PDA

View Full Version : 2 Trebuchets: Cheesy?



The Beast Walks Among Us
06-12-2010, 12:53
Hi guys, I'll be playing my first few games of 8th in a tournament in Jan., using Bretonnians. It seems that trebuchets are pretty awesome, perhaps overly so. Would you have a problem playing against 2 trebuchets? Thanks.

ColShaw
06-12-2010, 13:22
I hope not, because that's what I use when playing Brets. :)

Of course, I used them back in 7th, too, before they were cool.

Given all the artillery silliness that Skaven, Empire, or Dwarfs can unload, no, I would not have a problem playing against a 2-warmachine army.

Torpedo Vegas
06-12-2010, 13:30
The last game I played was against Dorfs, and the guy took 5 warmachines, so only taking two is fine by me.

scarletsquig
06-12-2010, 13:34
Not at all, in fact you'd be better off maxing out your rare with them.

Empire and Dwarf armies have access to even more brutal gear than a S5 stone thrower.

Bretonnians are not exactly powerful in 8th, they need all the help they can get.

SkawtheFalconer
06-12-2010, 13:54
WoC often take two Hellcannons. Plus, you'll be playing in a tourney, so expect to see more cheesy things than two Trebs!

Caitsidhe
06-12-2010, 14:18
There is no such thing as cheesy. You play to the strength of your army. Your opponents do the same. If you got it... flaunt it. I play WE and we don't have warmachines, but I'm sure I would use them if we did.

The Beast Walks Among Us
06-12-2010, 14:35
Thanks guys, I guess I can rest easy now!

sulla
06-12-2010, 23:04
I play against 2 hellcannons pretty regularly. If both hit in the first turn, it's usually game over for my elves. Even if one hits, it usually 'pick up your best unit and put them back in the box'. I imagine playing against 2 trebuchets is much the same, except that your opponent's war machine hunters at least have a chance of killing them on turn 2.

S5 templates are pretty broken in this edition, double rares are pretty much the same. You have a very powerful combo in 2 trebuchets. Expect some dirty looks and a couple of ruined games as a result of it.

theunwantedbeing
06-12-2010, 23:15
This falls under the category of just because you can, it doesn't mean you should.

Glen_Savet
06-12-2010, 23:20
If the tournament rules pack allows it, do it. Don't weaken your army at the expense of your possible victory just because you might ruin someones tournament chances. They'll be doing their best to ruin yours. (At least they should be, if they're serious about a tournament)

russellmoo
07-12-2010, 03:58
I actually don't use any treb's as I've found them to be too unreliable- they miss a whole lot- plus I like to first, or second turn charge- so I don't get to shoot much with them-

Any warmachine can be easily overcome and destroyed- if your playing against Skaven you might not even get to use them before the Skaven player takes them out- i.e. Stormbanner + Gutter runners-

With the overall debuffing of cavalry and scenarios like the Watchtower- anything goes for Bret's-

Korraz
07-12-2010, 07:27
You are playing Bretonnia, no?
Play the Trebs. Really. Your army got screwed at so many points, stuff like the Trebuchet is just fair.

Mullitron
07-12-2010, 07:39
For a tournament list its perfectly suitable in my opinion. One of the main objectives of the tournament is to compete with other players and come out on top, some of that will be determined by luck, some by skill and some by choosing a strong list and/or army.

I'am sure there will be people out there with lists stronger and weaker than yours, there's always a cheesier list than yours and some are often softer, but that's part of the fun of the tournament. :)

Two trebuchets are nasty and may be boring to play against on a regular basis with the same opponent over and over again,and I could understand why friends may ask you to not take it every game. However this is a tournament, time to bring out your big guns and do the best to win (whilst having fun of course)

Destruction2
07-12-2010, 08:44
my mate takes 3 trebs and they work really well for him, use them there great, i almost always have to try and take them out because my saurus blocks just disintigrate when they hit

oldschoolmonk
07-12-2010, 09:01
It has to depend more on your current gaming setting than our opinion. And Points values are an impact too, such as 2 trebs in 1000 points or two trebs in 2000 points.

They are a remarkably powerful war machine, and underpriced in the current rules. Because the Bretonni lances dont have the same impact I think having two trebuchets gives them options and the ability to win games that knights alone won't do. I say go for it, but do it for your own reasons instead of saying 'warseer says its fine'.

Keith_Lupton
07-12-2010, 09:25
I play O+G and i take 4 Spear Chukkas and a Rock Lobba. I get funny looks even though my warmachines are as reliable as a politician and people know this. You should play with whatever you want out of your army book. Its a tournie, people there will be using lists designed to win not to have fun. Some maybe but not all of them. I say go for it. these people at the events will have lists designed to take out warmachines anyway so i cant see the issue.

Snake1311
07-12-2010, 12:44
The last game I played was against Dorfs, and the guy took 5 warmachines, so only taking two is fine by me.

The guy took 5 out of a possible 11 in 2500 pts, not counting bolt throwers - so about half. You took 2 out of 2.




Empire and Dwarf armies have access to even more brutal gear than a S5 stone thrower.

Really? Empire mortars aren't any better than a trebuchet. Dwarf grudge throwers can be, but they are waaaaaaaaaaay more expensive if you want them as efficient. The trebuchet is one of the best war machines in the game atm.

Mind you, I'm in favour of you taking 2 trebuchets - its a tournament, you are meant to bring the best you can. Just don't let these deluded people convince you that you (and they) have a moral high ground.


Blay the Trebs. Really. Your army got screwed at so many points, stuff like the Trebuchet is just fair.

I agree that brets got hosed by the general rules. However, what they field is not in the power metagame, which means opponenets are generally not as efficient vs Brets as vs others - so Brets tend to perform better than you'd expect.

Pacorko
07-12-2010, 13:16
Well, it's in the rules stated as a clear "Yes, you can!" entry; so if it's a tourney, nevermind what others say. It's allowed and cheese is relative to the opponent in turn and his level of bias/inability to defeat certain elements.

I would not give you a hard time for your choices, that's for sure.

Teongpeng
07-12-2010, 15:09
if its something like the Flagellant congo line, its cheese. Else its not.

RanaldLoec
07-12-2010, 18:18
Empire mortars are much cheaper and only a special choice not a rare.

