PDA

View Full Version : Empire Halberd Love?



Seabo
13-10-2009, 01:40
Does anyone actually use Halberds out there?
Fluff wise it says that the halberd is the standard state troop wep and all others are either for detachments or provincially localized.
I played Empire way back in the Dark Times (4th or 5th Edition? Bout 8 years ago) and the center of my army was a massive block of Halberdiers with a Captain and the Griffon Standard.
The unit rocked and very rarely was beaten. +8 combat res (6 for ranks, Standard, Battle Standard) before any casualties is a rather large hurdle to jump. Sure the block could be done w/spears and probably have more whacks back but I am a fan of the S4 :D
Now the forums seem to be rather anti-halberd oriented...anything to base it on?

TonyFlow
13-10-2009, 01:46
With the current rules, halberds are definitely the worst choise for state troops.
That being said, i love the look and idea behind them so i always field a 25 man unit of them. They almost always gets killed, but i feel that they are mandatory in an empire army. I am also trying to collect enough spears so i can field a unit of each halbers, swordsmen and spears.

Commodus Leitdorf
13-10-2009, 02:06
I have a unit of 30, with plans to build another 30 man block.

Oh they suck (except as a detachment...they rule as detachments) but they look so good ranked up. Its part of the reason I play Empire. Just the imagery of ranked up halberds or spears holding fast against the charge is why I love the Empire!

...Too bad most of my State troops stay home nowadays (for tournaments anyway ;))

orlanth1000
13-10-2009, 10:26
I have a bucket load of the original halberdiers, I love them.
I have 3 big units for massive games, sure they suck now, but thats not the point...is it?
Anyway, I cannot stand the new models, anyone for their soldiers with no shoes on?

Commissar Vaughn
13-10-2009, 11:30
I love my halberdiers, my Averland army contains 115 of them (though thats only 1/5th of the army!) with both the really really old plastic single pose minis from 4th edition, and the later 5th edition style. Dont like the new ones though, they just aint landsknechts!

Bta back then it wasnt Griffon banner, if was Banner of Defiance...and still cost 50 points.

Arguleon-veq
13-10-2009, 12:50
I don field them as blocks of infantry, they are my main Detatchment choice though.

I dont think they are all that bad to be honest, against weaker troops in the game they do a decent enough job, at least comparable to Spears or Swordsmen.

I think they work best as detatchments though as unlike the other weapons, Halberds only really shine in any way at all on the charge.

I think its a silly bit of fluff that suggests Halberds are more prevelant than Spears anyway. Spears are easier/cheaper to produce and easier to use and so take less training.

Plus we are thinking that State Troops are the biggest fighting arm of the Empire, in most of the fluff I read [Rieksguard being the latest that s uggests it, along with curse of the Necrach] the biggest fighting force are militias and locally levied troops. These arent just rag tag vagabonds like the fluff for the actual militia units in the Empire book, most of the time they are kitted out and given a few weeks formal training. So in game terms would actually be Empire State Spearmen/Halberdiers.

So Halberdiers ARE the most comman State Troop Regiment.

BUT, Spearmen are probably the most common unit seen in Empire armies.

Onisuzume
13-10-2009, 13:34
Imo, Halberdiers ain't that bad... as detachments.
The problem lies in their relative inability to hold a charge.

That said, I don't use them because my empire army isn't allowed to use detachments (Cult of Ulric ftw!).
And because Halberdiers aren't worth a special choice when I can get better halbediers in the form of Inner Circle Teutogen Guard (who *can* hold a charge due to full plate).

Keller
13-10-2009, 18:12
I love using units of Halberdiers, for the same reason some others have pointed out; they just look awesome!

Mine are all from the 6th edition soldier box, which I like well enough except for the fact the halberd heads snap off soooooo easily. I have converted 30-40 militia men armed with halberdiers that often serve as my halberd detachments, and though they don't look the same as the uniformed State troops, the halbderds do look much better.


Spears are also a favorite unit of mine, with swords a very distant 3rd. A unit of spearmen with a halberdier detachment, or some halberdiers with militia detachment, just looks fantastic on the table top and is still relatively effective.

I just painted up a new regiment of spears this past weekend and can't wait to get them on the table. I think I still have enough models to get another regiment together, but I have decided to get a few more handgunners ready next since I never have enough for siege games. (I bought a ton of the 6th ed starter sets for the spearmen and gunners, but sadly I think I may be hitting the bottom of my extra-model box soon :()

Rioghan Murchadha
15-10-2009, 20:14
I don't use any for a couple of reasons.

1: My army is thematically, 9th century Irish. They didn't use halberds.
2: My army is based on the Rohirrim models from the LotR range, and they don't have any halberdier models.

Suckage has nothing to do with why I personally don't use them, but if I were trying to build a block of troops to hold a charge, based around the Griffon Banner, I'd use swordsmen for sure. The extra point of WS, and better armour save in CC makes them that much more surviveable.

Condottiere
15-10-2009, 21:00
Actually, Halberdiers would be the standard troop type if your opponents don't use pikes and heavy cavalry.

The way they're featured here makes them unattractive, since a single strike should have the potential to kill an ordinary human. However, since the mechanics dictate that they have one wound anyway, KBing R&F doesn't make them worthwhile for their cost.

Gazak Blacktoof
15-10-2009, 21:20
Our group agreed that they were pretty poor, they were constantly getting wasted by anything thrown their way.

We agreed on a rule changed for halberdiers so that they have a maximum +4 rank bonus and have heavy armour instead of the shield option.

It doesn't make them brilliant by any stretch, but our empire player is happy enough with the change.

Lusall
15-10-2009, 21:49
I'm kinda with the majority of the group here. Halberds just arn't that great for Statetroop blocks, but...they're my favorite troop type, they're supposed to be the most common state troop type, and the Halberd is my favorite weapon ever.

Souppilgrim
15-10-2009, 22:02
Halberd's look great, but they are pretty bad in game. I wish I could use them, but they won't hold a charge from hardly anything. When charging it would be better to have a great weapon anyway. If they got free heavy armor I'm still not sure I would take them...maybe with that AND armor piercing...

fluffstalker
15-10-2009, 22:15
Is a shame that the fluff is rife with halberd blocks being the core of the Empire forces, yet hardly any competetive general will touch them, favoring instead swordsmen who are supposed to be rarer and harder to equip.

Id say reduce the points cost of halberds a bit to make them more attractive, as it is they're not really good at anything except being flank chargers, and other units can accomplish that much better.

brendel
15-10-2009, 22:15
I like them I use them with shields, so they are more flexable, hand weapon and shield if they are charged and agianst low toughness troups I find they preform as well as my swordsmen, and i use the halberd if the charge or if they have higher toughness, but they work for me.

Condottiere
15-10-2009, 22:42
The shields are too unfluffy - heavy armour is a better representation.

Gazak Blacktoof
15-10-2009, 22:43
If they got free heavy armor I'm still not sure I would take them...maybe with that AND armor piercing...

Armour piercing along with being able to set pole weapons against charges is something we've been discussing for a while now. That would have to come along with major changes though as it wouldn't make sense to apply it to the empire alone and would make the elite halberd units even more ridiculous.

w3rm
15-10-2009, 23:41
They need to fight in two ranks and have +1 str. I would still use them as I most of the armies I play have plenty of str 4+ attacks which makes swordsmen not as effective. But i stupidly got rid of my empire and now am pining for them..

Dexter099
16-10-2009, 00:25
Our group agreed that they were pretty poor, they were constantly getting wasted by anything thrown their way.

We agreed on a rule changed for halberdiers so that they have a maximum +4 rank bonus and have heavy armour instead of the shield option.

It doesn't make them brilliant by any stretch, but our empire player is happy enough with the change.

I think that letting them fight in two ranks is a better idea. Though it might throw off the balance with spearmen. To remedy that, giving spearmen a maximum +4 rank bonus would help.

Lord Dan
16-10-2009, 00:29
I think that letting them fight in two ranks is a better idea. Though it might throw off the balance with spearmen. To remedy that, giving spearmen a maximum +4 rank bonus would help.

