PDA

View Full Version : I take back what I said about ASF for high elves



Pages : [1] 2

etancross
06-11-2007, 13:15
As everyone knows, i've been one of the folks complaining the most about the always strike first rule for HE’s and now after having played against it I have to say its not ANYWHERE NEAR as bad as I thought.

After finally getting to see this in action, I would have to say the reason they were given this is because they needed it. They can have some cheesy things (like a dragon in a game 1000 pts and under) but with out ASF rule this army would stand no chance. Their magic is pretty good (Empire magic seems better to me) and everything else is sooooo retardedly expensive that in a 2000 pt game an O and G player can outnumber them 3 or even 4 to one.

If they take a good number of Archers, once you get to them they will die, the only thing that I saw that made me mad was when a unit of big’uns hit a unit of white lions, the lions went first and basically it came down to my big’uns having 28 attacks (because they charged) but since they went first it came down to 8 attacks (I run a frontage of 6) but they were beaten’, broken’, and ran down.

So in conclusion I have to say they NEED ASF because without it they would be beaten down badly drastically outnumbered.

sephiroth87
06-11-2007, 14:19
You'll be one of the few who admits it. All the others who were complaining will just lurk for a while and try to blend in.

Alathir
06-11-2007, 14:25
Well said, etancross. It takes alot to admit something like that.

You have gained much honour in this knight's eyes. :p

Finnigan2004
06-11-2007, 14:27
Congratulations Etancross, most will not admit it. From the start I have found it hard to believe that an entire army book would be broken-- some builds will be, as some are almost invariably. I do think I will wait to evaluate it and play against them first, but it does not look too scary to me. Strikes first will change things for sure, but we will have to wait to see how and how much.

Rightnow
06-11-2007, 15:38
I used to play High Elves. They need something like ASF. My solution was elves always strike in initiative order, but I suppose the GW wanted to simplify things. They are still just T3, expensive elves with bad armor saves. They will now be competitive, but not broken.

You can't strike first against crossbows and handguns...

Kahadras
06-11-2007, 17:35
I've hopefully got my first game against High Elves lined up for this Sunday. I'm looking forward to it at the present moment because I'm pretty sure I'm more mobile than the Elf player. I'm looking forward to running rings round his army with my pistoliers.

Kahadras

etancross
06-11-2007, 17:51
another important thing to remember is if he uses anything mounted, ONLY the riders get the ASF rule, the mount does not.

theunwantedbeing
06-11-2007, 17:54
High elves need always strikes first eh?

And you deduced that from a single game?
Where you got lucky in breaking 1 opponent and pointed out the obvious about archers.
More info on the actual lists that were used and how those lists fought each other and how they rolled is needed to gain any shred of useful info to back up your frankly rediculous claim.

Im not saying ASF wont be or isnt balanced, far from it.
Im merely saying the HE dont "need" it.

Although Im sure Etancross will agree that Dark elves "need" always strikes first as well to stand any chance against the new high elves.

Lord Raneus
06-11-2007, 18:50
Be that as is may, I'm still not looking forward to my first game against them with Dark Elves. Gaaah.:(
DE stand no chance against them at this point. Other armies are not as affected, but when another expensive T3 army with bad armor saves goes up against them, bad things will happen.

Ah well, I only have seven more months to wait and then my favorite army gets a power boost! =D

Kahadras
06-11-2007, 18:55
Be that as is may, I'm still not looking forward to my first game against them with Dark Elves.

I agree with that DE did kinda just get screwed over big time. I suppose they'll just have to rely on dark riders, RBT and lots of missile troops against HE untill their new armies book comes out. :(

Kahadras

etancross
06-11-2007, 19:01
High elves need always strikes first eh?

And you deduced that from a single game?
Where you got lucky in breaking 1 opponent and pointed out the obvious about archers.
More info on the actual lists that were used and how those lists fought each other and how they rolled is needed to gain any shred of useful info to back up your frankly rediculous claim.

Im not saying ASF wont be or isnt balanced, far from it.
Im merely saying the HE dont "need" it.

Although Im sure Etancross will agree that Dark elves "need" always strikes first as well to stand any chance against the new high elves.

yes genius HE's need always strike first...
yes i deduced that from a single game, i didn't write a battle report i only gave a couple example that came to mind and could have gave several more but felt there was no need to because my point was made. I also got to see several more games with them vs Tomb Kings, and Empire and i haven't seen them win yet.

their units are so expensive that when we started playing i was like... "Dude wheres the rest of your stuff" he replyed "this is it man". I think they need it because they just flat dont have a lot of units and what they have is SOOOO expensive that IMHO it was a needed thing to help out the army.... but yes anything can be abused and im sure that someone will cook up something

Rediculous clam? what the hell are you talking about? I beat them in a game, i out numbered them almost 3 - 4 to one and trounced them really good? and from now playing agains them and seeing them play agsint 2 other races, ASF seems like something that army needed but once again thats IMHO!

Chiungalla
06-11-2007, 19:02
DE stand no chance against them at this point.

They will stand a chance.

Not in a one on one close combat against his elite close combat infantry, but repeater boldthrowers, repeater crossbows and magic will work very well against this units.

The Lifetaker magic repeater crossbow will be the end of many many high elves on foot.

Magic and repeater boldthrowers will also work against his cavalry.

And chariots are very dangerous for the whole high elf army, and not so easy to kill.

Crazy Harborc
06-11-2007, 19:15
5th, 6th and now 7th Editions WHFB were/are topics of Warseer (old name Portent). New armybooks and or codexes get raked over the coals too. Many times the complaints start before the new rules/suppliments are available?:confused:......How is dat?? Oh well...it does provide reading material;)

Heretic Burner
06-11-2007, 20:24
From the sounds of it HE are just as broken as expected. Capable of absolutely annhilating one of O&G's strongest units despite the greenskin player having about as advantageous position for them as possible. They retain the absolute advantage in the other phases of the game.

The idea of HE being so expensive as to require strike first despite having so many units actually reduced in price is absurd. In particularly the dirt cheap spearmen which are capable of absolutely mauling entire armies like O&G and DE.

Can you imagine having the new HE sprung on an unsuspecting player without having had the opportunity to rake it over the coals beforehand? It would be outrageous, at least you know what is coming.

etancross
06-11-2007, 20:40
From the sounds of it HE are just as broken as expected. Capable of absolutely annhilating one of O&G's strongest units despite the greenskin player having about as advantageous position for them as possible. They retain the absolute advantage in the other phases of the game.

The idea of HE being so expensive as to require strike first despite having so many units actually reduced in price is absurd. In particularly the dirt cheap spearmen which are capable of absolutely mauling entire armies like O&G and DE.

Can you imagine having the new HE sprung on an unsuspecting player without having had the opportunity to rake it over the coals beforehand? It would be outrageous, at least you know what is coming.


OMG i can't belive im defending HE's in any shape or fashion....

but let me say this Once you actually see 2000 pts of HE on the table, ive seen them against me (O&G) empire and tomb kings and it frankly looked like someone taking 2000 pts of something vs 1500 to 1800 pts of something else.

Now the player I played against brought a lot of archers, some Cav, white lions, and i'm sorry I don’t know the names of all the HE units but he just seemed WAY undermanned. Their magic isn’t bad, but it seemed expensive, and I was over prepared for it (3 dispell scrolls, 3 shaman, etc) and his cross bows did some damage, but over all from what I saw (and the army book is in most stores so you can see it to) it just seemed like he loaded up on expensive stuff and didn’t have what he needed.

Now my statement about them needing ASF was once again JUST MY OPINION! HE’s are as weak as any of the other Elf races, but man there was just not a lot on the table. Maybe if my opponent would have brought more core troops like spearman, or whatever or even a dragon the game might have been different but I didn’t have much trouble with them at all.

Another thing I was worried about was combats going into the 2nd and 3rd rounds and my str dropping to 3, that wasn’t really a factor because at toughness 4 they were wounding me on 5’s? So with combat res, and numbers there was just really not much to fear; the longer the book is out the better the lists will get but in the game I played and the 2 others i've seen they haven’t yet won, and they looked very underwhelming.

If anyone thinks i'm a HE fanboy go back and look at my other posts, I was one of the main voices complaining about them, the ASF rule, the dragons I low point games, but now my complaining stops.

Now when the lists with 2 and 3 dragons start hitting them I might start complaining again!

antin3
06-11-2007, 20:48
Etancross- you were one of the most vocal about this rule, I remember well. But I will side with Alathir on this, it takes a lot to admit something like this and I respect you for it. These other people complaining, well these are the same people that if you handed them gold bars on a silver platter they would STILL find something to complain about. They're never happy and they are always a victim, just ignore them.

Crazy Harborc
06-11-2007, 21:22
It gives them (and us) reasons to post.;) What comes out next....the Undead? Many of those posters do in fact help (me at least) to look for whatever in a new rule/armybook/codex......That's enterrrrtaaainment.:D

stonehorse
06-11-2007, 22:14
ASF dosen't seem broken, until you look at the other Elf armies and see that they are going to have an up hill struggle against the HE. Also looking at the other army books, it seems that each race has a magic weapon that allows them to always strike first... which cost about 30 points... so the HE characters are in effect getting a free magic weapon (they just won't have the magic attacks, unless they buy a magic weapon).

As a Dwarf player I'm not too bothered, I'm used to AGL (Always Going Last)... luckily I have;

A) Good Toughness
B) Good Armour
C) Lots of Warriors
D) Good firepower

So I think the odds are in my favour, elves split if you hit them hard enough.

Prince Facestab
06-11-2007, 22:47
Well, depends what you mean by free, Stonehorse. If you mean free as in it doesn't count against the character's magic allowance, than this is true. However, the cost of all characters went up, so if you meant free in terms of points cost, than this is not so.

Glad to hear you don't mind the rule, Etancross! I haven't gotten to try it myself, whether using it or having it used against me, nor will I be able to for some time. So I enjoy hearing accounts from people who have tried it.

Lord Raneus
06-11-2007, 22:53
From the sounds of it HE are just as broken as expected. Capable of absolutely annhilating one of O&G's strongest units despite the greenskin player having about as advantageous position for them as possible.


At least Greenskins are T4 and cheap. ;) The others elves are going to have problems. WE are less affected due to more shooting capability, but DE are going to find themselves in a bit of trouble from now until June. We'll just have to grin, bear it, and wreak bloody vengeance in the name of Khaine when we get our new book.;)

That being said, I don't mind the rule overall, but for right now, a couple of armies are in trouble because of it.

Heretic Burner
07-11-2007, 01:50
but let me say this Once you actually see 2000 pts of HE on the table, ive seen them against me (O&G) empire and tomb kings and it frankly looked like someone taking 2000 pts of something vs 1500 to 1800 pts of something else.

By this point we know the point costs of HE units and I am fully aware how many models a HE can bring. Quite frankly a 2000 point army of HE will look like a 2000 point army. The absurd notion that HE are utterly expensive across the board has been shot down many times, their spearmen and archers are dirt cheap, and just about every elite in their army comes at a bargain for their abilities. Are they smaller than most armies? Sure, but not the smallest. After all, comparing the cost of a dragon prince to a basic orc is one thing, comparing the cost of a HE spearman to a Big Un Boar Boy is quite another.


Now the player I played against brought a lot of archers, some Cav, white lions, and i'm sorry I don’t know the names of all the HE units but he just seemed WAY undermanned. Their magic isn’t bad, but it seemed expensive, and I was over prepared for it (3 dispell scrolls, 3 shaman, etc) and his cross bows did some damage, but over all from what I saw (and the army book is in most stores so you can see it to) it just seemed like he loaded up on expensive stuff and didn’t have what he needed.

Sounds like your opponent went elite heavy and expensive magic heavy against you who were loaded up on magic defense to an astonishing degree. Where were the spearmen, a unit that shreds through O&G units? And archers? Why so many archers, I don't suppose you loaded up on dreadful arrer boyz. So yes by taking the most expensive units in the army a HE player can have a small army. So can Lizardmen, Chaos, and yes even O&G.


Now my statement about them needing ASF was once again JUST MY OPINION! HE’s are as weak as any of the other Elf races, but man there was just not a lot on the table. Maybe if my opponent would have brought more core troops like spearman, or whatever or even a dragon the game might have been different but I didn’t have much trouble with them at all.

HEs are some of the most survivable T3 units in Warhammer. They certainly don't need ASF to survive! And seeing how spearmen absolutely tear through O&G units like nothing I do imagine that game would be different!


Another thing I was worried about was combats going into the 2nd and 3rd rounds and my str dropping to 3, that wasn’t really a factor because at toughness 4 they were wounding me on 5’s? So with combat res, and numbers there was just really not much to fear; the longer the book is out the better the lists will get but in the game I played and the 2 others i've seen they haven’t yet won, and they looked very underwhelming.

What was wounding on 5s? Not the swordsmasters. Not the white lions. The archers maybe? Then again even the worst close combat unit in the HE book still hit on 3s so it can't be them either...so what unit was easy for O&G to defeat in close combat exactly?

Certainly virtually every unit in the HE book point for point defeats O&G units. Now you've said nothing about the overwhelimg mobility advantage your opponent had over you so what came about from that?


If anyone thinks i'm a HE fanboy go back and look at my other posts, I was one of the main voices complaining about them, the ASF rule, the dragons I low point games, but now my complaining stops.

After 1 game? 2? Against an army you admittedly had the exact magic defence perfectly suited to defeat? An army that took none of the units most effective against yours? Are you sure you aren't a GW playtester?


Now when the lists with 2 and 3 dragons start hitting them I might start complaining again!

Dragons are the least of the worries for such armies as O&G and DE. The overwhelming advantage in every phase of the game is.

Grinloc
07-11-2007, 02:26
Now c'mon, Heretic, don't you see it?
Possible recipe for success:
1.) Release new shiny miniatures
2.) Army-wide special rule (which most likely lessens the amount of time spent on balancing)
3.) Release a highly competitive army which has the potential to get its rules abused to being borderline overpowered

Warhammer is nothing but a business and things like ASF shouldn't surprise you when it comes from a corporation which is also selling the miniatures for the very same game.

When it comes to Warhammer it will most likely always be this way, so you better forget about having any faith in proper non-business related "army balancing".
Where would someone think terms like "SAD" or "BRAF" came from....

WillFightForFood
07-11-2007, 02:51
Okay, I was writing an article summary, but I'll stop for this to do a line analysis.


By this point we know the point costs of HE units and I am fully aware how many models a HE can bring. Quite frankly a 2000 point army of HE will look like a 2000 point army.

A 2,000 point HE army will look like a 2,000 point Elite army. It won't look anything like a 2,000 point Orc army. It'll take up roughly half the board space and seem a little smallish.


The absurd notion that HE are utterly expensive across the board has been shot down many times, their spearmen and archers are dirt cheap, and just about every elite in their army comes at a bargain for their abilities.

Dirt Cheap? 9 points for Spearmen, 11 for archers? That's dirt cheap? Dirt cheap is 2 points. Cheap is 5 points. 9 Points is expensive. 11 points costs more than any of the infantry in some armies.

Bargain? What makes a bargain is not whether or not the abilities are good, but whether or not they are cheap relative to other races. The problem here is you're comparing this newest army to the costs of a lot of armies that are 5 and 6 years old. Of course they look like a bargain then, because a lot of things in 6th edition were overcosted because the value of units and abilities shifted so radically from 5th to 6th. They're trying to rectify this in newer books. Looking at some of the newer books, like WE and Empire, they don't look particularly better on a point per point basis. Or are you telling me that an always striking first 11 point HE archer is a better bargain than a no penalty for moving and shooting/move through woods/STR 4 at short range WE archer?


Are they smaller than most armies? Sure, but not the smallest. After all, comparing the cost of a dragon prince to a basic orc is one thing, comparing the cost of a HE spearman to a Big Un Boar Boy is quite another.

I may as well compare Goblin spearmen to a Blood Thirster, when you put it like that. You're really just comparing apples and oranges here.


Sounds like your opponent went elite heavy and expensive magic heavy against you who were loaded up on magic defense to an astonishing degree. Where were the spearmen, a unit that shreds through O&G units? And archers? Why so many archers, I don't suppose you loaded up on dreadful arrer boyz. So yes by taking the most expensive units in the army a HE player can have a small army. So can Lizardmen, Chaos, and yes even O&G.

The point is not whether or not the HE player can take a small army, the point is he cannot take a horde army.


HEs are some of the most survivable T3 units in Warhammer. They certainly don't need ASF to survive! And seeing how spearmen absolutely tear through O&G units like nothing I do imagine that game would be different!

You're pretty plainly wrong here. The 6 or so long years since the HE book was published pretty much confirmed that the HE were the most fragile army in the game. Until this rule Empire had more survivable units. And for far cheaper.

In any case, from a basic math standpoint you keep stating that the HEs will tear through the Orc units but I don't see this. Supposing totally average rolls it will take 9 attacks from HE spearmen to ensure one standard Orc (with Shield) death. That's not particularly good.



What was wounding on 5s? Not the swordsmasters. Not the white lions. The archers maybe? Then again even the worst close combat unit in the HE book still hit on 3s so it can't be them either...so what unit was easy for O&G to defeat in close combat exactly?

Spearmen and Archers would wound on five. The point is that even with the rule they don't actually make that many more kills, and certainly not for their cost. Elite infantry have always been at a disadvantage since the inception of 6th edition. This doesn't change that by a great deal.


Certainly virtually every unit in the HE book point for point defeats O&G units. Now you've said nothing about the overwhelimg mobility advantage your opponent had over you so what came about from that?


Point for point? How many of the Orc and Goblin units are even comparable on that basis? And overwhelming mobility advantage? Surely you jest. Orcs and Goblins have two fast cav units (one of which ignores difficult terrain), one heavy cav unit, and one skirmishing unit that moves 3D6.



After 1 game? 2? Against an army you admittedly had the exact magic defence perfectly suited to defeat? An army that took none of the units most effective against yours? Are you sure you aren't a GW playtester?

Yes, and how many games have you played? At least a hundred against the new HE I'd wager, what with all of your fear mongering. No? Fifty then? Nope? How about 25? How many actual games are you basing this off of?

All I see is a lot of theory-hammer and very little actually gaming. From a statistical stand point the HE sound good (not even great), but even an overpowered army can be defeated if mis-deployed and misplayed.


Dragons are the least of the worries for such armies as O&G and DE. The overwhelming advantage in every phase of the game is.

And HE should be the least of your worries, your defeatist attitude should be yours.

In any case, I'm done being a voice of reason.

Prince Facestab
07-11-2007, 02:57
By this point we know the point costs of HE units and I am fully aware how many models a HE can bring. Quite frankly a 2000 point army of HE will look like a 2000 point army. The absurd notion that HE are utterly expensive across the board has been shot down many times, their spearmen and archers are dirt cheap, and just about every elite in their army comes at a bargain for their abilities. Are they smaller than most armies? Sure, but not the smallest. After all, comparing the cost of a dragon prince to a basic orc is one thing, comparing the cost of a HE spearman to a Big Un Boar Boy is quite another.

You might want to try writing up a HE army list yourself, and seeing if you can cram in everything you'd want, and still have a high model count. It's a lot harder than it looks. And yes, both of those comparisons are absurd. Compare core units with core units, characters with characters, etc. With the cheapest model being 9pts, and characters being very expensive, HE really can't do horde well.




HEs are some of the most survivable T3 units in Warhammer. They certainly don't need ASF to survive! And seeing how spearmen absolutely tear through O&G units like nothing I do imagine that game would be different!

To quote from "The Princess Bride", you keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means. I suppose that 15 point white lions weather shooting better than say, 6 point empire swordsmen, and a tiny bit better than orc boys. 9 point spearelves or 15 point swordsmasters, on the other hand, are the same as the swordsmen, and worse than the orcs. Perhaps you could expand on what you mean by survivable?




What was wounding on 5s? Not the swordsmasters. Not the white lions. The archers maybe? Then again even the worst close combat unit in the HE book still hit on 3s so it can't be them either...so what unit was easy for O&G to defeat in close combat exactly?

Archers, any spearmen he took, cavalry in subsequent rounds of combat, some st4 things attacking orc characters. So true, not very many. But I think the point was that, even hitting on 3s, these units needed 5s to wound, and therefore had great difficulty in combat.


Certainly virtually every unit in the HE book point for point defeats O&G units.

Point for point, eh? I'll point out that, comparing kills between spearelves and orc boys w/shields fighting, spearelves get about .16 more kills when charging, and .4 more kills when being charged. If you used the points you saved by having cheaper models to expand the size of your boys mob, the orcs win by outnumber, on average, whether charging or being charged. So point for point, the orcs actually win.

Now, I'll admit that some of the elf elites do look pretty tough to beat. But I do think that you should math some of these things out a bit before declaring defeat on every front.

Speaking of which...



After 1 game? 2? Against an army you admittedly had the exact magic defence perfectly suited to defeat? An army that took none of the units most effective against yours? Are you sure you aren't a GW playtester?

I think he said he's played 3 games, which gives him 3 games worth of actual experience more than me with that rule. How about you?

So, please! Everyone! Give a few games a try! Allow me to experience the new book vicariously, while I'm in another country for a year!

Finnigan2004
07-11-2007, 03:10
HEs are some of the most survivable T3 units in Warhammer. They certainly don't need ASF to survive!

The previous two posts cover many of the questions that I would ask, so I will keep it down to one and see if you have a solid answer. You have claimed more than once that high elves are one of the most survivable t3 units in warhammer. Even though this is sort of like an argument about which featherweight boxer has the best chance of knocking out the heavyweight champ (and it goes against the experience of most people who played against the previous edition of high elves), I will humor you. Which toughness 3 units in a high elf army were the most survivable in warhammer and why? Also, please point out which units in other armies they were more survivable than. Doing so by comparing them unit by unit and including points cost in the analysis would make for a far stronger case. It is way too easy to make outlandish claims, if you do not have to back them up with solid facts.

loveless
07-11-2007, 03:15
You can't strike first against crossbows and handguns...

Oh how I love that line

TheSanityAssassin
07-11-2007, 03:54
See....I think there`s too much emphasis here on comparing the new HE with the DE book. Yes, DE will probably suffer significantly at the hands of their cousins for what...6 months at the most? And I mean, you're comparing books across editions. Look over to the 40k boards and compare 4th Edition Eldar or Chaos or Tau to 3rd Edition Orks. Not a chance in hell in most circumstances. I still think the DE could win if played right, and hell, you'll get the new book soon...they probably balanced the army against the play testing rules that I'm sure they have for DE already. And to mention WE's....think that the T3 5+ save elves will last long against that shooting? I sure don't.

And I still don't give the Elves a snowball's chance in hell against say a Dwarf gunline...or really Dwarfs in general.

And basing such assumptions on numbers/potentials like that just doesn't work. I mean...if they did the New York Rangers would win the Stanley Cup every year....and if you've seen them play recently, you know that's not going to happen.

etancross
07-11-2007, 12:52
Ok im not gonna do all the cutting and pasting of quotes like you guys did, but what i did last night after i got off work i call my buddy who plays HE's and asked if he was going up to GW he told me he was already there and had a game setup. I asked him to wait till I got there and I snapped a few pictures with my camera phone.

My friend is an experienced HE player and has been playing then for a while (WE’s too), he was playing against an semi-experienced empire player and the outcome of the game was: it was over by the 3rd turn, HE player had some HORR-RAA-BULLLL rolls at the end of the game, he had a unit or some spell or ability or something where he rolled 3 dice for his leadership and he got to take away the highest dice and he rolled 6 3 times, but I have some pics on my phone and will try to post them from work if the sites aren’t blocked so ill try that now.

I think he picture will show how small he HE army looks, so give me a bit and ill see what I can do.

EDIT

ok here are the pictures, one is a pregame shot of the units, the other is an end game shot showing the end of turn 3.

pregame:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y206/etancross/HE2.jpg

endgame:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y206/etancross/HE1.jpg

those units in the upper left of the 2nd pic near the building are dead, and those unengaged units near the upper middle of the table are also dead.

etancross
07-11-2007, 13:13
I know I play O&G but still this doesn’t look like a lot of units on the table, and i'm sure you HE players will know these units better than I.

Some things that stands out to me about this game:
a.) empire player didn’t move, he stood there and let the HE’s come to him
b.) empire player at one point in the game had 3 maybe 4 charges and didn’t take any of them, I asked why and he said he wanted to get all the shooting in he could and didn’t want to waste shooting by charging them
c.) HE player has some horrible dice rolls, he failed so many panic and leadership rolls that it was almost laughable.
d.) HE player after this game has 1 win, 1 draw, and 4 losses, the win was a massacre the draw was a late game rally by his opponent and the losses have all be in or around turn 4
e.) I asked why he didn’t have a dragon or some of the other units, he said he was waiting for the new stuff to come out first.
f.) The empire player was blasting him to bits, his rocket gun was doing absolutly crazy damage! The HE player destroyed it but I was talking to a friend and missed how he did it.

@ Heretic Burner you seem awful hostile about me giving my thoughts on what i faced, and what ive seen. Im not downing the army at all, im just saying that ASF rule is something that GREATLY benefits this new army... thats all. When i played against the new HE's and you keep saying spearmen shredded though O&G's, i tore the spearmen he had a new a$$ spearmen just aren't that good and they have a hard ass time hurting O&G even attacking in multiple ranks. They killed a good number of boys, but they also fail to wound a LOT becaue they are hitting on "5's". I won combat EASILY and ran the unit down, the other unit was hit by a unit of big'uns, and flanked by spiders and this unit actually somehow by the grace of mork lasted till the 2nd round of combat ONLY because he rolled insane courage, because my big'uns killed over half (more like 3/4's) of the unit and in the second round they went first and killed 2 biggie's TWO and thats all, I massacred that unit and kept on trucking.

what was easy for me to beat in CC, lets see, his archers, his spearmen, i didnt perticularly have that much troble with anything in his core. His lions where a bear and the cav units were also fast and hard for me to take down but I won the game and it was a major victory.

Heretic Burner
07-11-2007, 18:55
I have no idea where you get the idea spearmen are not effective against O&G. The most effective unit at tearing through light infantry in the O&G book are savage orc boyz with an additional handweapon. At a pont more expensive than a spearman, having to deal with frenzy, and having to deal with animosity you would imagine the rare instances they actually get into combat with the spearmen they would tear them up. They don't. Quite the opposite. The absurd idea that O&G field units significantly more survivable than HE is nonsense.

