PDA

View Full Version : I've finally gotten to read the Empire book



Petey
20-12-2006, 01:06
I hope the trend of amazing books from GW continues. This army book, as well as the eldar codex, are both absolutely amazing. I loved all the revamps on Magic items, the characters are all awesome, the faith, men, and gunpowder split is very well thought out and none of the units look over/under powered. It's worth it to go infantry or cavalry. This book is a hell of a work.

I love the Wood Elf book, kind of "meh" about the orcs, but this... this is amazing. I hope they do the same quality of work for High and Dark elves (not to forget about VC)

Blackbird
20-12-2006, 01:11
I'll probably get it to read. I dont play Warhammer but I enjoy painting the models. I'm more of a painter than a player. I havent played 40k since 2nd Edition.

Grand Warlord
20-12-2006, 09:17
I also think this new book is awesome.

Falkman
20-12-2006, 11:20
From what I've heard the book contains only small changes, while the O&G book got a real revamp, so I don't get why you think the O&G book is meh and the Empire one fantastic.
There's been almost no revamping of Empire magic items, almost no new ones, the only things that changed is some points costs has been fiddled with a bit.

Kedlav
20-12-2006, 12:11
The O&G book is meh mostly because of the gobbos getting hit with the nerfbat(+1 point and losing shields for light armor, either would have been acceptable minor tweaks, but both). I think of the Empire book as a flop, as while some things were needed(GS to go down in points, lose 0-1, steam tank fix, priest changes, etc.), some changes suck royally(Helblaster), the traded fluff error(lose Elector's as they are uncommon,get Arch-Lectors, who are even more uncommon), the fact there's no reason to take Halberdiers and little reason for spears still, as well as the frenzy/toughness drop of flagellants, and the continued uselessness of the engineer(combined with the spectacularly crappy clockwork horse, stupid pigeon bombs, and a damn grenade launcher), as well as no major magic items overhaul, only really the nerfing of the most valuable Empire item(which it was assuredly a balanced change) with minimal compensation, the WWK nerf, and the lack of Kislev & Ulric units, which could have easily been cut and pasted in...

Empire's still a viable army, but the book is a wholly lacking IMO.

Falkman
20-12-2006, 12:19
I think this is the way many of the books receiving a remake will go.
Just tweaks and adjustments to bring the army into line with 7th ed and iron out some of the worst problems, no super-changes really.
Some army books will probably receive quite the overhaul, as some of them really need it, but I think overall, most books won't change much.

The Flagellants lost Frenzy you say?
That's quite sad, it was fluffy, and not very overpowered.

Grand Warlord
20-12-2006, 13:06
They are also T3 which kinda sucks in my opinion but they are still unbreakable and you can sacrifice some of then each turn to get various bonuses.

der_lex
20-12-2006, 13:09
The Flagellants lost Frenzy you say?
That's quite sad, it was fluffy, and not very overpowered.

It's also completely untrue. Not only do they have frenzy, they can also never lose it.

I'm new to Empire, but the book seems pretty balanced to me. Some things have been toned down from 6th ed, most notably the Helblaster, but that's mainly because it was probably a tad too strong before. Won't stop me from trying one out, though.

As for having no new things, the Empire just got two units that they didn't have in 6th ed, and even though some people might dislike the new engineer gizmo's, some people will see them as an enjoyable addition. What I like about the Empire is that with such a vast range to choose from, you don't have to field a unit if you don't like it and still end up with a viable list.

I do, however, agree that the archlector thing is a tad strange. You'll need some creative background writing to explain why one of the two (or both, in a big list) second-highest religious leader in the Empire are leading your little army...

Falkman
20-12-2006, 13:14
It's also completely untrue. Not only do they have frenzy, they can also never lose it.
Good to hear, thanks for that der_lex :)

Petey
21-12-2006, 00:50
The O&G book is meh mostly because of the gobbos getting hit with the nerfbat(+1 point and losing shields for light armor, either would have been acceptable minor tweaks, but both).