I always thought spearmen should strike simultaneously with charging units.

Dexter099
16-10-2009, 00:37
I always thought spearmen should strike simultaneously with charging units.

Sort of like pikes.

Maybe only when they're being charged, though, to make them more of a defensive unit.

Condottiere
16-10-2009, 01:03
Depends on whether you consider the reach of the weapon.

Dexter099
16-10-2009, 01:09
Pikes grant the ASF, but maybe spears should just deny the charging bonus, like defensible terrain.

R Man
16-10-2009, 01:31
Oh god. Its happening again. Whats this? The 8th time this year.

There are always these convoluted ways to try to balance the halberd. Really though, there are several issues here. 1stly against soldiers of similar capabilities (i.e: Empire Swordsman) they don't do too badly. Not great either. Simply giving Halberds heavy armour would fix this without affecting any other unit.

Secondly, a lot of units these days have multiple attacks at high initiative which excel at slashing open cheap infantry units regardless of what weapon they are using. This includes elite infantry and heavy cavalry. Changing Halberds probably won't fix this. And is it really fair to compare Halberds to the like of Chaos Warriors?

Its worth noting that on the attack, against enemies with lower I, Halberds do ok. A bit more armour and they'd actually be reasonable. So to see what Empire Halberds need, lets compare them to other basic troops of similar ability, then make a judgement. P.S: I am aware of the Cavalry problem, but I doubt that a single weapon change would really be worth all the fuss.

Gazak Blacktoof
16-10-2009, 11:09
What we were considering for the halberd was:

Halberds are Two-handed, they can be used to fight in one of two ways:

Offencive- +1 Strength, Armour Piercing.

Defencive- Fight in two ranks, Set Against A Charge.

*We hadn't decided if you could switch voluntarily between the fighting modes or if the Defencive stance was only against a charging enemy.


Set Against A Charge would be a general weapon rule applied to pole arms carried by infantry:
Any weapon successfully Set Against A Charge (by passing a leadership test) gains a strength bonus against cavalry, chariots and monsters charging them to the front- +1 strength if used one handed, +2 strength if used two handed.

We had considered the ancient battles rules but decided this resulted in more dead bodies (generally a good thing in warhammer) and removed the need to decide which weapons were longer. As I said before this would be part of a larger set of changes to the game, which would include some drastic changes to armour (like elves in full plate) and adjustments to the racial stat-lines.

Glabro
16-10-2009, 11:18
Just the imagery of ranked up halberds or spears fast fast against the charge is why I love the Empire!



Too bad the rules turn out to be the exact opposite of this imagery of yours. They are the absolute worst weapons to hold fast against any kind of charge.

Halberds and spears really need a rules revamp, hopefully 8th is on the ball. We need more anti-cavalry options in the basic weapons to bring the game back to infantry.

Condottiere
16-10-2009, 12:01
Halberds are iconic for guard units, together with partizans. It comes down to the mechanics of this game, you just can't get the results you think you're supposed to have.

gorenut
16-10-2009, 19:25
Yea.. I think the easiest way to "fix" Halberdiers is to just give them heavy armor (atleast the option to). If you mess with the Halberd rules, it may imbalance other armies. Halberd units seem to do fine in other armies (Chaos Warriors, DE Black Guards, LM Temple Guard, and even Grave Guards), its mostly the Empire that seems to be having the biggest problem because its supposed to be their main troop.

Dexter099
17-10-2009, 18:31
Heavy Armor it is, then. I think that that's the easiest way to go about it.

yabbadabba
17-10-2009, 20:45
Unfortunately if Halberds are the main troop infantry choice for Empire, then equipping them all with Heavy Armour would be a)unfluffy and b)impractical in the Empire World. When you add in that GW are not interested in armour/saves, just more killy-death then making Halberdiers more survivable goes against the desired results of the game.

So the question isn't one of effectiveness in the game, or even one of fluff - but it is "What are empire halbardiers supposed to do in the game?". Are they are a core infantry unit designed to encourage attacking play in Empire players and avoid static games? Are they a bulk infantry unit? Are they a shock, heavy infantry unit or anti-cav? Once you have the answer then you can design a rule for the halberd that reflects its use in the rules mechanics.

Idle Scholar
18-10-2009, 02:27
Heavy Armor it is, then. I think that that's the easiest way to go about it.

For what it's worth IRL it was the development of practical and available heavy armour (well full plate really) that led to the widespread adoption of halberds, zweihanders and pikes.

scarletsquig
18-10-2009, 08:14
Anti-cav - give them armour piercing.

Line troops - give them heavy armour.

After mulling this one over several times, the best option is to simply have them with heavy armour by default, shields for +1 point.

I did think of light armour as standard, half point for shield, half point for heavy armour, but it's a bit clunky and still leaves the naked halberdier as a terrible choice.

Heavy armour or armour piercing are the only two options that don't overcomplicate things.

Of course, despite the thousands of posts on this topic over the last decade, I still fully expect GW to get it wrong again in the 8th edition book. :P

decker_cky
18-10-2009, 08:20
I think they should drop by another point and a 15 pt command option like DE spearmen. Make them the core because they're actually cheaper than swordsmen to fit in. They're still the be all and end all of weak static CR infantry so being underpriced in this metagame isn't a problem. And if you save 35 pts on a 25 man unit with shields, it'd certainly be worth looking at them over swordmen.

Don Zeko
18-10-2009, 08:22
They could always go back to 5th edition weapon rules: great weapons still strike last even if they charge, and hand weapons and shields don't provide the bonus save. In this case, you have a spectrum of survivability vs. hitting power, where halberds offer a middle ground between spears + shield great weapon, and hand weapon+shield is for cheap bastards that still want semi-survivable troops.

decker_cky
18-10-2009, 08:25
Honestly...they should've given halberds the ability to fight in two ranks when 7th was released. At that point, halberd units universally were horrible, so the boost wouldn't be a problem. Now...phoenix guard, black guard, warriors and chosen would make it a bit much. So it's too late for boosting halberd rules themselves.

A.Gentleman
18-10-2009, 08:58
Spears and halberds have always had, in reality, an advantage over a charging enemy, particularly against cavalry. The rules for both of these weapons don't represent this at all. Idealy, halberds should fight in 2 ranks, +1 strength and have armour piercing. But this would make them far too expensive as a core choice :(

yabbadabba
18-10-2009, 09:15
... ... in reality ... ... Not a good choice of words here. Reality has nothing to do with this. Again, the first question hasn't be answered except by GW. If the Empire Halberdier is an all round infantry unit then its weakness is that it is not very good at anything.

What function would you empire players like the Empire Halberdier to fulfill within the game mechanic?

Condottiere
18-10-2009, 12:50
The halberd was a combination of three weapons - spear, axe and spike. The spike could be used to punch through armour and pull down horsemen. In RPG mechanics, this doesn't represent a problem and makes it very versatile; for Warhammer games mechanic, it's just hard to do that.

yabbadabba
18-10-2009, 13:25
The halberd was a combination of three weapons - spear, axe and spike. The spike could be used to punch through armour and pull down horsemen. In RPG mechanics, this doesn't represent a problem and makes it very versatile; for Warhammer games mechanic, it's just hard to do that.

I agree with the weapon description, but again move away from that. If you had a block of 30 Empire Halberdiers with a command unit wha would you like that unit to do on the tabletop? Be offensive or defensive? Anti-cav or speed bump?
This could give you, for example:

Defensive: HA and/or fight in 2 ranks
Offensive: HA and/or AP and/or +1 WS
Anti-cav: Ap and/or fight in 2 ranks
Speed Bump: HA and/or reroll first failed Ld test

The role defined for the unit within the game mechaincs can then target how the unit should be changed without necessarily eliminating all weaknesses.

Condottiere
18-10-2009, 13:40
Another factor hard to represent is that a usual technique is to equip only the front ranks with heavy armour.

Commissar Vaughn
18-10-2009, 14:04
I still say the best way to improve the game balance to help out the halberd is to get rid of the proliferation Full plate and its variations, and to get rid of the "Hand weapon and shield save" which single handidly messed up a lot of the current edition, and wasnt introduced for any good reason that I can see....

