View Full Version : Best Defensive Measure

29-03-2011, 05:20
Now, I know the game has different ways of mitigating damage to your units, some are magical and beyond the limits of most of the mundane troops out on the field.

So if you had to choose between a high WS, a high T, or a low AS, which would you choose, and why?

29-03-2011, 05:49
From those three options, I'd definitely take high T.

29-03-2011, 06:00
In general I like having a higher toughness than save.

29-03-2011, 06:14
Sorry but i have to go with the same answer. T is the best according to me

29-03-2011, 06:19
Toughness by a wide margin.

29-03-2011, 06:41
As a Beasts player, I'd rather toughness 4 on my Gor than say, 5+ Armour.

29-03-2011, 07:15
Definitely Toughness.

29-03-2011, 08:50
Much prefer T.

29-03-2011, 08:51
Is this question even worth asking?

T any day.

29-03-2011, 09:18
Toughness though not actually getting hit is tops!

29-03-2011, 09:25
Due to how the WS table works, and how easy it is to ignore or reduce armor, and how you're screwed if they use lore of metal against your chaos knights... High T all the way.

29-03-2011, 09:26
Ooh what a 'tough' question. :)

29-03-2011, 10:09
I vote for High WS. :shifty:

Nah...Toughness all the way. Too many things can ignore armour or affect "to hit" rolls.

vinny t
29-03-2011, 12:23
Well it dos depend on how low an AS we are talking. If its around 4+ I would probably take it rather than a toughhness increase from 3 to 4. If it's an T increase from 4 to 5 however, toughness all the way

29-03-2011, 12:31
I feel like I'm jumping on the band wagon, but it has to be toughness.

Weapon skill is (sadly) virtually a non-entity. Most of the time the difference is hitting on 3s or 4s. Hardly a massive difference.

I find it hilarious how much armour is just shunned nowadays. For instance, back when I used dwarfs, the combination of toughness and armour made them hard as nails. now they all seem to just have big hammers and axes and neglect armour.

The only time it's really worth having a high weaponskill is when you already have a high toughness. The two together are very good. Toughness on it's own is good. Weaponskill on it's own is... not so good. Armour... should be a ward save, or is too expensive (eg when choosing magic items, I'd much rather have a 4+ ward than 1+ armour).

29-03-2011, 14:06
If the armour save is a 2+ (or better) then armour.
If not, toughness.

29-03-2011, 14:51
Toughness. For my Razorgor vs Minotaurs, I can tell you that T 5 instead of T 4 has made all the difference in every game I've used them.

There are more ways of mitigating damage than those things, however.

29-03-2011, 15:17
Ask my High WS, Low AS, ASF, T3 High Elf BSB which he would prefer....

Toughness, in case you were wondering...

29-03-2011, 16:10
Toughness... Except against low str spammed poison attacks... Then I'd consider AS.

Wade Wilson
29-03-2011, 16:13

WS4 can still be hit on a 4+ by a WS3 unit.

But T4 is wounded on a 5+ by an S3 unit.

Its why night goblins with netters can be a sneaky nasty suprise.

A 1+ or 2+ save is fantastic but that high armour save comes at an often huge points cost.

With 'hatred' and so many re-roll to hit rules i reckon its the weaker of the defensive measures (unless you are WS10 and fighting an enemy WS4 or under with an extra -1 to hit)

29-03-2011, 18:23
In a general sense, definitely Toughness, but raw Toughness alone isn't all it's cracked up to be. I'd take good Toughness with a good armour and/or invulnerable save any day :D

My point being; Toughness is probably the best lone thing, but without other things to back it up it's not really enough.

29-03-2011, 19:20
WS has become more useful now as it's amortized out with the more attacks. Last edition paying 12 - 15 points for elite troops with high WS when 5 models can just roll bad was painful.

WS is the first wave to remove attacks. If you can vastly limit the number of hits on you, then actually wounding and saving is less an issue.

Toughness is still super important though. Being T4 or T5 is huge which I have noticed on my Great Bray-Shaman. So I may lean towards T but I still see WS play a big part in 8th ed.

Lord of Divine Slaughter
29-03-2011, 19:35
High M, WS and S is the way to go to avoid taking damage :)

29-03-2011, 19:42
High M, WS and S is the way to go to avoid taking damage :)

Best defense is a good offense, I like it ;)

29-03-2011, 19:55
I would also say Toughness but the attacking threat carried is also a factor.

For example, I notice that when fighting my Stegadons, 99% of the time people attack the T6 beast (3+ save, 6W) instead of the T3 character (2+ save, 2W).

29-03-2011, 21:21
id have to agree with the majority id prefer higher T. but for the low armour save depends really on how its being used if its light armour and shield onlt 5+ but in combat 5+ and 6+ ward and i think that might be better for combat. but vs missiles and magic T obv choice

29-03-2011, 21:37
Toughness. End of.
You cant force a save if you dont wound ^_^ , and to hit rolls are generally always a 4+ for troops etc.

29-03-2011, 22:08
A more interesting line of questioning, I imagine, would be:

How much armor is worth 1 point of toughness?

How much would a ward/regen save be worth?

What about a -1 to hit penalty for your opponent?

29-03-2011, 22:53
What xxRavenxx said.

Sure, 1 point of Toughness is the best option compared to 1 point of anything else.

What about 2 points of armour? 3?

Or more esoteric defences? There is an ogre tyrant build with -2 to hit which is considered very mean, even at the expense of an armour save.

Further, what would you rather have - T3 4+ armour or T4 with no armour? As compared to T6 4+ armour or T7 with no armour? There's a sliding scale of worth going on here.

29-03-2011, 23:05
Ok so if Toughness is best why are Hyppogriffs, Griffons, Manticors ect rarely used? I think it depends on where you start at.

If you have normal toughness, normal WS and a normal AS then:
Toughness is best (most everyone agrees)

If you have low toughness, low WS and a bad AS then:
Maybe Armor is better? Your dead anyway so who cares?

If you have high toughness, high WS and a good AS then:
More toughness is best? Or higher WS to get hit on 5+? Re-roll AS?

What would you give your Skink Priest to keep him alive (other than a 4+ Ward)?
What would make large target flying monsters useable?

29-03-2011, 23:39
Ok so if Toughness is best why are Hyppogriffs, Griffons, Manticors ect rarely used? I think it depends on where you start at.

Because 1) They don't have that high of a toughness, and 2) on top of them is a key character just waiting to take a cannon to the face.

Just think of the toughness 10 steam tank. If the only way to take one was as mount for your lord you wouldn't see them taken either, no matter what toughness it has.

29-03-2011, 23:54
Generally Toughness, but high Wounds isn't a bad thing either (in combination with other things, obviously).

30-03-2011, 00:02
Depends on base stats. T7? Rather take an AS than another point of T. T3? Would prefer a point of toughness.

So, for most "normal" things, toughness. For big gribblies that are already being wounded on 6s by the vast majority, a AS, maybe WS if yours is sufficiently high.

30-03-2011, 17:32
I vote for none. I'd rather have 50 t3 guys than 20 T 4 guys.

Oh how I love my skaven slaves ;)

30-03-2011, 18:12
I suppose theres the whole poison thing too since T offers no protection against it