Are Empire swordsmen still worth taking?

[Pancakey]

Ws4 is huge. Yes they are worth taking in an army with mostly ws3 troops.

[Algovil]

Mathhammer (facts)

Against a Horde of Grave Guards with Great Weapon and Banner of the Barrows (+1 to hit, very common setup)
Vs
Bus of Halberdiers/Swordsmen/Spearmen 5 wide.

Halberdiers strike first,
10 attacks
5 hits
2.5 wounds
~2.1 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards strike,
21 attacks
14 hits
~11.67 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards win by ~9.58 only counting wounds

Compared:

Swordsmen strike first,
10 attacks
6.67 hits
2.22 wounds
~1.48 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards strike,
21 attacks
14 hits
11.67 wounds
~9.72 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards win by ~8.24 only counting wounds

Compared:

Spearmen shields/no shields(no difference) strike first (let us assume the did not charge)
15 attacks
7.5 hits
2.5 wounds
~1.67 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards strike,
21 attacks
14 hits
~11.67 unsaved wounds

Grave Guards win by 10 only counting wounds

Discussion

Swordsmen die by almost two men less each combat phase in average, compared to Halberdiers, which in turn kill in average about 1/2 Grave Guard extra each combat phase. Spearmen do not kill much, and die in droves, cheap without shield though. Swordsmen lose ~68pts of models each phase. Halberdiers lose ~70pts of models each phase. Spearmen with shields lose ~70pts of models each phase, Spearmen without shields lose ~58.3pts of models each turn.

Spearmen without shields would be better economically in this match up, but that is not the common equipment seen is it?

I have not made the calculations which unit would remain steadfast for the longest time, but what you need is 1-2 turns of steadfast for a counter charge, all units will lose combat eventually in a drawn out combat.

Halberdiers are not the best choice with a deep bus vs elite enemies, Spearmen with shields are equally bad. Spearmen without shields are good economically if you field enough of them. Swordsmen are fine in this role, can have smaller units, and do not lose as bad (in most cases none of the units will stand their ground if not steadfast though, but swordsmen have the better chance).

Swordsmen compared to Spearmen without shields

Spearmen does seem to lose less points and in a deep unit will remain steadfast for a while, but have weakness when charged in side, and not a good units offensively, also more vulnerable vs Warmachines and low strength shooting. Swordsmen are a little bit worse /point when used as a steadfast bus vs elites, but are more versatile, in that they can survive ranged attacks better, can be used offensively. Though swordsmen lose parry when attacked in flank.

Conclusion

As a steadfast bus, there is nothing wrong with swordsmen, they are as good a choice as spearmen vs elites, and probably better vs say S3, T3 enemies. Halberdiers are probably better used as a horde. Spearmen work well as deep bus, because they are cheap, but shields only work vs low strength enemies, vs elites without shields is a better choice, but then they become vulnerable to other kind of enemies.

Overall I did these calculations to show that there is nothing wrong with swordsmen as a deep bus or maybe a detachment, even counting there cost/model. I would not field them in a horde, other units does that better.

[GotrekFan]

For me, I'd play them regardless of Internet wisdom 'cos real life and mathhammer rarely meet and I prefer with units I like over statistically superior units (which my numerous defeats can attest to ) but I do enjoy painting and playing my armies so much that I generally enjoy myself despite the outcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DeathlessDraich]

Mathhammer (facts)
Calculations
.

Nice to see your calculations correspond with mine in that Swordsmen, per point, are still the best infantry unit for Empire for the role of holding - true against nearly all units except maybe 2.
Incorporating Steadfast, assumed the test is passed, Using Sav Orcs - Swordsmen will last 7.4 rounds while Halberdiers will last about 2 rounds less.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8Pxb...ature=youtu.be

[The bearded one]

Nice to see your calculations correspond with mine in that Swordsmen, per point, are still the best infantry unit for Empire for the role of holding - true against nearly all units except maybe 2.
Incorporating Steadfast, assumed the test is passed, Using Sav Orcs - Swordsmen will last 7.4 rounds while Halberdiers will last about 2 rounds less.

7.4 rounds against savage orcs? Howmany swordsmen are there exactly against howmany savage orcs?

[Spiney Norman]

People are crazy if they think Spearmen are better defensively. No parry, worse WS. That makes them WORSE defensively.

The thing that makes Spearmen better is that they are 2pts cheaper per model, for every 2.5 models in your unit you get an extra one with Spearmen. Trust me, 2 points cheaper over a unit of 50 is huge, it's almost an extra cannon huge. Would I rather have a unit of swordsmen, or a unit of Spearmen AND a cannon...

Ws4 is huge. Yes they are worth taking in an army with mostly ws3 troops.

Ws4 might be "huge" but 2 pts is "huger".

