PDA

View Full Version : Where is Warhammer Won and Lost?



Jadawin
19-07-2012, 14:38
In everyones experience when would you say the majority of your games are won and lost? To put it another way when you have played a game what area do you most often look back on and think, "damn shouldn't/ should have done x,y,z.

I know the choices are a bit simplistic but, in general what does everyone think?

My own opinion is that Deployment is key, even with the increased movement/reduced effect of terrain I believe that if you make a serious mistake in deployment you will be up against it straight away.

danny-d-b
19-07-2012, 14:44
depends on the army

A quick army (brets) might not be as dammaged by a bad deployement as it would by bad movement phase or a bad combat phase
A lizard man army or HE with a load of points tied up in magic might be dammaged by a poor magic phase turn 2 or 3
A gunline Dwarf army or empire army isn't going to be dammaged bad movement phase, as it is a bad shooting phase

Oogie boogie boss
19-07-2012, 15:21
I agree that for different armies and list different phases can be more important, but in my experience the game is won or lost in combat about 90% of the time.

Malorian
19-07-2012, 15:25
Absolutely it's close combat.

Other aspects like deployment and magic can effect combat, but in the end combat is the part of the game where the majority of the points are gained and lost. Make a list that dominates in combat and you will dominate most of your games.

IcedCrow
19-07-2012, 15:29
IMO - list building. Distil a list down to its numbers, and a stronger list will have huge advantages over a weaker list. (It's not a guarantee but most often if two lists are not near each other in power level you can tell who is going to win).

As such I say list building is the predominant area where the game is won and lost. After that, given two fairly even lists, it comes down to the combat phase. The magic phase is great but not a given, and the combat phase has more predictable outcomes as opposed to the magic phase which depends on you getting the spell off.

MOMUS
19-07-2012, 16:23
Althougth I agree with Malorian in theory, for me its still deployment. Deployment for me changes how the battle will flow, it will dictate whether your units will actually play a part in the game, be crushed mercilessly or isolated and peppered with shooting. :evilgrin:

Ratarsed
19-07-2012, 17:19
I find deployment, Movement and close combat to be the areas I most associate with victories or defeats. However it must be noted that magic can be a big influence on close combat so can not be ignored and shooting can take out/weaken threats before close combat so that cannot be ignored either! I had to vote for "It's the dice damnit!" because I often find victories and defeats creep up on me without me noticing until that moment of "Wow! That's worked out better/worse than I expected!"

Djekar
19-07-2012, 17:35
I said movement, I find movement the lynch-pin that everything else orbits. Only slightly less important in my mind are list building and deployment.

Jind_Singh
19-07-2012, 18:07
After playing so many tournament events were I see COUNTLESS players bring on their 'A' game list I can say that's all in the...


Deployment and Movement!


List's mean diddly squat - if you can move better and deploy better than the opponent your laughing all the way to Turn 6.


Now some may argue that combat is were it's all at - but I disagree as combat is dictated by match-up - and if you're letting that 40 Bloodletter horde hit your main units then you deserve to lose! Forcing the combats you want, stacking the odds in your favor - these are the true traits of beating your opponent.



List building/army selection

As stated while list building is important it's no were near being the 'be all and end all' as a good list on it's own means P-Diddy squat!! I've seen people take solid lists and still not do well in their games, and then they move on to a new army list chasing the elusive dream! If the hobby was down to just list building no one would be playing!!!

It's like a sharp sword - having a sharp sword won't mean your going to win the duel - doesn't matter how shiny or sharp it is - if the other duelist is better than you, you got no chance!

Deployment

Deployment used to be CRUCIAL just due to the fact it took so long to redeploy your forces once the game was underway - march blocking, terrain - all this would slow the game down to a crawl. But now with swift reforms and leadership tests to get round this...

Not to mention 2 of the 6 games force random deployments!! Meeting engagement - on a 1 the unit won't even deploy on the board, and dawn attack - yet you can still, easily, win those 2 games so deployment is no longer the 'be all and end all' that it was!!!

Movement Phase

THIS is the new King of the 8th ed! With random charges, terrain effects, swift reforms, new unit formations such as hording, the movement phase dictates the game - it allows you to set up the fights you want to fight, bring over whelming force to a part of the field, it's were you leave your opponent second guessing your intentions!

Point in case - got my Giant and Squig Hoppers poise to flank a unit of Chaos warriors - he reformed to face me thinking I was fully intent on charging him but I just ran my 2 units down the side and hid BESIDE him!!! Running circles around the enemy is were it's at! Depending on how you move your units also dictates how the game will treat you - as the more dice rolls you either force your opponent to make, or you have to make, the more chance they will fail those dice rolls sooner or later - but movement - it's a mechanical action you have full control over!

Magic phase

Magic is, and always has been, a VERY important phase of the game - and if anything is even better now with crazy spells! I've won games from the magic phase, that's for sure - like one time my butt was being handed to me by Thorek, his Anvil, and a static dwarf gunline with about a million warmachines - only for my level 4 Shaman throwing Curse of the Bad Moon DOWN the dwarf line - and wiped out 2/3 of each of his units!!

This allowed my shattered remains of the Goblin army to overcome the hated stunty - in the end of the game he had just 11 models alive!!!

BUT then there are the games were I miscast 1st spell of the game and DIE! Or fail to cast - or just poison myself with mushrooms!


Last week there was the game I took just a single Warrior Priest and had no magic phase so to speak.

So while magic is powerful, and while it does take a really skilled magic user to effectively make the most of each and every magic phase games are not solely determined by the magic phase. It reminds me of the phase...

"Money isn't everything - but it sure does help!"

Same goes for the Magic Phase....

Shooting

Been there, done that - can anyone even remember a gun line army dominating the game? It's wasted - with the speed in which we see combat now the shooting phase along is not were this game is won and lost - as there LOTS of armies out there that don't even HAVE a shooting phase - yet they do well.

Granted armies with strong shooting, Dark Elves for e.g. can make your game turn a living hell - but it's not really why you lose those games - OR WIN THEM!

Close combat

Well of COURSE CC is were it's at - the game's called WARHAMMER for Petes Sake!! But to say games are won or lost on close combat is over simplifying the facts - WHY did you lose that combat? Didn't you know that the horde of bloodletters was going to mash through your unit of Gnoblars?

Pick the fights that you want, and grit your teeth for the ones that are forced upon you. And then hope you roll well....

