Where is Warhammer Won and Lost?

[Malorian]

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]

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]

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

Wood Elves can move and fire with no penalty.

[Why]

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]

Thanks Why, that went completely over my head.

[HurrDurr]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I guess at this point we'll need to agree to disagree.

[Scythe]

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]

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.