PDA

View Full Version : Should Greatswords be better?



Maren
16-01-2012, 21:44
I've was flipping through the Empire armybook and came upon an old question of mine. Should greatswords be better?

Now to explain where I'm coming from in this question: I've never played empire myself, nor have I played against them in quite a few years. Since 6th i Believe.
But everytime I've read their rules I've always thought they look a little weak. But then again as I stated I really don't know anything on the subject.

I think they should either have 2 attacks or maybe strength 4. I mean aren't they supposed to be an elite combat unit, or have I got that all wrong? That's at least how I have always pictured them.

Catferret
16-01-2012, 21:46
They are a lot better than they used to be. Back in 4th they were basic human statline with light armour and a 2-handed sword.

I'd say that, in comparison, WS4, Ld8 Stubborn and Full Plate is pretty darn elite.

Mozzamanx
16-01-2012, 21:52
They are already excellent, dependable troops:

- WS4, S5 with a Greatsword
- ASL is slightly cancelled out by the 4+ Plate Armour
- Stubborn at any unit size

While it isn't tremendously impressive on paper, it means that against 'normal' core you can quite happily get away with hitting on 3's, wounding on 2/3. The worst you can realistically send them into is hitting on 4s, wounding on 3s. That's respectable for infantry, not to mention the benefits of Hatred for a Warrior Priest. And ultimately, you're sending them into troops which have already been withered by Handguns and artillery!

They pack good armour for infantry and are always Stubborn. While slow, they will deal some good damage and hold the line where it matters. And all for 10pts!

They aren't Chaos Warriors, but then they're also 60% of the cost.

the Witch kings regent
16-01-2012, 21:52
no they are just good enough as they are. as catferret said thier Ws4 Ld 8 and stubborn. then they have thier 4+ full plate which other races would kill for on thier elite. the dark elf equivilant is around the same points but has a +1 to Ws and S plus killing blow to even out the stubborn and full plate. high elves are more expensive for good reason. (damn ASF and 2 attacks). Empire in general had the most balanced Points per guy. the things people complain about with empire is they play units against thier tactics. back from tangent great swords are good just as they are. no need to change them.

Makaber
16-01-2012, 21:58
Yeah. Basically you don't want too much inflation of troops. They're as good as they realistically should be: WS4, 4+ armour, Stubborn. Though I feel it's weird elves for some reason should have Strength 4 when humans doesn't, thought that's more of a problem with elves more than anything else.

Algovil
16-01-2012, 22:01
They are perfect as they are!

While they can not stand up to the elites of other races, I think they fit the image I get from reading the fluff perfectly, stubborn is a great rule!

Skywave
16-01-2012, 22:07
They aren't "good" when you look at the damage potential, but they are an effective unit. They might be a bit pricy in points, but they definitly work the way they are.

Urgat
16-01-2012, 22:10
Greatswords are certainly superior to normal humans, with superior stats, superior gear and even a special rule. I understand that some would like them even better, a human elite that could go toe-to-toe with other species elites, but they remain normal mortals. Elves and dwarves are species that do enjoy superior physical aptitude of their own, being more agile, fast, or strong, or tough. Lizardmen are brutishly strong too. Chaos warriors are magically boosted, so is their gear. Orcs are also hulking brutes compared to a human. You can only do so much with a basic human, really. Any better and you would be stepping in hero-level humans, and we don't really want space marines in WFB, right? The closest you'd come to that would be Grail Knights, but they aren't really human anymore either. Greatswords are the perfect embodiment of the Warhammer human, pushing their skills to the limits, but those limits are, well, those of a human. The best a human can do is not enough to match the other races, that's probably what makes Warhammer so grim: humanity is outmatched in every aspect by one or the other enemy species.

In short: Greatswords are perfect the way they are.

Maren
16-01-2012, 22:13
Thanks, as I said I hacen't seen them in action for a lng time so I don't really know how they perform. Thank you for the replies and now I can finally relax when looking at the models. :)

ihavetoomuchminis
16-01-2012, 22:21
They are fine for Empire. They work really good in a big horde with an archlector or warrior priest and the Armour Piercing or the +1 Leadership banner. But they should be 1 point cheaper, IMO.

The Low King
16-01-2012, 22:26
They have the same damage output as Dwarf warriors with GWs (also 10pts), similar survivability (less toughnees, better armour), higher movement, higher initiative (for spells), 1 less LD and Stubborn.....i would say they are fine

Francis
16-01-2012, 22:43
I think great swords work very well, although I would have liked it if they had I4 and not I3. This is simply because I think they should be at least as fast as Swordsmen. (And yes I know they have ASL and that it doesn't really matter, but still).

