What stat is most important? Leadership

Your army is led by the prince of death (Why is it oft called the angel of death? In modern times are angels not regarded as sweet, kindly protectors?) wielding weapons too terrible for words. His very gaze slays dozens, the gesture of his hand wipes away hundreds, the sweep of his sword decapitates thousands.

Mithridates, Dealer of Death and Destruction atop Phangoria, Dragon of Demolition

Where he walks the blood of his victims forms mighty rivers, where his steed thunders are oceans of gore. Death itself flees from his martial splendor. He is good at what he does, and what he does is wield death and destruction unmatched.*


The only problem last turn he fluffed his attacks and is fleeing for his life. At this point, a single WS4, S3, 1 A model is more dangerous than he is.



See D-Pince be stubborn,. See D-prince fluff his attacks and fail LD. See D-prince run.

 Failed leadership checks are what keep models with good WS, S and A from destroying this game. Otherwise it would be a simple matter to math-hammer out what units will win and just skip playing the game entirely.

There is a reason a LD7 unit is infinitely better than LD6 and LD 10 units are in a whole different world. They tend to stick around much longer.

LD checks are everywhere these days. Certain artillery weapons and spells cause them on units. Lost combats and large numbers of casualties sustained force them to be taken. Sometimes a models' own rules force it to take tests.

A couple of failed LD tests can really ruin your day, no matter how well you have played.**

Conversely, unexpectedly rolling insane courage can give you an unexpected bonus when your unit holds up that buzzsaw rampaging through your army at a frenetic pace.

Earlier in this series I talked about how typically most close combat units might only spend 4 - 6 rounds actually engaged in combat. Failed LD tests are the main reason why. These days there are some combats that last longer due to the new improved steadfast rules, items such as the Crown of Command and things of that nature.

Even with being steadfast, however, failed LD checks happen. They happen less frequently with the re-roll which leads to a game within the game as savvy opponents try to kill your army Battle Standard bearer while you strive desperately to keep him safe and where he needs to be.

So how important is LD? Here comes an answer you are probably tired of if you have read the entire series.

It depends.

How did you build your list? If one failed LD check destroys your day, you arguably did a very poor job of list building. (Or are the Vampire Counts general, or a Slann BSB in Blood and Glory...do the Tomb Kings still melt when their big guy dies? If so, include him.) Then again, your list may work very well in your environment and this just happens to be the chink in the armor.

Be that as it may, the more important a unit is, the more important LD is.

Example: a Warriors of Chaos army has a block of Knights to finish combats against weakened opponents, a modest frenzied Chosen unit with great weapons, a big block of tzeentch marked Chaos Warriors with shields, and 10 units of Chaos Warhounds serving as shooting cover.



Rund, dogs. Run!

 LD is important for the Chaos Warriors primarily, the Chosen and Knights less importantly, and the Warhounds not at all.

If all the Warhounds run the Chaos player is still in excellent position to win the game. But if they lose their block of Chaos Warriors they have lost their ability to provide an anvil and control space. Indeed, failing a LD test and being run down could be a disaster from which they cannot recover.

The end result is the clever player will typically have ways to make his key units either steadfast or stubborn and keep his BSB nearby and protected for his important unit(s). This way, even modest LD levels have a good chance of holding their place in line and continuing their job.



The Ogre flank melts as unit after unit is wrecked in combat, fails LD and runs.

 So how important is LD then? Obviously, I am arguing it is very important. However, there are ways of improving/altering LD to ensure your key units consistently operate with LD 8, 9 or even 10 while being stubborn through one means or another.

There will still be those unforeseen disasters when you fail the re-rolled LD 10 check. It happens. When it does, you feel the pain.  Recognizing how important LD is, you should have done your work ahead of time to minimize the number of times it happens.

With that said, if your unit has high scores in the other key stats, you are probably winning your combats. With proper use of your general and BSB, you should minimize the impact of tests forced upon you by your opponent or self-inflicted through rules such as stupidity.

Properly handled, even low LD scores can be protected and have little impact. It is very important...but also relatively easy to deal with. Improperly handled, you will not even do well with LD11.

The biggest single factor that turns a good LD into a disastrous one is losing a combat by a massive amount. Hint; work to prevent that. I know, hard to do...but indisputably the key.

When it comes to LD, in the hands of a great player low LD is a problem but a minor one. In the hands of a poor player, high LD is nice to have but will not protect them.



Me'n Sguiggy thought the dragon looked hungry. We also remembered something important we need to do in the other direction....

 In summation, LD is vital to your battle plan; make sure your plan includes keeping your LD high and used as seldom as often.

*Yes, I could write the fluff people chastise Matt Ward for. They are wrong...it is jolly good fun to write. No, it does not make sense or have any bearing on reality. Says the guy playing a game filled with magic and fantastic races.

