View Full Version : When is shooting, TOO MUCH Shooting?

09-08-2009, 07:11
Hi there,

I would love to get some feedback from the Warseer members.

I have a Wood Elf army and I am running 71 bow fire shots a turn. That's 50 Glade Guard 15 Glade riders and 3 Characters. I am also running a unit of wardancers and a Treeman.

What I want to know is this too much shooting especially in a RTT or Indie GT setting? I used to run Tomb Kings and people really hated the unrelenting magic phase I had each turn. I don't want to then trade on phase overpowering army for another one.

I want a competitive list with the Wood Elves and I think I have one. Yes I have a lot of shooting, but get into HtH and I fall like a house of cards. I had a unit of 2 Chaos Warriors slam into my 10 man unit of archers and they got worked. These two warriors then hit another and another unit killing 3 of them. Talk about OUCH!

Let me know what you think and how to make the list more fun to play against. Or do you think it is an OK list already?

09-08-2009, 08:06
Shooting is their shtick, it's what they do, besides being the masters of maneuver. Besides, it's not like you're using Handguns and war machines amongst all that shooting, like the Dwarfs and Empire do.

09-08-2009, 08:15
When your opponent doesn't get to have any CC combat, while he has a CC army, and simply could just as well granted you the victory before unpacking his army, then you got too much shooting...

Personally I think you got waaay too much, but I play O&G's and those little un-armoured greenskins only have very little defense against that much shooting.

Also, I think you might get in trouble against an army like bretonnia, who just shrug your arrows of their armour, and charge you in turn 2.

09-08-2009, 09:19
A friend of mine worked out a Dark Elf army that contained enough elves with bows and war machines to get 128 shots a turn. Way to much. I played against his force and despite having the first turn, the game was over by the end of my shooting phase.

Your Wood Elf army is designed in the same way and from my point of view would be no fun to play against. So yes, you do have to much shooting.

09-08-2009, 09:46
The problem is, the WEs were conceived as shoot and scoot. You do have close combat options, though, even if inflammable.

kor anon
09-08-2009, 10:20
Thats nothing ;) my last edition DE army had 96 shots a turn with 2 bolt throwers. What a lot of fun that was

09-08-2009, 14:57
Well, DE shooting is literally half as accurate as WE. My DE list fires 60 shots a turn including RBTs, but that doesn't always do a lot of damage. Most of the time, it's pretty marginal.

WE weren't designed to be pure shoot and avoidance, there is just no innate restriction on those types of units so you can get away with it if you want. WE have _tons_ of strong combat options. You should try to work some of them in.

I used to have a lot of fun and success with 3 units of archers. I find that to be, not only effective but, reasonable. But even then I didn't take GR or Warhawks, so I wasn't fast enough to truly avoid combat and often used Wardancers to set traps behind my archers, who would angle to redirect into those traps.

To be fair, every army should offer a chance to the enemy to get into combat. And of course, you're cheating yourself by avoiding combat as well.

09-08-2009, 15:02
I tend to find that there's just too much cool stuff you can have and still be competetive. I've recently started to take shooting out of my WE army - I now run 20 Glade Guard, 6 Glade Riders, and a couple of Treemen and characters.

I use shooting to support my combat and manouvrable troops, rather than relying on it whole heartedly.

Have you too much shooting? Depends. Personally I think so, but if you can get it to work for you, then why not. It's a legal army build.

09-08-2009, 16:51
When do you have too much shooting?

When in a competitive tournament environment it's easier to get points off you by not playing (hiding and playing for the tie), than it is to come and get points off of you.

If you're in a situation where your opponent has more incentive to not come at you unless he has to, you've got too much shooting.

09-08-2009, 17:29
It's all subjective really, but I would say 100% that if you find yourself running out of time when playing games, then your shooting phase is probably the culprit (worse if combined with magic). The only tournament games that I've failed to finish in the last year have been against Empire with 4 guess-range weapons, Skaven with 15 Jezzails, 2 WLC and 4 magic users, and Dark Elves with ~120 shots per turn. In the first two games if we'd got to turn 5/6 my combat armies would have smashed home and killed a fair amount of the remaining shooters and won me the game, and against the Darl Elf army I was so bored that I had lost all will to play the game anyway. If there had been an option to dock the sports or comp of either player in some small way I would have in these cases.

09-08-2009, 19:42
When you play against my empire friend who has a gunline and takes about 30 minutes a shooting phase....ugh. He talks about how the empire cavalry is horrible and how he needs more guns. Handgunners, outriders, steam tank, and 2 cannons etc. All of that in like 1500 Point games is overkill and really isn't that much fun.

sorry about the rant. :evilgrin:

09-08-2009, 19:49
I am sometimes annoyed by the "too much shooting!!!" argument. There are times that a player will rely on missile fire to excess, but usually (certainly, not always, and not with all armies) these are inexperienced players. I've found that shooting can rarely stop an opponent entirely, and that it is best complemented by some maneuver elements as well as some sort of hammer and anvil. A balanced army that includes a lot of shooting (that is well employed) is, from my experience, generally more effective than an army that that thinks it is playing 40k.

