What REALLY Wins Games?

[Oogie boogie boss]

Hi all, I was talking to a friend yesterday about a big game we've planned later this year (16,000pts- Skaven vs Allied WoC, Beastmen and Ogres), and an interesting question was posed which I thought was worthy of internet based discussion.
Basically, we are both going to be on opposite sides during this game, I controlling 1/3 of the Skaven force, whilst he controls the Beastmen element of the 'dark alliance', and we were discussing which of side would win. Graciously, he was of the opinion that the Skaven would emerge triumphant, whilst I believed that the allied force would wipe the floor with us.
The reason he thought the Skaven had the edge was, because it's all one army, we'd have a greater level of synergy and army inter-play. I, however, thought that the uber units and spells those armies can put out, such as Chosen Hordes, Monsters, Ironblasters, etc would be too much.

This led me to ponder, which, in 8th ed., is the more crucial factor in winning games; synergy and tactics or power? Now, I know before I even ask most people will say synergy and tactics, because we all like to believe we are Hannibal reborn, but think of all those games where your opponent's deathstar horde has smashed your army despite you doing everything right. Or those times where an uber spell wipes half your models off the board. And think about the army lists you yourselves use, and how much particular units, characters, items, etc are stand alone game winners.

8th is all about 'more'. More men, more firepower, more magic, more hittyness.

So what is it that really wins? Power? Or Tactics.

[Asuryan's Spear]

Personally i'm gonna be boring and say a mixture of the two. your manouvering can be as good as you like but if you don't have tools to make it count then your gonna be in trouble. although in general the units that cause chaos and are often central to plans tend to have high WS/BS and high str so i am gonna argue that acess to these tends to be important.

[Yowzo]

Personally i'm gonna be boring and say a mixture of the two.

There's a third factor: luck.

Warhammer is ultimately a dice-based system so having dice on your side (or against you) can turn a battle's outcome.

It's all nice if you have set up for a multi charge on an enemy unit, then your flank unit rolls a 3 for charge distance and doesn't get there. Or you have saved 3 dice to dispel the last crucial 2-dice spell and he rolls double sixes. Or your trolls fail to regenerate any of 9 wounds they have received.

Good generalship is about turning the odds in your favour, but dice are still dice.

[Chaos Undecided]

Agreed even the best laid out plans of attacks can be foiled by a bout of rubber sword syndrome, personally I seem to consistently roll worse on wounding dice than I should when faced with an opponent who seems to always roll over average (same set of dice btw) it kinda screws things over regularly.

[Oogie boogie boss]

True, luck is always going to play a cruial role, but that's an immutable situation. Besides, having a good mind for tactics or powerful units, spells, etc, minimises the effect luck has on the game. What i'm really asking is has 8th swung the balance in favour of power reliance or is the game more dependent on strategy?

[bad dice]

Whit 16.000 points i would say that endurance is going to take the day.
That is going to bee a long long game and it's hard to keep you edge that long.

But when it comes down to these kind of games in my experiance the team that wins is the team that can deploy the most flying monsters on the flanks.
Realy that is so incirdibly hard to deal whit if there are 4 or 5 of thos things.

[Tayrod]

Well: Im under the impression that if you'd let me pick the units I want from all over the warhammer universe, in a single army. Raw Power would trumf tactic. Chosenstar, buffed with warrior priests, and banner of the world dragon. Skavenslaves locking huge chunks of the enemy in CC, while dwarf templates rain down on them, and Druchii Sorceress using the sacrifical dagger on goblins? Yes please.

[kaubin]

True, luck is always going to play a cruial role, but that's an immutable situation. Besides, having a good mind for tactics or powerful units, spells, etc, minimises the effect luck has on the game. What i'm really asking is has 8th swung the balance in favour of power reliance or is the game more dependent on strategy?

It depends on style too. I have my Dark Elves that I dislike to play in 8th. Everyone says they are still a top army thanks to the synergy of the cauldron of blood and shadow magic, that all the parts fit well together, but I can`t seem to be giving the right buffs where and when I need them, and at the end of the day all I seem to get is a bunch of strength 3 attacks, which doesn`t cut it past big blocks of core.

On the other hand, my Orcs are all about power. My army is full of strength 5 and 6 attacks. Things like animosity cut down the synergy a lot but the sheer number of bodies and the fact that the strength is high all the time seems to align more with my style of playing than buffing and synergy. As long as I bring more power, i`ll be fine.