** Unless, of course, you are immune to taking them. Naturally, most though not all units that do not have to take them  are penalized in other ways such as crumbling.

What stat is most important? Attacks

You have made the right moves, you get the cream of the crop of your warriors into combat, you withstood the furious assault of the hapless enemy, and at last it is your turn to strike. Tough, strong, courageous, you are going to carve a sea of red through the cowering pointy ears in front of you. Grabbing your mighty two-handed axe, you bring it up over your head and cleave through the helm of the sissy elf. Chortling madly, you ready it again...only to see a flurry of attacks coming back at you. What happened?

Almost from the moment the details of the rules to be found in 8th edition were released, the brilliant never to be contradicted, never wrong wisdom of the internet was that Dwarf armies would be awesome in the new edition. I looked at the book for about 40 seconds and consigned them to the "Eh. If their war machines hit or the other army is magic reliant, they will be okay. Otherwise they are pedestrian file."

This might seem curious to those who know me. After all, a decent WS, high T, and can have high S guy with above average saves and excellent leadership is nothing to be scoffed at.

Slow moving guys with 1 attack each are, however, something to be scoffed at. Units I cannot outmaneuver are few and far between, I can combo charge them to my hearts content with a very high degree of success, and if all else fails and they bring me to combat...they just are not that scary from an offensive standpoint. It is entirely because they have 1 attack.

Almost every other army has ways of getting multiple attacks. Sometimes it is frenzy. Sometimes it is extra hand weapons. Sometimes it is in their stat lines. The dwarf army has exactly one line unit with multiple attacks; Giant Slayers, the overpriced, dead before they get into contact or get to fight upgrades.

Fail.

Horded up Dwarf Warriors hitting Saurus 5 wide get just 24 attacks...if those Saurus have spears, 15 of them have 20 attacks at half the cost with better strength, equal T (assuming base stat lines).



Flee from my mighty archer attack, cowardly knights!

 I dwell on this because it matters. No matter how awesome your guy is, the potential damage he can do is limited to the number of attacks he has. If he is WS 10, S10 and has 1 attack, he is arguably worse than a guy with WS4, S4, 3 attacks.

Additionally, the smaller a base you can fit a guy with a large number of attacks, the better off you are. We discussed frontage earlier. Massing large numbers of attacks over small frontages makes a unit insanely powerful.

Chaos Knights are nice with WS5, S5, and armor save 1+. Then again, Grail Knights have S4 if charged, S6 if charging, equal save and Ws, and a ward save to boot. But give Chaos Knights frenzy and suddenly 3 guys in the same space are dealing out 50% more attacks than the Grail Knights. Personally, I think Grail Knights are awesome...and to me, it is the extra attacks that make the Chaos Knights even better.

They simply have the ability to deal out so much damage in a narrow frontage it is ridiculous. It is what makes the Warriors of Chaos so strong in combat. Even if they run into relatively equal troops, they simply pile on more attacks and thus outperform their enemies.

It is one reason hordes can be powerful (other than the space control we discussed earlier). They start adding attacks to the pile, ramping up the number of potential wounds they inflict. It is also the reason Monstrous Infantry such as the various Ogres, Trolls, and so forth are so dangerous. 6 Treekin in 3x2 formation deal out 18 attacks over 120 mm. (Not including their stomp).

Obviously the potential or lack thereof is directly related to their WS compared to the opponents, their S compared to the opponent's T, and the dice. But you do not have to be any sort of math major to know  18 is more than say...5x5 Dwarf Warriors would get back 10 attacks. Who wins that one?

The importance of the number of attacks a model has is greatly affected by their quality. Night Goblins facing 5+ WS3, T3 infantry need 12 attacks to do 2 wounds. Saurus facing those same troops do 5 wounds in that same number of attacks. Obviously the Saurus benefit more from extra attacks than the Night Goblins do.

Of course, there are other factors to consider. The Tomb Kings ability to give a unit Killing Blow turns the humblest model into a credible threat against the most powerful man-size model. More attacks obviously benefits them greatly. Drop Wyssans Wildform on the humble Gor once or twice and they become merchants of devastation. Give High Elf spearmen Okkrams Mindrazor and watch Chaos Knights melt off the gaming table in a heartbeat with enough attacks.

Aha. We just discovered a key. In the modern magic era, most armies have the ability to alter certain stats. S, T, I, WS, M all come to mind readily. But very little affects the number of attacks you start the game with.

That means if you are locked into an army with low numbers of attacks, you need to be creative with bringing more attacks to bear in any given combat. The most common way is through making combo-assaults to bring higher numbers of Attacks into the combat, but this has a natural drawback in that it also allows the opponent to add more attacks.