At the very fundamental level Warhammer is won on close combat, each and every game, but the events that lead up to the close combat are MORE CRUCIAL:

- Did you flank the enemy to prevent them from hitting back as effectively?
- Was you able to catch the enemy unit in a place were you could bring on an extra advantage? (For e.g. when I was able to squeeze by 2 Hydras to flank charge a unit of Dark Elf Spearmen with their unkillable level 4 INSIDE a forest! Because I won the combat and they were not steadfast I was able to run them down!!
- Are you going to be able to hold the line for one round of combat so you can then bring in the big hitters NEXT turn?
- Are you fining favorable match-ups for your blocks?

All of the above come from the movement phase!


Its the dice dammit!!!

Well of course it's the dice dammit! Dice based game means you need the right numbers to pop on the D6 to win - otherwise we'd all play paintball instead!!

But you rarely lose to bad luck - bad luck is just saying that you HAD to get a certain result to win - which means you only had one option to make that win - but really you should be trying to position your units in a way were you can force the other person to roll more dice than you - because the more dice you roll the more chances you have of failing!!

I lost a game the other day as I had stupidly ignored the threat of my flank collapsing by failing 2 leadership 8 tests! As a result as the game drew on I was unable to stop my opponent from moving down the flank and throwing my units around - Even with re-rolls you're going to fail leadership sooner or later.

So make the enemy player roll more dice than you have to and sooner or later things will even out and come back your way.



Of course all of the above is a personal view and represents MY own experience of playing Warhammer!

Pavisel
19-07-2012, 18:33
^ this, totally agree. movement is where it's at for current HE list. a block of spears to give the enemy something to chew on, with Phoenix guard to back 'em up. archers chill in back, raining shots as they please. But the action comes from my dragon princes and their carnosaur (we use bound monster rules :D) running around you flank, while my ellyrion reavers run down the other flank, bypass it, and hit you in the rear! hooray movement! my enemies neve seem ready for it, tho I've been playing this way for the last few months.

as awesome as all that is, I tend to lose due to my own forgetfulness - oops, totally skipped the magic phase, forgot about a special rule that would have saved half my unit, didn't think ahead for my opponent's move that could counter mine... But when I play right, it's great!

TheDungen
19-07-2012, 20:05
I agree, combat is just a couple of random rolls that can to some extent be predicted. Chosing which combats to fight and how to fight them is movement and thus movement is the important part. Deployment is what you have to work with movementwise so again important.

Listbuilding? Is unfortunatly not entirly unimportant, but it should be.

fransotto
19-07-2012, 20:26
...and I voted for movement; A bad deployment can be "fixed" with the movement phase. Magic can be avoid or used thanks to good tactical movement (same with shooting). Combat phase is according to me the result of the tactical decisions (and random) that have been done before and if I dont like to have a combat, my only way to avoid bad odds is in the movement phase.

and I also believe that too many dices are thrown i warhammer to blame bad luck. Sooner and later the statistcs shines through -and a good general do not believe in luck :)

Malorian
19-07-2012, 21:13
I don't think it's movement at all. I can make a list full of awesome combat hordes and march on up to your face. Sure can bait and tarpit all you want but in the end your units are going to need to beat my units in combat.

The movements, shooting, and magic phase are all just aspects in the game that give you an advantage in the combat phase, the phase where the winner of the game will be decided.


Oh you flanked my trolls with harpies? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh your handgunners shot my savage orcs? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh you cast wildform on those skinks my black orcs are fighting? Good for you, they're dead now.


There is no phase in the game that grants more victory points on average than the combat phase, and it's victory points that win games. (Unless you're playing watchtower in which case it's all about the combat phase again...)

Enigmatik1
19-07-2012, 21:30
I gotta co-sign what Mal's saying here. My original thought was deployment/movement, but the more I think about my own personal experience, it boils down to: Can my units make it across the table in good enough shape have a chance of winning close combat (keeping in mind what army I run)? Sure, I'll dance around some to try and keep my constructs from getting shot/magicked off the table and shoot at what I can when I can, but it ultimately boils down to can my Chariots, Tomb Guard and/or assorted constructs win in CC.

My army is not going to out maneuver you, I run the slowest army in the game. If I do out maneuver you, you're probably going to lose and/or you're so "White Girl Wasted" you won't know any better anyway.
My army is not going to erase your army off the table via magic unless you are running LM or Dwarfs with only I1 models and I happen to roll PS on my L2 and actually get the spell off. Magic exists to make me more likely to win in CC via augments and hexes.
My army is not going to shoot your army off the table because I don't run enough shooting to do so. Shooting exists, such that it is, to thin you ranks to once again give my units an edge in CC.

So yeah, games are won and lost in the close combat phase. Everything else is just there to (hopefully) make it easier for me to win. YMMV, of course.

fransotto
19-07-2012, 22:18
I don't think it's movement at all. I can make a list full of awesome combat hordes and march on up to your face. Sure can bait and tarpit all you want but in the end your units are going to need to beat my units in combat.

The movements, shooting, and magic phase are all just aspects in the game that give you an advantage in the combat phase, the phase where the winner of the game will be decided.

Oh you flanked my trolls with harpies? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh your handgunners shot my savage orcs? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh you cast wildform on those skinks my black orcs are fighting? Good for you, they're dead now.


There is no phase in the game that grants more victory points on average than the combat phase, and it's victory points that win games. (Unless you're playing watchtower in which case it's all about the combat phase again...)

...I highlighted the part I believe those who votet "movement" was thinking about. Successful close combat needs a good movement phase. A "good" movement phase is not dependend of the close combat, or maybe put it in this way; Movement can stop the combat phase (fleeing units for example and redirectors) but close combat can not stop the movement (moving into victory zones and watch towers for example).

I have played couple of games there my opponents "super-duper-death-unit" have not been in combat at all due to magic, terrain, fleeing troops, redirectors and therefor lost -Not with much but still...

Malorian
19-07-2012, 22:32
Unless we are talking about a wood elve list that runs circles around the enemy and picks off support units for the win, movement is not going to win the game.

A good movement phase might not depend on combat, but it didn't get you any points either. You can tarpit that deathstar all you want, but in the end unless you scored points somewhere else those throw away units you tossed in front of the deathstar actually lost you the game.

And just so this doesn't focus on deathstars, I've had games where my skill in deployment, my superior list, or my movement phase had lead me to winning the game, but it was done by focusing on the major combats. Everything is done to win those key combats that broken the enemy line, killed the key characters, and scored you the points for the win.

Wood elves when done right can get around this rule, but in the vast , majority of games everything (be it army list, deployment, movement, magic, or shooting) is focused on winning that one critical round of combat (or series of combats) to win the game.