My issues with the o and g book are that they left fanatics the same, and they could have made them more streamline (like have them be a charge reaction) I feel goblin heroes should be weaker and cheaper(if more numerous), and i feel there was an effort put into the book to make gobbos a disadvantageous choice over orcs


I think of the Empire book as a flop, as while some things were needed(GS to go down in points, lose 0-1, steam tank fix, priest changes, etc.), some changes suck royally(Helblaster),

you re nuts, that change to the hellblaster has been needed since they made the damn thing up.


the traded fluff error(lose Elector's as they are uncommon,get Arch-Lectors, who are even more uncommon),

Umm no, you clearly haven't read the book. They have a general, which may be the elector (but doesn't have to be) same stats as before, same options, kept the runefang, you re clearly talking about things you have no idea about.
As to Archlector, they could easily be any religious heads of the empire, which is quite a few


the fact there's no reason to take Halberdiers and little reason for spears still, as well as the frenzy/toughness drop of flagellants,

Again, talking out of your rear. the point reduct on spears and halberds (and to their command) means that you get the many extra points to play with in the final army total, and they are more fairly comparable to swordsmen. In addition the frenzy is there for the flagellants. The T drop was necessary, it always has been.


and the continued uselessness of the engineer(combined with the spectacularly crappy clockwork horse, stupid pigeon bombs, and a damn grenade launcher)

he's cheap, and his magic items (ie gear) do decent damage and can't be dispelled, also he can boost artillery, at the cost of a shooting attack. As an addition to outriders, he can add great damage too.


, as well as no major magic items overhaul, only really the nerfing of the most valuable Empire item(which it was assuredly a balanced change) with minimal compensation,

By nerf you mean,"Well, i've yet to see the list and think it sucks on principle."
All the magic items that have not been changed are good, all the ones that did, got cheaper or stronger, like the crystal ball, or the laurels of victory. Or the new cask of what'shisname which steals spells from your enemies.


the WWK nerf,

you mean making them cost the same as other knights and giving them great weapons, thus bringing them in line with other knights in the game. the trade off is now save 1+ s5 on charge or you can have s4 all the time, w/ save 2+. Seems fair to me.



and the lack of Kislev & Ulric units, which could have easily been cut and pasted in...
Empire's still a viable army, but the book is a wholly lacking IMO.

Ulric units are empire units with a different sculpt. TG are GS. Priest of sigmar with name changes is Priest of ulric, The prayers are apropriate to any warpriest, as is the universal hatred of enemy army rule.
As to Kislev, much as i think they're lame looking figs, they Do deserve their own book, and own rules, and have been clearly NOT empire troops Always. They re fiercely independent and have their own government and distinct fighting style of army, to suggest that they be part of the empire book is as lame as saying that the bret. book needs an added list of wood elf units.

Kedlav
21-12-2006, 08:09
Well, as long as we wish to unleash the power of quote-fu...


you re nuts, that change to the hellblaster has been needed since they made the damn thing up.

I didn't dispute the the Helblaster needed changed(I was more for raising points), but making a weapon with a high probability of misfiring roll BS as well sucks donkey nuts. It is seriously unreliable now, even if it is better at range.


Umm no, you clearly haven't read the book. They have a general, which may be the elector (but doesn't have to be) same stats as before, same options, kept the runefang, you re clearly talking about things you have no idea about.
As to Archlector, they could easily be any religious heads of the empire, which is quite a few

Suggest you reread. We lost the Elector and had him replaced with the Empire General as there are very few electors. Meanwhile, we get the Arch-Lector of Sigmar, of which there are two.


Again, talking out of your rear. the point reduct on spears and halberds (and to their command) means that you get the many extra points to play with in the final army total, and they are more fairly comparable to swordsmen. In addition the frenzy is there for the flagellants. The T drop was necessary, it always has been.

The point reduction also included swordsmen, which are not only better, but are significantly more prevelant. They are the best all-around choice with WS4, I4, and AS4/5+, so there's still little reason to field halberdiers or spears as your main units. I was also complaining about frenzy, as a T3 unit with no armor save that can be run around the table and shot is just STUPID. While T4 was out of line with human stats, it compensated for having a rare unit that costs a fair bit with no armor save.


he's cheap, and his magic items (ie gear) do decent damage and can't be dispelled, also he can boost artillery, at the cost of a shooting attack. As an addition to outriders, he can add great damage too.

He's not really that cheap, he can only reroll for cannons and mortars, and there are much more useful hero selections. There's still little to no reason to take him beyond fluff purposes.


By nerf you mean,"Well, i've yet to see the list and think it sucks on principle."
All the magic items that have not been changed are good, all the ones that did, got cheaper or stronger, like the crystal ball, or the laurels of victory. Or the new cask of what'shisname which steals spells from your enemies.

Funnily enough, I've probably read it much more often than you, as I've a pdf of the full book, as well as seen a copy in the store. The point is, unlike many new lists, we got mostly tweaks but no new items, as well as a nerf on a valuable item. I do however like the 20 point dispel scrolls, but I won't be doing much item-wise with the extra ten points on my caddy.


you mean making them cost the same as other knights and giving them great weapons, thus bringing them in line with other knights in the game. the trade off is now save 1+ s5 on charge or you can have s4 all the time, w/ save 2+. Seems fair to me.