A typical O&G unit is either T4 with 6+ save or even T3 with a 6+ save. A typical HE unit is T3 with a 5+ save (for reference for those doubting HE are some of the most survivable T3 armies in the game, typical Empire troops are T3 and no/6+ save). Are HE typically more expensive? Sure, they also tend to be superior in almost every single stat, most importantly movement and leadership - by far the most important stats in the game. However are they somehow so weak defensively that they require some absurdly strong rule like strike first to compare - well the answer is of course no.

Head to head HE statistically maul O&G units. Fine, they tend to be more expensive but of course they are more expensive - they are better in virtually every stat including the two most important. Even more so, they have such a tremendous mobility advantage they can take O&G on any terms they want.

O&G are the very worst army in the game in movement. The very worst army in the game in magic. Against HE, an army near the top in both categories, you would expect they would have some dominant advantage. Sadly this is not the case against such a broken army.

Kellindel
07-11-2007, 19:03
Hey Ethancross ... I feel your pain. Or more precisely, you're now feeling the pain all of us "pre-release" people felt when we said "SoA is not game breaking" and you shot us down like Heretic is right now.

It's good you've seen the light. And if Heretic gives it a shot I'm sure he will too.

Me ... I'm looking at getting crunched this weekend by a Chaos player in 1000 point games.

Kellindel
07-11-2007, 19:22
I have no idea where you get the idea spearmen are not effective against O&G. The most effective unit at tearing through light infantry in the O&G book are savage orc boyz with an additional handweapon. At a pont more expensive than a spearman, having to deal with frenzy, and having to deal with animosity you would imagine the rare instances they actually get into combat with the spearmen they would tear them up. They don't. Quite the opposite. The absurd idea that O&G field units significantly more survivable than HE is nonsense.

What are you going off of here?? Are you looking at the papers and rules saying "This is going to happen"??? Have you actually tried this in the game?? Maybe you should think first of what do do besides running them into the frey.

HE have to still over come the Orcs toughness before they have to roll an armor save. And they still have to "hit" before they get to try to "wound".



Head to head HE statistically maul O&G units. Fine, they tend to be more expensive but of course they are more expensive - they are better in virtually every stat including the two most important. Even more so, they have such a tremendous mobility advantage they can take O&G on any terms they want.

How so?? What stats are you talking about? You're still hitting on a 4+ so weapon skill doesn't really come into factor on your effectivness. Yeah so they will be hitting you on a 3+ but the spearelves still need a 5+ to wound.

Unless the guy is rolling hot then I think you can sweat a tad less at the game table.



O&G are the very worst army in the game in movement. The very worst army in the game in magic. Against HE, an army near the top in both categories, you would expect they would have some dominant advantage. Sadly this is not the case against such a broken army.

4 Movement .... that's pretty much standard for everyone across the board. Wait .... Dwarves are worse right?? And worse in Magic?? I don't think so. Last game I had I practically crapped myself when I got hit with Gork and Mork spells. And Fanatics??? Don't even get me started on those...

But I'm still of the camp that thinks SoA is not needed. That something else could have been done for the army. Is SoA the easiest solution they came up with though??? Maybe. Did they test it to see if it was unbalancing?? I think so. Give it a try, if you get beat then look at your game plan and you list and figure out what didn't work. $10 says you'll end up picking up something you never thought you'd use cause it "sucked" and I bet it will work wonders. Kind of like my COK's. I don't think SoA is broken, but I scared of what it will do to future list releases.

stonehorse
07-11-2007, 20:33
Aren't Bretonnian Knights the most survivable T3 armies in the game?

All being well I should have a game against the new High Elves soon, so I'll be able to face them where it counts... on the field of battle.

etancross
07-11-2007, 20:59
I have no idea where you get the idea spearmen are not effective against O&G. The most effective unit at tearing through light infantry in the O&G book are savage orc boyz with an additional handweapon. At a pont more expensive than a spearman, having to deal with frenzy, and having to deal with animosity you would imagine the rare instances they actually get into combat with the spearmen they would tear them up. They don't. Quite the opposite. The absurd idea that O&G field units significantly more survivable than HE is nonsense.

A typical O&G unit is either T4 with 6+ save or even T3 with a 6+ save. A typical HE unit is T3 with a 5+ save (for reference for those doubting HE are some of the most survivable T3 armies in the game, typical Empire troops are T3 and no/6+ save). Are HE typically more expensive? Sure, they also tend to be superior in almost every single stat, most importantly movement and leadership - by far the most important stats in the game. However are they somehow so weak defensively that they require some absurdly strong rule like strike first to compare - well the answer is of course no.

Head to head HE statistically maul O&G units. Fine, they tend to be more expensive but of course they are more expensive - they are better in virtually every stat including the two most important. Even more so, they have such a tremendous mobility advantage they can take O&G on any terms they want.

O&G are the very worst army in the game in movement. The very worst army in the game in magic. Against HE, an army near the top in both categories, you would expect they would have some dominant advantage. Sadly this is not the case against such a broken army.

I have no idea why you are thinking spearmen are an uber unit? Spearmen are good for their points but thats all, and as far as tearing though O&G's that can happen, im not saying it can't but you thinking hitting on 3's and wounding on 5's is so super duper? you think tha can tear though O&G's? What are you smoking? Even 3 ranks of hitting on threes and wounding on fives isn't good at ALL not at freaken ALL! You must be kidding me....

wounding on fives is what kills the hitting on 3's.

etancross
07-11-2007, 21:09
Hey Ethancross ... I feel your pain. Or more precisely, you're now feeling the pain all of us "pre-release" people felt when we said "SoA is not game breaking" and you shot us down like Heretic is right now.

It's good you've seen the light. And if Heretic gives it a shot I'm sure he will too.

Me ... I'm looking at getting crunched this weekend by a Chaos player in 1000 point games.

yea i see what you mean.... next time im keeping my mouth shut untill i play it on the table. HE's are a good army but they aren't the unstopable juggernault i thought they were gonna be with ASF rule.

2thesword
07-11-2007, 22:35
Hi all - thought I'd add my 2c worth to this game, played HE through 6th ed and had my first game with new rules last night - observations below:

in 2K points I fielded:
20 odd spearmen w/ FC w/ BSB
18 archers w/ Hero w/ Reaver bow & Std, Mus
15 Sea Guard w/ lvl 2 mage & basic items

12 SM w FC
12 White Lions w FC
White Lion Chariot
3 RBTS

thats it - so to heretic and everyone else, having played a game (yes only but, but comparing it to many other armies, and even 6th ed HE) the army is ******* small.

I was trying many of the units with the new rules - FYI the archers and sea guard were ranked up for shooting at the empire's Cannon Hill.

the small number of troops that are really fragile against shooting really limited my ability to project force and play aggressively... I initially had wanted a least 1 unit of cav, no room, another chariot, no room, more magic, no room - you get the picture.

Many of the core troops are really solid (especially compared to 6th ed rules) - its almost perverse... they have really made many of the special units really strong (albiet very specialised) but the sheer points cost means that you are going to have to take core troops if you want any sort of balanced list.

In a balanaced list - forcing the opponent to come to you is going to be paramount against any sort of shooting strength - so RBTs and archers/sea guard are going to be popular.

ASF was very good for me - but I think a lot of that was because my opponent didnt know about the rule and so had planned his deployment & strategy not knowing that charging greatswords into fully ranked spearmen was a bad idea.

Once opponents learn & adapt I think it will lose some of its power, but that in itself will still be valuable - it means that you can now use spearmean to march/charge block just about any infantry unit and invite the charge onto you.

One final comment - magic items are going to be even more rare - you simply cannot afford 100 or so points of magic items in a 2K list... also because a hero on foot w GW in a unit suddenly becomes the most effective (for points) build against most armies.

which is a shame cause many of the special characters have a lot of character and would bring a lot of theme to an army... but I cannot see them getting used very often (and I really really wanted to use the new un-nerfed teclis... finally the most powerful mage on the planet won't keep dying when he tries to cast a powerful spell and miscasts in the 2nd turn).

Dragon Prince of Caledor
07-11-2007, 22:51
Have you seen the orcs vs high elves battle report in the white dwarf? ;) I love playing against orcs with high elves because orcs are so unpredictable. In my opinion I first objected to always strikes first but the army as a whole needed it. It nicely reflects the elite skills that one can obtain after hundreds of years of training! The only unit that can not be beaten in combat because of always strikes first is swordmasters. But they can be shot out and they have flanks. Even the most elite warriors in the warhammer world will run if hit in the flank with a chariot or a dragon.

Dragon Prince of Caledor
07-11-2007, 22:53
that is true... the expensive elf troops leave little room for characters. I am fighting to find a way to fit a dragon mage in my list..... Teclis is only like 400 pts now so it would be the same as taking a dragon mage of caledor.

BenK
07-11-2007, 23:46
Okay, mathammer scenario: High Elf Spears vs Empire Swordsmen

Spears are 9 points, Swords are 6, so let's assume a block of 20 spearmen vs 30 swordsmen.

Spears strike first with 16 attacks (include champions) = 1/2 hit times 1/2 wound times 1/2 fail their armor saves. On average - two swordsmen dead.

Swords strike back with 4 attacks = 1/2 hit times 1/2 wound times 2/3 fail their saves. On average, two thirds of a spearman dead.

Elves are up by 1 and 1/3 of a wound, Empire have outnumber.

Elves win the combat by 1/3 of a wound.

Non-combat advantages: Elven unit is faster and has higher leadership, Empire unit less vulnerable to missile fire (it'll take more wounds to force a panic test and a lot more wounds to reduce a rank) and has detachments; if the Swordsmen have a detachment which counter-charges the spearmen, they will beat the elves in double time.

Overall this doesn't sound overpowered to me at all. Elite armies should beat other armies in toe-to-toe combat as the other armies bring more options and a greater margin for error.

Prince Facestab
08-11-2007, 00:34
I have no idea where you get the idea spearmen are not effective against O&G. The most effective unit at tearing through light infantry in the O&G book are savage orc boyz with an additional handweapon. At a pont more expensive than a spearman, having to deal with frenzy, and having to deal with animosity you would imagine the rare instances they actually get into combat with the spearmen they would tear them up. They don't. Quite the opposite.

Spearelves do very well for their cost against other high cost units with low toughness or armor saves, and dependency on front rank attacks for CR. Perhaps it is the fact that the savage orc boyz have T4 that keeps the kills at .4 in favor of the spearelves. Also note that while savage orc boyz are not optimal against new HE, there are still things they can do. They can try to get flanks, or they can try to fight units that they do win with a fair margin against, like white lions, as long as the boyz go for static CR, and the white lion unit is not hugenormous.


The absurd idea that O&G field units significantly more survivable than HE is nonsense. A typical O&G unit is either T4 with 6+ save or even T3 with a 6+ save. A typical HE unit is T3 with a 5+ save (for reference for those doubting HE are some of the most survivable T3 armies in the game, typical Empire troops are T3 and no/6+ save). Are HE typically more expensive? Sure, they also tend to be superior in almost every single stat, most importantly movement and leadership - by far the most important stats in the game. However are they somehow so weak defensively that they require some absurdly strong rule like strike first to compare - well the answer is of course no.

Okay. First for the orc part. Guess which survives better against arrows, crossbows, and especially guns, the T4 6+ or the T3 5+? Also, which one tends to be cheaper? The answer is the same each time. And the idea is that the elves are fragile for their points cost. T3 5+ survives slightly better than T3 6+ save against bowfire, and no faster against gunfire, but the spearelves cost three times as much as goblins, and almost twice as much as empire state troops. Only 1.5 times as much as swordsmen, who are also T3 5+, and are the most commonly used state troop. So when people say that elves are fragile, they are taking into account that while they may die at the same rate as other lightly armored T3 units, there are many fewer of them to kill. In a battle of attrition, HE lose. So perhaps HE are, on a model-to-model basis, ignoring points costs, more survivable than other T3 units (but not T4 units). By any practical measure, however, they are less survivable.

2thesword
08-11-2007, 00:51
that is true... the expensive elf troops leave little room for characters. I am fighting to find a way to fit a dragon mage in my list..... Teclis is only like 400 pts now so it would be the same as taking a dragon mage of caledor.

Teclis is a tad under 500 points (with some good items & abilities that finally make him a genuine & reliable force during the magic phase)

dragon mage @ lvl 2 is a tad under 400 points

I haven't used either in a game yet... stinkin work getting in the way of playing, but they have very different roles & suit different armies

If you can squeeze him in, and are prepared to sacrifice taking more than 1/2 special units, then teclis is very very good for a defensively minded, force the enemy to come to you type army. Load him up with lore heavens or something else with long-range/no range spells and watch him cast ultimate force spells all game.

Dragon mage to my mind is much more suited to an aggresive, fast moving army - maybe use spears or archers to anchor a flank (compulsory non-cav core) and then use dragon princes, chariots, silver helms, mounted characters and even white lions (woodsmen) to engage quickly and decisively.

Heretic Burner
08-11-2007, 01:26
Spearelves do very well for their cost against other high cost units with low toughness or armor saves, and dependency on front rank attacks for CR.

Yes spearelves are extraordinarily powerful units for a dirt cheap price. Exactly as stated.


They can try to get flanks, or they can try to fight units that they do win with a fair margin against, like white lions, as long as the boyz go for static CR, and the white lion unit is not hugenormous.

Yes, using what is possibly the very worst unit in the game to achieve such feats of mobility is indeed an idea...just not a very good one. The HE player will, of course, dictate where the savage orcs attack having such an overwhelming advantage in the movement phase.


So perhaps HE are, on a model-to-model basis, ignoring points costs, more survivable than other T3 units (but not T4 units).

Exactly as stated, HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army in the game. The notion that they require a rule like strike first is absurd, armies with far less capable units more than make do.

Prince Facestab
08-11-2007, 02:03
Yes spearelves are extraordinarily powerful units for a dirt cheap price. Exactly as stated.

Ok, that's not what I said. I said that they were very effective against frontal charges from units like your savage orc boyz. They fold against durable units (like your ordinary boyz), heavy cavalry charges, pretty much anything in the flank. They do very poorly on the charge. Regardless of what you say, they die quickly. And if they are dirt cheap, what are ordinary boyz, and other such basic troops? Air cheap? Yearly trip around the sun cheap?


Yes, using what is possibly the very worst unit in the game to achieve such feats of mobility is indeed an idea...just not a very good one. The HE player will, of course, dictate where the savage orcs attack having such an overwhelming advantage in the movement phase.

Yeah, it's tricky, I'll give you that. But you should have better access to bait/sacrificial units, and pretty darn good access to fast cavalry, so it's not impossible. It's better than tipping your king whenever you are playing high elves, right?




Exactly as stated, HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army in the game. The notion that they require a rule like strike first is absurd, armies with far less capable units more than make do.

Also not what I said. I stated that this was a meaningless measurement, and the fact that high elves die to 1 in 6 less arrows than an empire halberdier does not make up for the fact that they have about 1/2 the numbers, not to mention the fact that they die faster to arrows than T4 units while costing more. To call them durable by the measure of their T3 5+ nature while ignoring their limited numbers is, to use one of your examples, calling a dragon prince expensive because it costs 10 times more than a goblin.

Now, I do my best to answer the arguments that you bring up. I'll admit that I do leave things out if I don't feel that I can offer any sort of opinion on them (for example, most of your comments relating to animosity or the O&G magic phase). But I do feel as though you're ignoring most of what I and other posters are saying. That does not lead to good discussion. And if you don't want to discuss, if you'd rather cherrypick a line or two from other posts, and try to play "who can have the last post supporting their cause", well, ok...

but I'm having a very slow day at work ;)

Lord Raneus
08-11-2007, 02:42
Aren't Bretonnian Knights the most survivable T3 armies in the game?

All being well I should have a game against the new High Elves soon, so I'll be able to face them where it counts... on the field of battle.

QFT

Call me the day you see HE spearmen ripping through Bretonnian Knights.;)


Sure, knights are very expensive, but technically, they're the most survivable T3 race in the game.

Finnigan2004
08-11-2007, 02:43
Exactly as stated, HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army in the game. The notion that they require a rule like strike first is absurd, armies with far less capable units more than make do.

Hmm... since you seem to be into cherrypicking quotations and ignoring points values, are you saying that high elves are more survivable than Brettonians with their armour and ward saves? Of course you are not (um, I think-- if you are please elucidate). You should try not to distort what others say because it hurts credibility. ;)

Finnigan2004
08-11-2007, 02:43
Oh, I hate it when someone has the same idea and posts while you are posting! Curse you Lord Raneus!:mad:

Dranthar
08-11-2007, 03:05
20 High Elf Spearmen w. command is around the same, or more expensive than 40 Night Goblins with full command, nets and 2 Fanatics.

Assume optimal frontage for elves (5x4), common frontage for goblins (7x6), goblins outnumbering elves 2:1 and the fanatics doing nothing to either unit (note that I'm favouring the elves in most of these variables).

17 Spear attacks are, on average, going to cause 2.5 wounds on net-armed goblins, for a total CR of 6.5 (std, 3 ranks, 2.5 kills).

The goblins retaliatory attacks will cause, on average, 1 wound for a total CR of 6 (std, 3 ranks, outnumber and 1 kill). That's a win for the elves by 0.5, but a lost rank for round 2.

Should the combat continue to round 2 the numbers effectively remain the same, but the lost rank from the elves will have effectively tipped the odds in the goblins favour. Against mere goblins and even without their feared fanatics, the numbers speak a very different story than the 'one-sided slaugher' Heretic Burner seems to be blindly advocating. :rolleyes:

P.S. Just for kicks, I also tried the above elves (20 in a 5x4 formation) against Orcs with shields (30 in a 6x5 formation). CR works out to 6 for the elves (1.8 kills + 4 static CR), vs. 6 for the orcs (1.4 kills + 5 Static CR). Another draw, although in the second round the elves would get a CR of 4 (1.3 kills +3 Static CR) vs. the orcs 6 (1 kill +5 Static CR).

That's two of the most commonly seen core units from the O&G list either nearly matching, or beating a more expensive unit of spearelves. "Extraordinarily powerful"? I think not. :D

WillFightForFood
08-11-2007, 03:45
Actually the real point here is that Heretic Burner is baiting replies. It clearly doesn't matter to him that the neither the theory hammer or the actual playing support his bitter stance against SoA (which is puzzling to think about so much hysteria over a board game). I think there is internet jargon for this, something starting with a t, I believe...

In any case, if you're so worried about the high elves ruining the game, Heretic, you might as well send me your army. You surely won't be needing it anymore. :)

BenK
08-11-2007, 04:13
Mathhammer scenario 2: High Elf Spearmen vs Brettonian Knights of the Realm

Assume 23 spears vs 9 kniggets, which are equivalent pointswise:

Spears strike first: 1/2 hit times 1/2 wound times 1/6 fail to save. Given sixteen attacks we expect 2/3 wounds.

Kniggets strike back: 1/2 hit times 5/6 wound. Given seven and a third attacks we expect just a tad over three wounds.

Spears have one rank and outnumber, kniggets win the combat by one point, probably not enough to break the unit.

This strikes me as about right. If the kniggets were up by even one more wound it would tip the balance in favor of the spearmen breaking off the charge. High Elf spear blocks should be able to repel unsupported frontal assaults by KotR.

sainthale1988
08-11-2007, 09:22
i'd just like to point out there is an even more naste unit to charge in the front than HE spearmen......Dogs of war pike men.
fight in 4 ranks, always strke first against chargers and are only 6pts!!!! (admit lower WS and still T3 and 5+ save)
that not taking into account the regements of renown pikemen with special abilites/ mini heros
charge your knights into them and see what happens!

TzarNikolai
08-11-2007, 10:18
Exactly as stated, HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army in the game.

an arguement is backed up by some sort of evidence, a statement is basically just your opinion. without explaining yourself how can other people come round to seeing things from your point of view?

please clarify exactly how HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army i the game, bearing in mind you're using the survivability angle to argue against them getting ASF and that silverhelms can no longer be taken as core.

2thesword
08-11-2007, 10:45
Actually the real point here is that Heretic Burner is baiting replies. It clearly doesn't matter to him that the neither the theory hammer or the actual playing support his bitter stance against SoA (which is puzzling to think about so much hysteria over a board game). I think there is internet jargon for this, something starting with a t, I believe...


I'm still trying to figure out what Heretic is starting with a "t". If the clue was anything in the first 6 letters of the alphabet (except "e") I would get it in a second.

Ward.
08-11-2007, 11:23
Throw an r at it and your all set...

Although he does have a point.

Finnigan2004
08-11-2007, 11:26
The second letter is "r", and it is also a creature that is commonly seen in orc and goblin armies.

Fluffy
08-11-2007, 11:44
The second letter is "r", and it is also a creature that is commonly seen in orc and goblin armies.

Tr... tr... trrr... treeman? Treeman!

Hah!

But treemen arn't very common in orc and goblin armies? :eyebrows:

No, I don't get it. :(

Andyroo
08-11-2007, 11:51
They also live under bridges.
Threads getting slightly off topic now.

So, those Silver Helms aye? Is there really much point to them now?
Considering how little effective ranked-up cavalry is in 7th ed (except Bretts ofc), and that a big unit of Helms would cost more than the standard 5/6man unit of Princes, I dont see the point in wasting a Special slot on them anymore.
They were fantastic as Core, but it did lead to the ugly proliferation of All-Cav HEs. Maybe making them a 0-1 Core, Rest special choice (like Flagellants in a Priest army) would've been a better idea.

Finnigan2004
08-11-2007, 12:29
Yup, I suspect that they will be replaced by dragon princes in most armies. They are just not as good a deal for the points, if the rumours I have heard about point cost are true. I am glad the all cavalry build is gone though. Personally I think there are too many such armies running around (and I am not just talking about high elves here). Well, I suppose they are riding around technically, but you know what I mean.

Kellindel
08-11-2007, 15:02
i'd just like to point out there is an even more naste unit to charge in the front than HE spearmen......Dogs of war pike men.
fight in 4 ranks, always strke first against chargers and are only 6pts!!!! (admit lower WS and still T3 and 5+ save)
that not taking into account the regements of renown pikemen with special abilites/ mini heros
charge your knights into them and see what happens!

Actually Saint the attack would still go to the HE. When two units have the same ability it defaults to the unit's initiative. And if I remember right, the HE win out there. If they both had an I of 5 then it would be a roll off.

Already ran into this when my friend used his Pikemen against my Spearelves.

The second game we played he grabbed a wall and dared me to attack. At which point I started hitting the Pikemen with arrows and moved my spearmen somewhere else.

Kellindel
08-11-2007, 15:07
Okay, mathammer scenario: High Elf Spears vs Empire Swordsmen

Spears are 9 points, Swords are 6, so let's assume a block of 20 spearmen vs 30 swordsmen.

Spears strike first with 16 attacks (include champions) = 1/2 hit times 1/2 wound times 1/2 fail their armor saves. On average - two swordsmen dead.

Swords strike back with 4 attacks = 1/2 hit times 1/2 wound times 2/3 fail their saves. On average, two thirds of a spearman dead.

Elves are up by 1 and 1/3 of a wound, Empire have outnumber.

Elves win the combat by 1/3 of a wound.

Non-combat advantages: Elven unit is faster and has higher leadership, Empire unit less vulnerable to missile fire (it'll take more wounds to force a panic test and a lot more wounds to reduce a rank) and has detachments; if the Swordsmen have a detachment which counter-charges the spearmen, they will beat the elves in double time.

Overall this doesn't sound overpowered to me at all. Elite armies should beat other armies in toe-to-toe combat as the other armies bring more options and a greater margin for error.

What does a Swordsman come with?? LA, Sheild, and sword??

How are the blocks set up?? There's a few things we need to get corrected before we can go with numbers...

Heretic Burner
08-11-2007, 18:43
an arguement is backed up by some sort of evidence, a statement is basically just your opinion. without explaining yourself how can other people come round to seeing things from your point of view?.

I don't know what other evidence you need more than comparing HE units to other T3 armies units. It is pretty clear that the HE field much more survivable T3 units than most other armies due to their armor save.


please clarify exactly how HE are perhaps the most survivable T3 army i the game, bearing in mind you're using the survivability angle to argue against them getting ASF and that silverhelms can no longer be taken as core.

Silverhelms? They aren't infantry so that of course is irrelevant. He infantry tend to have 5+ armor saves, most other armies have infantry with 6+ or none. Throw in the fact that they are one of the fastest T3 army in the game, then yes they are indeed much more survivable than say Empire.

For some bizarre reason Brets have been brought up as being more survivable. I don't see how peasants (no save) or M@A (equal to HE saves) are more survivable. They are also a lot slower. Just don't get it.

superknijn
08-11-2007, 18:51
Men at arms are very cheap, and can use the leadership of nearby units of Knights. They are also a rather uncommonly seen unit in a bretonnian army, and we all know that Knights are way more 'survivable' than most High Elf units, and are Core.

WillFightForFood
08-11-2007, 19:06
First off, you never specified infantry. You said T3 army. Regardless, More survivable T3 units based on armor save? Let's think about this, assuming shields/armor are purchased for those that can purchase them.
Empire: Swordsmen 5+/4+, Halberdiers & Spearmen 5+, Greatswords 4+
Orcs: Goblin/Night Goblin spearmen 5+
Chaos: Marauders 5+/4+, Bloodletters/Daemonettes/Horrors 5+ Ward
OK: Gnoblars - Nada
Skaven: Clanrats 5+/4+, Slaves 6+/5+, Stormvermin 4+/3+
Tombkings/VC: Skeletons 5+/4+

And of that list of T3 infantry, all but the Chaos Daemons and the Greatswords are cheaper. Pretty much all have the same save, some are even better. Of course survivable doesn't mean much because many of them are meant to die. Not only do I expect to lose Skaven when I play, a number of units are just there to die, primarily.

Now look at the new HE:
Spearmen 5+, Phoenix Guard 5+Armor 4+Ward, Swordsmasters 5+, White Lions 4+/ 3+ vs shooting

So where does this added survivability come from? With the exception of the Phoenix Guard, none of those is exceptionally better. Their armor saves are pretty much the same.