Zaonite
07-12-2010, 18:44
Trebuchets are amazing for their points and help thin out your enemies' units before your knights hit home.
I usually take two just in case one fails.

IMO; two in 3k is not cheesy... maybe in lists up to about 2k but yeah....

herald of kairos
07-12-2010, 18:59
No taking two trebs is not cheesey especially when you consider what hits we took with 8th and trebs are probably are way of compensating for this. and if you find anone in a tournament that says this is cheesey point them to the nearest empire or dwarf army as their likely to have twice as many warmachines as you

The Beast Walks Among Us
07-12-2010, 21:25
Thank you for all the input guys. I think I'm gonna email the tournament organizer and run it by him, just to gauge the overall power level of the tourney. If he's cool with 2 trebuchets in a Bret army, I'll probably go with it. More than ever, I feel like the traditional full-on frontal cavalry assault, which Brets used to do so well, isn't really viable any more. We need a way to 1) deal with large steadfast blocks, and 2) dictate enemy movement, which is where trebuchets and archers come in. Our other answer would be large, steadfast blocks of our own, namely men at arms. They're OK, but really a bit overpriced for their statline (compare to marauders or clanrats, for example).

Against low T, elite armies like elves, I can see how they could be seen as excessive and lead to unfun games, which was the main reason for my original question. But, going second as Brets usually do, against a good opponent, I should only get one shot off before warmachine hunters get there. So, I guess the best answer is that I need to do some playtesting, and if I find this build leads to unfun games, I'll have to mix it up.

Thanks again.

friendsofrhomb
08-12-2010, 01:58
I see trebuchets as one of the few still viable units in the bretonians, until a new army book arrives. Im in the same boat with my tomb kings, the only way for them to be competitive is to spam Sreaming skull catapults and bowmen. which makes for a very boring game.

scruffyryan
08-12-2010, 02:03
I play against someone with 2X trebuchets all the time, if people find it unfun to play against theyre really just looking for an easy win. 2 stone throwers will not ruin a game. People who take issue with it should really never ever face dwarves, tomb kings, or empire.

Snake1311
08-12-2010, 17:17
Empire mortars are much cheaper and only a special choice not a rare.

Much cheaper? lol


if its something like the Flagellant congo line, its cheese. Else its not.

So your point is that anything in the army composition is fine, but usage can be cheesy? I'd argue for the exact opposite to be honest.


No taking two trebs is not cheesey especially when you consider what hits we took with 8th and trebs are probably are way of compensating for this. and if you find anone in a tournament that says this is cheesey point them to the nearest empire or dwarf army as their likely to have twice as many warmachines as you

It's not that you have two warmachines; its that you have two of the most point-effective ones in the game. And saying 'X is UP so its fine that Y is OP' is a terrible arguement, becasue thats how minmaxing starts. And other armies designs is dependant on having warmacines (dwarfs for example - they need to output more ranged damage than the opponenet to force them to engage, otherwise the opponent can just sit around), wheres Brets aren't.

Awilla the Hun
08-12-2010, 18:57
I'm thinking of getting a second one, certainly, to bulk out the Red Guards to 2500 points. (Only mine isn't going to be a catapault, because I'm not going to built yet another one of those nightmares! No, it's going to shoot rockets! And propaganda leaflets! And hookers! No, wait, forget the rockets and propaganda...)

tezdal
10-12-2010, 02:22
Go for it, 8th neutered our cav, peasants still fairly crappy, why not throw rocks at em?

sulla
10-12-2010, 04:08
Go for it, 8th neutered our cav, peasants still fairly crappy, why not throw rocks at em?I see this a bit. How did 8th neuter Bret cav? On paper they look like the only cav that can break units on the charge, thanks to their ranks destroying steadfast in target units. Is this not how they work in practice?

Even your infantry looks ok. Crappy stats, but s4 and dirt cheap. They look like they should do ok in horde formation, 40-50-ish strong. Only a little over 250pts for 50. Same with the archers; 10 with a flag and flaming shots for 75-ish is decent enough too considering they only need to do a wound on a regen unit to strip away regen before the trebuchet swats them.

Your casters even look pretty well priced and have access to some of the better lores.

Does it not work out that way on the tabletop? Because they look pretty competitive on paper. (Genuine question; I haven't faced them in 8th but they look to have gained a bit from 7th to 8th. In 7th they were fairly outclassed by the powerful armies.)

Pointy Headed Elven Paladin
10-12-2010, 05:44
I see this a bit. How did 8th neuter Bret cav? On paper they look like the only cav that can break units on the charge, thanks to their ranks destroying steadfast in target units. Is this not how they work in practice?

Even your infantry looks ok. Crappy stats, but s4 and dirt cheap. They look like they should do ok in horde formation, 40-50-ish strong. Only a little over 250pts for 50. Same with the archers; 10 with a flag and flaming shots for 75-ish is decent enough too considering they only need to do a wound on a regen unit to strip away regen before the trebuchet swats them.

Your casters even look pretty well priced and have access to some of the better lores.

Does it not work out that way on the tabletop? Because they look pretty competitive on paper. (Genuine question; I haven't faced them in 8th but they look to have gained a bit from 7th to 8th. In 7th they were fairly outclassed by the powerful armies.)

I'm in the process of building a Bretonnian army and with what I've gathered with discussion from veteran players and reasearch this is what I've come with in terms of the army's effectiveness.

While Lance formations do get a boost from the recent changes in the FAQ the most KoTR & Errants get is 4 ranks & Grail/Questing Kinghts get 3 ranks which means most horde units they attack the kinghts won't be able to remove steadfast unless they hit it with multiple lance charges. Against smaller units they do fine.

Brets get beasts & life lores which IMO is pretty useful for an army that 50% mounted most of the time. I think the Bretonnian ladies could have better arcane items but this is coming from a player that's primarily plays high elf.

Dirt cheap road blocks for the M@A units are all I can really say about them. While they do have a 50% chance of hitting & 66% most troop types if the unit takes damage they get almost no chance to save and if no Knights are around their low LD they will almost be sure to break in combat. Also they tend to get hit with a lot of template based warmachines as well so they don't stick around for very long.

The Peasant Bowmen are much better selections to support the Knights in conjunction with the trebuchets. On their own they suffer the same issues as the M@A (low WS, high AS, & low Ld).

