PDA

View Full Version : So how large are your ranked infantry units going to be?



ashc
17-06-2010, 12:30
Considering the stuff coming from the new book threads, I wondered what people's considerations are towards their unit sizes for 8th edition. I keep hearing units the likes of 10 wide and 6 deep and all kinds of sizes, so wondered how people were looking at changing up their armies in 8th's wake in this regard.

Frankly
17-06-2010, 12:37
40 for my NGs with bows.

30 shots + stand and shoot + 30 attacks at the start of combat. For its points its a reasonable unit against other standard units of its type.

My DE spearmen and X.Bows won't change much, but my empire units will certainly get play tested especially my spearmen.

dragonet111
17-06-2010, 12:45
My bloodletters will be 5 wide and 3 deep I have 2 units in support.

My Horrors will be 10 wide 4 deep to use the horde rule + banner of change + herald of Tzeentch.

Frankly
17-06-2010, 12:51
My Horrors will be 10 wide 4 deep to use the horde rule + banner of change + herald of Tzeentch.

It will be interesting to see the errata on horrors.

Rhellion
17-06-2010, 12:53
I'll be interested in playing 2 different Horde units. One unit of Clan Rats with spears and a Screaming Bell to make them unbreakable. Another unit of Plague Monks with a Plague Furnace to make them unbreakable. With Skaven Leadership, I don't think I'll be running 40-50 Skaven in a single unit unless it is unbreakable.

lycanthought
17-06-2010, 12:54
I'm quite looking forward to trying out dwarf warriors at 10x3 or 10x4 with great weapons - and maybe not fielding anything other than core units(!) what else gives you an additional ws4 s5 attack for every 10 points you spend?!

dragonet111
17-06-2010, 12:56
It will be interesting to see the errata on horrors.

Yes at present I play that unit but I don't have a GD I use a Prince-daemon (because I love the Be'lakor mini). That unit is my Lvl 4 sorcerer the Horde is just a nice bonus:D

oCoYoRoAoKo
17-06-2010, 13:06
Daemonettes: 10 wide, 4 deep, 3 heralds
Horrors: 6 wide, 3 deep, 1 herald

Cy.

Peregijn
17-06-2010, 13:08
warriors of chaos: 18 models 6 wide 3 ranks
marauders: 24 models 6 wide 4 ranks
knights: still 5 models/unit
horseman: still 5 models/unit
chosen: 12 models 6 2 wide 2 ranks

and some more stuff... lots that still needs painting

Frankly
17-06-2010, 13:12
I'll be interested in playing 2 different Horde units. One unit of Clan Rats with spears and a Screaming Bell to make them unbreakable. Another unit of Plague Monks with a Plague Furnace to make them unbreakable. With Skaven Leadership, I don't think I'll be running 40-50 Skaven in a single unit unless it is unbreakable.

I had a mock 8th ed game against skaven, against units of 50 slaves with slings, they had awesome sauce thrown all over them for their points cost great investments imho.

Eternus
17-06-2010, 13:14
Might be fun to try Zombies or Skeletons at 10 wide and 7 deep! I could manage that.

Frankly
17-06-2010, 13:21
Same Eternus.

I've boxed up my undead for a bit, but if the errata looks like you can make crazy zombie lists then I'm all for that :)

Your pale companion
17-06-2010, 13:24
The 8th edition just looks like another attempt from GW to sell more models (apoca*cough*lypse).

Arbas
17-06-2010, 13:30
I'm quite looking forward to trying out dwarf warriors at 10x3 or 10x4 with great weapons - and maybe not fielding anything other than core units(!) what else gives you an additional ws4 s5 attack for every 10 points you spend?!

Presumably if your opponent has a 10 wide unit and you have a 5 wide unit he wouldn't be able to use the maximum number of attacks since there would be a number of his minis that weren't in base to base contact .... soooo IF you could line up properly he would get 5 face to face plus one diagonal (or two diagonal, I'm not sure of the rules these days :)) for 6/7 attacking minis plus another 6/7 in the second rank - now assuming the total number of minis in each unit is the same how likely is it that after a period of attrition the unit with the greater number of ranks would start to win combats since it's rank bonus would last longer ..... Hmmmm but the narrow unit would lose ranks faster given the same wounds caused .... my head is starting to hurt now .... :)

So dwarf warriors, one unit 10 wide 3 deep vs 5 wide 6 deep all things being equal, anyone fancy trying it out?

dragonet111
17-06-2010, 13:32
I like that new trend HUGE blocks of infantry, screaming hordes (for my horrors:D)..........
I use to play 2 units of 20 horrors those units merge into a massive horde

Frankly
17-06-2010, 13:34
The 8th edition just looks like another attempt from GW to sell more models (apoca*cough*lypse).