JellyPie
20-07-2012, 00:22
When someone goes 6 dice dwellers.....hurr

Duke Danse Macabre
20-07-2012, 00:26
Personally I see it as how you fight combats, do you challenge in that combat, have you reformed into a better formation to fight that foe, what position is you're army in to support, have you got counters lined up, are you fighting on you're terms, are you magically buffed and is you're foe?.....

Its hard to pick just 1, however I decided on magic as it can win a game in its own right and to be honest, I'm a Vamps player, for me it is magic. :rolleyes:

DrMooreFlava
20-07-2012, 02:32
All of the above

ftayl5
20-07-2012, 09:49
Combat is the most important part of the game. Thanks to hordes and super-monsters and monstrous cavalry the amount of damage you can do in combat is so much more than can be done with shooting or magic.
As to the other phases:
The deployment phase is very important as it (in most cases) decides whether or not you'll get the match-ups that benefit you in the combat phase.
Movement is very important too, for getting your units into the combat phase.
Shooting helps to whittle units down so that you can finish them off in the combat phase.
Magic is similar, allowing you to make units more manageable or make your own units better, in the combat phase.

Truly, everything we do revolves around combat. While flanking units of skirmishers and fast cavalry are very pretty, they're just going to die. Shooting is important but rarely does it actually destroy units. Magic is mostly comprised of spells that make your units better or your opponent's worse: at combat.
Go and watch 10 battle reports with different armies and different scenarios and you will see that almost everything happens in combat. You do the most damage in combat and get the most points from combat.

tl;dr
The other phases basically all exist simply to give you the biggest advantages possible in combat.

Oogie boogie boss
20-07-2012, 09:55
Movement dictates whether the combats you fight are in your favour or not, as can magic and deployment. Shooting can make sure you fight weakened opposition and can get rid of redirectors so that you get your combat units in where you need them. List building decides which units are going to deliver your hammer blow and which will counter your opponents. At the end of the day though, combat is a bit like Rome; all paths lead there. Everything else essentially serves as a means to make sure that you win the decisive combats, and sure, they are thus influential, perhaps decisively so, on the outcome. But at they end of they day after all that preparation, things are still actullay decided in combat 9/10.

Very few games which i've witnessed or been involved in have been decided by magic and/or shooting without any combat happening. As Mal said, you can maneouvre as brilliantly as you like, but in order to win eventually you actually have to hit something and get some points.

List building is the foundation on which victories are built, but you still actually have to beat someone on the table, and again, this is done in combat almost every time.

Trains_Get_Robbed
20-07-2012, 10:48
Pure dice game.

When you start failing "key" opportunities and statistical variances with odds in your favor, the dice gods just laugh.

For example, in my recent game I failed six L.D tests on LD 8-9, to rally, or hold against Terror causing mosnters etc. . ., I didn't Dweller a opponent with the Book, ten spearman and then ten archers couldn't kill 4 demonettes.

Combat, Magic, Movement, those all just tilt the game in your favor DICE are the really factor in this game.

hazmiter
20-07-2012, 11:07
Deployment is where my games are made and broken, bad deployment lost me a few, good deployment has won me some, second to all that is dice, the roll for first turn helps heaps.

Vipoid
20-07-2012, 12:37
I think it's often a combination of the above, although an individual game may be won or lost because of just 1-2 of those.

- Deployment is important, but some armies may be mobile or resilient enough to recover from a bad deployment.
- Movement is very important, because there are various bonuses for outmanoeuvring your enemy (flank/rear charges, redirecting, getting to vulnerable wizards and war machines in combat).
- Combat is important, and a lot of games are lost here. However, it's also affected by most of the other factors (deployment, movement, magic, and dice).
- Magic is incredibly varied, and will likely depend a lot on the Lore and the points that have been focussed into it. Magic can be devastating, and I think it's certainly possible for games to be lost in the magic phase. Although, it's another one that can impact the other factors (magic can aid movement, and frequently gives buffs related to CC). I'd also say that you can lose because of not having magic. Or, to be more precise, not having magic when you need it. Sometimes there's a turn when you really need a good magic turn, but you roll badly on the winds of magic dice, or your opponent whips out a dispel scroll.
- Dice can win/lose you games. Usually, it's when you roll badly on aspects that involve just a few dice (e.g. the magic phase). Sometimes you just can't recover from rolling snake-eyes on the winds of magic dice in a critical turn, or you fail a couple of charges in the same turn. There are ways to help mitigate this, but sometimes there's just nothing you can do.

hazmiter
20-07-2012, 12:51
Vipoid explained it eloquently there.
How's things???

Scythe
20-07-2012, 13:21
For all those people talking about the combat phase, let's take a closer look at the opening post:


In everyones experience when would you say the majority of your games are won and lost? To put it another way when you have played a game what area do you most often look back on and think, "damn shouldn't/ should have done x,y,z.


Emphasis mine. Now, the game comes together in the close combat phase indeed. All other factors work towards that. The movement phase manoeuvres your units to a favourable combat. The shooting phase engages threads to even the odds in combat. The magic phase buffs/debuffs units in combat to gain the edge. The deployment phase tries to match your combat units to units of the opponent they can take down. In list building, you make units who can beat enemies in combat, or to support those units. This is all perfectly understandable, as beating an enemy in combat and running it down is the easiest and surest way to get victory points.

However
Players hardly actually make decisions in combat. Once you get to the combat phase, it is all up to what you did beforehand and the dice gods. Apart from some small things like issuing a challenge or allocating a couple of attacks, once you are in the combat phase, you just roll dice and hope for the best. Every large factor that matters in combat has been decided beforehand. What units are engaged, and how? Listbuilding, deployment and movement. How strong are these units currently? Shooting and magic.

So, when players think by themselves 'damn, I should have done that differently', it will 99% of the time not have any relevance to decisions made in combat, but in other phases in or before the game. 'I should have avoided that unit' (deployment and movement), 'I should have cast that spell on that other unit', 'I should have brought a unit of Swordmasters' (army building), 'I should have shot that cannon at those mournfangs instead'. These are decisions that can win and lose games, and they generally don't occur in the close combat phase.

Haravikk
20-07-2012, 13:33
Hmm, a bad deployment can leave a game practically impossible to win, especially in smaller games as it might mean your key unit(s) aren't able to get where they need to be. However, I'd say close combat is the phase where games are normally won or lost, but all other phases contribute in some way or another.

For example; a really lucky magic phase could pretty much win you the game, but it's unlikely to do so during that phase but instead by allowing you to mop up a bunch of weakened units in combat.