A lot slower? 1" less a turn.

You have a penchant for hyperbole.

Finnigan2004
08-11-2007, 19:25
I don't know what other evidence you need more than comparing HE units to other T3 armies units. It is pretty clear that the HE field much more survivable T3 units than most other armies due to their armor save.

Depends upon on whether you are comparing them to other armies where all models are toughness 3 or not. If this is the case, I assume that you are writing about dark elves, as that is the only other army without access to troops or heroes with a higher toughness than 3. If that is the comparison that you are making, I concede to your argument. Dark elves are probably not as good as high elves will be. Otherwise, the comparison on a unit by unit basis as everyone else is doing would make your point better than a circular argument that it clearly is because you say so and because you say so it clearly is.

Heretic Burner
08-11-2007, 19:29
Empire: Swordsmen 5+/4+, Halberdiers & Spearmen 5+, Greatswords 4+

Handgunners, xbowmen, archers, huntsmen, flagellants, freecompany...I'm going to assume these were "accidentally" omitted. Clearly Empire aren't anywhere close to the norm of HE survivability.


Orcs: Goblin/Night Goblin spearmen 5+

All of which tend to fear HE, adding to HE survivability. Herds and hoppers, also oddly omitted, also T3, also nowhere near as survivable. Next.


Chaos: Marauders 5+/4+, Bloodletters/Daemonettes/Horrors 5+ Ward

I'm not following you, none of these are more survivable than HE T3 infantry and none come from a T3 army. Next.


OK: Gnoblars - Nada

Certainly the toughest of all armies :rolleyes: Next.


Skaven: Clanrats 5+/4+, Slaves 6+/5+, Stormvermin 4+/3+

No need to even begin listing the countless "accidentally" omitted units here. Clearly not as survivable as an army. Next.


Tombkings/VC: Skeletons 5+/4+

Zombies. Quite frankly there is little else in the VC army even remotely survivable compared to most HE units and the TK army are primarily T4+ so of no consequence to the discussion. Next.


And of that list of T3 infantry, all but the Chaos Daemons and the Greatswords are cheaper. Pretty much all have the same save, some are even better. Of course survivable doesn't mean much because many of them are meant to die. Not only do I expect to lose Skaven when I play, a number of units are just there to die, primarily.

I don't see any more survivable than Phoenix Guard. I don't see any of the armies listed that contain anywhere remotely the overall armor save in the HE army list. I have noticed many omitted units however.


Now look at the new HE:
Spearmen 5+, Phoenix Guard 5+Armor 4+Ward, Swordsmasters 5+, White Lions 4+/ 3+ vs shooting

Yes HE units tend to have at least a 5+ save with very few exceptions. All on a horrendously powerful offensive unit.


So where does this added survivability come from? With the exception of the Phoenix Guard, none of those is exceptionally better. Their armor saves are pretty much the same.

Across the board HE units are indeed much more survivable than comparable armies. I see you may have omitted some (most?) units, I don't know why but when included it makes it quite clear.


A lot slower? 1" less a turn.

Yes, most armies tend to be at least 20% slower than HE infantry, not even considering such rules as animosity. 20%! Yes, a lot slower.


You have a penchant for hyperbole.

You have a penchant for omitting facts. :p

Havock
08-11-2007, 19:49
I think ASF is overrated, but that doesn't make it weak.
The main issue is that was -until now- quite rare, usually taking a lord-level character with a good deal of magic items to get the most out of it.

However, as mentioned, the elves sort of need it, although it would have been better if the rule was written as "ASF against opponents in the front, if the attacker is in the side, all normal rules apply", that way,a clever elf player will still get his ASF, but it pays off to try and outmaneouvre him, rather than the current "throw something nastier at it" school of thought. An arrow in large numbers qualifying.
The rule isn't broken per sé, it's just that whilst stuff like a nice mounted chaos list won't have too much trouble (chosen knights for example still can take out 12 swordmasters, which is the most likely unit size), ogres and O&G can -and will- struggle. Outnumbering and static CR is nice, but if your opponent can average out an equal amount of kills before you strike, that's the end of that dream as well.

Still, there is a good deal of units that have the potential to utterly maim a unit of swordmsaters, they are horribly vulnerable. Leadblechers, anything with breath attacks, RBT'schariots, chosen chaos knights, so A Way Shall Be FoundŪ.
And in the end, stuff like chosen chaos knights, airforces and others are equally hard as nails units. Last Tuesday, my unit of 5 chosen knights with warbanner and attached Exalted champion nearly singlehandeldy tore the **** out of say, 600 pts worth of orcs. The game was 750 pts, and yes, I love the unit. Equally 'broken' if you ask me, they might not strike first, but they'll probably survive to strike anyway :p

W0lf
08-11-2007, 20:37
I dont think the rule is that broken.

the only two times i have a issue with it are:

sword masters. 2 ws s5 ASF dosnt sit with me.
Spearmen. coupled with fight in 3 ranks its a tad gay.

the rest dosnt really matter all that much...

and chosen knights are just lame lol. They might aswell strike first with I5 and the fact they will get the charge (against most things)

But meh i love my chaos knights (i run the same set-up as you.. 5 chosen + exalted and a warbanner on the unit... brutal..)

EndlessBug
08-11-2007, 21:00
Heretic, I believe WillFightForFood was refering to most armies "mainstay" combat units.


Handgunners, xbowmen, archers, huntsmen, flagellants, freecompany...I'm going to assume these were "accidentally" omitted. Clearly Empire aren't anywhere close to the norm of HE survivability.

handgunners/xbow, archers, hunters = missile troops, going on this line please compare them to archers and shadow warriors, whichn likewise have no armour (6+ for the SW I think but that's laughable) and yet the HE cost around 3 points more per model. So no they are not more survivable, they are equal in survivability.


All of which tend to fear HE, adding to HE survivability. Herds and hoppers, also oddly omitted, also T3, also nowhere near as survivable. Next.

only when not outnumbering 2-1, with HE being expensive that's quite likely. Negating the fear point, making them again equally survivable.


I'm not following you, none of these are more survivable than HE T3 infantry and none come from a T3 army. Next.

well demons are slightly different, not so good against magic but MUCH more survivable against shooting and combat attacks as it's a ward save not a armour save. Marauders are equally survivable again.


No need to even begin listing the countless "accidentally" omitted units here. Clearly not as survivable as an army. Next.

I believe he included the most common units which are the "core" fighting units of the army (including jezzails, gutter runners, rat ogres would need to be compared to other unit types), granted he ommitted plague monks with no armour. But all save the slaves (2 points/model!) have equal if not better saves.



Zombies. Quite frankly there is little else in the VC army even remotely survivable compared to most HE units and the TK army are primarily T4+ so of no consequence to the discussion. Next.

I'd consider CV and Tomb Kings a T3 army as their core infantry is all T3, although I could see why you don't.


I don't see any more survivable than Phoenix Guard. I don't see any of the armies listed that contain anywhere remotely the overall armor save in the HE army list. I have noticed many omitted units however.

That is true, PG are VERY survivable, but then again all the troops WillPayForFood mentioned were core troops and not specials. This unit does seem obsenely defencive.

[quote]Yes HE units tend to have at least a 5+ save with very few exceptions. All on a horrendously powerful offensive unit.[/quote

5+ (if not better) is generally the most common save for rank and file troops against shooting and combat, so all in all it isn't that odd to see it on HE. Dropping this to 6+ or no save would be ridiculous. Look at the mathhammer everyone has done, granted it isnt as straight forward as that, but it takes you along the right lines.

HE are without doubt more survivable than DE, but everyone has accepted that DE are a weaker army to begin with, now vastly outmatched by their goodie goodie cousins... for now.

sainthale1988
08-11-2007, 21:11
Actually Saint the attack would still go to the HE. When two units have the same ability it defaults to the unit's initiative. And if I remember right, the HE win out there. If they both had an I of 5 then it would be a roll off.

Already ran into this when my friend used his Pikemen against my Spearelves.

The second game we played he grabbed a wall and dared me to attack. At which point I started hitting the Pikemen with arrows and moved my spearmen somewhere else.

i didn't mean against HE they would 'naturaly' go first, i was talking about taking the hit from heavy cavalry in general. my point was that they are cheaper (in points) and do much the same job

Lord Raneus
08-11-2007, 21:56
Yes, if you start comparing PG to other armies' rare troops you'll probably find ones that are comparable in survivability, although I am dubious about the 4+ Ward Save.

And Dark Elves should not be used to compare at all. They're so hopelessly in need of an update at this point that they aren't even valid for comparison against HE. :P

And as repeatedly stated, HE are not more survivable against "most armies". If you're looking at straight survivability, I'd say they beat Goblins, DE (duh. :P), Skaven, and technically Undead. But that's it.

And as already said by people before me, you cannot compare Empire Handgunners to Swordmasters or even Spearmen in terms of survivability. Two completely different roles.

BenK
08-11-2007, 22:18
Ever seen anyone backed into a corner who's obviously wrong but too proud to admit it?

T3 AS5+ troops that cost 15 points each are now 'survivable'. Please. T3 AS5+ troops that cost 5 points could vaguely be considered survivable. 15 points, or even 9 points, it's just a stupid claim.

Dranthar
08-11-2007, 22:40
Yes spearelves are extraordinarily powerful units for a dirt cheap price. Exactly as stated.

Sensational claims made repeatedly and without a shred of logic given.

Reported for trolling

I'm done with this thread.

Heretic Burner
08-11-2007, 23:13
5+ (if not better) is generally the most common save for rank and file troops against shooting and combat, so all in all it isn't that odd to see it on HE. Dropping this to 6+ or no save would be ridiculous. Look at the mathhammer everyone has done, granted it isnt as straight forward as that, but it takes you along the right lines.


5+ save isn't at all that common as you make it out. I don't know why you are limiting it only to units that are typically used in ranked blocks as the other units in the army should be considered equally. I've been through the list and pointed out in all the armies where it simply isn't the case they are more survivable than HE. It is quite rare for a primarily T3 army to have this kind of save coupled with that kind of mobility (to say nothing of leadership). The mathhammer only reinforces the notion, HE units maul other units in combat particularly DE, OK, and O&G. And they have this overwhelming offence in the form of units with top notch mobility and, yes, quite decent survivability.

I have no reason at all to have a problem with the high saves though, its perfectly reasonable on its own. My problem is the bizarre notion that:

A) HE are fragile

and

B) HE require strikes first

It is quite clear both are nonsense.

jonnywright104
08-11-2007, 23:31
these arent nonsense at all!! when you think that an orc is T4, it is quite reasonable for an elf to b T3, and the whole reasn behing asf is that elves are hundreds of years old and r thus wel experienced at fighting!!

theunwantedbeing
08-11-2007, 23:35
Spear elves are rather good though.
Consider what they are now.
9pts for a fight in 3 ranks unit with a 5+ armour save and weaponskill 4.
Deployed 7 wide of course.
Full command, 21 of them.
214pts which may seem a lot to skaven and goblin players but to say.....chaos players and even undead players thats not that many points on a 21 man unit.

22 attacks hitting on 3's is good for dropping a couple of knights a turn, which seems rubbish but as most knight units arent very big and you strike first your negating a couple of wounds you'll take yourself.
So it makes for less knights to kill more models giving you an advantage.

One reason pikes are not so nice for knights to charge, sure they hit harder but the principle is the same but has a higehr leadership and greater speed.
An extra movment is worth a lot, as is a bit more leadership.

Although untill I get a proper guage of the battlefield situation by facing such things my opinion (and likely that of other "complainers" or "whiners") will stay the same as a result of comparions like the one above.

I'm sure everyone is more worried about dragon princes and lion chariots and swordsmasters to be particularly bothered about spearmen though.

Heretic Burner
08-11-2007, 23:50
these arent nonsense at all!! when you think that an orc is T4, it is quite reasonable for an elf to b T3, and the whole reasn behing asf is that elves are hundreds of years old and r thus wel experienced at fighting!!

I'm not following you. A bog standard orc is T4 with a 6+ save. A bog standard HE tends to be T3 with a 5+ save. This is certainly not a massive change in survivability.

Now, as for elves being hundreds of years old - sure, and they have superior weapon skill to show for it. They are more skilled at fighting than an orc - which one might find quite odd considering greenskins spend their entire lives fighting while the higher skilled elves can very well come from a part-time militia! Shockingly enough these part timers are equally skilled as their dark counterparts, who most certainly aren't part timers - and oddly they strike first. Must be oddly confusing even in a dark elf's drug addled state.

From a game perspective, the rules simply don't match the fluff at all many times. This is acceptable, there is an attempt at some game balance (Slann in particular are short changed when considering fluff to game rules). The problem arises when both the fluff and game balance doesn't work out very well.

Spear Elves aren't the big concern for opponents of HE, however there is no doubt they are an excellent choice and simply not that much more fragile than the aforementioned orc which, from a fluff perspective, should indeed be nasty and hard as nails. HE didn't need strike first, it doesn't make sense from a fluff perspective, and it doesn't make sense from a game perspective. I just don't see why they went this way.

Flypaper
09-11-2007, 00:21
Was the problem ever that ASF was overpowered? The intelligent complaint was always that it was poorly designed, and made High Elves better against the units they could already beat without improving them against the units they struggled against.

HE Spearmen can take out Orcs. You don't say? Heck, why are you doing ranked infantry vs. ranked infantry in the first place? That's not what it's for, barring a few specialised units like Witch Elves (who are being legitimately screwed over).

But since when was cheap infantry the most powerful force in Warhammer? Greenskins are bottom tier, and the most powerful skaven armies run a seriously reduced model count.

... And High Elf spearmen haven't improved much against heavy cavalry, and still struggle to kill armoured T4 units. Sound familiar? Yup, it's just like it was in 6th edition. :angel:

BenK
09-11-2007, 00:45
I have no reason at all to have a problem with the high saves though, its perfectly reasonable on its own. My problem is the bizarre notion that:

A) HE are fragile

and

B) HE require strikes first

It is quite clear both are nonsense.

HE are fragile.

Consider empire soldiers, the 'vanilla' troops of the warhammer world, right? Consider empire spearmen:

T3, save 5+ - for 5 points.

Now consider HE spearmen:

T3, save 5+ - for 9 points.

They die just as easily as each other, and you have 9 empire wounds for every 5 HE wounds you've got. That is, HE core infantry are almost twice as fragile as empire infantry. No matter which way you spin it, being outnumbered 9 to 5 is a significant disadvantage.

Of course, the HE have corresponding advantages; they're faster and have one point of better leadership, - and they have ASF. Of course they don't _need_ ASF. But it's hardly overpowering (consider that 20 HE spearmen beat 30 empire swordsmen by a grand total of average 2/3 of a wound in CR) and personally I like it. Adds a strong dash of flavor to the potentially insipid high elf list.

Lord Raneus
09-11-2007, 01:26
I'm not following you. A bog standard orc is T4 with a 6+ save. A bog standard HE tends to be T3 with a 5+ save. This is certainly not a massive change in survivability.

Now, as for elves being hundreds of years old - sure, and they have superior weapon skill to show for it. They are more skilled at fighting than an orc - which one might find quite odd considering greenskins spend their entire lives fighting while the higher skilled elves can very well come from a part-time militia! Shockingly enough these part timers are equally skilled as their dark counterparts, who most certainly aren't part timers - and oddly they strike first. Must be oddly confusing even in a dark elf's drug addled state.

From a game perspective, the rules simply don't match the fluff at all many times. This is acceptable, there is an attempt at some game balance (Slann in particular are short changed when considering fluff to game rules). The problem arises when both the fluff and game balance doesn't work out very well.




First of all, never insult the Druchii. Khaine will feast upon your soul.:)

Secondly, the DE and HE are not a valid comparison, because the DE army book is 6th Ed. and to be honest, was not that strong even then. OK are not the shining example of a good list either, and you're also the same person who keeps whinging about how bad the O&G book is, and then you want to use it to prove how good another army is? Please.

Also, if you want to talk about getting short-changed from fluff to game rules, the C'tan are waiting in the lobby. =P
I do agree though, that some parts of the rule don't make sense. HE Bowmen striking before things like DE Assassins or Chaos lords is just...eh?:eyebrows:

Chiungalla
09-11-2007, 05:56
I played new high elves against empire yesterday (2000 points).

I won in general, but lost my white lions (including hero and archmage) to a unit of knights (not inner circle including a templar grand master) after a long battle of 6 combat phases.

With ASF they have done a good fight.
Without ASF they would have been annihilated without dealing any damage.

But of couse, I would not have fieldet them without ASF.

The Dragon Princes have done a great job.
And the shooting (20 archers, 6 shadow warriors, 2 RBT's) and magic won the battle for me.

EndlessBug
09-11-2007, 08:57
5+ save isn't at all that common as you make it out. I don't know why you are limiting it only to units that are typically used in ranked blocks as the other units in the army should be considered equally. I've been through the list and pointed out in all the armies where it simply isn't the case they are more survivable than HE. It is quite rare for a primarily T3 army to have this kind of save coupled with that kind of mobility (to say nothing of leadership). The mathhammer only reinforces the notion, HE units maul other units in combat particularly DE, OK, and O&G. And they have this overwhelming offence in the form of units with top notch mobility and, yes, quite decent survivability.

I have no reason at all to have a problem with the high saves though, its perfectly reasonable on its own. My problem is the bizarre notion that:

A) HE are fragile

and

B) HE require strikes first

It is quite clear both are nonsense.

Heretic when you compare RnF troops to others of diff armies you compare them to those of similar roles! infantry to infantry, special or rare to special or rare, cavalry to cavalry, shooting to shooting etc.

You want to average out the HE saves?
spearelves, swordmasters, Sea Guard = 5+
archers = none
Shadow warriors, reavers = 6+
White Lions = 3+/4+ (shooting/combat)
Phoenix Guard = 5+ then 4+ ward
Silver helms, Dragon Princes = 2+ (assuming fully equiped)

so an average save of around 5+ for an average points cost of 16.7 points. So, yeah they are blooming fragile for their points cost, their average model (excluding characters) is almost 17 points, that's almost 3x the cost of an empire RnF troop, it is over 2x the cost of a empire shooty unit, and about 3/4 the points cost of a empire knight.

Sure, HE have better movement (Ld can be changed to suit for the Empire with characters) but they need it, being outnumbered on average over 2 to 1.

Darkspear
09-11-2007, 09:13
I have heard many players mentioning that Asur sux even now and they need the ASF rule. I have take a look at these army lists and conclude that these Asur armies have not been doing well because the army were build inefficiently. I see many examples of players taking powerful units such as swordmasters and 2 dragons only to be defeated due to low model count.

In my opinion, winning with Asur will require making good use of your cheap spearmen, underpriced knights and powerful dragon princes. A good reliance on shooting (3 rbts) and a steady magic phase. However this is only a theory. I will be getting my asur book tomorrow and will be trying out this army.

I still feel that Asur are cheesy but I will not comment much until my game tomorrow. Meanwhile stay tune for an update :).

By the way druchii and asrai players, in addition to a Asur, lead by myself, vs any takers game, I have also scheduled a druchii (myself) vs Asur and a Asrai (also by myself) vs Asur game in the subsequent weeks. Wish me luck!!!

Lord Raneus
09-11-2007, 11:53
You're gonna lose the Druchii game, man.:p

But good luck with the Asrai, they still have a good chance.

Varath- Lord Impaler
09-11-2007, 12:41
i look forward to facing high elves with my Dwarfs. Ironbreakers vs Swordmasters will be very fun.

DeathlessDraich
09-11-2007, 13:58
By the way druchii and asrai players, in addition to a Asur, lead by myself, vs any takers game, I have also scheduled a druchii (myself) vs Asur and a Asrai (also by myself) vs Asur game in the subsequent weeks. Wish me luck!!!

Asrai can beat the Asur. I don't think their tactics will change.
Druchii? That will be difficult but do report the outcome here.


i look forward to facing high elves with my Dwarfs. Ironbreakers vs Swordmasters will be very fun.

IB vs SM is a coin toss, I think. I think it's the Dragon Princes you need to worry about more. Dwarfs with an Anvil and Miners could win.
Looking forward to a battle report.

I intend to try my luck against the new Asur with Tomb Kings, Skaven and possibly Empire in the next few weeks.
I shall be insisting that the Asur field there strongest possible army lists, replete with Swordmasters, Dragon Princes and Bolt throwers. A bloodbath would be good. :D

smileyface
09-11-2007, 14:29
As everyone knows, i've been one of the folks complaining the most about the always strike first rule for HE’s and now after having played against it I have to say its not ANYWHERE NEAR as bad as I thought.

That's big of you. It's nice to see people who are man (or woman) enough to admit they made a mistake.


Spear elves are rather good though.
22 attacks hitting on 3's is good for dropping a couple of knights a turn,

It's good for a couple if they have a 3+ save. Against 2+ saves it's good for about one. Also consider that most knights are WS4 - the only WS3 ones that spring to mind are Errants. With WS4 and a 2+ save the kills drop down to 0.916 recurring. Obviously it's nice to get a kill in and prevent that one attack (plus the horse), but it doesn't make spearelves cav killers. They're still in their original role of killing infantry.


I dont think the rule is that broken.
the only two times i have a issue with it are:
sword masters. 2 ws s5 ASF dosnt sit with me.

Me neither, and I might be using a unit of them. It's just a bit too much. Still, I don't see any other way they could have done it - one attack was too few, two is too many. This happens to quite a lot of elite (but not as elite as Chosen) troops - they get stuck with dodgy rules that don't quite work because the 1.5A middle ground doesn't exist. Look at Black Guard - they chose the other way there and didn't give them 2A, instead choosing a re-roll as a sort of half attack extra.


Spearmen. coupled with fight in 3 ranks its a tad gay

I think you should avoid using "gay" as a pejorative.


Was the problem ever that ASF was overpowered? The intelligent complaint was always that it was poorly designed, and made High Elves better against the units they could already beat without improving them against the units they struggled against.

I agree with the sentiment. As changes go, this one is inelegant, which is particularly inappropriate considering the army.


I think ASF is overrated, but that doesn't make it weak.
...it would have been better if the rule was written as "ASF against opponents in the front, if the attacker is in the side, all normal rules apply", that way,a clever elf player will still get his ASF, but it pays off to try and outmaneouvre him

Yes, that would've been better. If they see you coming, their decades of training kick in and they stab you a lot. If they don't see you coming, you surprise them. Have you considered applying for a job with GW? They need ideas like this.


So, those Silver Helms aye? Is there really much point to them now?

I'm not seeing one, really, except that I have a load of the models. I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of Reavers and other fast cav. I think that really, fast cav should be core, because all armies (of races that use horses) should have scouts and they shouldn't have to compete for special slots. Obviously the problem there would be armies with all fast cav (or all heavy cav if we extend to silver helms) as their core, which basically stops them from being a proper army. The best thought I came to was that you could make them Core, but not count as such for the minimum core restriction. Hence, no slot competition but no all-cav army. I think that would be a good plan for most fast cav and most core heavy cav (not Brets).

Dragonics
09-11-2007, 19:25
Theres one or two possible army lists that could 'break' the ASF rule, namely White Lion armies and Hoeth Armies. Admidtly when i first heard about the ASF i was kinda annoyed but I do see why and do see that it is 'needed'. It all depends on the players choice, whether that would like to field a 'broken'ish army or a more balenced army. Personally, 1 of my friends is fielding a 2000 point white lion army with units of 20 white lions and chariots which with my dark elves im not looking forward to, but each his own.

Heretic Burner
09-11-2007, 20:14
HE are fragile.

No, they aren't.



Consider empire soldiers, the 'vanilla' troops of the warhammer world, right?

The 'vanilla' Empire troops in the Warhammer world are halberdiers

T3, save 6+ - for 5 points.

Now consider HE spearmen:

T3, save 5+ - for 9 points.

HE spearmen are more survivable, at a cost less than twice the Empire unit. HE spearment are vastly more offensive. HE spearmen have a better statline across the board, including in movement and leadership by far the most important stats in the game. So yes, they are quite survivable.

So yes, ASF is by no means necessary are even warrented.
[/QUOTE]

Bluepothos
09-11-2007, 22:09
Just to confuse things a little more - being new to warhammer - I'm disappointed that spearmen aren't cavalry killers - historically (not warhammer but in the real world) spears were the 2nd best defence against cavalry (first being pikes). Would be cool to see spears causing fear to cavalry (given that horses strangely don't like charging a forest of lethal pointy stabby hurty things). But thats by the by - game balance is more important. Sorry, I'll let the discussion go on now... :)

Kahadras
09-11-2007, 22:49
HE spearmen are more survivable, at a cost less than twice the Empire unit.

I agree. Based on the fact that they are nearly twice as expencive they should be nearly twice as good.

Moving back onto a more sensible note ASF isn't that awesome. The HE still have the same problem that they had back in their old book. Lack of numbers. Even a decent amount of firepower in an army will cause HE a problem and countering this by increasing the firepower of the elf army leads to a decrease in the amount of 'scary' close combat troops the HE can field.

Kahadras

Exitus
09-11-2007, 23:11
OK, I've been lurking for the past few days watching this debate unfold, and, as a long time High Elf player, I feel the need to weigh in on the issue.

My first point is that, initially I was highly dubious about ASF, as was the other HE player I know at my club. We both thought that it was an incredibly dubious fix, and quite likely overpowering. However, as I have listened to the debate, and more and more information about the new army book was released, I can to the following conclusion: ASF isn't really overpowering and broken. In fact, I think I can see what their intentions are. High Elves have become a truly "Elite" army. Everything, with the exception of Core is horribly expensive, which is merely expensive. The result is a small, but highly deadly army.
The effect of ASF changes by unit. Cavalry it has the least effect on, due to their reliance on the charge to get weapons bonuses. For archers, it makes them a much more daunting proposition for light cavalry and skirmishers, and for infantry, it makes they a lot more dangerous in various degrees.
The main effect that ASF has, along with the various other improvements to the Elite infantry means that they can consistently beat roughly equivalent units in other armies. he Elf spearmen will rip through Empire Spearmen, Clanrats, Goblins and will give Orcs a hard time, if not exactly shine. The elite on the other hand . . . Swordmasters will massacre anything which doesn't have a 1+ or 2+ save and/or Toughness 4, while White Lions will be damaging to heavily armoured stuff and stick around. To my eye it looks like PG will mainly be used as an anvil unit, with minimal damage output.