Chiron
16-01-2012, 23:10
Really need to be able to take a magic banner without having to rely on the General

scarletsquig
16-01-2012, 23:13
Magic banner and I4 are definitely the 2 tweaks that I would make.

Commissar_Kahl
16-01-2012, 23:13
No they are fine

snyggejygge
16-01-2012, 23:20
They're fine as they are, have faced them with many armies, they always seem to perform well enough for their points.

Okuto
16-01-2012, 23:24
They're only human......

I think they're fine....they don't need S4...nor do they need A2

They're just exceptional state troops with better gear and weapons....they aren't daemon infused loonies....elves...dwarves...orcs...vampires

Look at much muscles orcs and chaos marauders have...you dont see them running around with S4

Shadowsinner
16-01-2012, 23:30
i think being a unit that honors the tradition of using greatweapons they should be at least ws 5, and s4. make them 1-2 points more expensive to compensate for the boost.

I always felt that they should ignore ASL anyway given the fluff. but thats just me

The Low King
16-01-2012, 23:37
because being as strong as the best dwarf troops wouldnt be too good.....

Maren
16-01-2012, 23:46
I would also like to see them I 4. As stated it wouldn't actually do anything for them but I just want it there for apperances sake :P

Tuttivillus
16-01-2012, 23:56
Really need to be able to take a magic banner without having to rely on the General

That (!!!) is the biggest sin GMcNeill made to them. Everything is fine stats, cost, gear. It's all perfect, but why elite unit cannot take magic banner is a mystery to me. :shifty:

Okuto
17-01-2012, 01:03
I think I rather save the pts than have I$ for the sake of having it....

Francis
17-01-2012, 01:45
I think I rather save the pts than have I$ for the sake of having it....

Wouldn't want the stat change to increase their cost at all. It just feels right for them to be I 4 when the Swordsmen are. I also want to get on the magic banner bandwagon, those two things are the only things that should change with this unit.

sulla
17-01-2012, 02:29
Yeah. Basically you don't want too much inflation of troops. They're as good as they realistically should be: WS4, 4+ armour, Stubborn. Though I feel it's weird elves for some reason should have Strength 4 when humans doesn't, thought that's more of a problem with elves more than anything else.
Plenty of humans have s4 too; inner circle knights, grail knights and questing knights too. It's not unheard of for human r'n'f to have s4. IThe question is whether the extra strength wold be worth the extra cost. If the cost jumped by, say 2pts, would the extra kill or two reall be worth losing the extra bodies? Probably worth including as an option for one unit though, I suppose.


Magic banner and I4 are definitely the 2 tweaks that I would make.
I suppose the magic banner thing was to represent the rarity of magic gubbins in the footsloggers of the empire. With knights being so weakened in the current game, it makes sense to make banners more available to infantry, I suppose. As to I4, beastmen lost a lot of their I4 for their latest book... perhaps swordsmen will do the same?

Overall, greatswords are pretty solid for their current cost. Besides, Empire players can always buff them with Wyssan's wildform, or hex their opponents with miasma or use any of a host or more difficult spells. or use the tried and true empire artillery to reduce enemies to a more manageable size before combat...:)

Okuto
17-01-2012, 02:32
Wouldn't want the stat change to increase their cost at all. It just feels right for them to be I 4 when the Swordsmen are. I also want to get on the magic banner bandwagon, those two things are the only things that should change with this unit.

You'd still pay a pt for the +1 to I.....regardless of whether or not you actually use it.....greatswords are fine......

Just cause everybody else's elite infantry have "special rules" doesn't mean our humble greatswords need to as well....

So what our greatswords don't have "armed to tha teef"/killing blow....etc etc...

Yeah yeah our greatswords are generic....what of it:shifty:

Francis
17-01-2012, 02:41
You'd still pay a pt for the +1 to I.....regardless of whether or not you actually use it.....greatswords are fine......

I don't think you understand me m8. I would like them to be +1 I without any increase in costs. If that is not possible I would not like any change at all. Imho I don't think a +1 in initiative would warrant a +1 in points cost for the greatswords.

Okuto
17-01-2012, 02:47
I don't think you understand me m8. I would like them to be +1 I without any increase in costs. If that is not possible I would not like any change at all. Imho I don't think a +1 in initiative would warrant a +1 in points cost for the greatswords.

I simply don't think they hand out +1 I for free......:D
Trying to eat your cake now are we?

Even swordsmen pay half a pt for +1 I

What makes you think greatswords would get this for free:eyebrows:

dwarfhold13
17-01-2012, 02:48
i using them as much as i like using hammerers in a dwarf list.. the tough 3 kinda sucks, but they make a great anvil unit with a bsb

Skywave
17-01-2012, 03:21
What makes you think greatswords would get this for free:eyebrows:

Because Swordmen have + 1WS and +1I over other core state troops for free? :D They cost +1pts because of the shields (and the other can pay for it too), but they have better stats for the same price :p

Giving Greatsword +1I would not necessailly equal to +1pts, especially for a uneventfull boost like this on GW-wielding troops. It'll be mostly a cosmetic change ;)

Anyway I'm not looking to any boost when they got remade outside of the magical banner thing. That thing is just an old concept of early 7th book that was quickly scrapped after a few books, a shame!

Don Zeko
17-01-2012, 03:36
I think that one point cheaper would be fair, and I'd fix the magic banner issue, but beyond that I'd say that they're fine.

shabbadoo
17-01-2012, 04:02
With a bit of help from a Razor Standard(BSB) and a piddling Wyssan's Wildform spell, last night I watched a unit of Greatswords chop the living bejeezus out of Chaos Knights led by a cheesed out Chaos Lord. It was sheer brutality. Two combat phases and the Chaos Knights were hacked apart and scattered over the ground. Chaos Knights are just plain foul, and it didn't take much to boost the Greatswords to a point where they could demolish one of the hardest units in the game. Almost anything other than Chaos Knights is similarly going to be in trouble, even without the Greatswords having the Razor Standard or being affected by a buffing spell.

I agree that such an elite unit, which literally makes up the personal body guard of Elector Counts, should be able to take a magic banner all on its own though.

ChrisIronBrow
17-01-2012, 04:21
Honestly I think there Terrible. They are double the points of Halbs and don't perform double as well, and they are special instead of core.

20 greatswords or 40 halbs? I know which I take every time.

The Halbs will be Steadfast, and 2 wounds is better than 4+ armor. Ws 4 rarely matters, and while Str 5 is nice it's not that much better. GS are ok as a tiny stubborn speedbump. but that's about it.

Agoz
17-01-2012, 04:46
greatswords are just experienced state troops with a little bit more skill, one step above state trooper but one step below a knight, which means they should be better than state troops but worse than a knight, which they are, so they are exactly where they should be in the empire power scale.

theshoveller
17-01-2012, 08:08
I'd have them at 9 points (because Stubborn is less of a big deal nowadays) but I wouldn't change the stats. I'd like to have them with a magic banner, but I could live without it if the points went down.

Hive Mind 33
17-01-2012, 09:18
Why would you take greatswords ever. Between cannons and mortars there is no reason ever to take a them. A unit of 40 with a full command is about the same price as 3 mortars and 2 cannons. Stubborn ld 8 and a 4+ saves means nothing when your t3, other then the most basic of infantry they are not going to compete with anything else. Swordsmen are a better investment at six points you get the same weapon skill, a parry save, the ability to strike at I4, and more of them.

Ctuchik
17-01-2012, 09:30
Drop the full plate and go back to heavy armor. Reduce cost to 7 or 8. Ten points is way to much for one T3 wound.

Aluinn
17-01-2012, 09:57
I'd have them at 9 points (because Stubborn is less of a big deal nowadays) but I wouldn't change the stats. I'd like to have them with a magic banner, but I could live without it if the points went down.

I find Stubborn very useful on them since it allows you take a horde of 40 or so and be confident that they'll stick around and keep chopping things up even if they lose combat by, say, 3, and their rearmost rank is lost. I really wouldn't field them in a formation, nor in numbers, where I'd ever feel that they were likely to be Steadfast (without Stubborn) in most fights. That would require either "wasting" their high-quality attacks by not hording them up, or taking at least 50, which is again not making the best use of their offensive power and strikes me as trying to use them for something which State Troops would do better and more efficiently.

Overall I think they're very good for their points cost; they aren't the best elite unit in the game by a very long shot, but being around the cost of a lot of other armies' Core I think you get a lot of bang for your buck out of them.

The one change I would make if charged with writing a new army book would be to allow them a magic standard of up to 50 points, though, without a General in the list, given that they're the premier elite infantry of the Empire and it's pretty much par for the course in any other army.

(Oh, and they should also re-name full plate to something like, I don't know, truesteel plate, augmented plate, Dwarf-forged plate, or some such, and then it wouldn't seem so completely silly that Greatsword models aren't wearing full armor.)

Far2Casual
17-01-2012, 09:57
The only thing they deserve is a Magic Banner.

For the rest, they are already awesome.

Spiney Norman
17-01-2012, 10:30
I think they're fine, there was a time when I advocated them being WS5 because they should be better than core swordsmen, but fluffwise its the swordsmen that should have WS3 (though sadly that would kill them as a viable choice). WS4 is the standard goto figure for human veteran fighters (empire/bret knights, greatswords, etc), whereas WS3 is the human grunt infantry (core state troops) and WS2 the untrained yob with a pointy stick (bret peasants).

They definitely do deserve a magic banner, although the solution to that of course is to lead with a general of the empire ;)


Because Swordmen have + 1WS and +1I over other core state troops for free? :D They cost +1pts because of the shields (and the other can pay for it too), but they have better stats for the same price :p

They don't get those stat boosts for free, they pay 1pt for them combined. Halberdiers and spearmen have additional wargear (either a spear or a halberd) which at the time the book was released was appropriately valued at 1pt each. Ironically in 7th Edition nobody took halberdiers because they were generally the worst performing of the 7th Ed Empire infantry, swordsmen and spearmen however were pretty popular as I recall, with a large spearman unit backed up by combat detachments being one of the hardest basic infantry units to crack in the game at the time.

When the last empire book was written the initiative stat was largely ignored unless someone cast pit of shades on you, combat strike order was decided by who charged, and certainly against infantry combat rarely lasted more than 1 turn. So essentially the difference between a swordsman and a halberdier is swapping the halberd for a shield and paying 1pt for +1WS.

Sh4d0w
17-01-2012, 11:06
They have the same damage output as Dwarf warriors with GWs (also 10pts), similar survivability (less toughnees, better armour), higher movement, higher initiative (for spells), 1 less LD and Stubborn.....i would say they are fine

Haha i see the similarities but you can't really compare when one is special and the other is core, especially when that is as elite as the empire get while dwarfs step up a whole nother level

SquigBoy Extraordinaire
17-01-2012, 11:31
They are fine for Empire. They work really good in a big horde with an archlector or warrior priest and the Armour Piercing or the +1 Leadership banner. But they should be 1 point cheaper, IMO.

Agreed. I always field them with a WP with 2 hand weapons. No complaints in that department, barring the price, but 10 pts doesnt sound too bad when flagellants cost the same for a lot less in their stats, despite hatred, frenzy, etc.

Spiney Norman
17-01-2012, 11:40
Agreed. I always field them with a WP with 2 hand weapons. No complaints in that department, barring the price, but 10 pts doesnt sound too bad when flagellants cost the same for a lot less in their stats, despite hatred, frenzy, etc.

Almost anything looks good when you compare it to flaggellants, they're the worst value unit in the Empire book in 8th Edition. Its like holding a piece of rusty metal next to a **** and saying "wow, isn't it shiny"

Far2Casual
17-01-2012, 11:54
You're kidding right ?

Astafas
17-01-2012, 12:22
I think when taken in the context of the army they are great.

Reasonably priced, hard hitting and backed by cannons, mortars, xbowmen and knights as well as some very very cheap infantry.

Cheaper and they would be too easy a call. More effective and Empire would be outclassing other armies on a regular basis.

Consider Chaos and Elves (take your pick)

Chaos Warriors make greatswords look poo, except for stubborn... but cost WAY more and chaos dont get cannons* and xbows.

Elves of all types cost just that bit more and dont get any template weapons or cannons, and s3 missiles is the best that they can do. Their equivalent troops are better but the whole more expensive / crappier armour and weaker missile phase etc balance that back out.

Hope my points made sense...

*yes smartipants the hellcannon exists and is so expensive compared to cheap empire mortars or cannons that your argument is not relevant. I know you are thinking it :P

Cambion Daystar
17-01-2012, 12:27
They really need to be able to take a magic banner without having to take an Empire General.
Also the option to upgrade to strength 4 (for enough points, while moving them to rare, same as Inner Circle knights).

Oh, and they are not a step between state troops and knights as some before mentioned. They are handpicked bodyguards to elector counts. They should be better than knights, altough this is hard to achieve ingame without making them too good.

The bearded one
17-01-2012, 12:33
'handpicked bodyguards' might be an overstatement. They're statetroops who have proven themselves through acts of valour to be promoted to greatsword. Even then greatswords perform lots of pretty mundane tasks, like patrolling and guarding.

The Low King
17-01-2012, 12:40
Haha i see the similarities but you can't really compare when one is special and the other is core, especially when that is as elite as the empire get while dwarfs step up a whole nother level

Why not? one is part of an elite army whose GW warriors are one of its best units....

Also, elite troops in an army of cheap troops should really be more expensive than elite troops in an army of elite troops.


Almost anything looks good when you compare it to flaggellants, they're the worst value unit in the Empire book in 8th Edition. Its like holding a piece of rusty metal next to a **** and saying "wow, isn't it shiny"

Really? my main empire opponant swears by hordes of flaggelents...the ability to get all those valuable abilities it incredible. I seen them regularly chew through a giant or block of (my) dwarf warriors. They are very much a one use unit (because they tend to lose a lot of guys) but my they hit hard...


They really need to be able to take a magic banner without having to take an Empire General.
Also the option to upgrade to strength 4 (for enough points, while moving them to rare, same as Inner Circle knights).

Surely as the bodyguard of the Elector counts (or empire generals) they should only be able to get those benifits when you have a general or elector count on the table?


Oh, and they are not a step between state troops and knights as some before mentioned. They are handpicked bodyguards to elector counts. They should be better than knights, altough this is hard to achieve ingame without making them too good.

Veteran Knights who have spent their lives training for combat > handpicked and well trained warriors from the standing army > the troops in the standing army.

Cambion Daystar
17-01-2012, 15:00
Surely as the bodyguard of the Elector counts (or empire generals) they should only be able to get those benifits when you have a general or elector count on the table?

Not for game balance purpose



Veteran Knights who have spent their lives training for combat > handpicked and well trained warriors from the standing army > the troops in the standing army.

That's not how most knights are. Lots of them are spoiled nobility .A requirement to joint most knightly orders is noble birth. Also, training is all good and well, but greatswords have lot of battlefield experience.

theshoveller
17-01-2012, 15:46
That's not how most knights are. Lots of them are spoiled nobility .A requirement to joint most knightly orders is noble birth. Also, training is all good and well, but greatswords have lot of battlefield experience.
Noble birth is a reasonably low threshold really, historically it just means "I have an ancestor who was either rich or brave enough to be noticed" (take a look at the impoverished end of the Hidalgo class in pre-modern Spain - no matter how poor the family were, they were legally barred from taking non-military jobs because they were nobles).

Empire knights are usually as much veterans as Greatswords - the Knightly Orders are military units first and foremost, that's the distinction between them and Bretonnian knights. As a result, Empire knights and Greatswords have largely the same stats.

ChrisIronBrow
17-01-2012, 19:06
Ok, so Maybe I'm wrong. Can someone point out a single situation where Greatswords will perform better than an equivalent points value of state troops? Other than small units holding stubborn which I acknowledge is a use for small units of them.

Tuttivillus
17-01-2012, 20:46
Taking up fights where enemy cannot use his steadfast, like forests, rivers.

The Low King
17-01-2012, 20:55
in horde formation stubborn is golden

Tuttivillus
17-01-2012, 21:33
in horde formation stubborn is golden

I second that. Unit of 30 with WP is a grim reaper :evilgrin: .

Makaber
17-01-2012, 21:35
Plenty of humans have s4 too; inner circle knights, grail knights and questing knights too. It's not unheard of for human r'n'f to have s4.

I guess I was so caught up with great weapon infantry that I completely forgot about them. You are, of course, completely correct. I do still feel Strength 4 Elven infantry is pretty weird though, but I digress.

Tuttivillus
17-01-2012, 21:43
I do still feel Strength 4 Elven infantry is pretty weird though, but I digress.

They are lumber jacks, man. They chop things to make up for living, and since Ulthuan is a most expensive place to live, they have a whooooooole lot of chopping. :D

Makaber
18-01-2012, 00:09
Elf lumberjacks bodyguards with a lion fetish. It's weird place, Ulthuan.

The bearded one
18-01-2012, 00:23
Elf lumberjacks bodyguards with a lion fetish. It's weird place, Ulthuan.

elves are weird in general.






yeah, I went there!

Okuto
18-01-2012, 01:50
And dwarves are drunks....but lovable little drunks....

Tuttivillus
18-01-2012, 02:04
They are no drunks! Just Jovial in character LOL :D

Maskedman5oh4
18-01-2012, 04:22
I got 6 boxes of Greatswords for Christmas; to me, the unit screams "You missed me me and I hit you with my big killy sword!"

They do not need a str increase, init increase or points adjustment.

Greatswords are not a Chosenstar; they will not annihilate. Nothing in the Empire list does (barring artillery(. The Empire succeeds through multiple units supporting each other. I.E. crossbowmen firing into a unit that is then charged by knights. Halberdiers charging a unit and their detachment of swordsmen charging the flank.

IMHO the Empire should not have a 'Deathstar-like' unit.

Damocles8
18-01-2012, 04:58
I could see WS5, swordsmen are WS4, so they aren't "better" than humans, but they do feel fragile even for humans....

Souppilgrim
18-01-2012, 05:22
Honestly I think there Terrible. They are double the points of Halbs and don't perform double as well, and they are special instead of core.

20 greatswords or 40 halbs? I know which I take every time.

The Halbs will be Steadfast, and 2 wounds is better than 4+ armor. Ws 4 rarely matters, and while Str 5 is nice it's not that much better. GS are ok as a tiny stubborn speedbump. but that's about it.

This guy knows what he is talking about. They can be almost decent in horde formation with a wp, but even then they are horribly overpriced. They are T3 with a 4+ save which means they will die by the tens if you fart at them. In practice almost every troop they face will kill them on 3's and you'll get a 5+ save.

the Witch kings regent
18-01-2012, 05:47
Yeah. Basically you don't want too much inflation of troops. They're as good as they realistically should be: WS4, 4+ armour, Stubborn. Though I feel it's weird elves for some reason should have Strength 4 when humans doesn't, thought that's more of a problem with elves more than anything else.

they have S4 because they live longer and spend all thier time fighting. 2,000 years of war will make you strong. at least 2,000 years of killing with a giant blade does for executioners.

Maren
18-01-2012, 05:58
Yea but humans are physically stronger than elves (it actually even sais so in the dark elf armybook) so they having strength 4 while we don't is stupid from a fluff perspective. I call it game balance. Anyone with me?

Valnir
18-01-2012, 06:07
Yea but humans are physically stronger than elves (it actually even sais so in the dark elf armybook) so they having strength 4 while we don't is stupid from a fluff perspective. I call it game balance. Anyone with me?

Where in the army book does it say that?:confused:

therisnosaurus
18-01-2012, 06:45
You also have to consider the context under which greatswords are fielded. Elite armies traditionally have slightly overpriced core and underpriced elites. Regular armies (skaven, empire, orcs etc) have standard priced core and elites).

So you're best comparing a greatsword to a stormvermin or black orc. If you do you'll find they're pretty good value. 2 points for better armour in CC, stubborn and +1 strength over stormvermin, for 1 movement and ASL.

3 points less for 1 less toughness, no immune to psych and lack of choppas/ATTT but gain stubborn.

All in all not bad, especially when you consider how easy it is to get them hatred. I wouldn't be surprised if they get some minor adjustments in the new book, but I think they might (and should) stay pretty much the same. They're an extremely versatile unit, very solid in large numbers and still viable in small units of 10 or so to hold up enemies and flank.

Arijharn
18-01-2012, 08:17
i think being a unit that honors the tradition of using greatweapons they should be at least ws 5, and s4. make them 1-2 points more expensive to compensate for the boost.

I always felt that they should ignore ASL anyway given the fluff. but thats just me


So in short, they should be Empire White Lions with Swords?

With better armour.

Gotta disagree with you there mate, and I don't play either army. Greatswords are pretty murderific as they are imo.

Cambion Daystar
18-01-2012, 13:04
If you do you'll find they're pretty good value. 2 points for better armour in CC, stubborn and +1 strength over stormvermin, for 1 movement and ASL.

And -2 I, and no SiN, and can't take a magic banner and can't take weaponteams, but can take detachments and +2 Ld standard (but SiN is better).




3 points less for 1 less toughness, no immune to psych and lack of choppas/ATTT but gain stubborn.

Did you count the price for shields with the orcs? If not, greatswords have a better save.

Cambion Daystar
18-01-2012, 13:06
So in short, they should be Empire White Lions with Swords?

With better armour.

Gotta disagree with you there mate, and I don't play either army. Greatswords are pretty murderific as they are imo.
Only if you add a priest/archlector to the unit. Without it they are not worth their price (although that doesn't stop me from fielding. They are to cool to leave at home :))

woodster17
18-01-2012, 13:13
How would you explain the buff to I4 since they are wearing massive heavy plate armour and carrying a monstrous sword around? Not happening. Problem is people want to compare Greatswords to Swordmasters since they look kind of similar model wise. Not happening. Greatswords do fine, they are a useful unit and certainly better than standard state troops. Just don't make the assumption you can go toe to toe with other armies elite units, that ends in a mess.

The bearded one
18-01-2012, 13:50
In comparison to dwarf warriors with great weapons they've got -1 toughness, but a better save and stubborn, and dwarf warriors with great weapons are pretty good value and the mainstay of dwarf armies nowadays.


Honestly I think there Terrible. They are double the points of Halbs and don't perform double as well, and they are special instead of core.

20 greatswords or 40 halbs? I know which I take every time.

The Halbs will be Steadfast, and 2 wounds is better than 4+ armor. Ws 4 rarely matters, and while Str 5 is nice it's not that much better. GS are ok as a tiny stubborn speedbump. but that's about it.


This guy knows what he is talking about. They can be almost decent in horde formation with a wp, but even then they are horribly overpriced. They are T3 with a 4+ save which means they will die by the tens if you fart at them. In practice almost every troop they face will kill them on 3's and you'll get a 5+ save.