Djekar
20-07-2012, 13:38
+1 to what Scythe is saying.

Lord Solar Plexus
20-07-2012, 13:46
Close combat is the most important part of it. As others have pointed out, all other phases are subservient to this: You deploy and move to get favourable matchups and you shoot stuff to keep it from diverting combat units, or to stack the odds in your favour.

That doesn't mean that they are not important, far from it. A balanced list will be inherently stronger than one with no support. However, a pure close combat army such as mono-Khorne always is a real danger, whereas a pure gunline will be a lot weaker. Again, exceptions exist, such as a good WFT shot at a horde of Gobbos.

Vipoid
20-07-2012, 15:28
Vipoid explained it eloquently there.
How's things???

I'm good, thanks. :D

Yourself?



Emphasis mine. Now, the game comes together in the close combat phase indeed. All other factors work towards that. The movement phase manoeuvres your units to a favourable combat. The shooting phase engages threads to even the odds in combat. The magic phase buffs/debuffs units in combat to gain the edge. The deployment phase tries to match your combat units to units of the opponent they can take down. In list building, you make units who can beat enemies in combat, or to support those units. This is all perfectly understandable, as beating an enemy in combat and running it down is the easiest and surest way to get victory points.

However
Players hardly actually make decisions in combat. Once you get to the combat phase, it is all up to what you did beforehand and the dice gods. Apart from some small things like issuing a challenge or allocating a couple of attacks, once you are in the combat phase, you just roll dice and hope for the best. Every large factor that matters in combat has been decided beforehand. What units are engaged, and how? Listbuilding, deployment and movement. How strong are these units currently? Shooting and magic.

So, when players think by themselves 'damn, I should have done that differently', it will 99% of the time not have any relevance to decisions made in combat, but in other phases in or before the game. 'I should have avoided that unit' (deployment and movement), 'I should have cast that spell on that other unit', 'I should have brought a unit of Swordmasters' (army building), 'I should have shot that cannon at those mournfangs instead'. These are decisions that can win and lose games, and they generally don't occur in the close combat phase.

That's an interesting point actually - combat might be where the game is lost, but often as a consequence of other phases.

Thinking about it, I can defiantly see what you mean. Aside from challenges and a few combat-specific powers, you really don't have many options in the combat phase. Generally, your options lie in the earlier stages (manoeuvring your units, weakening enemy units with shooting or magic, buffing your own units with magic etc.).

hazmiter
20-07-2012, 16:02
I'm doing pretty good.

I might also add, magic phase can potentially demolish units, dark elves being notorious for it, a soulstealer cast into cc is brutal, as is a black horror, both can tip odds in favour of said player.
Vampire counts have a nasty one...... Mortis engine, that dies in cc, as a vamp, you want it killing more enemies than your own in the combat phase....
Shooting can be an advantage, especially over armies that have none.
Movement and charges are for tactical gain IMHO, I use magic and shooting to pick off/kill things I find a little scary, or just don't like............
Combat is what it boils to, and needs consideration, picking the right combat, at the right time, is really really difficult, and even then, the dice gods can cackle insanely while dancing butt naked in the street while you roll quad ones in a challenge to hit, or wound........... (its been known to happen)

Vipoid
20-07-2012, 16:09
Combat is what it boils to, and needs consideration, picking the right combat, at the right time, is really really difficult, and even then, the dice gods can cackle insanely while dancing butt naked in the street while you roll quad ones in a challenge to hit, or wound........... (its been known to happen)

That reminds me of a battle recently, involving a Vampire Lord with Quickblood, Red Fury and OTS (amongst other things). He was against bloodletters. With the rerolls, I hit with all five attacks. Then I rolled to wound... and got a four 1s. That really wasn't a good day for my combat-resolution. :shifty:

grumbaki
20-07-2012, 22:07
I would agree with Mal, but then I think back to a game I had against dark elves. The opposing player took a dragon and two hydras against my Empire list. I won the game because I one shotted the dragon with a cannon, and magicked a hydra to death. Pure and simple, the dice were on my side. If either of those made it into combat, it would have been a different game.

Even with combat, it comes down to the dice. I've had great wins go away because my hammerers failed a re-rollable break test. Army lists, movement, magic, shooting and close combat can all stack the odds in your favor, but at the end of the day a few bad dice rolls can undo all of that.

"What? My marauder horde whiffed in combat again?"
"Damn, that is the fourth failed animosity test!"
"Are you sure those cannons aren't borrowed from your imperial guard army?"

Texhnolyze
21-07-2012, 10:28
Every game with Dwarves or Empire in is won with cannons/grudge throwers.

I'm browsing the ETC lists and 90% of all the empire lists have 3 cannons in them (2 great cannons, 1 steam tank) And 90% of all the dwarf lists have a permutation of 3 cannons/grudge throwers.
Oo, and every single Ogre list that I spotted in there (I might have missed some lists since I just browsed through) have an Iron blaster!

Something is wrong when cannons are so common in a tournament setting that already put heavy comp on most big monsters in the game.

ETC lists : http://www.mediafire.com/?mhmjr47aod55wca

Nymie_the_Pooh
21-07-2012, 12:05
I think it depends a bit on army size in comparison to the dimensions of the table being played on. Playing large games on a 6x4 table with terrain can leave no room for maneuvering. Deployment still matters no matter how much space is available for moving in any direction other than straight forward. In small games, or on bigger tables, the choices for positioning throughout the game is a factor again. I agree that the game is technically won or lost in the combat phase, but what participates in each combat is decided through deployment and/or movement.

MyNameDidntFit
21-07-2012, 13:08
Dice. My Warriors of Chaos army loses games on the dice. Now, it doesn't bother me and I'm a good sport about it... but there's only so much deployment, movement, shooting (haha) and combat you can do when you make 3+ dice rolls ~1/5 times (as an example, I roll to hit with 19 attacks from a 6-wide unit of Warriors and I'll hit with 4).

Every time I've rolled average or above I've won... but that's twice that I can think of! :p

Haravikk
21-07-2012, 14:44
These are decisions that can win and lose games, and they generally don't occur in the close combat phase.
That's a very good point actually, though that said there are still some important decisions to be made in combat; whether to challenge or not can be a big one, as limiting a tough character's damage can be crucial to winning the round. Choosing whether to pursue or reform is also very crucial, as I found to my cost recently when I should have left pursuit to another unit and ended up stranding my best combat unit for a turn when they didn't manage to run the enemy down. There are also a bunch of items that can be important to use at the right time to tip a combat.