So, what point am I trying to make throughout all this rambling? High Elves have always been about armies which are, to quote Rick Priestly, "Small but perfectly formed". In my mind, the High Elf army has been one that is horribly outnumbered, but due to sheer skill, are still capable of winning the day. So, thematically it fits, more so that the 6th edition book. but what of the over powering issue? Well, this comes back to something which has been fiercely discussed here. The fragility of Elves. Elves are fragile, no two ways about it. In 6th edition, elves died a lot, with T3 and a minimal armour save an anything not cavalry, even Goblins killed elves without to much bother. In the games I played, losing about 1/2 my Swordmasters was normal, through combat, not shooting. Now, overall survivability in combat has gone up, due to ASF. Even in the case of squishy archers, striking first means less attacks back, so Survivability has gone up. This only applies to combat though. Against missile fire, High Elves are just as vulnerable, with the exception of White Lions and Phoenix Guard.
High Elves have always been a Glass cannon, except now its a tempered shock proof glass cannon that shoots you in the face before you can smash it. It is however even more ludicrously expensive. Sure, Core has dropped, and for good reason, in 6th they were over priced to the point that spears and archers were rarely taken, now, slightly cheaper and with ASF they are a much better bet. Everything else, with the exception of Silver Helms and possibly Tiranoc chariots has gone up in price, this means less elves on the table. The general trend in Army List posted is that they are very very small.
Overall, I would say that ASF, when put in context wit the rest of the changes makes sense, and will not be over powering. I hardly think its an ideal solution, but its here now so we have to live with it. The inclusion of ASF has made high Elf units more survivable in combat, but they are still equally vulnerable to Shooting and flanking and being engaged by superior units. A unit of say, black Orcs or Dwarven Ironbreakers will still break spearmen, but will have a much tougher time with Swordmasters and White lions, who in turn will suffer against Chariots and Heavy cavalry.

So I've waffled on a fair bit here, but I think that many of the same tactics will work against the new High Elves. They have become more durable in combat, but overall costs have increased meaning smaller armies on the field.

stonehorse
09-11-2007, 23:23
People are saying that an High Elf army is troop lite. I was just wondering if anyone has thought of going SpearElf and Archers heavy. I can imagine they can be fielded in quite large numbers at the expense of other elite units. Stick a High Elf character in the front rank with a Great Weapon and some type of Magical protection, and just march towards the enemy.

If I where to do an Elf army I would favour Spearelves, for their points cost they can be horrid. If I ever do High Elves in the future, I'd use just Spearelves, Archers and Repeater Bolt Throwers... keep it simple and effective.

Kahadras
09-11-2007, 23:53
If I ever do High Elves in the future, I'd use just Spearelves, Archers and Repeater Bolt Throwers... keep it simple and effective.

It might work or it might horribly backfire. At the end of the day the best save you have is a 5+ and you're relying on your characters for a strength above 3. On top of this maneuverability is awful so points will at least have to be put into some form of light cavalry to counteract this.

Kahadras

BenK
10-11-2007, 02:03
I actually really like ASF as a high-elf thing. High Elves deserve a significant sense of leetness.

Lord Raneus
10-11-2007, 03:12
No, they aren't.



The 'vanilla' Empire troops in the Warhammer world are halberdiers

T3, save 6+ - for 5 points.

Now consider HE spearmen:

T3, save 5+ - for 9 points.

HE spearmen are more survivable, at a cost less than twice the Empire unit. HE spearment are vastly more offensive. HE spearmen have a better statline across the board, including in movement and leadership by far the most important stats in the game. So yes, they are quite survivable.

So yes, ASF is by no means necessary are even warrented.
[/QUOTE]


Oh, Sigmar. *smacks forehead*
So many people have put forth rational arguments and you simply reject them. Why are you only allowed to compare Halberdiers to HE spearmen? There's a thread not two below this asking "Are Halberdiers useless?" How about Swordsmen? 6 pts for a 4+ save? Statistically, a unit of 15 HE spearmen willl cause 2.5 casualties to the Empire soldiers, leaving 3-4 attacks coming back at them, which translates into possibly one dead Elf, and that means Empire wins because of outnumbering and better rank bonus. As pointed out, if they cost 2/3s more then they damn well better have better stats, but HE spearmen are not more survivable than Empire swordsmen. Sure, Swordsmen have worse Ld, but they have more bodies to soak fire, so panic tests from shooting are less likely, they will get a better rank bonus, outnumbering, will be able to flank HE, etc.

Basically, what I see here is you using weaker units/armies, that in some cases you have called weak, as an excuse to go "O NOEZ T3H HIGH ELV3S 4R3 BROK3N RUN!!! :eek:" Please, look at both sides of the argument or don't post at all.

Really, I'm sick of arguing with you. You simply reject everything that's been thrown at you and keep on saying "Nuh-uh, I'm right, you're wrong."
I'm through responding to your posts.

Kahadras
10-11-2007, 07:16
Why are you only allowed to compare Halberdiers to HE spearmen? There's a thread not two below this asking "Are Halberdiers useless?" How about Swordsmen? 6 pts for a 4+ save?

Actualy by buying Halbardiers shields they become tougher than HE spearmen. As they have hand weapons they can chose to use those instead of their halbards giving them a 4+ save in hth.

Kahadras

Spoonie
10-11-2007, 07:29
Well yes, but at that point you might as well compare them to the equally costed swordsmen who trade the halberd for WS4 and I4. And by the same token the elves could use their own hand weapon and shield combo, it's just way more worth it for them to use spears then it is for halberdiers to use their halberds.

txamil
10-11-2007, 07:48
Why do people kep saying HEs are expensive? Dwarfs, C dwarfs, Chaos, Ogres, and lizardmen are all more expensive.
HE, DE and WE are all equally expensive. Beastmen are about the same, as are Brets all things considered.

So HEs aren't even in the top half.

For the new abilties/stat lines, HEs are not expensive at all, definately not in the top half. (Poor DEs on the other hand:)

In my experience HE armies had few troops because (for some reason) HE players spend a ton on characters and kitting out characters. HE generals hated 6th ed so they just played as if they were still in 5th. HE armies always had a good third of their points sunk in Characters and trappings. Every lis started with the asumption it had to dominate the magic phase, and snowballed rom there.

And I have no idea if ASF will be messed or not. Have to wait and see really.

Kahadras
10-11-2007, 07:50
Well yes, but at that point you might as well compare them to the equally costed swordsmen who trade the halberd for WS4 and I4.

Yup but according to Heretic Halbardiers are the 'vanilla' Empire unit (whatever that means).


And by the same token the elves could use their own hand weapon and shield combo, it's just way more worth it for them to use spears then it is for halberdiers to use their halberds.

but like you said it's better for the HE to use their spears to give them an extra two ranks of attacks. Without Spears the HE just become expencive Swordmen.

Kahadras

Urgat
10-11-2007, 08:52
I agree. Based on the fact that they are nearly twice as expencive they should be nearly twice as good.

Moving back onto a more sensible note ASF isn't that awesome. The HE still have the same problem that they had back in their old book. Lack of numbers. Even a decent amount of firepower in an army will cause HE a problem and countering this by increasing the firepower of the elf army leads to a decrease in the amount of 'scary' close combat troops the HE can field.

Kahadras

But what about armies with little/no ranged units? I'd like to see a battle report of HE versus ogres, VC or chaos, personaly. You're all talking dwarfs, empire, other elves. Well yeah sure, these ones won't have so much pb with ASF to begin with, but what about the ones who don't have helblasters or RBT? Not saying it's impossible, I don't know, I just want to read battle reports about that.

logan054
10-11-2007, 11:07
Well im playing my first game against the new High Elves today with my chaos, no matter the result i still think ASF was the greatest thought out rule, i do agree however that the problem is with the 6th ed HE that people would easily spend nearly 800pts + on characters and then wonder why they had so few troops.

Anyways after today i will decide if i hate the new rules or not

sainthale1988
10-11-2007, 11:08
i played a 1000 pt game vs new high elves yesterday with my VC, and actually i'm in no way as big a panic that i was before. basicly there still so expensive that they don't have large numbers of units thus i was able to outmenuver them, thier magic was not an issue as i had 3 necromancers, they still failed fear check and auto breaked and i netralied the new lion chariot thing but putting 2 bases of spirit hosts on it. basicly ASP spearmen in the front were realy realy nasty, but otherwise were managable, ohh and the new dragon princes were nasty till i got something in thier flank (i do love that book of arnack :evilgrin:) they are eminatly killable you just have to pick your fights a little more carefully so it made for a very good game

smileyface
10-11-2007, 14:12
Why do people kep saying HEs are expensive? Dwarfs, C dwarfs, Chaos, Ogres, and lizardmen are all more expensive.

HE don't have any way to make up numbers - their best bet is the 9pt spear. All those other armies except dwarves can take cheap troops to bulk them out (greenskins, marauders, warhound, gnoblars, skinks).

Dwarves are slightly cheaper than HE in the basic infantry department, dwarf elites are cheaper than elf elites, dwarf artillary is in the same price range as elf, but the dwarves don't have to invest any points in magic (or at least, they get a combat character out of it if they do), and they can't take cavalry (which is obviously a disadvantage, but it does improve their model count). Overall the result is that dwarf armies tend to outnumber HE ones. This is frankly quite alarming the first time you play as the elves.

Ogres are underpowered. We could discuss it at length, but basically I think GW just made a mess of that one.


For the new abilties/stat lines, HEs are not expensive at all, definately not in the top half. (Poor DEs on the other hand:)

I don't think anyone suggested they were overpriced... merely expensive. The two are different.
*feels sorry for the DE players*


In my experience HE armies had few troops because (for some reason) HE players spend a ton on characters and kitting out characters.

I spent half of last edition fielding exactly one combat character. He had a great weapon, a horse, mundane armour, and a 25 point magic hat. That's not a lot on characters, and I was still outnumbered... I was just less outnumbered than I would have been.

I think there were two things that contributed particularly to HE outnumbering last ed. First, with the infantry being overpriced, most people went for all cav. Obviously that gives a small army. Secondly, because everyone said HE magic was good, people tended to take a lot of magic. Casters are really expensive.

Of course, if the HE players in your area always fielded a combat lord with 100 points of magic items, that wouldn't help either. :)


Every lis started with the asumption it had to dominate the magic phase, and snowballed rom there.

Yeah, it was a problem. Probably still is - I don't see two level 2's being particularly cost effective this time round either. The same thing happens with WE - you know you need some decent magic defense because you're fragile, which means you need mages. Once you have mages you might as well make them offensive casters rather than defensive, because it isn't much more. Then you've invested 350 points, so why not put in another 180 just to make sure you get those spells off?
*shrugs*

I'm not a big fan of the magic system - the way it balances out, what looks like a sensible fluffy mage load means you pay 250 points to get a couple of spells off, but you have to have them for insurance. Gah, it's like owning a car.
I was even less of a fan of the previous one though.


But what about armies with little/no ranged units? I'd like to see a battle report of HE versus ogres, VC or chaos, personaly.

Ogres I think are stuffed. Then again, they were stuffed before, so ASF hasn't changed anything.

VC I don't think ASF changes much. On the one hand, you won't want your vampire to charge those swordmasters unless he's a blood dragon or has got a ward save. On the other hand, ASF versus most of your troops is meaningless. If the spearelves put down three skeletons before they strike instead of afterwards, would those three S3 attacks have changed the game? Not very often. You won combats before either by summoning and/or moving units so that the HE were annihilated by the static combat res; or by throwing in a mix of static CR andd combat monster. The first still works, and the second still works in most cases. Unless it's a thrall plus some skeletons trying to go toe-to-toe with swordmasters then the results of combat haven't really changed.

Chaos now, that's going to be interesting. I imagine the marauders with flails might switch to HW & shield. :) Still, the really heavy stuff is so heavy it will still win, and the dirty magic tricks still work. Plus, core chariots.

Thinking about it, I might need a cannon.

Lord Raneus
10-11-2007, 14:24
Yup but according to Heretic Halbardiers are the 'vanilla' Empire unit (whatever that means).



but like you said it's better for the HE to use their spears to give them an extra two ranks of attacks. Without Spears the HE just become expencive Swordmen.

Kahadras

It means they are the basic Empire foot troops. Which they are most certainly not. And with a thread not two or three away from this one asking whether or not Halberdiers are useless, I don't see how Heretic Burner got that as a valid comparison.

EndlessBug
10-11-2007, 15:26
Halberdiers are well known as one of if not the weakest infantry unit in the game, as we've seen with Heretic he only ever compares HE to those he knows are considered underpowered, be them halberdiers or orcs of some sort. Next thing he'll do is compare them to DE units (I suggest you start with the spear elves Heretic, then mention witch elves, Executioners and finally Black Guard). Oh and dont forget to compare them to the 2 point Skaven slaves, those poor beggars don't even get a save! Now that's poor survivability.

The 'Vanilla' Empire unit Heretc would be considered as Swordsmen or Spearmen, as they are the most widely used. Halberdiers fluff wise are the most commonly used, but everyone knows a swordsman is far better value than a halberdier.

Lord Raneus
10-11-2007, 18:05
Likewise, he compares the HE to O&G, which he has ranted about being weak, and Ogres.:rolleyes:

My thoughts as an Elf player are that ASF or some kind of special rule is not necessarily needed, but it helps. Elves can be very difficult to play with, at least DE, because S3 and T3 affect you much more than high Initiative and to a lesser degree, Movement.

Von Wibble
10-11-2007, 18:16
Likewise, he compares the HE to O&G, which he has ranted about being weak, and Ogres.:rolleyes:

My thoughts as an Elf player are that ASF or some kind of special rule is not necessarily needed, but it helps. Elves can be very difficult to play with, at least DE, because S3 and T3 affect you much more than high Initiative and to a lesser degree, Movement.

I would agree it is "not necessarily" needed. But at the same time I feel that something is required. The one thing I do want to do is see the rule from the opponents perspective and see how my wood elves and tomb kings fare. Especially in the case of the latter I am concerned - High elves never were an easy fight for them as they tended to stop all my magic, have immunity to my fear, and be able to outfight me. But I shall play a game to see...

logan054
10-11-2007, 18:50
well finally played two games against them today, one was against a all character army (sadly he was against me using a bloodthirster so i didnt), pretty much made a mess outta them with a chaos warrior list.

So yeah my concern over a single unit still remains however lucky for me i managed to take them out before they actually did any real damage.

As i thought great weapons would be the only real problem with ASF, i certainly admit however that they arnt as bad as i thought they would be however i guess this really is the problem with basing games just on the maths!

Lord Raneus
10-11-2007, 19:12
Just another note on survivability:
A Bretonnian M@A for 5 points can get a 4+ save. So just to repeat, HB, HE are not incredibly survivable. :P


I hope DE get something that increases the army-wide potential as well, Khaine knows they need it.

Heretic Burner
10-11-2007, 19:43
Yes from a fluff perspective a halberdier is the most common state troop in the game. As the very assumption is the army books are well balanced, you simply don't get any more 'vanilla' than the most common unit in the army. Of course the most common unit in HE are the archers though I am certainly willing to go with the second most common - spearmen.

However I just finished three games involving HE over the past two days. O&G vs HE ended with the expected massacre of the greenskins. No surprise as the HE were on O&G extremely quickly, the eagles march blocked at will and had the battle line going buggy. It was really just a walk in the park for the HE player, hitting the line with very little casualties despite multiple chukkas, a doom diver, and a lobba.

Second game was Empire vs HE, a solid victory for HE. Despite taking a sea of blackpowder the HE player knew full well they could play a refused flank. Simply put, I couldn't come near enough to focusing firepower on the HE before the plowed through the right flank. A definite learning experience.

Final game we were both still reeling from the absolute dullness of the last gunline game so decided to switch armies. Yup, an absolute massacre for HE this time as I lead them using the very same tactic of rolling up the Empire's right side. Simply put, the concentrated force just overwhelms the Empire units making it very difficult to stop. Terrain I suppose helped somewhat more this game leading to a massacre instead of simply a solid victory.

After that I think neither of us wished another game. None of them were particularly enjoyable to play, though as far as Empire selection I take equal blame for that. I just don't see me playing them again any time soon.

Things Learned:

* Dragon Princes are absolute monsters. First target priority or once they hit your line you've lost.
* Refused flank is ultra effective for HE. Cuts down line of fire and is nigh unstoppable if they hit with numbers.
* Eagles win games against O&G. Yes, they're enough to decide games almost by themselves.
* First striking HE combat characters are CR generating monsters.
* Handgunners are dreadful against HE. Strictly Xbowmen in the future.
* Gunline vs HE can suck both player's very will to live.

I hope this information helps potential players of HE and opponents.

Chiungalla
10-11-2007, 20:14
* Dragon Princes are absolute monsters. First target priority or once they hit your line you've lost.

Nothing new. The same is true for every cavalry with 2 attacks.


* Refused flank is ultra effective for HE. Cuts down line of fire and is nigh unstoppable if they hit with numbers.

Nothing new. Works great with every fast elite army.


* Eagles win games against O&G. Yes, they're enough to decide games almost by themselves.

Thats were Fanatics and Spear Chukkas should come in.

Grinloc
10-11-2007, 20:32
Fanatics being the "logical" answer against those eagles? Interesting.

After being released it is in no way guaranteed that they actually reach the eagle.
What's worse is, even after killing the rushing eagle, those very same fanatics potentially gonna block those other O&G's units from marching forward, since you aren't allowed to move "through" a fanatic on purpose, unless when charging. A bright idea indeed...

Chiungalla
10-11-2007, 20:45
You can release the fanatics in every direction you like.
And it's very much better to loose some fanatics, or the opportunity for one march move, then for all march moves in the whole game.

But of cause the best answer to eagles are squigghoppaz.
But they are nearly worthless against most of the other high elf units.

And I did not wrote that fanatics are the "logical" answer to eagles, so stop reading something no one wrote!

txamil
10-11-2007, 21:07
Smileyface good post on the last page.


* First striking HE combat characters are CR generating monsters.

wouldn't this be something? Exact same trend as 6th ed then, with 1/3 of the points on charaters:)
At least fightie chars are cheaper than mages. I feel really bad for the people tha try to do both.

New book, same old problem? Wanting/needing to win on characters?

I'm going to talk some HE player into playing a 1000-1500 point battle with no characters on either side just to see next weekend.

Bluepothos
10-11-2007, 21:40
I've hopefully got a couple of games versus High Elves coming up soon. I'll use my Wood Elves first (as I've just finished a 2000pt list and am itching to try it out) and I'll also try Ogres to see what happens there (I'll report back but it probably won't be pretty). Getting impact charges is difficult at the best of times, but now its essential. I might pull my leadbelchers off of flank duty and into the middle to scare his elite infantry - I'll be scared as well given their propensity for blowing themselves up but in theory they could cause him a problem :). Oh and 2 gorgers for mage hunting.

Grinloc
10-11-2007, 22:10
Since it's apparently about misreading what people wrote...
Who said anything about losing some fanatics? A half way competent HE player won't shoot those...
So you release the fanatics to hopefully kill the rushing eagle to prevent your units from getting slowed and/or getting your battle line disrupted due to animosity.
Let's pretend they kill the bird. Now the fanatics stand there with the O&G's behind them.
I'm not talking about preventing any units from marching, i'm talking about the O&G's units being prevented from moving forward in any meaningful manner.
HE have the firepower at their disposal to stay behind and wait for the greenskins if they want to. So the loss of one eagle compared to possibly preventing numerous O&G's units from moving towards the elves since they can't move through their own fanatics?

What else is there? Yeah the night goblins or arrer boyz can shoot their own fanatic. Oh wait, they don't. The option of shooting your own fanatic to prevent fatal situations from happening was removed in the 7th edition army book, so unless the HE player shoots them (which he won't do in such a situation) those fanatics gonna prevent the O&G's from moving forward. This cannot be considered a viable option in any way. Since shooting a friendly unit isn't allowed the only way for an O&G's player to get rid of those is either charging the HE's (which he most likely can't do), rolling a double on the fanatic move distance or rolling a "6" on the animosity check, possibly stepping on the fanatic(s) and receiving 2d6 str5 hits in the process from each of those....Urgat can tell you quite revealing stories about this "viable" fanatic tactic....

For a HE player choosing an eagle against O&G's is a no-brainer. It's either march-blocking (standard version), an anti-fanatic sacrifice and/or "enemy move-blocking" (!). As an O&G's player against a competent HE player those fanatics are a truely nice way of screwing yourself up...

In one of my first battles with 7th edition O&G's against Khemri i tried that tactic. I got butchered, standing there with the fanatics in front of me, not being able to shoot them, not being able to advance with 1/3 of my army. Against experienced HE players fanatics are a big NO.

Squighoppaz? A unit with random movement which also "wastes" a special unit slot and a points cost of 15 points per model? You would most likely need 5 of those to reliably kill the eagle and then being utterly worthless against the rest of the HE's. Also 1 unit of squighoppaz (regardless of size) means one less stonethrower/chariot or 2 less bolt throwers.
So squighoppaz aren't an option either.

logan054
11-11-2007, 00:18
4 me i think the key was psychology and chariots

Chiungalla
11-11-2007, 05:21
So you release the fanatics to hopefully kill the rushing eagle to prevent your units from getting slowed and/or getting your battle line disrupted due to animosity.

That's the point were you get it wrong.
I did not say, "release the fanatics to hopefully kill the rushing eagle".

You are most likely forced, to release the fanatics, by the eagle, if you take some with you. And fanatics are great against high elves.

And you do not even take into account, that the fanatics will move, before you have to move your orcs and goblins.

Maybe he crushes your units, which will cause a bit of harm, to a normal orc unit, and leaves your way free.

Or he may move somewhere, where he didn't stand in your way.

That he moves from a point in average 7 inches in front of your battleline, to a point where he prevents you from moving, is not the most likely situation.

And Squigghoopaz are one of the best orc & goblin units against most armies.
And if the high elf eagles can win battles on there own, they are good against those as well. But taking 2 spear chukkas would be the better choice most of the time.

Grinloc
11-11-2007, 11:58
That's one of the big *yawn*'s about the O&G's of 7th edition.
Almost all units one might consider as "special" are to a varying degree highly unpredictable. Sure, with very few exceptions HE's won't have an armor save against the armor piercing str5 hits from fanatics. But it's their total randomness which makes them not ideal to use, especially against HE's, since making major mistakes or getting screwed due to this randomness is even more dangerous against them.

When i had that battle against Khemri 3 of the 4 fanatics i had didn't reach the enemy but remained between my orc boyz and those undeads. They didn't move out of the way, not doing any harm to the undeads but rather preventing me from moving forward.
This is the main reason why i didn't take fanatics with me anymore. The option of shooting your own fanatic was removed so those ball-whirling freaks became even more dangerous for the O&G's player.

Halfway predictable units which tend to be effective against HE's? Sure.
Units which can potentially screw you over against them 50% of the time? Then you better get lucky...:(

EvC
11-11-2007, 13:44
[QUOTE=Heretic Burner;2080570Things Learned:

* Dragon Princes are absolute monsters. First target priority or once they hit your line you've lost.
* Refused flank is ultra effective for HE. Cuts down line of fire and is nigh unstoppable if they hit with numbers.
* Eagles win games against O&G. Yes, they're enough to decide games almost by themselves.
* First striking HE combat characters are CR generating monsters.
* Handgunners are dreadful against HE. Strictly Xbowmen in the future.
* Gunline vs HE can suck both player's very will to live.

I hope this information helps potential players of HE and opponents.[/QUOTE]

We should have a game sometime. With my dice, you'd be able to get a win.
-Dragon Princes: major combat was a result of an overrun, so they gt a Chariot in the side. I had accounted for this by giving them an S7 Noble BSB... who couldn't hit the Chariot in the first place.
-GW don't actually sell proper Eagle models (Direct only doesn't count), so I don't have any :(
-They can only generate CR if they hit. Mine don't.

logan054
11-11-2007, 14:54
with 3 attacks as well thats hardly a massive CR, i think my chaos characters certainly are however, heros with 5 attacks, lords with 6.

Still something i hate is how you can use lances and the such against units thats charge you in the flank (if you overran), really makes no sense to me.

FatOlaf
11-11-2007, 15:11
Still something i hate is how you can use lances and the such against units thats charge you in the flank (if you overran), really makes no sense to me.


They stick em in the air like a brettonian archer waiting for you! :D

Chiungalla
11-11-2007, 15:38
with 3 attacks as well thats hardly a massive CR, i think my chaos characters certainly are however, heros with 5 attacks, lords with 6.

High elf heroes, not only create CR by them self, but also reduce the CR generated by there enemys, because they are killed, before they can attack.

But this hasn't got greater impact, then the more attacks of the chaos heroes, most of the time.

Urgat
11-11-2007, 15:52
You can release the fanatics in every direction you like.
And it's very much better to loose some fanatics, or the opportunity for one march move, then for all march moves in the whole game.

But of cause the best answer to eagles are squigghoppaz.
But they are nearly worthless against most of the other high elf units.

And I did not wrote that fanatics are the "logical" answer to eagles, so stop reading something no one wrote!

You can't be serious, can you? HE players have, suaully, a good deal of ranged weaponary. Unless you are yourself going shooty heavy, there is no way taking loads of fanatics will help any, on the contrary, it's just free addiotional shooting phase for them, just taking the opportunity to "arrow" the greenskins to death while they're waiting behind them fanatics. Moving out of the way? The average movement of a fanatic is 6, 7 inchs (there's a reason why they're released when a unit is at 8", it's because most likely the fanatic will miss). Now O&G have large battlelines, I mean LAAAAAAAAAARGE. Fanatics rarely get out of the way, they go some way left, or right, sometimes they reach you and burry their way to your back, sometimes they move forward a bit, very rarely do they cross the table. Against shooty armies, against armies that can field flying units or charriots (and HE have nasty ones), fanatics are also a nice mean for you to stand there waiting for charges that you cannot avoid.