You mean not going down in points after losing a fair bit of combat power, as well as becoming just as unwelcome as Questing Knights in a truly competitive list.


As to Kislev, much as i think they're lame looking figs, they Do deserve their own book, and own rules, and have been clearly NOT empire troops Always. They re fiercely independent and have their own government and distinct fighting style of army, to suggest that they be part of the empire book is as lame as saying that the bret. book needs an added list of wood elf units.

Not quite the same. GW has said they'll not release a new human list(which may be BS--Cathay is in consideration, but definately not Kislev). If you've played the game long enough, you'd know Kislev has been included in the Empire book longer than they've been a seperate part. While they are independent, they are extremely close allies, much different than the WE/Bret relationship. In fact, the Empire's saved Kislev's bacon a number of times

Baindread
21-12-2006, 08:36
Funnily enough, I've probably read it much more often than you, as I've a pdf of the full book, as well as seen a copy in the store. The point is, unlike many new lists, we got mostly tweaks but no new items, as well as a nerf on a valuable item. I do however like the 20 point dispel scrolls, but I won't be doing much item-wise with the extra ten points on my caddy.

Unlike ALL new lists, Empire didn't get a revamped magic section. They lowered some points here and there. Wow, exciting :rolleyes: .

I don't care if they make the good items better, I wished they did like they use to do, taking away crappy unused items and replacing them with new items, balanced and interesting ones. I mean, how much work did they put in the magic items? 5 minutes? 10? Seriously, are they so swamped with the 40K crap they don't have time to do a proper revision of Empire magic items?

Aaah, nevermind. Iīm just pissed that one of the most interesting things in an army book was left almost untouched. I'll get over it when the new HE book comes along.

Voltaire
21-12-2006, 08:45
The Empire was not a broken army in many peoples opinions. There were a few issues (Inner Circle Knights, Griffon Standard) that needed addressing and some things people thing should have been there (Arch Lectors), so really, this book was a revision and a much needed one. Why fix it if it ain't broke eh?

Petey
22-12-2006, 01:01
First off, the empire general may be the elector (states in the description) and hasn't changed at all as a pick. You have not lost the elector, the statement is erroneous and misleading.
As to the hellblaster, it made cover and skirmishing irrelevant which it should not have. people behind a wall or taking maximum advantage of cover should not be as easy to hit by it, the error has been fixed. It was too effective before, now it will be in line with most other seige weapons in terms of damage caused, with a higher top end for damage possible.
I ll leave you alone on the engineer as at this point we re going have to agree to disagree as his power with siege pieces alone makes him worth cost IMO and you think that he sucks for that purpose. As to his items, i find it crazy that you think they're not effective for point cost (lame in concept i could understand, but not ineffective)
Which item got nerfed? I may have missed that one. As far as i could tell everything got better or cheaper (and i m not inclined to believe that the list needed all that many new items) If you re talking about the griffon banner, i'ld argue that it was brought to it's rightful cost, it was too much a crutch before and EVERY empire list took it, that's not right.
As to playing the game, I ve played it for going on 16 years. I have the original Warhammer Armies book(in very poor shape) and even there the kislevites are not in the Empire list, they're in the back as old worlder allied contingents. I don't understand how you can't see that they deserve to be seperate from the empire.
And lastly in the current book page 30 KotWW cost 25, new book cost 23. The point that they didn't go down in cost is again erroneous. As to effectiveness, they're just no longer a no brainer, which they were before.

Kedlav
22-12-2006, 06:25
First off, the empire general may be the elector (states in the description) and hasn't changed at all as a pick. You have not lost the elector, the statement is erroneous and misleading.

My point, which I've been trying to get across the entire time, is that the elector's name was changed to Empire General for fluff reasons, namely that there are not many of them, so its kind of ridiculous to have Elector Counts in many armies. Then they go ahead and insert the Arch-Lector, a reasonable, balanced guy(though 2A sucks for a Lord, magic or no), but the fact is, there are only two Arch-Lectors in the Empire, so they made the same damn mistake.


As to the hellblaster, it made cover and skirmishing irrelevant which it should not have. people behind a wall or taking maximum advantage of cover should not be as easy to hit by it, the error has been fixed. It was too effective before, now it will be in line with most other seige weapons in terms of damage caused, with a higher top end for damage possible.

Yes, it was too powerful before. I'm not disagreeing with this. I'm disagreeing with the manner in which it was toned down. I favored jacking it up in points to around 175. It remains the most unreliable weapon in warhammer, and now its in line with both the cost and the damage potential of other rares. So long as its about the same cost and damage, it should be about the same in reliability, which it most assuredly not.