The trebuchets are probably the best supporting units in the army as they can help take down horde units before the knights go in to mop up.

R Man
10-12-2010, 05:58
Much cheaper? lol

15 points cheaper. That is quite a bit.


It's not that you have two warmachines; its that you have two of the most point-effective ones in the game. And saying 'X is UP so its fine that Y is OP' is a terrible arguement, becasue thats how minmaxing starts. And other armies designs is dependant on having warmacines (dwarfs for example - they need to output more ranged damage than the opponenet to force them to engage, otherwise the opponent can just sit around), wheres Brets aren't.

Point efficiency is not an issue due to the limitations. It doesn't matter much how good they are if they cannot be spammed there is a limit to how dangerous they can be unless they cost something ridiculous. Your own logic goes against you too. Brets need to break on the charge but with ranks giving stubborn this is unlikely to happen, therefore the Trebuchet is needed to to remove ranks to allow a charge to succeed. Just as much as Dwarves need firepower to bring the enemy close.

Darthvegeta800
10-12-2010, 10:00
15 points cheaper. That is quite a bit.



Point efficiency is not an issue due to the limitations. It doesn't matter much how good they are if they cannot be spammed there is a limit to how dangerous they can be unless they cost something ridiculous. Your own logic goes against you too. Brets need to break on the charge but with ranks giving stubborn this is unlikely to happen, therefore the Trebuchet is needed to to remove ranks to allow a charge to succeed. Just as much as Dwarves need firepower to bring the enemy close.


Agreed. I just don't see why some people keep implying it would be cheesy. 2 Trebs to make your army work (hopefully) OR play with a nerfed army that will limp through the tournament and probably be squished by any half decent powerbuild...

DigbyWeapon
10-12-2010, 10:08
Bretts have been screwed on hard as, feel no shame in 2 trebs.

Tymell
10-12-2010, 10:15
I don't see any problem with it, other armies have access to more than just two stone throwers. The treb is the only war machine Brets have anyway.

There's nothing wrong with taking things because you think they're good, even very good :) IMO it's only cheesiness when you start going mad with them or forming armies that don't really fit with the background just for in-game bonus.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 10:18
Agreed. I just don't see why some people keep implying it would be cheesy. 2 Trebs to make your army work (hopefully) OR play with a nerfed army that will limp through the tournament and probably be squished by any half decent powerbuild...

It's 90pts for a st5 template you put anywhere you like within 60" of the thing. Its the very definition of cheese if your taking more than one of them.

Tymell
10-12-2010, 10:46
It's 90pts for a st5 template you put anywhere you like within 60" of the thing. Its the very definition of cheese if your taking more than one of them.

Again, I'd argue there's a difference between taking something good (or even very good) and outright cheese, and people seem too keen to proclaim anything very good as cheese.

Context is important. Things will perform differently overall depending on the army they are part of, how they are used, and how many more than one there are.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 12:10
Again, I'd argue there's a difference between taking something good (or even very good) and outright cheese, and people seem too keen to proclaim anything very good as cheese.

What army do you use normally?

Tymell
10-12-2010, 12:46
What army do you use normally?

I collect Orcs & Goblins, Skaven, Dark Elves and Lizardmen.

Snake1311
10-12-2010, 15:32
What's that noise... that whining kind of noise? Is it the wind? If it is legal, it is fine. There is no such thing as cheese. There is just within the rules and outside the rules. I don't play Brets. I don't have access to the Trebuchet. I have taken my lumps from them... and yet... strangely... I don't have a problem with them. Why is that? Why does this strange whining noise not flow from my pie hole? Could it be that I understand that "cheese" is merely in the eye of the biased beholder and has no basis in fact. Could it be that I know that statements like:

"Unfair! Broken! Cheese!"

Are merely the battle cry of the inept?

A fair viewpoint, and one I agree with to some extent; but it does raise one question:

If you don't even want to attmept to understand what people view as 'cheese' and why, then why post in this thread? the title is clear enough.

Your point can be summarized as:

Q: Is X cheese? Yes/No
A: Cheese doesn't exist

which is a waste of time and doesn't help anyone


IMO it's only cheesiness when you start going mad with them or forming armies that don't really fit with the background just for in-game bonus.

Trebuchets are meant to be rare, as the knight's dogma seems to despise their very concept; they are also hard to make etc. So having two in an army is a very good example of what you just said. Its just as bad as 2 steam tanks really.

Korraz
10-12-2010, 16:05
It's 90pts for a st5 template you put anywhere you like within 60" of the thing.

That is in the rare slot, has a minimum range, can't move and is even more vulnerable than other warmachines. So, yeah.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 17:22
That is in the rare slot, has a minimum range, can't move and is even more vulnerable than other warmachines. So, yeah.

Min range is largely irrelevant, it's got a 60" max range and doesn't need line of sight to shoot and will be sitting well out of the way all game.

As for being more vulnerable...it can't move rather than is able to move upto 4" a turn, big deal. No war machine is going to be able to avoid a war machine hunter type unit.

Brets have those in abundance, peasants with bows are plenty good at taking down those things, and dirt cheap, and can sit between the trebuchet and the enemy and aren't in it's way at all.

For 5pts more than a hydra, you can throw two 3" st5 templates upto 60" across the board and potentially decimate any ranked unit they land on.

Two is cheese.
It's about the only cheese bretonnians have, but it's still cheese.

Tymell
10-12-2010, 17:37
Something being powerful doesn't make it cheese though. It's a powerful tool that can do a lot of damage, but the game is all about countering your opponent's strengths while trying to bring your own to bear.

It would only be cheese if you took a large number of them (of which 2 isn't) or if they were frighteningly cheap (which 90 pts isn't, maybe a bit on the cheap side, but not excessively so).

In short: your opponent has something dangerous in their army. Welcome to wargaming ;)

ColShaw
10-12-2010, 17:41
What I want to know is, why is it cheese all of a sudden? I mean, these weapons have been around a LONG time. I've had my Trebuchets since 2006. Is it just that you don't have to guess range anymore? Because a skilled veteran could guess ranges pretty reliably in the old days. I'm just confused as to why people are even asking about this now.

Razaan
10-12-2010, 17:41
Don't let anyone here convince you otherwise. Take two. Hell, take three if you can.