Though Id like to introduce two rules from WAB: the fall back in good order rule, and the rules for pikes....

Lusall
18-10-2009, 22:21
I still say the best way to improve the game balance to help out the halberd is to get rid of the proliferation Full plate and its variations, and to get rid of the "Hand weapon and shield save" which single handidly messed up a lot of the current edition, and wasnt introduced for any good reason that I can see....

Though Id like to introduce two rules from WAB: the fall back in good order rule, and the rules for pikes....

Honestly...I've always thought Halberdiers should look a little like this.

5pts per model

M:4 WS:4 S:3 T:3 W:1 I:3 A:1 LD:7 (or eight, but I don't really care.)

Heavy armor, Halberd, shield for 1 pt.

Iron Discipline: Re-roll failed panic tests, or can fight in two ranks when charged. (something along those lines)

And/or

Expert Halberd training (something like that) : Can use a shield and halberd in cc

Swordsmen should be made into skirmishers, imo.

And I don't mind the full plate armor...as long as it stays with Dwarves/Warriors of Chaos/Empire. Most of the time, the str of 4 isn't a bad deal.

Commissar Vaughn
18-10-2009, 23:33
but theres no way to justify any of that.

an empire halberdier is a bloke with a sharp stick. he doesnt get any better training than any of the other blokes in the empire and less than some of them, why does he need so much extra baggage?

gorenut
19-10-2009, 00:18
Agree with Vaughn. Thats a bit over the top. Heavy Armor is enough IMO...

Lusall
19-10-2009, 00:41
Halberdiers are troops that train on a constant basis...State troops in general, train on a constant basis. I think a WS 4 isn't too much at all.

Rioghan Murchadha
19-10-2009, 01:09
Honestly...I've always thought Halberdiers should look a little like this.

5pts per model

M:4 WS:4 S:3 T:3 W:1 I:3 A:1 LD:7 (or eight, but I don't really care.)

Heavy armor, Halberd, shield for 1 pt.

Iron Discipline: Re-roll failed panic tests, or can fight in two ranks when charged. (something along those lines)

And/or

Expert Halberd training (something like that) : Can use a shield and halberd in cc

Swordsmen should be made into skirmishers, imo.

And I don't mind the full plate armor...as long as it stays with Dwarves/Warriors of Chaos/Empire. Most of the time, the str of 4 isn't a bad deal.

Congratulations, you've just made swordsmen useless instead. The current appeal of swordsmen is that they are more surviveable than halberdiers / spears. The downside being they're supposed to do less damage. Giving halberdiers +1 ws, heavy armour, and the additional point of strength from the halberd for the same cost as a swordsman is assinine. I'll just take halberds, and if I need surviveability, I'll fight HW/Shield and end up with a 3+ save.

Swordsmen would be completely useless as a skirmishing unit, since they can't do ANYTHING other than hand to hand combat, and currently they rely almost exclusively on static CR to win anything. If I want useful skirmishers in an empire list, I'll take archers thanks.

Making a different choice a no-brainer isn't the way to fix the list. All you're doing is trading one pile of crap for another.

Frep
19-10-2009, 01:46
Personally all I would like to see for halberdiers would be the inclusion of heavy armour for free. Halberds basically fold under a stiff breeze now, from shooting or close combat because they're so damn vulnerable. Giving them a small boost like heavy armour would make them far more useful, without compromising the internal balance of the list, spears and swordsmen would still have their uses and halberds finally would be a viable option.

Lusall
19-10-2009, 01:49
Congratulations, you've just made swordsmen useless instead. The current appeal of swordsmen is that they are more surviveable than halberdiers / spears. The downside being they're supposed to do less damage. Giving halberdiers +1 ws, heavy armour, and the additional point of strength from the halberd for the same cost as a swordsman is assinine. I'll just take halberds, and if I need surviveability, I'll fight HW/Shield and end up with a 3+ save.

Swordsmen would be completely useless as a skirmishing unit, since they can't do ANYTHING other than hand to hand combat, and currently they rely almost exclusively on static CR to win anything. If I want useful skirmishers in an empire list, I'll take archers thanks.

Making a different choice a no-brainer isn't the way to fix the list. All you're doing is trading one pile of crap for another.


I love nerd rage and people just being deuchs on the internet.

So don't make swordsmen skirmish. That was by far not the primary point of my post.

The fluff talks about how the Imperial state troops are a standing army that train day in, day out...I'm sorry. But WS 3 doesn't represent that.

And at that...I fail to see how Swordsmen would be entirely useless as a skirmishing unit. You could even lower their points cost to 5. (Swordsmen that is.)

Seabo
19-10-2009, 01:55
Well this got highly amusing :D. Personally, I still am planning on using a large unit of 30ish as the center of my, so far, theoretical Empire army :).
Changing the rules or even armour options is useless IMO for a couple reasons.
1) At the glacial pace that GW moves it would take them years of humming and hawing before deciding to change the statline and the revamped ruling would not get released until after the current generation of players are in geriatric homes... :D
2) The addition of Heavy Armour equip would mean a new figure release....exclusive halberdiers, knowing GW, probably all metal...making your funky core unit at least $100 if not more to field.

Remember...fluff wise these are glory hungry farm and village boys that join the army for the promise of a few coppers and 3 meals a day. Stat line works just fine for me as it is the standard for the game and the +1S works also. 5pts really isn't that bad.

Condottiere
19-10-2009, 04:54
If you consider Ws 3 as trained and competent, then the rank and file are unlikely to advance beyond that.

Rioghan Murchadha
19-10-2009, 05:39
I love nerd rage and people just being deuchs on the internet.

So don't make swordsmen skirmish. That was by far not the primary point of my post.

The fluff talks about how the Imperial state troops are a standing army that train day in, day out...I'm sorry. But WS 3 doesn't represent that.

And at that...I fail to see how Swordsmen would be entirely useless as a skirmishing unit. You could even lower their points cost to 5. (Swordsmen that is.)

It's douche my friend, douche.

WS3 is a trained human fighter. It actually does represent a human standing army that trains regularly, when you consider that most of the things out there that are physically superior to humans in areas that impact combat are WS4.

As for swordsmen being useless when compared to your 5 point halberdiers with heavy armour and ridiculous special rules (which also by the way make spearmen useless at the same time), Think really really hard. When was the last time you saw a skirmishing unit fielded that had human stats, no ranged weapon, and no special rules? Tell you what, I'll wait a bit and let you get back to me on that one.

I'm sorry to have been the one to point out the ridiculousness of your idea, but, if it helps, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, and you can take down the angsty poem you've likely posted on your blog to that effect ;)

Hive Mind 33
19-10-2009, 07:48
And at that...I fail to see how Swordsmen would be entirely useless as a skirmishing unit. You could even lower their points cost to 5. (Swordsmen that is.)

All state troops are Useless anyway, Skirmishing could maybe be useful

[QUOTE=Rioghan Murchadha;4051222]

WS3 is a trained human fighter. It actually does represent a human standing army that trains regularly, when you consider that most of the things out there that are physically superior to humans in areas that impact combat are WS4.

/QUOTE]

If weapon skill three is a trained human fighter the Marauders should not be ws4, they are HUMAN.

Commissar Vaughn
19-10-2009, 08:28
most humans dont get brought up fighting demons that live just up the road. And if being a full chaos warrior gets you ws5 being part of one gets ws4.

But even so theres no way a trained human who serves in the forces for at most 10-20 years will be even close to a near immortal elf who trains his entire life.

All that is required is to take away the hand weapon and shield save: it was a retarded idea anyway. Instantly the opposition gets a little les tough, and swordsmen are no longer a no-brainer.
If you give them heavy armour, then suddenly "everyone else should have it too"...you'll simply start an arms race which will finish with everyone wearing full plate and carrying muskets. And thats retarded too.

greendan
19-10-2009, 08:46
I love the halberdier models, in fact the newer state troops are what attracted me to the Empire in the first place.
I always use halberds as my detachments, but would love to have them as my main block, though sadly they are out performed by swordsmen completely.

