Finally did some painting

Finally did some painting. Won't win any awards, even if it is a contest full of 10 year-olds, but it is a fully painted unit. :-) Took about 2-2 1/2 hours.

1k O&G V Empire rehash

A couple days ago I published a story-driven version of this report. This will be a bit more straight forward. Well, sort of...many strategy and tactical digressions. And anything else that interests me.

I wanted to try out the O&G book, Fullur wanted to try out the new Empire book. 1k is pretty small but hving played little lately, it seemed about right.

I built three lists; all Night Goblin, all Savage Orc and a mixed Orc and Goblin list. At the last second I went the Savage Orc version.

Pretty compact list; 20 Savage Orcs w/full command and extra hand weapon. This unit fills two rolls; 1, if we roll up Watchtower they are agood starting block and 2, should we roll blood and gloy, they provide a banner.

Next I put in a pair of Savage orc warbosses, one with Crown of Command and the other with battle standard and sword of...might? giving him S5 and S6 on the first turn of combat.

A level 3 Savage Orc shaman for magic defense. An Orc chariot (okay, not ALL savage orcs...this was lone exception) and 10 Boar Boyz rounded out my army.

I am really looking forward to seeing how the chariot and Boar Boyz work. I have a pretty good idea of what the Savage Orcs and Shaman will do.

I specifically built this army with a specific thought in mind. A lot is made on many sites about the importance of "having more drops" than the opponent to out-deploy them.

My force is designed to do one thing; enter combat quick, hit hard, get into the next combat. As a result, I am going to find a place where I can protect one or both flanks, get in combat quick and Hulk-smash stuff. Hey, Orcs and Hulk are all Greenskin, so the analogy works.

The upshot is...I do not much care where or how the opponent deploys. I am basing my deployment on what my army does well. Adopting the Robert E Lee principles that allowed him to constantly have more troops at the point of contact despite being vastly outnumbered overall, I am going to force the action when and where I want it.

In this case, poor Fullur ended up reacting in deployment and cramping himself...thus allowing me to generate exactly what I wanted, a way to force the combats I wanted when I wanted them and where I wanted them.

My deployment would more or less have looked exactly like it did regardless of what he put where.

My flanks are protected, my path to the enemy unimpeded, and I can avoid unneccessary dangerous terrain tests or mucking about with the Mysterious Forests that dotted the field.

We got "Blood and Glory" for a scenario. Cool. 2 unit standards, an army standard and my General...I am covered.

He won the roll to go first.

Empire Turn 1
He walked his archers on the left flank forward to get a shot at my Savage Orcs. The Knights moved forward a bit, the Greatswords behind them.

H started by firing his handgunners at my Boar Boyz. 3 hits, 2 wounds, and I am down to 8. His archers get 4 hits in 10 attempts needings 6s...that is a pretty good roll. He makes up for it by wounding just one Savage Orc who duly finds paint does not protect against iron and dies to the arrow.

Then he opens up with his volley gun. 8/8/misfire. He gets 8 shots. 4 hit the chariot. No problem, I will take a wound or two, I am okay with that...except, needing 4s...he rolls 5/6/6/5 and blows up my chariot. In one go. before it ever moves.

!@#$%^&.

This continues my run of looking forward to trying stuff out. My Shaggoth famously died to Dark Elf Repeater Crossbows before ever seeing combat. Galraug did nothing in his debut. And so forth. Welcome to "Darth Weasel's Hall of Shame", Orc chariot.

On the bright side, Fullur had to LOVE the effect of his @#$%^& Volley Gun.

Orc Turn 1
I want to play the Orcs differently than I do the WoC. Typically with the WoC I play a very conservative game; charges need a high percentage chance of success to be declared. I seldom get into "fair" fights; the outcomes are all but predetermined when the lines crash together.

This time I needed a 9 to charge the knights with my Savage Orcs and I think the same with the Boar Boyz. I declared both charges (and just now note I forgot to declare the Waaaagghh).

This, of course, is because both units passed their animosity test. I actually remembered to roll for it.

The Savave Orcs make it, the Boar Boyz fail by a couple inches and thus move forward just 6"...a good roll on that die. Too bad the other two combined to total less than 3...

I then roll a 3ad 1 for the winds of magic and successfully channel. It is at this point I notice I mis-positioned the shaman. He is out of range to cast his augment on the unit in combat. So instead I Foot of Gork the Greatswords, throwing all 5 dice and forgetting to make it the powerful version. Would have been successful.

A scatter means I hit just 3 greatswords, but they all die.

My general hits thrice, wounds twice, one saved. Uh oh. I was counting on my Choppas rule to help out...falling strength in round two will hurt against his 1+ save.

But the standard bearer shows the power of the Sword of Might/Choppaz combo. He hits thrice, wounds thrice, and that extra point of S leads to 3 kills.

The knights and their horses hit 5 times but cannot wound. The last one breaks...and I pursue all of 3". Whatever.

I feel this means he will have a full turn of shooting at my unit which will whittle them down, then I will charge his greatswords who by then will have both detachments positioned to counter-charge. I would have much preferred a pursuit roll that took me into his next unit.


Empire Two

He chargs his greatswords and one unit of Swordsmen, advances his archers, moves his volley gun.

The handgunners get a whipping 11 hits in 19 tries but kill just 2 Boar Boyz. Still, I have lost 4 of them already, 40%...and am probably two turns from combat. They will not be a force to be reckoned with when they get into combat.

I send my boss after his Captain, but just 2 of my 4 hits wound and one of those he saves. My standard bearer kills a couple greatswords. My unit champ goes after his general but he saves the only wound I get off.