Everyone on this forum calls cheese on anything they don't like to go against.

Teclis, Power Scrolls, Book of Hoeth, Cupped Hands, Hell Pit Abominations.... you name it, someone on this forum has whined about it at some point. Hell, there's probably been a 3+ page whinefest thread about it.

My "friendly" environment is very competitive. I've played against all of the things I already mentioned and more. If it's in the book, it's a valid choice. People need to learn to deal with it.

If you are in a tournament, I can guarantee a very small minority, if any, of your opponents will ever look at their list and think, "hrm, this is too cheesy for a tournament setting... I don't want the cash prize THAT much". If it's a valid choice and it will help you win the tournament, take it.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 17:44
We have different definitions of cheese then.
I've made mine clear, whats yours?


What I want to know is, why is it cheese all of a sudden?

The rules have changed, that's why.
No more partials is a massive change, similarly it can fire indirectly now, these are both very big benefits to a machine that was simply "pretty good" in previous editions and has now bumped it into "cheese if you take more than one".

Rule changes often mean things get more, or less good.


Don't let anyone here convince you otherwise. Take two. Hell, take three if you can.

Everyone on this forum calls cheese on anything they don't like to go against.

That's what cheese is though.
Something powerful and not fun to play against.
Sure it's somewhat subjective, so what?

One person's cheese is another person's normal.
Doesn't mean that it isn't cheesy for some people.

Warhammer is a game.
Not an actual war where your life is at risk, so just because you can take something powerful, it doesn't mean you have to.

Don't be so damned immature.

Korraz
10-12-2010, 18:05
"Pretty good"? I've never seen a trebuchet in 7th. Everyone wanted the other rare-stuff.

Razaan
10-12-2010, 18:20
Don't be so damned immature.

In my defense here, I'm not the one complaining about things being too hard for me to handle.

Granted, you are right, I'm not at war. No one is really dying. But if I cried to my opponents about everything he had that posed a challenge to me, what's the point of playing? I'd hate to play against someone who didn't use their army book to its fullest potential just because I wanted to whine about how unfair it was.

The OP was asking about bringing 2 or more Trebuchets to a tournament. Not a friendly game, not a casual pick up at the gaming store. If it is considered "immature" for me to suggest he bring everything in his power to win that tournament, then I guess you play in different tournaments than I do.

Darthvegeta800
10-12-2010, 18:21
It's 90pts for a st5 template you put anywhere you like within 60" of the thing. Its the very definition of cheese if your taking more than one of them.


And what else can they take? They don't have a huge selection. Their man@arms are mediocre. Their Knights are no longer reliable as they once were. It isn't cheese if it makes your army perform average. Which is what Trebs do.

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 18:23
We have different definitions of cheese then. I've made mine clear, whats yours?

I beg to differ. I don't think your standards as to what exactly qualifies as "cheese" and what doesn't is very clear. I think it boils down to YOU don't like it. It seems unfair to YOU. Right now I'm rubbing my thumb and index finger together and playing you the world's smallest violin.


The rules have changed, that's why.
No more partials is a massive change, similarly it can fire indirectly now, these are both very big benefits to a machine that was simply "pretty good" in previous editions and has now bumped it into "cheese if you take more than one". Rule changes often mean things get more, or less good.

The rules have changed. There are more units that can get across the board to destroy Warmachines by the 2nd Turn (not just those that can fly) too. What's your point? Things change. This makes things different, not cheese.


That's what cheese is though.
Something powerful and not fun to play against.
Sure it's somewhat subjective, so what?

Ah, good. We agree. Your definition of "cheese" is whatever you personally don't like, i.e. what YOU don't have fun playing against. Your opponents owe you something? Your fun is more important than their fun? Do you let them disallow things from your list? :) When you arrive at the tournament do you show your list to them and say, "please tell me which units take away from your fun and I will NOT deploy them?" There are things I find difficult to fight (warmachines are among them) but it doesn't weigh in on my fun. Why is that? What is different about me and you?


One person's cheese is another person's normal.
Doesn't mean that it isn't cheesy for some people.
Warhammer is a game.
Not an actual war where your life is at risk, so just because you can take something powerful, it doesn't mean you have to.

There are so many logical fallacies in this bit that I don't know where to begin. I will point out that because this is just a GAME and that since no lives are actually lost to the warmachines... that there is no reason for the death and destruction they cause should cut into your fun.


Don't be so damned immature.

Oh... right. That is the difference between us. Maturity. In your corner we have someone who has anointed him/herself the authority on what is cheesy and what is not. We have someone who considers their own fun more important than their opponent's fun. In my corner you have a guy who simply plays by the rules and doesn't begrudge anyone else their models. When that Trebuchet takes out an entire unit of mine I wince and laugh. "Good one," I say. I don't make the face of a spoiled child and groan, "cheese." Which one of us was immature again. I want to make sure we define that the same too?

Herod
10-12-2010, 18:23
Go for 2.

They will scatter and misfire, and most armies will be equipped with some kind of countermeasure to remove at least one. I think they are a bargain points-wise, but in the context of the army are not going to push your army into the "ugh-rolling-eyes" zone. :)

H

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 18:33
In a tournament, it doesnt matter what you take provided its legal.

Out of a tournament, it's cheesy(for some) to have 2 at 2k(or less).

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 18:35
In a tournament, it doesnt matter what you take provided its legal.

Out of a tournament, it's cheesy(for some) to have 2 at 2k(or less).

Ok... why? Do you let people disallow things from your list in friendly games? What makes your fun of NOT HAVING TO FIGHT AGAINST that model... more important than their fun in WANTING TO USE said model?

Lord Inquisitor
10-12-2010, 18:39
What I want to know is, why is it cheese all of a sudden?

1. No more guessing
2. No more partials (massively more hits)
3. All stone throwers got downgraded to S9/S3. The Trebuchet remains at a whacking S10/S5, which is horrific.
4. People are taking infantry now in a big way, making stone throwers relatively more useful.

I dont think it's cheesy to take 2, now 4 in 3000 points is pushing it but it's not a soft option at all. The only saving grace is that brettonians don't get runes or engineers to increase accuracy.

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 18:48
1. No more guessing
2. No more partials (massively more hits)
3. All stone throwers got downgraded to S9/S3. The Trebuchet remains at a whacking S10/S5, which is horrific.