If they had WS 4, heavy armour, halberd & shield (no hand weapon) as standard for 6pts i think that would be fair enough.
Compared with swordsmen they would have a better save verse shooting but worse whilst in combat. Also strength 4 vs initiative 4 would even them out a little as well.

On another note i'd like to see spearmen reduced to 5pts and be equipped with spear, light armour & shield (again no hand weapon) and have them as your cheaper core infantry that represent the state troops from poorer regions.
The inclusion of the hand weapon for halberdiers and spearmen to me at least seems to defeat the point of them having a specialized weapon.
I know it gives you an option, but thats why you have swordsmen.

Oh and also give the empire pikemen! :chrome:

Commissar Vaughn
19-10-2009, 10:40
getting rid of the sword makes no sense. get rid of the shield instead.

R Man
19-10-2009, 10:42
If weapon skill three is a trained human fighter the Marauders should not be ws4, they are HUMAN.

Its worth noting that there are other ways to show superiority of training than just WS. Look at Elven Elites. Swordmasters, WS 6, but also two attacks. White Lions, Stubborn and S4. Phoenix Guard, Leadership 9. Dwarvern units get similar. Iron Breakers, Longbeards and Hammerers have extra strength and extra special rules.

In truth, the descriptions of State Troops are exaggerated. If they were not, Grail Knights should entire units single handed, Elves would have M9 and Slaanesh Warriors would fight with vigorous pelvic thrusts. Then think what a Slaan could do. Most state troopers would be average. They'd train, but also spend time standing around doing not much in particular.


If you give them heavy armour, then suddenly "everyone else should have it too"...you'll simply start an arms race which will finish with everyone wearing full plate and carrying muskets. And thats retarded too.

Actually, a 5+ save (what they have now vs Shooting) is about average. Besides, while I see the concern, it is the simplest, cleanest fix without introducing convoluted weapon changes or special rules. Anyway, Halberds came in when, and partly because of, the prevalence of Heavy Armour, which also saw the decline of the Shield.

Onisuzume
19-10-2009, 14:58
Imo, the best fix would be to give them heavy armour instead of a shield.
Sure, you can carry a halberd and shield at the same time, you can't use them at the same time. Imo, it'd be unlogical to even have it as an option.

The warfare around the time halberds were used consisted mostly of: pikemen, musketeers, doppelsöldners, halberdiers and cavalry. I doubt that most people in that time would have ever seen a shield being used in combat.

Most state troopers would be average. They'd train, but also spend time standing around doing not much in particular.
While marauders spend a lot of their time fighting, if not with the empire, then amongst themselves.

Condottiere
19-10-2009, 15:23
Presumably, since this is in abstract, the organized nature of the halberds compensates against the individualistic nature of Maruder techniques.

Onisuzume
19-10-2009, 15:31
Do marauders have the option for halberds?

yabbadabba
19-10-2009, 17:06
The warfare around the time halberds were used consisted mostly of: pikemen, musketeers, doppelsöldners, halberdiers and cavalry. I doubt that most people in that time would have ever seen a shield being used in combat. Historical reference is a very poor basis to solve this issue unless you want the Halberd to act like a Halberd, in which case WFB is not the game to be playing.

Its not just the fluff which is fantasy, the rules are too. They have no reality bearing. Stop looking at the halberd as a polearm from this reality and start looking at the Empire Halberdier as a tool to achieve a desired result within the mechanics of the rules.

Haravikk
19-10-2009, 17:34
I like the idea of having the empire halberdiers fight a bit more effectively by passing a leadership test when charged. Either giving them a further +1 strength for that round of combat (charging a strength 5 enemy isn't an appealing notion for many people!), or letting them fight in two ranks for that round.

This makes the halberdiers a "mobile defensive" unit, in that they can move all they want, but are durable against charges.

Kahadras
19-10-2009, 21:52
The way to fix Halbardiers is simple IMHO. Give them heavy armour as standard and change the Halbard rule to allow it to work as either a great weapon or a spear (player has to choose at the start of combat). That should make Halbardiers a bit more attractive and I'd probably up the cost of Swordsmen as well to try to balance things out.

Kahadras

Lusall
20-10-2009, 01:50
It's douche my friend, douche.

WS3 is a trained human fighter. It actually does represent a human standing army that trains regularly, when you consider that most of the things out there that are physically superior to humans in areas that impact combat are WS4.

As for swordsmen being useless when compared to your 5 point halberdiers with heavy armour and ridiculous special rules (which also by the way make spearmen useless at the same time), Think really really hard. When was the last time you saw a skirmishing unit fielded that had human stats, no ranged weapon, and no special rules? Tell you what, I'll wait a bit and let you get back to me on that one.

I'm sorry to have been the one to point out the ridiculousness of your idea, but, if it helps, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, and you can take down the angsty poem you've likely posted on your blog to that effect ;)

Oh dear…another person on Warseer thinks he’s a half-way descent troll. :(

After writing in my none existent, angst, teenage blog…I’ve come up with this response.

WS 3 does not represent a human who trains on a constant basis. WS 4 does. WS 3 represents a warrior who has had some training. Marauders, for instance. And for that matter, why are Swordsmen WS 4 then? They –should- be WS 3 by your logic. (Or lack thereof.) With that in mind, let’s remember that each Elector-Count is required to raise and maintain at least one regiment of Halberdiers at all times. This regiment trains every day. WS 3…makes no sense what so ever. Sorry mate.

My idea is hardly ridiculous. The special rule can be ignored or not. It’s your choice. However, since you chose the “No you’re just an idiot, shut up” route, we’ll just take the special rule off the table. Now, let’s move on, shall we? (Unless I’m moving too fast for you.) Let’s give the Halberdiers Heavy armor. They can still take shields, I’m assuming. Just by that alone they trump swordsmen. (At least, according to what you say.) One less WS for a better armor save if needed? Well forget swordsmen. Except if you just like swordsmen. (Oh dear…we’re leaving room for people to make choices based on taste? Now that’s just Heresy!) Or…GW could revise the rules and say…if you have a Halberd or spear you can’t gain the additional +1 armor save for using hand-weapon and shield.

You see what I’m doing here? I’m doing what people with an IQ above 7 called…constructive!

So let’s move on again. Skirmishing is useful, especially if you have a unit of cheap skirmishers. And since you mentioned them not having any ranged weapons…give them ranged weapons? Thrown weapons, maybe? (Being as they had them in the 5th ed list if I remember right.) Or throwing axes, why not? Maybe even give them pistols. (And raise their points cost if so.)

So, WS 4 Heavy armor halberdiers (Let’s say 8 pts) and Skirmishing swordsmen with pistols. (7-10 pts there about.) Now…instead of just being a douche (I appreciate you correcting my bad internet grammar) perhaps you could respond constructively. I realize you’re probably not capable of that because in High school you were probably an “awesome” sports player, and now you’re just depressed all the time because you’ve failed in life…but try for me. :)

And it takes a lot more than that to hurt my feelings on the internet. The internet is for serious business, after all!

R Man
20-10-2009, 03:46
Oh dear…another person on Warseer thinks he’s a half-way descent troll.


If I recall correctly you are the one who started with the accusations. So please stop before something big and hammer shaped puts this to bed.


WS 3 does not represent a human who trains on a constant basis. WS 4 does. WS 3 represents a warrior who has had some training. Marauders, for instance. And for that matter, why are Swordsmen WS 4 then? They –should- be WS 3 by your logic. (Or lack thereof.) With that in mind, let’s remember that each Elector-Count is required to raise and maintain at least one regiment of Halberdiers at all times. This regiment trains every day. WS 3…makes no sense what so ever. Sorry mate.

Just because they are forced to have them doesn't automatically make them effective. Like I said earlier, Halberds are ordinary people and ordinary soldiers. Being mandatory does not make them exceptional. For the record, I don't know why Swordsmen are WS 4, but two wrongs don't usually make a right.


My idea is hardly ridiculous. The special rule can be ignored or not. It’s your choice. However, since you chose the “No you’re just an idiot, shut up” route, we’ll just take the special rule off the table.

You opened up that route. You suggested an idea and he's allowed to critique it. You cannot make an ad-hoc qualification and then use it as an attack.