Then my unit opens a can on the greatswords, hitting 7 times in 7 attempts and, even more awesomely, wounding all 7. I had made them Big uns which means I had S5 in the first round...he saves just one wound and is in deep trouble.

The Greatswords get some back, killing 3 savage orcs, his general fluffs all but one attack which kills another, and then the swordsmen detachment wounds 2 more, one of which I save (yeah, I saved 1 time in 11 tries with my ward save...so I expect to get the next one :-) )

He breaks...has just one standard left...game.


Looking back, I think he lost this game in deployment. He had the wrong units in the wrong place, was too crowded and thus I was able to have huge advantages at every point of contact; roughly 387 points did all my work in this game.

Hthe greatswords been in front, the knights ready for a supporting flank charge and he softened me up with a couple turns of shooting, it might have gone differently.

Instead I was able to get my best combat unit into situations that negated his advantages (his nights got no strength bonus, his detachments were out of position, his archers and volley gun only fired once).

Of course, my Boar Boyz and Chariot were huge disappointments...but I am used to that. Next time they will do better.

I enjoyed the orc army a lot. I like their feel...but never failed an animosity attempt (onl had to roll for each unit once, so...)

Looking forward to more games with them.

1k Orcs & Goblins v 1k Empire

Welcome, stranger. You come to hear how the Orc band of

You might wonder why I, the once-respected chronicler of the Bretonnia Empire have been reduced from the noble halls of my forefathers to chronicling the crass, brutal ways of a small, nigh-irrelevant tribe of orcs rather than toasting the noble deeds of mighty knights.

I myself cannot answer tha question. Perhaps it hearkens back to a drinking session at court. A beautiful maiden that rumor held to be closely related to the King was visiting. Those of us unmarried and hopeful of a prosperous match were taking turns trying to impress her.

As the night waxed late the ale flowed freely and the lies even more so. Libations removed inhibitions and loosened tongues as we began trying to tell stories of our personal might and valor that eclipsed those of our rivals for her affection.

It is possible our stories verged beyond the realm of truth into the impossible. Noble after noble rose to his feet to tell tales of triumph and chivalry against ever more impossible odds. Each story grew more fantastic until, in my turn, I told a tale of defeating hordes of enemies single-handed.

So tall had grown the prior tales that mine, and my hubris, led to an attempt to eclipse them all by including all manner of foes ranged against me and a battle won against impossible odds such that none other might rise after me and put my deeds to shame with a greater tale.

As I wove my story I defeated goblins, trolls, orcs, beastmen, and even managed to best three doombulls in a final confrontation.

The passion with which I wove the story combined with the potent ale to end my nigt in ignominous fashion as I pitched forward in a stupor.

 I awoke from my sleep to find myself  facing a fell wizard. Though I saw not his lips move, yet I knew his intent. As punishment for my extravagant boasting, I was cursed to wander the world telling tales of those truly heroic in battle.

And so have I been. I never know when I will next be swept away to appear in the camp of some battle about to be commenced. At times I take on the appearance, mannerisms and sppech patterns of those I join. At others I retain my own sensibilities.

I feel as if there is a mystical force protecting me. Perhaps I am doomed to this existence forever. Or perhaps I can find peace when I am able to atone for my verbal indiscretions. I know not.

What I do know is I found myself in the camp of Alaric, a minor Orcish chieftain. As is their way, he loved to fight. He sought ways to be involved in more battles. The prior chieftain, whose name I never learned, had just died in single combat with Alaric for his failure to find enough enemies to fight.

Fresh off this, Alaric actually concocted a rather clever plan. The nearby plains were known to have a shrine held in high esteem by the forces of the Empire. Should they hear the Orcs were defiling it, they would doubtless come forth to fight over it.

Alaric donned the warpaint he and his band are so fond of and headed off to desecrate the shrine. His plan worked to perfection as a vainglorious captain of the Empire called Fetterman chanced to be nearby. Hearing of the approaching orc band, he formed a battle line.

I should grieve over his battle plan. On some level I know this, yet I find myself instead entering a sympathetic state with Alaric.

Fetterman anchored his battleline with the left flank of his greatswords against the chapel, the shrine just ahead of them. To allow his handgunners line of sight, he spread them out on the right flank, but this forced his flank protecting detachment swordsmen to stand behind, rather than beside the greatswords.

Furthermore, he put his knights in the center of his line, in front of the greatswords.

On his left flank  he anchored his archers against the building with their detachments again behind them. And on his extreme left he put the fearsome Helblaster Volley Gun.

Thus his deployment left his flanks vulnerable to fast moving Orcs who, should they be willing to risk the foreboding forests, could approach rather close without giving his missiles time to fire while his centre was quite crowded.

Alaric, meanwhile, ordered his Shaman Suevi to the far left flank, placed his boar-riding wild orcs on the left with that forest protecting their right flank. He protected the left flank of his foot-slogging band of orcs with the forest and put his fast moving chariot on his right. He and his lucky standard bearer, the ferocious Ariamir joined the orcs on foot.

As soon as the orcs go within range Fetterman began moving his forces forward. The archers on his left advanced to get a better firing position. His knights and Greatswords advanced and then the battle began in earnest as the volley gun blasted forth almost simultaneously with the handgunners on the right.

As smoke roiled over the flanks of he battlefield, the orc chariot disappeared in an explosion of iron, wood and orc as the volley gun shredded it in one go.
he flight of arrows seemed impressive, but killed just one of the foot Orcs who were heard to knowingly cackle about how "good my warpaint protects me".

Apparently the warpaint on the Boar-riders was not so good as two of them fell to the black-powder weapons.

Paying no attention to their falling brethren, the orc army surged forward. The Savage Orcs smashed into the knights as the Boar Boyz equivocated a bit, starting to charge the knights before slowing and aimlessly milling around.