I agree that all of this above makes Warmachines more effective. I don't think it makes them cheese. I think the Trebuchet's S10/S5 is great for the Brets but all armies have something great. Hell, I'm a WE player and find how devastating my Treekin have become somewhat unsettling from time to time. Then I remind myself how pathetic most of my army is in close combat. :)


4. People are taking infantry now in a big way, making stone throwers relatively more useful.

I have heard this argument before and I take issue with it. If more people are choosing to take the big blocks of infantry, they are doing so of their own free will. They want the perks the big blocks give and are choosing to take the risk of making themselves a juicier target for warmachines and certain spells. In other words, #4 there doesn't apply as a +/- to whether or not warmachines (or the Trebuchet in particular) is cheesy.


I dont think it's cheesy to take 2, now 4 in 3000 points is pushing it but it's not a soft option at all. The only saving grace is that brettonians don't get runes or engineers to increase accuracy.

We agree here in everything but the (4) in 3K. I don't even find that cheesy. It has always been dirt cheap to silence a warmachine and as long as we all have the option of launching things to shut them down by the 2nd Turn (and usually less expensive than the Warmachine itself), I think the world will keep on turning. I do appreciate your well formulated thoughts and arguments. I don't have any issue with someone making the argument that Warmachines are better than they used to be. They are. Of course, lots of things are better than they used to be.

Lord Inquisitor
10-12-2010, 19:03
Well, it very much depends on what you mean by "cheesy."

I've seen 4 trebuchets in a brettonian army at the Ard Boyz semis, which was fine. The format of the competition is no-holds-barred-beardy-cheese, which is great fun. He's going up against other armies that have 4 hydra, double stank artillery battery or whatever and seemed positively tame. It was a great event and because everyone was laying down maximum cheese, noone blinked an eyelid.

If you're a tournament player "cheese" tends to be reserved for dirty tricks (teclis and 100 archers in a folding fortress with banner of the world dragon), and mere out-of-the-book units are merely "good" or "not".

Regular basement games however often use "cheese" to denote a particularly strong build, or a unit that is suspiciously good and is considered "unsportsmanlike" to field more than one (e.g. hydra, stank, etc).

Trebuchets can do horrific damage as can hellstorm rockets (which are more inaccurate but have engineers) and hellcannons. Okay, small template, but for 90 points? They're absolutely one of the best artillery pieces in the game, no doubt. The fact that the army book is generally somewhat underpowered is a big reason there's not more complaining about them.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 19:07
Ok... why?
Do you let people disallow things from your list in friendly games?
What makes your fun of NOT HAVING TO FIGHT AGAINST that model... more important than their fun in WANTING TO USE said model?[/QUOTE]

In a tournament, the object is to win and everyone else is expected to turn up with that same objective, you'll not have enough games to properly guage everyone elses skill and army preferance so your safest bet is to go for the nastiest cheesiest list you can, as that's what everyone else will be attempting to do.


Do you let people disallow things from your list in friendly games?

Yes, I do let people disallow things I would otherwise field.
My opponents enjoyment of the game is important to me as a gamer because otherwise, they won't want to play against me again will they?


What makes your fun of NOT HAVING TO FIGHT AGAINST that model... more important than their fun in WANTING TO USE said model?

What makes their "fun" of using their "cheesy" army more important than their opponents "fun" of not having to play against a "cheesy" army?

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 19:36
Well, it very much depends on what you mean by "cheesy."

In fairness, I don't hold with the term "cheesy" in any format. To me there is only legal or not legal.


I've seen 4 trebuchets in a brettonian army at the Ard Boyz semis, which was fine. The format of the competition is no-holds-barred-beardy-cheese, which is great fun. He's going up against other armies that have 4 hydra, double stank artillery battery or whatever and seemed positively tame. It was a great event and because everyone was laying down maximum cheese, noone blinked an eyelid.

I suppose my different way of looking at this is that ALL of our games are friendly, i.e. we have fun and get along. In my area, competitive is not at odds with fun. We play all our games to win. That is the point, to give your opponent your best. We play to win, want to win, but we have a good time even when we don't.


Regular basement games however often use "cheese" to denote a particularly strong build, or a unit that is suspiciously good and is considered "unsportsmanlike" to field more than one (e.g. hydra, stank, etc).

Strong builds are not considered unsportsmanlike in my area. It is generally assumed that someone is going to play their better models and pass on the worthless ones.


Trebuchets can do horrific damage as can hellstorm rockets (which are more inaccurate but have engineers) and hellcannons. Okay, small template, but for 90 points? They're absolutely one of the best artillery pieces in the game, no doubt. The fact that the army book is generally somewhat underpowered is a big reason there's not more complaining about them.

Some people do love to complain. To me, complaints sound like excuses, like someone simply can't take responsibility for their own failures. "I only lost because of his cheesy list!" The implication is, of course, that the other players is somehow inferior. We lie best when we lie to ourselves. When the other guy/gal beats me... they beat me. I lost. It was my own damn fault.

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 19:46
In a tournament, the object is to win and everyone else is expected to turn up with that same objective, you'll not have enough games to properly guage everyone elses skill and army preferance so your safest bet is to go for the nastiest cheesiest list you can, as that's what everyone else will be attempting to do.

I hate to break it to you but the object is always to win, tournament or not. It is a competitive game. That is why there are dice. That is why there are win conditions. It is why we keep score. The point is to show up with a well built list regardless. The safest bet is always to have the best list you can put on the table. In this regards, Warhammer is no different from any other competitive game.


Yes, I do let people disallow things I would otherwise field.
My opponents enjoyment of the game is important to me as a gamer because otherwise, they won't want to play against me again will they?

So you show up with your list, hand it to them, and they mark off what you can't play? :) For starters, I don't believe you. But let's go ahead and play devil's advocate and say I did. Why would having a tough game make it an unfun game? If winning isn't that important to you, and your opponent's fun is important to you, why not let him play whatever he wanted? I'm sure he will have lots of fun dropping stones on you. It sounds to me like winning IS important to you, so important that anything which makes the game "hard" is unacceptable. The problem you have in making your arguments is you claim to care about he other opponent but what you keep coming back to is only caring about yourself. If you feel the need to exclude (or ridicule) someone else's models on the basis that they make it difficult for you to win, it means you have equated winning with fun.