Now, let’s move on, shall we? (Unless I’m moving too fast for you.) Let’s give the Halberdiers Heavy armor. They can still take shields, I’m assuming. Just by that alone they trump swordsmen. (At least, according to what you say.) One less WS for a better armor save if needed? Well forget swordsmen. Except if you just like swordsmen. (Oh dear…we’re leaving room for people to make choices based on taste? Now that’s just Heresy!) Or…GW could revise the rules and say…if you have a Halberd or spear you can’t gain the additional +1 armor save for using hand-weapon and shield.

Most suggestions were instead of a shield. And you are underestimating how useful WS 4 is. Against many troops, the extra point means the difference between being hit on a +3 and a +4.


So let’s move on again. Skirmishing is useful, especially if you have a unit of cheap skirmishers. And since you mentioned them not having any ranged weapons…give them ranged weapons? Thrown weapons, maybe? (Being as they had them in the 5th ed list if I remember right.) Or throwing axes, why not? Maybe even give them pistols. (And raise their points cost if so.)

Except there was no indication of that in your initial suggestion. And if you made these changes wouldn't they cease to be swordsmen? And then they start to compete with archers. Besides Skirmishing isn't always so good. After all, no rank bonus and no denying enemy bonuses. For march blocking? No, pistoliers would still be better.


So, WS 4 Heavy armor halberdiers (Let’s say 8 pts) and Skirmishing swordsmen with pistols. (7-10 pts there about.) Now…instead of just being a douche (I appreciate you correcting my bad internet grammar) perhaps you could respond constructively. I realize you’re probably not capable of that because in High school you were probably an “awesome” sports player, and now you’re just depressed all the time because you’ve failed in life…but try for me.

Except he did respond constructively. Your idea were, as presented, terrible and poorly thought out. Not everyone knows exactly what you have in mind and they can only go on what is typed. Thus they will only judge on what they see.

Rioghan Murchadha
20-10-2009, 04:27
(A whole bunch of other crap and this)I realize you’re probably not capable of that because in High school you were probably an “awesome” sports player, and now you’re just depressed all the time because you’ve failed in life…but try for me. :)

Actually, I was pretty much rubbish at most sports. Was in gifted programs, advanced mathematics, and english for my entire school career though. Doesn't make your initial ideas for halbers any less crap though :rolleyes:

Speaking of which, if you read the left side of the screen, you might notice I'm not from the good ol' USA. In Canada there is very, very little importance attached to high school sports. Consequently, being a jock isn't near as rewarding as it is down there.


Some other stuff

Thanks for posting for me while I was at work. I pretty much don't have to now. :p

Condottiere
20-10-2009, 05:46
Ws 3 is an abstraction, just like St 4 is. How can you realistically compare the strength of Heroes, Ogres and Kroxigors? And White Lions have a strength of 5.

Elves and Dwarves have Ws 4 as default, but they have several human lifetimes to achieve this.

Commissar Vaughn
20-10-2009, 08:47
With that in mind, let’s remember that each Elector-Count is required to raise and maintain at least one regiment of Halberdiers at all times. This regiment trains every day. WS 3…makes no sense what so ever. Sorry mate.
Im not sure why this idea keeps popping up, no fluff makes any mention of it, and I seriously doubt any unit in history has ever "trained every day" . Constantly for the first 6 months, maybe refresher courses every now and then if the regiments roll changes, but most of the rest of the time it will be acting out its duties or on leave. They wont have time to practice every day. I seem to recall the Swordsman regiments get the pick of the recruits, hence their WS4 and giving a reason why halberdiers should stick with ws3.
I think its one idea we can leave in the bin.


My idea is hardly ridiculous. The special rule can be ignored or not. It’s your choice. However, since you chose the “No you’re just an idiot, shut up” route, we’ll just take the special rule off the table. Now, let’s move on, shall we? (Unless I’m moving too fast for you.) Let’s give the Halberdiers Heavy armor. They can still take shields, I’m assuming. Just by that alone they trump swordsmen. (At least, according to what you say.) One less WS for a better armor save if needed? Well forget swordsmen. Except if you just like swordsmen. (Oh dear…we’re leaving room for people to make choices based on taste? Now that’s just Heresy!) Or…GW could revise the rules and say…if you have a Halberd or spear you can’t gain the additional +1 armor save for using hand-weapon and shield.
Not really sure what your on about here...anyway giving halberdiers both heavy armour and shield is not a very good move. Were not finding a way for halberdiers to trump swordsmen but to be an equally good alternative.

There is a way to do this becouse swordsmen, halberdiers and spearmen were once all an equally good choice(this is indicated by the fact that at the time Empire players all agreed that one was better than the others, they just couldnt agree which it was!)....then a rule was introduced which suddenly made swordsmen much better. All we have to do is REMOVE that rule. Can anyone guess which rule Im refering too?


So let’s move on again. Skirmishing is useful, especially if you have a unit of cheap skirmishers. And since you mentioned them not having any ranged weapons…give them ranged weapons? Thrown weapons, maybe? (Being as they had them in the 5th ed list if I remember right.) Or throwing axes, why not? Maybe even give them pistols. (And raise their points cost if so.) Hmm sounds like Dogs of War deulists...But empire already have good cheap skirmishers, and plenty of gunpowder already. Why have pistoliers on foot when you can have them going really fast on a horse?


So, WS 4 Heavy armor halberdiers (Let’s say 8 pts) and Skirmishing swordsmen with pistols. (7-10 pts there about.) Now…instead of just being a douche (I appreciate you correcting my bad internet grammar) perhaps you could respond constructively. I realize you’re probably not capable of that because in High school you were probably an “awesome” sports player, and now you’re just depressed all the time because you’ve failed in life…but try for me. :) Wait a moment, Dogs of War have to pay 9 for their heavily armoured halberdiers! and 9 for skirmishers with ws4 and pistols! Basicaly both of these ideas fail becouse they dont address the actual problem, and they introduce more by making what should be basic core troops the equal of another armies best troops.

Griefbringer
20-10-2009, 09:00
The warfare around the time halberds were used consisted mostly of: pikemen, musketeers, doppelsöldners, halberdiers and cavalry. I doubt that most people in that time would have ever seen a shield being used in combat.


AFAIK the halberds (and other hefty polearms) started to become popular in the 14th century and had their high days in the 15th. Once the pike started becoming the dominant infantry weapon in the 16th century, the halberd quickly fell into a supporting role.

Condottiere
20-10-2009, 11:02
It seems that the Swiss reassessed the usefulness of the Halberd as the principal weapon after the battle of Arbedo in 1422.

TheDarkDaff
20-10-2009, 11:35
There is a way to do this becouse swordsmen, halberdiers and spearmen were once all an equally good choice(this is indicated by the fact that at the time Empire players all agreed that one was better than the others, they just couldnt agree which it was!)....then a rule was introduced which suddenly made swordsmen much better. All we have to do is REMOVE that rule. Can anyone guess which rule Im refering too?

I sniped the rest as it was just useless back and forth and completely irrelevant to want i want to say. This is the crux of the issue, Swordsmen are too good compared to the other state troops. Give the Swordsmen WS3 and remove the Hand Weapon and Shield rule and reduce all the state troops by a point per model and increase the cost of Cavalry across the board (Orcs are the only army book with correctly priced Cavalry in the game).

If you really want to go by the fluff the add in a "mainstay" like rule that for every unit of Halberdiers you have you can have one other core unit or make only the Halberdiers count as core. I personally don't like this approach because it limits choice but it is there if you want it.

Onisuzume
20-10-2009, 14:06
Maybe a special rule that lets the entire unit attack a cavalry unit that charges them in the front?

"Okay lads, they're charging us, so form into neat rows with yard-sized gaps so the horses will go in there, then we can strike them while the ride past us." (an actual historical tactic)

Sure, it'll only be a bonus vs. cavalry, but its better than nothing.

Commissar Vaughn
20-10-2009, 16:00
@ TheDarkDaff:


You sir, Guessed correctly. Personally I think that removing that one rule (handweapon and shield rule) would go a long way to rebalancing the infantry metagame. It would certaintly balance the issues between the Empire state troops. (i dont agree with any of your other suggestions Im afraid!)