Suevi eyed the greatswords and summoned the might of his magic, bringing the foot of Gork smashing down on them, slaying three.

As the combat commenced, Alaric saw most of his efforts blunted by the mighty armor of the knights, yet still felled one. At his side Ariamir proved he was more than just a good luck charm as he slew three knights single-handed.

Seeing himself alone and with not a single Orc having fallen to the mighty knights, the remaining knight took to his heels.

Startled by the ease of their initial victory, the orcs chased him for just a handful of steps before suddenly pausing.

Now it was Fetterman's turn to charge as he led his Greatswords and one detachment of swordsmen in a charge against the fierce unit that had just shattered his knights.

I have much to say about Fettermans' lack of skill in deployment but nought but good to sa of his courage for that was indeed a courageous maneuver and upon it the entire battle would hinge.

The handgunners had reloaded and their guns took down two more Boar riders as the archers advanced around the shrine, one dtachment garrisoning the building. The mighty volley gun was silent as it had no targets, so the crew began shifting it to better position.

Alaric went after Fetterman himself who would have died but for the strength of his armor. As it was, he reeled from the blows and blood poured forth from him.

Again Ariamir proved his skill as even the mighty plate armor of the great swords could not keep him from killing two of them. This time the rank and file proved effective, killing or badly wounding another 6 Greatswords to the loss of but 4 of their own.

The carnage proved to be too much for Fetterman. He began to flee. Seeing their mighty greatswords slain or fleeing, the remaining Empire forces took to their heels.

This indeed ended the battle. The orcs held the field covered in human blood and orcish glory. And so began the rise to power of Alaric, Ariamir and Suevi.

Warhammer; 1000 Beastmen v. Tomb Kings

Click on the pictures to see the parts cut out by the post margins....



Well, as you can tell from post links...been a while. Close to a year since I have played. A lot of things have gotten in the way, but I still love the game. Chance came up to play my brother Fixed Dice. We elected to take...lower tier armies, lets say.

Battle report below a line of asterisks, the rest is all preliminary stuff about thoughts  on army building, etc.

His preferred army is the Dark Elf and mine is the Warriors of Chaos. I would argue we play those choices rather well, knowing the ins and outs of what works for the respective choices within our play group.

This time he would be playing his secondary army, the Tomb Kings and I would be playing my secondary army, the Beastmen.

At 1000 points it is tough to fit much in. The Beastmen the way I play them revolve around a horde of Gor buffed with Wyssans Wildform and beast banner to become a tough, hard hitting instrument of death and destruction.

Unfortunately, at 1000 points I cannot fit in my level 4, Herdstone, and barrage of level 1's giving me free power dice. So I looked to a Doombull...and that was too many points.

Nor could I fit in all 5 minotaurs I have painted.

So I started with a Beastlord with Crown of Command and, at the last second, through on the Brass Cleaver. This gave me a LD 9 stubborn general who could dish out several high weapon skill, high strength attacks.

Next I went with a Wargor for my BSB, gave him the ubiquitous Beast Banner, and planted them both in the Gor unit which ended at 29 Gor. So I had above average strength and WS, each front line guy dishing out 3 attacks...well, okay, 2 guys were dishing out 3 (extra hand weapon and the Frenzy offered by the Wargor), 2 were dishing out 4 and one was dishing between 5 and 8. So I had potentially 19-23 attacks S4 or better. That is a pretty stout unit.

4 Minotaurs and, to give me the requisite 3 units, I threw together a 30 point Ungor unit. This was pointless, as Ungor have a 16" range with a low strength bow. They figure to hit less and a third of the time and wound less than half the time they hit. So IF they shot 5 times 6 turns, they figure to hit ten times and wound 5 or less. They are unlikely to shoot more than once or twice so they are the epitome of throw-away points. Honestly, they are something I would normally never take.

Fixed Dice showed up with 2 20 strong and one 21 strong unit of skeletons, 3 chariots, and a  Necrophinx (sic) backed by a level 4.

Just looking at his army I thought I was in trouble. I assumed the skeletons had bows and I knew I would struggle against the sphinx and against his Hierophant's magic. I had to get across the table fast and hit hard when I got there.


*********************************************************************************
We rolled for scenario, got battle for the pass, and, in a rarity, ignored it. Re-roll produced Dawn Deployment. I won the roll and set up first. I rolled both the gor and Minotaur units in the center and the Ungor to the right. As it turns out, I put them where I would have put everything anyway except the Ungor who would have gone behind the fence to my left. As it was, my Gor unit anchored its flank against a building, the Minos against a fence, and a forest directly ahead would give me time to redeploy if he out-deployed me.

He then set u his three skeleton units on my left...one behind a fence, one behind the forest, the other opposite my Gor. His Chariots went on the right (all directions as I look at it) and his Necrosphinx anchored the right side of the line.

So as I looked at it, his best unit was looking at my weakest unit, his center could hit both my units that mattered head on, and he could flank me with his guys on my left flank.

Meanwhile, he could sit back and shoot at me, softening me up as I crossed the field and magicing me to death to boot if he had direct damage spells. Advantage; Tomb Kings.

He failed to seize the initiative and I thought about it for a bit. I figured he should go first, but then thought that might give him an extra turn of magic and shooting. I decided to take the turn and charge ahead full speed.

BEASTMEN TURN 1
I wanted the charge with my minotaurs. For some inexplicable reason, I therefore moved my Gor less than I could. I parked 13" from him, figuring he would need an 8 to reach and therefore probably fail. My Ungor advanced in a vain attempt to prevent his necrosphinx from charging my gor in the flank in combination, and my minos advanced and angled to countercharge his skeletons if they hit me in front of the Gor.