What makes their "fun" of using their "cheesy" army more important than their opponents "fun" of not having to play against a "cheesy" army?

The rules. That is the difference. The rules state what can and cannot be used in the game. By showing up at the game you are agreeing to play by the rules. To do it with a whine and a cheese song makes you a passive aggressive snot. The rules dictate what can and cannot be used, period. The rules are a contract between players. The fun is in the game, the competition, and the time well spent. Someone is going to win. Someone is going to lose. The rules and your wits dictate who. Your behavior and attitude is personal, however, and only you dictate that.

Razaan
10-12-2010, 19:52
Yes, I do let people disallow things I would otherwise field.
My opponents enjoyment of the game is important to me as a gamer because otherwise, they won't want to play against me again will they?


At what point would you draw the line? I have no idea what army you play, so I can't reliably draw a comparison. But if I removed every unit from my army list that my opponents felt were overpowered, I'd be stuck fielding an army of Night Runners and Giant Rats led by a Chieftain.

I've played against the "cheesiest" lists out there, from Teclis, Slaan, The Book of Hoeth casting Purple Suns and Dweller's Below to Empire warmachines and hordes of chaos warriors. I've yet to run into anything that is as overpowered as people like to think they are.

From my experiences, all of the "overpowered" whining is founded from that "one time" game where they got their asses handed to them on some fluke.

I've seen pages and pages of posts about my Hellpit Abomination being over powered. People were saying they've lost friends over them in casual games!!! In reality, one time I've seen it smoke my opponent. The rest, he usually randomly scatters off the table, can't roll anything but feed on the attacks or dies to a cannon in the first turn.

I've played against a Trebuchet list on several occasions. They are hardly so overpowered that they make the Brets an unbeatable army... in any allowed quantities.

Tech Hazard
10-12-2010, 19:53
Short answer: No
Long answer: Nope

owen matthew
10-12-2010, 20:05
In my defense here, I'm not the one complaining about things being too hard for me to handle.

I don't even play fantasy, and am just reading up on possible armys to get into, this thread took an uninteresting turn pretty quickly but... This comment is 100,000% Pure truth IMHO!

Reading Fantasy threads are just like reading 40K ones!

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 20:15
I hate to break it to you but the object is always to win, tournament or not.

There I was thinking the object was always for both players to have fun.
Silly me, I shall consider myself told.


They are hardly so overpowered that they make the Brets an unbeatable army... in any allowed quantities.

Who said 2 trebuchet's makes a bretonnian army unbeatable?
They're just not massively fun to play against on account of being st5 templates that can be lobbed from really really far away.
Cheese is something powerful (which they are) and not fun to play against (which they arent).

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 20:16
I don't even play fantasy, and am just reading up on possible armys to get into, this thread took an uninteresting turn pretty quickly but... This comment is 100,000% Pure truth IMHO!

Reading Fantasy threads are just like reading 40K ones!

Pretty much. :) I play Fantasy and 40K. Both are fun. You should get into it. Be brave. Jump into the currently weaker Wood Elves with me. Learn on (and to win) with that army and you will be a beast. Then when we finally get a new book (and a bit of the power creep), you will be an unbeatable beast. :) Advice I always give new players is NOT to go to the simple armies. You can learn the faster but faster isn't better.

shelfunit.
10-12-2010, 20:23
There I was thinking the object was always for both players to have fun.
Silly me, I shall consider myself told.

The object of the game is to win, but the point of the game is to have fun.

If you are playing in a tournament then why hamstring yourself? If you have the option to, then take them - there is no point martyring yourself to the "fun police" who seemingly wish that a draw was the best result available :rolleyes:

scruffyryan
10-12-2010, 20:46
I usually have more fun when my opponent takes the toughest things he can in his list...i just feel uncomfortable and awkward when im playing against someone who fields a sub par unit that breaks and gets overrun.

Razaan
10-12-2010, 21:02
I have this feeling that the thread has been derailed and is no longer pertinent to the original question.

I don't think anyone here has said not to take whatever units it takes to win a tournament, assuming your goal is to win the tournament.

So to answer the OP's question again. Yes, take whatever is allowed if you think it will increase your odds. I wouldn't worry about being cheesy, as we've obviously demonstrated here that "cheesy" varies based on how much your opponent likes to whine.

Good luck in your tournament. I hope your Trebuchets perform well!

R Man
10-12-2010, 21:28
Who said 2 trebuchet's makes a bretonnian army unbeatable?
They're just not massively fun to play against on account of being st5 templates that can be lobbed from really really far away.
Cheese is something powerful (which they are) and not fun to play against (which they arent).

So would you say Mortars are broken? They are not as powerful, but they are cheaper, use a large blast and are only special choices.

And you talk about fun, but it wasn't fun for orcs when they couldn't win games. It hasn't been fun for Tomb Kings either. Why should it be fun for the Bretonnians to struggle to win games?

And so what if Trebuchets damage the new infantry blocks so badly. The new infantry blocks got a massive boost especially against cavalry which is the Bretonnian mainstay. They are more flexible, get more benefit out of being large and can charge further. How can the Bretonnians be expected to defeat these ginormous blocks of stubborn troops without something to weaken them?

Korraz
10-12-2010, 22:15
Somebody is very very ******** by lobbed rocks there.
Trebuchets never struck me as very unfun to play against. At least, not more than the Scraplauncher or Grudge Thrower plates squishing my infantry in 7th or the hails of cannon balls or bolts smashing through my ogres. And even that is somewhat funny.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2010, 22:20
If you struggle with Bretonnians, you suck at Warhammer.
Especially if you feel you need trebuchet's to even be half competitive.

Psygon
11-12-2010, 00:01
If you struggle with Bretonnians, you suck at Warhammer.
Especially if you feel you need trebuchet's to even be half competitive.

You are kinda right about that. Bad dice rolls (in the area of armor and ward saves) can definitely send you down the garden path, so can no-saves-allowed attacks, but otherwise, you can be set to draw games pretty easily. Of course, this is a bit of an over-simplication.

Bergen Beerbelly
11-12-2010, 18:09
I take as many Dwarf artillery pieces as I can so I see no problem with Brettonians taking Trebuchets or anything else in their army as long as it's legal.