Hoppers. Right. Let's take 15 points, T3, without save units gainst a 99% ASF army. Maybe they can do something to the eagles(but yeah, they move 3D6 and eagles charge at what, 20"? hoppers never survive a charge). And then what? But then again, maybe not. Who in the world would be unskilled enough to have such a mobile unit stand in the way of hoppers?
You know what's good against HE? Anything that does impact hits, and anything that kills from afar. The rest is just to fill in choices and let you hope that the HE will botch some dices to hit, because either they'll oustrenght you (SW), either they'll bury you under ridiculous numbers of S3 attacks (spearmen).

Chiungalla
11-11-2007, 16:46
Choose one:
Option a) Let the high elf marchblock you for the entire game.
or
Obtion b) Let your fanatics block the movement of one small part of your army for a short while.

And yes, you yourself can field chariots, that can charge through the fanatics.

And Squigghoppaz will survive a charge from an eagle.


Who in the world would be unskilled enough to have such a mobile unit stand in the way of hoppers?

Someone who has no other option, if he wants to marchblock your army.

Grinloc
11-11-2007, 17:24
The only reliable (!) way to deal with potentially threatening HE units are chariots and war machines, since they both either deal damage from afar or have a greater charge distance than infantry units. They additionally don't suffer from animosity and also don't cause panic checks due to being less than US5 which is a very good thing due to the crappy LD of greenskins.

The only thing which sucks is that both boar chariots and war machines are special units. Wolf chariots are a no-no...LD6 and fear...

Chiungalla
11-11-2007, 17:33
Wolf chariots will work fine, if they start there charge within 12 inches of the general.

And if you want reliable (!) way to deal with anything: don't play orcs and goblins!

Von Wibble
11-11-2007, 18:12
The only thing which sucks is that both boar chariots and war machines are special units. Wolf chariots are a no-no...LD6 and fear...

You'd think that wouldn't you? Yet I have never seen a wolf chariot fail its fear check to charge high elves yet. In fact Ld 6 checks in my experience seem to always pass, unlike Ld 8.

Perhaps I should request that my high elves have ld 6 and the goblins Ld 8;)

Seriously theres always the general.

Also, why not try characters in chariots, and tehn have war machines from special? Also note the Doom Diver (excellent vs DPs) is rare- its not like you were going to use Trolls...

Urgat
11-11-2007, 18:19
Choose one:
Option a) Let the high elf marchblock you for the entire game.
or
Obtion b) Let your fanatics block the movement of one small part of your army for a short while.

And yes, you yourself can field chariots, that can charge through the fanatics.

And Squigghoppaz will survive a charge from an eagle.



Someone who has no other option, if he wants to marchblock your army.

option c) don't do as you say.
If I want to take out a lone eagle, I'm not going to take a unit of squigs just for that, I'm going to take a unit of wolves, or a charriot, or anything that will not eat up 75 pts and a special choice to deal with one or two (!) minis, and will then become absolutly useless once the job is done, if they manage to get the job done before getting themselves shot to death, that is.


Someone who has no other option, if he wants to marchblock your army.
There's nothing very difficult with flying over your line and place yourself behind, with a unit between the squigs and your eagle so they can't reach it, is there?


Yet I have never seen a wolf chariot fail its fear check to charge high elves yet.

Ah? My charriots always refuse to charge my DE opponent. Then one of them does get over his fear, and crunch!


Also, why not try characters in chariots, and tehn have war machines from special? Also note the Doom Diver (excellent vs DPs) is rare- its not like you were going to use Trolls...
Why not? Imho river trolls are excellent choices against HE. I place a unit of 4 of them among the best contenders to take on a unit of SM.

Grinloc
11-11-2007, 18:59
River trolls against SM? On average the trolls won't win against SM on their own. Supported by a RnF unit they will of course.
I wouldn't use a chariot against those eagles. After charging he would most likely stand in the open and we know what might happen to chariots when things like RBT's stand on the other side of the table....



And if you want reliable (!) way to deal with anything: don't play orcs and goblins!


What a concept...and witty to boot...:rolleyes:

Urgat
11-11-2007, 19:33
I'm no good at mathammer, but my river trolls have proved a few times to be able to withstand the charge of 6 chaos knights (one of them being a hero) thanks to the -1 to hit and regen. Sure the static CR might be lower, be is that so sure? Unless the HE player wants to dish out units of 20 SM, it' won't be so bad; trolls will be more likely to wound the elves than the knights (no crazy save, well, in fact, no save at all), so they can manage, I'm pretty sure.
What's sure is that the chaos player avoids them now, because they've proven to be hard as nail.

Grinloc
11-11-2007, 20:08
Well, let's pretend 4 river trolls charge into a unit of 14 (7-wide) SM's.
SM's go first, 15 attacks which hit on 4+ and wound on 3+. That's on average (i'd say) 8 hits and 5 wounds. Regeneration against those 5 wounds will on average result in one dead troll.
Now the 3 remaining trolls attack the SM's 9 times, hitting on 4+ and wounding on 2+. That's on average 5 hits and 4 wounds, resulting in 4 dead SM's.

Trolls: 4 kills, so 4 points on CR.
SM's: 3 dealt wounds, outnumbering, standard, one rank.

In this case the SM win the CR by 2 points.

Trolls are a unit of "active" CR, as are the SM's. But they are just better at the job. The "positive" part about all this is that almost no unit of equal points cost can reliably win a frontal confrontation against SM's all on its own. Your best bet would be to either shoot them to bits and/or deny them any combat.
Of course it is viable to defeat them in combat with a combined charge, but...
1.) the HE player has the option to flee as a charge reaction, trying to fight you on his own terms.
2.) the casualties you would most likely suffer from that combined charge won't be pretty.

Chaos knights? Any "normal" unit with a reasonable points cost won't withstand a chaos knight charge, they are one of the best cavalry units in the game for a reason. I guess you just got lucky on dice rolls :). I bet those knights weren't chosen ones of khorne. Those loonies rip basically any charged unit a new one lol.

Heretic Burner
11-11-2007, 21:04
You are most likely forced, to release the fanatics, by the eagle, if you take some with you. And fanatics are great against high elves.


Precisely, clearly any unit that is controlled by your opponent is no solution to the problem.

Eagles are devastating against O&G. Simply put O&G don't have a decent way of dealing with it. As a lone model it is constantly out of LOS of warmachines. It is faster than virtually anything else in O&G. It doesn't need to face the opponent, however chariots and wolf riders do. Absolutely smashes O&G by themselves.

feintstar
11-11-2007, 21:48
Hmmm. I played HE vs Goblins, and got massacred. I had 2 dragons, but I didn't have any eagles... Maybe that's the problem?

I found the squigs quite effective, and the fanatics devastating. And the outnumbering really did hurt. But I guess with an eagle, all would've been for naught...

Dranthar
11-11-2007, 22:10
Eagles are devastating against O&G. Simply put O&G don't have a decent way of dealing with it. As a lone model it is constantly out of LOS of warmachines. It is faster than virtually anything else in O&G. It doesn't need to face the opponent, however chariots and wolf riders do. Absolutely smashes O&G by themselves.

O&G armies may not have fliers, but aside from that their options for dealing with Great Eagles aren't much worse than any other army, and better than some others.

They've got Squig hoppers (who don't need LOS to charge), spear chukkas, fast cavalry (including the move-through-terrain kind) and of course, magic (eg. foot of gork has no LOS and unlimited range). Sure there's ways to counter all of that, but with all of those factors working together, against a semi-intelligent O&G player, great eagles (or any flyers) aren't going to 'smash O&Gs by themselves' (how do they do that anyway? Are great eagles so good that they can take on ranked infantry and win now?).

I don't know what all the fuss about fanatics is. Conservatively there's a better than 50% chance that any given fanatic will not interfere with the releasing units movement, and it's even less if you just release them out the side or rear. As you increase the number of fanatics released the odds of them interfering increases, but that brings me to my next point...

...What kind of ***** would release fanatics into the front of their own army when they're in danger of getting shot up by High Elves? If they try a stunt like that then the O&G player deserves to lose. :rolleyes:

Varath- Lord Impaler
11-11-2007, 22:41
River trolls against SM? On average the trolls won't win against SM on their own. Supported by a RnF unit they will of course.

Since when?

Trolls will demolish Swordmasters every time.

theunwantedbeing
11-11-2007, 22:49
Stop! Math hammer time!
(okay bad joke...)

Trolls x 4
Swordsmasters say 7 across.
Swordsmasters fight first so hitting on 3's wounding on 3's 4+ regen save.
3-4 wounds 1 dead troll
Trolls fight back with 9 attacks hitting on 4's wounding on 2's no saves
3-4 wounds for the trolls caused.

Vs river trolls the trolls only lose 2-3 wounds, potentially not losing a troll.
So upto 12 attacks in return dealing 4-5 wounds(more like 5)

Seems they are rather good at taking down swordsmasters, due to that regen save.
Vomiting is roughly the same potential although not worth it if the trolls dont lose any models of course.

3 trolls will have problems though.

Heretic Burner
12-11-2007, 02:35
O&G armies may not have fliers, but aside from that their options for dealing with Great Eagles aren't much worse than any other army, and better than some others.


Of course they don't. Clearly magic isn't an option, O&G have the very worst in the game. O&G don't have the units to chase down eagles when 1/3 of the time they just...won't. O&G don't have the shooting to do so reliably either, with short ranged bows simply not up to the job (against 1/6 time they simply can't fire at all, the remainder they are mostly like aimed the wrong direction or hitting on 6s at best). War machines? All follow LOS and can't move and fire particularly when O&G units are large and cumbersome by necessity.

No army is as ill equipped to deal with such units as O&G which wouldn't be quite a lost cause if O&G had an answer to HE. They simply don't.

Dranthar
12-11-2007, 03:45
O&G don't have the units to chase down eagles when 1/3 of the time they just...won't.

Alright. I give up. If you think that getting a 6 for animosity equals an inability to charge a great eagle and that it's somehow going to get by all O&G shooting/charging/magic then you are clearly hell bent on ignoring the realities of the game in order to prove a point.

Frankly, you're not worth my time.

Chiungalla
12-11-2007, 04:31
Regeneration against those 5 wounds will on average result in one dead troll.

No it will not.
With a chance of roughly 50% there will be no troll dead at all.

If you want to do the mathhammer, do it right!


Clearly magic isn't an option, O&G have the very worst in the game.

Lol, no.
Orc and Goblin magic is one of the best magic lores around.
No line of sight and a low complexity needed for some of the hardest damage dealing spells around.
And very usefull other spells as well.

Prophet009
12-11-2007, 04:38
Wow! Heretic Burner is hiiiiilarious! The funniest man to ever populate these forums, without a doubt. (I'm still laughing about Great Eagles beating O&G all by themselves). This guys is having waaaaay too much fun pulling people's legs.

I particularly find his hypocrisy funny: how he tells others that they have a penchant for omitting facts, and consistently omits the 'small matter' of point cost from any consideration.

Hey Heretic Burner, by your own arguments, Elves without any armour and without ASF would be some of the most fragile units in the game (not THE most, but fairly well up there).

Since there is nothing else to consider, I would LOVE to play against you with those house rules, even using the new Army Book. No ASF and no armour whatsoever (I suppose PG would still get their Ward Save). How does that sound?

Oh, I forgot to mention: I would play with the above rules only if followed by a house rules that all Elven models that are not Characters cost only 1pt per model. But that certainly won't matter to you, as you've clearly shown, so it shouldn't be a problem! Done. Nice fair match coming up!

_______________________________

Of course, Heretic Burner will INEVITABLY quote this post as follows:


Elves without any armour and without ASF would be some of the most fragile units in the game (not THE most, but fairly well up there)
"Of course not! Because they DO have those things, plus have the speed to make them tough (and that should require no more explanation than speed=toughness. If you can't get that, you are simply ignorant of everything this game stands for!)."


I would LOVE to play against you with those house rules, even using the new Army Book. No ASF and no armour whatsoever (I suppose PG would still get their Ward Save). How does that sound?
"And that's exactly how the designers should have made the army if they knew anything and didn't have such a hard on for Elves. Of course, they would STILL be pretty much the toughest T3 army out there, on account of their speed and leadership. And they would still massacre O&G every time thanks to their Eagles. But it WOULD be a step in the right direction. I'm glad we agree."

sephiroth87
12-11-2007, 05:21
I'd even be willing to let Heretic Burner come down to Tennessee. We could learn from each other.

It would be fun. He'd show me how to singlehandedly beat an army using a great eagle and I'd teach him how to play a banjo. I could play high elves and he could play orcs. We'd set up and I'd declare an automatic win before we even played.

Then Heretic Burner would come back on here and claim that the high elf army defeated his terrible, awful orc army without even losing a single casualty... :p

Come on Heretic Burner, I'll even buy you a milkshake with two straws and we can share it.

Hrogoff the Destructor
12-11-2007, 05:39
Of course they don't. Clearly magic isn't an option, O&G have the very worst in the game. O&G don't have the units to chase down eagles when 1/3 of the time they just...won't. O&G don't have the shooting to do so reliably either, with short ranged bows simply not up to the job (against 1/6 time they simply can't fire at all, the remainder they are mostly like aimed the wrong direction or hitting on 6s at best). War machines? All follow LOS and can't move and fire particularly when O&G units are large and cumbersome by necessity.


Why would you even bother chasing down great eagles? They are 20 inch flyers. A better question would be, why would you even be concerned about great eagles? I have never seen them do anything, ever. I see them lose to weapons crews as much as they win.

Orcs and Goblins do not have the worst magic in the game. Not even close. No matter what spells I get, I can put all of them to use. Of all my armies, their magic is my personal favorite.

I'm curious, what does your general 2000 pt orc list consist of?

Varath- Lord Impaler
12-11-2007, 05:43
I'm curious, what does your general 2000 pt orc list consist of?

If its Savage orcs i shall be annoyed. Ive yet to see a normal orc.

etancross
12-11-2007, 13:06
Of course they don't. Clearly magic isn't an option, O&G have the very worst in the game. O&G don't have the units to chase down eagles when 1/3 of the time they just...won't. O&G don't have the shooting to do so reliably either, with short ranged bows simply not up to the job (against 1/6 time they simply can't fire at all, the remainder they are mostly like aimed the wrong direction or hitting on 6s at best). War machines? All follow LOS and can't move and fire particularly when O&G units are large and cumbersome by necessity.

No army is as ill equipped to deal with such units as O&G which wouldn't be quite a lost cause if O&G had an answer to HE. They simply don't.

Ive seen O&G's beat HE's 5 times in the last 3 weeks using the new HE rules, How long have you been playing O&G's? Because in the games at my local GW, they were competetive but by NO MEANS unwinable and the O&G won 4 of them. The one loss ive seen were 2 young players messing around and both had HORRIABLE army comp.

Most battles are an uphill fight for Orcs because you are fighint your own army with anamosity, our magic isn't the best but its decent, but the miscast table is brutal, and our leadership is straight ass but so far i haven't had much trouble with HE's yet. The units that have given me the biggest issue are their Cav units and whitelions because i had substandard shooting in those games, ive sence changed my list and can't wait to play them again.

you are REALLLY making a mountain out of a mole hill.


Why would you even bother chasing down great eagles? They are 20 inch flyers. A better question would be, why would you even be concerned about great eagles? I have never seen them do anything, ever. I see them lose to weapons crews as much as they win.

Orcs and Goblins do not have the worst magic in the game. Not even close. No matter what spells I get, I can put all of them to use. Of all my armies, their magic is my personal favorite.

I'm curious, what does your general 2000 pt orc list consist of?

I agree our magic isn't he worst by any stretch... its not the best but not the worse.

Finnigan2004
12-11-2007, 14:24
Take it easy guys. Iit says right in the rules that orcs and goblins fear elves, and we seem to be seeing plenty of that being emulated by their generals on these boards ;). I'm not as familiar with orc armies as some, but they do look to have the means to deal with high elves-- impact hits, shooting, and especially numbers (if their list is properly crafted). It is always tough to figure out how to deal with an army that presents new challenges because we have never had to fight it before. People will figure out new ways to beat elves, but are put off because their previous strategies will no longer work (basically showing up with non high elf models was sufficient, unless they fielded a cavalry list or a seer council).

I think that people just need time to let the hysteria wear off. A few weeks ago we were hearing about armies with sixty swordmasters-- it will take some time before people realize that such an army will probably not be taking the field. I suspect that once the people who really complain about them get some experience against them, they will realize that the book is not quite as bad as advertised. Give it a few months and the complaining will subside, or at least be redirected at the vampire counts book.

etancross
12-11-2007, 16:01
Take it easy guys. Iit says right in the rules that orcs and goblins fear elves, and we seem to be seeing plenty of that being emulated by their generals on these boards ;). I'm not as familiar with orc armies as some, but they do look to have the means to deal with high elves-- impact hits, shooting, and especially numbers (if their list is properly crafted). It is always tough to figure out how to deal with an army that presents new challenges because we have never had to fight it before. People will figure out new ways to beat elves, but are put off because their previous strategies will no longer work (basically showing up with non high elf models was sufficient, unless they fielded a cavalry list or a seer council).

I think that people just need time to let the hysteria wear off. A few weeks ago we were hearing about armies with sixty swordmasters-- it will take some time before people realize that such an army will probably not be taking the field. I suspect that once the people who really complain about them get some experience against them, they will realize that the book is not quite as bad as advertised. Give it a few months and the complaining will subside, or at least be redirected at the vampire counts book.


Well like the thread sez.... i regreat having said anything about ASF rule being over powered, because after playing against it its not that big a deal. im not saying HE's are a push over, or trying to say they suck because they dont. If their units get into combat at the right time, or if they get a good flank, they will kick some butt, but the mass hystaria is just usless.

Azyriel
12-11-2007, 16:47
I haven't had the pleasure to play against them yet (i need some tips on my O&G 1k list). However, every game i've witnessed so far being 4 (SAD dwarfs, melee dwarfs, SAD empire, Blood Dragon VC) either was a massacre in favour of the elves or massacre in favour of the other army. Both SAD wrecked havoc on the HE's. The melee centric dwarves lacked enough fire power which was quickly taken out by the HE's which then in turn let them weaken up melee troops which proved effective because once a chariot and dragon princes hit the flank of any dwarf block it was game over for them. The blood dragon VC might of outnumbered quite badly but if the entire front rank of a regiment was destroyed EVERY single round of combat it didn't matter if you had a lot. It was proved to show how pivotal unit placement in a HE army is the HE player literally had to make a circle to show no flanks because if he had he would of lost.

Heretic Burner
12-11-2007, 18:12
I agree our magic isn't he worst by any stretch... its not the best but not the worse.

Of course O&G magic is the very worst.

Beginning with the lores, at best they are decidedly average. The Little Waaagh in particularly however is dreadful, the terrible casting values and the worst default spell in the game.

The miscast table? Worst in the game.

But the real killer of O&G magic - yup, animosity yet again. Every shaman taken is on average at least a free dispel scroll to your opponent. Every single shaman! As we all should know by now a single scroll combined with even a moderate number of dice will shut down even a heavy magic phase and O&G give these scrolls away like nothing.

It's the mechanics that ruin the O&G phase, the very worst in the game.

etancross
12-11-2007, 20:58
Of course O&G magic is the very worst.

Beginning with the lores, at best they are decidedly average. The Little Waaagh in particularly however is dreadful, the terrible casting values and the worst default spell in the game.

The miscast table? Worst in the game.

But the real killer of O&G magic - yup, animosity yet again. Every shaman taken is on average at least a free dispel scroll to your opponent. Every single shaman! As we all should know by now a single scroll combined with even a moderate number of dice will shut down even a heavy magic phase and O&G give these scrolls away like nothing.

It's the mechanics that ruin the O&G phase, the very worst in the game.

After going back though this thread HB im starting to wonder, why do you even play O&G's?

You seem to have many complaints about everything and dont seem to like any aspect of them at all, and you seem to think they are terriable, and you don't seem to have fun playing them..... and these are just things i picked up in the thread as i went though. im not being attacking or trying to be a jerk im just curious as to why you continue?

Heretic Burner
12-11-2007, 21:10
After going back though this thread HB im starting to wonder, why do you even play O&G's?

I found enjoyment in previous edition O&G armies. This one considerably less so, no wonder it finds itself on the shelf in favor of Empire most of the time.



You seem to have many complaints about everything and dont seem to like any aspect of them at all, and you seem to think they are terriable, and you don't seem to have fun playing them..... and these are just things i picked up in the thread as i went though. im not being attacking or trying to be a jerk im just curious as to why you continue?

Continue what exactly? I used them to give the new HE rules a tryout, knowing full well the supposed "weaknesses" of HE. It didn't work out very well. As you can see I immediately scrapped playing them and went to the far more enjoyable (usually) Empire army. That also didn't work out very well for either of us. I'm not sure what more you want from me.

Kahadras
12-11-2007, 21:17
why do you even play O&G's?


He doesn't anymore and feels the pressing need to bring up the fact they 'suck' in any arguement no matter the relevance. Personaly I saw O&G wipe the floor with HE a couple of weeks ago (the HE player was using the new book as well). I played the same guy last Sunday with my Empire and pulled off a solid draw (I would have won if we'd stopped playing in turn six but we had an extra turn which allowed his Prince and Silver helms to break my Swordsmen netting him a lot of VP).

Kahadras

etancross
12-11-2007, 21:36
I'm not sure what more you want from me.

how bout winning lottery numbers!

Finnigan2004
12-11-2007, 21:46
If orcs and gobbos actually do suck as you contend Heretic Burner, then it is surely silly to use them as a yardstick to provide proof that high elves are overpowered. Rather than lobbying Games Workshop to make high elves equally suck, common sense would dictate that you should devote your energy to getting them to do a revision for orcs instead. Take some time and let people try the new list to find out if you are right or wrong.

You jump on every instance of a win with the new high elf list as proof of brokenness, and you ignore losses and those have had other experiences with them. When you cherry pick arguments, people tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater and ignore otherwise possibly valid points. All that will prove whether the new book is balanced or not is time and lots and lots of games.

Heretic Burner
12-11-2007, 22:36
If orcs and gobbos actually do suck as you contend Heretic Burner, then it is surely silly to use them as a yardstick to provide proof that high elves are overpowered.

Nonsense. The yardstick I've used from a personal standpoint was Empire and O&G. Sure, O&G are a dreadful army but Empire is solid mid tier and should perform admirably. They don't.

Of course, a tournament result was supplied showing it against armies other than those two. Again HE dominated.

Now, it would be surely silly for GW to release an army book that would be so powerful as to render a mid tier army helpless. It would be certainly silly for GW to release an army that O&G would have no solution to whatsover. It would certainly be silly to release an army book that dominates another in every phase of the game. It would be certainly silly indeed...and yet it happened.

Finnigan2004
12-11-2007, 22:42
You are correct that it would be silly for GW to release an army that would make orcs and goblins helpless, but from the experiences of other players here that is clearly not the case. Some even seem to have beaten the new high elves. Time will tell, but with the release of the new book it seems that there are far fewer people complainting than there were a week ago. Heck, the next time that I go to Kamloops I will play a buddy who has been wanting to play some games. I will bring some old high elf models that are collecting dust and that I have just dusted off-- you can tell me a rough make up for the army if you want as long as it is all infantry (I want to take my time painting the cavalry and using unglued cavalry is very annoying). I have an ungodly amount of GW models, so I can even go swordmaster heavy if you want. Our game probably won't prove anything though because even though I usually win about half of my games with other people, he always beats me like I stole something (he is a great player). The massacre will provide evidence that high elves are not broken for you ;). If I win, I'll sign your "I hate high elves" petition myself.

sainthale1988
12-11-2007, 22:56
sephiroth87: ha ha ha, very good.
as far as orc and goblins are conserned they are the worst army not becuase their magic is bad (it isn't) but thier ill dicipline, they just can't hold a battle line unless thier made of units not suffering from animosity, i just mess up any battle plan they care to pick. i got the new HE army book to day and gave it a good read and i think that it is very balanced. the point is that HE armies could be very good at 1 or 2 aspects of the game, but due to thier high points cost they can't dominate everything. small, fast, elite but frail and limited in scope and scale, but in my humble opinion balanced (except silver helms which are overpriced for what you get compared to dragon princes)

Asuril
12-11-2007, 23:12
Listening to Heretic Burner BAWWWW his eyes out makes me want to start O&G; they sound like a lot of fun. Since every unit is completely useless, it must be fun to construct army lists. Everything is equally sucky!

Lord Raneus
13-11-2007, 01:29
Nonsense. The yardstick I've used from a personal standpoint was Empire and O&G. Sure, O&G are a dreadful army but Empire is solid mid tier and should perform admirably. They don't.

Of course, a tournament result was supplied showing it against armies other than those two. Again HE dominated.

Now, it would be surely silly for GW to release an army book that would be so powerful as to render a mid tier army helpless. It would be certainly silly for GW to release an army that O&G would have no solution to whatsover. It would certainly be silly to release an army book that dominates another in every phase of the game. It would be certainly silly indeed...and yet it happened.

Of course, said HE player has had months to figure out exactly what he needs to do to beat the Empire. Empire player has had at most a few games.

So I'm afraid that example goes right out the window, sorry.


Also, HB, we all have to lose sometimes, you know. Just because an Empire army lost once or twice doesn't mean you can go OMGONOEZBBQPWNEDROFL. For example, with DE I once scored a massacre against Dwarves. Does this mean DE are better than Dwarves? No. I just got lucky, which is a major factor of Warhammer. Unless you win absolutely 100% of all games played with your Empire army?;)

Chiungalla
13-11-2007, 05:22
Orcs and Goblins and the power of the waaagh! are still unbroken in the new edition. Orcs and Goblins are played with very great success in tourneys with in general good players and strong army lists around here.

The last three tourneys I'am playing a orcs & goblins player finished in the top 3.

Urgat
13-11-2007, 13:42
Stop! Math hammer time!
(okay bad joke...)

Trolls x 4
Swordsmasters say 7 across.
Swordsmasters fight first so hitting on 3's wounding on 3's 4+ regen save.
3-4 wounds 1 dead troll
Trolls fight back with 9 attacks hitting on 4's wounding on 2's no saves
3-4 wounds for the trolls caused.