Tomb King Turn 1
He revealed the one small flaw in my otherwise brilliant plan for world domination. He had a different plan than I did. His skeletons (as I now knew) had no bows...and he had no intention of advancing. He tried to charge the Ungor with his Necrosphinx. I was able, thanks to my nearby banner, to stand and shoot...and hit twice, wounding him once. He did not save. He did, however, fail the charge.

Wow, the useless Ungor I took by desperation and did not want have wounded THE nastiest model on the table. I apologize, Ungor. Well done.

Meanwhile, he rolls a 5 and 4 for magic, then channels, giving him 10 power dice to my 5 dispel...and he being a level 4...this could be painful.

He casts righteous smiting on his entire army (healing his Necro...grr...), and the additional attacks mean his bowfire gets 4 hits, but only one Gor dies.


Beastmen Turn 2
I move forward to get into charge range. My Ungor look to see if they can protect the Gor flank from the necro. Not really but they advance, fire their bows...and wound his chariots twice. They have demolished my super low expectations, already outperforming the most optimistic expectations anyone could ever have for them, dealing out 3 wounds to tough opponents.

Tomb King Turn 2

His Necro needs snake-eyes to hit the Ungor this time. His Chariots charge the Gor front. The theory is the Necro will wipe out the Ungor, flank the Gor, get to fight twice and with his Chariot impact hits, Sphinx, and regular attacks, he will do LOTS of damage to my Gor unit.

Again my Ungor outperform themselves, hitting just once with their stand and shoot...but that one wounds. Yep, the Ungor have now put two wounds apiece on the necrosphinx and his chariots. Best 30 points I have ever spent.

At this point I am pinning my hopes on the Gor takg all that punishment, passing my stubborn 9 break test, and the minotaur swinging the battle in my favor by smurf-slapping (Minotaur-slapping?) his Chariots in the flank next turn.

Things grow bleaker when he rolls 6 for power dice and again channels. His righteous smiting goes off irreversibly.

An so the chariots and Necro are back to full strength, in the key turn of combat he has extra attacks for all concerned...

The silver lining is he got Calamitous something or other, does a wound to his Hierophant and "kills" 4 skeletons (he regenerated 2 of the 6 wounds). So even though my awesome Ungor have done the more impressive wounds, at this point he only actual damage done to him has been done by him, he got the charges he wanted and the game is about to tilt heavily in his favor.

My Ungor fight bravely, hitting him twice, but failing to wound. Oh, well, they had a good run. He has 6 attacks, can hit just twice. 2 dead Ungor. Disappointing, but irrelevant...I will be running almost certainly. His Thunderstomp then rolls a pedestrian 2, killing 2 more. One Ungor left.

Who promptly rolls a 3. With my nearby Beastlord, I lost by 5 and need a 4 to stick around. His poor rolling starts to unravel his plan at the seams. There is no way that Ungor should have lived, much less held him up.

His chariots start to make up for it, doing a whopping 12 impact hits. 7 Gor make their way to the graveyard. He is going to win this combat anyway...

I have higher initiative so go first.

Beastlor opens up a can of whoop-smurf on their candy smurfs. He hits 6 times, 5 of them being wounds that go through, finishing off one chariot and leaving a second with just one wound.

The Wargor hits 3 more times, but does just 1 wound. Still, he is already down to one chariot.

The Gor get ridiculous; mustering 11 attacks, 10 of them hit. They then make up for this great success by dealing just 3 wounds...but that is enough to finish off his chariot.

I then roll insane courage...which means my over-run is a whopping 2". Oops.

Still, what could...and possibly SHOULD...have been a disastrous turn for me turned into a disastrous turn for him. The Ungor standing left my Gor free to try to rampage through his skeletons while the Sphinx was occupied by 30 points.

Beastmen Turn 3
The minos want to charge his middle skeletons that are hiding the Hierophant, but awkward angles make it too tough, so they charge the guys behind the fence instead. The Gor charge the skeletons straight ahead.

For the first time ever, my Minos get their impact hits. It helps as they put down three bundles of bones. The obstacle lowers me by 4 potential hits...but I still wound 7 more skeletons.

He then hits back with 8 successful strikes and 3 wounds. Armor save of 5+; no saves. Parry save of 6+ I roll 5, 6, 6. 2 saves. I then hit with all three stomps, his remaining skeletons crumble and I advance 4" with Bloodgreed.

Meanwhile, the Gor kill 7 skels, the Beastlor dedicates 2 attacks to the champ, wounding once and killing him, and getting 3 rank and file. The Wargor chips in a couple wounds. He kills 3 gor in return and crumbles. I again advance something like 4". I just cannot overrun. Grr.

His Sphinx finally kills the final Ungor, but that unit MORE than did its job. Even though he healed every wound they did, that unit occupied his Sphinx for 3 full turns. Go Ungor!

Tomb King 3
His Necro charges the Gor rear. He thinks for a long time about what to do; charge with the skeletons in support or no. Ultimately he wants to A) keep his Hierophant out of the combat (wise decision probably; my Beastlord would have been rht there trying to kill him) and B) not give me the easy combat resolution, as we both just saw the Gor rip through him by a (Wargor and Beastlord aided) 14-3 margin. He refuses to charge with them.

He then rolls 3 for Winds...they failed him at the key moment. A power-stone aided Cursed Blades makes his Necrosphinx potentially even more deadly, though.

I "make way" with my heroes, a potentially risky move...an enhanced Killing Blow could do a lot of harm to my cause. But with no Wyssans Wildform or other boost, the Gor do not seem like much of a threat.

The Beastlord does okay, hitting just 3 times, but all three go through for wounds. The Wargor hits twice but cannot wound and the Gor cannot wound.