It is, no doubt about that. But thats not what is thread is about.

they've actually buffed core units = good for the game.

ashc
17-06-2010, 13:36
they've actually buffed core units = good for the game.

= good for selling models? :shifty:

Hmm, I'm just seeing what the general feel is. Its looking like people are really bulking up some units. Are they then also going to up game size?

Bac5665
17-06-2010, 13:37
I'll still use units of about 20 for saurus and units of about 30-40 (5 wide) for any other core infantry. I'm still convinced that the horde rule is not worth it.

The SkaerKrow
17-06-2010, 13:47
If I ever deign to play a game of 8e, I'll be fielding infantry in blocks of 25-30 as standard.

Eternus
17-06-2010, 13:49
= good for selling models? :shifty:

Hmm, I'm just seeing what the general feel is. Its looking like people are really bulking up some units. Are they then also going to up game size?

This was a concern of mine - if the game size generally went up as indicated to 3000 points as the standard, but without gameplay being faster, we simply wouldn't have time to play a battle out to conclusion in a session. I like the idea of bigger battles and more models on the table, but at what point does it become impractical? Generally it sounds like the casualties will mount up faster in 8th, and units will be engaging quicker, so overall I think this will compensate for having larger armies.

Przemcio251
17-06-2010, 13:51
I will use 18 Warriors 6x3ranks + 20 marauders 5x4 ranks no more... the Warriors will tie up the enemy and marauders will try to hit the flank

ashc
17-06-2010, 13:51
It certainly sounds like the system has been sped up; things sound 'killier' and parts of the rules streamlined so things can get stuck in quicker.

lycanthought
17-06-2010, 13:52
Presumably if your opponent has a 10 wide unit and you have a 5 wide unit he wouldn't be able to use the maximum number of attacks since there would be a number of his minis that weren't in base to base contact .... soooo IF you could line up properly he would get 5 face to face plus one diagonal (or two diagonal, I'm not sure of the rules these days :)) for 6/7 attacking minis plus another 6/7 in the second rank - now assuming the total number of minis in each unit is the same how likely is it that after a period of attrition the unit with the greater number of ranks would start to win combats since it's rank bonus would last longer ..... Hmmmm but the narrow unit would lose ranks faster given the same wounds caused .... my head is starting to hurt now .... :)

So dwarf warriors, one unit 10 wide 3 deep vs 5 wide 6 deep all things being equal, anyone fancy trying it out?

Ok, assuming vanilla units with 2h weapons, 5 wide, 6 deep = 10 attacks =5 hits = 3.3 wounds (call it 3)
Simultaneously 10 wide, 3 deep = 7 can attack in front rank and therefore 7 each in ranks 2 and 3 so 21 attacks = 10.5 hits = 7 wounds

so the 5x6 unit gets 3 + 3 for ranks = 6 and the 10x3 gets 7 + 2 for ranks = 9

so 10x3 wins by 3

the 5x6 unit is stubborn this round (due to ranks)and assuming they don't run away, the maths stay the same in the next round but the chances are they'll lose a rank and stop being stubborn

Looks like a win for the 10x3 to me!

random600
17-06-2010, 13:53
So dwarf warriors, one unit 10 wide 3 deep vs 5 wide 6 deep all things being equal, anyone fancy trying it out?
The 10 wide would win. I think what i might start doing is have the 5 wide 6 deep unis, for mobility and getting around stuff. Then when there in place use the musician "free" reform to get them to the horde status.

Your pale companion
17-06-2010, 14:18
Well it really makes the game worse.
We no longer guess charge distances.So it goes like:
You set your 50man strong units in your side of the table.Then your opponent does the same.
You both march until you meet the foe and then roll a bunch of dice.
Yay...

Eternus
17-06-2010, 14:31
Well it really makes the game worse.
We no longer guess charge distances.So it goes like:
You set your 50man strong units in your side of the table.Then your opponent does the same.
You both march until you meet the foe and then roll a bunch of dice.
Yay...

Well if you simplify it to that degree, that's how it has always been since 1st Edition surely? It's only when you start deciding where you units will strike, matching them against suitable opponents, supporting them with other units and characters etc that it starts to become a game worth playing.

You may not be guessing charge distances, but you are having to guess how close you need to get to the enemy before you can rely on a charge hitting home.