Admittedly it's not much when seen in the context of which decisions affect the outcome of combat the most, but there are certainly still things you can balls up. Reforming to face an enemy only to find you've exposed your flank in a combat that decided to take ages is another one I've regretted; thinking that reforming to face would win the combat in short order, only to discover I'd cost myself the unit instead was not a happy moment.

Jadawin
21-07-2012, 15:44
Some very interesting comments here, I agree with Malorian to an extent but as others have said the combat phase is dependant on the other phases, and of those IMO deployment is the biggie. But good to see a variety of opinions.

One thing that surprises me is that, if you are to believe everything you read criticising 8th (particularly on this forum) the magic phase is the area that "breaks the game" (Purple son/dwellers rage etc). However according to this poll it is the second least important phase. Hmmm not sure what conclusion to make from that....

Thuggrim
21-07-2012, 15:58
Of all the posts Scythe and Vipoid summarise how you can lose a game of Warhammer clearly. The fact is it is often a combination of a few of these, and the point you lose the game is often not the point at which the flow of the game turned against you, spotting this can really help you improve as a general. I tinker with and watch a fair bit of Starcraft 2, spotting errors and learning what to avoid is a massive part of that game.

I would take acception to those saying list building is unimportant -it should be but you are deluding yourself if you think certain lists don't have a distinct advantage given the current meta, indeed game balance has been poor for several years. A well balanced game would regularly see a good mix of available armies and lists topping tournaments, Althought too many people have a bad tendency to dismiss options other than the supposed best units/lists. It is however, very true that a bad player with an excellent list is not going to roll over a better opponent. The flipside being that two well-matched players one with a top teir tournament army/list vs the other with a balanced/fluffy list from a middle to low teir book will not be an even contest.

I would also suggest that the game can be lost in other ways:

losing sight of your objectives/ maintaning your focus - I know fantasy is often, sadly lacking objective driven missions but never the less you will normally set yourself objectives when starting the game - avoid/divert the deathball, secure the win via total destruction of small units - or establish magical superiority via elimination of enemy wizards etc as a means to achieve victory. If you lose track of these mid-game or indeed start without a clear plan you can be put at a real disadvantage which can contribute to you losing. This can also apply to individual phases for example if you want to force a unit to take a panic test, ensure you have enough firepower/spells too cause the test and don't stop targetting it until you do 25% casualties. Then if your not aiming to wipe out the unit, or its not feasible, redirect your focus onto a secondary target.

Failure to recognise threats or target priority - I have seen people, and in the past have (and occassionally even now), fail to understand the important units for the enemy army or identify what is going to stop you achieving your aims. Its amazing how with a little use of player psychology and a big shiny model a lot of players can be distracted from targetting the real threats in an army, allowing the key units to go unmolested til far too late.

Making assumptions/inflexability - Put simply its a game with a random element, if you assume something is going to working in a certain way you can often end up out of position or disadavantage simply because you did not allow for any other possible outcome. As an example if that unit that shouldn't break does is it angled to direct the enemy away from the rest of your battle line, or if the 50/50 combat results in the enemy breaking are you in a position to exploit the resulting gap in the lines. I saw an example of this recently a big unit of saurus smashed into a small unit of night goblins, assuming the saurus would rout the gobbos and run through the lizardman player did nothing to block or prevent the possible flank charge from the Big'uns, when double one was rolled for goblin ld, the saurus were unprotected and subsequently lost. It was unlucky on the lizardman players part but pushing up a unit of skink skirmishers to block the flank charge would of prevented the bad luck having a major effect on the game. In short allowing for different outcomes or failing to allow for them can win or lose you the game.

Thuggrim
21-07-2012, 16:23
One thing that surprises me is that, if you are to believe everything you read criticising 8th (particularly on this forum) the magic phase is the area that "breaks the game" (Purple son/dwellers rage etc). However according to this poll it is the second least important phase. Hmmm not sure what conclusion to make from that....

Interesting point, I think the issue with magic is not so much that in general it is imbalanced but that good dice on the right spell can have a disportionate effect thus 'breaking the game' and by being reckless and spamming 6 dice you have a good chance of forcing a spell off. I think that this could be overcome by having the miscast proportional too the number of dice used to cast a spell, which would bring a real risk/reward aspect to big dice casts.

Gorstag
22-07-2012, 02:01
I feel it starts with army building, yes deployment is important but if you have the wrong army it won't matter where you put them.

N1AK
22-07-2012, 16:06
I don't think it's movement at all. I can make a list full of awesome combat hordes and march on up to your face. Sure can bait and tarpit all you want but in the end your units are going to need to beat my units in combat.

The movements, shooting, and magic phase are all just aspects in the game that give you an advantage in the combat phase, the phase where the winner of the game will be decided.


I don't agree at all. I think it is a gross oversimplification and certainly hasn't been my experience. Great combat units are only going to win you the game if they get the opportunity to do their thing. I've beaten armies with massively more combat potential, easily, by not allowing them to utilise it and I've played games using lists that could slaughter opponents in combat but been beaten by smart deployment and deft play.

The combat phase may we where things culminate, but the result is largely decided before then. The most important thing in a football match isn't simply having the striker with the highest conversion rate, you need the passing, marking and play making to give the striker opportunities first.

Vipoid
22-07-2012, 16:20
I don't think it's movement at all. I can make a list full of awesome combat hordes and march on up to your face. Sure can bait and tarpit all you want but in the end your units are going to need to beat my units in combat.

But that's exactly where movement comes in, isn't it?

If you have a combat horde that I can't possibly beat in a fair fight, then my objective is to do everything possible to keep it away from my valuable units, and ensure that, when it eventually does reach something, the fight is anything but fair.

Now, there are a few ways to do this: magic (either buffing one or more of my units, weakening your horde, or simply blasting it at range), shooting (if available), and movement.

In the case of movement, my aim will be to tarpit, redirect and (if possible) whittle your unit a bit, whilst I position my other units and attempt to take out your weaker units and support. If I do end up charging your super-killy horde, then it will most likely be from the flank or rear. Super hordes start to look a lot less threatening when only ~5 of their models get to attack, and they've lost their rank bonus because of a flank/rear charge.