He tries the super slay on the Wargor, hitting him but then rolling a 1 to wound. He attacks my general with the rest but only one hit...and that one is poison, denying him the chance to killing blow, and needing a 6 to save, I do so...he crumbles to resolution.

Beastmen 4
I reform both he mionotaur and the Gor to face his last remaining skeleton unit. It is just mopping up at this point; if his chariots and necrosphinx could only take off 11 Gor and 5 Ungor and his other unit of skeletons could only put one wound on the minotaurs, he stood little to no chance against the inevitable combined charge.

Tomb King Turn 4
He starts to move, then says, "I am just trying to avoid and survive at this point."
"Want to call it?" I ask.
"Sure," he says and I agree. All that is left is seeing if he can run 8" per turn between regular and magic movement and if I can catch him before the end of turn 6.

Mopping up
So what happened here?

First off, he remembered construction rules wrong. He thought he had to have 50% core points. As a result, he built and army where he had no intention of ever using half of it.

Second, his Necrosphinx woefully underperformed. While it did have the only success he experienced, taking 3 turns to kill 5 Ungor whilst taking 2 wounds in the process is...ridiculous.

As a result, he really had no way of actually damaging me. Maybe if he had somehow gotten two skeleton units to simultaneously charge the Gor and had a very fortuitous combat round he MIGHT have won that combat...but that would have counted on me A) being a complete tool with my Minotaurs to allow that, B) failing a re-rolled LD 9 stubborn test to flee IF he even managed to win the combat...which, without help from Chariot impact or Necrosphinx Thunderstomp and power attacks was not going to happen.

Meanwhile, he had no direct damage spells, so although his magic phases helped by giving him a few extra attacks and healing numerous wounds...it was a factor but not a game-changer.

Meanwhile, my Brass-Cleaver, Frenzy-fueled and Banner of the Beasts aided Beastlord ran around making Chaos Lords look wimpy, tearing up everything in sight almost single-handedly. The minos melted an entire unit of skeletons in a good defensive position in one turn. The Ungor looked like a real tarpit unit.

Everything went very, very right for me and it resulted in a surprisingly easy win.

After the game we talked for a while about the Tomb Kings.

I pointed out that with the Beastmen, I knew their weaknesses...an effective range of zero inches, if you breathe on them they die...but I also knew their strengths. Decent toughness, an ability to put out large numbers of decent strength attacks. I knew what they needed to do to win.

What do Tomb Kings need to do to win?

The upshot is...we found some things that MIGHT work, but they rely on A) having lots of points and B) EVERYTHING going right.

In other words, when I look at the Tomb Kings book, one word comes to mind...fail.

And that is in comparison to the Beastmen, typically regarded as one of the lowest-regarded books out there.

On the bright side, he enjoys playing them, so we will hopefully get in a few more games with and against them...though none with a power house like the Warriors of Chaos.


And now time for the traditional "We survived" Group Photo.

Introducing the next series of articles

I have long advocated for things to differentiate Warhammer. While the basic system is good, there are only so many times I can line up and play “kill them all dead”. That is a strategy that favors whoever is best at pure killiness or survivability.




Whether the model removal is accomplished through magic, war machines, massed missile fire or close combat specialty, the army that has the stronger kill factor wins that game every time.



If one army can stand out of range of the other and drop template weapons on them all day, it is an easy win. Likewise, if one army can cast devastating, unstopped magic on the other without fear of reprisal, it is again an easy win. And of course if an army of unstoppable, untouchable death merchants falls upon weak, unarmored troops, it is going to be a slaughter.



So the idea then is for troops who are vulnerable to shooting to stay out of sight, range, or both. Troops that are going to get devastated in close combat should try to keep distance between themselves and better warriors. And magic users should be sent to the bone pile asap, as defense against magic is seldom effective.



So every game tends to have many similar elements. The same order of targets, the same goals, and so forth. I try to mix it up as much as possible.



In 7th we were rolling on a campaign that I was finding highly entertaining. Armies of different sizes instead of “I have x number of points, you do” were replaced by “I have x number of points, you have y number”. It was quite entertaining.



I also loved the elements of one battle’s outcome impacting the next. Instead of having the same size unit all the time, forces were fluctuating. It kept the game fresh and interesting.



But with 8th, many of the elements no longer worked. Just having straight up fight after straight up fight tends to get stale, but there was a hidden gem within the 8th rulebook.



Enter the scenarios.



While flat out tabling the opponent still works, now there are other ways to win or lose a game. There are a host of new tactics and strategies available. Even list building is affected as the clever list-builder will take into account the need to provide a unit to start in the watchtower, plenty of fortitude for Blood and Glory, and even how to handle not having his troops where he wants them.



However, not everyone has a grasp on how the scenarios work. So over the next few days or weeks, the plan is to briefly address strategies you might find helpful in playing the various scenarios.

How much difference do the 8th Edition Rules make for playstyle after playing 7th?

In some of the last posts I mentioned a few tactics that have altered for 8th edition from 7th. How much difference does that make when actually playing a game?


Lets take a brutally obvious and easy one. In 7th edition it was possible for a weaker unit to take out a much stronger unit simply by getting the charge and having a small amount of fortuitous dice rolling.

This was due to two rules; 1), Chargers strike first and 2) removing casualties that were struck rather than from the rear rank.

As a result it was always better to charge than to be charged. Glass cannon units were extremely deadly as they could wipe out the front rank of the enemy before it ever had a chance to attack, thus winning the combat by virtue of charging.

These days with the “remove casualties from the rear rank” and “strike in I order” rules in place the charge has less importance; Great Weapons no longer go ahead of “faster” weapons, even if your front rank gets wiped out the unit gets to fight and thus recover from a bad start, and troop speed actually matters.