I ll leave you alone on the engineer as at this point we re going have to agree to disagree as his power with siege pieces alone makes him worth cost IMO and you think that he sucks for that purpose. As to his items, i find it crazy that you think they're not effective for point cost

Its nice to have the reroll, but I have 3-4 artillery pieces in most armies. I'm sure as hell not buying 3-4 engineers in a 2000 point army just to reroll artillery, especially when stunties can get them for what, ten points? I understand our engineers aren't supposed to be as good, so I can buy them being a more expensive upgrade, but they still should be an upgrade, not an individual hero-level choice.

Inkosi
22-12-2006, 06:58
Heed the wise words of Voltaire.

Though empire players might have a thing or two to say about the new book.

The fact remains that Empire remains as one of the last armies that need a major revamp.

Most of the arguements here are wholly from a personal point of view and IMHO, wouldnt affect an army that much.

There are quite a few other armies who DO require a major revamp so you guys might wanna save your breath on them.

Cheers.

Sir_Lunchalot
22-12-2006, 09:49
Personaly I like the changes made to the Helblaster. It means taking an engineer is worthwhile now! the extra point of BS does wonders. I have a feeling that the Empire Army book was like the Tau Empire codex for 40k, a short, quick makeover for a book that more or less worked as it was. My only complaint is that warrior priests are still too expensive for what they do.

atchman2
23-12-2006, 15:55
Overall I thought the NEB was a poor attempt. The Empire has always been a lower tier army and the NEB guarantees it will remain so. Oh sure there are some new builds that will be strong, but I think most Empire players just wanted some tweaks to their list. Instead they basically destroy some very strong items in the list that were what kept them at tier 3 instead of being the worst army in Warhammer.

I think I can still come up with a decent Empire list, don't get me wrong, but having to use all sorts of tricksy combinations and such take away a lot of the flavor for me personally. They are still T3 humans that are easily hit and easily spooked. I didn't think that would change, but removing or diminishing some key items that kept them in the game was a poor decision on GW's part.

Empire will be still be my favorite army for local play and perhaps RTT play. When I go to a GT, I'll just keep going with my Skaven.

FatOlaf
23-12-2006, 16:30
Personaly I like the changes made to the Helblaster. It means taking an engineer is worthwhile now! the extra point of BS does wonders. I have a feeling that the Empire Army book was like the Tau Empire codex for 40k, a short, quick makeover for a book that more or less worked as it was. My only complaint is that warrior priests are still too expensive for what they do.

But you still cant take an engineer with the Hellblaster so you're rolling 5's to hit early on, I will dump mine as soon as the rocket launcher comes out.

I think the priests are fine for the points, their prayers are now bound level 4 and you can now take a unit of flagellants as core so long as you have priest.
A good trade off me thinks..

:skull:

Skink General
23-12-2006, 18:09
I like the rest of you just got my hands on the Empire book, and in word it was awesome.

Major fix that needed to be done, toning down the hellblaster, done. Any war machine that had a better the 50% chance of destroying any infantry unit in the game in one turn needed to be redone. The hellblaster has undergone the most revisions of any war machine over the years (I have been playing for 16 years) and in each revision it was made weaker as it was too strong. As to raising the points to 175, and leaving the rules alone this would not limit the use of this very effective war machine. One of the things that happened in this version is that the rules were made simpler, same strength the entire range, same number of shots over the entire range, etc. Yes they toned it down, but it is still a very scary weapon to face.

Priests are a hybrid unit so will appear to the unimaginative as to weak for their points. They have some magic to offer, and some combat abilities, plus have a priest in the army lets you take one, and only one regardless of the number of priests, unit of flagellants as core instead of rare. Leaving that all important rare choice available for other units.

Engineer not only has access to some really cool guns, but again affects other units. In an army with no war machines he is over valued, but once again his abilities can make him vary powerful with the right combination of units.

Knights of the inner circle no longer 0-1, now making a unit of knight stronger places them as a special choice, more flexibility. By the way if you take WWK make them inner circle and you have strength 5 knights with a 2+ save. The only other army that can do that is Chaos, at a higher cost. Not to mention that WWK or no longer 0-1

Great swords no longer 0-1 and they are cheaper then before. In fact their is not a single 0-1 choice in the entire army for troops. Great for flexability.

The Empire army has been and should always be one of the easiest armies to play but at the same time one of the hardest armies to master. It is a list about choice and tactics. The Empire list is the most flexible in what it can do, so you never know what kind of army that you will face when playing an empire player for the first time, or if they have a big enough force ever. Yes they are not the best knights in the game but they are not the worst, the foot is just average, but its cost is average. They can do it all, what other army can say that.