[Oogie boogie boss]

Whit 16.000 points i would say that endurance is going to take the day.
That is going to bee a long long game and it's hard to keep you edge that long.

But when it comes down to these kind of games in my experiance the team that wins is the team that can deploy the most flying monsters on the flanks.
Realy that is so incirdibly hard to deal whit if there are 4 or 5 of thos things.

It's taking place over 3 days (the first day will be list writing and deployment. We're quite slow at this stuff as we always end up joking around and getting distracted by food and video games), and there's 3 Skaven players against 4 allied players. We did one last year which was the same points, but Skaven vs Dwarves, and it was amazing fun. By the end of the game on the second day, both sides had taken 70% casualties and it was a draw. Oddly, a lot of it did come down to tactics, and the way both armies operated as a whole was bigger than any one unit or spell, simply because there was so much there!
However, i think the nature of the allied forces will make that different this time around, and i'm really talking about the more usual sized games, i.e 1,000pts to 3,000pts. I only mentioned the big game as it was the catalyst too this conversation.

[Frankly]

So what is it that really wins?

Practise. Playing a heep of games.

[snottlebocket]

If you're talking purely winning? It's mostly a contest of how much of a dick do you want to be to your opponent. Warhammer isn't balanced by a long shot so if you're desperate to win it's just a matter of min maxing whatever is the most broken at any given time. It's not fool proof but it'll take you a long way.

[BigbyWolf]

Dice. All the power and tactics in the world won't help you if your don't roll well.

[En Sabbah Nur]

All these comments are right, but I personnally think it also depends on the army you're playing. Some armies have not the sheer power to overthrow anything only with it (Tk for ex), while others have definitely the combination (Ogres, WoC...).

I'd rather think that the question is reductive, for you can't only reduce the game to an apect of it, just like you can't spare any ingredient on another on a good dish.

I think what really wins games is... fun. Whether you win or loose, having a good time always has the upper hand

[boli]

The allied force will have a couple of significant advantages.

1. Access to more "spell lores"; allows a lot more flexibility
2. Leadership bubble... unless you have one homegeneus blob of skaven most of your army is going to be out of the 12" (I hope 18"!) leadership bubble.

[Noblesse oblige]

Yup, in dice we trust, I had many games in which everything was on my side and I was losing just because of good roll on one uber spell or my bad roll...
Also I think that in 8-th editions tactic doesn't mean much, the 8-th is nearly an absolute random, roll for charge, uber spell...but sometimes it has one more factor - deathstars, like chaos chosens, and personally I don't like games that were won by deathstars, even more than games which were won by one good roll.

[Sexiest_hero]

Deployment, followed by assassination followed by answer to armor/magic. Over all of that is Army know-how and getting the "feel" of being a good general. For instance, I know a lot of people look down on beastmen forgetting that they tangle with 7th books and are just as good as 8th books. Beastmen rares are quite the joke as well. Most monsters will get hacked down but not say the Ghorgon, with stubborn 10 and almost all 6s in stats, he can hit a unit and just killing blow and thunderstomp forever. A jabber is a joke, till there are flying doombulls harpies, angry razorgors anda shouting chariot in the back field. top that all off with the fact I will on average have 11PD to 4 DD advantage in magic. It usually goes from 'LoL beastmen" to "Herdstone spam is broken and so is the beast banner." If you know how to take advantage of your army and take advantage of the other guys army, you'll do well luck depending.

[Lord Dan]

What kind of lists are the Skaven players taking? Also how on earth are are you dividing 16,000 points 3 ways?

[Oogie boogie boss]

We're breakng the army into 3,000pt chunks, and dividing them up. Haaven't wrtten them yet, but we'll have pretty much everything!

[medevilmike]

Numbers mixed with buffs/debuffs. dont mean hordes really but just numbers...3 units of 20 gor one flanking with miasma on the enemy are going to put a hurt on most units...add wildform/beast banner and most things fall over. Id bet on allies just for versatility of magic. skaven lores are destructive and most of the allies units will be hurting b4 combat but they will then just wipe up the skaven

[Lord Dan]

We're breakng the army into 3,000pt chunks, and dividing them up. Haaven't wrtten them yet, but we'll have pretty much everything!

I guess that's my concern. 16,000 doesn't break down into 3,000 point chunks.