Empire Detachments

[Duke Donald]

I feel this discussion would be more productive if we agreed on the changes to the detachment rules. My understanding is that:

1. The opponent is free to charge the parent or the detachment(s)
2. Stubborn, Steadfast, Stupidity, Frenzy, Hatred, Immune to Psychology, Hold The Line is transferred from parent unit to the detachments
3. Detachment countercharges and supporting charges follow the rule of a normal charge (i.e. they do not automatically flank charge as before)
4. Detachments must remain within 3" of the parent unit to count as a detachment

Assuming the above is correct , this will lead to very interesting tactical decisions from both players and Empire could again become a finesse army. It will require a few games to understand what works and what doesn't. However, at the moment I suspect it will be even trickier than before to get any countercharge on the flanks without opening up a detachment's flank to the opponent. There may be situation where one actually wishes to offer a flank charge of a detachment to the opponent as a bait for a secondary flank charge by the parent detachment. However, this could be risky against elite troops. Detachments are typically small and made out of fragile troops. As such, they could easily be wiped out in the first turn of combat. This could be fairly disastrous as it might allow the opponent to overrun in the parent unit (possibly in the flank), or at least reform.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

I don't see the problem with getting a flank if you're charged by any bus. The counter-charge is only carried out after the attacker hits the parent's front, so you are nearly guaranteed a flank - only if a second enemy unit charges your detachment at the same time is this a problem.

With a horde, things can be a bit trickier but not much, as long as the detachment is on the side further away from the horde and a little (~0.01") back. The horde only gets to move straight forward or make one single wheel. It will often hit the parent's corner and then align before it can move so far to deny you a flank.

Lastly you can blade the parent in the TVI fashion. That usually worked in 7th and it worked in 8th - for some, at least. Deployment and movement are often key in all of these scenarios.

[Duke Donald]

@ Lord Solar Plexus

Thanks for the prompt reply. I thought about it more after reading your post and have to agree I probably overestimated the problem. The situation is indeed not that bad at least in a one-on-one fight (i.e. an empire parent unit with detachment(s) against a single other unit).

[DaemonReign]

Now, you are suggesting to keep the attachments up slightly ahead of the parent unit, and politely encourage your opponent to charge the parent unit which is stronger and farther away. That is silliness. Contrariness at its best.

You're not grasping the consequences of the rules-changes to Detachments.
Yes I'm suggesting you'll have to position your detachments slightly infront of the parent-unit with a slight angle 'inward' in order to have any chance of getting a Flank Counter charge.
That's exactly what I'm suggesting.

The ingenious part (all credit to Cruddace) is that now that Detachments share the Special Rules of the Parent unit this will mean that alot of times the enemy will indeed prefer to charge the "more powerfull" parent unit - or even be discourages to charge at all (!).
In my example before I talked about Great Swords and charging their [STUBBORN] Detachments, which would by definition get you charged in the flank the next turn by the Parent Unit of GreatSword.
Now I don't know about you, but I would much rather fight 40 GreatSwords to my front and have some detachment flanking me, compared to running straight into that speedbump and then get hit in the flank by those Great Swords.

So that's that. It's not silliness at all. But hey don't take my word for it. Just wait a few weeks.

The above stated is just the obvious perks of Detachments with this new book. The other 'alternative' is to actually pretend you're a tactician and run the rest of your army in a way that goads the opponant into charging your parent-unit (I mentioned this before as well) - admittedly this has always been the case, and it is less definate compared to my example above about Great Swords.

So yeah: 'No'.
Detachments are quite alot better than before, and Cruddace's fix for them is quite elegant now that those horror-stories about "having to charge the parent unit" have been debunked..

[AlphariusOmegon20]

2. Stubborn, Steadfast, Stupidity, Frenzy, Hatred, Immune to Psychology, Hold The Line is transferred from parent unit to the detachments

I read the book today. It gets worse than just that.....

Try that the captain in the parent unit, his cold blooded rule can confer also.

[Blkc57]

I read the book today. It gets worse than just that.....

Try that the captain in the parent unit, his cold blooded rule can confer also.

I think thats the "hold the line" rule that was mentioned. So having seen the book Alpharius do you know do spell effects tranfer over onto a detachment? like if Biona's Time Warp is cast on a parent unit do its detachments benefit from the spell as well?

[vinush]

I'm hoping not for that one Blkc, otherwise there's no reason they shouldn't be affected by enemy magic too. Can anyone say Curse of years? Or pretty much any of the uber effect spells...

THE \/ince

[Ctuchik]

What does it mean exactly when it says they inherit Steadfast? They count as steadfast if the parent unit has more ranks than the unit they are in combat with? I don't get it.