Sir_Lunchalot
23-12-2006, 20:31
Actually FatOlaf, the engineer can join a Helblaster. On page 46 under the Extra Crewman rule the first sentence states "The engineer can also replace one crew member of a war machine he joins, including Volley Guns (which will fire using the Engineer's Balistic Skill)"

The thing about Helblasters is that he can't use his ability to reroll the artillery dice.

The thing with priests is that there's nothing in particular they're good at. if they could either get a reduction in cost, or better combat stats (say an extra attack to put them near the Empire Captain) Then I'd take them, but as it is it seems too expensive for a relatively fragile combat character.

zak
25-12-2006, 13:10
The Empire book IMHO is the best revision that GW have done. They have solved everything that needed doing and introduced some interesting new items for the army. I shall enjoy seeing my own army get blown up by my own rockets. It'll be just like using my gobbo's!!

vorac
26-12-2006, 00:01
they could have brought out rules for different provinces and the rules for the more popular knightly orders.

Commodus Leitdorf
26-12-2006, 03:06
they could have brought out rules for different provinces and the rules for the more popular knightly orders.

Variation between the Provinces is merely and asthetic one. Some Provinces are rich...some not so. That is reflected in your own unit choices. Poor Northern province cant afford Handgunners? Then your shooty units are Crossbows....so on and so forth.

The Pros and Cons vis-a-vis the New army book ultimately come down to one thing "Do the changes support how I use my army?"

My battle line is held by 3 big units of foot troops...everything else is there to support them so for me, the Changes in the New book rock hard. I have no complaints....though I am torn as to whether or not I want that rocket launcher...Helblasters shooting at full effectiveness at 24" is a Knight hunting machine that makes me drool :)

ORKY ARD BOYZ
26-12-2006, 04:09
I am sure the revision was an excellent makeover to the Empire army. However it was boring. (This is just my opinion) The magic items weren't changed which was a shame. When a new army book came out I used to burn time anylayzing the usefullness of each magic item, after all, they are a pretty interesting park of customising your character, a new book means army lists have to be changed and new tactics thought up. Just a personal issue with army books, that I thought they would change the magic items.

Overall a pretty good revision but I can't help thinking, why did they do Empire, some armies need it a lot more than the Empire and since they didn't change that much, I thought they could have used their time to do High Elves or Dark Elves. The empire's revision wasnt that badly needed.

Just my 2 cents.:p

Falkman
26-12-2006, 11:02
they could have brought out rules for different provinces and the rules for the more popular knightly orders.
I'm under the impression that they want to steer away from appendix lists and having too many variant lists in the game.

DeathlessDraich
26-12-2006, 17:37
The Empire book is an improvement but I agree that the magic items haven't been looked at carefully and the Engineer will still be excluded from most armies.
Priests, Flaggies, Arch Lector, Infantry and possibly Steam Tanks have become more desirable but the unusual additions like Clockwork horse, pigeon bombs will probably be left unchosen.

BloodiedSword
26-12-2006, 17:56
I think the problem with the Helblaster before wasn't so much that it was too powerful for its points (although it most assurably was) - the problem was that it was too powerful full stop.

I mean, if you had a magic item that made your opponent roll D6 for each of his units and remove it on a 2+, but which cost your entire points allowance except for the hero carrying it, then it might be balanced on average for the points cost, but it is just too powerful to be allowed to exist.

Now the Helblaster was nowhere near that powerful, but I think overall the nerf is a good thing.

I'd much rather the Helblaster's unreliability was 50/50 "it might blow up" and "it might miss", than 100% "it might blow up". It has lost some power, but in exchange its unreliability is more likely to be non-explosive.

I can see what people are saying about things like the clockwork horse and pidgeon bombs though - I can't see myself ever wanting pidgeon bombs, for example..

Subscan
26-12-2006, 18:37
in 6th ed. there was someone who used to say, you can play the empire in many different ways, however there are only very few ways to play them succesfully. i dread this might even be more true in the 7th ed.

although i can see some improvements to the army (sigmarpriests, stanks) there are also some major dissapointments (flagellants, hellblaster, engineers...).
but lets see what we got:

EMPIRE GENERAL:
the main reason to field him was the ability to give a state unit the griffon banner. although i rarely did it, the psychological effect was tremendous. for the first time people respected empire infantry ;-). with griffon banner up in points and no other useful banner to give to the state troops, i just donīt have a reason (besides fluff) to take him, since

THE ARCHLECTOR:
seems so much better. of course he is easier to kill, but static wise heīs not much worse than a EG, but he has many useful advantages. (especially in combination with more priests and wizards). , unbreakability, hatred, a bunch of spells WITHOUT miscasts sound just too good, i guess...
and the bad profile just calls for the VHS

WIZARD LORD:
there are lots of other armies who are so much better in magic. and with only few useful arcane items and a mediocre leadership he will definitely be a worse choice than the other lords. and iīm not even mentioning the possibility of a miscast...