That said, it annoys me that one rarely hears complaints about an over- reliance on certain other things. It seems entirely acceptable to take uber-hard monsters in numbers (preferably with expensive character on top), or expensively accoutered and nigh-unstoppable heavy cavalry. It seems to me that armies that rely exclusively on bludgeoning power (of both the fast and slow kind) are exempted, unlike magic and shooting reliant forces, from being accused of excess. I've never seen a Chaos Warrior army composed entirely of Knights accused of being "too much killing power," when, like any good excessively shooty army, it relies on storms of dice rather than on tacticaal finess or movement. In my experience, it is the same people who are reliant on these sorts of builds who complain when they are confronted with something that can actually kill them or outmaneuver them.

Sorry for the rant. In retrospect, it smacks of the unhappy murmurings of a person over-reliant on hopelessly-inept gunpowder ingantry or the animation and reanimation of T2 recently-interred corpses.

09-08-2009, 19:54
My DE list has a fair bit of shooting.
Takes a bit of time to roll all the dice and it often feels like a total waste as very few models ever seem to die when the shooting isnt at close range.

98 shots in my army in total.(well 101 including the 3 my mage gets)

I'll class taking 4 bolt throwers as "too much" though.
It's really the lethality of your shooting that causes it to be "too much" rather than the amount of it.

Shooting is for causing panic tests on ranked units and making the enemy run away(or be incapable of rallying), rather than outright killing a unit.

Although small weedy unit's are fair game for even low amounts of shooting to destroy.

09-08-2009, 20:06
Medieval combat is supposedly about getting in close and personal with your opponent, and even in the abstract has a different feel to it than just shooting sitting ducks.

09-08-2009, 20:14
Never. I like gunline armies if executed well. At least they come from substantial models instead of single characters wiping the field clean with magic.

I really think we should be careful with telling other people when something is 'too much' as it squanders the motivation to theme your armies.

09-08-2009, 20:42
imo you have "too much shooting" if every one of your rares and specials are shooters, you have more than half your chars as shooters, and 75% or more of your core are shooters.

to be clear, the above is only in the context of friendly games.

competitive games are a different story. in competitive games, you should be playing to win, within the framework put forth by the organizers. if taking tons of shooting is how you get your wins, then that's what you should be taking.

the difference is that in competitive games, your opponent's good time shouldn't matter to you (in list generation). in friendly games, though, you should be making your lists with your opponent's fun factor in mind.

ask yourself, "would i enjoy playing against this?" if the answer is no, then you should think about toning it down a bit.

The Red Scourge
09-08-2009, 23:55
When you spend more time on your shooting than your movement phase, you have too much shooting :)

10-08-2009, 00:10
I think rtunian sums it up pretty well when he asks whether you yourself would like to play against the list. Opinions vary of course but thats a good rule of thumb.

Off topic: Is your avatar a chaos pattern? Because it makes my mind ache looking at it. I swear the first time I saw it it wasn't moving so I waited for it to stop, end loop or whatever but it never did. And all I got was a headache!

Sorry to write more about your avatar than your original question but I just had to comment. That thing is evil.

10-08-2009, 02:22
In my experience it isn't possible to make even a semi-competitive wood elf army without someone complaining about it. I've had folks complain about the fact that I take 30 glade guard in a 2250 point list (all in all i had 30 glade guard, 5 glade riders, 8 waywatchers, a treeman, and a hail of doom arrow).

Of course, if you take no shooters it means you're taking lots of dryads, so people complain about all the skirmishers.

I do think it's possible to have too much shooting, but most folks draw the line way too low, I think.

RossS - I very much agree with you, although I do notice some people complain about things other than shooting. Too many monsters, too much cavalry, too many skirmishers and such are all popular. The one thing that few if any people complain about is rank and file infantry. There are some folks out there who seem like they want Warhammer to be basically just big, slow fights between big, slow blocks of rank and file. I can't imagine how boring that would be!

10-08-2009, 02:26
When you have no dedicated hand to hand units.

10-08-2009, 03:59
Too much shooting = the only core used are missile troops, all characters have some kind of ballistic weapon, and the rest are war machines.

10-08-2009, 04:55
I once played a tomb kings army, he didn't move a single model the whole game. Shot me to death and I never saw combat.

You do this to 3 different armies, and I think you got too much shooting. As long as people reach you, and ya know they get to DO something, I'd say your good.

Brother J
10-08-2009, 06:43
It could be so much worse for your opponents then what you have it at currently. I really don't think your shooting phase is all that destructive, but I'm a slow moving Lore of Metal hating WoC player.

10-08-2009, 07:14
It's all so subjective to what you're facing. My High Elves think that amount of shooting is WAY too much, as they won't get anywhere near you before they fall to pieces. My Empire Knightly Order list or my Brets laugh at it on the other hand, as with the Brets I have almost that many bows, and still a big wack of cav to get at you by turn 2.

This is the problem with the "too much x or y" arguments. People invariably think from the position of their own army. As said above, a WoC player isn't worried about any number of s3 bows, where as a lot of magic can ruin their day. Vampires can generally cope with magic or shooting through their own dispelling prowess and the ability to raise the guys that bite it to arrows, but will have a lot harder time with say....a wack of chaos warriors who can bash 15 skellies a turn.....

Too much I think would be based around what you commonly play or what you think you will see. At a tourney, just build the list you think can win, unless it has a strong comp scoring system. Also build a list you find fun to play. I don't enjoy just lining up guys and pitching dice without moving. Some folks do. But for the general course of play, think this way. If you are building a list with that much shooting because it's what you want to do, how your list plays, and a good match for local armies, than go for it. If you're building it because "man, none of those low toughness/small/no armour lists I play will last 2 turns against this!" then it's over the top.