The natural result is you should look for opportunities to ensure you bring as many multiple attack models to the game as possible. Carefully consider your play style; how many points is a model with 2 attacks worth as opposed to another model? I use example in case you have the option of equipping your model with extra hand weapons.

Of course, it also matters what the assigned role is for that unit. If it is a tar pit designed to die but taking a long time doing so, then a shield is worth many times more what another attack is. But if a unit is designed to inflict casualties then the extra attack is exponentially better.

In the end, how important is the number of attacks? For a close combat model, it is close to being more important than even Strength. More attacks equals more potential wounds. For models that are jack of all trades, it depends on how they use them.

Warhammer; What stat is most important? Initiative

One of the major changes in the new edition is how close combat works. Formerly, if you got the charge you attacked first. Deadly great weapons on the charge were far more lethal as they could strike without worrying about their drawbacks. Poor quality troops getting the charge could, with a bit of luck, wipe out the front row of elite warriors and never face their vengeance. Initiative was irrelevant.

In the new edition, nothing could be further from the truth. Great weapons still strike last, even on the charge. In each round of combat between troops not wielding great weapons (or possessing the “Always Strikes First” rule) initiative determines who gets first shot.



This matters. If you are facing a guy with several high WS, high S attacks with a re-roll to hit and somehow manage to kill him before he gets to swing he does not matter. More realistically, if you are facing waves of troops of lower quality and you yourself are fragile, you have a better chance of not receiving your come-uppance if you take care of business when striking first.

So how important is a good I? I actually rank it fairly highly…but that is largely because most models with a high I also have decent to good WS and decent to good S.



For some models it is less important. A heavily armored, multi-wound character can get by with a lower I score because he can let most of the hits he takes bounce off his armor, and even if one gets through he is likely to be around to deal out some punishment.



By contrast, if a unit is a poor fighter anyway, they are unlikely to do much damage when they swing. If they get robbed of their attacks through inconveniences such as dying a horrible, grisly death before they get to swing, well, it probably did not matter much anyway.

Counter intuitively, this means I is less important the worse the other stats are. It relies more heavily on WS and S than most stats do. It only matters hugely between relatively equally matched models or between models with a slight advantage to one of them.



I think a classic match-up is Chaos Warriors versus. Temple Guard. Relatively close in points costs, they each have 2 base attacks, armor save of 4+, S4, T4, and save of 4+. Chaos Warriors hit on 3+ and are hit on 4+.



Warriors are required to take an upgrade, lets give them a shield as that is relatively common, and I think Temple Guard might have to take halberds, giving them S5. So those are our parameters.



First, based on I, 10 TG v 10 CW

CW 20 A, 13.34 hits, 6.67 wounds, 2.2 saves; 4.5 TG have 9 A, 4.5 hit, 3 wound, 2 save.

Round 2: 9 CW v. 4.5 TG; 18A, 12 hits, 6 wound, 2 save. 1 Saurus attacks back…does it matter?



Clearly, it is a rout.

Second, assume they had equal I

CW, same results; 10 Saurus, 20 attacks, 10 hit, 6.67 wound, 2.22 save, 4.45 dead

Round 2, 6.5 CW v. 4.5 Saurus

CW, 13 A, 8.67 hits, 4.33 wounds, 1.43 save; 4.5 TG, 9 attacks, 4.5hits, 3 wounds, 1 save

Round 3; 4.5 CW v. 1.5 TG

CW, 9 A, 6 hits, 3 wounds, 1 save; TG, 3 attacks, 1.5 hit, 1 wound, .33 save



Still a clear win for the Warriors, but now their numbers have been reduced by over half. They are down to 3ish warriors. Not enough to win a game on its own…but in conjunction with their (theoretical) magic advantage, it can swing a game hugely.





Just altering the I of the TG to match the Warriors, while it does not make them equal, it at least allows them to be a credible threat and do some damage on their way out the door.



So clearly, I is important between similar ability models. As shown by the above, S, T, and saves still mean more.



When the models have widely disparate abilities, it matters less. So yes, I is important…but not the most important stat.

Warhammer: What is the most important stat? First up, Movement

When you sit down to look at a roster in Warhammer, one of the things that jumps out at you is the sheer amount of information. How many times have you seen a roster sheet with "M WS  BS  S  T  W  I  A LD" plastered across the top?

For the experienced Warhammer player, it is very easy to get a general feel for it. We know the baseline that has been established is the Human stat. If the line you are looking at is equal to it, you have a rough idea of that model's capabilities. If slightly higher you will have a rough idea of how often you will win against that model and how often you expect the minor upset of losing to it.