GRAND MASTER:
though he has a pretty decent profile, he is still too expensive for what he actually does. might be taken into consideration in an all knight army, but even then...

Conclusion:
iīm pretty sure that an archlector will become the standard lord in an empire army. moreover i dread, due to the bad profile, the VHS will likely become the standard item for him. i hate it when certain items become overused, so i hope we wonīt end up like that.

in general, i like the idea of having different lord choices, however i just dislike the idea that even a goblin!!! hero is supposed to fight better than my lord! that just doesnīt seem to sound right, especially since the lord is much more expensive, but thats a different issue...

Subscan
26-12-2006, 18:49
Heroes:

CAPTAIN:
still a cheap and versatile option. especially the captasus is always a good choice.
and due to the mediocre leadership, a BSB should also be taken into consideration.

WIZARDS:
they are also worth their points, especially since they are really cheap in comparison to other mages.

WAR PRIESTS:
have definitely made the biggest jump since 6th ed. although a bit costy, they can actually do a lot of useful things and are at the same time very fluffy.

MASTER ENGINEERS:
they are the only hero choice that is an abolute waste of points. i canīt believe they even increased the point costs!!! even for 50 points they were way too bad. of course, they have some nice gadgets, but they arenīt really an improvement for the artillery, (if they could at least improve the hellblaster, but nope)
and the clockwork horse is modelwise a joke and rulewise not even worth thinking about. iīm really disappointed that the sigmar priests got seriously improved while obviously ME didnīt any improvement. for once, no one would have complained if a ME had become an upgrade for warmachines. the other thing is, they suck so much, especially for their costs!

Conclusion:
in contrast to the lord choice, on the hero level we can expect more versatility from the players.
however, the combo AL, 2 WP (or 1WP, 1 Captasus) and a L2 mage could well become a standard option.

Subscan
26-12-2006, 19:12
units:

i try to make it shorter:

infantry:

imho, the whole concept of empire infantry has ever since and will ever be based on winning by CR and not by killing the enemy.

SWORDSMEN:
in 7th ed. still by far the best choice as main regiment.

SPEARMEN:
nothing changed, against bad fighters, they are the better option, but against anything else swordsmen do the better job

HELBARDS:
although in unisono with many others here i think they are still too bad to take as main regiment (they get killed so easily), i think the 7th ed. has made them much better as detachment. for once, the HWS bonus does only apply to the front, so they will be actually able to kill anything with their helbards when brought into the flank. the other important change is that they can be given shields, so they can have a 4+, when not fighting with their helbard. thatīs pretty good!

FREE COMPANY:
still cheap, though they wonīt kill much, and die easily.

ARCHERS:
good as shooting screen. bad as everything else, especially since they cannot march when enemies within 8". but also nice at redirecting charges.

HUNTSMEN:
with 10+required and 10p. each they have unfortunately become useless. theyīre simply too expensive to be used anymore. moreover, where are you supposed to hide 10! scouts? :-( the captasus will be a much better choice.

HANDGUNNERS:
still okay, but the extra range makes

CROSSBOWMEN:
the better choice, at least for me. of course, HG are better at killing knights, but that shouldnīt really matter, if you donīt even hit anything, as i usually do with my HG...

GREATSWORDS:
with 10 points each, they have finally become better. i mgiht even take them into consideration, they suffer only from one big problem, they require a special choice :-(

FLAGELLANTS:

to me the biggest dissapointment in the whole army. Frenzy is a big issue! itīs so bad, so basically everything can redirect you. Moreover T3, no armour is a bad joke!!! basically everything kills them within seconds. T4 represented for me that they fought, altough a leg was cut off etc. but even a beastmen herd kills them in 2 rounds at max. i donīt care about the fancy extra rules! theyīre so bad. as i initially stated, empire soldiers are not meant to be super killers! i want them to hold the ground, nothing else. why would you thing about killing your own unit for a +1 CR!?! and against basically everything you wonīt even be able to attack back! these guys will be cannonfodder and the perfect unit to get victory points easily, i mean common, they are basically free company who dies as fast but cost twice as much....