If anyone still thinks cavalry will stomp infantry too much you can always introduce the Fall back In Good Order rule from WAB. I always find its the infantry that wont bloody die though!

grumbaki
20-10-2009, 17:32
Just make them dirt cheap. Even more so than they are now (which GW would be happy to do).

3 points base, free (and mandatory) command. No shield option.

20 halberdiers cost 60 points. With two detachments of 10 halberdiers, the cost goes up to just 120 points.

As an Empire player, I'm happy. I can make a huge horde like this! For very little points I can cover the field. However, my opponents know that I have poor blocks of infantry that can be easily broken and those mandatory standards can be easily taken.

GW sells more models and we get to see hordes of halberdiers on the table top. We all win!

Ramius4
20-10-2009, 17:50
Halberds are a nice weapon as long as you can use your attacks. They really need to be versatile by having a shield as well so you have the option of using hand weapon and shield or using the halberd.

They're pretty nice to have against armies that have a lower Initiative troops than your own (undead, Orcs, etc). as long as you can hold the initial enemy charge or charge yourself.

Note that I do NOT endorse this philosophy against Saurus units... ;-)

yabbadabba
20-10-2009, 18:51
If anyone still thinks cavalry will stomp infantry too much you can always introduce the Fall back In Good Order rule from WAB. I always find its the infantry that wont bloody die though! I agree. In most WAB games I have played a well formed block of infantry are very effective at seeing off most cavalry units. However, get the cavalry to flank them and its good night fighting line!

TheDarkDaff
20-10-2009, 19:31
I agree. In most WAB games I have played a well formed block of infantry are very effective at seeing off most cavalry units. However, get the cavalry to flank them and its good night fighting line!

But we aren't talking about WAB here but WFB. Heavy Cav is the single most powerful unit type in the game, be they Bret Lances, Coldone Knights, Chaos Knights or Blood Knights. Their high speed, high strength and high armour save means most units have trouble with them. Most of the above units can break fullly ranked units with a frontal charge reliably which i believe is a problem with them being too cheap for their effectiveness. That was the reason Elite Infantry didn't work until it got pumped up to it's current state, and even then it is iffy most of the time. You have a handfull of workable elite infantry and in most cases they are overshadowed by the armies Heavy Cav (notable exceptions being Grave Guard, Black Guard, Swordmasters and Saraus Warriors).

yabbadabba
20-10-2009, 20:14
But we aren't talking about WAB here but WFB. I know mate, just like we are talking about a d6 based game with toy soldiers, not reality. Just backing up a p.o.v. It still hasn't solved the fundamental question which is what function should halberdiers have in the Empire army. Forget messing about with rules, in plain words What Do You Want Them To Do?

Condottiere
20-10-2009, 22:00
You can't make them better, so you'll have to nerf the competition.

Commissar Vaughn
20-10-2009, 22:25
You can't make them better, so you'll have to nerf the competition.

Hey thats a good idea...erm....why dont we take away the hand weapon and shield rule for extra save?

fluffstalker
20-10-2009, 23:56
But we aren't talking about WAB here but WFB. Heavy Cav is the single most powerful unit type in the game, be they Bret Lances, Coldone Knights, Chaos Knights or Blood Knights. Their high speed, high strength and high armour save means most units have trouble with them. Most of the above units can break fullly ranked units with a frontal charge reliably which i believe is a problem with them being too cheap for their effectiveness. That was the reason Elite Infantry didn't work until it got pumped up to it's current state, and even then it is iffy most of the time. You have a handfull of workable elite infantry and in most cases they are overshadowed by the armies Heavy Cav (notable exceptions being Grave Guard, Black Guard, Swordmasters and Saraus Warriors).

This. There used to be a way to field infantry heavy armies without penalty (Skaven aside, who always have to go that route). You gave up mobility for staying power and numbers. Now however, you give up mobility...for...nothing, since your staying power is pretty much zero against the charge of monsters and heavy cav, unless you happen to be a Black Guard star or the like.

Whats the point of even trying to pull of flanking charges? Just charge em and watch all the infantry scatter. This puts sub par infantry like halbediers in an even worse position than they were relative to the superior swordsmen. Why take a harder swing when you know your never going to get to swing? Better to get that save and higher WS.

Sadly this seems to jar with the fluff completely. So either GW can go on ignoring it, or even change it so swordsmen are the backbone of Empire armies? Unlikely and unsatisfying.

Yabba asked what the role of the halberds should be. Since Empire armies are built after the 15th and 16th century armies of Europe (at least the conventional parts are), halberd would have the same role as the did there: a jack of all trades, thats useful against most armour types and most troop types. A halberd is essentially an axe, spear and warhammer all in one, and its not too complicated to use, especially in formation with someone covering your left with his halberd. The sergeant from Warhammer Mark of Chaos RTS says, thrust and hack, or something along those lines, and is quite correct. This is why they would be an ideal weapon for the majority of men, veterans or not. Also they give reach and armour penetration power, something that allowed the halbediers of the Renaissance to fight knights, whereas a sword and shield wouldn't be as effective.

How to translate this into the tabletop isn't so easy because the currrent ruleset is that men with swords and shields are actually more effective than ones with halberds. Making halberd men cheaper (to represent the ease of equipping and training them) would go a long way though.

yabbadabba
21-10-2009, 00:28
OK here are some thoughts:

Statline - keep the same
Drop the shield
Ugrade - Heavy Armour +1pt
Armour Piercing

So basic infantry, more survivable but not a defensive unit. Can go after cavalry and heavy infantry. An offensive unit in essence. Until GW bring in a weapon reach classification their is no point adding anything else as it gets too complicated. If you want a defensive unit, drop the AP and add fight in 2 ranks, but I can't agree to Halberdiers being defensive.

There you go, a core unit in the game designed to be offensive AND chase heavy armoured troops/cavalry.

Commissar Vaughn
21-10-2009, 00:59
But we aren't talking about WAB here but WFB. Heavy Cav is the single most powerful unit type in the game, be they Bret Lances, Coldone Knights, Chaos Knights or Blood Knights. Their high speed, high strength and high armour save means most units have trouble with them. Most of the above units can break fullly ranked units with a frontal charge reliably which i believe is a problem with them being too cheap for their effectiveness. That was the reason Elite Infantry didn't work until it got pumped up to it's current state, and even then it is iffy most of the time. You have a handfull of workable elite infantry and in most cases they are overshadowed by the armies Heavy Cav (notable exceptions being Grave Guard, Black Guard, Swordmasters and Saraus Warriors).

I think you missed my point entirely.

In order to rebalance the state regiments (and the infantry metagame) the hand weapon and shield rule needs to go.

As the rule was brought in to help Infantry against the otherwise onstoppable cavalry we need something else that wont unbalance other areas.

The Fall Back in Good Order rule seems to do this nicely.

Condottiere
21-10-2009, 04:13
Initiative adjusted by reach, perhaps, at least on the first round. Of course, other factors would effect initiative.

However, a lance trumps halberds in RL.

Lord Lucifer
21-10-2009, 10:31
Oh dear…another person on Warseer thinks he’s a half-way descent troll. :(

Lusall, don't make me get my Mod Voice out.
Play nice.
Cheers :)




As to Imperial Halberdiers...
I use them primarily as detachments, on the basis both of rules and of background.
The halberd in the rules is an offensive weapon. Trade-off, dropping the extra save granted by a shield in exchange for the +1 Strength.
State Troop 'parent' units are a defensive unit, as they lack the mobility and/or god-like statline that would make them a truly formidable offensive formation. Infantry, unless it is VERY good, exists solely to add what I term 'static' Combat Resolution (ranks, command groups, outnumbering etc.), and this means you want a unit that can keep its' own casualties to a minimum.
Halberds don't do that. They're an offensive option on a unit whose purpose is to stand there and not die.
Nerfing the other options isn't going to change that, because Swordsmen will ALWAYS be the best unit. WS4 with Light Armour and Shield, with or without the HW&S save-bonus, reduces the number of hits on the unit by most enemies (Elves, Dwarfs, Marauders, Greenskin/Skaven/Lizardmen elites) and has a chance of saving one in every 3 or 6 troopers, depending on the enemy.
No amount of nerfing is going to make halberdiers a sensible Parent Unit prospect. And the options proposed for buffing the Halberdiers have mostly been too powerful, needlessly complex, drastic, or divorced entirely from the background.


