Depends if the goblin is steadfast on his own pathetic leadership, or the generals not pathetic at all leadership.Originally Posted by narrativium
Depends if the goblin is steadfast on his own pathetic leadership, or the generals not pathetic at all leadership.
Plan B kill it with fire
Meat is Murder tasty, tasty murder
Well we had the 'autobreak'-shennanigans in 7th and, while handling situations such as the five goblins fighting the BT rather damn appropriately, we all got tired of this after a while.
So I guess this is just Another instance of the pendulum swinging back with full force, as a GW does have a tendency to conduct things for better or worse..
In the end, and perhaps because I'm not yet bored with it, I Think the merits of Steadfast outweighs the Corky off-chance stupid scenarios (Thirster vs Goblins being one, and clearly outnumbered/surrounded units being Steadfast the other) - that probably could have been tended to in an alternate universe without 'destroying' the mechanic as a whole.
This is one of the reasons I am starting to run 10 man skink cohort units for 50 points. I can stop a decent sized monster or small unit of scouts or cavalry for 2 or 3 rounds sometimes.
That only gives us one more reason to kill the General. It makes so much sense it's uncanny.
What is one of the reasons, steadfast? How do those 10 skinks survive even a single round against a "decent sized monster", assuming they are still SF after the first round? How is a Varghulf equivalent to a small unit of archers or Pistoliers...? And how do you hold up 5 Knights for more than one turn?
The Germans are exceedingly fond of Rhine wines; they are put up in tall, slender bottles, and are considered a pleasant beverage. One tells them from vinegar by the label.
www.tablepott.de - Wir sind das Ruhrgebiet!
Yeah, I'm not sure 10 skinks hold a monster up for that long. Between their attacks and thunderstomp a monster only needs to do 6 wounds for you to lose steadfast.
I'm not saying it will work every time, but it can. Monsters aren't guaranteed to do 5 or more wounds and you can't COUNT on them every time, but it can.
As far as the knights I'll give the example of my last tournament. My unit of 10 charged a unit of 4 demigryph knights in the flank and held them for 2 turns because not only did they hold, they won the combat due two 2 wounds and a flank charge against his 2 wounds.
For 50 points it scared the heck out of him and made a huge difference in the battle because that unit was poised to flank charge my large block and then had two wait two turns to do it. The opponent just assumed he could ignore the skinks. Also many games can be won by out-deploying and for only 50 points you get another drop with 6AS, 6Parry save, poison javelin toting, aquatic, cold blooded annoyances.
I think you were outrageously lucky to do 2 wounds. Had you not done 2 you'd already have lost by 1. Had the demigryph not fluffed so badly, 3-5 skinks mightve been dead in one round.
Sometimes a post is so rotten I have to respond like dr.Cox-- My Dwarven painting log -- My Lizardmen painting log -- My Scurrying Skaven painting log -- My nurgle beastmen painting log --My Tau cadre painting log -- My knights of the white wolf -- My Ork painting log
---> Newest: 23-5-2013; Finished Riptide, broadsides and pathfinders ---> New: 13-5-2013; Lizardmen, tournament pictures, Won best painted army!
This.
You're also lucky your opponent didn't reform into a 2x2 (which probably would have been better in the ensuing combat, as I'd rather have a smaller frontage than 2 extra stomp attacks) and luckier still that he didn't run them in the more-typical 3x2 formation. A single demigryph should average 3 wounds against skinks, so two would have (on average) knocked out steadfast and forced you to take a test at -5.
More importantly, you wouldn't have been steadfast against him in the combat you described, as you both had a single rank remaining after wounds. This means even if he hadn't done any of the things I mentioned above, you would have lost combat by 1 (without steadfast) if you hadn't gotten in those two unlikely wounds.
I don't quite see the advantage of a 2x2 formation over 4 wide. You're not only losing stomps but all of the DG's attacks. 3x2 however is rather difficult with only 4 models.
Sure, but in 99 percent of the cases the monster will still win. Being steadfast alone doesn't mean you automatically hold. Just because "it can happen" doesn't make it good idea. Chances are that you're throwing away those 50 points. They would be better employed by diverting.
Last edited by Lord Solar Plexus; 26-09-2012 at 11:29.
The Germans are exceedingly fond of Rhine wines; they are put up in tall, slender bottles, and are considered a pleasant beverage. One tells them from vinegar by the label.
www.tablepott.de - Wir sind das Ruhrgebiet!
Hey, looks like we've been playing monstrous cavalry incorrectly!
Not that I don't agree with most of what you guys have said but it's still such a small points cost and they have many uses. I do see however that I was wrong in that they would have been steadfast, silly to even miss that, but since I won the combat regardless that first round it didn't matter. The reason he didn't reform was because he had assumed that the skinks would break and it would have totally put his unit out of position to get into a real combat for another 2 rounds. Which, again, was well worth my 50 point unit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote