# Worst Hit Army - 8th Ed.



## Red Corsairs (Jun 8, 2008)

What army do you think was the worst hit in the recent Edition? Which has gotten worse the most?


----------



## PanzerPig (Apr 15, 2008)

From what ive heard and picked up, i think Wood Elves and Brets have been hit bad. But then again the inventiveness of players to overcome these obstacles such as rules never fails to impress


----------



## mynameisgrax (Sep 25, 2009)

In my opinion, it's either Bretonnians or Wood Elves. 

The nerf to cavalry in general really hurt the Brets, and made it very difficult for them to break large blocks of infantry. They're still a fairly good shooting army, but they now lack the punch they had in 7th.

Wood Elves also took a hit because of weakened cavalry, although they don't rely on it as much as the Brets do. Their skirmishers also took a hit though, and the Lore of Athel Loren isn't as good as the basic Lores now. 

Of course, Tomb Kings also took a hit, but they didn't lose as much. They weren't that effective in 7th, and now they're worse in 8th. However, they didn't lose as much as the Brets and WE did.

If I had to pick one, that lost the most, I'd have to say it's the poor Brets. The glorious charge of their knights just isn't what it used to be.


----------



## Cheese meister (Jun 5, 2010)

tk just becamee awesome and brets actually can do raer well as if fighting a unit with the horde rule you can get 3 units of knights in there easily and ranks of 3 12 knights thats 3 ranks and a beep load of attacks got to be wood elves although the former competetive lists will just change


----------



## Shadow Hawk (Apr 26, 2009)

TK haven't been hit that bad. We get a huge boost in magic, not having to rely on the winds of magic unlike other armies, and ushabti have a huge boost with stomp, too bad they cost £11 each, I don't think we'll see units of 40 Ushabti unless playing a millionaire, although a block of 40 Ushabti would be amazing.

A problem with TKs now is the fact we have limits on how many models we can have in a unit, which affects everyone bar Ushabti. Also, over pricing is pretty bad as well, we have to be much, much cleverer to win.


----------



## Yilmar (Sep 12, 2009)

Shadow Hawk said:


> ... and ushabti have a huge boost with stomp, too bad they cost £11 each, I don't think we'll see units of 40 Ushabti unless playing a millionaire, although a block of 40 Ushabti would be amazing.


Luckily for you, Ushabti are on monster bases and therefore only require a 6 wide rank to benefit from the horde rule. So a unit of 18 Ushabti would take full benefit of all horde extra's. Now if you could only find some loose change around your house of about £200...


----------



## silentrob (May 17, 2010)

Without a doubt its brets considering all the changes to charging, initiative, steadfast and calvary rules. They were brutally effective in 7th edition but I guess if they stop doing a lance formation and adopt the horde rule they could still be decent.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I think the only army that really got hit was wood elves as the basic cost of everything means they can't compete with numbers and both cavalry and skirmishing troops which to be honest were the main focus of there army are now weaker.
They have no artillery so didn't benefit from that boost, a few boosts in the shooting phase but archers are to expensive to lay down a mass of fire.
The woodies magic is not to bad and they have access to a few of the lores but not the most destructive ones.
Bretts and tomb kings generals will still be able to compete although it will take a change of tactics and army building, Men at arms, bowmen and catapults are all good options for bretts where they were afterthoughts before.
Tombkings can spam magic like never before and although fear is different tomb guard can still compete.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

mynameisgrax said:


> They're still a fairly good shooting army


I find the idea of bretonians being a fairly good shooting army rather amusing


----------



## CaptainBudget (Jun 14, 2010)

*cough* Trebuchet! *cough*


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

CaptainBudget said:


> *cough* Trebuchet! *cough*


*shrugs* so what?, its still amusing that an army that shuns ranged combat is fairly decent at it


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

Well WE cetainly have been hit hard and are now one of the weaker armies around... but I dont think they lost a huge amount from the new rules, they just got hit from middle-low to low, so I dont think they are the worst hit.

Brets didnt come off too bright either, but I have the sneaky feeling that clever Bret players will still muddle through: their cav is harder to use but I think it may still work, and lots of peasants, trebuchets and men at arms will help them out. Again, they took a hit but not the biggest hit.

...
...

So, the army I recon that got hit harder then any others- Daemon of Chaos
Daemons were the undisputed kings of 7th, but I really dont think they'll be anywhere near as good under 8th ed rules. PBs basically dont work anymore, blocks of horrors are pretty pointless (unless you go for a mega block to fill core and get you a Lv4 caster) and all the 'big hitters' wont have ranks to stop enemies being steadfast, so may be hard to beat/kill, but wont just knife through an army like they used to.


----------



## Skartooth (Jun 4, 2010)

People will just have to learn how to play Wood Elves a different way. They haven't been hit bad, they have just changed. The new magic lores means that they can finally do something in the magic phase. And with the shooting in 2 ranks it means that the units will have smaller foot prints, therefore being more manoeuvrable

Brets on the other hand = fail

Skar


----------



## Cheese meister (Jun 5, 2010)

brets are down right harsh 2 units against infantry of about 9 get 20 attacks and you have a gd armour save and a ward if you pray


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

Brettonians absolutely were the hardest hit. They're still very playable, though. The difference is that you can't just leave the peasants at home and play nothing but knights. Large units of peasants are cheap, and you can use them to keep an enemy in place so the lance formations of knights have advantageous charge avenues. While the knights still get hit first by a lot of stuff, their armor and the strength of the lances in the volume they're able to attack more than makes up for it, I think.


----------



## Cheese meister (Jun 5, 2010)

yes they where hit but i am seriously considering a pure knight army and i am regarded as a tourny player in my gaming circle just knights to


----------



## Ikurei Conphas (Jul 19, 2010)

This is why I love the internet.
I really thought us brets had come out alright. 
We can now participate in the magic phase. Damsals aren't just scroll caddies. Our magic choices are excellent.
We now really want to participate in the shooting phase. 2+ ranks shooting. Cheap archers (Volley FTW!) + best stone throwers in the game.
We can horde up [email protected], I bet that [email protected] will be the best selling bretonnian unit for a while, most of us don't have any. 
Questing Knights got better as well. 

I'm looking forward to playing Brets in 8th edition. I now have choices in how I want to play instead of just fielding eleventy billion knights and hoping I get my charges off.


----------



## mynameisgrax (Sep 25, 2009)

Hmm...we'll have to see how Chaos Daemons go. They certainly can't roll up the enemy army by panicking them off the board as easily (and not at all if they have a BSB), and they can't dominate the magic phase quite as easily (although extra casters never hurt), but overall I think their strategy will be about the same: avoid getting shot to death, and then dominate with your superior units. 

They should still be an effective, albeit 'elite', army.


----------



## the-graven (Apr 26, 2010)

Daemons got really weakened, but are still an good army, middle tier in my opinion.
Now Daemon players have to use their brain to win, instead of a cheesy list(which was very easy to make), I still think their special characters are too cheap, especially Epidimius, think about a nurgle-only army with epidimius, that was toooooo cheesy in the 7th ed, and in 8th still annoying, luckily my friend doesn't use that


----------



## Farseer_Iowan (Jun 25, 2010)

At they LGS since I have not had a chance to sit down with the new rule book, I asked a friend why he went with O&G instead of his Brets (he has them all painted and ready to go now for about three years) He said that the Brets are way overpowered now


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

I still can't believe lances don't have ASF... When I read the lance entry I was literally stunned.


----------



## mynameisgrax (Sep 25, 2009)

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> I still can't believe lances don't have ASF... When I read the lance entry I was literally stunned.


That is kind of stupid, now that you mention it. Striking first was more or less the entire point of using a lance in real life.