Your pale companion
17-06-2010, 14:37
The units are now bigger and take too much space.
Fliers, cavalry and skirmishers are all nerfed to varying degrees.

rtunian
17-06-2010, 14:46
if i do any horde units, they will be ng speargobs. i will keep using my 21 bowgob units. my orc blocks will probably stay 5 wide 6 deep. i cannot see going 10 wide with orcs. an 8 inch wide unit is unwieldly enough (horde gobs). 10 inches wide is ridonculous... i don't honestly expect to see 10 inches between any 2 pieces of terrain, save for the exact middle of the board (assuming the central dead zone still exists)

Bac5665
17-06-2010, 14:54
Well if you simplify it to that degree, that's how it has always been since 1st Edition surely? It's only when you start deciding where you units will strike, matching them against suitable opponents, supporting them with other units and characters etc that it starts to become a game worth playing.

You may not be guessing charge distances, but you are having to guess how close you need to get to the enemy before you can rely on a charge hitting home.

No you don't. Now that you can premeasure, you just move up the the statistically best distance (which isn't hard to calculate) and charge, and see if you get the dice roll you need. Or if your opponent does first. Really, with premeasuring, if you can do basic stats, random charges really do make it entirely the dice's choice who gets the charge. No player skill needed, beyond simple stats.

ChaosVC
17-06-2010, 15:19
I find premeasuring okay, while the ability to judge a distant may need some practice and make the game more challenging, premeasuring will speed up the thought process and open up more tactical options(which also means your oponent and you will spend more time thinking aboout the best option...*tick tock tick tock*). But then when you add in an element of randomness say 2d6 charge... , its really become a waste of time to think too much, since those options while apparently available, is decided only after the result of dice rolling. Technically, a multiple choice question not answered by your brain but the dice, you just do what left for you to do after that.

tiger g
17-06-2010, 15:25
Presumably if your opponent has a 10 wide unit and you have a 5 wide unit he wouldn't be able to use the maximum number of attacks since there would be a number of his minis that weren't in base to base contact .... soooo IF you could line up properly he would get 5 face to face plus one diagonal (or two diagonal, I'm not sure of the rules these days :)) for 6/7 attacking minis plus another 6/7 in the second rank - now assuming the total number of minis in each unit is the same how likely is it that after a period of attrition the unit with the greater number of ranks would start to win combats since it's rank bonus would last longer ..... Hmmmm but the narrow unit would lose ranks faster given the same wounds caused .... my head is starting to hurt now .... :)

So dwarf warriors, one unit 10 wide 3 deep vs 5 wide 6 deep all things being equal, anyone fancy trying it out?

You are forgetting that 10 wide the third rank gets to attack

The SkaerKrow
17-06-2010, 15:26
Charging isn't important in 8e anyhow, so being the side to get the charge doesn't really decide much.

nick_robinsonchia
17-06-2010, 15:46
WoC

marauders (50-60) 10 wide
warriors
tzeentch- (20)5 wide 4 deep
khorne (18-21) 6-7 wide 3 deep
trolls (7+BSB) 4 wide 2 deep.
Nurgle ogres 3x2 w greatweapons
dragon ogres 2x2 w greatweapons
Knights: have changed alot.They arnt the killing machines+grinders of 7th anymore necesarily.
- My khorne knights have been getting overwhelmed vs horde sized units but against regualr ones they are still fine at a 6 model count+std,mus.
- Honestly the best my knights have performed was a unit of 5 vanilla knights with a musician. They are actually really good troubleshooters.
- I plan on running a tzeentch 9 man unit with blasted standard with a lvl 2 Mage with MR to try soak up some of the fire that's getting poured into my main line.

N

Frankly
17-06-2010, 15:53
Well it really makes the game worse.
We no longer guess charge distances.So it goes like:
You set your 50man strong units in your side of the table.Then your opponent does the same.
You both march until you meet the foe and then roll a bunch of dice.
Yay...

LoL. I'm sorry but that is just silly.

Wargaming is never that straight ford, well not in the games played around here.

I.E. If the player is one of those players that counter-deploys straight ahead of his opponent's battleline and can only work out single targets; than its not the rules thats the problem.

Corbu
17-06-2010, 16:02
I'm thinking about running 2 10x3 and one 5x4 squad of dwarfs (put a hero in a unit that has greater mobility).

Arbas
17-06-2010, 16:18
You are forgetting that 10 wide the third rank gets to attack

Didn't know it mate :) haven't played since 2002 :)

Eternus
17-06-2010, 16:54
Really, with premeasuring, if you can do basic stats, random charges really do make it entirely the dice's choice who gets the charge. No player skill needed, beyond simple stats.

Except the skill in manouvering your units to get them a close as possible to the enemy before charging to reduce your chances of a failed charge of course. It's only the dice that decide if you are attempting charges from several inches away - if a cavalry unit gets to roll 3 dice and discard the lowest, and you charge from less than 6 inches or so away, you should be confident, but it's still not guaranteed, which is great, because the more you can predict what will happen, the more boring the game becomes. At the extreme, if everything were predictable then we wouldn't need models, just army lists and a clear way of judging who is the best general.