Heavy Armour can be justified for the Halberdiers. It gives them a chance of surviving a couple hits. Just don't give them shields, or you'll never see the Halberds used, and you'll never see Swordsmen (well, rarely anyway).
A points drop might make them more enticing, and giving the Halberdiers an option for magic standards as 'carrying the town colours' (especially if this option is for the Griffon Standard! Determined defence of their homes granting great resolve? Winner!), would certainly help.
Anything more is too fiddly for the definitively 'basic' troops in the army.
Perhaps an option for a 'Guard' unit would be good, where every second unit of Halberdiers can be upgraded to an elite status, would be good. Black Fire Pass Mountainguard, Wolfenburg Patriots, Altdorf Watch, Black Guards of Nuln, Helmgart Regiment... a nice semi-elite flair for your army, a chance to get creative.




In terms of background... my force is an Averlander army, where the sense of professionalism and flair for the dramatic/love of pomp and ceremony, makes Swordsmen the logical option, as Swordsmen are the professional soldiery within the Empire, serving as the mainstay of campaigning forces and as nationalist Imperial mercenaries, known for their flash and flair and more extravagant uniforms.
Thus Halberdiers are the support elements of my professional force.

Halberdiers are common within the Empire as they are the town watch of almost every Imperial town, which is probably where the 'every Elector has to maintain at least one regiment' line comes from. They are outfitted by the town's coffers, and any burgher who values the concept of privately-owned property and a standing force that can ensure that concept holds, will certainly contribute to outfitting such men. At times of war, they get drafted into military service.
Spearmen are similar.
Not everyone can afford a standing army, but the Watch is another matter.

Lord Anathir
21-10-2009, 11:21
I think empire halberdiers and phoenix guard should take one for the team and let halberds stay as they are... no need for temple guard, chaos warriors and black guard to become stronger 0_0

Condottiere
21-10-2009, 11:31
As they stand, I doubt that Phoenix Guard need any improvement.

Keller
21-10-2009, 13:30
A points drop might make them more enticing, and giving the Halberdiers an option for magic standards as 'carrying the town colours' (especially if this option is for the Griffon Standard! Determined defence of their homes granting great resolve? Winner!), would certainly help.

I really like this idea, but only if the Empire gets some worthwhile standards. As it is now, the Warbanner is the best bet, with the Arcane Warding being of some use, but not on a cheap unit of halberdiers. Perhaps something like units w/in 6" can reroll panic (or psychology) tests. I realize area-affect standards are usually limited to BSB's, but the Dwarves have the 5+ ward vs ranged Runic-Standard which can be taken by any Longbeard or elite units, so its not unheard of.

As of now, Empire has a lack of magic standard options, with the only units able to take them being Knights, or 1 unit of infantry if you have a GotE. Greatswordsmen don't even get to take them anymore by default. I think it would be appropriate to open up more access to magic standards in a standard army, especially when many armies nowadays have very little restriction on them, even for Core units.

I really think this could help make the halberdiers more worth while to those who pick units for reasons other than how great they look on the tabletop.


I think making them WS 4 would go a long way too.

TheDarkDaff
21-10-2009, 14:50
I think you missed my point entirely.

In order to rebalance the state regiments (and the infantry metagame) the hand weapon and shield rule needs to go.

As the rule was brought in to help Infantry against the otherwise onstoppable cavalry we need something else that wont unbalance other areas.

The Fall Back in Good Order rule seems to do this nicely.

I get your point i am just looking at it from a different angle. We both agree that the hand weapon and shield rule was brought in to stop the massive advantage of Heavy Cav but i believe it is going about things the wrong way. It was trying to fix everything but the problem when you could just make Heavy Cav. weaker or more expensive in the first place to fix their massive advantage over infantry without creating all these problems for infantry internally.

My point being that removing the hand weapon and shield bonus should help correct the infantry metagame but it will just make Heavy Cav even more dominant. Add in that most other elite infantry has been improved and reduced in cost and Empire State troops need something to make them comparative to other armies. Reducing their points cost is the easiest way as the other option is rewriting every single other armybook to bring the other Infantry in line with the Empire rather than the current metagame.

The Empire have 2 issues in that the Handweapon and shield bonus has skewed the effectiveness of infantry to survive at all costs and other armies infantry has been 'corrected' to the current metagame while they have not. Removing the handweapon and shield rule makes them balanced in the confines of the empire book but they are still outclassed by the other books out there (which is where my reduce them all by 1 point idea is from).

puppetmaster24
21-10-2009, 14:56
rule 34 anyone.

but leaving the bad jokes at home no one uses halberds on there state troops because shields and hand weapons are better because of the better save and better WS.

Redvampire7
21-10-2009, 17:07
Halberdiers should not have better armour than swordsmen. Halberdiers are the most numerous state soldiers (p 37 of the army book). Just make them 3pts each and remove the shield option. Their role should be to outnumber and have decent chances to be victorious against similar troops (goblins, men at arms, zombies etc), not to be better than swordmen.

TheGreatJoker
21-10-2009, 17:09
rule 34 anyone.

thats just not nice.

Lord Lucifer
22-10-2009, 00:26
I really like this idea, but only if the Empire gets some worthwhile standards...

I really think this could help make the halberdiers more worth while to those who pick units for reasons other than how great they look on the tabletop.


I think making them WS 4 would go a long way too.

On the dire state of Imperial Banners, I agree with you fully. It's a pity, and I'd LOVE if it would change. Imagine Halberdiers with heavy armour and the old 5th ed. Standard of Shielding, I'd never leave home without 'em!

I disagree on the WS4 bit, though. WS3 is an average trooper, and it's hardly average if almost no units are WS3.
The Swordsmen are great as WS4, we don't need more WS4 state troops. It neatly divides the three core units into Skilled, Lotsa attacks, and Good Strength.
Heavy Armour and access to some decent magic standards is enough. Perhaps incorporate it into the unit's rules instead of the magic item list, access to some halberdier-only magic standards (Griffon Standard, Standard of Shielding, Banner of Sigismund) would make them a pretty damn awesome 'core' unit.


Halberdiers should not have better armour than swordsmen. Halberdiers are the most numerous state soldiers (p 37 of the army book).

This matters why? They're the most numerous state troops, but they've also got the steadiest income and as a standing guard, they've got the best access to skilled artisans that can craft and maintain their armour.
Swordsmen are skilled deullists, they need freedom of movement so it would be understandable why they'd prefer light armour over heavy.
Fluff justification exists.

Laughingmonk
22-10-2009, 03:16
Just remove the part where it says that they are the most numerous state troops. They make fine detachments in my experience.

Condottiere
22-10-2009, 08:27
Actually, Greatswords may have usurped their role.

Allow Halberdiers to be Stubborn under certain circumstances, such as when a specific character is assigned to them.

Keller
22-10-2009, 16:03
I disagree on the WS4 bit, though. WS3 is an average trooper, and it's hardly average if almost no units are WS3.
The Swordsmen are great as WS4, we don't need more WS4 state troops. It neatly divides the three core units into Skilled, Lotsa attacks, and Good Strength.
Heavy Armour and access to some decent magic standards is enough. Perhaps incorporate it into the unit's rules instead of the magic item list, access to some halberdier-only magic standards (Griffon Standard, Standard of Shielding, Banner of Sigismund) would make them a pretty damn awesome 'core' unit.

That's a good point about WS 4 being too prevelant. Perhaps make Swordsmen WS 3, and make Halberdiers WS 4, but remove the option for shields. This would help reflect the fact that the Halberdiers are the standing army for the Empire, thus actually train regularly to get WS4, but they'd not replace swordsmen because of lack of 4+ AS in combat with no shield option. WS 4 would help protect them against WS 4 enemies some, without messing around with armor types and what not.
Swordsmen would still have their 4+ AS, and I 4 to strike before many types of soliders, reflecting that they are lighter and faster than the heavier halberds or lengthy spears.