Picture this: a knight with a lance on horseback, charging into an elf holding a knife. The elf strikes first and hits, but fails to cut through the knight's armor. Afterward, the knight hits the elf with the tip of his lance, and the full strength of the charge behind him.

How the hell did that happen?! Unless that elf's knife is 10 feet long...

I'm getting a migraine trying to imagine it.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

You forget, those elves are sneaky... they stuck their (spare) knives on poles that they cunningly camoflaged as bushes just in front of their lines- the knives hit the horses, and any that survive manage to carry the knights in to strike the elves with their lances. Damn those cunning elves


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

I agree that Bretonnians and Wood Elves got hit the hardest as well as Daemons though at the moment in the long run of things I believe Wood Elves have been due to skirmishing armies really taking a hit (and the gang up effect of small units) but also the fact that Bret's will most likely be the next (after TK) to get a new book, but ehn whom after wood it be Wood Elves then and how long as they have had alot smacked out. 

I suppose for the Wood Elves it really is the Winter of Woe as Eternal Guard seem to better units now than small gang units of dryads as they have gone to sleep!


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Personally, my funny story for how lances work this edition, is that the lances charge in like normal, but the elves jump on the knights' horses, and try to kill them. Armor saves, so the knight smacks them off the horse breaking their neck. :grin:


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Admittedly Bretts have been hit and lances not having ASF on the turn they charge, i think thats important, is bloody stupid.

However i dont think its as bad as everyone is making out, yeah we are a bottom tier army but i think we can still compete

The old lists dont work and now we willl have to buy peasants to be competitive so brett players will have to spend money. However our spearman are a tiny price cost compared to high elves, mounted yeomen as fast cavalry are now excellent and questing knights have improved 3 fold compared to grail knights.

We actually have a magic phase so to speak which is lovely and the banner of the lady is now completely justified even at that high points cost.

As said before we might not be strong but there is now questions about what we take, which is far more interesting


----------



## unixknight (Jul 26, 2010)

I agree in some ways that the Brets are getting nerfed, but I also see some benefits.

My Bret army (as are most) was designed around the idea of breaking enemy units with knight charges in the first round of combat... high strength lances striking first, killing enough enemy models to minimize their ability to hit back (combined with the narrow lance formation). 

That's prettymuch gone now, so Bretonnia is going to have to resort to traditional, and more historically consistent, tactics of using infantry to anchor enemy units while the cavalry flanks. With lance formation making it easy to get lots of ranks that helps us both with static CR and preventing the enemy from getting Steadfast. Knights' Initiative isn't so good so with all these factors together we'll see Bretonnian generals being a LOT more careful to set up flank charges. That means smaller, more maneuverable units and with the new supporting attacks rule, lance formation in smaller units is only useful now for getting more ranks. 

My favorite size for flankers was 6 knights plus a Hero or Lord in Lance formation. Now I can field that same unit and have ALL of my knights attack. Not too shabby. With great weapons going back to a +2 Strength our Questing Knights become useful again, and unlike the lance they get that bonus in every round. Sure, they always strike last but with our Initiative that'll happen a lot anyway so it isn't such a handicap.

And as was mentioned before, our magic phase just got a badly needed boost, and our Damsels will be more than scroll caddies. I'm looking forward to it. The power gap between armies in the Magic phase has been narrowed considerably.

The army I think is taking the biggest hit: Vampire Counts. Seriously. Fear is much less potent than it was before, and every single VC unit was fear causing. That means every single VC unit has been weakened. Couple that with the narrower gap in Magic and it's going to be much tougher to get those summoned units out there to swamp enemies. Vampire Counts rely on fear and magic and both have been nerfed for them. This is true to a lesser extent for TKs but at least they have artillery and units that could hide under the sand for easy flanking. At worst, TK players have a new book to look forward to. I'm looking at my small VC force and feeling much more dismayed about it than my Bretonnians.


----------