Swordsmen would be viable at 6pts, at 7 they are not, one point more than Spearmen would have made them a wash, 2 points more makes them distinctly overpriced.

[Torga_DW]

Mathhammer (facts)

Discussion

Spearmen without shields would be better economically in this match up, but that is not the common equipment seen is it?

I have not made the calculations which unit would remain steadfast for the longest time, but what you need is 1-2 turns of steadfast for a counter charge, all units will lose combat eventually in a drawn out combat.

Perhaps it wasn't the common equipment, but maybe it will become that? For the competitive players, if thats the best unit to hold the line for 1-2 turns, and possibly do it again later during the battle, then thats probably what they'll use. For the OP, i guess it depends what sort of meta you're going to be playing in, and possibly tournaments. Theres nothing fundamentally 'wrong' with swordsmen, and myself i think they look cool. Its just a matter of how efficient you want your list.

This is all comparing in a vacuum though, as i said i would probably have a warrior priest in my regimental anvil, and possibly detachments to support it such as halbadiers.

[vinush]

Swordsmen would be viable at 6pts, at 7 they are not, one point more than Spearmen would have made them a wash, 2 points more makes them distinctly overpriced.

I have to disagree here. WS 4, hand weapon and shield is worth more than a halberd, which is in turn worth more than a spear. It's all a matter of scale really.

THE \/ince

[The bearded one]

I have to disagree here. WS 4, hand weapon and shield is worth more than a halberd, which is in turn worth more than a spear. It's all a matter of scale really.

THE \/ince

To be honest, I think a halberd is worth more. Sure, you sacrifice protection, but you are better at wounding and modify enemy armoursaves. Halbediers actually kill stuff, especially with hitting buffs from hurricaniums or warriorpriests.

[Algovil]

I forgot one thing in my calculation, Killing Blow. Now the purpose was not to show how the different units does against KB and no armour saves were available against S6 anyway, still can you parry a Killing Blow?

[Spiney Norman]

I have to disagree here. WS 4, hand weapon and shield is worth more than a halberd, which is in turn worth more than a spear. It's all a matter of scale really.

THE \/ince

Ws4 + shield is probably worth the same as a halberd, a spear is worth less than that admittedly, which is why it is a point cheaper. str3 still makes swordsmen negligible as damage causers, which is what makes halberdiers so much better. The only example I know of for halberd costings in an 8E book is tomb guard where Halberds cost 2pts per model, which seems consistent with the pricing of empire halberdiers (if we assume the basic state trooper profile at 4pts with no gear).

If we assume the convention common in many army books (both 7th & 8th edition) that spear and shields are both worth 1pt per model on infantry as an additional option, you basically end up with swordsmen paying 2pts for +1WS, which is too much.

[vinush]

To be honest, I think a halberd is worth more. Sure, you sacrifice protection, but you are better at wounding and modify enemy armoursaves. Halbediers actually kill stuff, especially with hitting buffs from hurricaniums or warriorpriests.

In game use, I would agree, but from a design perspective not strictly true. A halberd is a 1 point piece of equipment, as is a shield. +1 WS is worth the equivalent of 1 point, therefore Halberdiers cost 1 point more than the spearmen do, but swordsmen cost 2 points more.

THE \/ince

[vinush]

Ws4 + shield is probably worth the same as a halberd, a spear is worth less than that admittedly, which is why it is a point cheaper. str3 still makes swordsmen negligible as damage causers, which is what makes halberdiers so much better. The only example I know of for halberd costings in an 8E book is tomb guard where Halberds cost 2pts per model, which seems consistent with the pricing of empire halberdiers (if we assume the basic state trooper profile at 4pts with no gear).

If we assume the convention common in many army books (both 7th & 8th edition) that spear and shields are both worth 1pt per model on infantry as an additional option, you basically end up with swordsmen paying 2pts for +1WS, which is too much.

Actually, O&G and VC both get spear upgrades for free on their troops. It's not entirely unthinkable that Empire Spearmen get them for free too.

THE \/ince

[Algovil]

For Warhammer in general, handweapon and shield compared tp spear and shield are considered about equal as far as I am concerned. For example in the NEW Vampire Counts book, skeletons with or without spear cost the same, parry is about comparable to fight in extra rank. 7th ed book, spears were +1pts, something that was not worth taking, spears cost extra for Orcs in the NEW O&G book right? Spear is not worth taking for extra cost.

I would almost go as far to say that Hw&S is better than Spear & Shield for core troops used for steadfast. The reason people take spears on skeletons is mainly because of 6+ regen from mortis engine. We have the same problem with the Empire where the Ward save from the Luminark and from Prayers, does nothing for Swordsmen, while it boosts all other state troops, bad design IMO, and this maybe pushes swordsmen to be overcosted, when using these units, when I think about it, swordsmen would maybe be fine at 6pts.