Halberdier-only banners could work, too.


Actually, Greatswords may have usurped their role.

Allow Halberdiers to be Stubborn under certain circumstances, such as when a specific character is assigned to them.
I liked how the Cult of Ulric (and Middenhiem Defenders?) had the Senschel, a captain who made his unit Stubborn. Kislev Boyars do the same thing, so Empire Captains could be made to boost certain units, even if for a slight cost increase. Though I do love my 62 pt Captains....

Souppilgrim
23-10-2009, 03:45
I don't like the idea of changing other things just because halberds are bad. The parry rule is awesome and should stay. Swordsmen should stay as they are, they are already some of the worst infantry in the game, don't nerf them. Buff Halbreds. There have been some decent ideas in here. I like the no shield option, add heavy armor. Maybe add armor piercing.

ChaosVC
23-10-2009, 09:44
Empire halberd is sadly weak because its str 3 and 6 armour save. Only good for detachment and even for that, people believes that militia is better(2x attack).

Lord Lucifer
25-10-2009, 07:47
That's a good point about WS 4 being too prevelant. Perhaps make Swordsmen WS 3, and make Halberdiers WS 4, but remove the option for shields. This would help reflect the fact that the Halberdiers are the standing army for the Empire, thus actually train regularly to get WS4, but they'd not replace swordsmen because of lack of 4+ AS in combat with no shield option. WS 4 would help protect them against WS 4 enemies some, without messing around with armor types and what not.
But the problem here, using fluff to justify making Halberdiers WS4 and Swordsmen WS3, is that the fluff that already exists already supports WS4 Swordsmen and WS3 Halberdiers.
Halberdiers aren't actually the standing army of the Empire. They're the most numerous troop type, being fairly easy to train, and a bit heavier-hitting than the Spearmen. But they're the most prevalent because most Imperial regiments are actually drafted in from Town Watch, toll guards, village militia and unimportant garrissons.
The Imperial Swordsmen are the only 'professional' soldiers in the Empire army (with the possible exception of the revamped Greatswords, which were formerly just more militia... and Knights aren't professional soldiers, they're Nobles, they have a special kind of mulitary jurisdiction so are excluded from this distinction). From at least 4th ed. onwards the Swordsmen were the Professional Soldiers that always trained and campaigned, they're a standing military unit that exists solely for battle and training, and are maintained only by those with serious military commitments to maintain.

The Halberdiers don't need to be Elite WS4 troops (and if they were WS4, you'd never see Free Company). They just need a bit of backbone.


Swordsmen would still have their 4+ AS, and I 4 to strike before many types of soliders, reflecting that they are lighter and faster than the heavier halberds or lengthy spears.
Swordsmen used to be I4. I miss those days :p
Although, technically the short spears some Imperial troops wield could justify granting an I bonus to Spearmen...




I liked how the Cult of Ulric (and Middenhiem Defenders?) had the Senschel, a captain who made his unit Stubborn. Kislev Boyars do the same thing, so Empire Captains could be made to boost certain units, even if for a slight cost increase. Though I do love my 62 pt Captains....

Seneschels were awesome!

Rioghan Murchadha
25-10-2009, 19:54
Swordsmen used to be I4. I miss those days :p


They still are my friend, they still are. Which is one of 3 reasons that they make halberdiers sub-par.

yabbadabba
25-10-2009, 21:39
If the rules could be more in depth I would go for statline unchanged.
+1 AS to the front.
AP
ASF on the charge, Fight in 2 ranks when charged.

Seabo
26-10-2009, 01:27
Saw a show on History channel of a group of about 20 people acting out a Halberd defence against charging barbarian types (long Swords, Shields and maces and stuff in skirmish style) Can't remember name of show..think it was about the Norman invasion vs the Scots?
The first line took a step forward and set the halberd like spears and, as the barbarians slowed to try to get through them, the second rank stepped forward swinging through the gaps in the front line and just whaled on em. Second line then held Halberds down and first line swung theirs with a step forward. It kept repeating as the 2 lines surged step by step forward and the barbarian guys could do nothing.
The guys were talking afterwards and the Barbarian actors said it was like trying to run through a thornbush with lots of low hanging branches.
Now that would be cool. Give Halberdiers the 2 ranks, ASF when charged, S4....but of course that would be way too powerful. Kinda sucks that this was the way they were used in RL though lol.

Lord Lucifer
26-10-2009, 01:40
Don't forget Ash trained up a regiment of Halberdiers to fight the Deadites, that's gotta count for something.
I'd fully support the inclusion of an option for the Champion of a unit of Halberdiers to purchase a Boomstick.
Shop smart. Show S-Mart.

R Man
26-10-2009, 04:52
If the rules could be more in depth I would go for statline unchanged.
+1 AS to the front.
AP
ASF on the charge, Fight in 2 ranks when charged.

For the Weapon or the unit? If its the unit, then we face some unfortunate questions about how Elves haven't figured this out. If its the weapon then we just broke Chaos Warriors, Phoenix Guard and Temple Guard and made Black Guard even worse (a lot of Guards use the Halberd).


I think you are getting distracted by trying to make the Halberd ultra realistic, rather than making it work for the unit.
S4....but of course that would be way too powerful. Kinda sucks that this was the way they were used in RL though lol.

Be very careful about that though. There is no guarantee that the display was strictly accurate. Like where there any javelins thrown? Did the barbarians just pour in? What if they were fighting 'trained' infantry? And so on.

Arkh
26-10-2009, 06:13
For the Weapon or the unit? If its the unit, then we face some unfortunate questions about how Elves haven't figured this out. If its the weapon then we just broke Chaos Warriors, Phoenix Guard and Temple Guard and made Black Guard even worse (a lot of Guards use the Halberd).


Be very careful about that though. There is no guarantee that the display was strictly accurate. Like where there any javelins thrown? Did the barbarians just pour in? What if they were fighting 'trained' infantry? And so on.

IMO Halberds should receive a universal parry bonus to the front when used on foot (+1 AS to the front, or perhaps even -1 to hit but this would require serious rework of several units). Even a +1 AS to the front would mean nerfing to some of the current halberd units that are already ridiculous.. But at the same time, as stated above, a lot of halberd units are guard units and they simply don't act like guard units. Unless they are given extra bonuses like 4+ Ward Saves or Stubborn. Which they all seem to be getting now.

The current state of mounted halberds compared to mounted great weapons probably bothers me more than anything... But then I am a Bretonnian player and now have 36 Questing Knights collecting dust because of the great weapon change.

Condottiere
26-10-2009, 09:02
Halberds are really vulnerable out in the open, which was why they were usually part of a team. Skirmishers could snipe away at them, while heavy cavalry could smash into them. Their strength was getting into an existing melee.

yabbadabba
26-10-2009, 09:26
For the Weapon or the unit? If its the unit, then we face some unfortunate questions about how Elves haven't figured this out. No you don't. As I said the issue with what I wrote isn't that its the changes to the rules, its that the rules have been designed to either support great depth (aka WFRP) or no real depth (aka current WFB). And who cares about Elves?

In the end, with the current ruleset you cannot change the Halberd, dropping the HW+Shield Parry affects the whole game, so you need to change the Empire Halberdiers. As such you can then forget about all the other units.

Remember the rules are a mechanic, not a reflection of reality. Who is to say that the HE stat line also reflects a higher ability and confidence in their weaponry? Hence the lack of need to change their Phoenix Guard rules. In the end there is no need for any kind of conformity in weapon performance. Its a Fantasy game. GWhas this conformity because it wants quick killy-death from its games and lots of sales, not because of any deep historical loyalty.

Condottiere
26-10-2009, 09:35
Weapons are tools, and tools tend to perform the same, all things being equal.

The difference would be the skill of the user - give me a three-piece flail, and the chances are I'll end up hurting myself; give it to a knowledgeable Kung Fu practitioner and he'll hurt someone else.