[Blkc57]

I don't know Vin, I'm kinda willing to take the downside of having the hex effect my detachment if an augment effects them as well. I mean if they are so close to their papa unit that they are stubborn and hateful then they should get old with them as well, it seems only just. I guess I'm more interested in: Do prayers transfer over as well?

[DaemonReign]

What does it mean exactly when it says they inherit Steadfast? They count as steadfast if the parent unit has more ranks than the unit they are in combat with? I don't get it.

Yeah that one is a bit puzzling. I think your interpretation seems like the only possible explanation though. The only caveat I can think of is that the Parent unit would have to involved in the same combat, or at least be engaged in a combat where it fullfilled the requirements of being steadfast 'by itself'.
But to be honest I doubt it. If it says in the book that "Steadfast" is one of the 'Special Rules' that are transfered to the Detachment then, like you said, it probably means that as long as the parent unit would have been Steadfast [if it was in the combat] then the Detachment in the actual combat is concidered Steadfast as well.

The more I'm looking at these Detachment rules and running scenarios in my head, the more I'm beginning to think that they'll be potent to the point of being slightly boring to face for some match-ups. It's funny that the initial reactions have been to give Cruddace alot of flak for raising the cost of troops, and a couple of weeks/months down the line I'm pretty sure he's gonna get even more flak for 'breaking' them in the other direction.

[Blkc57]

l.

The more I'm looking at these Detachment rules and running scenarios in my head, the more I'm beginning to think that they'll be potent to the point of being slightly boring to face for some match-ups. It's funny that the initial reactions have been to give Cruddace alot of flak for raising the cost of troops, and a couple of weeks/months down the line I'm pretty sure he's gonna get even more flak for 'breaking' them in the other direction.

Thats an interesting assessment Daemon, but do you mean that the detachment rule sounds overpowered? or simply will not function in a game of warhammer in the manner by which we have all come to know (used to add some combat res and break ranks in a block on block infantry fight)?

[vinush]

I'm interested in knowing if a Parent unit, plus two detachments counts as the minimum 3 units you need, or just the one...

THE \/ince

[DaemonReign]

I don't think it looks 'overpowered' but I certainly think it looks potent and together with 'Hold the Line!' I certainly don't think Empire troops have been nerfed on account of their general increase in cost.
Even if I did think it overpowered I wouldn't be against it because I like a good challange and in our group we play big enough games so that when I assess the opposition I will face in Empire I think about a list that includes Everything the book can possibly offer.
DemiGryphs, Waltar, Luminark, Hurricanium, handfull of Griffons, a few hundred statetroops with detachments, close to a hundred GreatSwords with Detachments, Horde o' Knights - all at the same time.

Of course, I'll be bringing a Daemon List (or whatever) to match but the point, I guess, is that Empire has struggled so far in 8th Ed and the sort of games we usually play - and with Cruddace's new book I have high hopes of actually getting my ass handed to me a little more often.

@ Vinush
Haha! Good catch.
My bet is it would only count as 'the one' unit. But I guess you never know..

[Blkc57]

That is an excellent sentiment Daemon, and Vin I too am now intrigued by these small loop holes that the detachment rules seem to breed. I guess I'll have to wait a few more days for the book to see if the rules are gonna need a rather extensive FAQ. I hate having to write the personal FAQ for our gaming group because it has to be done by committee, I remember our group's Skaven FAQ before they released an official one was something like 14 pages.

[Souppilgrim]

People are forgetting that you sorta/kinda need to outnumber your opponent in order to pull off some of this stuff. Which can be hard in some cases. If you have a big unit of spearmen with halberdiers as a detachment, they may be facing TWO big units of ors/skaven/skellies/whatever. It's not like they will always be facing up against single units.

Wondering if a detachment of swordsmen come from the special or core points allowance when they are specifically attached to say, greatswords.

[vinush]

Rumours as they currently stand say the detachment cost comes from the section the parent unit comes from, so Greatswords parent unit means Special swordsmen.

THE \/ince

[Ctuchik]

If Steadfast is passed on as we speculate, you won't have much use of Greatsword attachments. Everything will be "Stubborn" anyway.

[Arduhn]

Rumours as they currently stand say the detachment cost comes from the section the parent unit comes from, so Greatswords parent unit means Special swordsmen.

THE \/ince

I can confirm that.

[Blkc57]

I'm envisioning these small steadfast roadblocks of like 10-15 militiamen that if you can't wipe the unit, you be going nowhere.

[Arduhn]

Dunno if this was mentioned, but stand and shoot is at -1 to hit for detachments now.