But there is not really enough room for balance adjustments between three almost equal troops. Swordsmen could be too cheap at 6pts, compared to spearmen, but would be Ok compared to Halberdiers IMO. At 7pts I think they are a tiny bit too expensive. (Say if a spearmen was 50pts, a Halberdier could be 60pts and a Swordsman 65pts.)

EDIT: are spears free for Orcs?

[Spiney Norman]

Actually, O&G and VC both get spear upgrades for free on their troops. It's not entirely unthinkable that Empire Spearmen get them for free too.

THE \/ince

Errr, Night goblins get them for free, common goblins, orcs and savage orcs all pay 1pt for them (so the majority of O&G units that can take them), and so do tomb king skeletons. IMHO the pts irregularity with common goblins and night goblin spears was either a mistake they won't admit to or a gimmick to make NGs more attractive to counterbalance the introduction of the common gobbo ninjas.

VC skeletons got free spears so that Phil Kelly could one-up the tomb king book, because apparently the theme of the VC book was "we're tomb kings but better".

The point is clear that "free" spears on infantry is the exception on a few isolated units rather than the rule. After all a spear is clearly worth more than a basic hand weapon because it affords you an extra rank of attacks.

[vinush]

What is your proof that Phil Kelly was trying to "one up" the TK army book? Or are you basing this on internet scuttlebut?

[Souppilgrim]

Honestly, 7 pts is too much to pay for a state troop. It's not hugely overcosted for swordsmen, but it is at least half a point overcosted. I think it comes down to the following, in my case:
1. I'm not converting painted swordsmen, they look good and 20 of them aren't so bad as a detachment bus.
2. I'm not making any future swordsmen what-so-ever.
3. If the arms aren't glued heavily, I would be very likely to convert non-painted swordsmen, assuming I have the shaft arms available (halbs use them, so they might not be).

[Lord Solar Plexus]

I think people in general underestimate how huge WS4 is compared to WS3.

It's usefulness correlates with the model's cost and alternatives.

People are crazy if they think Spearmen are better defensively. No parry, worse WS. That makes them WORSE defensively.

On a model vs. model basis, yes. There's more to defense than those stats though: Offensive output is very important to determine defensive value for example (because fight are not won looking at kills OR casualties but both) as well as numbers. In units of a fixed size (detachments), Swordsmen could be halfway passable.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

Mathhammer (facts)

Halberdiers
...
Grave Guards win by ~9.58 only counting wounds

Swordsmen
...
Grave Guards win by ~8.24 only counting wounds

Spearmen
...
lose by 10

Discussion
Swordsmen die by almost two men less each combat phase in average, compared to Halberdiers, which in turn kill in average about 1/2 Grave Guard extra each combat phase. Spearmen do not kill much, and die in droves

Your conclusions are not entirely true. Swordsmen are likely to lose 1 model less (1.38) per round. When we spend the same amount of points on the unit - and why not, we need to fill core -, Halberdiers will have 6-7 more models to start with. Both will break in round 3 with a very very marginal edge to the Halberdiers. In this situation, Swordsmen are not the better anvil.

Spearmen lose 2 more models each round compared to Swordsmen. Both are at a disadvantage when flanked but Swordsmen suffer more - it's the AS + parry that makes them survive. Spears without shields - and that is how I would use them to keep them cheap -, and assuming the same amount of points spent on the unit, their increased starting numbers allows them to stay steadfast / keep 3 ranks for four turns.

If you cannot increase the size of the unit in question, eg. in a detachment, then individual quality can be more important than point cost.

I have not made the calculations which unit would remain steadfast for the longest time, but what you need is 1-2 turns of steadfast for a counter charge, all units will lose combat eventually in a drawn out combat.

Yes, but that is the most important question we must answer when we ask what the best anvil unit would be. If you only need to hold for a single round, the question is moot - just use anything with ranks. Also, no counter-charge is ever guaranteed. We all know what happens to plans once we start to deploy, or roll for a scenario. Sometimes a unit must hold out on its own just one more round.

As an aside, in this particular scenario, you'd also need to have something extremely killy. The flanker would need to kill ~8-10 models, or he could easily run. 3 DGK's all in b2b (15 GS/10 S6 Knights) kill about 4 GG (5 GG/5 GG) + flank + charge and do not even disrupt. With Halberds to the front, you get 6 kills, 3 ranks, standard, flank, charge = 12. That's barely enough to break even with the GG's kills, let alone whatever SCR they've got. Then there's the possibility that the ones fighting to the side cause a wound on your flankers or that your opponent removes models from the flank about to get charged to reduce attacks...

[The bearded one]

statetroops sure do suck at fighting