The game is meant to be exciting, and that means being unpredictable. Nobody can win every battle, and changes to 8th just reinforce this principle. We will just have to accept that not even the best general can triumph on every battlefield, the gods of chance have put their foot down and decided that they will simply not allow it. So I'm going to just deal with it, make by sacrifices to the dice gods, and fight the best battle I can.

random600
17-06-2010, 16:56
Charging isn't important in 8e anyhow, so being the side to get the charge doesn't really decide much.

Your really wrong, out of the games I've seen played the change +1combat res was really helpful in winning. The old charge wouldn't be that good with the new combat rules anyways. Please don't judge it that way.

ChaosVC
17-06-2010, 17:10
Your really wrong, out of the games I've seen played the change +1combat res was really helpful in winning. The old charge wouldn't be that good with the new combat rules anyways. Please don't judge it that way.

Haha, you are right that he is wrong to underestimate the importance of charging. But not the way you have just describe, the timing of deciding when to make contact with your oponent unit is especially important when you have only 6 turns to do it. +1 cr is a tiny advantage compared to the number of dice you will be rolling in the combat phase now.

Bac5665
17-06-2010, 17:22
The game is meant to be exciting, and that means being unpredictable. Nobody can win every battle, and changes to 8th just reinforce this principle. We will just have to accept that not even the best general can triumph on every battlefield, the gods of chance have put their foot down and decided that they will simply not allow it. So I'm going to just deal with it, make by sacrifices to the dice gods, and fight the best battle I can.

You say exciting, I say frustrating. I don't like random elements as a general rule. If warhammer could be diceless, I'd like that.

But if dice are going to be a part of the game, then I feel they are best used sparingly. That way only time dice come into play, its naturally tense and "exciting" because new and unusual. With every unit randomly charging, the gimmick will get old quick and be reduced to just a whim of the dice gods.

Obviously you feel differently, and more power to you, but I prefer a different feel to my games and 8E takes away from that.

LordBadgash
17-06-2010, 17:30
responding to the original poster;

I'm thinking the size/formation of your units will depend on what you want them to do.

For example, i might have 40 night goblins in 5x7 formation, if I want them to be stubborn and hold down an enemy unit until re-enforcements arrive. I might do this against an elite enemy unit. If I find that I need the night goblins to win a combat against a weaker opponent, I would reform the unit into Horde formation and go 10x4.

With my Orcs, I'm thinking 6x6 would be ideal, because if armed with 2 choppas, the unit would get 19 strength 4 attacks with a Boss, and also have enough ranks to be confident that they will be stubborn, should they lose combat.

Eternus
17-06-2010, 19:21
You say exciting, I say frustrating. I don't like random elements as a general rule. If warhammer could be diceless, I'd like that.

But if dice are going to be a part of the game, then I feel they are best used sparingly. That way only time dice come into play, its naturally tense and "exciting" because new and unusual. With every unit randomly charging, the gimmick will get old quick and be reduced to just a whim of the dice gods.

Obviously you feel differently, and more power to you, but I prefer a different feel to my games and 8E takes away from that.

That's fair enough, and thanks for continuing to respect my opinion. I do think that a balance between randomness and enough predictability to underpin a degree of strategy is what is important. All I say is that we have tried it the 7th Edition way, and it has generally worked that way for a long long time, so maybe a change will be good for the game as a whole - until we've got a few months worth of games under our belts, we're not going to know all of the implications of the changes.

I think we've got an interesting few months ahead of us.

Bac5665
17-06-2010, 19:31
That's fair enough, and thanks for continuing to respect my opinion. I do think that a balance between randomness and enough predictability to underpin a degree of strategy is what is important. All I say is that we have tried it the 7th Edition way, and it has generally worked that way for a long long time, so maybe a change will be good for the game as a whole - until we've got a few months worth of games under our belts, we're not going to know all of the implications of the changes.

I think we've got an interesting few months ahead of us.

I certainly agree that it will be interesting. And even fun :D

I'm just very afraid that it wont last, that the new rules will be less deep and will get boring. I could easily be wrong (as could any of us without having played several games).

Eternus
17-06-2010, 20:07
I certainly agree that it will be interesting. And even fun :D

I'm just very afraid that it wont last, that the new rules will be less deep and will get boring. I could easily be wrong (as could any of us without having played several games).

I'm sure that the introduction to the rules will include the ageless lines about how the rules are a starting point and how we as gamers can do with them as we please. If certain stuff did turn out to be pants, we could just mosey on back here and discuss some house rules.

Lets not jump the gun though.