Conclusion:
there wonīt be a major change to the basic infantry selections. still lots of swordsmen, maybe more helbards as detachments, more crossbowmen instead of HG. you might even see GS, while i dread that over the first excitement about the fancy rules, people will soon notice that they are probably a waste of points, even as a core unit.

Subscan
26-12-2006, 19:23
Cavalry:

KNIGHTS:
imho, still very good for what they can.
i wouldnīt even have complained if they increased the points! in general i favor cavalry becoming more expensive.

WHITE WOLVES:
too bad. i canīt believe they lost their cavalry hammer. i have never heard anyone complain about WW being too powerful, especially since the 2+ makes them the worse choice anyway! now, i donīt see any reason to take them over vanilla knights. too bad, especially since they are so fluffy! imagine heavy cavalry with S4, thatīs as bad as gobbo wolfriders :-( ...oh come on...

PISTOLIERS:
i like their new role as fast cavalry. still a very good unit

OUTRIDERS:
move OR shoot, ouch! why having a cavalry unit, who cannot do anything when it moves!?! however the 360° shooting can be nice, i comparison to HG. but they die fast and shouldnīt move...hmmm, i dunno

Conclusion:
the cavalry plays still a good supportive role. the units are all worth taking, even if the effectiveness of the outriders is yet to be seen...

Subscan
26-12-2006, 19:37
Artillery:

CANNONS:
expensive, but they can decide games, so 100p. seem fair.

MORTARS:
cheap, thatīs good. S3, thatīs bad. i hate the idea that against some armies they are incredible effective, while other armies just laugh about its strength. the scattering between 2 and 10" makes it also more a roulette than an effective waepon.

HELLBLASTER:
now we come to the biggest loser of the new army book. for once, i have to say i like the idea that auto hits are no longer possible. but BS3 and all penalties, are not making me happy!!! especially since it blows up as easily as before. again, like in many cases, no opponent of me ever complained about HB being too powerful. of course it can be devastating, but for a reasonable price! how often did it explode just with the first shot, giving 125 free victory points to the opponent.
but as it is now, it will be only facing skirmish shields, not being able to kill more than 3 beastmen at max, before getting boned. :-(
iīm sure, we wonīt see them very often.

ROCKET BATTERY:
now we come to another special friend of mine. a warmachine that costs a lot and very probably wonīt even hit an elephant in 50 metres distance is baaaaad. 1 possible scattering of 20"!!! just makes me shiver, probably more than the opponents..

STEAM TANK:
very good, of course not unbeatable, but still very good for its points.
however the biggest disadvantage is, that you will probably find them in every army from now on :-( since the other rare choices are really really bad

Conclusion:
cannons will be a common choice as always, the others wonīt. inaccuracy is the biggest enemy of a well structured army. the high probability of a disastrous misfire or friendly fire makes the artillery worse than it should be. imho its a joke that skaven artillery is much more reliant than empire artillery. thereīs simply too much probability that sth expensive blows up...

Subscan
26-12-2006, 19:45
FINAL CONCLUSION:

As I initially stated, I dread that weīll see even more empire armies that are exactly the same, even more so as in 6th ed. although more troops to choose from, certain types of armies are simply not playable, at least succesfully (especially engineer armies).
i reallys hope for all of us, that we donīt have to face the standard troop, lord & hero choices, (as the nike lizard, the hail of doom error etc. )
that would be a pity, since the empire is supposed to be the army with the biggest versatility, and not the army who always has to field certain troops, in order to be competitive (with lots of warrior priests and steam tanks)

BloodiedSword
26-12-2006, 20:48
Well, I disagree with you over Flagellants. GW obviously thought that the use of Flagellants as purely a tarpit unit was not what they intended them as and changed them accordingly.

Now, expensive as they may be, they can not only take a charge (with casualties of course, but what did you expect) but also dish it out themselves, whether it be in later rounds of combat or charging themselves. And yes, Frenzy is a mixed blessing, but I'd hardly say it cripples them.

Also, the edit button is your friend. Surely sextuple-posting wasn't strictly necessary?

Axel
26-12-2006, 21:09
STEAM TANK:
very good, of course not unbeatable, but still very good for its points.
however the biggest disadvantage is, that you will probably find them in every army from now on :-( since the other rare choices are really really bad


Highly unlikely. If the rumours on the usage of Steampoints are true, a Steamtank can be effectively disabled by just two or three hits, and can be hurt (though with some luck) by a crossbow. At 300pts I will surely never field one again in competetive games.

