t quite get why you are all poo-poo-ing the idea when you were ok with Bretonnia. Much of a muchness in my view.

Was never in to the Brets hype to. Its fine to play other armies. But this is an empire forum so I try to keep it to that. I have other armies, including Chaos with a lord on dragon. But will play The Empire

[commandant]

And there are other places for discussing playing non empire armies

[Minsc]

Faith, gunpowder, and steel made us special!  But now the faith sucks, gunpowder is mediocre (great cannons are worse than bombards!?) and steel is over priced.

The faith sucks.
The gunpowder is wet.
And someone stole our steel and gave it to the elves...

(Yes, Brets literally have a subfaction with better cannons than us...)

[Warlord]

including Chaos with a lord on dragon. But will play The Empire

Thing is, I’m not saying taking a lord on dragon, or ogres or trolls or chosen, or the things that make Chaos have Chaos flavour. Pretty much just the Chaos Core, also just as undivided, is very, very similar to what our Empire Core and Special choices are. People were saying taking Bret exiles with Empire models is still playing Empire. I am arguing the same for a Chaos Core only approach.

Others have suggested it might actually make more sense for an Ulrican army, especially if you compare the Warriors of Ulric from the Cult of Ulric list and Marauders - they are almost exactly the same.

Why is discussing Brets as Empire any different? Its either the Empire ruleset or its not…

[Tiberius]

Yeah I don’t see the big deal either. People only have so many models and so much time. They want to use their models, and they want to play an enjoyable game.  If the game is more enjoyable having empire models use chaos rules, I don’t think it’s a big deal.

Also why not discuss this things on an Empire forum. The empire kinda sucks right now so let’s share strategies to make it a better experience!

[Sir Falo]

Well I have said multiple times that the Brets talk is done to death. So I dont like that. Regardless how you play Chaos you are still playing Chaos. I played a guy that had a Chaos dwarf army but all the models were penguins (with fake beards and small helmets). Thats still a Chaos dwarf army regardless how you play it. There is a place on this forum called "Armies Beyond The Empire" were you can talk Brets or Chaos.

[commandant]

Also why not discuss this things on an Empire forum. The empire kinda sucks right now so let’s share strategies to make it a better experience!

The reason not to discuss it is because it is not sharing strategies to make it a better experience. It is just whining. There has been a collective agreement that the Empire sucks without testing what options we have available to us.

If people want to play other armies that is reasonable and fine but there are other places to discuss the tactics of those armies.

[Gorim]

I understand that point of view, but have an opposite one. For me ruleset is secondary, and miniatures come first. So I "will play Empire" whatever rules I use, be it Chaos or Brets. At the same time, if someone uses Penguins, I would be facing (stupid) Penguins, not Chaos.

The forum is not as big as in the past, and doesn't really need many subforums, who cares anyway?

[Warlord]

I come from two schools of thought on this.
If I am playing with my pure Empire models, then of course I play Empire rules.
However I have a LOT of ‘count as’ or themed armies, where I am going for a particular feel that no army quite matches. Usually they start with Empire, but can vary a little. As such, I am generally looking at rulesets that closely match what I am going for with my theme. Usually it involves self imposed restrictions in the ruleset, so I can keep that specific feel, rather than just playing a set faction.

For example, my Ulrican army does not take any blackpowder or wizards.
My Sigmarite army doesn’t take any Steam Tanks, Outriders, Captains, Generals or Wizards.
I don’t see it as all that different. Its the identity of the army, rather than the ruleset IMO

[Perforated]

There has been a collective agreement that the Empire sucks without testing what options we have available to us.

And as it stands, with the current rules available to us, Empire of Man is a "trash-tier" army.

Highly optimized builds, which to me, look nothing like the Empire army I want (but that is personal preference) come out as average at best. And when facing off against optimized builds of other armies it's back to the trash tier again.

Now, an argument could be made that not all games will be around optimized builds, and this is true. But even in that meta Empire of Man is at the bottom rung of the ladder.

I really appreciate the positivity you try so hard to maintain @Commandant, but the writing really is on the wall.