Even a lowly Gnoblar can expect to deal the occasional wound to a might Dragon, for example, but it is an unusual event that always comes as a surprise. But even a Gnoblar will roll a 5 to hit one in 3 attempts, and of those hits 1 in 6 will score a wound. As a general rule, 4 of those wounds will be saved (assuming 3+ scaly skin) which means actually scoring a wound is not something you expect to do, but you will always accept that unexpected bonus.

But what is the most important stat? Lets go through them one by one and do a bit of examination.

First up is movement. Ranging from 3 to 9, there is a wide range of movement. What dwarf has not bemoaned being doubled up by the sneaky skinks who run circles around them, never provide a valid target, and cannot be drawn into combat?

Of course, most models and units can double their base rate through marching, though this comes at the price of limited maneuverability. Still, it does allow them to traverse the field much more quickly.

In the end, most models that will do the bulk of the fighting are infantry and range between 3 and 6. Most models that value the charge are much quicker in their movement, with cavalry and units wanting to deal impact hits at the forefront.

The new, improved charging rules rightfully make it less certain those units will get the charge, though properly played they are still far more likely to achieve their goal.

There are ways of getting around it, however. You can defend an obstacle, lock down the chargers with a unit that can sustain the casualties, then grind down the units that count on the damage done by the charge, and so forth.

Even if you do not control who gets the charge, you can control where the combat occurs and who is involved if you have superior movement.

Click on me to see all the glorious stuff he discusses

Take this scene for example. On the left are Chaos Knights, movement of 7, who have charged into some skinks, movement 6. Behind the trees and in the flank of the Chaos Warriors are some more skinks with a Kroxigor in the second rank (this game was played during 7th edition, but the principles still hold true) and ahead, but to the left of them are some ranked up Skinks.

If the Lizardman player so chooses, the skinks will not engage in close combat ever again in this game. Their superior movement means they can stay out of range of the Chaos Warriors. There is only one other Chaos unit on the table and they are too far away to protect the forwardmost unit.

If they ever close in combat the Chaos Warriors will not just win the combat but will absolutely CRUSH the skinks well over 90% of the time. They are stronger, tougher, better armored, better weapon skill, and have more attacks. So the Chaos Warriors will hit more often, wound more often, and save more often. Thus it behooves the Skinks to use their superior movement to avoid combat.

Meanwhile, the knights will almost assuredly overrun the skinks on the left and take 2 - 3 turns to get back in to the battle. They will therefore be unable to protect the Warriors and use their superior movement to force combat.

Generally speaking, the faster force will therefore be allowed to choose which units fight. Movement can and should be used to ensure you are getting your units into the combats you want them in. If your tooled up Chaos Warrior unit slams into a Night Goblin horde and somehow loses the combat, you live with that result.

By contrast, if you let your Chaos Warriors get charged by Grail Knights you should not be surprised to see your troops disappear under an avalanche of S6 attacks and are probably going to lose that combat most of the time.

Clearly it is important to pick your fights.  Movement is the way to do that.

Thus, IN A VACUUM, the movement characteristic is the most vital. In truth, there are ways to control space that allow slower moving forces to bring faster forces to battle.

I have mentioned hordes before. On the internet, many people have dismissed hordes, pointing out that most units that can horde are units that do no damage. The general argument goes, "With a horde you get x number of extra low ws, low s attacks that do less than one wound per round according to mathhammer".

All true. All irrelevant. The horde unit can be used more effectively to control space than it can to actually deal damage.

Lets say you want your Black Orcs to be able to beat face on a unit they desperately do not want to get charged by....say, an Always Strikes First impact causing Tomb King Chariot unit. (I assume their magic would let this happen...if nothing else, they could get the I10 spell off. Might be something that cannot be done, but the principle of a unit you do not want to get charged by holds...say ranked Ogre Bulls)

That Tomb King unit is going to absolutely buzzsaw through the Night Goblin unit, winning most combats by double digits. Of course, the properly built and played Night Goblin unit designed for this task will have decent leadership, steadfast, and a re-roll from the nearby battle standard bearer which means even after taking 30 casualties, they are still there.

Now the Black Orcs can sweep around the flank and get into combat with the chariots/Ogre Bulls/impact unit of doom despite having slower movement.

It does require some skill and the knowledge of how to protect your flank chargers from getting flanked themselves. And obviously the example of Night Goblins versus chariots assumes a field where you can somewhat direct where the chariots are going to go through use of terrain and deployment.

But it is a powerful tool in the hands of slow moving armies. It is one method to minimize slow movement.

And it is a demonstration that movement is important but not the only important factor. After all, if you somehow double the speed of Gnoblars but that is all you have...they are still going to lose to any half-decent troop anyway. Great movement with poor troops helps, but it does not make them good troops.