Scythe
23-07-2012, 08:02
I would also suggest that the game can be lost in other ways:

losing sight of your objectives/ maintaning your focus - I know fantasy is often, sadly lacking objective driven missions but never the less you will normally set yourself objectives when starting the game - avoid/divert the deathball, secure the win via total destruction of small units - or establish magical superiority via elimination of enemy wizards etc as a means to achieve victory. If you lose track of these mid-game or indeed start without a clear plan you can be put at a real disadvantage which can contribute to you losing. This can also apply to individual phases for example if you want to force a unit to take a panic test, ensure you have enough firepower/spells too cause the test and don't stop targetting it until you do 25% casualties. Then if your not aiming to wipe out the unit, or its not feasible, redirect your focus onto a secondary target.

Failure to recognise threats or target priority - I have seen people, and in the past have (and occassionally even now), fail to understand the important units for the enemy army or identify what is going to stop you achieving your aims. Its amazing how with a little use of player psychology and a big shiny model a lot of players can be distracted from targetting the real threats in an army, allowing the key units to go unmolested til far too late.

Making assumptions/inflexability - Put simply its a game with a random element, if you assume something is going to working in a certain way you can often end up out of position or disadavantage simply because you did not allow for any other possible outcome. As an example if that unit that shouldn't break does is it angled to direct the enemy away from the rest of your battle line, or if the 50/50 combat results in the enemy breaking are you in a position to exploit the resulting gap in the lines. I saw an example of this recently a big unit of saurus smashed into a small unit of night goblins, assuming the saurus would rout the gobbos and run through the lizardman player did nothing to block or prevent the possible flank charge from the Big'uns, when double one was rolled for goblin ld, the saurus were unprotected and subsequently lost. It was unlucky on the lizardman players part but pushing up a unit of skink skirmishers to block the flank charge would of prevented the bad luck having a major effect on the game. In short allowing for different outcomes or failing to allow for them can win or lose you the game.

Some good points. Mainly, you are talking about causes of bad in-game decisions, right? The last one is an interesting one. Indeed, people often don't account for chance enough in their battle plans. The risk / reward calculation is an important one, as is the flexibility to have a backup plan once your unit which was supposed to win that combat suddenly fluffs its attacks and breaks.


But that's exactly where movement comes in, isn't it?

If you have a combat horde that I can't possibly beat in a fair fight, then my objective is to do everything possible to keep it away from my valuable units, and ensure that, when it eventually does reach something, the fight is anything but fair.

Now, there are a few ways to do this: magic (either buffing one or more of my units, weakening your horde, or simply blasting it at range), shooting (if available), and movement.

In the case of movement, my aim will be to tarpit, redirect and (if possible) whittle your unit a bit, whilst I position my other units and attempt to take out your weaker units and support. If I do end up charging your super-killy horde, then it will most likely be from the flank or rear. Super hordes start to look a lot less threatening when only ~5 of their models get to attack, and they've lost their rank bonus because of a flank/rear charge.

And even working on the assumption that the original statement is true (eg, that you need the most badass combat horde to win the game; not something I agree with personally, but let's roll with it), that is a decision that would win or loses you the game in the 'list building' phase, not in the combat phase.


That's a very good point actually, though that said there are still some important decisions to be made in combat; whether to challenge or not can be a big one, as limiting a tough character's damage can be crucial to winning the round. Choosing whether to pursue or reform is also very crucial, as I found to my cost recently when I should have left pursuit to another unit and ended up stranding my best combat unit for a turn when they didn't manage to run the enemy down. There are also a bunch of items that can be important to use at the right time to tip a combat.

Admittedly it's not much when seen in the context of which decisions affect the outcome of combat the most, but there are certainly still things you can balls up. Reforming to face an enemy only to find you've exposed your flank in a combat that decided to take ages is another one I've regretted; thinking that reforming to face would win the combat in short order, only to discover I'd cost myself the unit instead was not a happy moment.

True, there are some decisions to be made in combat, as I also mentioned in my first post (hence the 99%, not 100% ;)).
The pursuit / reform one can affect the game significantly in some cases, but it is still quite rare in my experience (at least, the situations were it is not really clear cut what would be the best course of action). A challenge is a rather minor one imho. Usually, it is rather trivial to decide whether to challenge or not.
Still, in general, I believe all those are rather minor compared to the effects which can be felt in other phases of the game.

Lord Dan
23-07-2012, 08:07
Dwellers below.

Verm1s
23-07-2012, 10:37
A quick army (brets) might not be as dammaged by a bad deployement as it would by bad movement phase or a bad combat phase
A lizard man army or HE with a load of points tied up in magic might be dammaged by a poor magic phase turn 2 or 3
A gunline Dwarf army or empire army isn't going to be dammaged bad movement phase, as it is a bad shooting phase


Absolutely it's close combat.
Make a list that dominates in combat and you will dominate most of your games.

So... list-building then. :p

N810
23-07-2012, 18:42
Nope its the dice rolling phase that gets me every time. :p
(I get everything ealse right, but dice just hate me)

Djekar
23-07-2012, 19:52
Where's the option for "The Model Buying Phase"?

Nymie_the_Pooh
23-07-2012, 20:17
It's the painting phase. Painted models perform better. :p

Luigi
24-07-2012, 08:58
It's the painting phase. Painted models perform better. :p

There might be some truth in this, since I believe that we are (at least slightly) inclined to unconsciously believe that a more visually appealing model is somewhat better and therefore threatening than an unpainted one

Scythe
24-07-2012, 10:45
There might be some truth in this, since I believe that we are (at least slightly) inclined to unconsciously believe that a more visually appealing model is somewhat better and therefore threatening than an unpainted one

I don't know about that; those shiny new painted models usually attract that much attention that they get nuked by a couple of war machines in the first few turns :p

Yowzo
24-07-2012, 12:52
Very few games which i've witnessed or been involved in have been decided by magic and/or shooting without any combat happening. As Mal said, you can maneouvre as brilliantly as you like, but in order to win eventually you actually have to hit something and get some points.

But with the exception of the 3++ chosen, you can't just walk your blocks, smash face then win.

You need to pick your fights carefully, delay the enemy's finest with steadfast blocks and bsb support, cleave your way into favourable positions, etc. etc. Of course in the end victory points are gained in combat but it's movement that puts you in the best position to make those points.

Why don't we just align our blocks in front of each other 6 inches apart and start rolling dice?

Rillix
24-07-2012, 13:57
In my experience of warhammer, games are won/lost for me in the magic phase. If you have a bad first magic phase or your mage miscasts turn 1 its pretty much over

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

DeathlessDraich
24-07-2012, 15:09
Didn't vote but will comment instead. :)

1) My answer to the original question:

The relative skill, ability and luck of your opponent to yours, determines who will win.

2) On the question of which is more important, movement, deployment, combat - they all are! I would also add knowledge of the armies, knowledge of basic strategies and using terrain correctly to the 3 above.