While you are not actually at war you are simulating war. What General in his right mind wouldn't take whatever he has at his disposal to win the war?

War isn't pretty. If it hurts your delicate feelings for your opponent to take a few Trebuchets to kill your army then you shouldn't have chosen to go to war against him.

And since when has it ever been the responsibility of a person to make sure his opponent is having fun, especially in a tournament setting? It's your responsibility to have your own fun. If you aren't having fun, it's not up to your opponent to make it fun for you, it's up to you. And if you aren't having fun then why are you bothering to play the game at all?

russellmoo
11-12-2010, 22:33
Players should try to have fun, however, it is the responsibility of everyone who plays a game to avoid certain things that make the game unenjoyable- "like taunting, or pointing out a player's poor paint job" these things are almost universally unpleasant-

The question is- are there certain types of builds, units, models, items that make this game less or more fun-

The problem is this seems to be more a matter of taste than anything else-

R Man
11-12-2010, 22:40
If you struggle with Bretonnians, you suck at Warhammer.
Especially if you feel you need trebuchet's to even be half competitive.

And yet it is acceptable for Dwarves to have these things because they need them for their armies to work?

Or Empire?

Or Skaven?

Is this stand against artillery in General that just happens to be on a Bret thread. Or is this against Bretonnians having artillery?

puckus10
11-12-2010, 22:47
And you talk about fun, but it wasn't fun for orcs when they couldn't win games. It hasn't been fun for Tomb Kings either. Why should it be fun for the Bretonnians to struggle to win games?



This is funny because your talking about a struggling army and I play wood elves. ;)

sulla
12-12-2010, 05:10
Is this stand against artillery in General that just happens to be on a Bret thread. Or is this against Bretonnians having artillery?There are two types of war machine that are exceptional value for their points in 8th edition; cannons and high strength stone throwers.

Most players with access to either will maximise them in their lists. If you are the sort of player who practices self restraint in army building, you probably should be looking for alternatives. In a tournament setting anything probably goes. In a more friendly setting, taking these in large numbers forces your opponents to abandon ranked infantry and high value single models; probably in favour of massed war machine hunters, shooters and magic. In other words, gunlines with certain war machines are powerful enough to force other armies to gravitate towards gunlines/magiclines themselves. This is pretty much what happened in 6th edition, before 7th edition army lists like VC, daemons and DE came out that were powerful enough to make them irrelevant.

In short, one of the weaknesses of the warhammer system is that it allows too much of a good thing, be it double hydras, maxed dwarven war machines, double trebuchets or whatever. It would work a lot better if you couldn't duplicate specials or rares (although it would punish those specials and rares that are overpriced/underpowered, like spawn or goblin chariots).

Psygon
12-12-2010, 05:20
In short, one of the weaknesses of the warhammer system is that it allows too much of a good thing, be it double hydras, maxed dwarven war machines, double trebuchets or whatever. It would work a lot better if you couldn't duplicate specials or rares (although it would punish those specials and rares that are overpriced/underpowered, like spawn or goblin chariots).

Ah, the 0-1 restrictions! They are currently the bane of my existence when writing Bretonnian lists. It certainly would have been a smart choice for Games Workshop to include such a thing on the Amendment/Eratta release. One can wonder how 7th edition would have been with such restrictions on units like the Hell Pit Abomination, Hydra, or Steamtank. The funny thing is, the one Bretionnian rare choice that many would say now deserves a 0-1 restriction does not have it; the poor grail knights have it instead.

Torpedo Vegas
12-12-2010, 05:21
Go for it, 8th neutered our cav, peasants still fairly crappy, why not throw rocks at em?
In all my games of 8th, when I used Bretts, the lance was our saving grace. Cutting straight through Skaven and elves like butter. Admittedly, I've only managed to play like 3 games with them in 8th, but I won all three,and my knights kicked ass.

scruffyryan
12-12-2010, 05:39
I've faced brets a bunch and frankly the ability to hero/lord boat a lance formation dramatically beats out trebs as far as things that are kind of unfun to play against are concerned.

Trebuchets misfire, they scatter, they do amazing damage IF they land well, but if someone taking 2 trebuchets is such a difficulty to overcome, you are bad at this game and its not your opponents fault. 2 stone throwers are not that much of a swing in the battle. 2 trebs isnt even in the near REALM of things that should be considered cheesy about this game when held up against grudge throwers, hydra spam, stank spam , the unkillable DE lord, Teclis in the 2nd rank, a fully kitted out slaan, chameleon skinks vs a shooty army, the new skavenslave shooting scatter rules, HPA spam, fight my artillery + quarrelers with great weapons, hey look t1 3+wardsave tzeentch chosen, Demon leadership sapping + terror...the list goes on and on.

Gotrek
12-12-2010, 11:06
i play dwarfs with 3 runed up grudgethrowers, 2 cannons and an organ gun supported but 2x30 wrriors with GW and a nice unit of hammerers. my GTs can all reroll scatter and at least 1 missfire per turn from the master engineer standing next to them and both my cannons can reroll missfires. i belive any bret army that has any hope to be competitive needs 2 trebs so i'd be more offended if my oponent didn't take them and didn't even try to make the battle interesting before i smear him on the battlefield with my firepower before he even reaches me.

Haravikk
12-12-2010, 12:22
Bretonnian Knights weren't hit as hard as other cavalry, but suitably cavalry heavy Bretonnian armies are still going have a tough time dealing with the big blocks of infantry that are springing up everywhere.

The way I see it the Trebuchet is the perfect way to soften up those infantry blocks before the knights do their work, so unless you have a huge amount of Men at Arms and Peasant Bowmen then taking one is pretty much a must, and taking two is just levelling the playing field (balance-wise, not smashing it to bits :D).

So no, while the Trebuchet is an amazing war machine for 90 points, I don't think it's cheesy considering the limitations of the army and the current challenges that it faces. I'm not saying that a Bretonnian player needs Trebuchets to win, but as far as choices go they're a very solid one as they work perfectly with your knights by smashing up infantry blocks before you try to wipe them out with a combined charge.

russellmoo
13-12-2010, 04:17
scruffyryan has it right here- character boating and hero spam- are much more problematic than dual trebuchets-

PeG
13-12-2010, 09:45
I havent yet played against trebs in 8th but I have played and watched a number of games against multiple mortars and must say that I am not impressed with what I have seen so far. When they play against anything else then horde armies they usually miss more times then they hit. S3 or 5 doesnt matter unless you actually hit something.