Vs river trolls the trolls only lose 2-3 wounds, potentially not losing a troll.
So upto 12 attacks in return dealing 4-5 wounds(more like 5)

Seems they are rather good at taking down swordsmasters, due to that regen save.
Vomiting is roughly the same potential although not worth it if the trolls dont lose any models of course.

3 trolls will have problems though.


Thank you, proves my point (and, to be honest, I don't know many players who field elite units 7 wide, seems sensible to me to do so, but for some reason most people I know try to get static CR instead). Well anyway I'll still take units of 4 trolls anyway over a giant or a doomdiver versus HE. The only other rare option that seems interesting to me are pump wagons.

etancross
13-11-2007, 13:51
Nonsense. The yardstick I've used from a personal standpoint was Empire and O&G. Sure, O&G are a dreadful army .


you keep saying this and im getting sick and tired of hearing it, O&G's are not a dreadful army, i hate to be attacking but maybe you just suck with them. I wasn't very good at all with Wood elves, does that mean they are dreadful? (i won a few games with them and had limited success but wasn't very good with them at all) No that means IMO they might suck but they are no means dreadful and you saying that over and over is not only getting old its just flat out not true.

Ill admit im not by any stretch the best O&G player in the world but I have had GREAT success with O&G and i’ve never been massacred, (killed to a man anyways) i’ve lost but i’ve won WAAAAAY more than ive lost, and now I have decided i’m going to start playing a Green Wave list and I bought a few more boxes of boys and will try to start hammering away with that....

anywayz just because "YOU" aren't good with something doesn't mean that they suck, and Orcs are NOT dreadful that’s just some crap you keep spewing forth that is nothing more than your opinion and its getting old and i'm tired of you attacking this army.

Dranthar
13-11-2007, 14:17
The only other rare option that seems interesting to me are pump wagons.

PUMP WAGONS! :D

Vs. Swordmasters;
7 Impact hits on average
4 2/3 Wounding hits
3.9 Kills
Average CR4, with no hits back by the swordmasters. :angel:

Yay for the most awesome chariot in existance! Now I just need to find 80pts to throw in a pair of these pansie-mincers. :p

EDIT: Heretic Burner, you've made far too many sweeping generalisations backed up by flawed logic for me to put any stock in what you say. Come up with a rational, logical arguement and I'll listen, otherwise I have more important things to do, like buying another pump wagon. ;)

Kellindel
13-11-2007, 14:30
I'll throw an update in here about the results of some games I played this weekend with my HE.

Got three games in with 1500 points each. Won all but they were marginal at best. Heck I think the Orc game was basically a draw.

Game 1 vs. DoW: I still HATE pikemen. even with ASF I was not out wounding the guy and his numbers were making me sweat the end of phase results.

Game 2 vs. Skaven: I made a big mistake and basically watched my White Lions Break two rounds in a row. Outnumbering and more ranks against a special unit is a good thing.

Game 3 vs. Greenskins: Fear on the goblins actually came in handy in breaking one unit and causing another to break as well. Allowed me time to adjust and break the Orc charge. If it didn't happen I would have lost again to my buddy.
How did I win??? My hero's basically pulled my bacon out of the fire both times. My Mage did average at best. Meaning sucked for three rounds and Kick Butt the other three.

Heretic Burner
13-11-2007, 14:42
you keep saying this and im getting sick and tired of hearing it, O&G's are not a dreadful army, i hate to be attacking but maybe you just suck with them.

Sure, it is a possibility. However, how I do is irrelevant, the accumulated data of other players tells the same story. It has been shown that O&G truly are a broken army, scoring absolutely dreadfully in our only source of verifiable compiled information - tournament results. If you have a better method of such strong statistical information I am all ears. But until that time I'll go with the facts over some personal gut feeling/anecdote.


I wasn't very good at all with Wood elves, does that mean they are dreadful? (i won a few games with them and had limited success but wasn't very good with them at all) No that means IMO they might suck but they are no means dreadful and you saying that over and over is not only getting old its just flat out not true.

WE are one of the highest performing armies in the game. If your argument was that the army was bad based solely on your poor showing then yes, it would be a false argument. However, neither of us base our viewpoints on such a simple matter so it is irrelevant.


Ill admit im not by any stretch the best O&G player in the world but I have had GREAT success with O&G and i’ve never been massacred, (killed to a man anyways) i’ve lost but i’ve won WAAAAAY more than ive lost, and now I have decided i’m going to start playing a Green Wave list and I bought a few more boxes of boys and will try to start hammering away with that....

Again some personal anecdote on how you've found some success against your limited opponents - though troubling by the gaping hole in rules knowledge. A massacre in Warhammer is not killing every model on the table. A massacre is determined by victory point differential. I haven't been wiped to that last greenskin in 7th edition - but I certainly have experienced and done my own massacres!



anywayz just because "YOU" aren't good with something doesn't mean that they suck, and Orcs are NOT dreadful that’s just some crap you keep spewing forth that is nothing more than your opinion and its getting old and i'm tired of you attacking this army.

Absolutely, I agree 100%. Whether or not I am good is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether or not the information supports that O&G players succeed with the army. They don't. It certainly isn't nothing more than my opinion, it is instead a logical and concise showing backed up with the best evidence I (or even GW use themselves!) have to offer. Now, we can certainly expect the same from you so, well, where is your statistical evidence?

Kellindel
13-11-2007, 15:06
Sure, it is a possibility. However, how I do is irrelevant, the accumulated data of other players tells the same story. It has been shown that O&G truly are a broken army, scoring absolutely dreadfully in our only source of verifiable compiled information - tournament results. If you have a better method of such strong statistical information I am all ears. But until that time I'll go with the facts over some personal gut feeling/anecdote.



WE are one of the highest performing armies in the game. If your argument was that the army was bad based solely on your poor showing then yes, it would be a false argument. However, neither of us base our viewpoints on such a simple matter so it is irrelevant.



Again some personal anecdote on how you've found some success against your limited opponents - though troubling by the gaping hole in rules knowledge. A massacre in Warhammer is not killing every model on the table. A massacre is determined by victory point differential. I haven't been wiped to that last greenskin in 7th edition - but I certainly have experienced and done my own massacres!



Absolutely, I agree 100%. Whether or not I am good is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether or not the information supports that O&G players succeed with the army. They don't. It certainly isn't nothing more than my opinion, it is instead a logical and concise showing backed up with the best evidence I (or even GW use themselves!) have to offer. Now, we can certainly expect the same from you so, well, where is your statistical evidence?

$10 says all the people you hear from that say the O&G book is bad are the ones that can't get it to work. You tend to hear more from the people that cry foul than the ones that think there's nothing wrong with it. Hence you data is flawed.

Theory-hammer only works in giving odds. It doesn't take into consideration that dice are to random to follow statistics. If you roll enough dice you may eventually fall into your Theory-hammer stats, but you have a limited number of dice to roll on a limited number of rounds.

I think this topic is just become a "he-said, she-said" issue and there is no point in taking it any further. People say SoA is broken and it isn't. People say O&G are broke (in a bad way) and I don't think so. I've had my back end handed to me by them on so many occasions. I've only one one game out of three with the new rules ... so does that mean I suck???

Well my dice rolls might, but my tactics have always been good. When the dice suck all plans fall apart.

Grinloc
13-11-2007, 15:11
The most frequent armies i had to fight with my O&G's were Skaven, WE, Brets, Empire, Dwarves, VC and Chaos (of various kinds).
Yes, it's a local small community of friends, nothing close to a tournament level, but naturally i had my "receiving" experiences against stuff called BRAF, treehuggers, SAD, that special dwarven gunline thing, etc.

Those are army list compositions you frequently can find at tournaments and unfortunately my 7th edition greenskins didn't have the means to counter them. Yes, 6th edition O&G's could, but since 7th edition is the recent one....

I don't participate in official tournaments, so i can avoid those SAD's, BRAF's, etc. My gaming friends only used the most brutal versions of those lists for "experiment reasons", but it clearly showed me the shortcomings of my army.

Due to this the official tournament rankings of O&G's don't surprise me really and when your opponent in a local game confronts you with a powergaming list it won't have much difference with a tournament battle.


You tend to hear more from the people that cry foul than the ones that think there's nothing wrong with it. Hence you data is flawed.

Heretic isn't talking about people who cry foul or the opposite but about official tournament rankings of O&G's armies which match his own gaming experiences. His data are those rankings and they, quite frankly, can't be flawed.

Glabro
13-11-2007, 16:39
Would you care to present your data for examination, Heretic Burner?

I had forgotten about the animosity roll of 1 rendering your shamans unable to cast.
Taking that, the miscast table and the fact that the spells arenīt that impressive to make up for it, I would tend
to agree that playing offensive magic is not worth it, when the points and slots can be spent otherwise.
Just take the Spirit Banner (5 dispel dice) and trust in your orky numbers and toughness to shrug off the rest...

Chiungalla
13-11-2007, 16:46
The problem with all tourney charts that show which army suck, and which rocks is, that they include data from different army books.

Orcs were not so strong in the last edition, and this data are still present in the database.

Orcs were not so stong, short after the new army books release, too.
That is still present in the database as well.

But, since the orc & goblin players had time to figure out there army lists, try some compositions and tactics, and get familiar with the new strengh and weaknesses... orcs & goblins rock.

And they made a great jump in the tourney placements since then.

Edit:

I had forgotten about the animosity roll of 1 rendering your shamans unable to cast.

Shamans do not need to roll for animosity by them self, and you can avoid animosity by placing them in an unit, that is not subject to animosity, such as black orcs.

Maybe you need to field a complete other army to get those orcs & goblins magic to work, but if it works, it will annihilate the other army.

I often play with one level 4 orc shaman and one level 2 goblin shaman, and that works great.
In 2.000 points the orc shaman will be the general, which is great, because he needn't leave the line to get his close combats...

Glabro
13-11-2007, 17:17
I donīt field Black Orcs.

Deyīs not propa orkses.


Besides, shouldnīt an army that foregoes magic have an equal chance of defeating most forces with heavy magic (Undead and their broken Necromancy excepted), or the game is skewed towards magic?

And I donīt mean going in magic defenseless, at the very least the Spirit Totem is included.

Grinloc
13-11-2007, 18:11
Not using any shamans/wizards at all can get quite dangerous since you wouldn't have any dispel scrolls. Mork's spirit totem might be nice, but against an opponent with remotely good magic those 5 dispel dice won't cut it really.

Tried to play with no shamans at all once against Skaven. Didn't expect him to play so magic-heavy, in the process 2/3 of my army ran off the table on the first turn lol.

A handful of armies got such a powerful magic that it quickly becomes a battle deciding factor when not using any wizards yourself. The term "scroll caddy" exists for a reason :).
Just imagine you use an army with mostly Ini 2 and eat a pit of shades :skull:.

Glabro
13-11-2007, 18:59
Actually, Iīd probably go for the staff of sneaky stealing + Spirit Totem combination.

Both of them effectively grant +3 dispel dice to your pool (+1 from the gobbo, -1 from the enemy, +1 for you), meaning your magic defense is actually maintainable throughout the game and you donīt need to rely on 2nd/3rd turn charges to eliminate the offending mages.

Lord Raneus
13-11-2007, 19:56
HB, that Empire yardstick is not accurate either, seeing as the book was only out for a few days, a couple weeks at the most. Not enough time to adapt to deal with it. :P

Basically, if the HE are as broken as you say, we might as well pack up our armies and sell them on Ebay now, because they can never be beaten ever again. That's basically what you're saying.

Heretic Burner
13-11-2007, 20:17
The problem with all tourney charts that show which army suck, and which rocks is, that they include data from different army books.

In this case that problem isn't pronounced at all. It includes only 7th edition data. Thus, the only armies affected are Empire and O&G.



Orcs were not so strong in the last edition, and this data are still present in the database.

Absurd. The data shows just the opposite, they were much stronger. Now, every result using 6th edition rules would actually raise the overall score so from this result the conclusion is unmistakable: O&G 7th edition is even worse relative to other armies than the results indicate!



Orcs were not so stong, short after the new army books release, too.
That is still present in the database as well.

I'm not sure what this mean. Shortly after release they were just the same as 2 months after release and just the same as 4 months after release. New army book, same rules at all times.



But, since the orc & goblin players had time to figure out there army lists, try some compositions and tactics, and get familiar with the new strengh and weaknesses... orcs & goblins rock.

Again the opposite holds true, every other player in the game had time to figure out the list. As there is no correlation present between release of army book and results this is meaningless.



And they made a great jump in the tourney placements since then.

No, the results clearly show this has not happened at all.



Shamans do not need to roll for animosity by them self, and you can avoid animosity by placing them in an unit, that is not subject to animosity, such as black orcs.

You know what other wizards don't need to roll for animosity? Every single one of them. And every single wizard in every single book don't need to be forced into specific units just to be even with every other wizard. Clearly this is a major mechanics problem.



Maybe you need to field a complete other army to get those orcs & goblins magic to work, but if it works, it will annihilate the other army.


Yes, I would love the luxury of fielding two armies to every one of my opponents. Maybe that is required to have even games with the dismal O&G book. Sadly the rules prevent this.

Chiungalla
13-11-2007, 20:56
And where to find your tourney ranking for armies?
Untill you give this little information, I will not believe you.


I'm not sure what this mean. Shortly after release they were just the same as 2 months after release and just the same as 4 months after release. New army book, same rules at all times.

The problem is, that the orc and goblin players needed time to figure out the strongest lists. And this takes time.

Same will be true for high elves.


Again the opposite holds true, every other player in the game had time to figure out the list. As there is no correlation present between release of army book and results this is meaningless.

No it isn't.

The advantage of the orc and goblin player, which has experience with the list and can field far better lists, is greater then the disadvantage, that everybody knows your list in a tourney enviroment.

-----

And even if orcs and goblins suck in your statistic, you need to overthink the reason!

Orcs and goblins are one of the starter armies in the new starter box.
15 year old kids buy some orcs, went to the next tourney and got sloughtered by experienced players all the time.

That is the reason why they maybe suck in the statistics.
Not because they are a weak army, otherwise I can't believe how good I must be, winning over 80% of my games with the new orcs.

-----


You know what other wizards don't need to roll for animosity? Every single one of them. And every single wizard in every single book don't need to be forced into specific units just to be even with every other wizard. Clearly this is a major mechanics problem.

Most other wizards, don't get such a devastating lore.
Most of the greenskin spells have a very low complexity, for there abilities.

And few laws have such good spells in general.
Okay, many laws have better spells, then many orc spells.
But the orc spells are all good and usefull, and this isn't true for any lore in the rule book.

Dragonics
13-11-2007, 21:09
Not sure about everyone else but I would REALLY like to see your "official Tournament Statistics" Heritic Burner, so we can all see where your getting this unwarrented flame of, IMO, a very good, strong and, at times, EXTREAMLY funny. So until you post your stats or provide a viable link to them all your rants/flames etc will fall on deaf ears.

Ive playe my fair share of battles against O&G and have had mixed results. about a 50/50 win rate, usually comes down to the dice rather than tactics, oh and fanatics, there whirly balls of fun squelchy death.

truthsayer
13-11-2007, 21:12
I must say I was dubious avbout the rule but after charging some reavers and them failing to hit let alone wound after their strikes first i wasn't too worried. the only part of the army you have to be wary of now are swordmasters, potentially white lions and characters with great weapons. apart from that they still go down quite easily!

Glabro
13-11-2007, 23:12
Exactly, Heretic Burner - you canīt worm your way out of refusing to show the results now that so many others have demanded to see it along with me!

In any case, I can happily live without magic. Thereīs always Grimgor or Gorbad as an alternative - and donīt give me that about special characters - if I had to choose between facing a (fighty) special character or a level 4 wizard, Iīd go with the SC each time.

WillFightForFood
13-11-2007, 23:42
Sure, it is a possibility. However, how I do is irrelevant, the accumulated data of other players tells the same story. It has been shown that O&G truly are a broken army, scoring absolutely dreadfully in our only source of verifiable compiled information - tournament results.

Herein lies the problem. You're using tournament outcomes as a measure of army strength. In reality you're not accounting for the most important part of any wargame: the players. There may, in fact, be a certain type of player attracted to certain armies. Perhaps the Win At All Costers are brought to the Wood Elf/Bret armies in tournaments, leaving those oriented more towards fun playing the Orc and Goblin armies in the tournaments. Certainly we all know of certain configurations of certain armies that are pretty likely to win, but with Orcs and Goblins, no one has discovered such a configuration. People like to eliminate uncertainty, especially those looking to win. No army better exemplifies the image of uncertainty than Orcs and Goblins.

Don't make the logical jump from outcomes of tournaments to army strength. It's a mistake.

marv335
13-11-2007, 23:53
i just put my HE up against a dwarf army.
got totally mullered. it wasn't funny in the slightest. ASF overpowered?
you need to get into combat first. the only time I saw combat in the whole game was when he was kind enough to put miners into my lines. as for powerful magic? I got one spell off with three mages all game.

Glabro
14-11-2007, 00:04
Excellent point, WillFightForFood.

Before the new Chaos Codex, the Iron Warriors dominated rankings. Thatīs partly because the list was broken, but partly because the players who play to win at all costs played them, too.

Kahadras
14-11-2007, 00:06
Herein lies the problem. You're using tournament outcomes as a measure of army strength. In reality you're not accounting for the most important part of any wargame: the players. There may, in fact, be a certain type of player attracted to certain armies. Perhaps the Win At All Costers are brought to the Wood Elf/Bret armies in tournaments, leaving those oriented more towards fun playing the Orc and Goblin armies in the tournaments. Certainly we all know of certain configurations of certain armies that are pretty likely to win, but with Orcs and Goblins, no one has discovered such a configuration. People like to eliminate uncertainty, especially those looking to win. No army better exemplifies the image of uncertainty than Orcs and Goblins.


Really I wouldn't bother trying. I've already raised this issue but aparantly O&G should have some kind of tournament winning build (along with all the randomness removed). I suppose some peoples idea of a 'good' or 'none broken' O&G armies book is where Black Orcs cost 6 points each and are a core choice, animosity is removed alltogther as is the O&G miscast table.

Kahadras

smileyface
14-11-2007, 01:37
I've been thinking about magic a bit recently, because as HE I need to choose between a scroll caddy build, or a 350 point two mage build that probably won't achieve a lot, or a 500 point three mage build which means dropping all the combat heroes and hoping my spears don't need any high S backup. None of the options look particularly good to me.


I donīt field Black Orcs.
Besides, shouldnīt an army that foregoes magic have an equal chance of defeating most forces with heavy magic?

And I donīt mean going in magic defenseless, at the very least the Spirit Totem is included.

Well, the two are rather different. After all, if you go in with no magic at all you are basically saying "Cast to your hearts content. I might get lucky and stop one spell.". That really is asking for it. I think you always need at least three dice, if only to give yourself one good dispel shot per turn.

Personally, if I could fit in extra dispel dice without taking mages then I usually would. I hate shelling out for a scroll caddy. I also hate shelling out for two level 2's and then finding that my opponent now has exactly the right amount of defence. I also hate spending 25% of my army on magic. If I had an orc army (and if I get another fantasy army it will be O&G) then I'd probably go with the spirit totem option.

To answer the question no defence at all: I don't think so. I'd say yes, if all magic ever did was direct damage. In that case a no magic army ought to be okay as long as it ran quickly enough - it would just be like facing extra firepower. Unfortunately the most powerful spells aren't damage. Consider Invocation of Nehek, for example, or any of the movement spells. 2D6 S4 hits might cost you a light unit, but an unexpected flank charge can easily cost you the game. Put together, that means going without a big sack of dice and/or scrolls is like betting the game on your opponent not getting any truly powerful spells. Is that a good bet? I don't think so.

Flypaper
14-11-2007, 03:09
And where to find your tourney ranking for armies?
Untill you give this little information, I will not believe you.
Sheesh, I link (http://www.warvault.net/warhammer_realm/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4037.) to the stats every five seconds or so. Keep track, people! :p

Greenskins are currently bottom tier, there's no arguing this. Given the number of results, individual player skill should have been well and truly averaged out accross all armies, unless you want to argue that greenskin tourney players are invariably idiots. :eek:

The only conceivable light at the end of the tunnel is the idea that there's a build out there that people haven't stumbled upon yet - it took Ogre Kingdoms a while to pull themselves up by the bootstraps, after all. There's no guarantee that light isn't a train, though. :cool:

Grinloc
14-11-2007, 03:27
And where to find your tourney ranking for armies?
Untill you give this little information, I will not believe you.

Most other wizards, don't get such a devastating lore.
Most of the greenskin spells have a very low complexity, for there abilities.

And few laws have such good spells in general.
Okay, many laws have better spells, then many orc spells.
But the orc spells are all good and usefull, and this isn't true for any lore in the rule book.

We discussed these rankings in another thread, think it was GT O&G's rankings along the lines of one player finishing 20th and the rest in the last quarter of 140 people (don't remember the exact numbers). Heretic probably can tell you more about that stuff.

Granted, numerous spells of the rulebook are average, but...

Devastating lore? Very low complexity?
All the spells in the little waaagh got casting values of 8+ or more, except the first one. The only spell of the big waaagh which can potentially be really devastating (besides "bash em ladz") is "waaagh", which has a casting value of 12+.
The awesome spell of 6th edition "gork's warpath" (a gunline's nightmare) got toned down in 7th edition to a point of not being worth casting at all unless you wanna risk having to roll on that juicy miscast table which can get your great shaman killed on a slightly below average roll of 6.

Where is the spell which is similarily powerful as pit of shades, which totally wastes Ini 2 troops?
Where is the spell which is similarily powerful as black horror, which totally wrecks low strength troops and causes panic checks under a 5" template?
Tzeentch magic? Skaven "2d6 str5 hits" warlocks? Flaming skull? Those are just the ones from the top of my head, there are plenty more. Don't even get me started on slaanesh magic, it's just disgusting.

I don't know which kind of O&G's army book you are reading but the casting values aren't low at all. Couple that with this horrid miscast table (the worst of them all) and such things as animosity...those spells aren't powerful at all in comparison.

Compared to 6th edition Matt Ward totally wrecked O&G's magic in almost every respect, including all the items which made greenskin magic really strong (they are all indeed gone). Back then their magic was devastating, but not anymore.
Dangly Wotznotz, Knobbly Staff, Double-Doin-Dooh-Daahz, Shiny Baubles, ...do i need to continue...

Waaagh magic is approximately as powerful as most of the rulebook spells, but when having that miscast table and a crippling animosity in play then this clearly falls short of compensating...

As an example, some spells from the dark magic lore, which is used by DE and not considered overpowered (didn't ever hear complaints about it):

Chillwind (5+): 24", LOS, d6 str3 hits, units with casualties may do nothing in their next shooting phase.

Word of pain (RIP, 8+): 24", LOS, all models in the enemy unit got their WS and BS reduced TO 1.

Dominion (10+): 12", no LOS, in the following turn enemy unit may either not move, or shoot, or cast any spells. (DE player's decition which one it shall be, probably the best one of the lore)

Black Horror (12+): 18", LOS, 5" template, roll over enemy model's strength (no armor save), 6 always succeeds, units with no strength value are destroyed on a 6, any casualties result in an immediate panic check. (Get that spell off on the first turn and it potentially can win you the game. Ate it once and dished it out once against Beasts of Chaos, both times it made the casting player effectively win the battle.)

It is quite clear that utility spells (which may even cause casualties) are considered the best in this game. No movement or shooting, provoking panic checks, wrecking stat lines, etc. and none of these can be found in the greenskin lores.
Due to this the opponents i frequently played against weren't in the least bit worried about greenskin magic in general, i'm not either with my DE's now.

Finnigan2004
14-11-2007, 04:05
O.K., I just feel compelled to point this out one more time. Maybe orcs and goblins stink and maybe not, but this thread is actually about high elves and ASF. Maybe it's time for to start a thread about the stinkiness of orcs and goblins for some of the people who seem to be threadjacking every high elf thread with orc and gobbo spam. Then they can discuss the relative smelliness of the greenskins on that thread, and other people can discuss the topics that are clearly stated in the title of other threads in said threads. I know that this is crazy talk, but I figured that it was worth a shot.

Grinloc
14-11-2007, 04:11
You are correct, Finnigan.
Doesn't seem to serve any purpose on either "side" anyway.

Chiungalla
14-11-2007, 04:54
Greenskins are currently bottom tier, there's no arguing this. Given the number of results, individual player skill should have been well and truly averaged out accross all armies, unless you want to argue that greenskin tourney players are invariably idiots. :eek:

You are wrong.
Individual player skills, will never been "averaged out".

Different people chose different armies, and beginners often chose the armies from the starter box.

And different people chose different armies when they go to tourneys.
And unless the orcs & goblins are as strong as bretonia, wood elves and such stuff, many high competative players with more then one army will not lead orcs & goblins to a tourney.


All the spells in the little waaagh got casting values of 8+ or more, except the first one.

And they all are at least worth there casting value.


The awesome spell of 6th edition "gork's warpath" (a gunline's nightmare) got toned down in 7th edition to a point of not being worth casting at all unless you wanna risk having to roll on that juicy miscast table which can get your great shaman killed on a slightly below average roll of 6.

The slightly below average roll of 6 will not kill a level 4 orc shaman.
And yes, the warpath was better in the 6th edition.
But D6 strengh 6 hits, with the chance for more of them on other units, isn't bad at all. And it needs no range or LOS. Which is the great part of the spell.
You can kill hidden units with the spell.

Adoregrim
14-11-2007, 07:43
with my beasts im not very worried about ASF, ive got chariots and magic(slannesh) and better toughness than the elves, i will just need to think a little more about when i charge. which tbh i think is fair. elves have been around for 1000s of years, people should think twice before running into them blindly.

EndlessBug
14-11-2007, 09:43
As an example, some spells from the dark magic lore, which is used by DE and not considered overpowered (didn't ever hear complaints about it):

Chillwind (5+): 24", LOS, d6 str3 hits, units with casualties may do nothing in their next shooting phase.

Word of pain (RIP, 8+): 24", LOS, all models in the enemy unit got their WS and BS reduced TO 1.