Do not underestimate strength 5 compared to strenght 4. And just for the record, let's mathhammer it out. 40 halbediers vs 20 greatswords, lets say both are 10 wide. This matchup is inherently disadvantagous for any great weapon wielder in.. well. existence, because of the lower numbers and loss of attacks by striking last. If it were 80 halbediers vs 40 greatswords it'd probably be a different matter.

regardless, 40 halbediers in a horde strike, 30 attacks, 15 hits, 10 wounds, 3.33 of which are saved. 7 greatswords die. The remaining 13 strike, hit roughly 9 times (8.66, but we rounded up the number of dead greatswords too), and kill about 7.5 halbediers.

the damage output is pretty much the same, though the situation heavily disfavours greatswords. If we were talking 40 of them, then it'd be 16.66 kills.

Maren
18-01-2012, 16:15
Where in the army book does it say that?:confused:

Where it explains why they like humans as slaves, something along the lines off "Humans are physically strong and multiply quickly etc"

Ok so it doesn't say they are stronger but it is implied ;)

The Low King
18-01-2012, 17:47
Saying someone is physically strong could easily be refering to their stamina/endurance

Also, when you can take 50% special in an army where core troops should really be filling your core it shouldnt really make any difference whether Greatswords are special or core. And they are as good as dwarf warriors.

CaliforniaGamer
18-01-2012, 19:20
~50 pt magic banner allowance without needing General of the Empire (this is a likely change regardless in a few months)

~I4 to match swordsmen. (tho really only matters if Lore of Light is maintain on the War Altar, which it probably wont be)

~Reduction in points to 9 per (vs. 10) perhaps with a +2 pts per model upgrade to Inner Circle variant with base strength 4.

maintain all previous rules aside from the above.

The Low King
18-01-2012, 19:32
40 Greatswords vs 40 Ghouls or 40 GW dwarf warriors

Ghouls strike first, 40 attacks hitting on 4s, 20 hits, 6.5 of them poisoned.
13 hits, wounding on 4s, 6.5. 13 wounds total.
Greatswords have 4+ save, 7 dead.

Dwarfs strike Greatswords, 30 attacks, hitting on 4s, 15 hits.
15 hits, wounding on 2s, 12.5 wounds.
12.5 wounds, 6+ armour save, 10 kills.

Greatswords strike Ghouls, 30 attacks hitting on 3s, 20 hits.
20 hits wounding on 3s, 13 wounds....13 dead? (do ghouls get basic regen?)

Greatswords strike Dwarfs, 30 attacks hitting on 4s, 15 hits.
15 hits wounding on 3s, 10 wounds.
No armour save.


So...tell me, whats wrong with them again?



so whats wrong with them?

Freman Bloodglaive
18-01-2012, 20:31
40 Greatswords vs 40 Ghouls or 40 GW dwarf warriors

Ghouls strike first, 40 attacks hitting on 4s, 20 hits, 6.5 of them poisoned.
13 hits, wounding on 4s, 6.5. 13 wounds total.
Greatswords have 4+ save, 7 dead.

Dwarfs strike Greatswords, 30 attacks, hitting on 4s, 15 hits.
15 hits, wounding on 2s, 12.5 wounds.
12.5 wounds, 6+ armour save, 10 kills.

Greatswords strike Ghouls, 30 attacks hitting on 3s, 20 hits.
20 hits wounding on 3s, 13 wounds....13 dead? (do ghouls get basic regen?)

Greatswords strike Dwarfs, 30 attacks hitting on 4s, 15 hits.
15 hits wounding on 3s, 10 wounds.
No armour save.


So...tell me, whats wrong with them again?



so whats wrong with them?

I just bought some more metal Greatswords to bump my unit up to 30.

What's wrong with them?

Nothing at all.

(Except the lack of a magic banner)

thesheriff
18-01-2012, 20:59
They shoudl just be as they are, but with "White-Lion Syndrome" ie; They need S4, even if the standard profile does not permit it. They are the closest thing to body-builders in that army. They need to be better than swordsmen, but not too good. Ws5 is too much IMO (but not laughable). I wouldnt think I4, as most of them are older soldiers, and not used to fighting with speed, just brute-strength :evilgrin:

S4 w/ great-weapons (For S6) would make them decent IMO.

thesheriff

ChrisIronBrow
18-01-2012, 20:59
So...tell me, whats wrong with them again?



so whats wrong with them?
Other than the fact that their overpriced compared to the core? well nothing. Run your numbers again. this time with 80 halberdeirs. That's why they aren't good.

theshoveller
18-01-2012, 21:10
They shoudl just be as they are, but with "White-Lion Syndrome" ie; They need S4, even if the standard profile does not permit it. They are the closest thing to body-builders in that army. They need to be better than swordsmen, but not too good. Ws5 is too much IMO (but not laughable). I wouldnt think I4, as most of them are older soldiers, and not used to fighting with speed, just brute-strength :evilgrin:
I suppose I should point out that a two-handed sword isn't actually that heavy (and neither is plate armour). I can outrun lads half my age while I'm in plate and they're in sports kit... and I'm not particularly fit. A greatsword is actually a faster weapon to use than a halberd, mainly because it's more evenly balanced and can be held in a variety of different grips.