It is difficult to create a hierarchy of importance as these factors are interdependent but most players will agree that the main indicator of the probable victor occurs in the combat phase (or just after it).

3) If both players are reasonably skilled then deployment becomes less important (in betting on the winner) because not only will they deploy correctly but they should also have an idea of how their opponents should deploy and make the necessary adjustments in the 1st turn.

Similarly list building is not a factor for players with sufficient skill and knowledge of the armies.

Movement - Very important indeed. I tend to spend 10-20 minutes for this phase in turns 1 and 2 and my best opponents take about the same length of time.

4) Luck is the wild card that could swing a game either way with the Magic phase being the most luck dependent.

HurrDurr
25-07-2012, 01:16
Shooting, Wood Elves.

Why
25-07-2012, 01:20
Movement is more important for wood elves. Sure you can plink away with 60 shots a turn but if your archers just stand there you will lose the game.

Gork or Possibly Mork
25-07-2012, 04:23
All of the above. Each and every phase and usually a combination of them are what wins and loses games. It's a combined effort. I wouldn't necessarily say one phase is most important.

If your army is designed to excell a certain way then you need to create more oppourtunity to take advantage of it's strengths while minimizing it's weaknesses.

At the same time you have to try to nullify your opponents strengths and exploit thier weaknesses. From my experience the best way to do that is a combined effort.

Note Im not saying you need a little of everything but stacking one phase thinking it's the be all end all. Surely it's better to stack as many phases as you can in your favour and that's
always going to be more than one in an all comers list.

Thinking in terms of one phase is most important is a little close minded to me.

Jezbot
25-07-2012, 05:22
I think Scythe got to the heart of this issue. Combat is where most games are won or lost, because its where most of the damage is done, and it's where you break and pursue units, and that's the big way to score victory points. But combat itself is almost entirely based on mechanics and dice rolling, once engaged there's little for players to do to other than issue challenges and allocate attacks to individual characters. Deciding who has the advantage in combat comes from everything else, from list building to give your list strong core combat units and support units to allow you to control who engages in combat and when, from deployment and movement to further determine when combats happen, and from shooting and magic to whittle down the enemy and give you the buffs to swing combat your way.

ewar
25-07-2012, 13:34
I don't think it's movement at all. I can make a list full of awesome combat hordes and march on up to your face. Sure can bait and tarpit all you want but in the end your units are going to need to beat my units in combat.

The movements, shooting, and magic phase are all just aspects in the game that give you an advantage in the combat phase, the phase where the winner of the game will be decided.


Oh you flanked my trolls with harpies? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh your handgunners shot my savage orcs? Good for you, they're dead now.

Oh you cast wildform on those skinks my black orcs are fighting? Good for you, they're dead now.


There is no phase in the game that grants more victory points on average than the combat phase, and it's victory points that win games. (Unless you're playing watchtower in which case it's all about the combat phase again...)

You're missing the point though. Once you're in close combat there is virtually no player input to the outcome - the phase effectively runs itself, aside from some very limited target priority decisions (against characters, champions etc). However this is almost always a simple case of 'hit the RnF to get as much CR as possible', unless you're faced with very weak characters where they are not much harder to kill than a trooper.

Your argument is actually in list building - yes, there are some very few armies (like Ogres) where you can build a single mega unit which can fight effectively on all sides. However this is a massive minority of lists.

Movement is where the close combat phase is actually decided. You can only base your decisions on the statisically likely outcomes of close combat, so as mentioned above there is no decision making involved there. Yes, the game is 'decided' in the close combat phase, but purely as a product of the movement phase. You could actually remove the mechanics of the CC phase of the game completely and not affect a battles outcome - just have a simple unit strength stat that when in CC the weaker one is removed.

So where does a player add value? In the movement phase or list building. I prefer the former.

Arctaeus
25-07-2012, 16:38
I voted magic phase - in the last game I played, my Level 4 Vampire Lord general died due to being sucked into the Realm of Chaos :P I lost the game by about 300 VPs, and the general was worth just shy of 450 points

Malorian
25-07-2012, 16:55
You're missing the point though. Once you're in close combat there is virtually no player input to the outcome - the phase effectively runs itself, aside from some very limited target priority decisions (against characters, champions etc). However this is almost always a simple case of 'hit the RnF to get as much CR as possible', unless you're faced with very weak characters where they are not much harder to kill than a trooper.

Your argument is actually in list building - yes, there are some very few armies (like Ogres) where you can build a single mega unit which can fight effectively on all sides. However this is a massive minority of lists.

Movement is where the close combat phase is actually decided. You can only base your decisions on the statisically likely outcomes of close combat, so as mentioned above there is no decision making involved there. Yes, the game is 'decided' in the close combat phase, but purely as a product of the movement phase. You could actually remove the mechanics of the CC phase of the game completely and not affect a battles outcome - just have a simple unit strength stat that when in CC the weaker one is removed.

So where does a player add value? In the movement phase or list building. I prefer the former.

It's not a matter of how the player adds value, it's a simple matter of knowing what phase wins you the game.

Since it's obvious that it's the combat phase where the game is won or lost, all other aspects of the game need to be geared to support it. Your list should be built with combat in mind, your deployment should be done to set up the best matches for combat, supportive shooting and magic is aimed at making the combat in your favour, and then in the end it all comes down to the combat.

When I look back on a game and think about what I could have done differently it almost always comes down to the combat and how they were supported.

HurrDurr
25-07-2012, 16:58
Movement is more important for wood elves. Sure you can plink away with 60 shots a turn but if your archers just stand there you will lose the game.

Id rather stand still and shoot than move and not shoot, pewpew phase.

I think this question is like asking which ingredient MAKES the sandwich, it isn't a sandwich without everything, and none of the phases work the way they work without the others.

Lord Dan
25-07-2012, 17:44
Id rather stand still and shoot than move and not shoot, pewpew phase.

Wood Elves can move and fire with no penalty.

Why
25-07-2012, 18:17
I think he meant that he would rather not be able to move an take 60 shots than move and not take any.
I would rather take 20 shots that could move than 60 that couldn't. I think movement is more important. Now if this was dwarves we were talking about...

Lord Dan
25-07-2012, 21:29
Thanks Why, that went completely over my head.

HurrDurr
25-07-2012, 22:10
Sorry it's hard to take this seriously because you could pick any one of those based on Xarmy and Xlist versus Yarmy and Ylist. You could argue which phases are more demanding of the player(makes them seem more influential), but really I think they all hold equal value based on investment vs returns.

ewar
25-07-2012, 22:43
When I look back on a game and think about what I could have done differently it almost always comes down to the combat and how they were supported.