Dominion (10+): 12", no LOS, in the following turn enemy unit may either not move, or shoot, or cast any spells. (DE player's decition which one it shall be, probably the best one of the lore)

Black Horror (12+): 18", LOS, 5" template, roll over enemy model's strength (no armor save), 6 always succeeds, units with no strength value are destroyed on a 6, any casualties result in an immediate panic check. (Get that spell off on the first turn and it potentially can win you the game. Ate it once and dished it out once against Beasts of Chaos, both times it made the casting player effectively win the battle.)

It is quite clear that utility spells (which may even cause casualties) are considered the best in this game. No movement or shooting, provoking panic checks, wrecking stat lines, etc. and none of these can be found in the greenskin lores.
Due to this the opponents i frequently played against weren't in the least bit worried about greenskin magic in general, i'm not either with my DE's now.

Please do read the ranges of said spells, also take note of the incredibly useless soul stealer with a 6" range, yes it CAN be nasty but it also restricts you to take a fast army or to have a weak magic phase for the first 1 or 2 turns. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying it's a weak lore at all, but it isn't a broken lore at all, it's just taking more power but giving it more restrictions.

Please note that you have again done as Heretic has done and chosen the specific 'broken' spells to prove a point that as O&G don't have broken spells then they are obviously underpowered. Tzeentch magic? VERY random. Skaven "2d6 str5 hits" warlocks? granted, but everyone agrees that this can be broken in mamny ways and very cheaply, but then again they can cause a wound on themselves just under 1/3 of the time.

Please if you feel strongly about this do as Finnigan2004 has said and start a new topic, get back to the point about HE ASF being 'broken' or well balanced.

etancross
14-11-2007, 12:52
Please if you feel strongly about this do as Finnigan2004 has said and start a new topic, get back to the point about HE ASF being 'broken' or well balanced.

Yes can we please get back on track about the ASF rule!

I have played against them 3 times now and havent lost yet, and i still think ASF is WWAAAYY over rated.

I would like to see more posts from actual HE players and find out what they think and hear more results from their games, and whey they find most useful, least usefull, what spells they like and dislike and what has actually helped them and hurt them.

Enough orc bashing, and saying this sucks and that sucks....

that ship has sailed so lets move on.

sainthale1988
14-11-2007, 13:12
i've played agiainst new HE twice, both wins for me, ASF didn't play a major role (except killing a lot of skellies who accidentaly overran into the front of a block of spearmen.....)
thier magic is good, but my necromancer were easily able to deal with it defensively and over power offensively (i'ts a REALY heavy magic based army though so not a fair comparison) and my empire uses warrior priests thus bucket loads of dispel dice and all 'bound' spells so drain magic did the square root of bugger all to stop me.
i've also played using the new HE list once and as far as ASF goes it meant i could be much more agressive and not relay on charging, just setting up good combats that when the happened were nearly always in my favour. on swordsmasters it is incredible however, twice they killed enough models first to stop any casulaties in return so once they wittled away static CR they won.

etancross
14-11-2007, 13:36
sainthale1988 what about HE magic?

In my Avarage list i have 2 Orc Shamans and one NG shaman and i have been able to all but shut down their magic phase? The players ive played against have said that their mages are very expensive and that is hard to setup a good strong magic phase.

Having played as HE's what are somethings that can be done to beef up magic output? To be strong in magic do HE players have to build more of a list centered around magic and have that be their primary focus? If they do beef up the magic how much will the CC aspect of their army suffer because of high cost and low magic?

Chiungalla
14-11-2007, 18:42
With the banner of sorcery, high elves can put up a very decent magic phase with 2 level 2 wizards in 2.000 points. With more wizards things begin to become nasty...

Like it was in the old edition, but now with a better magic lore.

sainthale1988
14-11-2007, 19:33
sainthale1988 what about HE magic?

In my Avarage list i have 2 Orc Shamans and one NG shaman and i have been able to all but shut down their magic phase? The players ive played against have said that their mages are very expensive and that is hard to setup a good strong magic phase.

Having played as HE's what are somethings that can be done to beef up magic output? To be strong in magic do HE players have to build more of a list centered around magic and have that be their primary focus? If they do beef up the magic how much will the CC aspect of their army suffer because of high cost and low magic?

these were only 1000 and 1500 pts respectively, and looking at the book if they realy wanted to go magic heavy they could do it well
thier spells are all good (except vauls unmaking which has too high a casting level to be done by anything other than an arch mage)

as far as your orcs and gobbos go it entierly depends on what your and his items go but with 5 dispel dice and say 3 scrolls i'd say you'd stop which ever spell is vital to the elves that turn.

but yes if they realy went for it (arch mage, two normal mages a couple of naste bound items with the banner of socery to up number of power dice they could be really REALY nasty. but your right the point of high elves that they can specialise to be the best in any field but are so expensive that they suffer elsewere, but i'm new to HE so i'm no expert, and in reality it depends on the indiviual list

Heretic Burner
14-11-2007, 20:36
You are wrong.

Flypaper certainly sounds right me, I don't see any flaws against him. I certainly don't see any statistical evidence.



Individual player skills, will never been "averaged out".

Sure they will. Given a large enough sample size, outlying results will have less effect on the average.



Different people chose different armies, and beginners often chose the armies from the starter box.

A good theory...sadly its been long since refuted. Both Empire and O&G were starter armies last edition, both were mid tier armies. There is zero, nadda, zip, no evidence at all starter armies have anything to do with O&G's dreadful performance.



And different people chose different armies when they go to tourneys.
And unless the orcs & goblins are as strong as bretonia, wood elves and such stuff, many high competative players with more then one army will not lead orcs & goblins to a tourney.

I'm not seeing how this helps your case at all. If the best, most highly competitve players know O&G are ghastly...then yes they are likely horrid. If O&G were competitve then yes they would be selected by those players. There is no evidence at all this is a factor, if anything just the opposite! O&G are one of the most represented in tournaments, having one of the largest sample size, and one of the largest player bases! Aside from WE, no top tier army has anywhere near the numbers.

And here it gets even more fun! Because of O&G's high representation, meeting between two opposing greenskin armies are more common. Therefore it will actually push the results towards the mid tier average. The performance of O&G is even worse!

EndlessBug
14-11-2007, 21:22
O.K., I just feel compelled to point this out one more time. Maybe orcs and goblins stink and maybe not, but this thread is actually about high elves and ASF. Maybe it's time for to start a thread about the stinkiness of orcs and goblins for some of the people who seem to be threadjacking every high elf thread with orc and gobbo spam. Then they can discuss the relative smelliness of the greenskins on that thread, and other people can discuss the topics that are clearly stated in the title of other threads in said threads. I know that this is crazy talk, but I figured that it was worth a shot.

Quoted again for emphasis!

Kahadras
14-11-2007, 21:38
This is getting boring. Can we actualy try to get the thread back to it's original topic?

ASF is more annoying than scary TBH. I've found that I can afford to sit back and let the HE come to me. Taking even a fair amount of shooting and concentrating on his missile units will force the rest of the army to move forward.

It's quite easy to whittle away the few units the HE player does have to the point where it becomes almost immaterial whether he's going to strike first, last or at any other time in the proceedings. Units like Swordmaster might sound scary but they are inevitably going to be the first to die and anybody who lets them get into close combat with anything remotly important in his army has obviously got a case of the galloping crazies.

Kahadras

WillFightForFood
14-11-2007, 21:51
This is the last I'm going to comment on this inane threadjack.


Flypaper certainly sounds right me, I don't see any flaws against him. I certainly don't see any statistical evidence.

Descriptive statistics like that really don't tell you much beyond what your sample looks like on a very basic level. All you know are results from a select set of tournaments (which is itself a convenience sample of tournaments), and you're assuming those outcomes tell us something about the armies.


Sure they will. Given a large enough sample size, outlying results will have less effect on the average.

Except that you have to make assumptions about your data, namely that the distribution is random. And that's not something you can make, so you're introducing a point of error. You have no idea if there is a selection effect.


A good theory...sadly its been long since refuted. Both Empire and O&G were starter armies last edition, both were mid tier armies. There is zero, nadda, zip, no evidence at all starter armies have anything to do with O&G's dreadful performance.

Long been refuted? Where? By whom?



I'm not seeing how this helps your case at all. If the best, most highly competitve players know O&G are ghastly...then yes they are likely horrid. If O&G were competitve then yes they would be selected by those players. There is no evidence at all this is a factor, if anything just the opposite! O&G are one of the most represented in tournaments, having one of the largest sample size, and one of the largest player bases! Aside from WE, no top tier army has anywhere near the numbers.

And here it gets even more fun! Because of O&G's high representation, meeting between two opposing greenskin armies are more common. Therefore it will actually push the results towards the mid tier average. The performance of O&G is even worse!

Again, you make major assumptions on the data. One, You have no idea why or who is playing those Orcs and Goblins armies. You have no idea how their armies are composed. Two, you're assuming that because Orcs and Goblins are roughly 10% of the tournament entries that they are playing eachother quite often. At 10% of the entries that means for there to be on average two Orcs and Goblins players there must be 20 players in the tournament. And that's not really a guarantee (both from the standpoint of there actually being two in that tournament and from the standpoint of them actually playing eachother in said tournament). To take that one further, you have no idea what armies are playing what armies. This isn't disagregrated by region, this isn't disagregated by direct matchups. Perhaps in one region there are a number of bad Orcs and Goblins players that get paired up against highly competitve Brets. The creator of the data himself states that taking away one (1) major tournament could cause a shift in the data.

Honestly, all those data tell you are that in 631 North American Tournaments he found Orcs and Goblins represented about 10% of the total players and won about 40% of their games.

Anything else is pure speculation.

Glabro
14-11-2007, 21:53
Very well, the statistics are there and they canīt really be argued with.
Orcs are bottom tier.

So, on to the ASF show.

GodHead
14-11-2007, 22:30
I donīt field Black Orcs.
Besides, shouldnīt an army that foregoes magic have an equal chance of defeating most forces with heavy magic?

And I donīt mean going in magic defenseless, at the very least the Spirit Totem is included.

I hate people who think like that. I hate the notion that if you tie your own hands behind your back and slit your own throat you should still be able to beat me when I'm actually trying to win the game.

It's a competitive game. If you want to throw away what works because it doesn't make you happy, too bad. Some army lists simply will perform better than others. If you can't bother to find one that works because of the silly story you wrote about how your green Orcs don't get along with Black Orcs, or how your Goblins ate all their shamans, then too bloody bad.

Just because your list adds up to 2000 points doesn't mean it should be able to win against any opponents. It doesn't even mean your list should have even a slim chance of winning against any opponents. Some armies are effective, some aren't. If you choose an ineffective army then you better have good reasons for doing so and I hope you like losing.

As to the thread's initial intention, my Ogres are terrified of ASF. I simply can not think of what I can do against it. I've proxied a couple of games, and it is a nightmare.

My Tomb Kings have no problems with it though.

therisnosaurus
14-11-2007, 22:56
I'd think ogres would be more scared of drain magic, that must screw butchers over royally, with all the one die casting going on, and going from 3+ to 6+ basic casting on all your spells, plus HE getting +1 on all their dispells... Ugh, I feel sorry for the poor overweight sods...

GodHead
14-11-2007, 23:42
There is no phase of the game in which Ogres can do well against High Elves. They are disadvantaged at every step.

Glabro
14-11-2007, 23:56
I hate people who think like that. I hate the notion that if you tie your own hands behind your back and slit your own throat you should still be able to beat me when I'm actually trying to win the game.

Thatīs your prerogative. I love you too.



It's a competitive game. If you want to throw away what works because it doesn't make you happy, too bad. Some army lists simply will perform better than others. If you can't bother to find one that works because of the silly story you wrote about how your green Orcs don't get along with Black Orcs, or how your Goblins ate all their shamans, then too bloody bad.

If you couldnīt figure out I was being sarcastic, too bloody bad for you. I would figure itīs plain obvious that in the tournament scene, you need magic defense. Itīs more about whatīs enough - is 7 dispel dice minus one power from the enemy enough to counter the worst of it? I think it could be.

I donīt field Black Orcs because I donīt like their fluff, but even if I did, I donīt see any need to do so. I can use my Special Slots better - and besides, going heavy-magic with orcs isnīt the best of plans, as has been shown.



Just because your list adds up to 2000 points doesn't mean it should be able to win against any opponents. It doesn't even mean your list should have even a slim chance of winning against any opponents. Some armies are effective, some aren't. If you choose an ineffective army then you better have good reasons for doing so and I hope you like losing.

Obviously true. You donīt know who youīre talking to - Iīm a firm believer in the importance of army selection.
And no, Iīm not just limited to Orcs & Goblins - itīs more of a "fun" army for me.

You obviously think I havenīt been around. Well, I might not have been around as long as some (only from ī92, Fourth Edition, not my birthdate, obviously), but letīs just say that Iīm not that used to losing.

Dranthar
15-11-2007, 01:42
There is no phase of the game in which Ogres can do well against High Elves. They are disadvantaged at every step.

I have to disagree.

Ogres can do MSU quite effectively and combined with their high movement, stand a good chance of out maneuvering a high elf army. If they take gnoblars, they will even have an expendible unit to bait and redirect high elf charges.

With their +1 dispel high elves stand a better chance than most at neutralising an ogre army's magic, but that's old news. Drain magic would be a threat, but only if the ogres let them get it off.

Shooting has never been an ogres strong point and although lead belchers are certainly not useless, I'd acknowledge that it won't be hard for High elves (or most armies) to outshoot the ogres.

In combat the multi-wound, high toughness ogres have a better chance than most armies of being able to dish out the return attacks, and the impact hits will really hurt those little elves. And lets not forget that whole 'fear' thing. ;)

As for characters? To be honest I'm not sure how a tyrant holds up vs a highborn, but with the toughness, immunity to killing blow and multiple wounds, I suspect it won't exactly be a walkover for the highborn, ASF or not.

So basically, not alot has changed in between army books. High elves still have the edge in shooting and magic, while ogres remain a threat by virtue of their mobility and damage output in combat.

Of course this is all theoryhammer. I've yet to actually see a HE vs Ogres game although I'll be interested to watch them in action.

GodHead
15-11-2007, 02:51
I really think you are mistaken if you think Ogres have a mobility advantage against any army. Even MSU, the Ogres are still largely blundering units that get flummoxed up hopelessly by multiple eagles, chariots, shadow warriors and Dragons.

I find that my Ogres are by far the worst army I've proxied against the elves because of the domination in the magic and shooting phase lets them put 1 or 2 wounds on all the Ogre units before they get into combat. These wounds combined with ASF means that they can pick off an Ogre (almost guaranteed) or two (more often than not) before I get to attack, on MY charges. Even with a flank attack, coming in 2 Ogres down before you can swing loses every time.

Runt Nosher
15-11-2007, 03:02
I'm actually really looking forward to taking on High Elves with my MSU 3 Butcher Ogres. Short of a dragon I don't see this match up changing much either, you can't kill my Tyrant in 1 round even with the Talisman of Loec. I also bring 30 ogre sized models to a game, in 8-12 units. There are far too many variables in a game to make these proclamations without seeing it done first.

Chiungalla
15-11-2007, 06:34
Very well, the statistics are there and they canīt really be argued with.
Orcs are bottom tier.


Flypaper certainly sounds right me, I don't see any flaws against him. I certainly don't see any statistical evidence.

Both of you, please take a lesson in theory of science!
Then you will learn what you could read into such a statistic, and what you must not read into it.

It is very wrong to take a given statistic like these, and draw such conclusions like "orcs and goblins suck because they are bottom tier", because you don't know enough about the taken samples.

The only conclusion you can realy take is:
"Orcs and Goblins don't perform well in average on the tourneys we got the data for this statistic from".

You can't conclude that they are crap, because you don't know anything about the players involved. And this will not "average out".

I have played very often against orcs & goblins on tourneys.
And very often my opponents were teenagers and beginners, and clueless about how to play them good.

But a very few times I faced good players with orcs & goblins, which allways gave me a hard time to make a draw (with old high elves) and finished good in the tourney in the end, often under the best 3.

EndlessBug
15-11-2007, 07:43
Can alll thread jackers please revert their arguements to the following thread:

http://warseer.com/forums/fantasy-tactics/113178-orcs-in-tournament-armies.html

thank you.

Heretic Burner
15-11-2007, 19:06
Absolutely, lets not move away from the original purpose of this thread which was...


uh...


...


I'm not exactly certain. As far as I can tell the thread started with a single poster's opinion that they don't mind ASF. Naturally a counterargument was made, bringing in ASF's obvious dominance - specifically against O&G. Obviously things have been on topic as far as I can tell.

Now clearly an army such as dwarfs are going to perform relatively well (in pitched battles anyway) against HE since they are priced already to reflect their poor movement. They have powerful stats to compensate already. Obviously an army like Dark Elves simply aren't. And I really don't know how you can balance DE against HE. If they pay for their massive mobility advantage against other armies they will be crippled against HE. If they don't have to pay because of HE then they will have a large advantage against the other armies. How odd.

Clearly how powerful HE compared to O&G has been covered. How powerful they are compared to OK is evident as well, as GodHead pointed out they have an advantage in every phase of the game over OK as well. So yes, ASF is monumentally powerful, it does have a major impact, and how that impact is felt on armies such as DE, OK, and O&G should be discussed...all completely on topic.

EndlessBug
15-11-2007, 20:15
Dark elves have already been pointed out as a pointless army to compare against HE, we can not know what GW will do to the DE to balance this out and speculation will not be a viable option for either sides arguement, this will only lead to 'What will DE get in their new book?' which is being discussed on another topic.

Dwarfs always have had the upper hand against HE IMO, with such great armour and decent magic defence the HE always will bounce off them, this IMO demonstrates how unimportant Weapon Skill and Initiative is compared to Armour save and Toughness. HE 'should' always get the charge against Dwarfs, so yes this does negate the usefullness of the ASF rule, as from the charge onwards the HE will strike first all the time.

This does seem to show that against Dwarfs the ASF rule is actually underpowered, upping the price of the HE warriors while in very few cases actually having any real dent on the effectiveness (where this is the case against some units in each army, it is the case in ALL units in the Dwarf army).

I don't know enough about OK to comment so I will leave that to others.

Chiungalla
15-11-2007, 20:28
DE will do fine against the new high elves.
They will outnumber the high elves by three to two, and have very good shooting and a decent magic phase.

Okay, maybe the high elves have an advantage against dark elves, but this is also true for nearly every other army book.
I don't see DE suffer more against high elves, then against bretonia and wood elves.

And dark elves will get a new army book in the next year.

Ogre Kingdoms will suffer, but this isn't something new.
They suffer against nearly every other army.

And yes, ASF is powerfull, but the high elves pay for it.
And I strongly believe ASF is overprieced in points by GW.
The low numbers of high elves are a far greater disadvantage in the most cases, then the ASF is an advantage.

And if you mention all the armies high elves will be great against, don't forget those armies against which they will suck in the future: wood elves, empire and dwarfs.

Dominatrix
15-11-2007, 21:14
They will outnumber the high elves by three to two, and have very good shooting and a decent magic phase.

So the DEs' best bet is to go pure gunline (and I am saying that because a "decent" magic phase can be nullified easily by HE as their magic is actually better than the dark elven one). Just what this game needs more gunlines.


Okay, maybe the high elves have an advantage against dark elves, but this is also true for nearly every other army book.
I don't see DE suffer more against high elves, then against bretonia and wood elves.

So they suck against everybody why not against HE too? Nice reasoning there. :rolleyes:


Ogre Kingdoms will suffer, but this isn't something new.
They suffer against nearly every other army.

How I envy Ogre players...:eyebrows:


And yes, ASF is powerfull, but the high elves pay for it.
And I strongly believe ASF is overprieced in points by GW.
The low numbers of high elves are a far greater disadvantage in the most cases, then the ASF is an advantage.

So paying 15 points for a model with ASF is overpriced? :wtf: I have news for you. I play a chaos army among other things. Years before you HE players discovered the wonderful world of expensive models me and every other chaos player had to cope with it all this time. And if you really want to talk about overpriced compare your unit costs with ANY unit from the chaos book (comparing with chaos warriors or bloodletters especially is always a knee slapper). No your "low" numbers are not low. Welcome to the elite army club. Enjoy your stay! ;)


And if you mention all the armies high elves will be great against, don't forget those armies against which they will suck in the future: wood elves, empire and dwarfs.

So out of a total of 15 different armies HE will suffer against what? Whole 3 ones? I can feel your pain really.

P.S. Sorry for the sarcastic tone of my post but you pretty much had it coming with what you wrote. HE don't exist in a bubble. Compare them to the other armies out there and you will see how unjustified your complains are.

etancross
15-11-2007, 21:22
So the DEs' best bet is to go pure gunline (and I am saying that because a "decent" magic phase can be nullified easily by HE as their magic is actually better than the dark elven one). Just what this game needs more gunlines.



So they suck against everybody why not against HE too? Nice reasoning there. :rolleyes:

.

How I envy Ogre players...:eyebrows:



So paying 15 points for a model with ASF is overpriced? :wtf: I have news for you. I play a chaos army among other things. Years before you HE players discovered the wonderful world of expensive models me and every other chaos player had to cope with it all this time. And if you really want to talk about overpriced compare your unit costs with ANY unit from the chaos book (comparing with chaos warriors or bloodletters especially is always a knee slapper). No your "low" numbers are not low. Welcome to the elite army club. Enjoy your stay! ;)



So out of a total of 15 different armies HE will suffer against what? Whole 3 ones? I can feel your pain really.

P.S. Sorry for the sarcastic tone of my post but you pretty much had it coming with what you wrote. HE don't exist in a bubble. Compare them to the other armies out there and you will see how unjustified your complains are.


everyone and their mom keeps bring up DE's, i have played a DE player once the entire time ive played WHFB and it was years ago when i played Dwarfs.

are DE a pothetic army? Are they so bad to really warrant all this worry?

from the way things are making them sound its almost like compairing a snotling to an Ogre. Are DE's that bad off?

fubukii
15-11-2007, 21:28
While choas are about expensive as high elfs point wise, they get a great dealwith their knights of khorne and core chariots. a unit of khorne knights is 210 pts gets 10 str ws 5 attacks (ALWAYS) and 5 str 4 horse attacks, And they also generate a dispel dice. Now for the same cost i can get 7 dragon princes who are only str 5 on the charge and do not rock toughness 4, do not generate a dispel dice, and do not have str 4 mounts, granted they do move 1 further inch which is nice. Chaos heroes are also alot tougher then high elf heroes for roughly the same cost (exalted champ has the statline of our prince minus wounds and ld!). YOu just have to realize yes elf models are pricey, yes other models from other armies are as expensive, But they arent toughness 3, rocking a 5+ armor save.

Dominatrix
15-11-2007, 22:08
from the way things are making them sound its almost like compairing a snotling to an Ogre. Are DE's that bad off?

Since I am not a DE player I can tell you how I see them as an opponent. In my club we used to have two dark elf players with whom we all started roughly the same period 8 years ago. Today they have both moved on to different armies. They got tired of being everyone else's bitch all the time. The only army list they ever came up with that even remotely presented a challenge (personally even so I never lost a game to them) to the rest of us was a cityguard army. Want to know what was in that list? Yeah you guessed it. Four reaper bolt throwers, lots of repeater x-bows etc.Trust me when I say that in the WHFB food chain DE are competing with Ogres for the bottom place.


a unit of khorne knights is 210 pts gets 10 str ws 5 attacks (ALWAYS) and 5 str 4 horse attacks, And they also generate a dispel dice. Now for the same cost i can get 7 dragon princes who are only str 5 on the charge and do not rock toughness 4, do not generate a dispel dice, and do not have str 4 mounts, granted they do move 1 further inch which is nice.

You are neglecting the fact that they suffer from frenzy and require constant babysitting (screening units, proper facing) so they don't chase some fast cavalry unit or eagle for the rest of the game (especially against a competent general. Besides heavy cavalry is not supposed to be a unit that can take a lot of damage and thus work as an anvil. They are supposed to break enemies on the charge and continue on. In that regard DP and Chaos Knights (not chosen) are pretty much equal in killing power. Anyway DP are one of the units least affected by ASF. The units that received a massive boost are the infantry ones. And you don't even want to compare chaos and HE infantry units. It is that tragic.

EndlessBug
15-11-2007, 23:41
So now a T4 WS 5 STR 4 AS 3+ basic chaos warrior is pants? Because 'almost' every infantry unit needs at least 4+ to hit it followed by the majority 5+ to wound and then you have to fail a 3+ save... so thats in most cases 1 in 18 attacks killing the model (that's a WS 3/4 STR 3 model)

core infantry to core infantry:
21 Spear elves with full command = 214
12 Chaos Warriors with full command = 210

assuming none take casualties:

22 attacks on Chaos warriors = 1 dead (ok so 1 2/9 ... roughly 1.2).
6 attacks on spear elves = 2 or 3 dead.

So combat res,
HE = std, outnumber, 2 ranks, 1 kill = 5.2
Chaos = 1 rank, std, 2.5 kills = 4.5 combat res

This is assuming the warriors are in a 6x2 formation and the spear elves are in a 7x3 ... which seems to be the norm. Next round the Chaos lose no CR, HE might lose 1 or might not depending on luck, if they do Chaos gain upperhand, if not HE will. VERY BALANCED IMO.

Or if you'd like, marauders:
20 marauders + fc = 165 points (7 points for light armour and shield correct?)
15 Elf Spearmen + fc = 165 points

16 attacks on marauders ( 1/2 hit 1/2 wound fails save 1/2 of the time) = 2 kills.
4 attacks back = 5/6 wounds - roughly 1

so Combat res:
HE = std, 2 kills, 2 ranks = 5
Marauders = std, 3 ranks, outnumber, 1 wound = 6

Next round HE lose 1 attack, both lose a rank.

Chaos win (barely). VERY BALANCED IMO.

Granted this is math-hammer and it does not take into tactics or the higher ld of the Elves or their higher movement. I assume both do their jobs properly and do not allow rank charges and that the elves allow Chaos the charge as they would benefit more from it.