Additionally, Steadfast has a huge impact.

This makes a huge difference. In 7th edition a block of 100 Skaven slaves was just 200 victory points donated to the opponent. At some point they would get charged, lose their front rank, and be testing on snake-eyes to not run. And that was against weak units like Empire State Troops or High Elf spearmen.

In 8th they are still going to lose that combat but will almost assuredly have more ranks than the opponent and thus have an excellent chance of staying around for multiple rounds, thus creating a morass that occupies a tremendous amount of space and alters the battlefield. They do not care about the casualties they are taking as they are likely Steadfast on close to LD 10.

Even if they never do a casualty to their tormentors, they have a respectable role and an important one. So these rules have a huge impact on how the game is and should be played.

These rules alone make infantry viable. All throughout 7th edition I never found value in taking even Chaos Warriors as more often than not it was just giving free points to the opponent…and Chaos Warriors are expensive.

Too many times I got charged by things like Grail Knight units, character-reinforced Cold One Knights, dragon-riders, Ogres…all of whom moved faster and thus had a near-guaranteed charge, did so many casualties that IF I got to attack back it was with my unit champion, and thus my expensive Chaos Warriors fled the field or were run down without ever raising a weapon in anger.

In fact, I cannot think of a single time in the whole of 7th Edition I was able to get the Chaos Warriors into an advantageous combat...I do remember them fleeing multiple times after having their front rank wiped out on the charge...the only time they even saw second rounds was against things with too few attacks (a Gorger) and when they were stubborn.


And that was with arguably the best infantry unit in the game. In 7th edition they were worse than useless; taking them was doing a favor for your opponent. In 8th they are close to a no-brainer; I say close because many people still argue huge blocks of cheap Marauders are better.

In 8th edition even a humble unit such as S3, 1 attack Night Goblin has at least a slim chance of doing some damage, and even if they cause no casualties, they are worth putting on the field which means stronger, harder-fighting troops such as Dwarf Warriors, Saurus Warriors, Chaos Warriors, etc. are not simply worth putting on the field but are often among the strongest choices in the entire list.

Some people have gone overboard the other direction; many people proclaim infantry is the king of the battlefield with cavalry and monsters not being worth taking. I disagree...but I "get" their reasons.

Another huge change was the way marching can occur. In 7th, just planting a single model within 8” of the opponent slowed their movement to a crawl. “Tactics” of flying cheap, pointless units behind the enemy line so they had to walk 4-7” per turn into the face of massive lines of missile fire was considered brilliant. If you could do it with a cheap, pointless model like a 15 point naked Skaven Engineer, so much the better.

Now by the simple expedient of passing a LD test troops can still march. To be sure, this is normally a virtual guarantee as most important units either have relatively reliable LD of 9 or 10 and/or a re-roll from a near-by BSB.

Yet the role of march blocking is still important as not every unit will be within range of the BSB, nor will the flanks always pass their tests. This means the march blockers are returned to their rightful role of support rather than game-dominating.

They still have a place. Sometimes even the chance of slowing that flank unit down is worth the allocation of forces to that side of the field. But now there is a defense against it. It means instead of say…automatically including 4 units of Chaos Warhounds to go march-block the enemy, now you have to decide if the vastly reduced role they play in screening and potential march-blocking is worth the points.

We could add swift reforms and combat reforms to the equation. It used to be that if someone hit the flank the unit would never turn to face them. Now there is the chance they will be able to do so which makes a great deal more sense aesthetically, logically, and from a game-play standpoint.

The negative to the reform if they lost the combat is an excellent deterrent to strategies that ignore flank charges, providing a defense against failed charges becoming THE deciding factor in a game. Those charges are still important as with the bonus for a flank charge, the fewer return attacks you are facing while still usually getting your own max attacks, you can often break a tougher unit with a well-timed flank attack.

At the same time, the clever opponent who hits the flank will also have a second unit hitting the target, thus pinning them in place and preventing the reform. This gives them the advantages of supporting attacks and the +1 combat resolution for hitting the flank that is denied the target. Thus the interplay between the charge zone arc and potential to combat reform becomes important as both generals attempt to maximize their own attacks while minimizing the number of attacks the face.

Even after combat the ability for most units to reform adds yet another level of control for the astute general. It prevents the ridiculous “I throw this 30 point unit in front of your powerful unit who then must stand facing away from my deathstar unit who will now wipe them out because they could not face me” maneuvers and makes for a better game.

It makes “speed bump” units still valuable but not vastly more powerful than their point values. Whereas in 7th, an astute player might drop a unit of harpies in front of a frenzied unit knowing they had to charge or get destroyed, then would over-run and either be out of the battle for several turns as it would take one full turn just to turn around, another to regain the over-run distance, and by then the battle would have moved away. Thus a 60 point unit could remove 300 or more points from the battle with no risk. The gain had no relation to the cost.

Now a move in the wrong direction still rightfully slows a unit down, but with the swift reform option, they can still get back in the action before the end.

Hopefully I will have time to write the second part of this post before heading on vacation...because there are plenty more changes that not only affect how the game is played...they affect how troops are chosen.

Does playstyle matter?

I am looking somewhat forward to the comments on the post that will pop up two days before this one yet dreading them at the same time. I am virtually guaranteed to see lots of disagreement, but I stand 100% behind what is there.

Others may have success with the WoC, but the reason I have had success is indisputably because I figured out a method that worked with their strengths that match mine, and it works well.

At the same time, I have had a lot of success with other armies as well. I never did lose a game when playing with Wood Elfs (though that was 7th edition) and Dwarfs, even though they have vastly different playstyles than the WoC do. Nor did I ever lose with the Orcs and Goblins, though again that was only back in 7th.