That makes literally no sense :) You are actually talking about the movement phase here.

The combat phase is just rolling dice - you have (almost) no input into this. Which combats you end up fighting and how well you are positioned within them is dictated purely by the movement phase.

Malorian
25-07-2012, 23:49
That makes literally no sense :) You are actually talking about the movement phase here.

The combat phase is just rolling dice - you have (almost) no input into this. Which combats you end up fighting and how well you are positioned within them is dictated purely by the movement phase.

Let me make an example: Last weekend I lost only 1 game. When I look back at why I lost the answer is simple, my horde of black orcs with flaming banner failed to kill a flanked treeman and then in the following turn I was flanked by mere archers and ran down.

Was my deployment wrong? No. Was my movement wrong? No. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really. It just comes down to the fact that I came to the most important phase of the game and the dice turned against me (twice) so I lost the game. Combat is so powerful that if it turns against you the game swings wildly in favor of your opponent.


Lets take another example: My last loss before that was with my tomb kings against warriors of chaos. In this match I was basically cut down and destroyed. Warriors of chaos are simply so powerful in combat that once they got to me I melted away like nothing.

Was my deployment wrong? No, I had out deployed him. Was my movement wrong? No, my moves actually ended up with me wiping out a unit of 12 knights do to overrun. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really, I was already running a casket and double skullapult. In the end combat had to happen and even tomb kings supported by a king wasn't enough to top his warriors. My solution going forward is to focus my points on units that are better in combat.


I don't understand what isn't clear. Combat wins games. If this was 7th I would agree that it's all about movement but this is 8th, an age with steadfast, combat reforms, hordes, and models that actually hit back when charged.

Everything you do in a game, from deployment to movment to ranged support, is all done so that when combat happens you can score the points you need to win the game. Without winning that combat you have no hope to win at all.

ewar
26-07-2012, 00:26
Let me make an example: Last weekend I lost only 1 game. When I look back at why I lost the answer is simple, my horde of black orcs with flaming banner failed to kill a flanked treeman and then in the following turn I was flanked by mere archers and ran down.

Was my deployment wrong? No. Was my movement wrong? No. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really. It just comes down to the fact that I came to the most important phase of the game and the dice turned against me (twice) so I lost the game. Combat is so powerful that if it turns against you the game swings wildly in favor of your opponent.


Lets take another example: My last loss before that was with my tomb kings against warriors of chaos. In this match I was basically cut down and destroyed. Warriors of chaos are simply so powerful in combat that once they got to me I melted away like nothing.

Was my deployment wrong? No, I had out deployed him. Was my movement wrong? No, my moves actually ended up with me wiping out a unit of 12 knights do to overrun. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really, I was already running a casket and double skullapult. In the end combat had to happen and even tomb kings supported by a king wasn't enough to top his warriors. My solution going forward is to focus my points on units that are better in combat.


I don't understand what isn't clear. Combat wins games. If this was 7th I would agree that it's all about movement but this is 8th, an age with steadfast, combat reforms, hordes, and models that actually hit back when charged.

Everything you do in a game, from deployment to movment to ranged support, is all done so that when combat happens you can score the points you need to win the game. Without winning that combat you have no hope to win at all.

Your orc example is due to movement though? You keep saying the combat phase, but that is just a literal interpretation of when the results are counted - all of the relevant decision making was done in previous phases (be it movement, list building, magic etc).

Ignore games where you're unlucky - those are just statistical outliers out of your control - all of those games you listed might have played out differently depending on the movement phase/particular matchups you might have engineered. I'll freely admit a WoC is a tough nut to crack for tomb kings in general, but all armies have bad matchups.

I could list a dozen games where I've won with inferior units against superior ones by engineering an advantageous position.

I know we're only discussing semantics, but the point I'm trying to get across is that you could actually remove all the dice rolling from the combat phase of the game and just replace it with fixed fight values for any given unit - highest wins, loser is destroyed, with a small random chance the more powerful side is routed instead - that is all that really happens in any given warhammer fight. The phase itself is almost irrelevant, despite it being where the numbers are determined for who wins or loses the game.

Malorian
26-07-2012, 00:55
I guess at this point we'll need to agree to disagree.

Scythe
26-07-2012, 07:49
Let me make an example: Last weekend I lost only 1 game. When I look back at why I lost the answer is simple, my horde of black orcs with flaming banner failed to kill a flanked treeman and then in the following turn I was flanked by mere archers and ran down.

Was my deployment wrong? No. Was my movement wrong? No. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really. It just comes down to the fact that I came to the most important phase of the game and the dice turned against me (twice) so I lost the game. Combat is so powerful that if it turns against you the game swings wildly in favor of your opponent.

Let's look at which poll option is the most applicable here then, shall we? It is clearly an example of
x Its the dice dammit

And let me ask you another question: what was your mistake in this example? What could you have done to prevent this result? Unless the answer is: "I should have declined that challenge of that ancient treeman with my Black Orc champion" or something similar, it has no application to the close combat phase.


Lets take another example: My last loss before that was with my tomb kings against warriors of chaos. In this match I was basically cut down and destroyed. Warriors of chaos are simply so powerful in combat that once they got to me I melted away like nothing.

Was my deployment wrong? No, I had out deployed him. Was my movement wrong? No, my moves actually ended up with me wiping out a unit of 12 knights do to overrun. Could I have supported any better with magic or shooting? Not really, I was already running a casket and double skullapult. In the end combat had to happen and even tomb kings supported by a king wasn't enough to top his warriors. My solution going forward is to focus my points on units that are better in combat.

So, what poll option is most applicable here? Easily
x List building/army selection
As you are going back to your list, and are selecting different units.

Again I ask the question: what decisions you made in the close combat phase made you lose this battle?


I don't understand what isn't clear. Combat wins games. If this was 7th I would agree that it's all about movement but this is 8th, an age with steadfast, combat reforms, hordes, and models that actually hit back when charged.

Have you read my first post in this thread? While it is true that points are scored in the combat phase, you hardly make any decisions there. It is the buildup for combat (and the uncertainty factor of dice) that decides games, not the combat itself.

Malorian
26-07-2012, 14:48
Have you read my first post in this thread? While it is true that points are scored in the combat phase, you hardly make any decisions there. It is the buildup for combat (and the uncertainty factor of dice) that decides games, not the combat itself.

My feelings are based towards the first sentence and yours are towards the second.