But that's game balance for you...

ihavetoomuchminis
18-01-2012, 21:12
~50 pt magic banner allowance without needing General of the Empire (this is a likely change regardless in a few months)

~I4 to match swordsmen. (tho really only matters if Lore of Light is maintain on the War Altar, which it probably wont be)

~Reduction in points to 9 per (vs. 10) perhaps with a +2 pts per model upgrade to Inner Circle variant with base strength 4.

maintain all previous rules aside from the above.

I like it very much. Hope this is close to reality when the book gets released soon.

The bearded one
18-01-2012, 21:15
Other than the fact that their overpriced compared to the core? well nothing. Run your numbers again. this time with 80 halberdeirs. That's why they aren't good.

40 dwarf warriors vs 80 halbediers.

halbediers do ~6 kills, dwarf warriors do ~17
[63 halbediers left, 34 warriors left]
halbediers do ~6 kills, dwarf warriors do ~16
[47 halbediers left, 28 warriors left]
halbediers do ~6 kills, dwarf warriors do ~12
[35 halbediers left, 22 warriors left]
halbediers do ~6 kills, dwarf warriors do ~9
[26 halbediers left, 16 warriors left]
halbediers do ~5 kills, dwarf warriors do ~6
[20 halbediers left, 11 warriors left]
halbediers do ~4 kills, dwarf warriors do ~4
[16 halbediers left, 7 warriors left]
halbediers (1 model not in basecontact anymore, so 1 attack less) do ~3 kills, dwarf warriors do ~2
[14 halbediers left, 4 warriors left]
halbediers (10 models left in contact) do ~2 kills, dwarf warriors do ~1
[13 halbediers left, 2 warriors left]
halbediers (7 models left in contact) do ~1 kill, dwarf warriors does ~1
[12 halbediers left, 1 warrior left]
halbediers (5 models left in contact) do ~1 kill
[12 halbediers left, 0 warriors left]

the math for greatswords is the same, except the greatswords suffer 0.41 wounds more per round.

Well, I guess dwarf warriors and greatswords suck. Apart from the fact of course they won the first 5 rounds or so.

The Low King
18-01-2012, 21:34
Other than the fact that their overpriced compared to the core? well nothing. Run your numbers again. this time with 80 halberdeirs. That's why they aren't good.

So what your saying is that Halberdiers are too good?

compared to same costed units in other books, one of them 8th edition, they are rightly priced. If your core are better for their points well.....


Anyway, 40 Greatswords vs 80 Halberdiers

Halberdiers strike first, 30 attacks, hitting on 4s, 15 hits
15 hits, wounding on 3s, 10 wounds.
10 wounds, 5+ save, 6.5 dead.

greatswords strike back, 30 attacks, hitting on 3s, 20 hits.
20 hits, wounding on 2s, 16.5 wounds.
No save, 16.5 dead

Halberdiers only survive due to steadfast.....................


Halberdiers strike, 30 attacks, hitting on 4s...
...6.5 wounds again

Greatswords strike, 27 attacks, 18 hits, 15 wounds, 15 dead

Again, halberdiers only survive due to steadfast..........


Halberdiers strike, 30 attacks, 6.5 wounds etc

Greatswords hit back, 21 attacks, 14 hits, 11.5 killed

Steadfast....surely theyve failed a LD test by now?


Halberdiers strike, kill 6.5

Greatswords strike, 14 attacks, 9 wounds, 7.5 kills

wow, we're 2 full turns in now....you get the picture, in a massive unit of 80 the halberdiers will simply grind the Greatswords down, holding because of steadfast (so you better hope your general is alive). In two units of 40 (wich i assume is the amount taken, ive never seen a unit of 80 halberdiers, the Greatswords will carve through both units, breaking steadfast in the first round with a massive modifiers.

Tuttivillus
18-01-2012, 21:52
Other than the fact that their overpriced compared to the core? well nothing. Run your numbers again. this time with 80 halberdeirs. That's why they aren't good.

My mortar wouldn't allow You to come up with 80 of them near my line, dude. :p

theshoveller
20-01-2012, 16:16
My mortar wouldn't allow You to come up with 80 of them near my line, dude. :p
They'll barely fit in a standard deployment zone, which means they'll run off the table the first time they fail a panic test (and there are enough panic-causing weapons in the game that the extra bodies won't matter).