Subscan
26-12-2006, 21:44
@bloodiedsword:
this was done by purpose, for once it makes reading much easier than in an 300 line post. and iīm sure not everyone is interested in all of my posts, so some might only go for a discussion about artillery

- also, flaggies never manage to kill sth, they never used to (okay in 5th edi, they did) and they never will. with M4, theyīll never be on the charge. and with I3 & S3 you wonīt kill anything either in subsequent rounds...
as i see it, theyīre still supposed to be a tar pit unit, i canīt imagine another use for them, however theyīre a very expensive and too fragile tarpit.

@axel:
true, it can be theoretically wounded by basically everything, still it is not very likely. itīs not invincible, but itīs very tough and can potentially kill everything. a good bargain for its points, if you ask me

BloodiedSword
26-12-2006, 23:59
No, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that Flags won't kill anything without either trying them out with the new stats or running some mathhammer.

As an example, if they get charged by a 6 wide unit of generic foot infantry with WS 3 or 4 and S3, they're likely to lose just under 2 models on the charge. That leaves at least 3 models to fight back, hitting and wounding on 4+. You'll kill one or two models with that, and that's after getting charged..

Now consider that Brets are generally I3. Dwarfs are generally I2. Lizards are generally I1 or 2 (I won't consider Skinks as they will take Flags apart long before there's any danger of reaching combat). Orcs are I2 or 3, Ogres the same, and Undead of either flavour are IBraindead.

So Flags will still outspeed/tie with a fair few things. They will still give non-RAF Brets a nightmare, and they can still go toe to toe with most armies' basic troops.

While you are right that they have been nerfed a lot as a tarpit unit, they have gained a fair bit of offensive potential. So, clearly they won't be worthwhile if you try to keep using them as nothing but a tarpit - you will need to change how you use them. I'm not saying it's obvious or easy, but I'm sure Empire players will find a way once the hysteria dies down..

Sir_Lunchalot
27-12-2006, 02:31
Dude, the Engineer CAN improve the Helblaster, which is the only reason to take one. It says so in the rules for the engineer. He can't reroll the artillery dice, but he can use his BS of 4 to fire the Helblaster.

vorac
27-12-2006, 05:43
it still isn't woth it, 65 pts. for a bs4, when dwarfs pay 15pts. for a reliable warmachine. I've played a couple of games with the new book and using a helblaster and only because i was playing an orc in a campaign, in one game i blew the giant up in the second i blew it up again and now the giant won't be played so neither will the helblaster, it has basically become a large target killer:(imo

Petey
27-12-2006, 08:00
I ll agree that the engineer is a dangerous pair with a helblaster, but bs four on that many shots is Very telling. Frankly, nothing in the dwarf list can compare to the HVG. Their siege tech is more reliable but nothing is killier.
I think the engineer is good with with a regular siege piece like a cannon. If he doesn't use his power he can always use one of his many long range weapons. And though many of you knock em, the pidgeon bombs are a great buy, they hit on a five and drop a template, and you can use them to single model snipe. The bomb does decent damage and will give you 6 hits and 5 partials on a block infantry unit 3 ranks deep. It's great for killing archers on a hill, or guys on the other side of a woods or large annoying infantry blocks, and with it's high strength it doesn't suck against cav, especially fast cav.

As to the lowered point cost, at one point a model and 5 points off command(for spear or glaive), in a standard human army the outcome is an extra 100 points(when you field infantry). I could certainly find use for those points
As to the Empire General and his lack of a griffon banner, so what. He's still worth taking in an infantry/combined arms army. He's not the killiest guy in the game, but he s punishing on a griffon and adds a great deal of damage to a unit on foot, and he's quite cheap.

The WWK loosing the hammer is a bit sad, but really they have four S every round. When knights get charged or bogged down, this will be very helpful, especially against undead, who don't break on a charge ever. And for goodness sake, they re down to 23 points, it's not a bad trade off

FatOlaf
28-12-2006, 13:10
I realise Engineer can join the crew but I was stating the use of his re-roll abitlies being curtailed to the cannon and mortar alone, adding him to the Hellblaster crew to use his BS 4 makes one hell of a points sink when that thing blows.
Not worth it IMHO, plus you then dont even get to use his Hochland which is only reason I took one.
But not now with so many units having access to one.

Falkman
28-12-2006, 19:53
I have a small question to ask to those of you who have read the book.
Now that crossbowmen are state troops, can they take the marksman upgrade and give him the "experimental" guns?

der_lex
28-12-2006, 19:56
Yes, they can take the marksman upgrade. No, you can't give them anything other than a crossbow.

Falkman
28-12-2006, 21:08
Aww, then I must include a unit of handgunners in my coming army after all :(