Yes, DE do lose out, but it is widely known that they are underpowered and are due a new book soon. So perhaps it is best not to compare HE with DE (or VC for that matter as they get a new book next).

kroq'gar
16-11-2007, 06:12
Cant say i agree.

I strongly dislike this as an armywide rule. Spearmen, fine. Swordmasters, fine - but as a charge reaction. (spearwall, sure strike). White lions, NO.

Now my antiarcher units are usless, tunneling teams can get beaten down by crew?!

Im being forced to adopt a style of play against highelves that i hate. I dont want to have to gun them, but i'm left without about nil choice. Im not saying its unbeatable or anything of the sort, but it really should have been in initiative order, even if charged. (that way, their high initiative actually would mean they fight first anyway if they charge + sub rounds, but they are not gaining a free 25point magic item, and actual magic items would strike prior. This would also mean other elves would just have a chance and not just get worked over by highelves.)


Post script, run the above scenario with clanrats or empire halberds please. Its those infantry that are getting their a$$es handed to them regardless of what they do. I like to try theme and have a little fun, but hoard clanrats just cant possibley win. Believe me, i tried.
and dont mention detachments... this would be a situation arising in an army sized battle where highelves with a decent general have used their units for mutual support and nullified detachements/slave flankers etc.

Chiungalla
16-11-2007, 07:26
So the DEs' best bet is to go pure gunline (and I am saying that because a "decent" magic phase can be nullified easily by HE as their magic is actually better than the dark elven one). Just what this game needs more gunlines.

I see no way in shutting a DE magic phase down with HE, except you succed in two drain magic spells in your own phase, or field more mages then the DE with your high elves.


So they suck against everybody why not against HE too? Nice reasoning there. :rolleyes:

Your reasoning is far worse:
"We make a new high elf army book, let's balance them with the worst armies around, and then make a new dark elf and chaos book next year, and let the dark elves and chaos rock the high elves from that point on for all times... or at least the next six yeares."

You can not compare your 6th edition army books with a brand new 7th edition army book.

High elves may have become stronger, but they have in my opinion not yet reached highes as the bretonian or wood elves.

Other army books (chaos, vampires, dark elves) will follow in the near future, and all this army books will get upgrades, which takes them to one level with the high elves.

If you balance the new high elves with the todays chaos, vampires and dark elves, you will prevent every opportunity to balance high elves, chaos, vampires and dark elves with each other and with bretonia and wood elves.

kroq'gar
16-11-2007, 07:34
Yeah, and what about empire, skaven and the like who want to take balanced lists for a fun game, and have half their army carved up because THEY got the charge?

The beauty of herohammer was, all heros were so good they were akin, and made all regiments equally useless.

Ecclesiastes
16-11-2007, 08:30
Yeah, and what about empire, skaven and the like who want to take balanced lists for a fun game, and have half their army carved up because THEY got the charge?


A quick math shows that Clanrats will on average suffer 2 casualties charging a high elf spears regiment... euhh, so? you should have an extra rank by then since even the most uncunning general manages to kill 1 t3 5+ save model by shooting, so even if you dont do any dmg back, you still should draw the combat by having 1 more rank (or maybe 2 if you get a shot with a ratling gun at them) and outnumbering...

As for empire halberds... I can honestly say that in my 9 years of playing tournaments, and gaming weekly at my gaming club I have only by exception seen an empire player, playing fluffy or not, with core blocks of halberds... (have seen a lot of empire players though) The mainstay unit of the empire have been and always will be the swordsman and spears... and they dont do to bad against the high elf regiments, swordsmen will draw the combat by their AS and spears by their extra attacks... The doomsayers that say that you wont have any attacks back should be less paranoid about some s3 attacks, do the math...

And swordmasters, well, tbh, if you charge those frontal with core units half their point cost without any support you deserve to die, I assume you charge your clanrats frontally in units of savage orcs and chosen chaos warriors also then?

I've been playing with the new elves now, and they still die vs the usual infantry killers, cavalry, monsters, chariots, other elite infantry and mass charges... nothing new. You just have to find a different way to approach the elite units, just like you currently handle blocks of chosen chaos warriors, ironbreakers, and units with characters in them. I assume you dont charge those frontally with core units and expect to win?

(btw, I'm not arguing if I think ASF is a good rule or not, I would have gone for the initiative option. But now we're stuck with it and ppl should try to get over their fustration and back to the board playing, cuz then you will see that you just have gotten lazy vs high elf infantry, previous, even common goblins could draw the combat versus them. Now, you've got more of a challenge than just facing the endless line of cavalry and mages)

Dominatrix
16-11-2007, 08:32
Your reasoning is far worse:
"We make a new high elf army book, let's balance them with the worst armies around, and then make a new dark elf and chaos book next year, and let the dark elves and chaos rock the high elves from that point on for all times... or at least the next six yeares."

I never said "balance the HE with the worst armies around". The HE update has been done and that's all over now. GW can't go back and change it. All I asked is that in the 7th ed DE book, enough changes will be made so they can actually compete with HE. What irks me though is the attitude of some people that "DE are fine, so what if HE are better".

smileyface
16-11-2007, 12:55
I'm actually really looking forward to taking on High Elves with my MSU 3 Butcher Ogres. Short of a dragon I don't see this match up changing much either, you can't kill my Tyrant in 1 round even with the Talisman of Loec. I also bring 30 ogre sized models to a game, in 8-12 units. There are far too many variables in a game to make these proclamations without seeing it done first.

That actually sounds alarming. I might give it a go, if my opponents don't mind a 40mm cardboard square being an ogre.



and dont mention detachments... this would be a situation arising in an army sized battle where highelves with a decent general have used their units for mutual support and nullified detachements/slave flankers etc.

The elf units cost more than yours. The elf characters cost more than yours. Their artillary cost more than yours. If you aren't outnumbering them on a unit-for-unit basis then either you brought one diabolically expensive character, or you're doing something wrong. Basically, if you end up fighting an elf unit toe-to-toe, and it costs more than yours does (which it does), then you lose. That doesn't sound like a problem with the game to me.

Hell, if my spearelves go toe-to-toe with Chosen, they lose. Does that mean chosen are overpowered? No. It just means I picked the wrong fight... or I didn't pick the fight at all. Either way, the fault is mine.

Now, if your unit were more expensive than the elf one, you'd have a point. Savage orcs, for example.

GodHead
16-11-2007, 13:32
A quick math shows that Clanrats will on average suffer 2 casualties charging a high elf spears regiment... euhh, so? you should have an extra rank by then since even the most uncunning general manages to kill 1 t3 5+ save model by shooting, so even if you dont do any dmg back, you still should draw the combat by having 1 more rank (or maybe 2 if you get a shot with a ratling gun at them) and outnumbering...


3.5 actually.
21 attacks, 2/3 hit,
14 hits, 1/2 wound,
7 wounds, 1/2 save
3.5 wounds.

EvC
16-11-2007, 14:44
I wonder if anyone posting in this thread other than me has actually played against Dark Elves with 7th edition High Elves?

My opponent quite blatantly tailored his list to fight me yesterday. I faced:
Level 4 on Pegasus
3 x Level 2
2 Infantry, 2 Chariots
RXB + 3 RBT
5 Dark Riders
It was a fun game, but yet again I had horrid luck- facing 13 power dice a turn, my opponent did not miscast once. At a tournament when I fought a Khorne Daemons army my opponent was nearly crying over the fact I hadn't miscast with my 7 power dice Vampire army, I think his head would've exploded if he'd been in my place in this game!

Despite the tailored list and amazing luck, my opponent only managed a losing draw- and it would've been a victory if Chillwind hadn't killed 5 (Yes, the spell that does D6 S3 hits managed to kill more than twice the average) Archers, just enough to bring them to beneath half strength and make them unable to claim a table quarter.

As has been said, Drain Magic is not going to make a difference against an army like that- both my Mages took High Magic to give it a shot, but against 7 DD it never got through.

So if Dark Elves can't manage a win when they take some of the most anti-HE lists possible (He could've added a 4th bolt thrower and 2 more chariots...) and roll amazingly throughout the game, then they should just keep making sacrifices on the Altar of Khaine to keep them going until the next army book is out :D

etancross
16-11-2007, 15:42
I wonder if anyone posting in this thread other than me has actually played against Dark Elves with 7th edition High Elves?

My opponent quite blatantly tailored his list to fight me yesterday. I faced:
Level 4 on Pegasus
3 x Level 2
2 Infantry, 2 Chariots
RXB + 3 RBT
5 Dark Riders
It was a fun game, but yet again I had horrid luck- facing 13 power dice a turn, my opponent did not miscast once. At a tournament when I fought a Khorne Daemons army my opponent was nearly crying over the fact I hadn't miscast with my 7 power dice Vampire army, I think his head would've exploded if he'd been in my place in this game!

Despite the tailored list and amazing luck, my opponent only managed a losing draw- and it would've been a victory if Chillwind hadn't killed 5 (Yes, the spell that does D6 S3 hits managed to kill more than twice the average) Archers, just enough to bring them to beneath half strength and make them unable to claim a table quarter.

As has been said, Drain Magic is not going to make a difference against an army like that- both my Mages took High Magic to give it a shot, but against 7 DD it never got through.

So if Dark Elves can't manage a win when they take some of the most anti-HE lists possible (He could've added a 4th bolt thrower and 2 more chariots...) and roll amazingly throughout the game, then they should just keep making sacrifices on the Altar of Khaine to keep them going until the next army book is out :D

Ive been waiting for a DE player to post and see what they had to say, it seems to me all this crying is just unfounded and has no merrit cause it seems like DE's did just fine.

Grinloc
16-11-2007, 15:57
Ive been waiting for a DE player to post and see what they had to say, it seems to me all this crying is just unfounded and has no merrit cause it seems like DE's did just fine.

Ok, so as an opponent a DE player, using an anti-HE list, barely managing a losing draw with shamelessly lucky dice rolling...sounds like "doing just fine" to you?

Impressive logical thinking right there...

Revlid
16-11-2007, 16:03
Ive been waiting for a DE player to post and see what they had to say, it seems to me all this crying is just unfounded and has no merrit cause it seems like DE's did just fine.

I hate to ask, etancross, I really do, but did you in fact read any of the post that you yourself just quoted?

EndlessBug
16-11-2007, 16:20
Ive been waiting for a DE player to post and see what they had to say, it seems to me all this crying is just unfounded and has no merrit cause it seems like DE's did just fine.

I hope you see the point of his post Etancross (or that that was sarcasm, it is hard to tell with text sometimes), what EvC was actually saying was that DE were underpowered, as the DE player took an army designed to beat his, got some darn good luck and still barely scraped a draw.

all in all they didn't do 'just fine' they did poorly, had the game been with 2 'balanced' lists then EvC is saying that the HE would've walked away with it easily.

Chiungalla
16-11-2007, 16:36
And how tailored was the high elves list?
How trustworthy is his opinion concerning the luck of his opponent?
And how will the dark elves be with there new army book?

Edit:
And I don't agree that a mages only army list will be the best kind of list for dark elves to use against high elves.

etancross
16-11-2007, 18:07
I hate to ask, etancross, I really do, but did you in fact read any of the post that you yourself just quoted?

i agree someone tell the etan cross guy to read quoted posts and to shut the hell up please! /sarcasim.

[i guess i will just say it but, i was being sarcastic because once again i know nothing about DE's, this was also in reference to my eariler statement about not having played against DE anytime recent.]

sainthale1988
16-11-2007, 21:17
the always strikes first rule is only realy a bugger for me with models with greatweapons (i do it too with my slannesh dragon ogre shaggoth) who should be striking last to compensate for their strength bonus, and now granted HE pay more for a great weapon than other armies for caracters but not more swordsmasters and definetly not for white lion standard troopers, where going first with sgt 5/6 is nasty otherwise i was always getting hit first my HE anyway, thus either he broke me in one turn or i bitch slaped the T3 models back to uthlan. (on a side note what the hell were they thinking making swordsmasters, phionix guard and white lions the same points cost? lions should be at least 2 or 3 more for thier higher strength and lion cloaks!!!)

Chiungalla
17-11-2007, 04:26
I disagree.

First of all, if you say the high elves with great weapons should allways strike last because of there great strengh, then trolls, dragon ogres, chaos knights and such troops should allways strike last, too.

It makes little difference in game design and balance if you have got strengh 5 because you are strong, or you have got strengh 5 because you carry a great weapon.

High elves have no trolls, but they do have swordmaster and white lions and need great strengh without the penalties for great weapons to be good in close combat.

And ASF is needed to make the high elves infantry any usefull, in a world where otherwise they got killed by cavalry, dryads, wardancers and tons of other units that are fast enough, and can wipe out all those tiny elves in the front rank.

No one will field a unit, that is a easy target for shooting, and is easily run down by opponents that are faster then they are and costs so much points.

And Phoenix Guard, White Lions and Swordmasters all have there strengh and weaknesses, and I spend the last few days figuring out, which one is better, and in my opinion the only answer is:
It depends on your opponent, and there tactical role.

Phoenix Guards are great to save your wizards from enemy shooting, or bring your characters to close combat, because they survive a lot of punishing.

White Lions are great to stand in the way of your opponent, and keep him in close combat for a while, so you can flank charge with another unit.

And Swordmasters can win nearly every combat, if they don't die to shooting.

EvC
17-11-2007, 12:49
And how tailored was the high elves list?
How trustworthy is his opinion concerning the luck of his opponent?
And how will the dark elves be with there new army book?

So basically you're calling me dishonest? Is there really any need for that?

My list:
Noble, Great Weapon, Armour of Caledor, Guardian Phoenix (My Noble did not use either of his magic items in the entire battle)
Mounted Noble BSB, Star Lance, Enchanted Shield (I charged a Cold One Chariot and rolled 2, 2, 1 for his hits)
2 x Level 2 Mages, one with JotD and scroll and one with Sigil of Asuryan (Which actually worked and destroyed Black Horror! I was so happy... just 4 Dispel Dice, not exactly tailored, even though I suspected I was facing Morathi in advance)
20 Spearmen - did nothing but look after a mage all battle.
12 Archers - Chillwinded twice, but did manage to kill the High Sorceress' Pegasus and take two wounds off of her. Fortunately, he failed her ward saves (He'd taken the magic item that makes her immune to High Magic, still think my list was more tailored than his?)
6 Silver Helms, Full Command (Lost 2 models to 7 Crossbowmen on turn one, turn two they lost another three, so the Champion attacked a RBT by himself- destroying it after two turns. Hurrah!)
6 Dragon Princes (Ellyrion Banner. Half the unit was wiped out by Drain Life, D6 S3 hits no armour save killing 3, which also killed 4 Spearmen and 2 Swordmasters- on average it will kill 1.75 models)
6 Shadow Warriors- this was quite fun: they got a turn two charge into the Pegasus' flank. It was looking good when they managed two wounds on the Pegasus, but in return it struck back with its two attacks, killed both Shadow Warriors, and the High Sorceress managed a kill as well. I failed their break test and they were run down. Shadow Warriors outfought by a Sorceress...
15 Swordmasters (Lion Standard) with the Noble- got into combat with Executioners, I killed a Sorceress with my Noble, their Champion and one other (I only deployed 5-wide). In return he fought back and scored 2 killing blows with his 2 attacks... good thing they hadn't been allocated to my Noble! The Executioners held and a Cold One Chariot countercharged... it killed 4 Swordmasters, leaving me with just enough attacks to survive. I lost the combat by 1, but unlike my first game with 7th HE, I managed to pass their break test second time round, and next turn all surviving Executioners died :D
2 RBT- managed to kill half the Dark Riders and about half a dozen rank and file.

I could go on describing the battle, but do trust me, I'm being completely objective here. I made some silly blunders as well, like placing my Dragon Prince Champion + BSB unit behind a Cold One Chariot that was about to flee from my Swordmasters, which killed the Drakemaster for 110 more easy undeserved VPs. He didn't even put standards in his infantry units, just to deny me the VPs (And they were there to hold the big charges in time for the Chariots to counter), whilst I had 4 for another 400 potential VPs. An all-mage build might not be the strongest anti-HE build, that's a valid opinion - though not one borne out of experience, obviously - but he did pretty damn well with it with my low magic defence. And still only scraped the draw. I honestly don't know how he could have done better- perhaps replace the Corsairs with more RXBs, RBT and another Chariot? That'd have been a fun game...

Dominatrix
17-11-2007, 13:13
First of all, if you say the high elves with great weapons should allways strike last because of there great strengh, then trolls, dragon ogres, chaos knights and such troops should allways strike last, too.

It makes little difference in game design and balance if you have got strengh 5 because you are strong, or you have got strengh 5 because you carry a great weapon.

How the hell is it exactly the same if you have strenght 5 because of your muscle mass or because you carry a great weapon? A skinny frail elf carrying a sword taller that it is SHOULD strike last because the bloody sword is unwieldy. No matter how much practice you have with that thing you can't change the laws of physics (but apparently GW can. Cheers for skinny, sickly elfs with great weapons always striking first! :rolleyes:). On the other hand a guy with great physical strength is not slowed because he simply uses his muscles.
I am absolutely astounded how you can possibly make an argument like that. Please try to be a little reasonable. :)

logan054
17-11-2007, 13:17
well i have seen a DE vs HE which wasnt such a cheese fest, it was actually pretty balanced thanks to hatred, it really does a long way to balance things out, i think the only problem is that its better for DE to be charged than to charge spearmen.

Chiungalla
17-11-2007, 15:56
How the hell is it exactly the same if you have strenght 5 because of your muscle mass or because you carry a great weapon? A skinny frail elf carrying a sword taller that it is SHOULD strike last because the bloody sword is unwieldy. No matter how much practice you have with that thing you can't change the laws of physics (but apparently GW can. Cheers for skinny, sickly elfs with great weapons always striking first! :rolleyes:). On the other hand a guy with great physical strength is not slowed because he simply uses his muscles.
I am absolutely astounded how you can possibly make an argument like that. Please try to be a little reasonable. :)

And what the hell has game design and balance to do with physics?
Nothing, and even less then nothing in a FANTASY game.

If I can chose between reason and balance in a game, I will allways chose the balance, and I hope the game designers at GW will do the same.

And I only made an argument about game design, and not about reason and physics. And for the game design there is no difference how an model gets stengh 5 or strengh 6 attacks.

If the high elves need strengh 5 or strengh 6, without the drawbacks of great weapons, for balance reasons, give them great weapons without drawback.

If the high elves need to allways strike first, to win any combat with infantry and there low toughness and armor given, give them allways strikes first.

If you find the reasoning GW provided behind the game design very weak, I agree with you. But I want to play a balanced game, not one with a superior reasoning.

And yes, if I had wanted a game with good reasoning, Warhammer would be one of my last choices. And that isn't because high elves wield two handed swords with great spead.


So basically you're calling me dishonest? Is there really any need for that?

No I don't, but I allways have daubt, if someone gives a statement about the luck in his own games. Call it experience. :angel:
And to have daubts about someones opinion is something very different from calling someone dishonest.

Urgat
17-11-2007, 16:42
"how trustwhorty is your opinion?" is barely a way of suggesting doubts w/o being disrespectful if you ask me.

sainthale1988
17-11-2007, 17:39
my actual first point is that ASF isn't that important to any model that not stacking a greatweapon (assuming they won the first round of combat and HE high Inititative they normaly went first anyway).
i think lions are underpriced, sorry with decent armour aginast shooting and +1 str, at the loss of 1A and 1 WS i don't think they compair equaly to swordsmaster (i love these guys but i think thier 1 point too expensive)

Heretic Burner
17-11-2007, 18:17
ASF clearly is important to models without high strength. Witness the effectiveness of spear elves, particularly against opposing light infantry. The difference of ASF spearelves and non-ASF spearelves vs witch elves is monumental.

Reason and balance should be important in Warhammer but clearly both went out the window with the HE army book.

sephiroth87
17-11-2007, 18:49
Is there an army book you DO like? I might suggest a different game with more balanced rules... Chess maybe?

Of course, white going first is so broken... ;)

sainthale1988
17-11-2007, 19:32
no no no, you have it all wrong black is broken becuase they can react to the devistating effect to any white opening move lol!
since when is comparing spear wheilding troops of any kind aginast light (what do you mean by that anway?) troop irestpective of ASF
and why are you comparing block combat infantry to frenzied poisning troops? what the hell?
i'm going to say this once THE NEW HE ARE BALANCED ACROSS THE LIST, so are most armies. beast of chaos have rubbish leadership, no armour and no shooting but they can field big scary things and ambush, thus not balanced in all areas but they work out being effective at what they do aginainst most opponents.
btw what armies do you have then?

Andyroo
17-11-2007, 21:47
my actual first point is that ASF isn't that important to any model that not stacking a greatweapon (assuming they won the first round of combat and HE high Inititative they normaly went first anyway).
i think lions are underpriced, sorry with decent armour aginast shooting and +1 str, at the loss of 1A and 1 WS i don't think they compair equaly to swordsmaster (i love these guys but i think thier 1 point too expensive)

How about being Stubbord Ld 8 and ignoring woods for difficult terrain purposes?
Moving 10" instead of 2.5" through woods for fullspeed is a pretty big difference.
White Lions are the best of the 3 block infantry by far.

Chiungalla
18-11-2007, 04:30
Reason and balance should be important in Warhammer but clearly both went out the window with the HE army book.

Reason maybe, but it was allready gone with the core rulebook in the third edition (I don't know the earlier editions).

And if balance is gone, we will see.
I don't think so, and all my friends which shared your point of view before the army book came out, now have daubts about the strengh of high elves too, after making some matches against them.


How about being Stubbord Ld 8 and ignoring woods for difficult terrain purposes?
Moving 10" instead of 2.5" through woods for fullspeed is a pretty big difference.
White Lions are the best of the 3 block infantry by far.

Which block infantry is the best, depends on your opponent.

Against some opponents two attacks with strengh 5 and weaponskill 6 are the best.
You can field them in small numbers, and still win close combats.

Against other stubborn and good armor against shooting will be the best choice.
You can play great expensive blocks that win combat, or small cheap ones, that hold a charge of your opponent till help arrives (in there flank).

And against some enemys it would be the best, to have ward save 4+ troops, that don't die in great numbers, and a good static CR, fear and a hero that generates a bit of additional CR.

etancross
19-11-2007, 15:09
ASF clearly is important to models without high strength. Witness the effectiveness of spear elves, particularly against opposing light infantry. The difference of ASF spearelves and non-ASF spearelves vs witch elves is monumental.

Reason and balance should be important in Warhammer but clearly both went out the window with the HE army book.

=======edit=============

ok im going to change what i said cause im only thinking of this one way, but i still feel you are over worrying about this and its not that bad at all.

Darkspear
19-11-2007, 15:17
I have heard many players mentioning that Asur sux even now and they need the ASF rule. I have take a look at these army lists and conclude that these Asur armies have not been doing well because the army were build inefficiently. I see many examples of players taking powerful units such as swordmasters and 2 dragons only to be defeated due to low model count.

In my opinion, winning with Asur will require making good use of your cheap spearmen, underpriced knights and powerful dragon princes. A good reliance on shooting (3 rbts) and a steady magic phase. However this is only a theory. I will be getting my asur book tomorrow and will be trying out this army.

I still feel that Asur are cheesy but I will not comment much until my game tomorrow. Meanwhile stay tune for an update :).



By the way druchii and asrai players, in addition to a Asur, lead by myself, vs any takers game, I have also scheduled a druchii (myself) vs Asur and a Asrai (also by myself) vs Asur game in the subsequent weeks. Wish me luck!!!

Hi all, I lost this thread previously and finally found it again. Here's my battle report

http://warseer.com/forums/fantasy-battle-reports/113711-my-dark-elves-vs-high-elves.html

i hope that it is not too brief

Corrupt
21-11-2007, 15:49
How the hell is it exactly the same if you have strenght 5 because of your muscle mass or because you carry a great weapon? A skinny frail elf carrying a sword taller that it is SHOULD strike last because the bloody sword is unwieldy. No matter how much practice you have with that thing you can't change the laws of physics (but apparently GW can. Cheers for skinny, sickly elfs with great weapons always striking first! :rolleyes:). On the other hand a guy with great physical strength is not slowed because he simply uses his muscles.
I am absolutely astounded how you can possibly make an argument like that. Please try to be a little reasonable. :)

I think if you read the last edition HE book theres an empire explorers description of a great weapon which does damage "not by crude weight like ours, but by balance and razor edging"

Dominatrix
21-11-2007, 16:08
Thanks for the heads up I haven't bought the new HE book yet (although I most certainly will, "know your enemy and all" :D). That might be an explanation although I would think that a balanced weapon would give you a bonus to hit or swing speed and a razor edged weapon maybe a penalty to opponents armor saves. The way I imagine it a bonus to strength should (at least partially) equal increased weight.

Corrupt
21-11-2007, 16:20
Thanks for the heads up I haven't bought the new HE book yet (although I most certainly will, "know your enemy and all" :D). That might be an explanation although I would think that a balanced weapon would give you a bonus to hit or swing speed and a razor edged weapon maybe a penalty to opponents armor saves. The way I imagine it a bonus to strength should (at least partially) equal increased weight.

Np buddy:)

The quote just for reference

Elven Battle Axe: Note, though not of the sheer weight of out own equivelent weapons, they are so finely forged and balanced so perfectly, they are capable of cleaving a man in half with a single blow

smileyface
21-11-2007, 16:46
That might be an explanation although I would think that a balanced weapon would give you a bonus to hit or swing speed and a razor edged weapon maybe a penalty to opponents armor saves. The way I imagine it a bonus to strength should (at least partially) equal increased weight.

Dude... don't look for realism or consistancy in rules. Seriously. You'll spend a lot of time getting worked up and it will destroy any enjoyment you got from the game.

The weapons rules are very silly generally, and the great weapons rules are the worst of them. Just say "a wizard did it" and walk away.

Crazy Harborc
22-11-2007, 00:15
To create "balance" between armies/races in WHFB, GW often ignores what should be "reality" in rules of the game. Just because "whatever" works in the real world often means little in WHFB. Keeping the game moving, keeping it simple......

Here's hoping that GW's rules boys do not go back to the way it was when each new armybook was the best army that would be better than any other already released.

IMHO, better a game created (but not 'real world" reality) reality than the old system of (un)balance.