Only with the High Elves have I hovered around 50% and, in fact, am probably under. Ironically, the army I have lost the second  highest percentage with is the WoC. In sheer number of games, it is WoC I have lost the most with by a landslide.

The background then is that I play a lot of different armies. I have games under my belt with the Vampire Counts, Tomb Kings, Orcs and Goblins, Chaos Dwarfs, Dwarfs, High Elfs, Wood Elfs, Lizardmen, and Beastmen.

With such a wide divergence in armies, is there a wide divergence in my results? Sometimes.

With the High Elf army in 8th edition, it is mostly been my failure to correctly apply the rules that cost me an easy victory in one game and in the other I just plain got outplayed from list-build to final tabling.

With the Beastmen it was hardly a fair test of tactical acumen as the game was specifically set up to be a "soft game" between too lightly regarded armies and we deliberately did not play to completion.

With the Dwarfs it is a bit more complicated. I had a good plan with them each time and drove it to completion but they are so slow they are just too boring to play.

Some of the other guys have varied their styles within their own book. Fullur, for example, wavers between magic-heavy skink based builds and the occasional close combat build full of carnosaurs, Krox/Skink blocks, and Saurus.

Yet his results have been relatively consistent.

One of the points I made loudly and repeatedly in the prior post was the Warriors of Chaos work very well with my skill set. In every game I have ever played…Warhammer Fantasy, Warhammer 40K, Stars and Bars, Johnny Reb, various Napoleonic's….where there was an option for a small, elite force or a larger but inferior one, I have invariably preferred and done better with the small, elite, hard as nails force.


This is not to say I am incapable of working with other elements. I have had excellent success with the Wood Elf, Orc and Goblin (7th edition) and Dwarf armies, all of which run a different style. I have had modest success with the High Elf army, however.

All of this leads to an easy, obvious question; how much impact does the style of army and its interaction with player play style have on success? Can a good player pick up any army book and expect similar levels of success? Or will he have outlier results with particular books.

For example, if someone picks up the Vampire counts book and wins 90% of their games, can they then expect to pick up the Empire book and have the same success rate, plus or minus a couple percentage points? The armies function very differently.

The same question would hold true for say…the Dwarf army versus the Lizardman army. One relies on war machines and stuffing magic while the other has few war machines and pummels opponents with magic. Can the same player expect similar results with both armies?

In some cases the answer is a clear and distinct yes. Some people are so well versed in the game rules, strategies, and theories that they can bounce from one style to another with no ill effect on their game. Others are so bad it does not matter if they use Beastmen or DoC, they are going to lose.

For the vast majority of us, however, the army we use has a huge impact on our results. Sometimes it is simply because we believe in a particular strategy.

For example, in a recent game I had a Chaos Sorcerer on a dragon. Outside of perhaps the Great Bray-Shamans, Chaos Sorcerers are clearly the best close combat wizards any army has available*. Combined with being on a dragon rider, he had fearsome potential to output attacks. Yet when the chance arose to charge a smallish unit of Skaven Clan Rats, I only did it because the game had gotten out of hand.

It is a clear and obvious charge for anyone who believes in the Glass Cannon strategy (though the ridiculous ward save I tooled him up with somewhat contradicts more traditional glass cannon strategies). With the large number of attacks he is putting out, he is likely to win the combat and, barring ranks and Strength in Numbers Shenanigans, break them in one round.

Because of his rugged nature, he was quite likely to win a grind combat as well since they would struggle mightily to put wounds on him and he should do enough casualties to win the combat despite the SCR advantage possessed by the rats.

It is a charge I make one time out of ten, and that one time is because of extenuating circumstances. Yet it is something I estimate I win, whether they flee the first turn or not, well over 80% of the time. And that might be underestimating it…I just do not trust 9 attacks + thunderstomp to beat 3 extra ranks and a standard all the time. Should hit 6 attacks, wound 4ish, then need 2+ thunderstomps to go through and to me that is not a big enough margin for error.

For others, they are thinking that is an awesome margin for error and they are sending in the dragon every time. They are better at the strategy than I am, something I am aware of and frankly acknowledge.

I also acknowledge there are others better than I am at the Dwarf strategy of huddling around a hill shooting stuff, then having their warriors slam into the weakened troops that come across the field. All too often my close combat Dwarfs wander out from the protection of their guns. Sitting back patiently is not my strong suit.

Clearly, then, a glass cannon type army is one that requires a significant change in approach. For example the Beastmen army has elements that resemble this; the Minotaurs with Impact hits, large numbers of high S attacks but absolutely no defense are very much a glass cannon. Getting them to work requires some thought and planning.

And, demonstrably, I am not good at that, having allowed them to get wrecked by a charge before they ever got to swing. Sure, with some practice I might improve.

The thing about it is, no obvious solution has presented itself as yet. There are a few plans I have bounced around, but for the moment their glass cannon nature has them being one of the last things I take since it is a strategy I struggle to employ correctly.

They end up being for me what the Dark Elf Assassin was for Fixed Dice from a game into last edition; I love the look, love the model, love the potential, and never take it because they just die without doing anything.

At the same time, the remainder of the army is also well outside my comfort zone. The Gor are the best option for an “anvil” but are a very poor choice; they have literally no armor. At all. Their magic has potential but does not get them into combat quick enough unless I take the despised Lore of the Wild.

Their weapon skill is pedestrian, their strength below average (though not, perhaps, below the median score) and their leadership sub-par. Their monsters are wildly overcosted and suffer the same glass cannon drawback as the minotaurs; they hit hard but die easy.

I know there are ways to use them and use them effectively. What I do not know is if I have the gaming personality to do it. I am not a risk taker. Chancy combats, long-shot weapons, and so forth are not my forte.