If you are lucky with a treb you can devastate a unit but in other games it will do nothing. Also the actual cost is higher then only the treb itself. It also needs a babysitter or it will die to scouts, fast cav etc in turn 1-2 of the game.

Finally if they are within LOS they are easy targets for a number of spells from the new lores.

yarrickson
13-12-2010, 14:00
I have four..... this is still not cheesy and I will explain why.
1. When your shooting phase otherwise consists only of s3 longbows you really do need something to strip ranks prior to charging.
2. The law of diminishing returns. More you take the more misfires you will roll.
3. War machines are ridiculously easy to kill with all the initiative test spells and other general nastiness that's floating around now.
4. It's only fair. You can down whatever monstrosity is in your book. This edition id fantasy is a much more even playing field than at any other time I can recall.

yarrickson
13-12-2010, 14:01
I have four..... this is still not cheesy and I will explain why.
1. When your shooting phase otherwise consists only of s3 longbows you really do need something to strip ranks prior to charging.
2. The law of diminishing returns. More you take the more misfires you will roll.
3. War machines are ridiculously easy to kill with all the initiative test spells and other general nastiness that's floating around now.
4. It's only fair. You can spam whatever monstrosity is in your book. This edition id fantasy is a much more even playing field than at any other time I can recall.

Snake1311
13-12-2010, 16:42
I have four..... this is still not cheesy and I will explain why.
1. When your shooting phase otherwise consists only of s3 longbows you really do need something to strip ranks prior to charging.
2. The law of diminishing returns. More you take the more misfires you will roll.
3. War machines are ridiculously easy to kill with all the initiative test spells and other general nastiness that's floating around now.
4. It's only fair. You can spam whatever monstrosity is in your book. This edition id fantasy is a much more even playing field than at any other time I can recall.

1. When your army isn't supposed to be strong at range, it shouldn't be getting awesome warmachines (and also good archers, but lets leave that for now) for dirt cheap. By your logic VC should have a S5 large template warmachine for the same cost because they dont have ANY other shooting? Warhammer works on a different principle I'm afraid - you pay more for atypical things. E.g. I pay 140 pts for a gyrocopter, when any other army would lol at anything approaching 100 for the same thing.

2. You don't understand the law of dinishing returns. It doesn't work like that. On the contrary, more warmachines improve exponentially, since at least one will hit that unit that really has to die.

3. War machines aren't easy to kill becasue they are far away; and after everything is in CC it doesn't really matter if they're alive or not.

4. This just proves its cheese - cheese vs cheese to be speciifc.

Caitsidhe
13-12-2010, 20:12
1. When your army isn't supposed to be strong at range, it shouldn't be getting awesome warmachines (and also good archers, but lets leave that for now) for dirt cheap. By your logic VC should have a S5 large template warmachine for the same cost because they dont have ANY other shooting? Warhammer works on a different principle I'm afraid - you pay more for atypical things. E.g. I pay 140 pts for a gyrocopter, when any other army would lol at anything approaching 100 for the same thing.

Who says his army isn't supposed to be good at ranged? You? I'm afraid your opinion doesn't matter. Games Workshop doesn't require your vote. :) Games Workshop has provided this army a cheap, somewhat effective warmachine. They have also altered their rules so more of them can be taken. This means they clearly do want this army to be able to do EXACTLY what is possible with the warmachine in question.


4. This just proves its cheese - cheese vs cheese to be speciifc

No. Your comments haven't proven anything other than the fact that you are one of "those" people who like to complain about the lists of others and have adopted the term "cheese" for anything you don't like.

R Man
13-12-2010, 20:27
1. When your army isn't supposed to be strong at range, it shouldn't be getting awesome warmachines (and also good archers, but lets leave that for now) for dirt cheap. By your logic VC should have a S5 large template warmachine for the same cost because they dont have ANY other shooting? Warhammer works on a different principle I'm afraid - you pay more for atypical things. E.g. I pay 140 pts for a gyrocopter, when any other army would lol at anything approaching 100 for the same thing.

Well undead do have some benefits all to themselves like the Lore of Necromancy and having everything cause fear. However some would argue that the undead should have some missile power. And I disagree that the unusual is charged for. You pay so much for a gyrocopter because in the last edition march blocking was absurdly powerful when your had 8 other war machines. Maybe the new tamplate rules balance this out. If not then gyrocopters are entitled to a buff, or a discount.


2. You don't understand the law of dinishing returns. It doesn't work like that. On the contrary, more warmachines improve exponentially, since at least one will hit that unit that really has to die.

Except that we can only have two (unless playing with a Grand Army). As a result the law doesn't come into play very strongly.


3. War machines aren't easy to kill becasue they are far away; and after everything is in CC it doesn't really matter if they're alive or not.

How big is your table? I would seriously doubt that a flier or unit of fast cavalry would take more than 2 turns to get there.


4. This just proves its cheese - cheese vs cheese to be speciifc.

So you admit it's true? If so, would you complain about their cheese? Why is, in a cheese on cheese situation, one form of cheese different from another?

Ultimately Trebs are not cheese. The exact same strategies that work on all artillery will work on Trebuchets. Their potential power is capped by their limited number and the fact that they need to be combined with expensive knights to win.

Darthvegeta800
20-12-2010, 11:13
I don't even play fantasy, and am just reading up on possible armys to get into, this thread took an uninteresting turn pretty quickly but... This comment is 100,000% Pure truth IMHO!

Reading Fantasy threads are just like reading 40K ones!

On a secondary note, this person deserves 100 cookies.
The fantasy community has a lot of members proclaiming superior tactical insight, maturity etc but frankly i see no difference between fantasy or 40K players in behaviour. Equally capable of the + and the - .

arthurfallz
23-12-2010, 17:31
As a Bret player I can say we have to work with what we have. The archery isn't weak, but it certainly isn't what I would call strong. Our Trebuchet gives us some ability to try and crush units hiding in the backfield or to move units forward to be hit by our charging knights. 180 points seems like a good deal until it's assaulted; then it's smoke and dust.