Contrary to what people who do not get the way WoC are effective think, I am incapable of just shoving them forward ignoring everything else. (A bad strategy, by the way, the WoC are frequently accused of. I suspect there are people out there who do that. I am willing to bet they win some games…but not nearly as good a percentage as I do)

Yet if I were going to adopt such a strategy, the WoC would be the army I would do it with. The Beastmen are forced into it by having even less effective shooting than the WoC but combining it with armor-less troops.

So their apparently strongest strategy…throw hordes of troops straight forward and hope to win grind combats while somehow getting their glass cannon troops into combat unscathed…is one I am psychologically incapable of using.

The obvious take-away is I will not only struggle to play them well, I will struggle to enjoy using them as game after game sees them melt to shooting past the point of combat effectiveness or else play a mindless “Oh, my turn? March straight forward. Are we in combat? No? okay, go” game which I have no interest in.

This is not to say there are not other armies I can play around with. The High Elf army is not my typical style either. Low T, lightly armored, and full of glass cannon units; Swordmasters, Phoenix Guard, White Lions…and units that are far more specialized such as archers, spearmen, Dragon Princes, Repeater Bolt Throwers.

As much as target priority matters for the WoC…which contrary to the interwebz matters a great deal in a 6 turn game…it matters even more for the High Elfs. ASF great Weapons are great for the first turn…but leave anyone alive to swing back and the pretty little elf army gets some new make-up in the form of bloody necks as they get decapitated by the weakest of enemy troops.

Can a person used to using a sledgehammer get used to using a precision laser?

I keep using myself as the example but the same is true of every player. Learning to use a different play style can be extremely difficult. For the Dwarf player used to little or nothing happening in the magic phase to suddenly attempt to play a list revolving around using magic would be quite a shock. For a player used to using the narrow formations of the Brettonian lance formation to suddenly figure out how to effectively use the Empire detachments could cause migraines.

Which brings us right back to the initial question; how much impact does the style of army and its interaction with player play style have on success?

I would argue a great deal. Obviously an average player using the DoC is going to do better than they would using the Beastmen. But would it be a 10% increase in wins? 50%? 80% more wins?

Or does it matter what the strengths of that player are? For example, if they excel at choosing targets for shooting but consistently pick the wrong spell to cast at the wrong time, how well are they going to do going from the Wood Elf army to the Lizardmen?

Or if they have mastered the art of choosing the right spell but are so nervous about failed LD checks that they strive to avoid close combat, how well are they going to do with the Beastmen or Warriors of Chaos? Or if they are afraid to use the glass cannon but strong at using an anvil and hammer strategy, how are they going to do with the High Elf army…oh, wait, we have seen that one. It was not pretty.

Or if they are very strong at using predictable, dependable armies, how will they do if suddenly handed the Orcs & Goblins or Skaven to play?

Mindset, comprehension of strategies, comprehension of tactics, understanding of probabilities, willingness to attempt long-shot maneuvers are all elements that affect how a player will do with an army that does not reinforce his strengths. Naturally if the army suits his strengths as a player his results will be the best.

If he is adaptable he will still do very well.

But if an army does not suit his strengths and he does not adapt well then he will tend to struggle mightily.

All of these things are possible to overcome but not all are worth overcoming. If a player sits down to every game, looks across the table and thinks he has little to no chance will not enjoy the game and soon not wish to play.

I am reminded of a game from last edition where one guy took a list that was maxed out on War Machines; cannons, grudge thrower,organ gun, anvil of doom. The rest of it was shooting troops; thunderers, I think. Just seeing that across the table was discouraging and depressing for the guy who faced it.

I was depressed just watching another player using O&G try to cross a field with NO TERRAIN AT ALL against an army putting out over 100 armor piercing shots per turn in one of the early games we played.

Both games were over before they started and even if the side locked into losing those messes won…was it an enjoyable game?

So for someone who enjoys using hordes of low quality troops to overwhelm good troops with a bit of shooting mixed in, how much fun would it be to play a small number of guys? Or if a guy loves magic, how much will he like using the Dwarfs? Or if he is infatuated with shooting, will he enjoy using the Beastmen or Woc? Or if he likes close combat, will he like using a Wood Elf list? If he likes using small, hard troops, wil he enjoy using vast hordes of wimps?

It goes on and on. There are large numbers of possible outcomes, and in most cases, the enjoyment of the game comes down to the style of army he likes to play and play against.

There is probably someone out there hearing that Dwarf list and saying, “Smurf yeah! I want to play against that!”

More power to him. It is a list I would neither want to use nor face.

I do think it is funny that I have seen dozens of lists where the player talked about how strong a list they had made and how much destruction it could wreak in a particular phase and then later  I find out that my lists, which I have deliberately avoided making the strongest ones I could, have been overpowered.

Perhaps I should shelve them forever and just use armies that do not fit my strengths. Then again…that just does not sound fun to me at all.

A lot of it is because I do not enjoy using horde units incapable of doing damage. (Okay, so certain O&G players swear by Night Goblins with nets...to me, they just are not a fun unit). I do not enjoy using armies with no save. I do not always enjoy using armies that have highly specialized units.

And obviously people do not enjoy facing an army that plays to my strengths. So that in turn retroactively makes it not fun for me.

I hear a female of intimidating girth warming her vocal chords.

Really unfortunate in many ways because this edition has been the best one I have ever seen in Warhammer, going back to 1995, but if it comes down to me having fun at the expense of others I just do not want to play. If both players do not enjoy the game then what is the point? Conversely, if it comes down to me playing but it being drudgery…again, I simply do not want to play.
 
So the trick is to find an army that is fun to play, balanced with our group, and in my possession.
 
Because yes...playstyle matters. A lot.